I'd like to know when my application is idle so that I can preload some content. Is there an event or something similar implemented in PyQt?
(I could also do it with threads, but this feels like being too complicated.)
You have at least two different options, you can use a thread or use a timer. Qt's QThread class provides a priority property that you can set to make it only process when no other threads are running, which includes the GUI thread. The other option is a single shot timer. A QTimer with a timeout of 0 milliseconds puts an event on the back of the event queue so that all events and synchronous functions already active or scheduled will be processed first.
In code, the two options would look like the following:
// (1) use idle thread processing
MyQThreadSubclass idleThread;
idleThread.run(QThread::IdlePriority);
// (2) use QTimer::singleShot
QTimer::singleShot(0, receiver, SLOT(doIdleProcessingChunk));
If you go with the single shot QTimer, be careful how much processing you do as you can still block the Gui. You'd likely want to break it into chunks so that GUI won't start to lag:
// slot
void doIdleProcessingChunk() {
/* ... main processing here ... */
if (chunksRemain())
QTimer::singleShot(0, receiver, SLOT(doIdleProcessingChunk));
}
Obviously, the above is C++ syntax, but to answer with respect to PyQt, use the single shot timer. In Python, the global interpreter lock is basically going to render much of your concurrency pointless if the implementation being called is performed within Python.
You also then have the choice of using Python threads or Qt threads, both are good for different reasons.
Have a look at QAbstractEventDispatcher. But ... I still suggest to use a thread. Reasons:
It will be portable
If you make a mistake in your code, the event loop will be broken -> You app might hang, exit all of a sudden, etc.
While the preloading happens, your app hangs. No events will be processed unless you can preload the content one at a time, they are all very small, loading takes only a few milliseconds, etc.
Use a thread and send a signal to the main thread when the content is ready. It's so much more simple.
Related
In his Qt event loop, networking and I/O API talk, Thiago Macieira mentions that nesting of QEventLoop's should be avoided:
QEventLoop is for nesting event Loops... Avoid it if you can because it creates a number of problems: things might reenter, new activations of sockets or timers that you were not expecting.
Can anybody expand on what he is referring to? I maintain a lot of code that uses modal dialogs which internally nest a new event loop when exec() is called so I'm very interested in knowing what kind of problems this may lead to.
A nested event loop costs you 1-2kb of stack. It takes up 5% of the L1 data cache on typical 32kb L1 cache CPUs, give-or-take.
It has the capacity to reenter any code already on the call stack. There are no guarantees that any of that code was designed to be reentrant. I'm talking about your code, not Qt's code. It can reenter code that has started this event loop, and unless you explicitly control this recursion, there are no guarantees that you won't eventually run out of stack space.
In current Qt, there are two places where, due to a long standing API bugs or platform inadequacies, you have to use nested exec: QDrag and platform file dialogs (on some platforms). You simply don't need to use it anywhere else. You do not need a nested event loop for non-platform modal dialogs.
Reentering the event loop is usually caused by writing pseudo-synchronous code where one laments the supposed lack of yield() (co_yield and co_await has landed in C++ now!), hides one's head in the sand and uses exec() instead. Such code typically ends up being barely palatable spaghetti and is unnecessary.
For modern C++, using the C++20 coroutines is worthwhile; there are some Qt-based experiments around, easy to build on.
There are Qt-native implementations of stackful coroutines: Skycoder42/QtCoroutings - a recent project, and the older ckamm/qt-coroutine. I'm not sure how fresh the latter code is. It looks that it all worked at some point.
Writing asynchronous code cleanly without coroutines is usually accomplished through state machines, see this answer for an example, and QP framework for an implementation different from QStateMachine.
Personal anecdote: I couldn't wait for C++ coroutines to become production-ready, and I now write asynchronous communication code in golang, and statically link that into a Qt application. Works great, the garbage collector is unnoticeable, and the code is way easier to read and write than C++ with coroutines. I had a lot of code written using C++ coroutines TS, but moved it all to golang and I don't regret it.
A nested event loop will lead to ordering inversion. (at least on qt4)
Lets say you have the following sequence of things happening
enqueued in outer loop: 1,2,3
processing 1 => spawn inner loop
enqueue 4 in inner loop
processing 4
exit inner loop
processing 2
So you see the processing order was: 1,4,2,3.
I speak from experience and this usually resulted in a crash in my code.
