Create a dynamic rescheduling GSource in JavaScript - javascript

GLib's main loop supports scheduling callback functions for periodic intervals, using g_timemout_source_new and related functions. The callback will repeatedly be called after the scheduled interval, until it returns false.
I now want to modify this process with a dynamic interval. Instead of just true or false, the callback should be able to return a time value that should pass until its next invocation.
Doing this in C is quite straightforward: A new GSource Type can be created, that only differs from the timeout source in its dispatch function, which then takes into account the return value when setting the next expiration.
Unfortunately, I am programming an extension for the GNOME Shell, so I'm stuck to JavaScript. The main critical point to porting the above strategy to JavaScript seems to be the equivalent of the g_source_new function, new GLib.Source. First, it requires the length of the struct type to initialize, which would be computed by the sizeof operator in C. I do not know how to get this value in JavaScript. In addition, it is an error to attempt the creation of a GSourceFuncs Struct, the second argument to this constructor, which is needed to hold the dispatch function.
gjs> new imports.gi.GLib.SourceFuncs()
Error: Unable to construct struct type SourceFuncs since it has no default constructor and cannot be allocated directly
How can I create a new GSource in JavaScript?

g_source_new() was not really designed for language bindings and should probably be marked to be skipped when generating bindings for JS or Python.
Including your own private C library, accessed via GObject introspection, as you suggest in your other question, is what I would usually do in an app. However, I have no idea if you can do it for a shell extension.
You should quite easily be able to implement what you want in JS, though. Here's a simple example I wrote from memory that seems like it might do what you want:
const Scheduler = new Lang.Class({
Name: 'Scheduler',
schedule: function (timeMs, callback, priority=GLib.PRIORITY_DEFAULT) {
this._callback = callback;
this._priority = priority;
GLib.timeout_add(priority, timeMs, this._onTimeout.bind(this));
},
_onTimeout: function (
let nextTimeoutMs = this._callback();
this.schedule(nextTimeoutMs, this._callback, this._priority);
return GLib.SOURCE_REMOVE;
},
});

Related

Rewrite browser JS code to transform global definitions into window properties

I support a very old PHP web framework that uses server-side rendering. I decided to implement Vue for the rendering of some modules, so I compiled a hello world app and realized deployment wouldn't be so simple.
The framework works as a giant SPA, with each module being rendered using the html output of a body() function. The output is replaced in the client's DOM without reloading the page itself.
<script> tags are banned for security reasons and will be sanitized from the resulting html. The only way to deliver JS to the client is by using an eval_js() function.
The problem is rather simple. I need to safely load JS code several times in the same DOM. I cannot load it as-is after app compilation, because from the second time onwards the code is executed (every time a user visits a module, or performs an action) the code will attempt to re-define global variables and kill the whole client.
The solution is also rather simple, just rewrite the JS code such that every global definition is transformed into a window property. This way, even if the same piece of code gets executed several times in the same DOM, it will simply replace window properties rather than attempting to re-define variables.
In example, the following input:
function Yr(t){
const b = t.prototype.hasOwnProperty;
this._init(b);
}
var hOe = sg(uOe, fOe, dOe, !1, null, "e687eb20", null, null);
const vOe = {
name: "AmmFilters",
components: {
AmmOptionSelect: pOe
}
};
new Yr({...}).$mount("#app");
Would be rewritten into:
window.Yr = function(t){
const b = t.prototype.hasOwnProperty;
this._init(b);
}
window.hOe = sg(window.uOe, window.fOe, window.dOe, !1, null, "e687eb20", null, null);
window.vOe = {
name: "AmmFilters",
components: {
AmmOptionSelect: window.pOe
}
}
new window.Yr({...}).$mount("#app");
I initially considered to write my own parser, but then realized that ES6+ syntax is no child's play. The code I will attempt to rewrite is optimized & obfuscated which means it will have all sort of complex syntax and I must be careful not to turn scoped definitions into window properties.
Any ideas on a tool that already performs this task? The resulting JS code should have no difference from the original, as global scoped variables end up in the window object anyway.
I believe it would be a fairly useful tool for various use cases, so thought about asking before attempting to reinvent the wheel.

Having two instances of Context Factory under the same JVM

I'm using Rhino to compile and execute javascript functions. In order to constrain the execution time of scripts, I created a custom ContextFactory where am able to set the max cpu time allowed and the number of instructions before calling observeInstructionCount, similarly to the example described in ContextFactory.
The following code is a sample of the method I use to compile and execute the functions.
CustomFactory factory = new CustomFactory().setMaxCpuTime(300L);
if (!ContextFactory.hasExplicitGlobal()) {
ContextFactory.initGlobal(factory );
}
Context context = factory.enterContext();
Scriptable Scope = context.initStandardObjects();
Function function = context.compileFunction(scope, script, "<func>", 0, null);
(...)
function.call(context, scope, scope, args);
Every thing works as excepted, the scripts that exceed the maximum allowed cpu time throw an Error. My problem is that I want to have two instances of my custom factory under the same JVM, one that will allow the scripts to run for a little longer than the other. But because of the call ContextFactory.initGlobal(factory) every Context will inherit the same ContextFactory. Even if I create a new custom factory with a different allowed cpu time, when I call factory.enterContext() the context will inherit the factory that was passed to initGlobal.
Is there any way to have two instances of ContextFactory (with different properties) under the same JVM?

