I am trying to change the screen of an app during a function is running.
public void StartRecording(View view)
{
start_button.setEnabled(false);
stop_button.setEnabled(true);
recording = true;
while(recording==true)
{
// Here is a code that changes many views on the screen
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
function StartRecording() is called by clicking the start_button in the xml file.
recording is set to false when clicking the stop_button.
The views on the screen should change, wait a second, change again, wait a second and so on.
But what happens is that the function waits until the loop is finished and then shows only the final screen change. What am I doing wrong?
Thanks ahead : )
Edit:
I tried using Handler and it has the same result..
private final Handler mHandler = new Handler(Looper.getMainLooper())
{
public void handleMessage(Message msg)
{
tv.setText((String) msg.obj);
}
};
tv is a textView. Instead of using tv.setText just above the try{} in the code above, I sent a message to mHandler to change the text, and it still changes it only after the whole startRecording function is over.
Now, what am I doing wrong? :/
What am I doing wrong
you are calling sleep wait the UI Thread, that is responsible for drawing your views and handle events. If you want to schedule 10 different redrawing of your views, you can use and Handler and its postDelayed method
Related
I have a simple Activity with two buttons "On" and "Off". I want start changing color of background in cycle with button "On" and stop this with button "Off". Also I need to have red color by click on "Off" button. I have wrote simple programm and everything is fine, but I can't understand one thing. Why the last color not always red? If I use code in main threads cycle
Thread.sleep(100);
or
Thread.sleep(1000);
I always have red color, but if I set
Thread.sleep(10);
I have random last color. Why??
Thank you !!
I have this code:
public class MyActivity extends Activity {
final Handler myHandler = new Handler();
private int randColor;
final Runnable updateColor = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
final Random random = new Random();
randColor = Color.rgb(random.nextInt (255), random.nextInt (255), random.nextInt (255));
mRelativeLayout.setBackgroundColor(randColor);
}
};
private ColorChanger myThread;
class ColorChanger extends Thread {
private volatile boolean mIsStopped = false;
#Override
public void run() {
super.run();
do
{
if (!Thread.interrupted()) {
myHandler.post(updateColor);
}
else
{
return;
}
try{
Thread.sleep(100);
}catch(InterruptedException e){
return;
}
}
while(true);
}
public void stopThis() {
this.interrupt();
}
}
private RelativeLayout mRelativeLayout;
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.activity_my);
mRelativeLayout = (RelativeLayout)findViewById(R.id.relativeLayout);
}
public void onflagClick(View view) {
myThread = new ColorChanger();
myThread.start();
}
public void onflagoffClick(View view) throws InterruptedException {
myThread.interrupt();
if(myThread.isAlive())
{
try {
myThread.join();
} catch(InterruptedException e){
}
}
else
{
mRelativeLayout.setBackgroundColor(getResources().getColor(R.color.redColor));
}
mRelativeLayout.setBackgroundColor(getResources().getColor(R.color.redColor));
}
}
I agree with the previous answer-ers, but propose a different solution.
First let me say that I recommend you stop using Runnables. In general posting a Runnable to a Handler is less efficient then sending a Message, although there are very rare exceptions to this rule.
Now, if we send Messages, what should we do? What we basically want to do is keep doing whatever we're doing until a condition is hit. A great way to do this is to write a Message Handler that receives a Message, does our work (setting the color), checks if we should keep going, and if so schedules a new Message in the future to do more work. Let's see how we might do this.
Assume the code below is inside an Activity.
private static final int MSG_UPDATE_COLOR = 1;
private static final int DELAY = 10; //10 millis
private final Object mLock = new Object();
private boolean mContinue = true;
Handler mHandler = new Handler() {
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message msg) {
switch (msg.what) {
case MSG_UPDATE_COLOR:
synchronized (mLock) {
if (mContinue) {
setColor(Color.rgb(random.nextInt (255), random.nextInt (255), random.nextInt (255)));
mHandler.sendEmptyMessageDelayed(MSG_UPDATE_COLOR, DELAY);
} else {
setColor(Color.RED);
}
}
break;
}
}
}
}
public void onflagClick(View view) {
mHandler.sendEmptyMessage(MSG_UPDATE_COLOR);
}
public void onflagoffClick(View view) throws InterruptedException {
synchronized (mLock) {
mContinue = false;
}
// cancel any pending update
mHandler.removeMessages(MSG_UPDATE_COLOR);
// schedule an immediate update
mHandler.sendEmptyMessage(MSG_UPDATE_COLOR);
}
Okay, so, what is happening here. We've created a Handler that will do all the color updates. We kick that off when our start event happens. Then the Message schedules a new message (and therefore color update) in ten milliseconds. When the stop event happens we reset a flag that the message handler reads to determine if a new update should be scheduled. We then unschedule all update messages because it might be scheduled for several milliseconds in the future and instead send an immediate message that does the final color update.
