如何在GHCJS程序中定期执行操作?

dan*_*nza 6 concurrency haskell ghcjs

应该setInterval通过Javascript 使用,还是使用一些基于线程的惯用解决方案?

dan*_*nza 8

利用亚历山大,埃里克和路易特自己setInterval提出的一些挑战和评论让我尝试线程.这无缝地工作,代码非常干净,类似于以下内容:

import Control.Concurrent( forkIO, threadDelay )
import Control.Monad( forever )

... within an IO block
threadId <- forkIO $ forever $ do
  threadDelay (60 * 1000 * 1000) -- one minute in microseconds, not milliseconds like in Javascript!
  doWhateverYouLikeHere
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

Haskell具有轻量级线程的概念,因此这是以异步方式运行动作的惯用Haskell方式,就像使用Javascript setIntervalsetTimeout.


ntc*_*tc2 4

如果您不关心动机,请滚动到runPeriodicallyConstantDrift下面我的最佳解决方案。如果您更喜欢结果更差的更简单的解决方案,请参阅runPeriodicallySmallDrift

我的答案不是特定于GHCJS的,也没有在GHCJS上进行过测试,只有GHC,但它说明了OP的幼稚解决方案的问题。

第一个稻草人解决方案:runPeriodicallyBigDrift

这是我的OP解决方案版本,以下进行比较:

import           Control.Concurrent ( threadDelay )
import           Control.Monad ( forever )

-- | Run @action@ every @period@ seconds.
runPeriodicallyBigDrift :: Double -> IO () -> IO ()
runPeriodicallyBigDrift period action = forever $ do
  action
  threadDelay (round $ period * 10 ** 6)
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

假设“定期执行一个操作”意味着该操作每隔几秒开始一次,那么OP的解决方案是有问题的,因为它threadDelay没有考虑操作本身所花费的时间。经过 n 次迭代后,操作的开始时间将至少偏离运行该操作 n 次所需的时间!

第二个稻草人解决方案:runPeriodicallySmallDrift

因此,如果我们实际上想每个周期开始一个新动作,我们需要考虑该动作运行所需的时间。如果与生成线程所需的时间相比,该周期相对较长,那么这个简单的解决方案可能适合您:

import           Control.Concurrent ( threadDelay )
import           Control.Concurrent.Async ( async, link )
import           Control.Monad ( forever )

-- | Run @action@ every @period@ seconds.
runPeriodicallySmallDrift :: Double -> IO () -> IO ()
runPeriodicallySmallDrift period action = forever $ do
  -- We reraise any errors raised by the action, but
  -- we don't check that the action actually finished within one
  -- period. If the action takes longer than one period, then
  -- multiple actions will run concurrently.
  link =<< async action
  threadDelay (round $ period * 10 ** 6)
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

在我的实验中(更多详细信息如下),在我的系统上生成一个线程大约需要 0.001 秒,因此 n 次迭代后的漂移runPeriodicallySmallDrift约为千分之 n 秒,这在某些用例中可能可以忽略不计。

最终解决方案:runPeriodicallyConstantDrift

最后,假设我们只需要恒定的漂移,这意味着漂移总是小于某个常数,并且不会随着周期性动作的迭代次数而增长。我们可以通过跟踪自开始以来的总时间来实现恒定漂移,并n在总时间n乘以周期时开始第次迭代:

import           Control.Concurrent ( threadDelay )
import           Data.Time.Clock.POSIX ( getPOSIXTime )
import           Text.Printf ( printf )

-- | Run @action@ every @period@ seconds.
runPeriodicallyConstantDrift :: Double -> IO () -> IO ()
runPeriodicallyConstantDrift period action = do
  start <- getPOSIXTime
  go start 1
  where
    go start iteration = do
      action
      now <- getPOSIXTime
      -- Current time.
      let elapsed = realToFrac $ now - start
      -- Time at which to run action again.
      let target = iteration * period
      -- How long until target time.
      let delay = target - elapsed
      -- Fail loudly if the action takes longer than one period.  For
      -- some use cases it may be OK for the action to take longer
      -- than one period, in which case remove this check.
      when (delay < 0 ) $ do
        let msg = printf "runPeriodically: action took longer than one period: delay = %f, target = %f, elapsed = %f"
                  delay target elapsed
        error msg
      threadDelay (round $ delay * microsecondsInSecond)
      go start (iteration + 1)
    microsecondsInSecond = 10 ** 6
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

根据下面的实验,漂移始终约为 1/1000 秒,与操作的迭代次数无关。

通过测试比较解决方案

为了比较这些解决方案,我们创建一个操作来跟踪其自身的漂移并告诉我们,并在runPeriodically*上面的每个实现中运行它:

import           Control.Concurrent ( threadDelay )
import           Data.IORef ( newIORef, readIORef, writeIORef )
import           Data.Time.Clock.POSIX ( getPOSIXTime )
import           Text.Printf ( printf )