So I have been using QtConcurrent::run for some time and its fantastic. But now I need the function to return an object. Therefore I use the pseudo code
QFutureWatcher<MyObject> fw;
QFuture<MyObject> t1 = QtConcurrent::run(&thOb, &MythreadObjFunc::getList, ConSettings, form, query);
fw.setFuture(t1);
// Both .results() and waitForFinished() block
fw.waitForFinished();
MyObject entries = t1.result();
Then I iterate through the myObject. The issue is that this is blocking e.g. my main GUI is not responsive. And this was the whole reason I started using QtConcurrent::run
Therefore, what is the recommended way to have my GUI execute a QtConcurrent::run and get the object back but not block? I thought of signals and slots where the signal would be from the QtConcurrent::run but this would mean that it would be from a different thread and I read thats not recommended.
Thanks for your time.
You should never use any waitForFinished functions in the GUI thread. Instead, connect a slot to the future watcher's finished signal. See this answer for an example.
From QtConcurrent::run() you can't emit any signal. Runnable function is not a QObject. That is the first thing.
The other thing is that QFutureWatcher::waitForFinished() blocks the execution until the thread ends its execution. This is the intended behaviour. If you have to wait for your function to finish, why do you even launch it on separate thread? It makes no sense.
The easiest solution would be to make your function a member of QObject-inherited class, move the instance to the other thread, launch the calculations and emit done() signal. Qt's signal and slot system is thread-safe and it is the perfect way to use it. There is a outstanding documentation provided by Qt that covers this subject more than enough. You should start reading here: http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.8/threads.html
How can I have a pause between looped plays? I do have a .wav file, and i do want to play it continuously, but I want an X ms pause between each playback. I know I can edit the .wav file and add 'quiet' at its end, but I wanted to know if it can be done programmatically, without using timers.
You definitely want to use a singleShot QTimer to do a pause in Qt. There are some other mechanisms in Qt that use a QTimer internally. Some of the alternatives may make it a little prettier, but often are in a larger framework and for a different use case.
Some alternatives that might fit your application include:
You could start a sequential animation that uses a QPauseAnimation, with internally uses some sort of QTimer.
You could poll QTime::currentTime() if you are checking something often inside a loop or a QThread. You could also do the same polling with QTime::elapsed().
You could #include "windows.h" or the appropriate library for your platform and command a sleep, if you don't mind the GUI hanging up during the sleep.
You could set up a QStateMachine and have a transition animation/timer built in to happen between when your video stops and when you want to do the next action, or have something else show up or start.
Hope that helps. Good luck.
I am not familar with WINAPI, and I am looking for a way to replace WaitForMultipleObjects used in one example I'm porting to Qt by anything using Qt only. Is it possible?
EDIT: (Providing more information as requested in comments)
A 3rd party API provides an array of events:
HANDLE m_hEv[MAX_EV];
In an endles-loop of a thread, the program waits for the events like this:
WaitForMultipleObjects(m_EvMax, m_hEv, FALSE ,INFINITE )
The HANDLE type seems to be void*.
So I wonder, if any Qt class could observe m_hEv for changes and unlock thread execution.
There is no simple way of porting WaitForMultipleObjects outside WinAPI. WinAPI has an "advantage" of that all lockable resources (sockets, files, processes) provide the same generic non-typesafe HANDLE, which is your void*. Unlike other platforms which have different ways of locking and signalling per the type of resource, the event handling in WinAPI is largely independent of the resources. Then a generic function like WaitForMultipleObjects can exist, which doesn't need to care who produced the HANDLEs. So you'll have to understand what the code is trying to do and mimic it differently per scenario.
The biggest difference is in WaitForMultipleObjects third parameter, which is FALSE in your case. Which means that the it will exit waiting as soon as any single event of the waiting array will happen. That is the easier scenario and can be replaced with a QWaitCondition.
Instead of m_hEv, you will pass a QWaitCondition* into the code which signals the event (most probably via WinAPI SetEvent(m_hEv[x]))
Instead of WaitForMultipleObjects, do QWaitCondition::wait().
Instead of SetEvent(), do QWaitCondition::wakeOne().
Would the third parameter be TRUE, then the WinAPI code waits until ALL m_hEv events are signalled. The established name for such functionality is a synchronization barrier and it can be simulated with QEventCondition too, but does not come out of the Qt box. I never needed to do any myself, but SO has some ideas how to do it:
Qt synchronization barrier?
