I'm fairly new to java and I was creating a program which would run indefinitely. Currently, the way I have the program set up is calling a certain method which would perform a task then call another method in the same class, this method would perform a task then call the initial method. This process would repeat indefinitely until I stop the compiler.
My problem is when I try to create a GUI to make my program more user friendly, once I press the initial start button this infinite loop will not allow me to perform any other actions -- including stopping the program.
There has to be another way to do this?
I apologize if this method is extremely sloppy, I sort of taught myself java from videos and looking at other programs and don't entirely understand it yet.
You'll need to run your task in a new thread, and have your GUI stuff in another thread.
Actually, if you keep working on this problem, you'll eventually invent event driven programming. Lots of GUI based software, like Android, use this paradigm.
There are several solutions. The first that comes to mind is that you could put whatever method needs to run forever in its own thread, and have a different thread listen for user input. This might introduce difficulties in getting the threads to interact with each other, but it would allow you to do this.
Alternatively, add a method that checks for user input and handles it inside the infinite loop of your program. something like below
while(true){
//do stuff
checkForUserInput();
//do other stuff
}
To solve this problem, you need to run your UI in another thread.
Many programs are based on an infinite loop (servers that keep waiting for a new user to connect for example) and your problem isn't there.
Managing the CPU time (or the core) allocated to your infinite loop and the one allocated to take care of your UI interactions is the job of the operating system, not yours : that's why your UI should run in a separate thread than your actual code.
Depending on the GUI library (Swing, ...) you're using there may be different ways to do it and the way to implement it is well answered on Stack Overflow
Related
I am trying to build something, which requires multithreading functionality. The desired work was not done using javascript i.e. Web-Workers.
So I changed focus from javascript to JSP. Now I want to call one method which will execute series of some queries, and at the same time I want to show the affected table rows on other hand. And when first process done with it's execution, I want to stop other process also. My work is done but statically. Now I want to share some resource between this two threads. So that when first thread done with it's execution, I will set some value to that resource(variable,flag), and check that resource in another thread. Is it possible to access variable of one thread in another while it running.
Thanks
JavaScript in a browser is per design not capable of multithreading. You can simulate it a little bit when using setTimeout or setInterval methods.
But, as with the introduction of HTML5, there are now so called WebWorkers available. They run completely separate, spawn a real OS thread, do not have access the DOM but can interact with your UI application e.g. via events.
I have a GUI and the GUI is starting another thread (Java). This thread is starting a class which is crawling many websites. Now I want to show in the GUI how many websites are crawled and how many are left.
I wonder what's the best solution for that.
First idea was to start a timer in the GUI and periodically ask the crawler how many is left. But I guess this is quite dirty...
Then one could pass the GUI to the crawler and it is calling a GUI method every time the count of ready websites changes. But I don't think that's much better?
What is the best way to do something like that?
It depends.
Ask the crawler how much work it is done isn't a bad idea. The benefit is you can actually control when an update occurs and can balance out the load.
The downside is that the information may go stale very quickly and you may never get accurate results, as by the time you've read the values, the crawler may have already changed them.
You could have the crawler provide a call back interface, which the GUI registers to and when the crawler updates it's states, calls back to the GUI.
The problem here is the UI may become swamped with results, causing to lag as it tries to keep up. Equally, while the crawler is firing these notifications, it isn't doing it's work...
(Assuming Swing)
In either case, you need to make sure that any ideas you make to the UI are made from within the Event Dispatching Thread. This means if you use the callback method, the updates coming back will come from the crawlers thread context. You will need to resync these with the EDT.
In this case you could simply use a SwingWorker which provides mechanisms for syncing updates back to the EDT for you.
Check out Concurrency in Swing for more details
register a callback function to your thread. when your data is dirty, invoke this callback function to notify GUI thread to update. don't forget to use synchronization.
I have a SWING UI that contains a button that creates a new SwingWorker thread. That thread then queries the SQLite database for results to put them in a JTable. In my StringWorker constructor, the parameters are various fields taken from other SWING components such as a JSpinner, JComboBoxes, etc.
