.pyc keeps running and never stops
Dear All, I am using Python 2.5 and used py_compile to produce a .pyc file. The script runs well. However, the .pyc keeps running and never stops. Advices will be deeply appreciated. Regards. David -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Looking for a nitty-gritty Python Ajax middleware script to fire off a number of processors
Dear All, I am looking for a nitty-gritty Python Ajax script to fire off a number of processing programmes, periodically checking their operations, sending messages back to an HTML div form by sending back the links of generated data files, to be downloaded by end users. I am using .NET IIS 6.0 and Windows Server. Regards. Shao -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
cunfused why gevent block redis' socket request?
GOAL:spawn a few greenlet worker deal with the data pop from redis (pop from
redis and then put into queue)
RUNNING ENV: ubuntu 12.04
PYTHON VER: 2.7
GEVENT VER: 1.0 RC2
REDIS VER:2.6.5
REDIS-PY VER:2.7.1
from gevent import monkey; monkey.patch_all()
import gevent
from gevent.pool import Group
from gevent.queue import JoinableQueue
import redis
tasks = JoinableQueue()
task_group = Group()
def crawler():
while True:
if not tasks.empty():
print tasks.get()
gevent.sleep()
task_group.spawn(crawler)
redis_client = redis.Redis()
data = redis_client.lpop('test') #<--Block here
tasks.put(data)
Try to pop data from redis, but it blocked..and no exception raised...just
freeze
and remove spawn method ,it will worked..
i feel confuse what happened, plz help!
thk u!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine)
Hi John, In my college, we are using Python 3.x to teach and personally I am using a Mac and it works well so far. But back to development work, I use 2.7x because of libraries I using. As for ide, we are using IDLE, we understand it is clumsy but it is the most basic and since it comes with it, so why not make use of it. But my personal choice will be Sublime and pyCharm or even vim. Shao Hong shaohon...@gmail.com "Respect needs to be earned, but honour is an attitude of the heart. Not everyone will earn your respect, but everyone deserves to be shown honour." - Anonymous On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:07 AM, John Ladasky wrote: > Hi folks, > > My side job as a Python tutor continues to grow. In two weeks, I will > start working with a high-school student who owns a MacBook Pro. > > I have had students with Linux systems (my preference) and Windows systems > before, but not Macs. On my first visit, I set up each student's computer > with Python 3.x, and SciTE for editing. I would like to do something > similar for my Mac student, and I want to make sure that it goes smoothly. > > My first question is whether Mac OS X ships with Python 2.x, and whether I > need to be aware of any compatibility issues when I install 3.x. (It's > 2013, and my students are new to programming. I refuse to hitch them to > Python 2.) > > Second: it doesn't look like I will be able to obtain SciTE for this > student. SciTE is free for Windows and Linux. Apparently, it's $42 for > Mac OSX? If I recall, SciTE is open-source, so I suppose that I could > compile the source myself. But since it is not my computer, and I'm being > paid for my time, and I haven't done much with Macs (to say nothing of > building from source code), I don't think that this is appropriate. > > I know, we can use IDLE. I continue to find IDLE clumsy. Also, there are > potential issues with event handling which arise when you use IDLE. I am > working with an adult professional who is developing a Telnet application, > which refuses to cooperate with IDLE/Tk. I had similar issues myself with > wxPython applications I was writing. While these issues may not affect a > beginning student, these experiences have informed my choices. > > So, what other free and lightweight editing options do I have for a Mac? > I have found a few (fairly old) discussions on comp.lang.python which > suggest Eric (http://eric-ide.python-projects.org/) and Editra ( > http://editra.org/). Opinions on these and other choices are appreciated. > > Thanks! > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Question on threads
Hi all, I'm a beginner to Python, so please bear with me. Is there a way of guarenteeing that all created threads in a program are finished before the main program exits? I know that using join() can guarentee this, but from the test scripts I've run, it seems like join() also forces each individual thread to terminate first before the next thread can finish. So if I create like 20 threads in a for loop, and I join() each created thread, then join() will in effect cause the threads to be executed in serial rather than in parallel. ~ Jon -- "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return." ~ T.H.White -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Question on threads
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jonathan Shao wrote: > > > Hi all, > > I'm a beginner to Python, so please bear with me. > > Is there a way of guarenteeing that all created threads in a program > > are finished before the main program exits? I know that using join() can > > guarentee this, but from the test scripts I've run, it seems like join() > > also forces each individual thread to terminate first before the next thread > > can finish. So if I create like 20 threads in a for loop, and I join() each > > created thread, then join() will in effect cause the threads to be executed > > in serial rather than in parallel. > > > > > No it won't, as in fact there is no mechanism to force a thread to > terminate in Python. When you join() each created thread the main thread > will wait for each thread to finish. Supposing the longest-lived thread > finished first then all others will immediately return from join(). > > The only requirement it is imposing is that all sub-threads must be > finished before the main thread terminates. > > regards > Steve > -- > Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 > Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ > I guess I'm doing something wrong with join(). Here's a test script I wrote up... import threading import time class TestThread(threading.Thread): def __init__(self, region): self.region = region threading.Thread.__init__(self) def run(self): for loop in range(10): print "Region " + str(self.region) + " reporting: " + str(loop) time.sleep(2) for x in range(10): thr = TestThread(x) thr.start() thr.join() raw_input() In this script thread 0 will finish first... Am I doing something wrong with join()? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Interesting timing issue I noticed