How does live object creation and partial teardown management work in javascript?

What I would like to do is load javascript to create a library of methods in an object and wait until the object is used for the first time before it is actually defined or compiled. I would like to build references to this object before it is actually fully defined. When I call a method on this object for the first time before the methods on the object are ever defined (meaning the object doesn't actually have methods) I would like to define the object and then call the method. Is there a way to do this using standard syntax such as "MyLibrary.sayHello()" if "sayHello()" is not yet defined on the object.
I imagine it would look like this:
var independentVar = "noCommitments";
var MyLibrary = function(user_ini){
//MyLibrary.init looks like
// (function(ini){
// var a = ini;
// return function(){
// //Notice the method sayHello defines when called,
// // and does not return a reference
// return {
// b:a,c:"c",sayHello:function(z){return "Hello"+a+z}
// }
// }
// })(user_ini);
var d1 = myRequire("MyLibrary.init");
return {
**handleAll : function(){ this = d1(); this.("**calledMethod")}
}
};
var greeting = MyLibrary.sayHello();
alert(greeting);
This is only pseudo-code. If I add a method to cleanup I can then return that object to the uninitialized state of "{**handleAll:function(){/noContext/}}". My application/library has a stub and a link this way and can be used immediately from an undefined state, when building modules this can be useful in order to lower the number of references to a utility, say a post has a menu of functions and those functions are shared by by all posts, -- with a mechanism such as is described here only the "active post"/"post in focus" will reference the utility. It moreless give the ability to activate and de-activate modules. The special part is the modules are already warmed up, they are ready to call functions even though they do not reference them yet, it is similar to live binding but allows the whole user interface to already be defined with functions already stubbed out with the exact name they will have when they are usable. A control mechanism for defaults and debounce is easily found in this model for me.
My question is: Is this type of scripting possible natively or will I have to use some form of compilation like for TypeScript, CoffeeScript or others. I understand it is possible if I pass the method I would like to call as a parameter to a singleton factory. I ultimately would like whole applications that are able to gracefully degrade unused functionality without polluting the code.
What I mean by pollution:
var LibDef = (
function(){
return {
callUndefined:function(methodName){
var returnVal = {}
}
}
})()
var MySingltonLibrary = moduleSinglton.getLibrary("MyLibrary", Lib);
var greeting = MySingltonLibrary.callUndefined("sayHello");
//
// Please use your imagination to consider the complexity in the singlton
The best way that will allow you to tear down an object releasing any space its functions and members consume on the heap and maintain a single reference, that will allow the object to rebuild itself or just rebuild the function that is called is like this - (A very simple model, you may like to use arrays and gradually tear down nested objects internally):
var twentySecondObj(function(window,document){
var base_obj = undefined;
var externalAPI = undefined;
setTimeout(function(){
base_obj = undefined;
},20000);
return function(){
base_obj = (function(base_obj){
if(base_obj === undefined){
return {
property1:"This is property1",
property2:"This is property2"
}
}
})();
externalAPI = (function(){
if(externalAPI === undefined){
return {
property1:base_obj.property1,
property2:base_obj.property2
}
}
})();
return externalAPI;
}
})(window,document);
console.log(twentySecondObj().property1);
On an additional note, you can use getters and setters to observe access to properties and can internally present a facade of both functions and properties which reference a build method like the one above, this way it looks like you are accessing a legit member of the object. There are no options I can think of that will allow you to intercept when attempt to set a new property on an object like: myObj.fooProperty = "foo", and buildup that property into a custom object with a getter and setter, if you have a custom type that needs to be set, then you will have to know it's implimentation details to set it, or call a function passing in the property name and value, or use a method similar to what is shown above.
Here is a link to the proposal for adding weak references to javascript: https://ponyfoo.com/articles/weakref weak-references would alter how this looks, however would not address everything mentioned in this question. Remapping an object when a property is added via some type of deep observer will allow new property members to be enhanced at the time they are set, this would require that the observer ran synchrounously when the property was set, or once the set is complete, the very next statement must be a call to update the object. I will keep posted here for any advances I see that will make the "default handler function" available within javascript in the future.
WeakRef can absolutely be used for recording and handling object usage. I would really like to move object management into webworkers and service workers so they can be maintained through all web endpoints on the domain and do not require to reload across requests. Web frameworks would need to have modified handle to offload all dom changes and updates to worker, essentially a single hook that handles message passing for all hooks. Modload, now must include a message handle name and have task priority meta data so it is properly placed in the least busy or least active worker (slow worker and fast worker) this helps to create an api that can offload to cloud functions, this shpuld give us ability to do more AI, lookups and work offline that is currently handled for most apps in the cloud where more processing power is, and in this way we can gracefully augment local processing with cloud functions only when local resources, or completion times are degraded below acceptable speeds, or above acceptable power policy.
https://v8.dev/features/weak-references