For bonus points we eliminate the use of a second thread which saves resources. Looking carefully I've used synchronized blocks, but these are actually unnecessary because everything is happening on the main thread. I included these just in case someone was changing mContinue from a background thread. Another great point of this strategy is that all color updates happen in one place in the code so it is easier to understand.
When you post to Handler, it will run your Runnable at some given time in the future. It is not immediate. It also works in a queue so the more times you post to Handler you are going to stack up the commands that will all get executed in order eventually.
You're facing a race condition because with Thread.sleep(10), the program is most likely stacking up a lot of Runnables to execute. They will run regardless of whether or not your Thread is running because they've been queued up to run on the main thread. Thread.sleep(100) or Thread.sleep(1000) doesn't have this issue simply because you're giving the system enough time to execute all color commands. However, it is still possible to have this issue if you pressed the off button at just the right time.
As DeeV told you, Handler sends Runnables to a Looper that is basically a Thread looping inside processing messages or runnables in each loop. You are queuing messaged to the main Looper and then you are sleeping your worker Thread. Its possible that you are sending for example 2 runnables in a row between each loop of your worker thread, but the main looper has only executed the last one so you cannot see each color as you want.
If you want a simple solution to make it work, you can use an Object or a CountDownLatch to synchronize your main Looperwith your worker Thread.
For example: Just before you will sleep your worker Thread you can do the next thing myLockObject.wait()
Then, you should change post(Runnable) to sendMessage(Message). In handleMessage from your Handler you can do myLockObject.notify() (Keep in mind that handleMessage will be executed inside the Looper that you have created your Handler or you can specify any Looper you want explicity). To obtain a new Message you should use myHandler.obtainMessage().
This will make your worker Thread wait your main Looperto process your runnable just before you wait X time until you post next color. Obviously you should create your new Object as a field of your Activity for example:
private myLockObject = new Object()
I finally got my app working, i just have one issue which i would like to correct.
I have a button which controls a thread that runs a couple function in the background. The functions in the background eventually stop the thread whenever a certain value is reached. What i am having issues doing is pressing that same button again to just stop the thread manually. Currently I can only start the thread and wait for itself to finish. I am able to do other things in the app, so the thread is running on its own, i just want to kill it manually.
public void onMonitorClick(final View view){
if (isBLEEnabled()) {
if (!isDeviceConnected()) {
// do nothing
} else if (monitorvis == 0) {
showMonitor();
DebugLogger.v(TAG, "show monitor");
//monitorStop = 4;
Kill.runThread(); // I want a function here that would kill the
// thread below, or is there something that
// can be modified in runThread()?
// I did try Thread.Iteruppted() without luck
shutdownExecutor();
} else if (monitorvis == 1) {
hideMonitor();
DebugLogger.v(TAG, "hide monitor");
monitorStop = 0;
runThread(); //The running thread that works great on its own
}
}
else {
showBLEDialog();
}
}
private void runThread() {
new Thread() {
int i;
public void run() {
while (monitorStop != 3) { //This is where the thread stops itself
try {
runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
((ProximityService.ProximityBinder) getService()).getRssi();
rssilevel = ((ProximityService.ProximityBinder) getService()).getRssiValue();
mRSSI.setText(String.valueOf(rssilevel) + "dB");
detectRange(rssilevel);
}
});
Thread.sleep(750);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}.start();
}
On first look, you could simply set monitorStop = 3, which would cause the thread to eventually stop after it's timeout completes.
The problem with this, is that I presume if you push the button again or your code modifies monitorStop at some point in the future, then the thead you wanted dead, might stay alive. ie: monitorStop will need to stay equal to three for at least 750ms to assure the thread will comlete it's loop and die.
The correct way to do this would be to create your thread as a new class with it's own monitorStop parameter. When you create the thread, you would keep a reference to it and modify the thread's monitorStop parameter. This way the thread would finish without interruption. If you wanted to create a new thread, then this would not affect the old thread from finishing appropriately.
long time watcher, first time writer :P
I got this problem:
I can't seem to change anything that has to do with the layout of android from my playSoundThread.
In this example, I use EventListeners. I already tried the simple way. I passed the ScrollView through, so that the thread can change it. But when it's happening, the thread stops immediately. And even when I use EventListeners, the same Problem occurs.
