Getting the time remaining before event.wait is done in Python - python

I'm writing a Python script in which i have a thread running that calculates some values and creates a graph every hour. What I would like to do is have a function in that thread that tells me how much time there is remaining before the next update happens. My current implementation is as follows:
class StatsUpdater(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, updateTime):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.event = threading.Event()
self.updateTime = updateTime
def run(self):
while not self.event.is_set():
self.updateStats()
self.event.wait(self.updateTime)
def updateStats(self):
print "Updating Stats"
tables = SQLInterface.listTables()
for table in tables:
PlotTools.createAndSave(table)
def stop(self):
self.event.set()
So what i would like is adding another function in that class that gives me back the time remaining gefore self.event.wait(self.updateTime) times out, something like this:
def getTimeout(self):
return self.event.timeRemaining()
Is this possible somehow?

There's no support for getting the remaining time directly but you can sleep several times and keep track of how much time remains.
def __init__(self, updateTime):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.event = threading.Event()
self.updateTime = updateTime
self.wait_time=None
def run(self):
while not self.event.is_set():
self.updateStats()
try:
self.wait_time=self.updateTime
inttime=int(self.updateTime)
remaining=inttime-self.updateTime
self.event.wait(remaining)
for t in reversed(range(inttime)):
self.wait_time=t+1
self.event.wait(1)
finally:
self.wait_time=0
And then use
def getTimeout(self):
return self.wait_time

Alright, i have a compromis to my problem. I implemented a variable in StatsUpdater.run:
self.lastUpdateTime = int(time.time())
right before i do the update function.
Now when I call getTimeout(), I do:
def getTimeout(self):
timePassed = int(time.time() - self.lastUpdateTime
return self.updateTime - timePassed
This way, I don't have a calculation intensive thread running and calculation
a small sum every second but i still get a pretty good indication of when the next update is since the ammount of time between updates is also known ;)

Related

Run thread in loop only if it's not currently running in Python

I'm trying to separate my logic (function or task) from main loop. This function usually takes long time to run. In following example calculate() function takes a lot of time to calculate self.time variable.
In other words I want calculate() to be called asynchronously. In every iteration first I would check if calculate() is running, if not then call it. Secondly I would call show() function in every iteration, no matter if calculate() changed self.time value.
import time
import datetime
class Clock:
def __init__(self):
self.time = None
def calculate(self):
time.sleep(3)
self.time = datetime.datetime.now()
def show(self):
print(f"{self.time.minute}:{self.time.second}")
def loop(self):
while True:
self.calculate() # this should be asynchronous
self.show() # this should be called every iteration
if __name__ == '__main__':
clock = Clock()
clock.loop()
Output:
36:9
36:12
36:15
36:18
This is not a wanted outcome. What I want:
36:9
...
36:9
36:9
36:12
...
36:12
36:15
36:15
36:15
...
36:15
36:18
36:18
...
36:18
How I've tried to solve this (this probably not the best solution, so future reader please check answers):
import time
import datetime
import threading
class Clock:
def __init__(self):
self.time = datetime.datetime.now()
self.__thread = None
def calculate(self):
time.sleep(3)
self.time = datetime.datetime.now() # race condition?
def show(self):
print(f"{self.time.minute}:{self.time.second}")
def loop(self):
while True:
if self.__thread is None or not self.__thread.is_alive():
self.__thread = threading.Thread(target=self.calculate)
self.__thread.start()
self.show()
if __name__ == '__main__':
clock = Clock()
clock.loop()
Program output is what I wanted. Is there any flaw in this solution? I can think only of race condition.
I am aware that's not the greatest description of this problem. If you
could help me with editing this post with more searchable and specific
vocabulary I would be grateful. If you have idea for better title please
leave it in comments.
I checked your code in my IDE, and it looks like exactly what you wanted using an acceptable approach. The only alternative solution I can think of is: 1) use a temp variable that goes up by one until it gets to 3 then reset. 2) similar idea but use time.nextTime = 3 to jump every 3 seconds and print current time.
Also, your first code solution seems to take some time to run is because it's waiting 3 seconds to show the time. And regarding race condition, that's not an issue since you're not using multiple threads at the same time in your second solution.

