We Keep Coding

How can I input a time and have the timer count down?

I am trying to run a while loop so I can run code while the timer is still counting down.I also want to see the timer as it counts down. I have tried to find something similar on stack overflow, but haven't been able to get the result I'm looking for.
print("Input minutes and seconds")
min = int(input("Minutes: "))
sec = int(input("Seconds: "))
while min & sec > 0:
# do some code
# I want the program to count down from whatever I input
print("")

You should run your timer on a different thread. If you don't need the timer to affect the main code being run this should work:
import threading
import time
def timer_function(seconds):
'''Countdown from number of seconds given'''
for t in range(seconds, -1, -1):
time.sleep(1)
print(t)
if __name__ == "__main__":
print("Input minutes and seconds")
min = int(input("Minutes: "))
sec = int(input("Seconds: "))
x = threading.Thread(target=timer_function, args=(min * 60 + sec,))
x.start()
# Run some other code in parallel with the timer
x.join() # will wait for the timer function to finish
print('All done')
If you need the timer to stop the main thread (the code being run on the main function) then you need send some signal through a variable from the timer thread.
There might be some libraries that handle thread timeouts better if you would like to look it up :)

Getting very precise timeout timing is somewhat troublesome, as the operation of reporting on the timing can affect the timing itself if not carefully written.
Something like this is often best accomplished with two threads in parallel
Making the threads "daemon threads" allows you to end them by quitting the program (otherwise the program will wait for them to be .join()ed)
You can rely on threading.Event() to clearly communicate into a thread and provide a .wait() method, which will either wait for a given timeout or immediately end when the event .is_set()
import threading
import time
def function_to_call(): # replace me with your function
time.sleep(1000)
def timer_fn(timeout, event, delay=5): # 5 seconds between reports
time_end = time.time() + timeout
while not event.is_set():
time_remaining = int(time_end - time.time())
if time_remaining <= 0:
return
print(f"{int(time_remaining)}s remaining")
event.wait((min(delay, time_remaining))) # wait for event
timeout = int(input("minutes: ") or 0) * 60 + int(input("seconds: ") or 0)
E = threading.Event() # Event to kill t2
# making t1 a daemon lets it not prevent shutdown
t1 = threading.Thread(target=function_to_call, daemon=True)
t2 = threading.Thread(target=timer_fn, args=(timeout, E), daemon=True)
# begin both threads
t1.start()
t2.start()
# wait for t1 to exit (but not t2)
t1.join(timeout=timeout)
# t1 may join faster by ending, otherwise reach here after timeout
E.set() # set the Event to quickly end t2 (timeout or t1 returned)
t2.join() # not technically necessary, but cleans up t2
# program quits and t1 is killed if it's still running
Note that the timing display is actually separate from the thread ending, and ending the function early is done here by stopping the program. The function will continue to run if the program is not stopped!
If more advanced task control is needed, consider
modifying your callable function to repeatedly check another threading.Event throughout it to see if it's time is up (yet)
use multiprocessing, which is much more featureful than threading, though it may need to copy memory into the new process, which can be slow if you have a tremendous amount
use subprocess, creating a script just for the purpose of a timed end (here you can kill the subprocess with a simple .kill() or setting a timeout= argument when creating it! (though again you'll find some inefficiency in copying/streaming input into and out of the new process)
use os.fork() and [os.kill()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.html#os.kill) to split your process (advanced, but usually much more efficient than multiprocessing` due to how memory is (or rather is not) copied)
if your function can be made asynchronous, which allows multiple tasks to collaborate in the same namespace similar to threading, but in a more friendly way (though how this behaves is fundamentally different from the other techniques given, it can be very efficient if you have many tasks which don't rely on local resources, such as a webserver or database)
Though further fundamentally different, you may find further or more benefit in designing your task to be a collection of work to iterate over (maybe in a list) and consider a library like tqdm to report on its status

Try this,
Code :
import time
print("Input minutes and seconds")
min = int(input("Minutes: "))
sec = int(input("Seconds: "))
t = min*60 + sec
while t :
mins, secs = divmod(t, 60)
timer = '{:02d}:{:02d}'.format(mins, secs)
print(timer, end="\r")
time.sleep(1)
t -= 1
print('Timer ended !!')
Output :
Input minutes and seconds
Minutes: 1
Seconds: 5
01:05
01:04
01:03
01:02
01:01
01:00
00:59
00:58
.
.
.
00:01
Timer ended !!

