It looks like it works OK: the "CLIENT=: 0" window gets its title bar
updated until the "CLIENT=: 1" session ends, then it reports
+---+-+------+------+--+
|die|0|778555|778553|88|
+---+-+------+------+--+
duty: end.
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> aha... a word I've forgotten to include. Can you try adding this to
> the script please?...
>
> jmf=: ] , ('.jmf' (#~) ([: -. ('.' e. ])))
>
> (I've just fixed the script in the wiki.)
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:22 AM, Devon McCormick <devon...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I get the following error attempting this under Windows XP:
> >
> > start 10
> > duty: starts...
> > |value error: jmf
> > | fi=.jpath'~temp/', jmf tolower y
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Following Bill's warning, I've just corrected the downloadable script:
> >> alivedemo.ijs at:
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Scripts/AliveDemo
> >> The "server" now accesses its jmf file using map_jmf, but the client
> >> uses share_jmf_.
> >>
> >> Can somebody please verify it works under Windows and tell me? (I
> >> don't currently have a windows machine).
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > I've just noticed that if IFUNIX then share_jmf_ calls map_jmf_ to do
> >> > the job. But if IFUNIX=0 then the code for share and map are
> >> > different. Quite likely it won't work as it stands under Windows. The
> >> > workaround is for mapex to check the value of CLIENT and use map_jmf_
> >> > if CLIENT=0, else share_jmf_ .
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:17 AM, bill lam <bbill....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Ian,
> >> >>
> >> >> I have not study the source carefully, but at the first glance, it
> >> seemed
> >> >> that two running J processes accessing the same mapped file. Why
> >> >> share_jmf_ was not needed? Please correct me if I missed anything.
> >> >>
> >> >> Вск, 08 Янв 2012, Ian Clark писал(а):
> >> >>> This is my eventual solution to the "are you alive?" problem:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Scripts/AliveDemo
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It doesn't use sockets, but a couple of mapped files instead. The
> >> >>> (identically coded) processes use them to play pat-a-cake.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> For demo simplicity I've coded a 'hard' duty cycle (a while.-loop.)
> >> >>> rather than one I find much more convenient: a "soft" duty cycle
> that
> >> >>> posts an event calling itself again after a given interval.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> A "soft" duty cycle has a lot of advantages. You have to play with
> the
> >> >>> alternatives to appreciate them, but the main ones are that it dies
> >> >>> gracefully if there's a code error, and it doesn't lock the session
> >> >>> window and any UI which the duty cycle happens to be managing.
> Indeed
> >> >>> the duty cycle runs in the background, keeping all displays
> up-to-date
> >> >>> and leaving you (almost) full use of J facilities.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'll place a "soft" duty cycle code sample on the wiki in a day or
> two.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>> > Please forgive these questions I post to the list to which I know
> the
> >> >>> > answer. Or rather: *an* answer. I learn a lot from others'
> responses.
> >> >>> > Even if it's "my way is best after all" -- that's a valuable
> thing to
> >> >>> > know.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I have two separate J processes running (assume Linux / Darwin,
> >> though
> >> >>> > I'm keen on cross-platform solutions). They communicate by each
> >> >>> > writing a text file which is read by the other
> >> >>> > (keep-it-simple-stupid). Is there a neat, robust way of one
> process
> >> >>> > asking the other: "are you there?" or "are you still alive?"
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I'm au-fait with how the yellow-J works, all the solutions
> involving
> >> >>> > timer-driven duty-cycles, timeouts, and reading files written by
> the
> >> >>> > sister process, Or the files' timestamps, or permissions. But
> these
> >> >>> > all seem so clunky. I guess what I want is something that was so
> easy
> >> >>> > in the 1970s but is so awkward on today's machines: just reserve a
> >> >>> > pair of bits in absolute memory -- or a pair of pixels on the
> screen
> >> >>> > -- or some inessential system flags -- and play pat-a-cake with
> them.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Once upon a time there was such a thing as "common memory".
> >> >>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> For information about J forums see
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> regards,
> >> >> ====================================================
> >> >> GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
> >> >> gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
> >> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> For information about J forums see
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Devon McCormick, CFA
> > ^me^ at acm.
> > org is my
> > preferred e-mail
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
--
Devon McCormick, CFA
^me^ at acm.
org is my
preferred e-mail
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
