is this python Timer usage safe?

Question

I have a small class with a timer, but don't have anything for the timer to do when it expires. Since Timer extends Thread, I get all I want to know from calling timer.isAlive(). Since Timer requires a function parameter, I'm looking for an anonymous 'nop' function that doesn't clutter the class, and came up with this;

  def ready(self, node):
    def nop(): pass
    delay = node.find('delay')
    seconds = float(delay.get('seconds'))
    self.timer = Timer(seconds, nop)
    return True;

It seems to work with my little test programs. Having not tried this before, or seen this as an example anywhere, I'm wondering, is this truly safe?

You really don't need that semicolon at the end.

ThiefMaster
– ThiefMaster

2012-03-29 21:55:59 +00:00
Commented Mar 29, 2012 at 21:55 — ThiefMaster
– ThiefMaster, Commented Mar 29, 2012 at 21:55

Niklas B. · Accepted Answer · 2012-03-29 22:19:18Z

1

Your code is fine. Functions doing nothing aren't dangerous -- they just do nothing. Using a lambda function would make the code a bit more concise:

self.timer = Timer(seconds, lambda: None)

edited Mar 29, 2012 at 22:19

Niklas B.

95.8k18 gold badges201 silver badges228 bronze badges

answered Mar 29, 2012 at 21:52

Sven Marnach

608k123 gold badges968 silver badges866 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

is this python Timer usage safe?

1 Answer 1

Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related