Changing a variable and posting log information works fine, but not layout Objects.
The first thing is, that I want to scroll a HorizontalScrollView from out the Thread's run() method.
the second case is, that, if the thread comes to it's end, I wanna fire an "i'm finished"-Event and change the image and function of an ImageButton
Here's the run()-method of the thread
public void run() {
if(this.playbackPosition < rhythm.tracks.get(0).sounds.size()) {
for (Track t : rhythm.tracks) {
if (t.sounds.get(this.playbackPosition).equals("1")) {
this.sp.play(t.SoundID, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1);
}
}
this.playbackPosition++;
if ( this.playbackPosition >= (this.scrollIndex*(192/this.zoom)) ){
this.scrollIndex++;
//Here I wanna fire the "Scroll" event
for(ScrollListener sl : scrollListeners){
sl.update(scrollPositions[scrollIndex]);
}
}
}
//This is the point where the playback is finished and the event to change a button is fired
else {
tmpListener.update();
}
}
}
The declaration of the OnPlaybackFinishedListener can be found in the class Player, which is the parent of the PlaySoundThread:
public void addOnPlaybackFinishedListener(){
tmpListener = new OnPlaybackFinishedListener() {
#Override
public void update() {
scheduledExecutorService.shutdown();
//this is a seconds Listener, which was implemented to test, if the problem still occurs with a little listener chain
shutdownListener.update();
}
};
}
public void addShutdownListener(OnExecutorShutdown sl){
this.shutdownListener = sl;
}
And here's the part of the MainActivity which is the parent class of Player and adds the shutdown listener and the ScrollListener:
awesomePlayer.addScrollListener(new ScrollListener(){
public void update(int position){
Log.i("ScrollListener update()","Running ScrollTo( "+position+", "+VIEW_rhythmscroll.getScrollY()+")");
VIEW_rhythmscroll.scrollTo(position, VIEW_rhythmscroll.getScrollY());
}
});
awesomePlayer.addOnPlaybackFinishedListener();
awesomePlayer.addShutdownListener(new OnExecutorShutdown() {
#Override
public void update() {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
//This method changes the Pause Button to a Play Button with a new OnClickListener and a new Picture
BUTTON_STOP.performClick();
}
});
Can anyone help? Is there another way to avoid this problem? I'm developing on Android 2.2
Is it even possible to access UI elements from a thread?
Thanks in advance :)
You can't modify UI elements from a seperate thread, UI elements have to be modified from the main, UI Thread. There are a lot of topics on this, but you can update the UI by using an AsyncTask's onPostExecute(), onPreExecute(), or onProgressUpdate() methods, the Activity class's runOnUiThread(Runnable action), or by sending a Message to a Handler.
I'd like to do setText() on a TextView and make the activity sleep just after.
Here is the code :
tv.setText("myText");
tv.invalidate(); // Doesn't work
pause(1000); // French for sleep
And my function pause :
public void pause(int seconds)
{
synchronized(this)
{
try {
this.wait(seconds);
} catch (InterruptedException ie) {
ie.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
The problem is that the TextView doesn't update before sleeping. I tried to call invalidate() on my TextView but it doesn't work.
I have another possible solution : create a new Thread for sleeping the activity, and if the value of my TextView is still the same, reload the Thread, else call my function pause(). But is it possible to get the real value of my TextView in the View ? Because I can get the new text when I do :
tv.setText("myText");
System.out.println(tv.getText());
pause(1000); // French for sleep
Whereas the text doesn't update in the View.
Any idea ?
I would suggest what Jave said.
tv.setText("myText");
Handler handler = new Handler();
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//Do something
}
}, 3000); //3000 is time in ms.
If you use the UI thread and make it sleep for too long , you will get the application-not-responding dialog . of course , only when the function ends , you will see the new value , so this is not a good solution . you can use handlers if you wish to use only the UI thread.
If you use a different thread , you will need to set the text of the TextView somehow using the UI thread since it's the only one that is allowed to do so (use handler for this) .
When trying to learn how to create a delay I researched and found the dominant answer to be to use Handler/Runnable/postDelayed.
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
delayedMethod();
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 1000);
That worked ok for a while, but I've added a few more things going on and now they are sometimes happening in the wrong order.
This set of events:
paintScreen1()
...
delayedPaintScreen2()
...
paintScreen3()
is screwing up (sometimes) and doing this:
paintScreen1()
...
paintScreen3()
...
delayedPaintScreen2() (runs last and gets messed up by the actions of paintScreen3)
There doesn't seem to be another good way to create delays - one that doesn't create threads.
