[ltk-user] fix for ltk on mswin?

[dherring at tentpost.com]

Thomas F. Burdick wrote:
> 2010/2/20  <dherring at tentpost.com>:
>> A major benefit of the (sleep 1) was to let Tk appear before Ltk sent it
>> bad commands.  However, it should not be removed; I still need it for
>> proper operation under clisp.
>
> This is worrisome. If it's only clisp where this causes problems,
> maybe we can see if there's any clisp-specific way of waiting for the
> subprocess to be ready for input.

Yes the sleep is bad, but I don't feel like debugging it further.  FWIW, a
(sleep 0.1) is too short, but a (sleep 0.5) seems to work.  Thus we apply
a margin of safety and conclude (sleep 1) is good.  ;)

Unfortunately, I don't see a way to wait for the subprocess.
http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes.html#run-prog

The docs do mention a possible deadlock; so its possible the sleep could
be restricted to clisp on win32.
http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes.html#pipe

- Daniel