threading - sentinel value or Event to break loops

I can think of two ways to break out of a loop in a Python thread, minimal examples below:
1 - Use a sentinel value
from threading import Thread, Event
from time import sleep
class SimpleClass():
def do_something(self):
while self.sentinel:
sleep(1)
print('loop completed')
def start_thread(self):
self.sentinel = True
self.th = Thread(target=self.do_something)
self.th.start()
def stop_thread(self):
self.sentinel = False
self.th.join()
simpleinstance = SimpleClass()
simpleinstance.start_thread()
sleep(5)
simpleinstance.stop_thread()
2 - Use an Event
from threading import Thread, Event
from time import sleep
class SimpleThread(Thread):
def __init__(self):
super(SimpleThread, self).__init__()
self.stoprequest = Event()
def run(self):
while not self.stoprequest.isSet():
sleep(1)
print('loop completed')
def join(self, timeout=None):
self.stoprequest.set()
super(SimpleThread, self).join(timeout)
simpleinstance = SimpleThread()
simpleinstance.start()
sleep(5)
simpleinstance.join()
In the Python documentation, it discusses events but not the simpler 'sentinel value' approach (which I see used in many threading answers on Stack Overflow).
Is there any disadvantage to using the sentinel value?
Specifically, could it cause errors (I have never had one but I imagine if you tried to change the value of the sentinel at exactly the same moment it was being read for the while loop then something could break (or maybe the CPython GIL would save me in this case). What is considered best (safest) practice?
If you look at the source of Event, you can see that the function you are using don't have any more value for you:
class Event:
def __init__(self):
self._cond = Condition(Lock())
self._flag = False
def is_set(self):
return self._flag
def set(self):
with self._cond:
self._flag = True
self._cond.notify_all() # No more-value, because you are not using Event.wait
So in your case Event is just a fancy wrapper for a sentinel value with no actually use, that will also slow down your operation time by a really tiny amount.
Events are only useful if you use their wait method.

multi threads modify a global list in python

i want to add an item into a global list every 2 seconds in one thread,
and save the list into database before empty it every 3 seconds in another thread.
i create two local varibles to monitor the total added items and total saveditems, they should be equal every 6 senconds,but it is not.
here is my code:
import datetime
import psutil,os,time
from threading import *
class AddToList(Thread):
totalAdded=0
def run(self):
lock=RLock()
lock.acquire()
while True:
entryList.append("AddToList at "+str(datetime.datetime.now()))
self.totalAdded=self.totalAdded+len(entryList)
print("totalAdded:"+str(self.totalAdded))
time.sleep(2)
lock.release()
class SaveList(Thread):
totalSaved=0
'''save entry to server'''
def __init__(self):
Thread.__init__(self)
def run(self):
lock=RLock()
lock.acquire()
while True:
#save list to database,then empty the list
self.totalSaved=self.totalSaved+len(entryList)
del entryList[:]
print("totalSaved:"+str(self.totalSaved))
time.sleep(3)
lock.release()
if __name__=="__main__":
global entryList
entryList=[]
addClass= AddToList()
addClass.start()
saveClass=SaveList()
saveClass.start()
result:
totalAdded:2
totalSaved:2
totalAdded:3
totalSaved:3totalAdded:4
totalAdded:6
totalSaved:5
totalAdded:7
totalSaved:6
totalAdded:8
totalAdded:10
totalSaved:8
totalAdded:11
totalSaved:9
totalAdded:12
totalAdded:14
totalSaved:11
totalAdded:15
totalSaved:12
...........
...........
totalAdded:51
totalSaved:39totalAdded:52
totalAdded:54
totalSaved:41
totalAdded:55
totalSaved:42
totalAdded:56
totalAdded:58
totalSaved:44
totalAdded:59
totalSaved:45totalAdded:60
......
......
i anm new to python and searched a lot about threading ,Lock and RLock ,but with no luck.
where am wrong?
To make Lock and RLock work you must use the same object in every thread. The lock objects must have the same "visibility" of the object that you want to "protect".
Here is a new version of you code which should work. It also avoid using things like global variables etc.
import datetime
import time
import threading
class AddToList(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, lock, entryList):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.totalAdded = 0
self.entryList = entryList
self.lock = lock
def run(self):
while True:
self.lock.acquire()
entryList.append("AddToList at {}".format(datetime.datetime.now()))
self.totalAdded += 1
self.lock.release()
print("totalAdded: {}".format(self.totalAdded))
time.sleep(2)
class SaveList(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, lock, entryList):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.totalSaved = 0
self.entryList = entryList
self.lock = lock
def run(self):
while True:
self.lock.acquire()
self.totalSaved += len(self.entryList)
del self.entryList[:]
self.lock.release()
print("totalSaved: {}".format(self.totalSaved))
time.sleep(3)
if __name__=="__main__":
lock=threading.Lock()
entryList=[]
addClass = AddToList(lock, entryList)
addClass.start()
saveClass = SaveList(lock, entryList)
saveClass.start()
Some things to note:
Use Lock instead of RLock when you don't have any particular needs. RLock is much slower.
As already pointed out by someone it is better avoid using global variables when not needed. Also Class variables should be used only when it makes sense.
When you use a lock you should try to limit as much as possible the code between acquire and release. In you previous code you never release the lock.

