Search Results

Search found 1226 results on 50 pages for 'asynchronous'.

Page 4/50 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Asynchronous background processes in Python?

  - by Geuis

  I have been using this as a reference, but not able to accomplish exactly what I need: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/89228/how-to-call-external-command-in-python/92395#92395 I also was reading this: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3145/ For our project, we have 5 svn checkouts that need to update before we can deploy our application. In my dev environment, where speedy deployments are a bit more important for productivity than a production deployment, I have been working on speeding up the process. I have a bash script that has been working decently but has some limitations. I fire up multiple 'svn updates' with the following bash command: (svn update /repo1) & (svn update /repo2) & (svn update /repo3) & These all run in parallel and it works pretty well. I also use this pattern in the rest of the build script for firing off each ant build, then moving the wars to Tomcat. However, I have no control over stopping deployment if one of the updates or a build fails. I'm re-writing my bash script with Python so I have more control over branches and the deployment process. I am using subprocess.call() to fire off the 'svn update /repo' commands, but each one is acting sequentially. I try '(svn update /repo) &' and those all fire off, but the result code returns immediately. So I have no way to determine if a particular command fails or not in the asynchronous mode. import subprocess subprocess.call( 'svn update /repo1', shell=True ) subprocess.call( 'svn update /repo2', shell=True ) subprocess.call( 'svn update /repo3', shell=True ) I'd love to find a way to have Python fire off each Unix command, and if any of the calls fails at any time the entire script stops.

  Read the article

• Asynchronous event loop design and issues.

  - by Artyom

  Hello, I'm designing event loop for asynchronous socket IO using epoll/devpoll/kqueue/poll/select (including windows-select). I have two options of performing, IO operation: Non-blocking mode, poll on EAGAIN Set socket to non-blocking mode. Read/Write to socket. If operation succeeds, post completion notification to event loop. If I get EAGAIN, add socket to "select list" and poll socket. Polling mode: poll and then execute Add socket to select list and poll it. Wait for notification that it is readable writable read/write Post completion notification to event loop of sucseeds To me it looks like first would require less system calls when using in normal mode, especially for writing to socket (buffers are quite big). Also it looks like that it would be possible to reduce the overhead over number of "select" executions, especially it is nice when you do not have something that scales well as epoll/devpoll/kqueue. Questions: Are there any advantages of the second approach? Are there any portability issues with non-blocking operations on sockets/file descriptors over numerous operating systems: Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, MacOSX, Windows. Notes: Please do not suggest using existing event-loop/socket-api implementations

  Read the article

• Blackberry Asynchronous HTTP Requests - How?

  - by Kai

  The app I'm working on has a self contained database. The only time I need HTTP request is when the user first loads the app. I do this by calling a class that verifies whether or not a local DB exists and, if not, create one with the following request: HttpRequest data = new HttpRequest("http://www.somedomain.com/xml", "GET", this); data.start(); This xml returns a list of content, all of which have images that I want to fetch AFTER the original request is complete and stored. So something like this won't work: HttpRequest data = new HttpRequest("http://www.somedomain.com/xml", "GET", this); data.start(); HttpRequest images = new HttpRequest("http://www.somedomain.com/xmlImages", "GET", this); images.start(); Since it will not treat this like an asynchronous request. I have not found much information on adding callbacks to httpRequest, or any other method I could use to ensure operation 2 does not execute until operation 1 is complete. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

