Signals | A lightweight signals and slots implementation | iOS library

You have

I hope I'm understanding the questions correctly. my understanding is that

1. you want to dynamically produce the extract_name_value() function, and make it not as bulky in your code.

2. Im sorry, but I failed to comprehend the for i in signal_name: print(i) part of the question. perhaps you can rephrase the question, and help me understand?

my solution to the extract_name_value() part would be using the exec() function. it is a built-in solution for dynamic execution.

you can extract the repetitive part into its own function that take as arguments the parts that change, like for example:

Following code adds a memory to the signals which can be wiped using MultiSig.reset() to reset the count of all signals to 0. The memory can be queried using MultiSig.query_memory(key) to return the number of hits for that signal at that time.

For the memory function to work, I had to add unique keys to the signals to identify them.

You need to use clusterMap() or another function from the parallel package rather than base::Map.

Look those options up with: ?parallel::clusterMap.

You are also currently mixing things up by introducing registerDoParallel(cl), which is from the foreach package. That would require you to then use foreach() and its helper %dopar%. If you do not use foreach() then you do not need registerDoParallel(cl).

The relevant part of your code would look something like this with clusterMap(). I've tidied it a bit but I can't test it on my machine.

The menu is a complicated object. You can dig in its internal and access menu.wibox:connect_signal("mouse::enter", function() end), but this is only the top-level wibox. Submenus generate their own menu instance and they only create that dynamically.

Thus, there is no easy way to connect signals like this, sorry.

Let the pulse width fractions (between 0 and 1) be p₁, ..., p_n. Let s₀ = 0 and s_n = s_n−1 + p_n be the prefix sums. Signal i should turn on at times s_i−1 mod 1 and end at times s_i mod 1.

This algorithm does what you want on the trivial example, since s₀, s₁, ..., s_n−1, s_n = 0, 1/10, ..., 9/10, 0.

For a less trivial example, suppose that we have signals at 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%. Then the pulses look like

Yes, you can safely wait on a "compound predicate," where one signal means "this state changed or that state changed or some other state changed or ..."

In your case, those states are the event_v flags you set. Presuming your main thread is in a loop, and that the event_v flags are initialized to false, it'd look something like this:

Virtual component binding using component declarations can either be explicit using a configuration specification to supply a binding indication, or rely on a default binding indication.

A default binding indication would rely on finding an entity declared in a reference library whose name matches the component name. That's not the case here, your entity is named MUX_2_1 (case insensitive) while the component name is mux2to1.

It's not illegal to have components unbound in VHDL, it's the equivalent of not loading a component in a particular location in a printed circuit or bread board, it simply produces no output which shows in simulation here as a 'U'.

Here the solutions could be to either change the name of the entity in both the entity declaration and it's architecture from MUX_2_1 to mux2to1, change the component declaration to MUX_2_1 or provide a configuration specification providing an explicit binding indication as a block declarative item in the architecture for mux16to1 of the form