Here's the test code: https://pastebin.com/Ye8qecgW https://pastebin.com/Ye8qecgW The original issue I had is that under Windows sometimes Watchdog picks up th

Here's the test code: https://pastebin.com/Ye8qecgW https://pastebin.com/Ye8qecgW The original issue I had is that under Windows sometimes Watchdog picks up the entire file as being Deleted/Added. Seems to be a race condition of some sort because adding "print" statements after picking up a change makes that less likely. That causes the part guarded by __name__=="__main__" to be re-run under the Jurigged thread: https://pastebin.com/p68NBxmE https://pastebin.com/p68NBxmE Or to get the same results without the Watchdog issue I can change time.sleep(1) to some other number. It makes sense that if you change the program top-level Jurigged will try to re-run it but at the same time it never makes sense to re-run infinite loops. I've tested changing __name__ when re-running and that works although requires a guard and I also think it might be helpful not to re-run module code that is already running as determined by the thread's call stack. --- (edited since can't reply) --- Good call on de-bouncing. I tested with both "notepad" and "notepad++" and get the same behavior. The Delete/Run happens within a millisecond so 0.1s filtering should work. Perhaps that would also allow you to monitor for file Delete/Add to work with editors that use atomic replacement. With that fixed, avoiding re-executing the main loop isn't as important but I think it's worth doing for robustness. Detecting this also gives you the option of restarting the process instead.