wait

问题 Is there any difference(performance, implementation. .whatever) between the following: i) DllImport("kernel32.dll")] public extern static void Sleep(uint msec); ..then call Sleep function ii) Thread.Sleep() 回答1: There's a big difference, actually. This blog post explains why managed threads should never do unmanaged blocking, if possible. The official MSDN documentation has the same guideline without all the underlying details. P.S. Thread.Sleep is a sign of a poorly-designed program. 回答2: I

问题 I need to get information from the server on the client side. So on the server side I got this when a client first connect: socket.on('adduser', function(username){ // misc code, where i set num_player and whatnot socket.emit('confirmauth', socket.id, socket.num_player, function(data){ console.log(data) }); // code } and on the client side I got this: var current_player; socket.on('confirmauth', function(id, username, num, callback) { current_player = new Player(username,id, num); console.log

问题 I came across this interesting paragraph in the Boost thread documentation today: void wait(boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex>& lock) ... Effects: Atomically call lock.unlock() and blocks the current thread. The thread will unblock when notified by a call to this->notify_one() or this->notify_all(), or spuriously . When the thread is unblocked (for whatever reason), the lock is reacquired by invoking lock.lock() before the call to wait returns. The lock is also reacquired by invoking lock.lock(

问题 Tried searching for the solution to this problem but due to there being a command Shell=True (don't think that is related to what I'm doing but I could well be wrong) it get's lots of hits that aren't seemingly useful. Ok so the problem I is basically: I'm running a Python script on a cluster. On the cluster the normal thing to do is to launch all codes/etc. via a shell script which is used to request the appropriate resources (maximum run time, nodes, processors per node, etc.) needed to run

问题 How can I perform wait without blocking thread and without TPL' ContinueWith? For ex. in 3.5? I know about TPL's ported version for 3.5 (by RX team), but i'm curious to know - which threading primitives I can use for that (... what is behing the scenes of TPL). And what ContinueWith alternatives in TPL? // will this handler block thread during async IO operation? public class AsyncHandler : IHttpAsyncHandler { public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext ctx) { // not used } public bool IsReusable

问题 Can you send me in the right direction for writing a Wait function in PHP? I'm using procedural code style. The scenario is as following: First, my webapp sends data to a server, and then it should pause the execution on the sending client (the webapp). Second, the server receives the data and does something to that data, and it sends the processed data back to the sender of step 1 (the webapp). Third, the sender of step 1 (the webap) receives the processed data from the server and checks it

问题 Currently I have one build file like <target name="test1"> </target> <target name="test2"> </target> .... <target name="test" depends="test1,test2"> </target> There is one problem, when run target "test1", ant always timeout(Confirm with Dev, ant is waiting for some back-end task completed in Runtime, this is correct)。 But based on that, the whole ant execution will be interruppted by the failure of test1, test2 will not be executed. So question is is there any way to tell ant, for test1, you

问题 May be it look childish for most of you but I am unable to understand this small piece of code. #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/wait.h> int main(int argc, char** argv) { int i, pid; pid = fork(); printf("Forking the pid: %d\n",pid); for(i =0; i<5; i++) printf("%d %d\n", i,getpid()); if(pid) wait(NULL); return (0); } Out put of this program is Forking the pid: 2223 0 2221 1 2221 2 2221 3 2221 4 2221 Forking the pid: 0 0 2223 1

问题 package wait1; import org.openqa.selenium.By; import org.openqa.selenium.firefox.FirefoxDriver; import org.openqa.selenium.support.ui.ExpectedConditions; import org.openqa.selenium.support.ui.WebDriverWait; public class Explicit { public static void main(String[] args) { FirefoxDriver driver= new FirefoxDriver(); WebDriverWait wait= new WebDriverWait(driver,20 ); driver.get("http://www.91mobiles.com/"); driver.findElement(By.xpath("//*[@id='q']")).sendKeys("Micromax"); //wait.until

问题 I recently discovered that using synchronized won't prevent any dead locks. E.g. within this code: ArrayList <Job> task; ... public void do(Job job){ synchronized(tasks){ tasks.add(job); } synchronized(this){ notify(); } } public void run(){ while(true){ for (int = 0;i<tasks.size();i++){ synchronized(tasks){ Job job = tasks.get(i); } //do some job here... } synchronized(this){ wait(); //lock will be lost... notifier = false; //lock will be acquired again after notify() } } } Now, what is the