  Read the article

• Sequential access to asynchronous sockets

  - by Lars A. Brekken

  I have a server that has several clients C1...Cn to each of which there is a TCP connection established. There are less than 10,000 clients. The message protocol is request/response based, where the server sends a request to a client and then the client sends a response. The server has several threads, T1...Tm, and each of these may send requests to any of the clients. I want to make sure that only one of these threads can send a request to a specific client at any one time, while the other threads wanting to send a request to the same client will have to wait. I do not want to block threads from sending requests to different clients at the same time. E.g. If T1 is sending a request to C3, another thread T2 should not be able to send anything to C3 until T1 has received its response. I was thinking of using a simple lock statement on the socket: lock (c3Socket) { // Send request to C3 // Get response from C3 } I am using asynchronous sockets, so I may have to use Monitor instead: Monitor.Enter(c3Socket); // Before calling .BeginReceive() And Monitor.Exit(c3Socket); // In .EndReceive I am worried about stuff going wrong and not letting go of the monitor and therefore blocking all access to a client. I'm thinking that my heartbeat thread could use Monitor.TryEnter() with a timeout and throw out sockets that it cannot get the monitor for. Would it make sense for me to make the Begin and End calls synchronous in order to be able to use the lock() statement? I know that I would be sacrificing concurrency for simplicity in this case, but it may be worth it. Am I overlooking anything here? Any input appreciated.

  Read the article

• how to use q.js promises to work with multiple asynchronous operations

  - by kimsia

  Note: This question is also cross-posted in Q.js mailing list over here. i had a situation with multiple asynchronous operations and the answer I accepted pointed out that using Promises using a library such as q.js would be more beneficial. I am convinced to refactor my code to use Promises but because the code is pretty long, i have trimmed the irrelevant portions and exported the crucial parts into a separate repo. The repo is here and the most important file is this. The requirement is that I want pageSizes to be non-empty after traversing all the dragged'n dropped files. The problem is that the FileAPI operations inside getSizeSettingsFromPage function causes getSizeSettingsFromPage to be async. So I cannot place checkWhenReady(); like this. function traverseFiles() { for (var i=0, l=pages.length; i<l; i++) { getSizeSettingsFromPage(pages[i], calculateRatio); } checkWhenReady(); // this always returns 0. } This works, but it is not ideal. I prefer to call checkWhenReady just ONCE after all the pages have undergone this function calculateRatio successfully. function calculateRatio(width, height, filename) { // .... code pageSizes.add(filename, object); checkWhenReady(); // this works but it is not ideal. I prefer to call this method AFTER all the `pages` have undergone calculateRatio // ..... more code... } How do I refactor the code to make use of Promises in Q.js?

  Read the article

• Asynchronous callback for network in Objective-C Iphone

  - by vodkhang

  I am working with network request - response in Objective-C. There is something with asynchronous model that I don't understand. In summary, I have a view that will show my statuses from 2 social networks: Twitter and Facebook. When I clicked refresh, it will call a model manager. That model manager will call 2 service helpers to request for latest items. When 2 service helpers receive data, it will pass back to model manager and this model will add all data into a sorted array. What I don't understand here is that : when response from social networks come back, how many threads will handle the response. From my understanding about multithreading and networking (in Java), there must have 2 threads handle 2 responses and those 2 threads will execute the code to add the responses to the array. So, it can have race condition and the program can go wrong right? Is it the correct working model of iphone objective-C? Or they do it in a different way that it will never have race condition and we don't have to care about locking, synchronize? Here is my example code: ModelManager.m - (void)updateMyItems:(NSArray *)items { self.helpers = [self authenticatedHelpersForAction:NCHelperActionGetMyItems]; for (id<NCHelper> helper in self.helpers) { [helper updateMyItems:items]; // NETWORK request here } } - (void)helper:(id <NCHelper>)helper didReturnItems:(NSArray *)items { [self helperDidFinishGettingMyItems:items callback:@selector(model:didGetMyItems:)]; break; } } // some private attributes int *_currentSocialNetworkItemsCount = 0; // to count the number of items of a social network - (void)helperDidFinishGettingMyItems:(NSArray *)items { for (Item *item in items) { _currentSocialNetworkItemsCount ++; } NSLog(@"count: %d", _currentSocialNetworkItemsCount); _currentSocialNetworkItemsCount = 0; } I want to ask if there is a case that the method helperDidFinishGettingMyItems is called concurrently. That means, for example, faceboook returns 10 items, twitter returns 10 items, will the output of count will ever be larger than 10? And if there is only one single thread, how can the thread finishes parsing 1 response and jump to the other response because, IMO, thread is only executed sequently, block of code by block of code