Simplest approach to Node.js request serialisation

I've got the classic asynchronous/concurrency problem that folks writing a service in Node.js at some point stumble into. I have an object that fetches some data from an RDBM in response to a request, and emits a fin event (using an EventEmitter) when the row fetching is complete.
As you might expect, when the caller of the service makes several near-simultaneous calls to it, the rows are returned in an unpredictable order. The fin event is fired for rows that do not correspond to the calling function's understanding of the request that produced them.
Here's what I've got going on (simplified for relevance):
var mdl = require('model.js');
dispatchGet: function(req, res, sec, params) {
var guid = umc.genGUID(36);
mdl.init(this.modelMap[sec], guid);
// mdl.load() creates returns a 'new events.EventEmitter()'
mdl.load(...).once('fin',
function() {
res.write(...);
res.end();
});
}
A simple test shows that the mdl.guid often does not correspond to the guid.
I would have thought that creating a new events.EventEmitter() inside the mdl.load() function would fix this problem by creating a discrete EventEmitter for every request, but evidently that is not the case; I suppose the same rules of object persistence apply to it as to any other object, irrespective of new.
I'm a C programmer by background: I can certainly come up with my own scheme for associating these replies with their requests, using some circular queue or hashing scheme. However, I am guessing this problem has already been solved many times over. My research has revealed many opinions on how to best handle this--various kinds of queuing implementations, Futures, etc.
What I'm wondering is, what's the simplest possible approach to good asynchronous flow control here? I don't want to get knee-deep in some dependency's massive paradigm shift if I don't have to. Is there a relatively simple, canonical, definitive solution, and/or widespread consensus on which third-party module is best?
Could it be that your model.js looks something like this?
module.exports = {
init : function(model, guid) {
this.guid = guid;
...
}
};
You have to be aware that the object you're passing to module.exports there is a shared object, in the sense that every other module that runs require("model.js") it will receive a reference to the same object.
So every time you run mdl.init(), the guid property of that object is changed, which would explain your comment that "...a simple test shows that the mdl.guid often does not correspond to the guid".
It really depends on your exact implementation, but I think you'd want to use a class instead:
// model.js
var Mdl = function(model, guid) {
this.guid = guid;
};
Mdl.prototype.load = function() {
// instantiate and return a new EventEmitter.
};
module.exports = Mdl;
// app.js
var Mdl = require('model.js');
...
var mdl = new Mdl(this.modelMap[sec], guid);
mdl.load(...)

Watch for a property creation event?

I need to be able to determine when an object is created (not a DOM element -- a JavaScript object).
An answer to this question has some very useful looking code for creating observable properties, so you can have a function fire when a property changes.
In my situation I need to do something when the object/property is created, not an existing property changed, and my limited understanding of such matters did not help me figure out if or how I could use that code to do this after much squinting.
The situation is: page loads a bunch of scripts. Some of the scripts create things that are needed by other scripts, e.g:
ThisStuff = (function () {
// blah blah
return self;
} ());
Some other code needs to initialize this ThisStuff, whenever it's available, which may be after the DOM is done loading. The user doesn't actually need ThisStuff right away, so it's fine for it to happen whenever the script is done loading. So I would like to do something along lines of:
$(document).ready(function() {
wheneverIsAvailable(window,'ThisStuff', function(object) {
object.init(args);
})
});
I realize there are other solutions to this problem (changing script order, or loading scripts on demand) but those are difficult because of the architecture. So I'm only interested in a way to do this versus other solutions. If jQuery offers some such functionality, that's fine also as I'm using it.
You could have a setInterval checking a number of times a second to watch the specific variable. You can check whether it is created using obj.hasOwnProperty(prop). When it is created, you invoke the function, and clear the interval.
It might be dirty but it might also just work fine for you.
Edit: I coded this for you: http://jsfiddle.net/jhXJ2/2/. It also supports passing additional arguments to the function.
window.__intervals = [];
function wheneverIsAvailable(obj, prop, func) {
var id = (Math.random()+"").substring(2);
var args = arguments;
window.__intervals[id] = window.setInterval(function() {
if(obj.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
window.clearInterval(window.__intervals[id]);
func(Array.prototype.slice.call(args, 3));
// Call function with additional parameters passed
// after func (from index 3 and on)
}
}, 1000/ 50);
}
wheneverIsAvailable(window, 'test', function() {
alert(arguments[0]);
}, 'Woot!');
window.setTimeout('window.test = 123', 1000);
This is a bit far-fetched but it might work.
You would need to use knockoutjs, a javascript library. It's awesome but is built for a slightly different purpose.
Anyways it has a dependentObservable thing which allows to fire up an event whenever a certain value changes. Now I know you want on creation but you can check whether your variable holds any value (other than what you provided initially), if yes then consider it initialize.
Let me know if you think this sounds feasible.

Categories