LoaderMax uses the following function in their DisplayObjectLoader.as class which is under loader/core :
Although they have put the forced GC under a Try/Catch block. Flash Player 11 still manages to crash on it. Any ideas about this?
protected static function _forceGCHandler(event:Event):void {
if (_gcCycles == 0) {
_gcDispatcher.removeEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, _forceGCHandler);
_gcDispatcher = null;
} else {
_gcCycles--;
}
try {
new LocalConnection().connect("FORCE_GC");
new LocalConnection().connect("FORCE_GC");
} catch (error:Error) {
}
}
Perhaps you could edit the forced gc out and use System.pauseForGCIfCollectionImminent(0.25)
To connect 2 different connections you can try:
new LocalConnection().connect("FORCE_GC");
new LocalConnection().connect("FORCE_GC1");
But I don't know will this force the GC.
Related
Because of I had problems with Bluetooth on Android Lollipop, I have tried to change the scanner method.
So I have tried to use the new package.
In the previous version, I called startScan(mLeScanCallback) and everything works but now, when I call startScan(mScanCallback) I have the error: "D/BluetoothLeScanner: could not find callback wrapper".
No devices are found and the ListAdapter, I use to show the devices, is empty.
The comment lines are the previous code (and it worked!).
This my code:
public class Selection extends ListActivity implements ServiceConnection {
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
mHandler = new Handler();
// Initializes a Bluetooth adapter through BluetoothManager.
final BluetoothManager bluetoothManager = (BluetoothManager) getSystemService(Context.BLUETOOTH_SERVICE);
mBluetoothAdapter = bluetoothManager.getAdapter();
getApplicationContext().bindService(new Intent(this, MetaWearBleService.class), this, Context.BIND_AUTO_CREATE);
}
private void scanLeDevice(final boolean enable) {
final BluetoothLeScanner bluetoothLeScanner = mBluetoothAdapter.getBluetoothLeScanner();
if (enable) {
mHandler.postDelayed(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
//mBluetoothAdapter.stopLeScan(mLeScanCallback);
bluetoothLeScanner.stopScan(mScanCallback);
setListAdapter(listAdapter);
}
}, SCAN_PERIOD);
//mBluetoothAdapter.startLeScan(mLeScanCallback);
bluetoothLeScanner.startScan(mScanCallback);
} else {
//mBluetoothAdapter.stopLeScan(mLeScanCallback);
bluetoothLeScanner.stopScan(mScanCallback);
setListAdapter(listAdapter);
}
}
private ScanCallback mScanCallback =
new ScanCallback() {
public void onLeScan(final BluetoothDevice device, int rssi, byte[] scanRecord) {
runOnUiThread(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
listAdapter.addDevice(device);
}
});
}
};
Instead the ListAdapter extends BaseAdapter and use a ViewHolder. If it necessary, I post it.
So what does it mean "D/BluetoothLeScanner: could not find callback wrapper"? What is it wrong?
Otherwise how I can't resolve the problem of scanning with the Android Lollipop?
In Lollipop I have often errors about BluetoothGatt. I don't know to minized it (or solve it).
Thanks
The log message D/BluetoothLeScanner: could not find callback wrapper appears whenever Android's bluetooth scanning APIs are told top stop scanning for an app when they think scanning has not started. You can see this by looking at the source code of Android's BluetoothLeScanner here.
This is usually safe to ignore as there are lot of reasons that scanning my not have actually started (it was already stopped, bluetooth is off, permissions have not been granted, etc.) Client software that does scanning often stops scanning on a timer regardless of whether it has been successfully started, or whether it was manually stopped before the timer goes off. Android's example code (and the code shown above) does exactly this, often causing these log messages to show up.
If you really want to minimize these messages, you need to keep track of whether scanning actually started and only stop scanning if it actually did. Unfortunately, you don't get a return code if scanning starts successfully, and you only get an asynchronous callback to onScanFailed(errorCode) if you cannot start successfully. So one approach would be to set scanStartCount++; when you call start scan, and set scanStartCount--; when you get a callback to onScanFailed(errorCode). Then when your timer goes off to stop the scan, only actually stop it if the scanStartCount > 0.
Keep in mind that you can only minimize these messages coming from your application. Other applications on the phone doing bluetooth scanning may be causing these messages to be emitted as well.
for the same problem
I had just add permissions :
Manifest.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION,
Manifest.permission.
Manifest.permission.