You should ideally use threads and spawn a daemon to keep track, but that might be overkill for your case. I've made a more simple implementation which is hopefully understandable, otherwise please ask and I'll improve the comments/explanation:
import time
set_time = int(input('For how many seconds do you want to run this?'))
start_time = time.time() # lets get the current time
inner_time = time.time() # Seperate vars so we don't overwrite the main loop
count = 0 #To keep track of how many seconds we've been going
while (time.time() - start_time) < set_time: #Lets run this until we've reached our time
if(time.time() - inner_time) >= 1: #If 1 sec has passed
inner_time = time.time() #Reset time
count += 1 #Increase second by 1
print("Code has been running for "+str(count)+" seconds") #Inform the user
#Do something here...
print(str(set_time)+" seconds have now elapsed") #Done and dusted
This is the output:
For how long do you want to run this?5
Code has been running for 1 seconds
Code has been running for 2 seconds
Code has been running for 3 seconds
Code has been running for 4 seconds
5 seconds have now elapsed

how to sleep just one function of the code in python?

i am writing a code in python and i just want one function to sleep not the whole code in time.sleep(). but i couldn't find a way.
my code:
from time import sleep
a = int()
def calc(a,b):
while True:
a=a*b
if a >> 12:
sleep(12)
#i just want this func to sleep here.
def print(msg):
while True:
msg = a
print(msg)
#i don't want this func to sleep
what should i do?

Use asyncio
import asyncio
async def calc(a,b):
while True:
a=a*b
if a >> 12:
await asyncio.sleep(12)

I think You need to read a little about the function time.sleep. Here's what the documentation says about it:
Suspend execution of the calling thread for the given number of seconds. The argument may be a floating point number to indicate a more precise sleep time. The actual suspension time may be less than that requested because any caught signal will terminate the sleep() following execution of that signal’s catching routine. Also, the suspension time may be longer than requested by an arbitrary amount because of the scheduling of other activity in the system.
The function pauses the program at the desired place, if you call it. It does not stop the other function.

code inside f1() function will be executed 2 seconds after running the code, but in that time f2() function will be executed.
from time import time, sleep
def f1():
print("Function1")
def f2():
print("Function2")
t1 = time() # Stores current system time in seconds
print(t1)
time_to_delay_f1 = 2
while True:
if time()-t1 > time_to_delay_f1: # time()-t1 is the time passed after assigning t1 = time(), [see before 2 lines]
f1()
else:
f2()

How does Thread().join work in the following case?

I saw the following code in a thread tutorial:
from time import sleep, perf_counter
from threading import Thread
start = perf_counter()
def foo():
sleep(5)
threads = []
for i in range(100):
t = Thread(target=foo,)
t.start()
threads.append(t)
for i in threads:
i.join()
end = perf_counter()
print(f'Took {end - start}')
When I run it it prints Took 5.014557975. Okay, that part is fine. It does not take 500 seconds as the non threaded version would.
What I don't understand is how .join works. I noticed without calling .join I got Took 0.007060926999999995 which indicates that the main thread ended before the child threads. Since '.join()' is supposed to block, when the first iteration of the loop occurs won't it be blocked and have to wait 5 seconds till the second iteration? How does it still manage to run?
I keep reading python threading is not truly multithreaded and it only appears to be (runs on a single core), but if that is the case then how exactly is the background time running if it's not parallel?