Solutions I have tried in order to make sure the code events run in the proper order:
0 Putting the main process inside one big synchronized block.
1 Putting the synchronized keyword in the method name of every method involved in the main process.
2 Putting the synchronized keyword only on the method in the Runnable.
3 Taking away the Handler/Runnable/postdelayed and replacing with handler.sendEmptyMessageDelayed(0,1000)
4 Making one Handler instance variable, used by every Handler/Runnable block (as opposed to Handler handler1, handler2, handler3, etc.)
5
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
waitOver = true;
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 1000);
while (waitOver == false) {
}
delayedMethod();
waitOver = false;
My next attempt may be to try to used the Thread class somehow so I can call thread.join().
When that fails the next thing will be very long and complicated, I fear.
Any suggestions?
Any simple examples of a solution?
Thanks
Edit: I may be confused about whether Handler/Runnable results in literal threading or not.
Edit: It's a game. User makes a move, screen updated to show the move, calculation tells that they scored a point, recolor the boxes on the screen, add delay to allow user to see their point, then call method to removed colored squares, when that method completes and we return to the method that called it (containing the Handler/runnable), the code continues down to a point where it calls another method that results in a random square of the board being turned purple. So it should happen user-move, repaint to show point scored, delay so user can see point scored, repaint to erases squares, then random purple square happens. Sometimes what will happen (as far as I can tell) is the random purple square will execute before it should, choose one of the squares where the point was scored, interfere, and make it so the cleanup method gets confused and fails to cleanup.
mainmethod() {
...
if (pointscored) {
squaresglow();
...
//delay so user can see the glow before the cleanup happens
Handler-runnable
cleanup();
postdelayed
}
...
purpleSquare();
}
I hope this is not even more confusing. purpleSquare runs before cleanup and things get screwed up.
Edit:
Tried this:
6
CountDownLatch doneSignal = new CountDownLatch(1);
Handler handler=new Handler();
final LatchedRunnable lr = new LatchedRunnable(doneSignal);
handler.postDelayed(lr, COMPUTER_MOVE_DELAY);
try {
doneSignal.await();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
class LatchedRunnable implements Runnable {
private final CountDownLatch doneSignal;
LatchedRunnable(CountDownLatch doneSignal) {
this.doneSignal = doneSignal;
}
public void run() {
delayedProcess();
doneSignal.countDown();
}
}
7
ExecutorService executorService = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);
final CountDownLatch latch = new CountDownLatch(1);
executorService.execute(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
try {
Looper.prepare();
Handler handler=new Handler();
final Runnable r = new Runnable()
{
public void run()
{
delayedMethodCleanupCalc();
}
};
handler.postDelayed(r, 4000);
} finally {
latch.countDown();
}
}
});
try {
latch.await();
delayedMethodPaintScreen();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// todo >> handle exception
}
purpleSquare runs before cleanup and things get screwed up
mainmethod() {
...
if (pointscored) {
squaresglow();
...
//delay so user can see the glow before the cleanup happens
Handler-runnable
cleanup();
postdelayed
}
...
purpleSquare();
}
You have a design flaw here. Think of Handlers as a queue of messages that will execute code "later" whenever the processor decides to process messages and postDelayed as an inexact way to stuff that message at the bottom of the queue. If you call postDelayed and you still have lines of code left in the current method to execute, chances are very good that those lines will execute before postDelayed messages are even received.
What you are trying to do is to make sure purpleSquare() gets called after the pointscored routine has done it's job, which may require waiting for it to finish. PostDelaying to the message queue is not what you should be doing in this case. What you should be using is a semaphore and a pointScored thread.
Consider the following code design:
final Runnable pointScoredTask = new Runnable() {
public synchronized void run() {
try {
squaresglow();
//...
Thread.sleep(2500); //2.5 sec before cleanup occurs
cleanup();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
notify(); //make sure we call notify even if interrupted
}
};
void mainmethod() {
//...
if (bPointWasScored) {
synchronized (pointScoredTask) {
try {
Thread psThread = new Thread(pointScoredTask,"pointscored");
psThread.start(); //thread will start to call run(), but we get control back to avoid race condition
pointScoredTask.wait(6000); //wait no more than 6 sec for the notify() call
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
}
}
//if a point was scored, nothing past this line will execute until scoreglow has been cleaned up
}
//...
purpleSquare();
//...
}
I know you'd rather avoid threads, but there are some things that just work much better when you use them. Try the above design and see if that works out the synchronization issues you were seeing.