Python threading and handing over values

Im trying to update threads which continuously run with new values every now and then.
class Test:
def __init__(self, num):
#testing reasons
self.num = num
def printloop(self, num):
self.num = num
#running is set to True sometime in the beginning
while running:
print(self.num)
time.sleep(3)
if not running:
print("finished")
def setnum(self, num):
self.num = num
I create threads like this:
t1 = threading.Thread(target=test.printloop,args=("1"))
This works and prints the proper arg.
But how can I update single threads with new values - if needed? Not all of the threads might need to be updated. The setnum method in my class there is obviously not working since it would update the value for all of the threads.
Do I need to limit the thread lifetime and join and wait for them to finish. Then recreating them with new values?
Or should I define a variable for each thread - how do I do that dynamically?
Or is there a better way im not seeing?
Thanks!
Edit:
I suppose i'll end up with something like:
test1 = Test(1)
..
test5 = Test(5)
t1 = threading.Thread(target=test1.printloop,args=("1"))
t5 = threading.Thread(target=test5.printloop,args=("5"))
and then use a method on each to set the Values?
For single integer values you can make Test a subclass of thread (and have run call printloop). Then other threads can call setnum safely. Due to the GIL and the fact that you are setting a single value this is safe, if you were doing a more complex update you would have to wrap setnum and the inner loop in printloop in a lock to prevent race conditions.
EDIT: A simple example
from threading import Thread
from time import sleep
class Output(Thread):
def __init__(self, num):
super(Output, self).__init__()
self.num = num
self.running = False
def run(self):
self.running = True
while self.running:
print self.num
sleep(1)
def stop(self):
self.running = False
def set_num(self, num):
self.num = num
output = Output(0)
output.start()
sleep(3)
output.set_num(1)
sleep(3)
output.stop()
output.join()

Python Equivalent of setInterval()?