Manifest.permission.BLUETOOTH_PRIVILEGED,
in your activity call this methods :
checkPermissions(MainActivity.this, this);
public static void checkPermissions(Activity activity, Context context){
int PERMISSION_ALL = 1;
String[] PERMISSIONS = {
Manifest.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION,
Manifest.permission.BLUETOOTH,
Manifest.permission.BLUETOOTH_ADMIN,
Manifest.permission.BLUETOOTH_PRIVILEGED,
};
if(!hasPermissions(context, PERMISSIONS)){
ActivityCompat.requestPermissions( activity, PERMISSIONS, PERMISSION_ALL);
}
}
public static boolean hasPermissions(Context context, String... permissions) {
if (context != null && permissions != null) {
for (String permission : permissions) {
if (ActivityCompat.checkSelfPermission(context, permission) != PackageManager.PERMISSION_GRANTED) {
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
hope it's help
I had the same problem with android m.It was due to lack of permissions.Make sure you go to settings and grant location permission to your app
for location permission, only ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION worked. ACCESS_COARSE_LOCATION had the same problem.
I'm developing my own game with eclipse and I tried to export it and test it on an other computer. On my own computer the exported game worked fine but not on the other one. I started the jar from the commandline, so I can see the error and it is the error, mentioned in the headline, "Pixel format not accelerated" in this function (in line "Display.create(...)"):
public static void createDisplay() {
System.out.println("test1");
ContextAttribs attribs = new ContextAttribs(3, 2).withForwardCompatible(true).withProfileCore(true);
try {
System.out.println("test2");
Display.setDisplayMode(new DisplayMode(WIDTH,HEIGHT));
Display.create(new PixelFormat().withDepthBits(24), attribs);
Display.setTitle("Our First Display!");
System.out.println("test3");
GL11.glEnable(GL13.GL_MULTISAMPLE);
} catch (LWJGLException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
GL11.glViewport(0,0, WIDTH, HEIGHT);
lastFrameTime = getCurrentTime();
}
Now my question is, how I can get rid of this exception, so I can play the game on the other computer as well...
Thanks for you help :)
Here I have AS3 to for uploading recorded sound file to server. When I test it in Flash it works properly (record sound and upload it and goes to next frame) , but in browser it doesn't work. It seems can't call myUpload but I don't why? Is it should be mouse event? Thanks.
function VOCWordToYourMp3()
{
setTimeout(startRecording,3000);
recorder.addEventListener(RecordingEvent.RECORDING, onRecording);
recorder.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, onRecordComplete);
}
function startRecording()
{
if (! recording)
{
recorder.record();
}
else if (recording)
{
recorder.stop();
recording = false;
}
}
function onRecording(e:RecordingEvent)
{
//
}
function onRecordComplete(e:Event):void
{
//
}
function renderWav(src, convertToMp3 = false)
{
//
function handleRenderTimer(e:TimerEvent)
{
//
}
function finishRender()
{
//
}
}
function makeIntoMp3(wav)
{
wav.position = 0;
mp3Encoder = new ShineMP3Encoder(wav);
mp3Encoder.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE, mp3EncodeComplete);
mp3Encoder.addEventListener(ProgressEvent.PROGRESS, mp3EncodeProgress);
mp3Encoder.start();
function mp3EncodeProgress(e:ProgressEvent):void
{
//
}
function mp3EncodeComplete(e: Event):void
{
myUpload('sound1',mp3Encoder.mp3Data);
}
}
function myUpload(namefile:String,sba: ByteArray):void
{
//upload code
}
Update:
In Flash Player 10 and Actionscript 3.0, all the calls to URLLoader must be in the same callstack.
http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/user-interaction-required-upload-download.html
What is same callstack mean?
I recommend using something like Vizzy: https://code.google.com/p/flash-tracer/ to debug your swf in the browser. You can put trace statements into the onRecordComplete() and myUpload() functions, etc, to see how far the code is getting, and to see if you are getting any new errors. You may have some kind of security sandbox error because you are running in the browser. Being able to see what that error is will help you figure out what to do next.
To use Vizzy, you need to have the debug player running in your browser, and to configure the right path to your log file. This is sometimes a little bit tricky, so I'll give you some tips:
Add a file to your home directory called mm.cfg, and populate it with these settings:
ErrorReportingEnable=1
AS3Verbose=0
TraceOutputFileEnable=1
AS3Trace=0
TraceOutputBuffered=0
AS3StaticProfile=0
Then in Vizzy you have to set up the path to the log. On my windows 7 machine it is here:
C:\Users\MyUserName\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash Player\Logs\flashlog.txt
It may be different depending on your operating system.
Good luck, and report back if you Vizzy gives you any new information.
if i am running code
try
{
line one
line 2
line 3
.
.
.
.
}
catch(Exception x)
{
}
now if exception occurs at any line i dont know and we do some stuff in catch so that exception dose not occur again at that line now we need to goback to line from where exception occurred and execute same line how can we do that?
Assuming this is Java, you can't do that - once the exception is thrown, nothing in the rest of the try block will be executed. You would have to use multiple try/catch blocks to explicitly do what you want:
try {
line one
} catch (Exception x) {
fixup line one
}
try {
line 2
} catch (Exception x) {
fixup line 2
}
...etc.