So '.join()' is supposed to block, so when the first iteration of the loop occurs wont it be blocked and it has to wait 5 seconds till the second iteration?
Remember all the threads are started at the same time and all of them take ~5s.
The second for loop waits for all the threads to finish. It will take roughly 5s for the first thread to finish, but the remaining 99 threads will finish roughly at the same time, and so will the remaining 99 iterations of the loop.
By the time you're calling join() on the second thread, it is either already finished or will be within a couple of milliseconds.
I keep reading python threading is not truly multithreaded and it only appears to be (runs on a single core), but if that is the case then how exactly is the background time running if it's not parallel?
It's a topic that has been discussed a lot, so I won't add another page-long answer.
Tl;dr: Yes, Python Multithreading doesn't help with CPU-intensive tasks, but it's just fine for tasks that spend a lot of time on waiting for something else (Network, Disk-I/O, user input, a time-based event).
sleep() belongs to the latter group of tasks, so Multithreading will speed it up, even though it doesn't utilize multiple cores simultaneously.

The OS is in control when the thread starts and the OS will context-switch (I believe that is the correct term) between threads.
time functions access a clock on your computer via the OS - that clock is always running. As long as the OS periodically gives each thread time to access a clock the thread's target can tell if it has been sleeping long enough.
The threads are not running in parallel, the OS periodically gives each one a chance to look at the clock.
Here is a little finer detail for what is happening. I subclassed Thread and overrode its run and join methods to log when they are called.
Caveat The documentation specifically states
only override __init__ and run methods
I was surprised overriding join didn't cause problems.
from time import sleep, perf_counter
from threading import Thread
import pandas as pd
c = {}
def foo(i):
c[i]['foo start'] = perf_counter() - start
sleep(5)
# print(f'{i} - start:{start} end:{perf_counter()}')
c[i]['foo end'] = perf_counter() - start
class Test(Thread):
def __init__(self,*args,**kwargs):
self.i = kwargs['args'][0]
super().__init__(*args,**kwargs)
def run(self):
# print(f'{self.i} - started:{perf_counter()}')
c[self.i]['thread start'] = perf_counter() - start
super().run()
def join(self):
# print(f'{self.i} - joined:{perf_counter()}')
c[self.i]['thread joined'] = perf_counter() - start
super().join()
threads = []
start = perf_counter()
for i in range(10):
c[i] = {}
t = Test(target=foo,args=(i,))
t.start()
threads.append(t)
for i in threads:
i.join()
df = pd.DataFrame(c)
print(df)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
thread start 0.000729 0.000928 0.001085 0.001245 0.001400 0.001568 0.001730 0.001885 0.002056 0.002215
foo start 0.000732 0.000931 0.001088 0.001248 0.001402 0.001570 0.001732 0.001891 0.002058 0.002217
thread joined 0.002228 5.008274 5.008300 5.008305 5.008323 5.008327 5.008330 5.008333 5.008336 5.008339
foo end 5.008124 5.007982 5.007615 5.007829 5.007672 5.007899 5.007724 5.007758 5.008051 5.007549
Hopefully you can see that all the threads are started in sequence very close together; once thread 0 is joined nothing else happens till it stops (foo ends) then each of the other threads are joined and terminate.
Sometimes a thread terminates before it is even joined - for threads one plus foo ends before the thread is joined.

Python understanding the scheduler

I've a python scheduler code to print Hello and World!.
import sched
import time
def x():
print "Hello"
s = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
s.enter(10, 1, x, ())
s.run()
print "World!"
This waits for 10 seconds and outputs:
Hello
World!
I think a scheduler's job is to schedule a task without interrupting the current process. But here it's putting the whole program to sleep and behaves just like the below code:
import time
def x():
print "Hello"
time.sleep(10)
x()
print "World!"
I guess the scheduler makes the program to sleep due to the time.sleep parameter in sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep).
Is there anyway we can make it work just like a real-time scheduler without blocking the main process without using any multithreading or multiprocessing?

