At 06:34 PM 10/29/2007, Gabriel Genellina wrote: >En Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:22:36 -0300, Dick Moores <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > > > At 03:23 PM 10/29/2007, Gabriel Genellina wrote: > >> En Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:39:49 -0300, Dick Moores <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> escribió: > >> > >> > >> At least add a small sleep() call inside the loop, to be nice to other > >> running processes: > >> > > > > Yes, that makes a major difference in the CPU > > usage percentage on my computer. In fact I can't > > even tell that there is anything going on other > > than the usual behind-the-scenes XP stuff. CPU > > usage stays right around 0% or 6%, with an > > occasional 6% and a very occasional 15%. > > Interestingly, sleep(0.001) makes as big a > > difference as your sleep(0.1), but sleep(0.0001) bumps it up to a steady > > 100%! > >The underlying function in Windows is Sleep (or SleepEx) which takes an >argument in milliseconds. 0.0001s = 0.1ms and it's rounded to 0. Sleep(0) >has very specific semantics - for a single threaded program, it does >nothing, so your code is effectively a busy loop taking 100% CPU.
Ah, useful information. Thank you. Where'd you learn that? Dick Moores -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