-- | Use a @runPeriodically@ implementation to run an action
-- periodically with period @period@. The action takes
-- (approximately) @runtime@ seconds to run.
testRunPeriodically :: (Double -> IO () -> IO ()) -> Double -> Double -> IO ()
testRunPeriodically runPeriodically runtime period = do
  iterationRef <- newIORef 0
  start <- getPOSIXTime
  startRef <- newIORef start
  runPeriodically period $ action startRef iterationRef
  where
    action startRef iterationRef = do
      now <- getPOSIXTime
      start <- readIORef startRef
      iteration <- readIORef iterationRef
      writeIORef iterationRef (iteration + 1)
      let drift = (iteration * period) - (realToFrac $ now - start)
      printf "test: iteration = %.0f, drift = %f\n" iteration drift
      threadDelay (round $ runtime * 10**6)
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

这是测试结果。在每种情况下,测试运行 0.05 秒的操作,并使用两倍的时间,即 0.1 秒。

对于runPeriodicallyBigDrift,n 次迭代后的漂移大约是单次迭代运行时间的 n 倍,正如预期的那样。100 次迭代后,漂移为 -5.15,仅从操作运行时预测的漂移为 -5.00:

ghci> testRunPeriodically runPeriodicallyBigDrift 0.05 0.1
...
test: iteration = 98, drift = -5.045410253
test: iteration = 99, drift = -5.096661091
test: iteration = 100, drift = -5.148137684
test: iteration = 101, drift = -5.199764033999999
test: iteration = 102, drift = -5.250980596
...
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

对于runPeriodicallySmallDrift,n 次迭代后的漂移约为 0.001 秒,大概是在我的系统上生成线程所需的时间:

ghci> testRunPeriodically runPeriodicallySmallDrift 0.05 0.1
...
test: iteration = 98, drift = -0.08820333399999924
test: iteration = 99, drift = -0.08908210599999933
test: iteration = 100, drift = -0.09006684400000076
test: iteration = 101, drift = -0.09110764399999915
test: iteration = 102, drift = -0.09227584299999947
...
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

对于runPeriodicallyConstantDrift,漂移在约 0.001 秒时保持恒定(加上噪声):

ghci> testRunPeriodically runPeriodicallyConstantDrift 0.05 0.1
...
test: iteration = 98, drift = -0.0009586619999986112
test: iteration = 99, drift = -0.0011010979999994674
test: iteration = 100, drift = -0.0011610369999992542
test: iteration = 101, drift = -0.0004908619999977049
test: iteration = 102, drift = -0.0009897379999994627
...
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

如果我们关心恒定漂移的水平,那么更复杂的解决方案可以跟踪平均恒定漂移并对其进行调整。

推广到有状态周期性循环

在实践中,我意识到我的一些循环具有从一次迭代传递到下一次迭代的状态。runPeriodicallyConstantDrift以下是支持这一点的稍微概括:

import           Control.Concurrent ( threadDelay )
import           Data.IORef ( newIORef, readIORef, writeIORef )
import           Data.Time.Clock.POSIX ( getPOSIXTime )
import           Text.Printf ( printf )

-- | Run a stateful @action@ every @period@ seconds.
--
-- Achieves uniformly bounded drift (i.e. independent of the number of
-- iterations of the action) of about 0.001 seconds,
runPeriodicallyWithState :: Double -> st -> (st -> IO st) -> IO ()
runPeriodicallyWithState period st0 action = do
  start <- getPOSIXTime
  go start 1 st0
  where
    go start iteration st = do
      st' <- action st
      now <- getPOSIXTime
      let elapsed = realToFrac $ now - start
      let target = iteration * period
      let delay = target - elapsed
      -- Warn if the action takes longer than one period. Originally I
      -- was failing in this case, but in my use case we sometimes,
      -- but very infrequently, take longer than the period, and I
      -- don't actually want to crash in that case.
      when (delay < 0 ) $ do
        printf "WARNING: runPeriodically: action took longer than one period: delay = %f, target = %f, elapsed = %f"
          delay target elapsed
      threadDelay (round $ delay * microsecondsInSecond)
      go start (iteration + 1) st'
    microsecondsInSecond = 10 ** 6

-- | Run a stateless @action@ every @period@ seconds.
--
-- Achieves uniformly bounded drift (i.e. independent of the number of
-- iterations of the action) of about 0.001 seconds,
runPeriodically :: Double -> IO () -> IO ()
runPeriodically period action =
  runPeriodicallyWithState period () (const action)
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

  • @danza 关于最终解决方案很复杂,您是否看过“runPeriodicallySmallDrift”版本?该版本非常简单,但漂移也相对较小。 (3认同)
  • @danza,如果您首先不关心动机,我会添加有关跳转到最终解决方案的注释,并在最终解决方案中添加更多评论和散文。看看现在是否有意义。 (3认同)
  • @danza,我相信研究和构建这个答案所花费的时间比您仔细阅读它所花费的时间要长得多。您上面的评论会让人们在花时间回答您的问题时三思而后行。 (2认同)