That sort of defeats the purpose of a try catch. If you catch an exception, you should handle the error. If you want to continue where you left off, the best way would probably be to put code in a finally block. This code will always run if there is an exception or no exception is thrown.
try {
//some exception prone code
}
catch(Exception e) {
//handle exception
}
finally {
//Always runs after exception caught or if no exception thrown
}
You don't. If you fixed the problem, you should run the entire block again. The point of a try block is that it has everything you need to perform a certain task. An exception makes everything after that in the task impossible. If you need to clean up, say, open file descriptors, you can use a finally block; but you really need to just fix the problem and try again or die with a good error message.
You can stick the try/catch block inside of a loop like so:
bool done = NO;
while ( ! done ) {
try {
done = YES;
} catch {
}
}
This causes the entire block to be re-executed. If you want to resume where you left off then you need to track your state along the way:
bool done = NO;
int state = 0; // setup some constants, kStateA = 0, kStateB = 1, etc:
while ( ! done ) {
try {
switch ( state ) {
case kStateA: line 1; ++state; // fall through
case kStateB: line 2; ++state;
// etc.
}
done = YES;
} catch {
}
}
The above code, simplified to be more in line with your question looks like this (though the state-machine concept is still the underlying principle):
bool done = NO;
int lineNumber = 1;
while ( ! done ) {
try {
switch ( lineNumber ) {
case 1: line 1; ++lineNumber; // fall through
case 2: line 2; ++lineNumber; // fall through
// etc.
}
done = YES;
} catch {
}
}
i want to implement a code to keep a watch on suppose some event ...at the meantime i don have any inbuilt eventwatcher so i hv to implement one of mine..which consumes least cpu & memory.
can u suggest me one..
for example a pseudocode is given:
while(true)
{
if(process.isrunning)
process.kill();
}
If you don't have any event to hook into, then your code has to be "active" to run the checks. And that costs CPU cycles.
What you can to do ease waste is to add a call to sleep (Thread.Sleep in .NET, sleep in some implementations of C++).
while (true) {
if(process.isrunning)
process.kill();
sleep(100); // Wait 100 millisecond before trying again
}
But that will make you code a little less responsive.
you can try using timer queue : http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms687003%28VS.85%29.aspx its basically using kernel scheduler to call your function callback at specified interval, the caller is from different thread so it won't interrupt the main thread and make your application responsive, the thread is managed by Windows so you don't have to manage your own pooling thread, and its relative accurate.
implementation example:
`
//a singleton class that hold timer queue
class TimerQueue {
protected:
HANDLE timerQueue;
TimerQueue() {
this->timerQueue = ::CreateTimerQueue();
}
~TimerQueue() {
if(this->timerQueue) {
::DeleteTimerQueueEx(this->timerQueue,NULL);
this->timerQueue = NULL;
}
}
public:
static HANDLE getHandle() {
static TimerQueue timerQueueSingleton;
return timerQueueSingleton.timerQueue;
}
}
//timer base class
class Timer
{
protected:
HANDLE timer;
virtual void timerProc() = 0;
static void CALLBACK timerCallback(PVOID param,BOOLEAN timerOrWait) {
Timer* self = (Timer*)param;
self->timerProc();
}
public:
Timer(DWORD startTimeMs,DWORD periodTimeMs) {
if(!::CreateTimerQueueTimer( &this->timer, TimerQueue::getHandle(),
(WAITORTIMERCALLBACK)&this->timerCallback,
this, startTimeMs, periodTimeMs,
WT_EXECUTEDEFAULT) ) {
this->timer = NULL;
}
}
virtual ~Timer() {
if(this->timer) {
::DeleteTimerQueueTimer(TimerQueue::getHandle(),&this->timer,NULL);
this->timer = NULL;
}
}
}
//derive and implement timerProc
class MyTimer : public Timer
{
protected:
virtual void timerProc() {
if(process.isRunning()) {
process.kill();
}
}
public:
MyTimer(DWORD startTimeMs,DWORD periodTimeMs)
: Timer(startTimeMs,periodTimeMs) {}
}
//usage:
int main(int argc,char* argv[]) {
MyTimer timer(0,100); //start immediately, at 10 Hz interval
}
`
disclaimer : i don't test or compile those codes, you should recheck it
Although you've tagged this as language-agnostic, any good implementation is going to vary widely not just from one language to another, but across operating systems. There are plenty of circumstances where programs or operating system functions need to do just this sort of thing, and mechanisms will have been implemented to do this in as sensible, non-intrusive a way as possible.
If you have a particular language and/or operating system in mind, please tell us, and give us a better idea of what you're trying to achieve. That way we can point you towards the most appropriate of the many possible solutions to this problem.