计时计数可以做到高精度(即< 1毫秒)，因为它与系统时钟同步。它不会随着时间的推移而漂移，也不受代码执行时间长度的影响(当然，前提是它小于间隔时间)。

一个简单的阻塞的例子:

from timed_count import timed_count

for count in timed_count(60):
    # Execute code here exactly every 60 seconds
    ...

你可以通过在线程中运行它来让它变得不阻塞:

from threading import Thread
from timed_count import timed_count

def periodic():
    for count in timed_count(60):
        # Execute code here exactly every 60 seconds
        ...

thread = Thread(target=periodic)
thread.start()

我认为更简单的方法是:

import time

def executeSomething():
    #code here
    time.sleep(60)

while True:
    executeSomething()

这样，你的代码被执行，然后等待60秒，然后再次执行，等待，执行，等等…… 没有必要把事情复杂化:D

我用这个方法使每小时产生60个事件，其中大多数事件在整分钟后的相同秒数内发生:

import math
import time
import random

TICK = 60 # one minute tick size
TICK_TIMING = 59 # execute on 59th second of the tick
TICK_MINIMUM = 30 # minimum catch up tick size when lagging

def set_timing():

    now = time.time()
    elapsed = now - info['begin']
    minutes = math.floor(elapsed/TICK)
    tick_elapsed = now - info['completion_time']
    if (info['tick']+1) > minutes:
        wait = max(0,(TICK_TIMING-(time.time() % TICK)))
        print ('standard wait: %.2f' % wait)
        time.sleep(wait)
    elif tick_elapsed < TICK_MINIMUM:
        wait = TICK_MINIMUM-tick_elapsed
        print ('minimum wait: %.2f' % wait)
        time.sleep(wait)
    else:
        print ('skip set_timing(); no wait')
    drift = ((time.time() - info['begin']) - info['tick']*TICK -
        TICK_TIMING + info['begin']%TICK)
    print ('drift: %.6f' % drift)

info['tick'] = 0
info['begin'] = time.time()
info['completion_time'] = info['begin'] - TICK

while 1:

    set_timing()

    print('hello world')

    #random real world event
    time.sleep(random.random()*TICK_MINIMUM)

    info['tick'] += 1
    info['completion_time'] = time.time()

根据实际情况，你可能会得到长度的刻度:

60,60,62,58,60,60,120,30,30,60,60,60,60,60...etc.

但在60分钟结束时，你会有60个滴答;而且它们中的大多数都将出现在您喜欢的正确偏移时间。

在我的系统中，我得到了< 1/20秒的典型漂移，直到需要纠正。

该方法的优点是具有较好的时钟漂移分辨率;这可能会导致问题，如果你做的事情，比如每tick追加一个项目，你希望每小时追加60个项目。未能考虑漂移可能导致次要指标，如移动平均线，将数据考虑得过于深入过去，从而导致错误的输出。

我使用Tkinter after()方法，它不会“窃取游戏”(就像之前提出的sched模块)，即它允许其他东西并行运行:

import Tkinter

def do_something1():
  global n1
  n1 += 1
  if n1 == 6: # (Optional condition)
    print "* do_something1() is done *"; return
  # Do your stuff here
  # ...
  print "do_something1() "+str(n1)
  tk.after(1000, do_something1)

def do_something2(): 
  global n2
  n2 += 1
  if n2 == 6: # (Optional condition)
    print "* do_something2() is done *"; return
  # Do your stuff here
  # ...
  print "do_something2() "+str(n2)
  tk.after(500, do_something2)

tk = Tkinter.Tk(); 
n1 = 0; n2 = 0
do_something1()
do_something2()
tk.mainloop()

Do_something1()和do_something2()可以以任意的间隔速度并行运行。在这里，第2个将以两倍的速度执行。还要注意，我使用了一个简单的计数器作为终止任一函数的条件。你可以使用任何你喜欢的条件，或者不使用，如果你想让一个函数运行到程序终止(例如一个时钟)。

如果您的程序还没有事件循环，请使用sched模块，它实现了一个通用的事件调度器。

import sched, time

def do_something(scheduler): 
    # schedule the next call first
    scheduler.enter(60, 1, do_something, (scheduler,))
    print("Doing stuff...")
    # then do your stuff

my_scheduler = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
my_scheduler.enter(60, 1, do_something, (my_scheduler,))
my_scheduler.run()

如果您已经在使用事件循环库，如asyncio、trio、tkinter、PyQt5、gobject、kivy等，则只需使用现有事件循环库的方法来调度任务。

import time, traceback

def every(delay, task):
  next_time = time.time() + delay
  while True:
    time.sleep(max(0, next_time - time.time()))
    try:
      task()
    except Exception:
      traceback.print_exc()
      # in production code you might want to have this instead of course:
      # logger.exception("Problem while executing repetitive task.")
    # skip tasks if we are behind schedule:
    next_time += (time.time() - next_time) // delay * delay + delay

def foo():
  print("foo", time.time())

every(5, foo)

如果你想在不阻塞剩余代码的情况下这样做，你可以使用这个让它在自己的线程中运行:

import threading
threading.Thread(target=lambda: every(5, foo)).start()

该解决方案结合了其他解决方案中很少结合的几个特性:

Exception handling: As far as possible on this level, exceptions are handled properly, i. e. get logged for debugging purposes without aborting our program. No chaining: The common chain-like implementation (for scheduling the next event) you find in many answers is brittle in the aspect that if anything goes wrong within the scheduling mechanism (threading.Timer or whatever), this will terminate the chain. No further executions will happen then, even if the reason of the problem is already fixed. A simple loop and waiting with a simple sleep() is much more robust in comparison. No drift: My solution keeps an exact track of the times it is supposed to run at. There is no drift depending on the execution time (as in many other solutions). Skipping: My solution will skip tasks if one execution took too much time (e. g. do X every five seconds, but X took 6 seconds). This is the standard cron behavior (and for a good reason). Many other solutions then simply execute the task several times in a row without any delay. For most cases (e. g. cleanup tasks) this is not wished. If it is wished, simply use next_time += delay instead.