I modified the OMGStop() method to something more like this:
public void cancelUpdates() {
//TODO potential bug here
if(pi == null)
setPendingIntent();
mgr.cancel(pi);
//Should one of these work?
stopService(new Intent(applicationContext, LocationPoller.class));
stopService(new Intent(applicationContext, LocationPollerService.class));
I'm storing pi (PendingIntent) as a member in my activity class. And this works fine to remove the PendingIntent from the AlarmManager.
However...
I would like to be able to stop the current location poll if there is one going on. Is it possible with your current design? I thought I could just stop the service, but the GPS continues to run.
Basically what i'm trying to do is stop everything when the user (me on my trip) changes a preference (such as the timeout, or USE GPS or update period. And then recreate everything with the new values.
Thanks,
Great code BTW - Exactly what I want for tracking my cross country journey :)
I faced the same issue. - On occasion I let my mousepointer hover over "mgr.setRepeating(..)" and read some of Eclipse's (Indigo) hints:
"If there is already an alarm scheduled for the same IntentSender, it will first be canceled."
But the IntentSender could be gone by then.
This led me to the following "solution" (in original CommonsWare code):
if(pi == null) {
Intent i = new Intent(this, LocationPoller.class);
pi = PendingIntent.getBroadcast(this, 0, i, 0);
mgr.setRepeating(AlarmManager.ELAPSED_REALTIME_WAKEUP,
SystemClock.elapsedRealtime() + 1000, PERIOD, pi);
}
mgr.cancel();
By adding 1000 msec I tried to make sure the AlarmManager has no chance to start before being hit by a cancel().
HTH, regards.
PS: I'd like to quote mparkes: "Great code"!
Is it possible with your current design?
No, sorry. That's theoretically possible to add, but probably a bit tricky, and definitely not there at the moment.
Basically what i'm trying to do is stop everything when the user (me on my trip) changes a preference (such as the timeout, or USE GPS or update period. And then recreate everything with the new values.
That is a perfectly reasonable concept, just not what LocationPoller supports. LocationPoller was designed more for the "check every hour" sorts of scenarios, where it is statistically unlikely that a check is going on while the user happens to be manipulating your app's UI.
Related
For a mental health app project, I need to intercept the startup of specific apps (like Instagram) and check if they used instagram the n-th time, possibly opening a questionair etc.
Searching for a solutions online, I came across the "android.app.usage" API. I could not get my around how to use this.
Do I need a for every running background service which does active polling with the usage api?
Or is their a way to say "run this code or start this app/service when appXY launches"?
Looking forward to any kind of input :)
Greetings Pascal
You can't listen out for an "app is being opened" intent unfortunately, Android doesn't support it. Your approach is likely the best workaround, to state it explicitly:
Have a foreground service running (so it is less likely to be killed by the OS) at all times.
Check regularly the currently running app, and see if it's the one you're trying to look for.
If this is different to last time you checked, do whatever you need to. Perhaps this will include keeping track of last time the app was opened, how many times it's been opened etc.
As a warning however, the OS won't really like this, and there's likely to be an impact on battery life. Whatever you do, make sure this check isn't happening when the screen is off, happening as infrequently as possible, and doesn't include any unnecessary computation, otherwise the user will quickly notice the negative impact.
Here's an extract from an article that looks like it'll be able to fetch the latest app even on later versions:
var foregroundAppPackageName : String? = null
val currentTime = System.currentTimeMillis()
// The `queryEvents` method takes in the `beginTime` and `endTime` to retrieve the usage events.
// In our case, beginTime = currentTime - 10 minutes ( 1000 * 60 * 10 milliseconds )
// and endTime = currentTime
val usageEvents = usageStatsManager.queryEvents( currentTime - (1000*60*10) , currentTime )
val usageEvent = UsageEvents.Event()
while ( usageEvents.hasNextEvent() ) {
usageEvents.getNextEvent( usageEvent )
Log.e( "APP" , "${usageEvent.packageName} ${usageEvent.timeStamp}" )
}
I implemented two different solution to discover service on my BLE device. One use a handler then return what .discoverService have found, the other one is really similar but give the size of the service discovered list that is always 0. I tried it with my realme buds 2 as test and some other device publically visible. The result is always 0. What can the problem be?
Handler(Looper.getMainLooper()).post {
var temp = bluetoothGatt?.discoverServices()
addGlog("discordservice() returned ${temp.toString()}")
}
addGlog("handler discover service reached an end")
val gattServices: List<BluetoothGattService> = gatt.getServices()
addGlog("Services count: " + gattServices.size)
for (gattService in gattServices) {
val serviceUUID = gattService.uuid.toString()
addGlog("Service uuid $serviceUUID")
}
edit: AddGlog is a simple log function to print results
answer: The code is not wrong but it take some time to discover those services so i put this code in a button. In this way there is 3-4 second of time between connecting with the device and make a discoveryservice operation. So a button make the conneting operations and another one the service discovery operations. I am sorry if my answer is pretty lame but I am still a noob on this topic
I have my game setup so that it starts and goes back to a loading screen room for 45 steps after which the next room is randomized. So at alarm[0] the following code activates:
randomize();
chosenRoom = choose(rm_roomOne, rm_roomTwo, rm_roomThree, rm_roomFour);
room_goto(chosenRoom);
The code here works fine the first time, but when it goes back from the randomly chosen room to the loading screen room it stays there and doesn't execute the code again.
Any help would be very much appreciated.
This may sound stupid but did you remember to set the alarm again after it's gone off? I know I've done this several times without thinking. Without seeing your code, I assume that after the alarm goes off it's not being set again, so it won't go off again.
I'm guessing the control object is "persistant", thus the Control Object only exists once and will remain forever (also after swithcing rooms) - thus thie create event only gets fired once - thus the alarm only gets set once.
Try to move your code to the event "Room Start" in your controller and it will work.
you can use event_perform(ev_alarm,0);.
The code here performs alarm[0] after 45 steps. after 45 steps again it triggers alarm[0]. Note that you have to put it in step event. And you have to initialize wait variable and times to zero in create event.
times is the repeat and wait is distance between events.
if(wait == 45 && times !=2){
event_perform(ev_alarm,0);
times++;
wait = 0;
}
else{
wait++;
}
In MT4, there exists a stage/state: when we switch from AccountA to AccountB, when Connection is established and init() and start() are triggered by MT4; but before the "blinnnggg" (sound) when all the historical/outstanding trades are loaded from Server.
Switch Account>Establish Connection>Trigger Init()/Start() events>Start Downloading of Outstanding/Historical trades>Completed Downloading (issue "bliinng" sound).
I need to know (in MQL4) that all the trades are completed downloaded from the tradeServer --to know that the account is truly empty -vs- still downloading history from tradeServer.
Any pointer will be appreciated. I've explored IsTradeAllowed() IsContextBusy() and IsConnected(). All these are in "normal" state and the init() and start() events are all fired ok. But I cannot figure out if the history/outstanding trade lists has completed downloading.
UPDATE: The final workaround I finally implemented was to use the OrdersHistoryTotal(). Apparently this number will be ZERO (0) during downloading of order history. And it will NEVER be zero (due to initial deposit). So, I ended-up using this as a "flag".
Observation
As the problem was posted, there seems no such "integrated" method for MT4-Terminal.
IsTradeAllowed() reflects an administrative state of the account/access to the execution of the Trading Services { IsTradeAllowed | !IsTradeAllowed }
IsConnected() reflects a technical state of the visibility / login credentials / connection used upon an attempt to setup/maintain an online connection between a localhost <-> Server { IsConnected() | !IsConnected() }
init() {...} is a one-stop setup facility, that is/was being called once an MT4-programme { ExpertAdvisor | Script | TechnicalIndicator } was launched on a localhost machine. This facility is strongly advised to be non-blocking and non-re-entrant. A change from the user account_A to another user account_B is typically ( via an MT4-configuration options ) a reason to stop an execution of a previously loaded MQL4-code ( be it an EA / a Script / a Technical Indicator ) )
start() {...} is an event-handler facility, that endlessly waits, for a next occurrence of an FX-Market Event appearance ( being propagated down the line by the Broker MT4-Server automation ) that is being announced via an established connection downwards, to the MT4-Terminal process, being run on a localhost machine.
A Workaround Solution
As understood, the problem may be detected and handled indirectly.
While the MT4 platform seems to have no direct method to distinguish between the complete / in-complete refresh of the list of { current | historical } trades, let me propose a method of an indirect detection thereof.
Try to launch a "signal"-trade ( a pending order, placed geometrically well far away, in the PriceDOMAIN, from the current Ask/Bid-levels ).
Once this trade would be end-to-end registered ( Server-side acknowledged ), the local-side would have confirmed the valid state of the db.POOL
Making this a request/response pattern between localhost/MT4-Server processes, the localhost int init(){...} / int start(){...} functionality may thus reflect a moment, when the both sides have synchronised state of the records in db.POOL
I need to add immovable feature to my project job scheduling solution, I have add locked property at Allocation class like this :
private boolean locked = false;
update the NotSourceOrSinkAllocationFilter class to include locked checking like this :
JobType jobType = allocation.getJob().getJobType();
return !allocation.isLocked() && jobType != JobType.SOURCE && jobType != JobType.SINK;
I tried to run it first, when the result appears, I immediately terminate the solving earlier. Then move one single allocation and set it to locked. When I run it again, it will gave me a infeasible solution.
Here is my screenshot:
initializes schedule:
adhoc decision:
try to moved it, lock it, and solve it again
unexpected result come out (it just come back to the previous allocation)
Please help me to add this immovable feature. Thanks.