Since I'm new to all of this thread thing, I'd like some advice from more knowledgeable programmers on how I should go about doing what I want to do.
I'd like to know if threads automatically end when I close the program with System.exit(0); so I don't end up with memory leaks
What is the best way to make sure I don't have two threads accessing my database at the same time (let's say the user clicks multiple times on the button or, other case, an administrator is updating the database with some files as input (within my program), then while the first thread is parsing the files and updating the database, he wants to query the database using the button, etc.).
Is it slower to use threads? At first I did all my calculations right in the EDT and of course the UI locked every time after pressing the button, but it only locked for about 5 seconds if I recall correctly. Now, when I press the button, it doesn't lock up but it seems like the result take about a little bit less than twice as long to show up in the JTable. Is it because I made a mistake in my code or is this normal?
I though about using a static field in the class the queries are in and setting it to true if it's in use. Is that the correct way of doing it? That way, not matter which thread is using the database, the second thread won't launch.
If it's not absolutely necessary (it shouldn't be), don't use System#exit in your code. Here are some explanations why and what is better.
Your database is capable of handling two concurrent requests, so it's not a bad thing in itself. If you use JDBC and its pooled connections via DataSource, then you should probably restrict the usage of one such a connection to one thread at a time. To cure the problem of having redundant database queries, e.g. when "clicking twice", there is probably more than one solution. I assume here that you mean the scenario where you have a Swing UI that is distributed to several people, and each of these instances talks to the same database -> simply disable your button as long as the execution of the database query takes.
It's slightly slower if you do not run your code directly in the Event Dispatch Thread due to scheduling of execution of your workers, but this should not be noticable. To see what goes wrong I would have to see the relevant code.
I'd like to know if threads automatically end when I close the program with System.exit(0);
Yes. Entire process will end and threads that are part of this process. However, if you don't call System.exit(), all non daemon threads must finish before process is gone.
What is the best way to make sure I don't have two threads accessing my database at the same time
Since it's a Swing application, I assume that both you and administrator can't access the application at the same time. However, to guarantee that even in single application you can't start more than one operation affecting database, you have to block UI. Either disable buttons or put glass pane on top of UI. Modal progress dialog is also helpful.
Is it slower to use threads?
No, it is not slower if done right. Slow operation will take as long as it takes. You can't fix it with threads, but you can, either keep speed (perceived) the same while providing nice, non blocking UI or you can do more than one slow operation at a time and therefore increase that perceived speed.
I have a piece of code that looks like this:
Algorithm a = null;
while(a == null)
{
a = grid.getAlgorithm();
}
getAlgorithm() in my Grid class returns some subtype of Algorithm depending on what the user chooses from some options.
My problem is that even after an algorithm is selected, the loop never terminates. However, that's not the tricky bit, if I simply place a System.out.println("Got here"); after my call to getAlgorithm(), the program runs perfectly fine and the loop terminates as intended.
My question is: why does adding that magic print statement suddenly make the loop terminate?
Moreover, this issue first came up when I started using my new laptop, I doubt that's related, but I figured it would be worth mentioning.
Edit: The program in question is NOT multithreaded. The code for getAlgorithm() is:
public Algorithm getAlgorithm ()
{
return algorithm;
}
Where algorithm is initially null, but will change value upon some user input.
I believe the issue has to deal with how grid.getAlgorithm is executed. If there is very little cost associated with executing the method, then your while loop will cycle very quickly as long the method continues to return null. That is often referred to as a busy wait.
Now it sounds like your new laptop is encountering a starvation issue which didn't manifest on your old computer. It is hard to say why but if you look at the link I included above, the Wikipedia article does indicate that busy waits do have unpredictable behavior. Maybe your old computer handles user IO better than your new laptop. Regardless, on your new laptop, that loop is taking resources away from whatever is handling your user IO hence it is starving the process that is responsible for breaking the loop.
You are doing active polling. This is a bad practice. You should at least let the polling thread sleep (with Thread.sleep). Since println does some io, it probably does just that. If your app is not multithreaded it is unlikely to work at all.
