On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:30:53PM -0700, Alexnb wrote:
.
.
.
> yes I know it runs in milliseconds. So what do you suggest? 1 millisecond is
> about what I want. it was .1 seconds for the sleep() time.
> I didn't write this code I found it online so I don't really understand it,
> but I know that is where the problem is, the for loop.
>
> Guilherme Polo wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Guilherme Polo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Alexnb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Guilherme Polo wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Alexnb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Guilherme Polo wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:57 PM, Alexnb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
.
.
.
> >>>>> def sleeper():
> >>>>> root.update
> >>>>
> >>>> What if you change this to root.update() ?
> >>>>
> >>>>> root.after(1, sleeper)
.
.
.
Again, I'm fuzzy on what questions remain open. The code
above is almost certainly wrong, though; far more likely
to be useful would be something like
def sleeper():
root.after(100, sleeper)
# update() is almost certain to introduce problems.
check_global_variables_and_so_on()
_______________________________________________
Tkinter-discuss mailing list
Tkinter-discuss@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tkinter-discuss
