mantra | A simple cron-like scheduler for a single command | Cron Utils library
kandi X-RAY | mantra Summary
kandi X-RAY | mantra Summary
A simple cron-like scheduler for a single command.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
- The cron program
mantra Key Features
mantra Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on mantra
QUESTION
TL;DR I want to have the functionality where a channel has two extra fields that tell the producer whether it is allowed to send to the channel and if so tell the producer what value the consumer expects. Although I know how to do it with shared memory, I believe that this approach goes against Go's ideology of "Do not communicate by sharing memory; instead, share memory by communicating."
Context:
I wish to have a server S that runs (besides others) three goroutines:
- Listener that just receives UDP packets and sends them to the demultplexer.
- Demultiplexer that takes network packets and based on some data sends it into one of several channels
- Processing task which listens to one specific channel and processes data received on that channel.
To check whether some devices on the network are still alive, the processing task will periodically send out nonces over the network and then wait for k seconds. In those k seconds, other participants of my protocol that received the nonce will send a reply containing (besides other information) the nonce. The demultiplexer will receive the packets from the listener, parse them and send them to the processing_channel. After the k seconds elapsed, the processing task processes the messages pushed onto the processing_channel by the demultiplexer.
I want the demultiplexer to not just blindly send any response (of the correct type) it received onto the the processing_channel, but to instead check whether the processing task is currently even expecting any messages and if so which nonce value it expects. I made this design decision in order to drop unwanted packets a soon as possible.
My approach:
In other languages, I would have a class with the following fields (in pseudocode):
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-May-22 at 17:31Yes, the approach described by you doesn't align with Golang's Idiomatic way of implementation. And you have rightly pointed out that in the above approach you are communicating by sharing memory.
To achieve this in Go's Idiomatic way, one of the approaches could be that your Demultiplexer "remembers" all the processing_channels that are expecting nonce and the corresponding type of the nonce. Whenever a processing_channels is ready to receive a reply, it sends a signal to the Demultiplexe saying that it is expecting a reply.
Since Demultiplexer is at the center of all the communication it can maintain a mapping between a processing_channel & the corresponding nonce it expects. It can also maintain a "registry" of all the processing_channels which are expecting a reply.
In this approach, we are Sharing memory by communicating
For communicating that a processing_channel is expecting a reply, the following struct can be used:
QUESTION
I want to sort a json data using javascript, the condition is user will enter a input value and based on the input value occurrence in json array I want to display a output. for example: If user input is userInput ="Man" & the json data is
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-May-20 at 17:56The easiest way would be to go through the list of strings and make a new array full of the strings that start with the user input. Then we can sort the matches and append the array of none matching strings to this list.
QUESTION
This is probably a pretty straight forward question but for some reason I haven't been able to find an answer on the great interwebs so far.
When using global variables, I know global variables are bad and should for the most part be avoided, but on those rare occasions where a global variable gets the job done best, should the global variable be both declared and initialized at once? I have been recently trying to drill into my head the mantra "always initialize variables upon declaration when possible" since this usually saves many headaches later and is encouraged with C++. Does this rule apply to global variables as well though?
If you initialize a variable in its global scope when declaring it, how does this affect the program? Is this best practice?
You're advice is very much appreciated!
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Feb-27 at 17:47Yes, you do want to initialize global variables. As @paladin commented, if you do not initialize them, the compiler will attempt to initialize them with the default values. Consider this simple example:
QUESTION
I have this html-code generated from a xml-file which is generated from latex code and I can't change the html output. I work on an indological edition of an anient yoga text. I not just want to have a nice latex document for printing my edition. I want to also have a web edition simultanously. So my lualatex code is processed putting out an xml-file which a xslt2 processor processes to an html file. This is the html:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jan-31 at 18:02Do you need such a result?
QUESTION
Multiple, perhaps most, language implementations that include a compiler at runtime neglect to garbage-collect discarded code (See, for example julia, where this leads to memory leaks in applications like genetic-programming)
My preliminary tests indicate that Chez Scheme does not leak memory here, but I would like to know with greater certainty, since I don't even know if f and g actually get compiled. (The old mantra: "Tests can only prove the presence of bugs, not their absence")
The test I tried: f and g call each other, and their definitions get replaced at runtime.
ANSWER
Answered 2020-Dec-24 at 07:31Given the importance of both procedures and garbage collection to Scheme, I would be surprised if Chez Scheme did not try to garbage collect any dynamically created objects. The R6RS Standard says [emphasis mine]:
All objects created in the course of a Scheme computation, including procedures and continuations, have unlimited extent. No Scheme object is ever destroyed. The reason that implementations of Scheme do not (usually!) run out of storage is that they are permitted to reclaim the storage occupied by an object if they can prove that the object cannot possibly matter to any future computation.
A procedure is an object, and any object may be garbage collected if the implementation can prove that the computation will not need it again. This is not a requirement, but that goes for any object, not just for procedures.
The Chez Scheme manual seems definitive, though (Chez Scheme Version 9 User's Guide, p. 82):
Since all Scheme objects, including code objects, can be relocated or even reclaimed by the garbage collector....
In the 1990s Kent Dybvig wrote a paper together with David Eby and Carl Bruggeman which may be of interest here, called Don’t Stop the BIBOP: Flexible and Efficient Storage Management for Dynamically Typed Languages, which describes the garbage collection strategy implemented in Chez Scheme. In the paper some time is spent discussing "code objects" and in particular how they are segregated and treated differently during the garbage collection process (since they may contain pointers to other objects).
QUESTION
This is my script, I wanna log in to google using selenium.
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Dec-24 at 13:59Based on my testing, it turns out that this problem is caused by VNC that I am using. I don't know the exact problem. However, the error I mentioned above didn't occur and my script was running normally after I install this package:
QUESTION
I am fetching data from an API that has a JSON file, I am trying to pass the data from app to appstack to sessionsStack that will then bring the data to the home page, currently my console.logs are telling me that my data is only getting to the appStack.
App
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Nov-14 at 18:25The best way to pass pros in navigation is to use params. And as your stack is loaded with data you can use the initialParams like below
QUESTION
I have a byte[], which holds a complete PGP Signed Message, consisting of: One-Pass Signature, Literal Data and Signature. Let's assume this is the representation of this message:
ANSWER
Answered 2020-Aug-24 at 23:30It's impossible to analyze your message, because binary data handled as text is garbled and corrupted, and you don't show your code. But you are correct that a PGP signed message can consist of onepass-signature packet, literal data packet, and signature packet. Note that literal data is not just data, it contains some metadata also. In particular, the _CONSOLE you seem to focus on is a special value for the filename field, and not part of the actual data.
BouncyCastle PGPObjectFactory returns this as PGPOnePassSignatureList PGPLiteralData (not byte[]) PGPSignatureList. Using this message signed on my test system:
QUESTION
response = ''+
''+
''+
''+
'';
response=response.toString().replace('/<\? xml .*\?>/', '').trim();
console.log(response);
ANSWER
Answered 2020-Jul-16 at 11:29Try this:
QUESTION
I am working on upgrading my Meteor project and since version Meteor 1.6 onwards, we keep encountering import errors. No matter we are using babel, webpack or ecmascript to compile.
My question is can we still using import? If yes, which compiler is best to use?
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Apr-22 at 11:17My solution is to change to compile using Meteor Atmosphere with ecmascript package installed. Given up on babel and webpack.
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install mantra
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page