The project I'm working on is motion detection, involving a bit of image processing. No worries: no image processing background needed. Suffice to say that I initially wrote a script that goes through every pixel of a 320x240 picture (turned into an array using PIL) and performs some calculatiosn. It simply goes through every pixel in the array and performs a simple subtraction with a known value. The idea is to try to find differences between the two images. After a while, to try to speed up the calculations, I realized that I didn't need to do all 320x240 calculations. So I implemented a slightly more sophisticated algorithm and localized my calculations. I still do the pixel subtractions, but I do it on a smaller scale. Surprisingly, when I used time.time() to time the procedures, I find that doing all 320x240 calculations are often faster! On my machine, the former gives me on average an execution time of around 0.125s (and consistently), whereas the latter on average takes 0.160s. Why does this happen? -- "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return." ~ T.H.White -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Interesting timing issue I noticed
I've written up a stripped down version of the code. I apologize for the bad coding; I am in a bit of a hurry. import random import sys import time sizeX = 320 sizeY = 240 borderX = 20 borderY = 20 # generates a zero matrix def generate_zero(): matrix = [[0 for y in range(sizeY)] for x in range(sizeX)] return matrix # fills zero matrix def fill_matrix(in_mat): mat = in_mat for x in range(sizeX): for y in range(sizeY): mat[x][y] = random.randint(1, 100) return mat ## # COMPUTES ONLY A PART OF THE ARRAY def back_diff_one(back_array, fore_array, box): diff_array = generate_zero() start = time.time() for x in range(sizeX): for y in range(borderY): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] for y in range((sizeY - borderY), sizeY): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] for y in range(borderY, (sizeY - borderY)): for x in range(borderX): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] for x in range((sizeX - borderX), sizeX): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] # tracks object if (len(box) != 0): for x in range(box[0], box[2]): for y in range(box[1], box[3]): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] print "time one inside = " + str(time.time() - start) return diff_array ## # COMPUTES EVERY ELEMENT IN THE ARRAY def back_diff_two(back_array, fore_array): diff_array = generate_zero() start = time.time() for y in range(sizeY): for x in range(sizeX): diff_array[x][y] = back_array[x][y] - fore_array[x][y] end = time.time() print "time two inside = " + str(end - start) return diff_array ## # CODE TO TEST BOTH FUNCTIONS back = fill_matrix(generate_zero()) fore = fill_matrix(generate_zero()) box = [20, 20, 268, 240] start1 = time.time() diff1 = back_diff_one(back, fore, box) print "time one outside = " + str(time.time() - start1) start2 = time.time() diff2 = back_diff_two(back, fore) print "time one outside = " + str(time.time() - start2) Here are some results from several test runs: time one inside = 0.078686646 time one outside = 0.125 time two inside = 0.078686646 time two outside = 0.14132425 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.062637604 time one outside = 0.125 time two inside = 0.078961853 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.062362396 time one outside = 0.13866486 time two inside = 0.078686646 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.078686646 time one outside = 0.172000169754 time two inside = 0.078961853 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.078686646 time one outside = 0.125 time two inside = 0.078686646 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.062362396 time one outside = 0.155999898911 time two inside = 0.078686646 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.077999830246 time one outside = 0.125 time two inside = 0.077999830246 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.078686646 time one outside = 0.17103815 time two inside = 0.077999830246 time two outside = 0.125 >>> RESTART >>> time one inside = 0.062637604 time one outside = 0.1876376 time two inside = 0.062362396 time two outside = 0.125 Why is a large percentage of the time, the execution time for the (ostensibly smaller) first loop is actually equal to or LARGER than the second? -- "Perhaps we all give the best of our hearts uncritically, to those who hardly think about us in return." ~ T.H.White -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Interesting timing issue I noticed
*Gabriel Genellina* gagsl-py2 at yahoo.com.ar *Wed Apr 16 08:44:10 CEST 2008* > Another thing would be to rearrange the loops so the outer one executes less times; if you know that borderX<-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
have opensource crawler written by python?
hi, Is there a crawler written by python? anybody can give me more information? thanks a lot! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
