I am trying to write a small little GUI that can start an audio recording with one button and end the recording with another.
I have written a recorder class that essentially does the following
class RecordAudio:
def __init__(self):
self.rec = True
def start_recording(self):
while self.rec:
record()
def end_recording(self):
self.rec = False
What is the mechanism, that I can use such that the recording continues on, while still enabling me to stop the recording using the function end_recording()? Or more precisely, what is the best practice for this problem?
I have tried to make the start_recording function async, but this doesn't work, as start_recording never finishes its computation.
Basically I would like to be able to do something like
import asyncio
rec = True
async def start_loop():
global rec
while rec:
await asyncio.sleep(1)
print("Slept another second")
print("Stopped loop")
def stop_loop():
global rec
rec = False
print("Stopping loop")
async def main():
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
loop.create_task(start_loop())
await asyncio.sleep(2)
stop_loop()
But where start_loop does not sleep but is continuously performing some endless task.
As said by Michael in the comments, I was using the wrong mode. The documentation gives to modes to operate either a blocking mode or a callback mode. In the callback mode it is possible to start recording in one function, while another function can change the state such that the recording stops.
Related
I want to execute a task after certain time, so I have tried a countdown timer with a condition of being finished (when countdown variable = 0, the task is performed). The thing is that I don't want to stop the execution of the main program while performing the countdown. I have tried this:
import time
def countdown(num_of_secs):
while(num_of_secs):
time.sleep(1)
num_of_secs -= 1
return num_of_secs
So, I run my code setting a number of seconds to the countdown, and when this countdown reaches the 0 value, a task must be executed. Using this code (it uses a while), when I call my function "countdown" it stops the execution of the main program, so it is the same as a big time.sleep. I want to carry out this countdown in the background, without stopping other actions until the countdown finishes and the task starts.
Thank you
Another alternative is by using threading.
I've got a simple example here with 2 Threads where the working thread is waiting for the countdown thread to finish and starting. The Main is still working fine.
import threading
import time
def do_something():
countdown_thread.join()
print("Starting Task")
time.sleep(3)
print("Finished Task")
def countdown(num_of_secs):
while(num_of_secs):
time.sleep(1)
num_of_secs -= 1
print(num_of_secs)
if __name__ == '__main__':
countdown_thread = threading.Thread(target=countdown, args=(3,))
work_thread = threading.Thread(target=do_something)
countdown_thread.start()
work_thread.start()
while True:
print("Main doing something")
time.sleep(1)
Example picture for multithreading: Sequential vs Threading
Usually python only has a single program flow, so every instruction needs to complete before the next one can get executed.
For your case you need asynchronicity, with e.g. asyncio.sleep(5) as a separate task in the same event loop.
import asyncio
async def sleeper():
print('Holding...')
await asyncio.sleep(5)
print('Doing Work!')
async def work():
print('Doing work')
print('while')
print('the other guy is sleeping')
async def main():
await asyncio.gather(sleeper(), work())
asyncio.run(main())
The most common and easiest way to implement this would be with a Timer object from the threading library. It would go as follows:
import threading
import time
i = 0
done = False
def show_results():
print("results from GPIO readings")
print("=)")
global done
done = True # signal end of while loop
def read_GPIO():
print("reading GPIO...")
t = threading.Timer(60, show_results) # task will trigger after 60 seconds
t.start()
# your while loop would go here
read_GPIO() # do work
while not done:
print("waiting", i) # doing work while waiting for timer
time.sleep(1)
i += 1
pass
Notice that the time library is used only for illustrative purposes. You could also start the timer recursively to check periodically GPIOs and print results or trigger an event. For more information on the threading library or the Timer object check the docs
In my simple asyncio Python program below, bar_loop is supposed to run continuously with a 1 second delay between loops.
Things run as expected when we have simply
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
However, when we add a asyncio.sleep(1), the loop will end instead of looping.
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
Why does asyncio.sleep() cause bar_loop to exit immediately? How can we let it loop with a 1 sec delay?
