asynchat sends data on async_chat.push and .push_with_producer

[Jean-Paul Calderone]

On Tue, 13 May 2008 20:56:03 -0400, Jean-Paul Calderone <exarkun at divmod.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 May 2008 16:44:11 -0700 (PDT), Giampaolo Rodola' 
><gnewsg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>>
>>>To support scheduling calls, you just have to know when the next call is
>>>going to happen.  Then, you can wake up at exactly that time.  This is
>>>what Twisted does, even for select reactor. ;)
>>
>>Yes but how do you know when it's the time to fire up a call without
>>using a thread?
>>You are forced to call time.time() periodically and check if that time
>>had come every time.
>>Take a look at twisted/internet/base/ReactorBase.runUntilCurrent.
>>That's where that should happen.
>
>Why?  Isn't this why subtraction exists?  If there is a call scheduled to
>happen at T1 and the current time is T2, then I know that after (T1 - T2)
>elapses, it will be time to run the call.  Why do I have to do any checks
>at all?  I just tell select() to wait that long.  Presumably this is just
>what someone will do if they want to use asyncore with timed calls.  Call
>asyncore.loop() in a loop, always passing (T1 - T2) as the timeout value.

Ah, of course this is wrong, since asyncore.loop... loops. :P  I meant to
say asyncore.poll() here.

>So, actually, I'm not sure what the disagreement is about. ;)  The
>default value for the timeout parameter to the loop function seems
>somewhat irrelevant.  If someone wants timed events in their loop,
>asyncore isn't standing in their way.  On the other hand, I didn't
>this thread (or maybe just this part of the thread) start out with
>a question about asyncore throughput?  I have no idea what that
>might have to do with this.
>
>Jean-Paul