  Read the article

• Asynchronous subprocess on Windows

  - by Stigma

  First of all, the overall problem I am solving is a bit more complicated than I am showing here, so please do not tell me 'use threads with blocking' as it would not solve my actual situation without a fair, FAIR bit of rewriting and refactoring. I have several applications which are not mine to modify, which take data from stdin and poop it out on stdout after doing their magic. My task is to chain several of these programs. Problem is, sometimes they choke, and as such I need to track their progress which is outputted on STDERR. pA = subprocess.Popen(CommandA, shell=False, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) # ... some more processes make up the chain, but that is irrelevant to the problem pB = subprocess.Popen(CommandB, shell=False, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, stdin=pA.stdout ) Now, reading directly through pA.stdout.readline() and pB.stdout.readline(), or the plain read() functions, is a blocking matter. Since different applications output in different paces and different formats, blocking is not an option. (And as I wrote above, threading is not an option unless at a last, last resort.) pA.communicate() is deadlock safe, but since I need the information live, that is not an option either. Thus google brought me to this asynchronous subprocess snippet on ActiveState. All good at first, until I implement it. Comparing the cmd.exe output of pA.exe | pB.exe, ignoring the fact both output to the same window making for a mess, I see very instantaneous updates. However, I implement the same thing using the above snippet and the read_some() function declared there, and it takes over 10 seconds to notify updates of a single pipe. But when it does, it has updates leading all the way upto 40% progress, for example. Thus I do some more research, and see numerous subjects concerning PeekNamedPipe, anonymous handles, and returning 0 bytes available even though there is information available in the pipe. As the subject has proven quite a bit beyond my expertise to fix or code around, I come to Stack Overflow to look for guidance. :) My platform is W7 64-bit with Python 2.6, the applications are 32-bit in case it matters, and compatibility with Unix is not a concern. I can even deal with a full ctypes or pywin32 solution that subverts subprocess entirely if it is the only solution, as long as I can read from every stderr pipe asynchronously with immediate performance and no deadlocks. :)

  Read the article

• Odd performance with C# Asynchronous server socket

  - by The.Anti.9

  I'm working on a web server in C# and I have it running on Asynchronous socket calls. The weird thing is that for some reason, when you start loading pages, the 3rd request is where the browser won't connect. It just keeps saying "Connecting..." and doesn't ever stop. If I hit stop. and then refresh, it will load again, but if I try another time after that it does the thing where it doesn't load again. And it continues in that cycle. I'm not really sure what is making it do that. The code is kind of hacked together from a couple of examples and some old code I had. Any miscellaneous tips would be helpful as well. Heres my little Listener class that handles everything (pastied here. thought it might be easier to read this way) using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Net; using System.Net.Sockets; using System.Text; using System.Threading; namespace irek.Server { public class Listener { private int port; private Socket server; private Byte[] data = new Byte[2048]; static ManualResetEvent allDone = new ManualResetEvent(false); public Listener(int _port) { port = _port; } public void Run() { server = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp); IPEndPoint iep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, port); server.Bind(iep); Console.WriteLine("Server Initialized."); server.Listen(5); Console.WriteLine("Listening..."); while (true) { allDone.Reset(); server.BeginAccept(new AsyncCallback(AcceptCon), server); allDone.WaitOne(); } } private void AcceptCon(IAsyncResult iar) { allDone.Set(); Socket s = (Socket)iar.AsyncState; Socket s2 = s.EndAccept(iar); SocketStateObject state = new SocketStateObject(); state.workSocket = s2; s2.BeginReceive(state.buffer, 0, SocketStateObject.BUFFER_SIZE, 0, new AsyncCallback(Read), state); } private void Read(IAsyncResult iar) { try { SocketStateObject state = (SocketStateObject)iar.AsyncState; Socket s = state.workSocket; int read = s.EndReceive(iar); if (read > 0) { state.sb.Append(Encoding.ASCII.GetString(state.buffer, 0, read)); if (s.Available > 0) { s.BeginReceive(state.buffer, 0, SocketStateObject.BUFFER_SIZE, 0, new AsyncCallback(Read), state); return; } } if (state.sb.Length > 1) { string requestString = state.sb.ToString(); // HANDLE REQUEST HERE // Temporary response string resp = "<h1>It Works!</h1>"; string head = "HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\nContent-Type: text/html;\r\nServer: irek\r\nContent-Length:"+resp.Length+"\r\n\r\n"; byte[] answer = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(head+resp); // end temp. state.workSocket.BeginSend(answer, 0, answer.Length, SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(Send), state.workSocket); } } catch (Exception) { return; } } private void Send(IAsyncResult iar) { try { SocketStateObject state = (SocketStateObject)iar.AsyncState; int sent = state.workSocket.EndSend(iar); state.workSocket.Shutdown(SocketShutdown.Both); state.workSocket.Close(); } catch (Exception) { } return; } } } And my SocketStateObject: public class SocketStateObject { public Socket workSocket = null; public const int BUFFER_SIZE = 1024; public byte[] buffer = new byte[BUFFER_SIZE]; public StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); }

