This question is about event handling on Android. It is not specific to c++.
I need to process UI/OS events, without blocking when all events have been processed.
The reason is that the application I am porting is very large and can't easily be rewritten to deal with its own stuff on a worker thread. Instead the application engine asks for UI/OS events to be processed during long-winded operations that would otherwise be blocking.
I have found that ALooper_pollAll(...) doesn't do this for me. If I, for example, create a dialog in my activity and start a long operation, ALooper_pollAll() won't make my dialog appear - it will show only when I return to the main loop (I tested this in onNativeWindowCreated).
The only solution that I have found to almost work is to do an inner loop on the UI thread, by calling the following code through JNI:
public class MyActivity extends NativeActivity {
private Handler _uiEventsHandler = null;
private Runnable _uiEventsTask = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
Looper looper = Looper.myLooper();
looper.quit();
_uiEventsHandler.removeCallbacks(this);
_uiEventsHandler = null;
}
};
public void ProcessEvents(int timeout)
{
if (_uiEventsHandler==null) {
Looper looper = Looper.myLooper();
_uiEventsHandler = new Handler(looper);
_uiEventsHandler.removeCallbacks(_uiEventsTask);
//_uiEventsHandler.postDelayed(_uiEventsTask,timeout);
_uiEventsHandler.post(_uiEventsTask);
try {
looper.loop();
} catch (RuntimeException re) {
// We get an exception when we try to quit the loop, but the inner loop actually terminates
}
}
}
}
This is, however, not an optimal solution, because it will not loop until there would be no more events to process (because events may be created during the run of the loop).
During my research I have found that I can get the MessageQueue from the Looper and add an IdleHandler that can quit my inner loop. I haven't tried this yet, there has to be a better way.
Given the fact that this is the architecture I must stick with, what is a better solution?
Update:
Using the MessageQueue I'm able to achieve what I need:
public class MyActivity extends NativeActivity {
private class IdleHandler implements MessageQueue.IdleHandler {
private Looper _looper;
protected IdleHandler(Looper looper) {
_looper = looper;
}
public boolean queueIdle() {
_uiEventsHandler = new Handler(_looper);
_uiEventsHandler.post(_uiEventsTask);
return(false);
}
};
private boolean _processingEventsf = false;
private Handler _uiEventsHandler = null;
private Runnable _uiEventsTask = new Runnable() {
public void run() {
Looper looper = Looper.myLooper();
looper.quit();
_uiEventsHandler.removeCallbacks(this);
_uiEventsHandler = null;
}
};
public void ProcessEvents()
{
if (!_processingEventsf) {
Looper looper = Looper.myLooper();
looper.myQueue().addIdleHandler(new IdleHandler(looper));
_processingEventsf = true;
try {
looper.loop();
} catch (RuntimeException re) {
// We get an exception when we try to quit the loop.
}
_processingEventsf = false;
}
}
}
However, I still would like to know if there is a better solution.
Not sure if I understood the question correctly but have you tried using an IntentService?
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/IntentService.html
From the docs:
This "work queue processor" pattern is commonly used to offload tasks from an application's main thread. The IntentService class exists to simplify this pattern and take care of the mechanics."
Related
This is a more general question about how to handle the Threads and Loopers in Android, thus the code is a bit generalized.
Consider the following class DoSomethingClass, which has to start some kind of action that needs listening for events (like cellular rssi changes, location changes etc).
public class DoSomethingClass {
private Thread listenForSomethingThread;
private void startDoingSomething() {
listenForSomethingThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
Looper.prepare();
SomethingListener listener = new SomethingListener() {
#Override
public void onSomethingHappened(Something something) {
// Quit looper if interrupted
if (Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
Looper.myLooper().quit();
} else {
// Do stuff with the Something if not
}
}
}
SomethingManager somMan = // Retrieve it
somMan.requestSomethingUpdates(listener);
Looper.loop(); // Blocks until Looper is quitted
somMan.removeSomethingUpdates(listener);
}
});
listenForSomethingThread.start();
}
private void stopDoingSomething() {
listenForSomethingThread.interrupt();
}
}
Pretty simple: When I call startDoingSomething(), a new Thread gets spawned that creates a listener listening for events and handling them (eg. logging, automated yelling at callers etc). For this, it prepares and starts a looper.