WaitForMultipleObjects is a kind of generic function that works with many things: threads, processes, mutexes, etc. Qt is an OOP library where every class exposes the operations it supports. So the equivalent operation in Qt depends on what class you're using. For example, with threads, use QThread::wait. With mutexes, use QMutex::lock.
I find that my Flex application's UI becomes unresponsive during very long processing loops (tens of seconds). For example, while processing very large XML files and doing something per-element...
Is there an equivalent of "ProcessMessages"? That is, a call that would tell Flex to continue responding to UI events, even in the middle of some long loop, so that the UI doesn't become unresponsive?
I'm aware Flex is single threaded by design. That's exactly why I'm looking for something like ProcessMessages() - a function that allows single-threaded reentrant applications (like in VB, or single-threaded message loop based C++ applications) to remain responsive during long operations.
Summary of Answers
There's no built-in function like HandleEvents() or ProcessMessages() in Flex.
Using some sort of callback mechanism to iteratively process chunks of a long computation process, while yielding to the runtime between chunks, thus enabling it to be responsive, is the only way to maintain a responsive UI during long computations.
Ways of accomplishing the above are:
Using the enterFrame event, which is called whenever the Flash "movie" layer below the Flex application refreshes its frame (which is something like 20fps).
Using a timer.
Using UIComponent.callLater() which schedules work to be done "later". (as the docs say: Queues a function to be called later. Before each update of the screen, Flash Player or AIR calls the set of functions that are scheduled for the update.
Using intentionally triggered mouse/keyboard events to create pseudo "worker threads", as in this example.
If there are further suggestions, or if I left out anything, please feel free to edit this (now) wiki piece.
The problem is that Flash is single threaded, i.e. until a part of the code is running, no other processing can be made. You'll somehow need to break up the processing into smaller chunks and execute these chunks, say, on the enterFrame event.
Edit: I'm afraid that downvoting this (or Simon's) answer does not change the fact that this is not doable in AS3. Read this article for more insight on the problem. The article also includes a simple "library" called PseudoThread, which helps in executing long background computations. You still have to break up the problem into smaller pieces yourself, though.
I can tell you definitively that as of Flex 3, there is no built-in construct similar to the ProcessMessages functionality you are describing.
The most common way to work around this is to split whatever work you are processing into a queue of "worker" tasks and a "worker manager" to control the queue. As each "worker" completes its processing, the worker queue manager pops the next worker off the queue and executes it in a callLater() invocation. This will have an effect that is similar to "yielding to the main thread" and allow your UI to receive events and be responsive, while still allowing the processing to continue when control is returned to the worker.
Once you've got this working, you can do some testing and profiling to figure out if your application can get away with executing a run of multiple workers before invoking callLater(), and encapsulate this logic within the worker queue manager. For example, in our implementation of this pattern (with a few hundred workers in the queue), we were able to get the processing done more quickly with a comparable perceived performance by executing 4 workers before "yielding to the main thread" with callLater(), but this is totally dependent on the scope and nature of the work that your workers are doing.
The process model for ActionScript is single threaded, so the answer is no. Best bet is to either defer to an asynchronous task on the server if you can, or pop up a wait cursor while your long loop runs, or break your process into some smaller pieces which are not quite as intrusive to the UI, or perform the long running tasks at a moment when the user is less likely to feel the effect (app startup for instance).
Actionscript is single threaded by design, no amount of downvoting answers will change that.
For compatibility your best bet is to try to split up your processing into smaller chunks, and do your processing iteratively.
If you absolutely need threading it can sort of be done in Flash Player 10 using Pixel Bender filters. These will run on a separate thread and can give you a callback once they are done.
I believe they are well suited for "hardcore" processing tasks, so they might fit your purpose nicely.
However, they will put a whole other set of demands on your code, so you might be better of doing small "buckets" of computing anyways.
There is no equivalent functionality in Flash Player. By design, Flash Player alternates between rendering to the screen and then running all of the code for each frame. Using Event.ENTER_FRAME events on display objects, or Timer objects elsewhere, are the best bet for breaking up very long calculations.
It's worth noting that some events in ActionScript have an updateAfterEvent() function with the following description:
Instructs Flash Player or the AIR runtime to render after processing of this event completes, if the display list has been modified.
In particular, TimerEvent, MouseEvent, and KeyboardEvent support updateAfterEvent(). There may be others, but those are the ones I found with a quick search.