From the docs:
In multi-threaded environments, the scheduler class has limitations with respect to thread-safety, inability to insert a new task before the one currently pending in a running scheduler, and holding up the main thread until the event queue is empty. Instead, the preferred approach is to use the threading.Timer class instead.
from threading import Timer
def x():
print "Hello"
Timer(10, x, ()).start()
print "World!"
without blocking the main process without using any multithreading or multiprocessing
A single thread can't be doing two things at the same time, so... threading is the absolute minimum you need to use in order not to block.

The scheduler's job is to not only execute the subsequent tasks after every particular time period. its job is also to lock the object until it completes its task.
from threading import Timer
def xy():
print("End")
Timer(4, xy, ()).start()
print ("Start")
Initially, Start will be printed, then 4 sec later End will be printed.
What if we have an endless loop
from threading import Timer
def xy():
print("End")
Timer(4, xy, ()).start()
print("Start")
i = 0
while i < 10:
print(i)
It will be running continuously. Hence, It is proved that it will hold the thread until the prev one completes its task.

How do I make a time delay? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How do I get my program to sleep for 50 milliseconds?
(6 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
How do I put a time delay in a Python script?

This delays for 2.5 seconds:
import time
time.sleep(2.5)
Here is another example where something is run approximately once a minute:
import time
while True:
print("This prints once a minute.")
time.sleep(60) # Delay for 1 minute (60 seconds).

Use sleep() from the time module. It can take a float argument for sub-second resolution.
from time import sleep
sleep(0.1) # Time in seconds

How can I make a time delay in Python?
In a single thread I suggest the sleep function:
>>> from time import sleep
>>> sleep(4)
This function actually suspends the processing of the thread in which it is called by the operating system, allowing other threads and processes to execute while it sleeps.
Use it for that purpose, or simply to delay a function from executing. For example:
>>> def party_time():
... print('hooray!')
...
>>> sleep(3); party_time()
hooray!
"hooray!" is printed 3 seconds after I hit Enter.
Example using sleep with multiple threads and processes
Again, sleep suspends your thread - it uses next to zero processing power.
To demonstrate, create a script like this (I first attempted this in an interactive Python 3.5 shell, but sub-processes can't find the party_later function for some reason):
from concurrent.futures import ThreadPoolExecutor, ProcessPoolExecutor, as_completed
from time import sleep, time
def party_later(kind='', n=''):
sleep(3)
return kind + n + ' party time!: ' + __name__
def main():
with ProcessPoolExecutor() as proc_executor:
with ThreadPoolExecutor() as thread_executor:
start_time = time()
proc_future1 = proc_executor.submit(party_later, kind='proc', n='1')
proc_future2 = proc_executor.submit(party_later, kind='proc', n='2')
thread_future1 = thread_executor.submit(party_later, kind='thread', n='1')
thread_future2 = thread_executor.submit(party_later, kind='thread', n='2')
for f in as_completed([
proc_future1, proc_future2, thread_future1, thread_future2,]):
print(f.result())
end_time = time()
print('total time to execute four 3-sec functions:', end_time - start_time)
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
Example output from this script:
thread1 party time!: __main__
thread2 party time!: __main__
proc1 party time!: __mp_main__
proc2 party time!: __mp_main__
total time to execute four 3-sec functions: 3.4519670009613037
Multithreading
You can trigger a function to be called at a later time in a separate thread with the Timer threading object:
>>> from threading import Timer
>>> t = Timer(3, party_time, args=None, kwargs=None)
>>> t.start()
>>>
>>> hooray!
>>>
The blank line illustrates that the function printed to my standard output, and I had to hit Enter to ensure I was on a prompt.
The upside of this method is that while the Timer thread was waiting, I was able to do other things, in this case, hitting Enter one time - before the function executed (see the first empty prompt).
There isn't a respective object in the multiprocessing library. You can create one, but it probably doesn't exist for a reason. A sub-thread makes a lot more sense for a simple timer than a whole new subprocess.

