(I thought my mail client had eaten this version, sorry ... *blush*)
--
Andy Mortimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Andy walking, Andy tired,
Andy take a little snooze
-- "Andy Warhol," David Bowie
Andy Mortimer writes:
> Zefram writes:
>> Andy Mortimer wrote:
>>>I'm sure I'm missing something fundamental here, but ... when should
>>>timer watchers be destroyed?
>>
>> After they've fired, they still exist and can be modified and
>> retriggered.
>> See the "again" method. You need to explicitly cancel your watchers.
>> Try this variant of your test program:
> [...]
>> __END__
>
> Yep, that works, thanks muchly!
>
> I'm still slightly puzzled, although since I have a workaround this is
> mostly out of curiosity! ;-) Since I haven't kept a reference to the
> watchers, I can't see that I could call the ->again method on them to
> re-trigger them anyway (at least, without calling all_watchers and
> breaking it down by desc/type/etc). Is this Just How It Is, Son, or am I
> missing a trick which having them stay in alive like this would allow?
>
> (Zefram, I'm afraid I can't answer your question in return ;-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> --
> Andy Mortimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> Andy walking, Andy tired,
> Andy take a little snooze
> -- "Andy Warhol," David Bowie
>
>
>