  Read the article

• C# Asynchronous Network IO and OutOfMemoryException

  - by The.Anti.9

  I'm working on a client/server application in C#, and I need to get Asynchronous sockets working so I can handle multiple connections at once. Technically it works the way it is now, but I get an OutOfMemoryException after about 3 minutes of running. MSDN says to use a WaitHandler to do WaitOne() after the socket.BeginAccept(), but it doesn't actually let me do that. When I try to do that in the code it says WaitHandler is an abstract class or interface, and I can't instantiate it. I thought maybe Id try a static reference, but it doesnt have teh WaitOne() method, just WaitAll() and WaitAny(). The main problem is that in the docs it doesn't give a full code snippet, so you can't actually see what their "wait handler" is coming from. its just a variable called allDone, which also has a Reset() method in the snippet, which a waithandler doesn't have. After digging around in their docs, I found some related thing about an AutoResetEvent in the Threading namespace. It has a WaitOne() and a Reset() method. So I tried that around the while(true) { ... socket.BeginAccept( ... ); ... }. Unfortunately this makes it only take one connection at a time. So I'm not really sure where to go. Here's my code: class ServerRunner { private Byte[] data = new Byte[2048]; private int size = 2048; private Socket server; static AutoResetEvent allDone = new AutoResetEvent(false); public ServerRunner() { server = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp); IPEndPoint iep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, 33333); server.Bind(iep); Console.WriteLine("Server initialized.."); } public void Run() { server.Listen(100); Console.WriteLine("Listening..."); while (true) { //allDone.Reset(); server.BeginAccept(new AsyncCallback(AcceptCon), server); //allDone.WaitOne(); } } void AcceptCon(IAsyncResult iar) { Socket oldserver = (Socket)iar.AsyncState; Socket client = oldserver.EndAccept(iar); Console.WriteLine(client.RemoteEndPoint.ToString() + " connected"); byte[] message = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes("Welcome"); client.BeginSend(message, 0, message.Length, SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(SendData), client); } void SendData(IAsyncResult iar) { Socket client = (Socket)iar.AsyncState; int sent = client.EndSend(iar); client.BeginReceive(data, 0, size, SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(ReceiveData), client); } void ReceiveData(IAsyncResult iar) { Socket client = (Socket)iar.AsyncState; int recv = client.EndReceive(iar); if (recv == 0) { client.Close(); server.BeginAccept(new AsyncCallback(AcceptCon), server); return; } string receivedData = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(data, 0, recv); //process received data here byte[] message2 = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes("reply"); client.BeginSend(message2, 0, message2.Length, SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(SendData), client); } }