Delays can be also implemented by using the following methods.
The first method:
import time
time.sleep(5) # Delay for 5 seconds.
The second method to delay would be using the implicit wait method:
driver.implicitly_wait(5)
The third method is more useful when you have to wait until a particular action is completed or until an element is found:
self.wait.until(EC.presence_of_element_located((By.ID, 'UserName'))

There are five methods which I know: time.sleep(), pygame.time.wait(), matplotlib's pyplot.pause(), .after(), and asyncio.sleep().
time.sleep() example (do not use if using tkinter):
import time
print('Hello')
time.sleep(5) # Number of seconds
print('Bye')
pygame.time.wait() example (not recommended if you are not using the pygame window, but you could exit the window instantly):
import pygame
# If you are going to use the time module
# don't do "from pygame import *"
pygame.init()
print('Hello')
pygame.time.wait(5000) # Milliseconds
print('Bye')
matplotlib's function pyplot.pause() example (not recommended if you are not using the graph, but you could exit the graph instantly):
import matplotlib
print('Hello')
matplotlib.pyplot.pause(5) # Seconds
print('Bye')
The .after() method (best with Tkinter):
import tkinter as tk # Tkinter for Python 2
root = tk.Tk()
print('Hello')
def ohhi():
print('Oh, hi!')
root.after(5000, ohhi) # Milliseconds and then a function
print('Bye')
Finally, the asyncio.sleep() method (has to be in an async loop):
await asyncio.sleep(5)

A bit of fun with a sleepy generator.
The question is about time delay. It can be fixed time, but in some cases we might need a delay measured since last time. Here is one possible solution:
Delay measured since last time (waking up regularly)
The situation can be, we want to do something as regularly as possible and we do not want to bother with all the last_time, next_time stuff all around our code.
Buzzer generator
The following code (sleepy.py) defines a buzzergen generator:
import time
from itertools import count
def buzzergen(period):
nexttime = time.time() + period
for i in count():
now = time.time()
tosleep = nexttime - now
if tosleep > 0:
time.sleep(tosleep)
nexttime += period
else:
nexttime = now + period
yield i, nexttime
Invoking regular buzzergen
from sleepy import buzzergen
import time
buzzer = buzzergen(3) # Planning to wake up each 3 seconds
print time.time()
buzzer.next()
print time.time()
time.sleep(2)
buzzer.next()
print time.time()
time.sleep(5) # Sleeping a bit longer than usually
buzzer.next()
print time.time()
buzzer.next()
print time.time()
And running it we see:
1400102636.46
1400102639.46
1400102642.46
1400102647.47
1400102650.47
We can also use it directly in a loop:
import random
for ring in buzzergen(3):
print "now", time.time()
print "ring", ring
time.sleep(random.choice([0, 2, 4, 6]))
And running it we might see:
now 1400102751.46
ring (0, 1400102754.461676)
now 1400102754.46
ring (1, 1400102757.461676)
now 1400102757.46
ring (2, 1400102760.461676)
now 1400102760.46
ring (3, 1400102763.461676)
now 1400102766.47
ring (4, 1400102769.47115)
now 1400102769.47
ring (5, 1400102772.47115)
now 1400102772.47
ring (6, 1400102775.47115)
now 1400102775.47
ring (7, 1400102778.47115)
As we see, this buzzer is not too rigid and allow us to catch up with regular sleepy intervals even if we oversleep and get out of regular schedule.

The Tkinter library in the Python standard library is an interactive tool which you can import. Basically, you can create buttons and boxes and popups and stuff that appear as windows which you manipulate with code.
If you use Tkinter, do not use time.sleep(), because it will muck up your program. This happened to me. Instead, use root.after() and replace the values for however many seconds, with a milliseconds. For example, time.sleep(1) is equivalent to root.after(1000) in Tkinter.
Otherwise, time.sleep(), which many answers have pointed out, which is the way to go.