If this loop is to wait for user input in a GUI then ouch. Bad, bad idea and even with Thread.sleep() added I'd never recommend it. Instead, you most likely want to register an event listener on the component in question, and only have the validation code fire off when the contents change.
It's more than likely you're program is locking up because you've reached some form of deadlock more than anything else, especially if your application is multithreaded. Rather than try to solve this issue and hack your way round it, I'd seriously consider redesigning how this part of the application works.
You should check getAlgorithm(), there must be something wrong in the method.
There are two scenarios:
Your code is really not meant to be multi-threaded. In this case you need to insert some sort of user input in the loop. Otherwise you might as well leave it as Algorithm a = grid.getAlgorithm(); and prevent the infinite loop.
Your code is multi-threaded in which case you have some sort of 'visibility' problem. Go to Atomicity, Visibility and Ordering or read Java Concurrency in Practice to learn more about visibility. Essentially it means that without some sort of synchronization between threads, the thread you are looping in may never find out that the value has changed due to optimizations the JVM may perform.
You did not mention any context around how this code is run. If it is a console based application and you started from a 'main' function, you would know if there was multi-threading. I am assuming this is not the case since you say there is no multithreading. Another option would be that this is a swing application in which case you should read Multithreaded Swing Applications. It might be a web application in which case a similar case to swing might apply.
In any case you could always debug the application to see which thread is writing to the 'algorithm' variable, then see which thread is reading from it.
I hope this is helpful. In any case, you may find more help if you give a little more context in your question. Especially for a question with such an intriguing title as 'Weird Java problem, while loop termination'.
Normally in a C or C++ program there's a main loop/function, usually int main (). Is there a similar function that I can use in android Java development?
As far as an Android program is concerned there is no main().
There is a UI loop that the OS runs that makes calls to methods you define or override in your program. These methods are likely called from/defined in onCreate(), onStart(), onResume(), onReStart(), onPause(), onStop(), or onDestroy(). All these methods may be overriden in your program.
The fundamental issue is that the OS is designed to run in a resource constrained environment. Your program needs to be prepared to be halted and even completely stopped whenever the OS needs more memory (this is a multitasking OS). In order to handle that your program needs to have some of all of the functions listed above.
The Activity lifecycle describes this best (your program is one or more Activities, think of an Activity as a screen).
Bottom line: Your program 'starts' at onCreate() through onResume() but the OS is running the loop. Your program provides callbacks to the OS to handle whatever the OS sends to it. If you put a long loop at any point in your program it will appear to freeze because the OS (specifically the UI thread) is unable to get a slice of time. Use a thread for long loops.
In Android environment, there is no main(). The OS relies on the manifest file to find out the entry point, an activity in most case, into your application.
You should read http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/fundamentals.html for more detail.
According to:
http://developer.android.com/guide/tutorials/hello-world.html
The application class must support a method for each activity that the Application
supports. In the general case, the onCreate is probably equivalent to the main/top
function for your needs.
Maybe it's possible by creating a timer and execute custom functions at every tick, reset the timer when it's at a specific time
The above answers provide a "why" as to there's no "main loop" on Android (which is important to understand). I'll offer a solution to the implied question, instead, as many visitors here will be looking for exactly that.
I believe the appropriate thing to do, here, would be to create an AsyncTask which operates as your "main loop". Or better yet, design your main loop to run as a java.util.concurrent future, which can be started and ended during lifecycle events (like rotation!), using signaling (keep your data separate). The AsyncTask API is deprecated, because it was complex, and handling it properly amounted to writing code that would, effectively, operate as an AsyncTask which cleaned up when the next problematic lifecycle event transpired.
Keep in mind that this will be a separate thread from the UI, and, as such, will be required to respond in short order to UI thread events, like "onPause" and "onDestroy". If your app does not respond within a certain period of time (~5 secs, iirc) to these events, or user input events, it will be killed by the OS. It's really prudent, for a real-time app, to be able to fully respond to these events in under 1 sec, even on the lowest-end device. You can use synchronization primitives to notify other threads that their response is pending, and they can use them to signal when they are finished (or simply end, in the case of a future).