  Read the article

• Reminder: True WCF Asynchronous Operation

  - by Sean Feldman

  A true asynchronous service operation is not the one that returns void, but the one that is marked as IsOneWay=true using BeginX/EndX asynchronous operations (thanks Krzysztof). To support this sort of fire-and-forget invocation, Windows Communication Foundation offers one-way operations. After the client issues the call, Windows Communication Foundation generates a request message, but no correlated reply message will ever return to the client. As a result, one-way operations can't return values, and any exception thrown on the service side will not make its way to the client. One-way calls do not equate to asynchronous calls. When one-way calls reach the service, they may not be dispatched all at once and may be queued up on the service side to be dispatched one at a time, all according to the service configured concurrency mode behavior and session mode. How many messages (whether one-way or request-reply) the service is willing to queue up is a product of the configured channel and the reliability mode. If the number of queued messages has exceeded the queue's capacity, then the client will block, even when issuing a one-way call. However, once the call is queued, the client is unblocked and can continue executing while the service processes the operation in the background. This usually gives the appearance of asynchronous calls.

  Read the article

• WPF: Asynchronous progress bar

  - by SumGuy

  I'm trying to create a progress bar that will work asynchronously to the main process. I'm created a new event and invoked it however everytime I then try to perform operations on the progress bar I recieve the following error: "The calling thread cannot access this object because a different thread owns it" The following code is an attempt to send an instance of the progress bar to the event as an object, it obviously failed but it gives you an idea of what the code looks like. private event EventHandler importing; void MdbDataImport_importing(object sender, EventArgs e) { ProgressBar pb = (ProgressBar)sender; while (true) { if (pb.Value >= 200) pb.Value = 0; pb.Value += 10; } } private void btnImport_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { importing += new EventHandler(MdbDataImport_importing); IAsyncResult aResult = null; aResult = importing.BeginInvoke(pbDataImport, null, null, null); importing.EndInvoke(aResult); } Does anyone have ideas of how to do this. Thanks in advance SumGuy.

  Read the article

• How to unit test asynchronous APIs?

  - by Ben Clayton

  Hi all. I have installed Google Toolbox for Mac (http://code.google.com/p/google-toolbox-for-mac/) into Xcode and followed the instructions to set up unit testing found here (http://code.google.com/p/google-toolbox-for-mac/wiki/iPhoneUnitTesting). It all works great, and I can test my synchronous methods on all my objects absolutely fine. However, most of the complex APIs I actually want to test return results asynchronously via calling a method on a delegate - for example a call to a file download and update system will return immediately and then run a -fileDownloadDidComplete: method when the file finishes downloading. How would I test this as a unit test? It seems like I'd want to the testDownload function, or at least the test framework to 'wait' for fileDownloadDidComplete: method to run. Any ideas much appreciated!

  Read the article

• Asynchronous PHP request (not AJAX)

  - by Renjith R

  Hi I am developing an eshop application. I am using webservice to create Order in Oracle database and websvc will give a response (OrderNumber) and I will inform customer that his Order (OrderNumber) is generated My problem The creation of order is taking too much time in backend system and user is keeping refreshing the page, On each refresh user is coming back to Order create Page, so user is able to click on create Order button again In such cases multiple orders are creating for same orderlines.I can restrict user to create only one order per session in case I got order number in websvc response and I can give ordernumber to customer in next page But real problem come when I didn't get response(Ordernumber) and user is refreshing page. request is already went to Backend system and it will create order and my applicaion will not get response Is there any method in PHP where we can asyncronously check the status of order if first request is initiated by user and it doesn't matter the furthur page navigation Please help me out.. Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• How can I mock this asynchronous method?