Delays are done with the time library, specifically the time.sleep() function.
To just make it wait for a second:
from time import sleep
sleep(1)
This works because by doing:
from time import sleep
You extract the sleep function only from the time library, which means you can just call it with:
sleep(seconds)
Rather than having to type out
time.sleep()
Which is awkwardly long to type.
With this method, you wouldn't get access to the other features of the time library and you can't have a variable called sleep. But you could create a variable called time.
Doing from [library] import [function] (, [function2]) is great if you just want certain parts of a module.
You could equally do it as:
import time
time.sleep(1)
and you would have access to the other features of the time library like time.clock() as long as you type time.[function](), but you couldn't create the variable time because it would overwrite the import. A solution to this to do
import time as t
which would allow you to reference the time library as t, allowing you to do:
t.sleep()
This works on any library.

If you would like to put a time delay in a Python script:
Use time.sleep or Event().wait like this:
from threading import Event
from time import sleep
delay_in_sec = 2
# Use time.sleep like this
sleep(delay_in_sec) # Returns None
print(f'slept for {delay_in_sec} seconds')
# Or use Event().wait like this
Event().wait(delay_in_sec) # Returns False
print(f'waited for {delay_in_sec} seconds')
However, if you want to delay the execution of a function do this:
Use threading.Timer like this:
from threading import Timer
delay_in_sec = 2
def hello(delay_in_sec):
print(f'function called after {delay_in_sec} seconds')
t = Timer(delay_in_sec, hello, [delay_in_sec]) # Hello function will be called 2 seconds later with [delay_in_sec] as the *args parameter
t.start() # Returns None
print("Started")
Outputs:
Started
function called after 2 seconds
Why use the later approach?
It does not stop execution of the whole script (except for the function you pass it).
After starting the timer you can also stop it by doing timer_obj.cancel().

asyncio.sleep
Notice in recent Python versions (Python 3.4 or higher) you can use asyncio.sleep. It's related to asynchronous programming and asyncio. Check out next example:
import asyncio
from datetime import datetime
#asyncio.coroutine
def countdown(iteration_name, countdown_sec):
"""
Just count for some countdown_sec seconds and do nothing else
"""
while countdown_sec > 0:
print(f'{iteration_name} iterates: {countdown_sec} seconds')
yield from asyncio.sleep(1)
countdown_sec -= 1
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
tasks = [asyncio.ensure_future(countdown('First Count', 2)),
asyncio.ensure_future(countdown('Second Count', 3))]
start_time = datetime.utcnow()
# Run both methods. How much time will both run...?
loop.run_until_complete(asyncio.wait(tasks))
loop.close()
print(f'total running time: {datetime.utcnow() - start_time}')
We may think it will "sleep" for 2 seconds for first method and then 3 seconds in the second method, a total of 5 seconds running time of this code. But it will print:
total_running_time: 0:00:03.01286
It is recommended to read asyncio official documentation for more details.

While everyone else has suggested the de facto time module, I thought I'd share a different method using matplotlib's pyplot function, pause.
An example
from matplotlib import pyplot as plt
plt.pause(5) # Pauses the program for 5 seconds
Typically this is used to prevent the plot from disappearing as soon as it is plotted or to make crude animations.
This would save you an import if you already have matplotlib imported.

This is an easy example of a time delay:
import time
def delay(period='5'):
# If the user enters nothing, it'll wait 5 seconds
try:
# If the user not enters a int, I'll just return ''
time.sleep(period)
except:
return ''
Another, in Tkinter:
import tkinter
def tick():
pass
root = Tk()
delay = 100 # Time in milliseconds
root.after(delay, tick)
root.mainloop()

You also can try this:
import time
# The time now
start = time.time()
while time.time() - start < 10: # Run 1- seconds
pass
# Do the job
Now the shell will not crash or not react.