Full Example:
import asyncio
from typing import Optional
class Foo:
def __init__(self):
self.bar_loop_task: Optional[asyncio.Task] = None
async def start(self):
self.bar_loop_task = asyncio.create_task(self.bar_loop())
async def stop(self):
if self.bar_loop_task is not None:
self.bar_loop_task.cancel()
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
if __name__ == '__main__':
try:
foo = Foo()
asyncio.run(foo.start())
except KeyboardInterrupt:
asyncio.run(foo.stop())
Using Python 3.9.5 on Ubuntu 20.04.
This behavior has nothing to do with calling asyncio.sleep, but with the expected behavior of creating a task and doing nothing else.
Tasks will run in parallel in the the asyncio loop, while other code that uses just coroutine and await expressions can be thought as if run in a linear pattern - however, as the are "out of the way" of the - let's call it "visible path of execution", they also won't prevent that flow.
In this case, your program simply reaches the end of the start method, with nothing left being "awaited", the asyncio loop simply finishes its execution.
If you have no explicit code to run in parallel to bar_loop, just await for the task. Change your start method to read:
async def start(self):
self.bar_loop_task = asyncio.create_task(self.bar_loop())
try:
await self.bar_loop_task
except XXX:
# handle excptions that might have taken place inside the task
I'm developing a blender operator that needs to run an expensive for loop to generate a procedural animation. It looks roughly like this:
class MyOperator(bpy.types.Operator):
def execute(self, context):
data = []
for _ in range(10000):
data.append(run_something_expensive())
instantiate_data_into_blender(data)
return {"FINISHED"}
The problem of course is that when I run it from blender it takes a lot of time to finish and the UI becomes unresponsive. What is the recommended way to handle this? Is there a way to run this computation in another thread and potentially update the blender scene as the results get generated? (i.e. running instantiate_data_into_blender every once in a while as data becomes available)
Take a look at the asyncio module.
First: you have to import asyncio and define a loop.
import asyncio
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
Second: you create an async method in your operator.
async def massive_work(self, param):
returnedData = await your.longrun.func(param)
if returnedData == '':
return False
return True
Third: call the async method from your execute method
allDone = loop.run_until_complete(massive_work(dataToWorkOn))
if allDone != True:
self.report({'ERROR'}, "something went wrong!")
return {'CANCELLED'}
else:
self.report({'INFO'}, "all done!")
return {'FINISHED'}
I'm playing with Python's new(ish) asyncio stuff, trying to combine its event loop with traditional threading. I have written a class that runs the event loop in its own thread, to isolate it, and then provide a (synchronous) method that runs a coroutine on that loop and returns the result. (I realise this makes it a somewhat pointless example, because it necessarily serialises everything, but it's just as a proof-of-concept).
import asyncio
import aiohttp
from threading import Thread
class Fetcher(object):
def __init__(self):
self._loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
# FIXME Do I need this? It works either way...
#asyncio.set_event_loop(self._loop)
self._session = aiohttp.ClientSession(loop=self._loop)
self._thread = Thread(target=self._loop.run_forever)
self._thread.start()
def __enter__(self):
return self
def __exit__(self, *e):
self._session.close()
self._loop.call_soon_threadsafe(self._loop.stop)
self._thread.join()
self._loop.close()
def __call__(self, url:str) -> str:
# FIXME Can I not get a future from some method of the loop?
future = asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(self._get_response(url), self._loop)
return future.result()
async def _get_response(self, url:str) -> str:
async with self._session.get(url) as response:
assert response.status == 200
return await response.text()
if __name__ == "__main__":
with Fetcher() as fetcher:
while True:
x = input("> ")
if x.lower() == "exit":
break
try:
print(fetcher(x))
except Exception as e:
print(f"WTF? {e.__class__.__name__}")
To avoid this sounding too much like a "Code Review" question, what is the purpose of asynchio.set_event_loop and do I need it in the above? It works fine with and without. Moreover, is there a loop-level method to invoke a coroutine and return a future? It seems a bit odd to do this with a module level function.