  - by Charlie

  I have a class that roughly looks like this: public class ViewModel { public ViewModel(IWebService service) { this.WebService = service; } private IWebService WebService{get;set;} private IEnumerable<SomeData> MyData{get;set;} private void GetReferenceData() { this.WebService.BeginGetStaticReferenceData(GetReferenceDataOnComplete, null); } private void GetReferenceDataOnComplete(IAsyncResult result) { this.MyData = this.WebService.EndGetStaticReferenceData(result); } . . . } I want to mock my IWebService interface so that when BeginGetStaticReferenceData is called it is able to call the callback method. I'm using Moq and I can't work out how to do this. My unit test set up code looks something like: //Arrange var service = new Mock<IWebService>(); service.Setup(x => x.BeginGetStaticReferenceData(/*.......don't know.....*/)); service.Setup(x => x.EndGetStaticReferenceData(It.IsAny<IAsyncResult>())).Returns(new List<SomeData>{new SomeData{Name="blah"}}); var viewModel = new ViewModel(service.Object); . .

  Read the article

• Asynchronous Image loading in certain custom UITableViewCells

  - by Dan

  So, I'm sure that this issue has been brought up before, but I haven't quite seen a solution for my specific problem. What I'm doing is loading a group of custom UITableViewCell's that are drawn using Loren Brichter's solution, each cell has some content, an icon (representing the user) that is asynchronously loaded into it, and a few other things. Eventually, I'm hoping to add support for images. Not every cell has an image, so in the creation of the cell, it determines if an image is required to be loaded and drawn into the cell. My problem is that I don't know how I can do that while keeping the image loaded asynchronously - with not every cell having the need to load an image (like needed with the icon) I'm not sure how to keep it in order when an cell is thrown off screen and re-rendered when the user scrolls over it. Each cell draws it content from an NSArray containing a custom object called FeedItem. All I'm really looking for is some sort of solution or idea to help me because right now I am at a loss. Thanks guys, I will appreciate the help.

  Read the article

• Asynchronous I/O on Mac OS X

  - by stas

  Hi, Meaning the C10K problem, what is the best way to do asynch I/O on Mac OS X (assume to use on Mac and iPhone/iPad)? On Linux our choice is epoll, on Windows is I/O Completion Ports. Top priority is performance and scalability (thousands of connections). Thanks

  Read the article

• Handling asynchronous responses

  - by James P.

  I'm building an FTP client from scratch and I've noticed that the response codes aren't immediate (which is no surprise). What would be a good approach for getting the corresponding code to a command? Below is an example of the output of Filezilla server. The response code is the three digits near the end of each line. (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> Connected, sending welcome message... (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> 220-FileZilla Server version 0.9.12 beta (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> 220-written by Tim Kosse ([email protected]) (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> 220 Please visit http://sourceforge.net/projects/filezilla/ (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> user anonymous (000057) 23/05/2010 19:43:10 - (not logged in) (127.0.0.1)> 331 Password required for anonymous

  Read the article

• asynchronous .js file loading syntax

  - by taber

  Hi, I noticed that there seems to be a couple of slightly different syntaxes for loading js files asynchronously, and I was wondering if there's any difference between the two, or if they both pretty much function the same. I'm guessing they work the same, but just wanted to make sure one method isn't better than the other for some reason. :) Method One (function() { var d=document, h=d.getElementsByTagName('head')[0], s=d.createElement('script'); s.type='text/javascript'; s.src='/js/myfile.js'; h.appendChild(s); })(); /* note ending parenthesis and curly brace */ Method Two (Saw this in Facebook's code) (function() { var d=document, h=d.getElementsByTagName('head')[0], s=d.createElement('script'); s.type='text/javascript'; s.async=true; s.src='/js/myfile.js'; h.appendChild(s); }()); /* note ending parenthesis and curly brace */

  Read the article

• Asynchronous Silverlight 4 call to the World of Warcraft armoury streaming XML in C#