Does Python have a function similar to JavaScript's setInterval()?
I would like to have:
def set_interval(func, interval):
...
That will call func every interval time units.
This might be the correct snippet you were looking for:
import threading
def set_interval(func, sec):
def func_wrapper():
set_interval(func, sec)
func()
t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
t.start()
return t
This is a version where you could start and stop.
It is not blocking.
There is also no glitch as execution time error is not added (important for long time execution with very short interval as audio for example)
import time, threading
StartTime=time.time()
def action() :
print('action ! -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-StartTime))
class setInterval :
def __init__(self,interval,action) :
self.interval=interval
self.action=action
self.stopEvent=threading.Event()
thread=threading.Thread(target=self.__setInterval)
thread.start()
def __setInterval(self) :
nextTime=time.time()+self.interval
while not self.stopEvent.wait(nextTime-time.time()) :
nextTime+=self.interval
self.action()
def cancel(self) :
self.stopEvent.set()
# start action every 0.6s
inter=setInterval(0.6,action)
print('just after setInterval -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-StartTime))
# will stop interval in 5s
t=threading.Timer(5,inter.cancel)
t.start()
Output is :
just after setInterval -> time : 0.0s
action ! -> time : 0.6s
action ! -> time : 1.2s
action ! -> time : 1.8s
action ! -> time : 2.4s
action ! -> time : 3.0s
action ! -> time : 3.6s
action ! -> time : 4.2s
action ! -> time : 4.8s
Just keep it nice and simple.
import threading
def setInterval(func,time):
e = threading.Event()
while not e.wait(time):
func()
def foo():
print "hello"
# using
setInterval(foo,5)
# output:
hello
hello
.
.
.
EDIT : This code is non-blocking
import threading
class ThreadJob(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self,callback,event,interval):
'''runs the callback function after interval seconds
:param callback: callback function to invoke
:param event: external event for controlling the update operation
:param interval: time in seconds after which are required to fire the callback
:type callback: function
:type interval: int
'''
self.callback = callback
self.event = event
self.interval = interval
super(ThreadJob,self).__init__()
def run(self):
while not self.event.wait(self.interval):
self.callback()
event = threading.Event()
def foo():
print "hello"
k = ThreadJob(foo,event,2)
k.start()
print "It is non-blocking"
Change Nailxx's answer a bit and you got the answer!
from threading import Timer
def hello():
print "hello, world"
Timer(30.0, hello).start()
Timer(30.0, hello).start() # after 30 seconds, "hello, world" will be printed
The sched module provides these abilities for general Python code. However, as its documentation suggests, if your code is multithreaded it might make more sense to use the threading.Timer class instead.
I think this is what you're after:
#timertest.py
import sched, time
def dostuff():
print "stuff is being done!"
s.enter(3, 1, dostuff, ())
s = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
s.enter(3, 1, dostuff, ())
s.run()
If you add another entry to the scheduler at the end of the repeating method, it'll just keep going.
I use sched to create setInterval function gist
import functools
import sched, time
s = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
def setInterval(sec):
def decorator(func):
#functools.wraps(func)
def wrapper(*argv, **kw):
setInterval(sec)(func)
func(*argv, **kw)
s.enter(sec, 1, wrapper, ())
return wrapper
s.run()
return decorator
#setInterval(sec=3)
def testInterval():
print ("test Interval ")
testInterval()
Simple setInterval utils
from threading import Timer
def setInterval(timer, task):
isStop = task()
if not isStop:
Timer(timer, setInterval, [timer, task]).start()
def hello():
print "do something"
return False # return True if you want to stop
if __name__ == "__main__":
setInterval(2.0, hello) # every 2 seconds, "do something" will be printed
The above method didn't quite do it for me as I needed to be able to cancel the interval. I turned the function into a class and came up with the following:
class setInterval():
def __init__(self, func, sec):
def func_wrapper():
self.t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
self.t.start()
func()
self.t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
self.t.start()
def cancel(self):
self.t.cancel()
Most of the answers above do not shut down the Thread properly. While using Jupyter notebook I noticed that when an explicit interrupt was sent, the threads were still running and worse, they would keep multiplying starting at 1 thread running,2, 4 etc. My method below is based on the answer by #doom but cleanly handles interrupts by running an infinite loop in the Main thread to listen for SIGINT and SIGTERM events
