Re: utter newbie expect question

On May 30, 10:37 am, cla...@xxxxxxxxx (Cameron Laird) wrote:
In article <1180533175.419845.307...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Artis Gripemore <wealthe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On May 29, 6:23 pm, cla...@xxxxxxxxx (Cameron Laird) wrote:
In article <1180472623.821578.15...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Artis Gripemore <wealthe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:>It would appear to be
working now. I did change all the sends to
exp_sends, but then the script would not run at all, but that helped
me debug a bit. The problem seemed to be that I had it in
conservative mode. Does that make sense?

So now I have exp_sends, conservative mode off, and a load of sleeps
inserted, and it seems to work in limited testing.

.
.
.
The sleeps are generally a symptom that there's a better coding
available. It's unlikely they're helping in other than a super-
ficial way.

I'm sure that you are right about that. The app does fail at one
point with the script going full out, but I doubt that the delays are
needed everywhere I put them.

Thanks!

Are you using

sleep ...

in place of a sufficiently specific

expect ...

? I urge you to reconsider the latter.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I will do so. I never stop trying to make these things better.

Thanks again.

.

Quantcast