  - by user348446

  Hello - I have been stuck on this all weekend and failed miserably! Please help me to claw back my sanity!! Your challenge For my first Silverlight application I thought it would be fun to use the World of Warcraft armoury to list the characters in my guild. This involves making an asyncronous from Silverlight (duh!) to the WoW armoury which is XML based. SIMPLE EH? Take a look at this link and open the source. You'll see what I mean: http://eu.wowarmory.com/guild-info.xml?r=Eonar&n=Gifted and Talented Below is code for getting the XML (the call to ShowGuildies will cope with the returned XML - I have tested this locally and I know it works). I have not managed to get the expected returned XML at all. Notes: If the browser is capable of transforming the XML it will do so, otherwise HTML will be provided. I think it examines the UserAgent I am a seasoned asp.net web developer C# so go easy if you start talking about native to Windows Forms / WPF I can't seem to set the UserAgent setting in .net 4.0 - doesn't seem to be a property off the HttpWebRequest object for some reason - i think it used to be available. Silverlight 4.0 (created as 3.0 originally before I updated my installation of Silverlight to 4.0) Created using C# 4.0 Please explain as if you talking to a web developer and not a proper programming lol! Below is the code - it should return the XML from the wow armoury. private void button7_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { // URL for armoury lookup string url = @"http://eu.wowarmory.com/guild-info.xml?r=Eonar&n=Gifted and Talented"; // Create the web request HttpWebRequest httpWebRequest = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(url); // Set the user agent so we are returned XML and not HTML //httpWebRequest.Headers["User-Agent"] = "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0)"; // Not sure about this dispatcher thing - it's late so i have started to guess. Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(delegate() { // Call asyncronously IAsyncResult asyncResult = httpWebRequest.BeginGetResponse(ReqCallback, httpWebRequest); // End the response and use the result using (HttpWebResponse httpWebResponse = (HttpWebResponse)httpWebRequest.EndGetResponse(asyncResult)) { // Load an XML document from a stream XDocument x = XDocument.Load(httpWebResponse.GetResponseStream()); // Basic function that will use LINQ to XML to get the list of characters. ShowGuildies(x); } }); } private void ReqCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult) { // Not sure what to do here - maybe update the interface? } Really hope someone out there can help me! Thanks mucho! Dan. PS Yes, I have noticed the irony in the name of the guild :)

  Read the article

• Pattern for limiting number of simultaneous asynchronous calls

  - by hitch

  I need to retrieve multiple objects from an external system. The external system supports multiple simultaneous requests (i.e. threads), but it is possible to flood the external system - therefore I want to be able to retrieve multiple objects asynchronously, but I want to be able to throttle the number of simultaneous async requests. i.e. I need to retrieve 100 items, but don't want to be retrieving more than 25 of them at once. When each request of the 25 completes, I want to trigger another retrieval, and once they are all complete I want to return all of the results in the order they were requested (i.e. there is no point returning the results until the entire call is returned). Are there any recommended patterns for this sort of thing? Would something like this be appropriate (pseudocode, obviously)? private List<externalSystemObjects> returnedObjects = new List<externalSystemObjects>; public List<externalSystemObjects> GetObjects(List<string> ids) { int callCount = 0; int maxCallCount = 25; WaitHandle[] handles; foreach(id in itemIds to get) { if(callCount < maxCallCount) { WaitHandle handle = executeCall(id, callback); addWaitHandleToWaitArray(handle) } else { int returnedCallId = WaitHandle.WaitAny(handles); removeReturnedCallFromWaitHandles(handles); } } WaitHandle.WaitAll(handles); return returnedObjects; } public void callback(object result) { returnedObjects.Add(result); }

  Read the article

• How to TDD Asynchronous Events?