No drift
Cancelable
Handles SIGINT and SIGTERM very well
Doesnt make a new thread for every run
Feel free to suggest improvements
import time
import threading
import signal
# Record the time for the purposes of demonstration
start_time=time.time()
class ProgramKilled(Exception):
"""
An instance of this custom exception class will be thrown everytime we get an SIGTERM or SIGINT
"""
pass
# Raise the custom exception whenever SIGINT or SIGTERM is triggered
def signal_handler(signum, frame):
raise ProgramKilled
# This function serves as the callback triggered on every run of our IntervalThread
def action() :
print('action ! -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-start_time))
# https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2697039/python-equivalent-of-setinterval
class IntervalThread(threading.Thread) :
def __init__(self,interval,action, *args, **kwargs) :
super(IntervalThread, self).__init__()
self.interval=interval
self.action=action
self.stopEvent=threading.Event()
self.start()
def run(self) :
nextTime=time.time()+self.interval
while not self.stopEvent.wait(nextTime-time.time()) :
nextTime+=self.interval
self.action()
def cancel(self) :
self.stopEvent.set()
def main():
# Handle SIGINT and SIFTERM with the help of the callback function
signal.signal(signal.SIGTERM, signal_handler)
signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, signal_handler)
# start action every 1s
inter=IntervalThread(1,action)
print('just after setInterval -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-start_time))
# will stop interval in 500s
t=threading.Timer(500,inter.cancel)
t.start()
# https://www.g-loaded.eu/2016/11/24/how-to-terminate-running-python-threads-using-signals/
while True:
try:
time.sleep(1)
except ProgramKilled:
print("Program killed: running cleanup code")
inter.cancel()
break
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
In the above solutions if a situation arises where program is shutdown, there is no guarantee that it will shutdown gracefully,Its always recommended to shut a program via a soft kill, neither did most of them have a function to stop I found a nice article on medium written by Sankalp which solves both of these issues (run periodic tasks in python) refer the attached link to get a deeper insight.
In the below sample a library named signal is used to track the kill is soft kill or a hard kill
import threading, time, signal
from datetime import timedelta
WAIT_TIME_SECONDS = 1
class ProgramKilled(Exception):
pass
def foo():
print time.ctime()
def signal_handler(signum, frame):
raise ProgramKilled
class Job(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, interval, execute, *args, **kwargs):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.daemon = False
self.stopped = threading.Event()
self.interval = interval
self.execute = execute
self.args = args
self.kwargs = kwargs
def stop(self):
self.stopped.set()
self.join()
def run(self):
while not self.stopped.wait(self.interval.total_seconds()):
self.execute(*self.args, **self.kwargs)
if __name__ == "__main__":
signal.signal(signal.SIGTERM, signal_handler)
signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, signal_handler)
job = Job(interval=timedelta(seconds=WAIT_TIME_SECONDS), execute=foo)
job.start()
while True:
try:
time.sleep(1)
except ProgramKilled:
print "Program killed: running cleanup code"
job.stop()
break
#output
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:51 2018
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:52 2018
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:53 2018
#^CProgram killed: running cleanup code
setInterval should be run on multiple thread, and not freeze the task when it running loop.
Here is my RUNTIME package that support multithread feature:
setTimeout(F,ms) : timming to fire function in independence thread.
delayF(F,ms) : similar setTimeout(F,ms).
setInterval(F,ms) : asynchronous loop
.pause, .resume : pause and resume the interval
clearInterval(interval) : clear the interval
It's short and simple. Note that python need lambda if you input direct the function, but lambda is not support command block, so you should define the function content before put it in the setInterval.
### DEMO PYTHON MULTITHREAD ASYNCHRONOUS LOOP ###
import time;
import threading;
import random;
def delay(ms):time.sleep(ms/1000); # Controil while speed
def setTimeout(R,delayMS):
t=threading.Timer(delayMS/1000,R)
t.start();
return t;
def delayF(R,delayMS):
t=threading.Timer(delayMS/1000,R)
t.start();
return t;