When I am finished, I call stopDoingSomething(), which interrupts the Thread: At the next event, nothing will be done, but the Thread will clean up and terminate.
And here's the problem: What if that event never occurs? Then the check for interruption will never be called, the looper will never be quit and will loop forever!?
Is there any way to get a Thread's Looper from another thread, in order to quit it? Or is there a possibility to let it listen for timing intervals in addition to its normal listenees?
I slightly changed your code sample. You can quit the looper like this:
public class DoSomethingClass {
private Thread listenForSomethingThread;
private Looper looper; // create this field
private void startDoingSomething() {
listenForSomethingThread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
Looper.prepare();
looper = Looper.myLooper(); // store the looper here
SomethingListener listener = new SomethingListener() {
#Override
public void onSomethingHappened(Something something) {
// Quit looper if interrupted
if (Thread.currentThread().isInterrupted()) {
Looper.myLooper().quit();
} else {
// Do stuff with the Something if not
}
}
}
SomethingManager somMan = // Retrieve it
somMan.requestSomethingUpdates(listener);
Looper.loop(); // Blocks until Looper is quitted
somMan.removeSomethingUpdates(listener);
}
});
listenForSomethingThread.start();
}
private void stopDoingSomething() {
looper.quit(); // quit the looper
listenForSomethingThread.interrupt();
}
}
But I guess this looper isn't doing anything because its message queue is not receiving any messages. The listener may be running in the UI thread, which is not what you want, I presume.
I want to create Base class to send any function to it to call with a thread.
Base on AsyncTask functionality, I can't use that because I will call a thread in another thread not only from Main Activity.
here is my sample code
in
Android:
public class BaseThread {
public static Thread call(Function threadMethod)
{
Thread thread = new Thread()
{
#Override
public void run()
{
threadMethod();
}
};
thread.start();
return thread;
}
public static Thread Call(Function threadMethod, Object parameter)
{
Thread thread = new Thread(threadMethod);
thread.start();
return thread;
}
public static void sleep(int millisecondsTimeout)
{
try {
Thread.sleep(millisecondsTimeout);
}
catch (InterruptedException ex)
{
///TODO Handle Exception and Logging
}
}
}
example in c#:
internal class BaseThread
{
public static Thread Call(ThreadStart threadMethod)
{
Thread thread = new Thread(threadMethod);
thread.Start();
return thread;
}
public static Thread Call(ParameterizedThreadStart threadMethod, object parameter)
{
Thread thread = new Thread(threadMethod);
thread.Start(parameter);
return thread;
}
public static void Sleep(int millisecondsTimeout)
{
Thread.Sleep(millisecondsTimeout);
}
}
which type of variable should set in method instead of this line :
call(Function threadMethod)
And whats best practice instead of this base class?
Actually Thread can be considered as a "base thread class" because you can achieve such behavior with putting Runnable/Callable implementation into constructor. Put logic into run method of runnable. But I highly recommend you not to use pure threads and take a look at ExecutorService. Good luck.
Android has a very handy class HandlerThread. You can make your custom thread and publish Runnables to it. It has a embedded queue of Messages, every one of which is handler sequentially.
So I have this method called PredictionEngine(int) that I want to run a certain number of time with a certain time-delay between each run. The method goes like this:
private void PredictionEngine(int delay) throws Exception {
final Handler handler = new Handler();
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
enableStrictMode();
String val = null;
try {
if (tHighPass == 0 && tLowPass == 0 && tKalman == 1) {
//Magic
} else {
//Magic
}
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
enableStrictMode();
new DropboxTask(side_output, "Result", val).execute();
}
}, delay);
}
As obvious, I am running a network operation in the main thread as this is a research app and no client is ever going to use it.
