A solution is to wrap the deferred in a datastructure, like an object,
list, set, or what ever you prefer.
On 10/08/2009, at 23.40, Martin Geisler wrote:
Janus Dam Nielsen writes:
Hi Martin
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
You're welcome, it took a me a while to figure out what was wr
Janus Dam Nielsen writes:
> Hi Martin
>
> Thanks for your thoughts on this.
You're welcome, it took a me a while to figure out what was wrong here.
>> I think the take-home message is that you have structured your code
>> in an unusual way. Whenever you add a callback to a Deferred but keep
>>
Hi Martin
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
I think the take-home message is that you have structured your code in
an unusual way. Whenever you add a callback to a Deferred but keep
referring to the Deferred inside the callback, then you're off
track. At
least that's my experience :-)
Actua
Janus Dam Nielsen writes:
> As you see when player 1 adds a share to the value list, the current
> result of the share is 13. However when player 1 comes around to add a
> new share with current result 9, the current result of the share
> already contained in the list has transformed into None! I
Hi VIFF'ers,I have a small class and a unit test for it. The unittest fails, but this is not the real issue. The issue is the strange behavior I see during execution.During execution I see output similar to this:>>>Seeding random generator with random seed 5590test_dealer DealerTest test_next_t