class THREAD:
def __init__(this):
this.R_onRun=None;
this.thread=None;
def run(this):
this.thread=threading.Thread(target=this.R_onRun);
this.thread.start();
def isRun(this): return this.thread.isAlive();
class setInterval :
def __init__(this,R_onRun,msInterval) :
this.ms=msInterval;
this.R_onRun=R_onRun;
this.kStop=False;
this.thread=THREAD();
this.thread.R_onRun=this.Clock;
this.thread.run();
def Clock(this) :
while not this.kStop :
this.R_onRun();
delay(this.ms);
def pause(this) :
this.kStop=True;
def stop(this) :
this.kStop=True;
def resume(this) :
if (this.kStop) :
this.kStop=False;
this.thread.run();
def clearInterval(Timer): Timer.stop();
# EXAMPLE
def p():print(random.random());
tm=setInterval(p,20);
tm2=setInterval(lambda:print("AAAAA"),20);
delayF(tm.pause,1000);
delayF(tm.resume,2000);
delayF(lambda:clearInterval(tm),3000);
Save to file .py and run it. You will see it print both random number and string "AAAAA". The print number thread will pause printing after 1 second and resume print again for 1 second then stop, while the print string keep printing text not corrupt.
In case you use OpenCV for graphic animation with those setInterval for boost animate speed, you must have 1 main thread to apply waitKey, otherwise the window will freeze no matter how slow delay or you applied waitKey in sub thread:
def p:... # Your drawing task
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread1 running draw
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread2 running draw
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread3 running draw
while True: cv2.waitKey(10); # Main thread which waitKey have effect
You can also try out this method:
import time
while True:
time.sleep(5)
print("5 seconds has passed")
So it will print "5 seconds has passed" every 5 seconds.
The function sleep() suspends execution for the given number of seconds. The argument may be a floating point number to indicate a more precise sleep time.
Recently, I have the same issue as you. And I find these soluation:
1. you can use the library: threading.Time(this have introduction above)
2. you can use the library: sched(this have introduction above too)
3. you can use the library: Advanced Python Scheduler(Recommend)
Some answers above that uses func_wrapper and threading.Timer indeed work, except that it spawns a new thread every time an interval is called, which is causing memory problems.
The basic example below roughly implemented a similar mechanism by putting interval on a separate thread. It sleeps at the given interval. Before jumping into code, here are some of the limitations that you need to be aware of:
JavaScript is single threaded, so when the function inside setInterval is fired, nothing else will be working at the same time (excluding worker thread, but let's talk general use case of setInterval. Therefore, threading is safe. But here in this implementation, you may encounter race conditions unless using a threading.rLock.
The implementation below uses time.sleep to simulate intervals, but adding the execution time of func, the total time for this interval may be greater than what you expect. So depending on use cases, you may want to "sleep less" (minus time taken for calling func)
I only roughly tested this, and you should definitely not use global variables the way I did, feel free to tweak it so that it fits in your system.
Enough talking, here is the code:
# Python 2.7
import threading
import time
class Interval(object):
def __init__(self):
self.daemon_alive = True
self.thread = None # keep a reference to the thread so that we can "join"
def ticktock(self, interval, func):
while self.daemon_alive:
time.sleep(interval)
func()
num = 0
def print_num():
global num
num += 1
print 'num + 1 = ', num
def print_negative_num():
global num
print '-num = ', num * -1
intervals = {} # keep track of intervals
g_id_counter = 0 # roughly generate ids for intervals
def set_interval(interval, func):
global g_id_counter
interval_obj = Interval()
# Put this interval on a new thread
t = threading.Thread(target=interval_obj.ticktock, args=(interval, func))
t.setDaemon(True)
interval_obj.thread = t
t.start()
# Register this interval so that we can clear it later
# using roughly generated id
interval_id = g_id_counter
g_id_counter += 1
intervals[interval_id] = interval_obj
# return interval id like it does in JavaScript
return interval_id
def clear_interval(interval_id):
# terminate this interval's while loop
intervals[interval_id].daemon_alive = False
# kill the thread
intervals[interval_id].thread.join()
# pop out the interval from registry for reusing
intervals.pop(interval_id)
if __name__ == '__main__':
num_interval = set_interval(1, print_num)