You would need to use set_event_loop if you called get_event_loop anywhere and wanted it to return the loop created when you called new_event_loop.
From the docs
If there’s need to set this loop as the event loop for the current context, set_event_loop() must be called explicitly.
Since you do not call get_event_loop anywhere in your example, you can omit the call to set_event_loop.
I might be misinterpreting, but i think the comment by #dirn in the marked answer is incorrect in stating that get_event_loop works from a thread. See the following example:
import asyncio
import threading
async def hello():
print('started hello')
await asyncio.sleep(5)
print('finished hello')
def threaded_func():
el = asyncio.get_event_loop()
el.run_until_complete(hello())
thread = threading.Thread(target=threaded_func)
thread.start()
This produces the following error:
RuntimeError: There is no current event loop in thread 'Thread-1'.
It can be fixed by:
- el = asyncio.get_event_loop()
+ el = asyncio.new_event_loop()
The documentation also specifies that this trick (creating an eventloop by calling get_event_loop) only works on the main thread:
If there is no current event loop set in the current OS thread, the OS thread is main, and set_event_loop() has not yet been called, asyncio will create a new event loop and set it as the current one.
Finally, the docs also recommend to use get_running_loop instead of get_event_loop if you're on version 3.7 or higher
I'm working with asynchronous programming and wrote a small wrapper class for thread-safe execution of co-routines based on some ideas from this thread here: python asyncio, how to create and cancel tasks from another thread. After some debugging, I found that it hangs when calling the Thread class's join() function (I overrode it only for testing). Thinking I made a mistake, I basically copied the code that the OP said he used and tested it to find the same issue.
His mildly altered code:
import threading
import asyncio
from concurrent.futures import Future
import functools
class EventLoopOwner(threading.Thread):
class __Properties:
def __init__(self, loop, thread, evt_start):
self.loop = loop
self.thread = thread
self.evt_start = evt_start
def __init__(self):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.__elo = self.__Properties(None, None, threading.Event())
def run(self):
self.__elo.loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
asyncio.set_event_loop(self.__elo.loop)
self.__elo.thread = threading.current_thread()
self.__elo.loop.call_soon_threadsafe(self.__elo.evt_start.set)
self.__elo.loop.run_forever()
def stop(self):
self.__elo.loop.call_soon_threadsafe(self.__elo.loop.stop)
def _add_task(self, future, coro):
task = self.__elo.loop.create_task(coro)
future.set_result(task)
def add_task(self, coro):
self.__elo.evt_start.wait()
future = Future()
p = functools.partial(self._add_task, future, coro)
self.__elo.loop.call_soon_threadsafe(p)
return future.result() # block until result is available
def cancel(self, task):
self.__elo.loop.call_soon_threadsafe(task.cancel)
async def foo(i):
return 2 * i
async def main():
elo = EventLoopOwner()
elo.start()
task = elo.add_task(foo(10))
x = await task
print(x)
elo.stop(); print("Stopped")
elo.join(); print("Joined") # note: giving it a timeout does not fix it
if __name__ == "__main__":
loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
asyncio.set_event_loop(loop)
assert isinstance(loop, asyncio.AbstractEventLoop)
try:
loop.run_until_complete(main())
finally:
loop.close()
About 50% of the time when I run it, It simply stalls and says "Stopped" but not "Joined". I've done some debugging and found that it is correlated to when the Task itself sent an exception. This doesn't happen every time, but since it occurs when I'm calling threading.Thread.join(), I have to assume it is related to the destruction of the loop. What could possibly be causing this?
The exception is simply: "cannot join current thread" which tells me that the .join() is sometimes being run on the thread from which I called it and sometimes from the ELO thread.
What is happening and how can I fix it?
I'm using Python 3.5.1 for this.
Note: This is not replicated on IDE One: http://ideone.com/0LO2D9