Thanks Cameron. I realize actually having something that works is good, however the "...do stuff..." in my code is controlling an xray beam taking pictures on a CCD, so I want it to be as streamlined as possible. I'll dig through that wiki article though, and maybe take a look at threads.
Thanks again, Adam On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Cameron Laird <came...@phaseit.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:34:38PM -0500, Adam Kadzban wrote: > . > . > . > > Hi again, let me start off by saying that my code does what I want it to, > > it's just done in a terribly hackish way, and I'm wondering if there's a > > better way to do it. > > > . > . > . > > ... > > loop = 1 > > ... > > (create a button that sets loop to 0) > > ... > > top.update() > > ... > > while loop: > > top.update() > > ...do stuff... > > top.update() > > > > This works, but I feel like there's got to be a better way to be doing > > this. I can get rid of the first top.update(), and one of the updates > in > > the loop, but this configuration seems to be the most responsive. And > using > > update_idletasks() doesn't seem to work, at all. > > > > Anyone have an idea? > . > . > . > A. A lot of people through the years have used update(). > If you have something already working as you want ... > well, there's *considerable* value in that. > B. The idiomatic way to do such things in Tkinter is with > after() <URL: http://wiki.tcl.tk/1526 >. > C. Many programmers also use Python threads to achieve > the effect you describe. I don't have an example at > hand just now. >
_______________________________________________ Tkinter-discuss mailing list Tkinter-discuss@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tkinter-discuss