neg_interval = set_interval(3, print_negative_num)
time.sleep(10) # Sleep 10 seconds on main thread to let interval run
clear_interval(num_interval)
clear_interval(neg_interval)
print "- Are intervals all cleared?"
time.sleep(3) # check if both intervals are stopped (not printing)
print "- Yup, time to get beers"
Expected output:
num + 1 = 1
num + 1 = 2
-num = -2
num + 1 = 3
num + 1 = 4
num + 1 = 5
-num = -5
num + 1 = 6
num + 1 = 7
num + 1 = 8
-num = -8
num + 1 = 9
num + 1 = 10
-num = -10
Are intervals all cleared?
Yup, time to get beers
My Python 3 module jsinterval.py will be helpful! Here it is:
"""
Threaded intervals and timeouts from JavaScript
"""
import threading, sys
__all__ = ['TIMEOUTS', 'INTERVALS', 'setInterval', 'clearInterval', 'setTimeout', 'clearTimeout']
TIMEOUTS = {}
INTERVALS = {}
last_timeout_id = 0
last_interval_id = 0
class Timeout:
"""Class for all timeouts."""
def __init__(self, func, timeout):
global last_timeout_id
last_timeout_id += 1
self.timeout_id = last_timeout_id
TIMEOUTS[str(self.timeout_id)] = self
self.func = func
self.timeout = timeout
self.threadname = 'Timeout #%s' %self.timeout_id
def run(self):
func = self.func
delx = self.__del__
def func_wrapper():
func()
delx()
self.t = threading.Timer(self.timeout/1000, func_wrapper)
self.t.name = self.threadname
self.t.start()
def __repr__(self):
return '<JS Timeout set for %s seconds, launching function %s on timeout reached>' %(self.timeout, repr(self.func))
def __del__(self):
self.t.cancel()
class Interval:
"""Class for all intervals."""
def __init__(self, func, interval):
global last_interval_id
self.interval_id = last_interval_id
INTERVALS[str(self.interval_id)] = self
last_interval_id += 1
self.func = func
self.interval = interval
self.threadname = 'Interval #%s' %self.interval_id
def run(self):
func = self.func
interval = self.interval
def func_wrapper():
timeout = Timeout(func_wrapper, interval)
self.timeout = timeout
timeout.run()
func()
self.t = threading.Timer(self.interval/1000, func_wrapper)
self.t.name = self.threadname
self.t.run()
def __repr__(self):
return '<JS Interval, repeating function %s with interval %s>' %(repr(self.func), self.interval)
def __del__(self):
self.timeout.__del__()
def setInterval(func, interval):
"""
Create a JS Interval: func is the function to repeat, interval is the interval (in ms)
of executing the function.
"""
temp = Interval(func, interval)
temp.run()
idx = int(temp.interval_id)
del temp
return idx
def clearInterval(interval_id):
try:
INTERVALS[str(interval_id)].__del__()
del INTERVALS[str(interval_id)]
except KeyError:
sys.stderr.write('No such interval "Interval #%s"\n' %interval_id)
def setTimeout(func, timeout):
"""
Create a JS Timeout: func is the function to timeout, timeout is the timeout (in ms)
of executing the function.
"""
temp = Timeout(func, timeout)
temp.run()
idx = int(temp.timeout_id)
del temp
return idx
def clearTimeout(timeout_id):
try:
TIMEOUTS[str(timeout_id)].__del__()
del TIMEOUTS[str(timeout_id)]
except KeyError:
sys.stderr.write('No such timeout "Timeout #%s"\n' %timeout_id)
CODE EDIT:
Fixed the memory leak (spotted by #benjaminz). Now ALL threads are cleaned up upon end. Why does this leak happen? It happens because of the implicit (or even explicit) references. In my case, TIMEOUTS and INTERVALS. Timeouts self-clean automatically (after this patch) because they use function wrapper which calls the function and then self-kills. But how does this happen? Objects can't be deleted from memory unless all references are deleted too or gc module is used. Explaining: there's no way to create (in my code) unwanted references to timeouts/intervals. They have only ONE referrer: the TIMEOUTS/INTERVALS dicts. And, when interrupted or finished (only timeouts can finish uninterrupted) they delete the only existing reference to themselves: their corresponding dict element. Classes are perfectly encapsulated using __all__, so no space for memory leaks.
Here is a low time drift solution that uses a thread to periodically signal an Event object. The thread's run() does almost nothing while waiting for a timeout; hence the low time drift.
# Example of low drift (time) periodic execution of a function.
import threading
import time
# Thread that sets 'flag' after 'timeout'
class timerThread (threading.Thread):
def __init__(self , timeout , flag):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.timeout = timeout
self.stopFlag = False
self.event = threading.Event()
self.flag = flag
# Low drift run(); there is only the 'if'
# and 'set' methods between waits.
def run(self):
while not self.event.wait(self.timeout):
if self.stopFlag:
break
self.flag.set()
def stop(self):
stopFlag = True
self.event.set()
# Data.
printCnt = 0