  - by Padu Merloti

  The fundamental question is how do I create a unit test that needs to call a method, wait for an event to happen on the tested class and then call another method (the one that we actually want to test)? Here's the scenario if you have time to read further: I'm developing an application that has to control a piece of hardware. In order to avoid dependency from hardware availability, when I create my object I specify that we are running in test mode. When that happens, the class that is being tested creates the appropriate driver hierarchy (in this case a thin mock layer of hardware drivers). Imagine that the class in question is an Elevator and I want to test the method that gives me the floor number that the elevator is. Here is how my fictitious test looks like right now: [TestMethod] public void TestGetCurrentFloor() { var elevator = new Elevator(Elevator.Environment.Offline); elevator.ElevatorArrivedOnFloor += TestElevatorArrived; elevator.GoToFloor(5); //Here's where I'm getting lost... I could block //until TestElevatorArrived gives me a signal, but //I'm not sure it's the best way int floor = elevator.GetCurrentFloor(); Assert.AreEqual(floor, 5); } Edit: Thanks for all the answers. This is how I ended up implementing it: [TestMethod] public void TestGetCurrentFloor() { var elevator = new Elevator(Elevator.Environment.Offline); elevator.ElevatorArrivedOnFloor += (s, e) => { Monitor.Pulse(this); }; lock (this) { elevator.GoToFloor(5); if (!Monitor.Wait(this, Timeout)) Assert.Fail("Elevator did not reach destination in time"); int floor = elevator.GetCurrentFloor(); Assert.AreEqual(floor, 5); } }

  Read the article

• Waiting on multiple asynchronous calls to complete before continuing

  - by Chad

  So, I have a page that loads and through jquery.get makes several requests to populate drop downs with their values. $(function() { LoadCategories($('#Category')); LoadPositions($('#Position')); LoadDepartments($('#Department')); LoadContact(); }; It then calls LoadContact(); Which does another call, and when it returns it populates all the fields on the form. The problem is that often, the dropdowns aren't all populated, and thus, it can't set them to the correct value. What I need to be able to do, is somehow have LoadContact only execute once the other methods are complete and callbacks done executing. But, I don't want to have to put a bunch of flags in the end of the drop down population callbacks, that I then check, and have to have a recursive setTimeout call checking, prior to calling LoadContact(); Is there something in jQuery that allows me to say, "Execute this, when all of these are done."?

  Read the article

• How to block the UI during asynchronous operations in WPF

  - by mcintyre321

  We have a WPF app (actually a VSTO WPF app). On certain controls there are multiple elements which, when clicked, load data from a web service and update the UI. Right now, we carry out these web requests synchronously, blocking the UI thread until the response comes back. This prevents the user clicking around the app while the data is loading, potentially putting it into an invalid state to handle the data when it is returned. Of course the app becomes unresponsive if the request takes a long time. Ideally, we'd like to have the cancel button active during this time, but nothing else. Is there a clever way of doing this, or will we have to switch the requests to execute asynchronously using backgroundworker and write something that disables all the controls apart from the cancel button while a request is in progress?

  Read the article

• Javascript Detect All Images (Including Asynchronous)

  - by Zach

  Is there a way in javascript to detect all images in a document, including those that may be loaded asynchronously (and maybe after the DOM is ready)? I'm looking to create a function that can detect if Google Analytics has been loaded by searching through the DOM looking for "__utm.gif". document.images doesn't seem to hold this image as it's loaded asynchronously and not displayed.

  Read the article

• Adding dynamic controls to Silverlight application after WCF Service Asynchronous Callback

  - by Birk

  I'm trying to add some dynamic controls to my Silverlight page after a WCF call. When I try to add a control to I get an error: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. Here is a simplified version of my code: using edm = SilverlightBusinessApplication.ServiceRefrence; public partial class ListWCF : Page { edm.ServiceClient EdmClient = new ServiceClient(); public ListWCF() { EdmClient.GetTestCompleted += EdmGetTestCompleted; EdmClient.GetTestAsync(); } private void EdmGetTestCompleted(object sender, edm.GetTestCompletedEventArgs e) { //This is where I want to add my controls Button b = new Button(); LayoutRoot.Children.Add(b); //Error: Object reference not set to an instance of an object } } Is it not possible to modify the page after it has been loaded? What am I missing? Thanks

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >