I'm using Symbian C++ to create my code, I'm using S60 5th Ed SDK
I want to know how to send different messages - Their body text not the same - to multiple recipients in a for-loop ?
I've tried the example below, but when I try to use it in a loop it crashes due to ActiveObjects properties, as I should wait to AO to finish before calling it again.
Sending_SMS_in_S60_3rd_Edition_MTM
Below is example of what I need to do:
SendSMSL(); // **I call this function once to start the process**
// **iRecepients is a CDesCArray contains phone numbers**
// ** iSMSBody is a CDesCArray contains each contact SMS body text**
void CSMS::SendSMSL()
{
if(iRecepients->Count() >= 1)
{
TInt x = iRecepients->Count()-1;
TInt y = iSMSBody->Count()-1;
// **If the sms validating and scheduling succeeded then delete last item from both arrays**
if(iSMSHandler->SendL((*iRecepients)[x],(*iSMSBody)[y])
{
iRecepients->Delete(x);
iSMSBody->Delete(y);
}
}
}
Now, in the code above I call iSMSHandler->SendL() which send sms using AO, and in iSMSHandler object RunL() function, I call back the function above CSMS::SendSMSL() , which in turn checks if there is still anymore iRecepients elements and then call again iSMSHandler->SendL() AO , and keeps this way till no more iRecepients.
Looking forward to hear your feedback on the modification above.
Many thanks in advance.
The link you posted doesn't work for me so I can't see the rest of the code.
Assuming that iSmsHandler is a class that uses active objects to send SMS messages,
I see several issues with your loop.
1) You need to wait for the first asynchronous SendL to complete before you can issue the next SendL
2) The buf variable can not go out of scope until the SendL completes. (This may be the reason for your crash)
I suggest that you keep the textbuffer somewhere else, like together with iSmsHandler, and then code the active object that is called when SendL completes to issue the next SendL.
All of this is guesses since I have no idea what class iSmsHandler is....
Related
How would I send a message to all of the players on the server? (When trying to do so, it only outputs to the console, and I believe that is because the mod is not installed on the client side.)
I have been trying to make a mod for a 1.7.10 server (To put in a 1.7.10 mod pack) that can message all of the players online. I have looked this question up, and have not found any answers.
#SideOnly(Side.SERVER)
#SubscribeEvent
public void onDeath(PlayerEvent.Clone event)
{
if (event.wasDeath) {
final String[] messages = {"Oh boiss we got a respawner O_O", "How dare ye respawn on me?", "GAAH! You died again!", "._. Just why...", "Was taht me or waas that you? -.-","Why isn't this in hardcore mode? It should be..."};
Random random = new Random();
int index = random.nextInt(messages.length);
ChatComponentText text = new ChatComponentText(messages[index]);
ChatStyle style = new ChatStyle();
style.setColor(EnumChatFormatting.LIGHT_PURPLE);
text.setChatStyle(style);
FMLCommonHandler.instance().getMinecraftServerInstance().getConfigurationManager().sendChatMsg(text);
System.out.println("Respawned");
}
}
I expect that the server will send a message to all, but only outputs to the console.
A really quick way this could be handled is to create an EventHandler for when a player joins. Then add them to an ArrayList. Then when they leave (Check for kick / quit event). Remove them from the ArrayList. By having an arraylist you can run through this and message every player.
Your 'System.out.println("Respawned");` line will only print to the console.
I believe what you are looking to do is the following:
1) Loop through all the players on the server.
2) Send each player the calculated message.
I'm not 100% sure how to access the player-list off the top of my head, but you need to access the FMLServerHandler and get the player-list, OR (the better way) access the EntityPlayer objects connected to the player's current world and do the above steps. The second method would only work for the current world, so if you wanted to access all the connections to the server, the first method is the way to go.
Use Case
Android fragment that consumes items of T from a ReceiveChannel<T>. Once consumed, the Ts should be removed from the ReceiveChannel<T>.
I need a ReceiveChannel<T> that supports consuming items from it. It should function as a FIFO queue.
I currently attach to the channel from my UI like:
launch(uiJob) { channel.consumeEach{ /** ... */ } }
I detach by calling uiJob.cancel().
Desired behavior:
val channel = Channel<Int>(UNLIMITED)
channel.send(1)
channel.send(2)
// ui attaches, receives `1` and `2`
channel.send(3) // ui immediately receives `3`
// ui detaches
channel.send(4)
channel.send(5)
// ui attaches, receiving `4` and `5`
Unfortunately, when I detach from the channel, the channel is closed. This causes .send(4) and .send(5) to throw exceptions because the channel is closed. I want to be able to detach from the channel and have it remain usable. How can I do this?
Channel<Int>(UNLIMITED) fits my use case perfect, except that is closes the channel when it is unsubscribed from. I want the channel to remain open. Is this possible?
Channel.consumeEach method calls Channel.consume method which has this line in documentation:
Makes sure that the given block consumes all elements from the given channel by always invoking cancel after the execution of the block.
So the solution is to simply not use consume[Each]. For example you can do:
launch(uiJob) { for (it in channel) { /** ... */ } }
You can use BroadcastChannel. However, you need to specify a limited size (such as 1), as UNLIMITED and 0 (for rendez-vous) are not supported by BroadcastChannel.
You can also use ConflatedBroadcastChannel which always gives the latest value it had to new subscribers, like LiveData is doing.
BTW, is it a big deal if you new Fragment instance receives only the latest value? If not, then just go with ConflatedBroadcastChannel. Otherwise, none of BroacastChannels may suit your use case (try it and see if you get the behavior you're looking for).
I got many scripts. I want to be able to manage them all in 1 in script.
What I want is that the main script will activate a certain script, then when the secondary script is done, it returns a value to the main script. After that, the main script calls another secondary script, etc...
Is there a proper way to do this?
More precise question:
Is it possible to activate a AHK script from another script AHK?
At the moment, to detect that at a secondary script is complete, the way I currently use is that right before the end of the secondary script, I press a combinaison of keys that the main script will detect. And once detected, it will increase a main script variable by one and this will trigger the activation of the next script. Is there a better way to achieve this?
The main script could call the other scripts using RunWait. The scripts could then communicate back before terminating themselves.
The best option for communication would be to use OnMessage.
The following is a working example from the documentation:
; Example: Send a string of any length from one script to another. This is a working example.
; To use it, save and run both of the following scripts then press Win+Space to show an
; InputBox that will prompt you to type in a string.
; Save the following script as "Receiver.ahk" then launch it:
#SingleInstance
OnMessage(0x4a, "Receive_WM_COPYDATA") ; 0x4a is WM_COPYDATA
return
Receive_WM_COPYDATA(wParam, lParam)
{
StringAddress := NumGet(lParam + 2*A_PtrSize) ; Retrieves the CopyDataStruct's lpData member.
CopyOfData := StrGet(StringAddress) ; Copy the string out of the structure.
; Show it with ToolTip vs. MsgBox so we can return in a timely fashion:
ToolTip %A_ScriptName%`nReceived the following string:`n%CopyOfData%
return true ; Returning 1 (true) is the traditional way to acknowledge this message.
}
; Save the following script as "Sender.ahk" then launch it. After that, press the Win+Space hotkey.
TargetScriptTitle = Receiver.ahk ahk_class AutoHotkey
#space:: ; Win+Space hotkey. Press it to show an InputBox for entry of a message string.
InputBox, StringToSend, Send text via WM_COPYDATA, Enter some text to Send:
if ErrorLevel ; User pressed the Cancel button.
return
result := Send_WM_COPYDATA(StringToSend, TargetScriptTitle)
if result = FAIL
MsgBox SendMessage failed. Does the following WinTitle exist?:`n%TargetScriptTitle%
else if result = 0
MsgBox Message sent but the target window responded with 0, which may mean it ignored it.
return
Send_WM_COPYDATA(ByRef StringToSend, ByRef TargetScriptTitle) ; ByRef saves a little memory in this case.
; This function sends the specified string to the specified window and returns the reply.
; The reply is 1 if the target window processed the message, or 0 if it ignored it.
{
VarSetCapacity(CopyDataStruct, 3*A_PtrSize, 0) ; Set up the structure's memory area.
; First set the structure's cbData member to the size of the string, including its zero terminator:
SizeInBytes := (StrLen(StringToSend) + 1) * (A_IsUnicode ? 2 : 1)
NumPut(SizeInBytes, CopyDataStruct, A_PtrSize) ; OS requires that this be done.
NumPut(&StringToSend, CopyDataStruct, 2*A_PtrSize) ; Set lpData to point to the string itself.
Prev_DetectHiddenWindows := A_DetectHiddenWindows
Prev_TitleMatchMode := A_TitleMatchMode
DetectHiddenWindows On
SetTitleMatchMode 2
SendMessage, 0x4a, 0, &CopyDataStruct,, %TargetScriptTitle% ; 0x4a is WM_COPYDATA. Must use Send not Post.
DetectHiddenWindows %Prev_DetectHiddenWindows% ; Restore original setting for the caller.
SetTitleMatchMode %Prev_TitleMatchMode% ; Same.
return ErrorLevel ; Return SendMessage's reply back to our caller.
}
Well, I'm not sure why you'd want to make one script run another one... but here are a few other methods:
Include a script in another one
but, you know you can include a script inside another one, right? That is, you can use another scripts functions in your main script.
Make sure a particular script is loaded
"I got many scripts" too. Sometimes I need to make sure that a particular one is included before I can use it, so I put this at the top:
;make sure core.ahk is loaded since it is required
#include c:\ahk\core.ahk
And you don't have to worry about it getting included more than once (unless you need it) because:
#Include ensures that FileName is included only once, even if multiple inclusions are encountered for it. By contrast, #IncludeAgain allows
multiple inclusions of the same file, while being the same as #Include
in all other respects.
Now, when I include file.ahk in main.ahk, I am assured of no problems using the functions from core.ahk that file.ahk requires. And even if I include core.ahk again in main.ahk it is no worry (unless it contains subroutines instead of just functions - in which case they get run at the point where they were included, so it's best not to put subroutines in your ahk libraries).
Use good ole' RUN on Scripts
Aside from that, you know you can always use the run command to launch an ahk script. You don't have to do all that fancy WM_SENDMESSAGE stuff.
Communicate betweenst scripts using a hidden GUI
Another way for two scripts to communicate between each other is for script #1 to keep open a hidden GUI window that has an edit box and a submit button. This window will never be shown. Now, Script #2 hunts for that message box, uses send to put a string in the edit box, and then control-click to push the submit button. Now script #1 has just received input from script #2. And you don't even have to hunt for the window if you put the windows hwnd value in both scripts (so they already know it ahead of time). This works like a charm.
Tell if a script has completed
If you use ahk's run command, there is an parameter that will give you back the PID of that process (PID = Process ID). You can use this PID to check to see if the script is running, and you can use it to terminate the process.
Also, if you use runwait - the script using that command will pause and wait for the runn-ed process to complete and close before continuing.
theoretically you could also use a file object between the scripts as a sort of stdin/stdout method as when opening a file with the file object you can set it as shared.
You could also set an environment variable and pass the name of the variable to the script ,given that you have setup argument handling in the target script, which then sets the environment variable value on closing. using RunWait and this you could find out what the return result of the script is after it runs.
Lastly, look into using a function as that is probably the "best practice" for what you are trying to do. Since a function can do anything a script can do and you can pass it an array to operate on or with using ByRef on the array param. This would mean that you don't have to write in a bunch of parameters when writing the function and the variables would release memory once the function is complete, automatically. You can even write your functions in a separate file and use #Include to use them in your script.
My application works like this:
Upload Excel file + convert to DataTable
Start new thread
Begin loop through DataTable
Update UI (Label) to show "Processing row [i] of [n]"
Next
End loop
The bold is what I'm not able to do. I've looked around online for updating UI elements from worker threads, but all the results I can seem to find are for Windows Forms, rather than a web project. Is this possible?
yes, you can do it, and actually it is not difficult. you can use ajax toolbox to do it easily. simply use an updatepanel, and update progress.
check http://ajaxcontroltoolkit.codeplex.com/
an example: http://www.asp.net/ajax/documentation/live/overview/updateprogressoverview.aspx
I found a workaround using jQuery AJAX and asp.NET WebMethods and a session variable.
I used a method from one of my previous questions, by having a WebMethod check on a Session variable that was updated by the worker thread.
Worker thread:
Session["progress"] = "{\"current\":" + (i + 1) + ", \"total\":" + dt.Rows.Count + "}"
WebMethod:
[WebMethod]
public static string GetProgress()
if (HttpContext.Current.Session["progress"] == null) {
return "{\"current\":1,\"total\":1}";
} else {
return HttpContext.Current.Session["progress"];
}
}
my jQuery basically looped calling that AJAX WebMethod every second. It would start on page load and if the current = total then it would display "Completed" and clear the loop, otherwise it shows "Processing row [current] of [total]". I even added a jQuery UI Progressbar
This is kind of a manual solution but it solves my problem, with little overhead. An unexpected but nice piece is that since it is utilizing a Session variable, and the WebMethod checks on page load, if the worker thread is active then the progressbar will show even if you navigate away and come back to the page.
I have a form with a listview in it that the user can add tasks too. Then the user can click a button then the application goes through each task in the listview 1 by 1 an executes it.
These tasks are more like instructions that actually complete tasks.I do this by having a class with a loop in it that goes through each item and it then completes a task I set for each item(instruction). In order to start the parsing I have a button on a form that calls that function. IE: RunTask(listview1, 1) - basically all this does it starts the loop I have in my class , with a specified listview and which item to start on.
Everything works perfect except the screen locks up, so I cannot implement a stop feature to stop the application from parsing these listview items. I just don't understand how I can implement this without crossthreading, since the thread that I would like to run seperate will always access this listview. It is not feasable to redesign the program to get rid of the listview. I tried application.doevents although it caused way too man bugs. I have been researching for days on how to fix this but I have NO idea. Hopefully someone cans hed some light.
Also I had already added a background worker to solve the issue, although I had to obviously set checkforillegalcrossthreadcalls = false and I know this isn't smart.
Try doing something like this. Take you list view and turn it into a set of values that aren't UI related. Like this:
string[] values =
this
.listView1
.Items
.Cast<ListViewItem>()
.Select(x => x.Text)
.ToArray();
Then you can use the parallel task library to run your task in the background:
var tokenSource = new System.Threading.CancellationTokenSource();
var token = tokenSource.Token;
var task = System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Factory
.StartNew(() => RunTasks(values, 1), token);
If you need to cancel the task you can do this:
tokenSource.Cancel();
But to handle UI updates when the task is finished do this:
task.ContinueWith(r =>
{
/* When compete code */
});
Make sure that you invoke the UI updates so that they go on the UI thread.
My apologies that I didn't write this in VB.NET. My VB is getting rusty.