# Flag to print.
printFlag = threading.Event()
# Create and start the timer thread.
printThread = timerThread(3 , printFlag)
printThread.start()
# Loop to wait for flag and print time.
while True:
global printCnt
# Wait for flag.
printFlag.wait()
# Flag must be manually cleared.
printFlag.clear()
print(time.time())
printCnt += 1
if printCnt == 3:
break;
# Stop the thread and exit.
printThread.stop()
printThread.join()
print('Done')
fall asleep until the next interval of seconds length starts: (not concurrent)
def sleep_until_next_interval(self, seconds):
now = time.time()
fall_asleep = seconds - now % seconds
time.sleep(fall_asleep)
while True:
sleep_until_next_interval(10) # 10 seconds - worktime
# work here
simple and no drift.
I have written my code to make a very very flexible setInterval in python. Here you are:
import threading
class AlreadyRunning(Exception):
pass
class IntervalNotValid(Exception):
pass
class setInterval():
def __init__(this, func=None, sec=None, args=[]):
this.running = False
this.func = func # the function to be run
this.sec = sec # interval in second
this.Return = None # The returned data
this.args = args
this.runOnce = None # asociated with run_once() method
this.runOnceArgs = None # asociated with run_once() method
if (func is not None and sec is not None):
this.running = True
if (not callable(func)):
raise TypeError("non-callable object is given")
if (not isinstance(sec, int) and not isinstance(sec, float)):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
def start(this):
if (not this.running):
if (not this.isValid()):
raise IntervalNotValid("The function and/or the " +
"interval hasn't provided or invalid.")
this.running = True
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
else:
raise AlreadyRunning("Tried to run an already run interval")
def stop(this):
this.running = False
def isValid(this):
if (not callable(this.func)):
return False
cond1 = not isinstance(this.sec, int)
cond2 = not isinstance(this.sec, float)
if (cond1 and cond2):
return False
return True
def loop(this):
if (this.running):
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
function_, Args_ = this.func, this.args
if (this.runOnce is not None): # someone has provide the run_once
runOnce, this.runOnce = this.runOnce, None
result = runOnce(*(this.runOnceArgs))
this.runOnceArgs = None
# if and only if the result is False. not accept "None"
# nor zero.
if (result is False):
return # cancel the interval right now
this.Return = function_(*Args_)
def change_interval(this, sec):
cond1 = not isinstance(sec, int)
cond2 = not isinstance(sec, float)
if (cond1 and cond2):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
# prevent error when providing interval to a blueprint
if (this.running):
this.TIMER.cancel()
this.sec = sec
# prevent error when providing interval to a blueprint
# if the function hasn't provided yet
if (this.running):
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
def change_next_interval(this, sec):
if (not isinstance(sec, int) and not isinstance(sec, float)):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
this.sec = sec
def change_func(this, func, args=[]):
if (not callable(func)):
raise TypeError("non-callable object is given")
this.func = func
this.args = args
def run_once(this, func, args=[]):
this.runOnce = func
this.runOnceArgs = args
def get_return(this):
return this.Return
You can get many features and flexibility. Running this code won't freeze your code, you can change the interval at run time, you can change the function at run time, you can pass arguments, you can get the returned object from your function, and many more. You can make your tricks too!
here's a very simple and basic example to use it:
import time
def interval(name="world"):
print(f"Hello {name}!")
# function named interval will be called every two seconds
# output: "Hello world!"
interval1 = setInterval(interval, 2)
# function named interval will be called every 1.5 seconds
# output: "Hello Jane!"
interval2 = setInterval(interval, 1.5, ["Jane"])
time.sleep(5) #stop all intervals after 5 seconds
interval1.stop()
interval2.stop()
Check out my Github project to see more examples and follow next updates :D
https://github.com/Hzzkygcs/setInterval-python
Here's something easy peazy:
import time
delay = 10 # Seconds
def setInterval():
print('I print in intervals!')
time.sleep(delay)
setInterval()
Things work differently in Python: you need to either sleep() (if you want to block the current thread) or start a new thread. See http://docs.python.org/library/threading.html
From Python Documentation:
from threading import Timer
def hello():
print "hello, world"
t = Timer(30.0, hello)
t.start() # after 30 seconds, "hello, world" will be printed

Categories