I want this whole function to run for say a 100 times with a certain delay, say 2 seconds. The initial thought was to do this:
for(loop 100 times){
PredictionEngine(int)
Thread.sleep(2000); //sorry for StackOverflow programming.
}
However I don't want to block the main thread as I am reading some sensor data there. Any ideas for the same would be very helpful!
Thanks.
The best way to solve this is by using rxJava library, because it allow to create, modify and consume streams of events. You can implement everything in a few lines of code and modify it so operatioin will be performed in background as well.
Observable.interval(1, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
.take(100)
// switch execution into main thread
.subscribeOn(AndroidSchedulers.mainThread())
.subscribe(t -> {
doSomethingOnMainThread();
});
On the other hand, there is another solution- you can use Handler, which is usually bein used for thread communication. It has method .postDelayed() allowing you to postpone execution of task. Handler can be conveniently used along with HandlerThread. But, rxJava is more convenient and simple way to solve your problem.
While creating your Handler, you can provide a looper as one of the constructors parameters that is based on different thread then the main thread:
HandlerThread thread = new HandlerThread("Thread name", android.os.Process.THREAD_PRIORITY_BACKGROUND);
thread.start();
Looper looper = thread.getLooper();
Handler handler = new MyHandler(looper);
Messages received by MyHandler will be processed on a separated thread, leaving the UI thread clear from interferences.
To loop on the task periodically, use something like:
for (int i=0; i<100; i++){
handler.postDelayed(new Runnable(){
...
...
...
}, i*delay);
}
This way, in case you decide that the periodic tasks need to be canceled, you will always be able to invoke:
handler.removeCallbacksAndMessages(null);
I tried to solve the issue as follows without blocking the main Thread
I created the worker thread for looping and still running the predictionEngine() on main thread
MyThread t = new MyThread(2000, 3000); // delay and sleep
t.startExecution();
Worker thread class looks as follows
class MyThread extends Thread{
private int delay;
long sleep;
MyThread(int delay, long sleep){
this.delay = delay;
this.sleep = sleep;
}
#Override
public void run() {
for(int i = 0; i < 100; i++){
try {
MainActivity.this.runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
predictEngine(delay);
}
});
Log.i("Mtali","About to pause loop before next predict");
sleep(sleep);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
void startExecution(){
start();
}
}
Hop this helps!
I have one function which queries a network server with a few "ping pongs" back and forth, and have written a custom handler to handle the message communication between my main UI thread and the communication thread (I was using AsyncTask for this, but as the program got more complex, I have decided to remove the communication code to its own class outside of the main activity).
Triggering a single instance of this thread communication from onCreate works perfectly, no problem.
I want this query to run on a regular timed basis -- in the background -- for the entire time the app is in use, so I've set up another thread called pollTimer, which I'm trying to use to call the OTHER thread at a regularly scheduled basis.
Obviously, it's crashing, or I wouldn't be posting this.
Is there a way to get a thread within a thread? Or put differently, trigger a thread from another thread?
Timer pollTimer = new Timer();
private void startPollTimer(){
pollTimer.scheduleAtFixedRate(new TimerTask(){
public void run(){
Log.d(TAG,"timer dinged");
//if the following is commented out, this "dings" every 6 seconds.
//if its not commented out, it crashes
threadedPoll();
}
}, 3120, 6000);
}
private void threadedPoll() {
testThread(asciiQueries,WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin);
}
edit: it would probably help to include the "testThread" function, which works by itself when called from onCreate, but does not make it when called from the Timer.
"WorkerThreadRunnable" is the massive chunk of code in its own class that has replaced the mess of having AsyncTask handle it inside the main activity.
private Handler runStatHandler = null;
Thread workerThread = null;
private void testThread(String[] threadCommands, int commandType){
if(runStatHandler == null){
runStatHandler = new ReportStatusHandler(this);
if(commandType == WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin){
workerThread = new Thread(new WorkerThreadRunnable(runStatHandler,threadCommands, WorkerThreadRunnable.typeLogin));
}
workerThread.start();
return;
}
//thread is already there
if(workerThread.getState() != Thread.State.TERMINATED){
Log.d(TAG,"thread is new or alive, but not terminated");
}else{
Log.d(TAG, "thread is likely deaad, starting now");
//there's no way to resurrect a dead thread
workerThread = new Thread(new WorkerThreadRunnable(runStatHandler));
workerThread.start();
}
}
You seem to be well on the way already - the nice thing about handlers, though, is that they aren't limited to the UI thread - so if you have a Handler declared by one thread, you can set it up to take asynchronous instructions from another thread
mWorkerThread = new WorkerThread()
private class WorkerThread extends Thread {
private Handler mHandler;
#Override
public void run() {
mHandler = new Handler(); // we do this here to ensure that
// the handler runs on this thread
}
public void doStuff() {
mHandler.post(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// do stuff asynchronously
}
}
}
}
Hopefully that helps... if I'm totally off base on your problem let me know
Wots wrong with a sleep() loop? Why do you have pagefuls of complex, dodgy code when you could just loop in one thread?
I have a Service that launches a Thread and a Runnable like so.
t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
doSomething();
}
});
t.start();
The reason for the thread is to perform an Async task doSomething(). For now lets not worry about the other class AsyncTask. I have tried it and it does not work for my case. Edit: I can't use AsyncTask because it is meant for the UI thread only. This piece of code has to operate inside a Service, so nope, no AsyncTask :(
doSomething() contains some external libs so the issue I am having is that it can potentially be hung at one of the commands, without return any value (hence no error checking can even be done)
To work around this, I will want to, at some point of time, destroy the Service.
stopService(new Intent("net.MyService.intent));
This works fine and is easily verified on the phone. However, the Thread which was created above will continue to run even when the Service that spawned it is destroyed.
I am thus looking for the correct commands to insert in the Service's onDestroy() which will clean up the Thread for me.
t.destroy();
t.stop();
are both depreciated and cause application crashes.
I took this code from somewhere
#Override
public void onDestroy() {
Thread th = t;
t = null;
th.interrupt();
super.onDestroy();
}
but it still does not work, the thread continues to run. Any help guys?
The thread destroy and stop methods are inherently deadlock prone and not safe. Their existence also gives the illusion that there might be some way of halting another thread immediately when something else tells it to.
I understand your thinking, from your point of view their is one main thread, and when this thread hasn't received a response from it's worker thread in a while you'd like to kill it and restart it, without caring what it's up to. But the reason those methods are deprecated is you should care what the thread is up to. A lot.
What if the thread has a lock around a variable you need to use later? What if a thread has a file handle open? In all these cases, and many more, simply stopping the thread at it's current operation would leave things in mess -- quite likely your application would just crash further down the line.
So in order for a thread to be interruptible or cancel-able or stoppable, it has to manage this itself. If a thread or operation provides no way for itself to be interrupted, then you cannot interrupt it - it is assumed to do so would be unsafe.
If you runnable is literally
public void run() {
doSomething();
}
then there is no way to interrupt it. One would hope that if doSomething were a long operation that there might be a way to either interact with it incrementally with something like
public void run() {
while (running) {
MyParser.parseNext();
}
}
or to be able to pass in a variable by reference which indicates whether the thread is interrupted or not, and hopefully the method would interrupt itself at suitable location.
Remember a blocking operation is blocking. There is no way to get around that, you cannot cancel it part way through.
Alternative answer
Use the following code:
MyThread thread; // class field
Create and start the thread as you do it right now.
thread = new MyThread();
thread.start();
When the service is destroyed, "signal" the thread to quit
public void onDestroy() {
// Stop the thread
thread.abort = true;
thread.interrupt();
}
Here is thread implementation
//another class or maybe an inner class
class MyThread extends Thread {
syncronized boolean abort = false;
//ugly, I know
public void run() {
try {
if(!abort) doA();
if(!abort) doB();
if(!abort) doC();
if(!abort) doD();
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
Log.w("tag", "Interrupted!");
}
}
}
You might want to read the following:
How do you kill a thread in Java?
Thread Primitive Deprecation as already pointed by Claszen
http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/31728 - based my code from here, but there are some issues with the code!
I think that you could rely on catching the exception and not check abort but I decided to keep it that way.
UPDATE
I've seen this sample in codeguru:
public class Worker implements Runnable {
private String result;
public run() {
result = blockingMethodCall();
}
public String getResult() {
return result;
}
}
public class MainProgram {
public void mainMethod() {
...
Worker worker = new Worker();
Thread thread = new Thread(worker);
thread.start();
// Returns when finished executing, or after maximum TIME_OUT time
thread.join(TIME_OUT);
if (thread.isAlive()) {
// If the thread is still alive, it's still blocking on the methodcall, try stopping it
thread.interrupt();
return null;
} else {
// The thread is finished, get the result
return worker.getResult();
}
}
}
Did you check the Java Thread Primitive Deprecation Documentation which is referenced in the Thread API JavaDoc. You will find some hints to handle your problem.
why don't you use an AsyncTask?
A task can be cancelled at any time by
invoking cancel(boolean). Invoking
this method will cause subsequent
calls to isCancelled() to return true.
After invoking this method,
onCancelled(Object), instead of
onPostExecute(Object) will be invoked
after doInBackground(Object[])
returns. To ensure that a task is
cancelled as quickly as possible, you
should always check the return value
of isCancelled() periodically from
doInBackground(Object[]), if possible
(inside a loop for instance.)
I like to take the following approach:
class MyHandler extends Handler {
final Semaphore stopEvent = new Semaphore(0);
#Override
public void handleMessage(Message msg) {
try {
while (!stopEvent.tryAcquire(0, TimeUnit.SECONDS)) {
doSomething();
if (stopEvent.tryAcquire(SLEEP_TIME, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)) {
break;
}
}
} catch (InterruptedException ignored) {
}
stopSelf();
}
}
On service onDestroy just release the stopEvent:
#Override
public void onDestroy() {
myHandler.stopEvent.release();
myHandler = null;
super.onDestroy();
}
Better to use global variable stopThread, stop thread once variable changed to true.
btnStop.setOnClickListener(new OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View arg0){
stopThread = true;
}
});
public void run() {
while (!stopThread) {
//do something
}
}
I think the best way to create and communicate with another thread is to use an AsyncTask. Heres an example of one:
public class Task extends AsyncTask<Void, Void, Void> {
private static final String TAG = "Task";
private boolean mPaused;
private Runnable mRunnable;
public Task(Runnable runnable) {
mRunnable = runnable;
play();
}
#Override
protected Void doInBackground(Void... params) {
while (!isCancelled()) {
if (!mPaused) {
mRunnable.run();
sleep();
}
}
return null;
}
private void sleep() {
try {
Thread.sleep(10);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
Log.w(TAG, e.getMessage());
}
}
public void play() {
mPaused = false;
}
public void pause() {
mPaused = true;
}
public void stop() {
pause();
cancel(true);
}
public boolean isPaused() {
return mPaused;
}
}
You can now easily use this class, and start the thread by writing:
Task task = new Task(myRunnable);
task.execute((Void) null);
Along with this you can easily pause or stop the thread from looping:
Example of pausing and playing the thread:
mButton.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View v) {
if (task.isPaused()) {
task.play();
} else {
task.pause();
}
}
});
Example of stopping and starting the thread:
mButton.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
#Override
public void onClick(View v) {
if (task.isCancelled()) {
task = new Task(myRunnable);
task.execute((Void) null);
} else {
task.stop();
}
}
});