Peter Hansen wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > So the problem (waiting tens to hundreds of us without busy looping) > > still remains... > > That's actually not a "problem", it's your solution > to a problem. Can you describe the _real_ problem, what > you are trying to do? _Why_ do you want to wait such > brief amounts of time? > > I ask as someone with fairly extensive background in > realtime software (which is basically what it sounds like > you are trying to write here), and I suspect that you are > either trying to achieve something that's not really possible > on Windows XP, or that you are simply doing something that > is entirely unnecessary, probably for good reasons but > with too little experience of the issues involved. Can > you expand on your situation? > > -Peter
What I am trying to do is sending binary data to a serial port. Since the device attached to the port cannot handle a continous in-flow of data, I need to make an artificial tiny delay in-between data chunks(a few hundreds of KBs). The delay might be a few tens to hundreds of us. I'd like to make the transmission as fast as possible, uh.. well.. reasonably fast. [I sort of posted this already but hasn't got it through so am reposting it now] Thanks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
