How to end a while loop containing a time.sleep? - python-3.x

Say I got a code like this:
import time
try:
while True:
print("Hello World")
time.sleep(10)
except:
print("Ctrl+z was pressed") #Doesn't get executed
When I try to execute this code in python 3, the stuff in my except block does not execute. What can I do?

you will always be stuck in the while loop, as the condition is always True. you will never exit the try condition and so never execute the except block.
If I am correct, crtl+z does only make the program sleep, so is no termination signal like crtl+c, which would break the loop and get the except block to execute.

Related

Can You Retry/Loop inside a Try/Except?

I'm trying to understand if it's possible to set a loop inside of a Try/Except call, or if I'd need to restructure to use functions. Long story short, after spending a few hours learning Python and BeautifulSoup, I managed to frankenstein some code together to scrape a list of URLs, pull that data out to CSV (and now update it to a MySQL db). The code is now working as planned, except that I occasionally run into a 10054, either because my VPN hiccups, or possibly the source host server is occasionally bouncing me (I have a 30 second delay in my loop but it still kicks me on occasion).
I get the general idea of Try/Except structure, but I'm not quite sure how I would (or if I could) loop inside it to try again. My base code to grab the URL, clean it and parse the table I need looks like this:
for url in contents:
print('Processing record', (num+1), 'of', len(contents))
if url:
print('Retrieving data from ', url[0])
html = requests.get(url[0]).text
soup = BeautifulSoup(html, 'html.parser')
for span in soup('span'):
span.decompose()
trs = soup.select('div#collapseOne tr')
if trs:
print('Processing')
for t in trs:
for header, value in zip(t.select('td')[0], t.select('td:nth-child(2)')):
if num == 0:
headers.append(' '.join(header.split()))
values.append(re.sub(' +', ' ', value.get_text(' ', strip=True)))
After that is just processing the data to CSV and running an update sql statement.
What I'd like to do is if the HTML request call fails is wait 30 seconds, try the request again, then process, or if the retry fails X number of times, go ahead and exit the script (assuming at that point I have a full connection failure).
Is it possible to do something like that in line, or would I need to make the request statement into a function and set up a loop to call it? Have to admit I'm not familiar with how Python works with function returns yet.
You can add an inner loop for the retries and put your try/except block in that. Here is a sketch of what it would look like. You could put all of this into a function and put that function call in its own try/except block to catch other errors that cause the loop to exit.
Looking at requests exception hierarchy, Timeout covers multiple recoverable exceptions and is a good start for everything you may want to catch. Other things like SSLError aren't going to get better just because you retry, so skip them. You can go through the list to see what is reasonable for you.
import itertools
# requests exceptions at
# https://requests.readthedocs.io/en/master/_modules/requests/exceptions/
for url in contents:
print('Processing record', (num+1), 'of', len(contents))
if url:
print('Retrieving data from ', url[0])
retry_count = itertools.count()
# loop for retries
while True:
try:
# get with timeout and convert http errors to exceptions
resp = requests.get(url[0], timeout=10)
resp.raise_for_status()
# the things you want to recover from
except requests.Timeout as e:
if next(retry_count) <= 5:
print("timeout, wait and retry:", e)
time.sleep(30)
continue
else:
print("timeout, exiting")
raise # reraise exception to exit
except Exception as e:
print("unrecoverable error", e)
raise
break
html = resp.text
etc…
I've done a little example by myself to graphic this, and yes, you can put loops inside try/except blocks.
from sys import exit
def example_func():
try:
while True:
num = input("> ")
try:
int(num)
if num == "10":
print("Let's go!")
else:
print("Not 10")
except ValueError:
exit(0)
except:
exit(0)
example_func()
This is a fairly simple program that takes input and if it's 10, then it says "Let's go!", otherwise it tells you it's not 10 (if it's not a valid value, it just kicks you out).
Notice that inside the while loop I put a try/except block, taking into account the necessary indentations. You can take this program as a model and use it on your favor.

How to not wait for the python line to fully complete and jump to next line

For Example:
def abc():
for I in range(1,10000000000):
print(I)
def def():
for I in range(1,1000000000000):
print(I)
abc()
def()
How to let the abc() keep running and not to wait abc() to complete and jump to def()
You can use threads to perform this:
from threading import Thread
def abc():
for I in range(1,10000000000): print(I)
def other():
for I in range(1,10000000000): print(I)
abc_thread = Thread(target=abc)
abc_thread.start()
# This starts the abc() function and then immediately
# continues to the next line of code. This is possible because the
# function is executed on another thread separate from the main program's thread
other()
Also as a side note, I am not sure what your implementation of this will be but because you are new, I have to point out that it is bad practice to name your functions, classes, variables, etc. to the same name as a builtin python object. This will cause headaches later on when you will run into errors.

Why is this queue.join call blocking indefinitely?

I'm playing about with a personal project in python3.6 and I've run into the following issue which results in the my_queue.join() call blocking indefinitely. Note this isn't my actual code but a minimal example demonstrating the issue.
import threading
import queue
def foo(stop_event, my_queue):
while not stop_event.is_set():
try:
item = my_queue.get(timeout=0.1)
print(item) #Actual logic goes here
except queue.Empty:
pass
print('DONE')
stop_event = threading.Event()
my_queue = queue.Queue()
thread = threading.Thread(target=foo, args=(stop_event, my_queue))
thread.start()
my_queue.put(1)
my_queue.put(2)
my_queue.put(3)
print('ALL PUT')
my_queue.join()
print('ALL PROCESSED')
stop_event.set()
print('ALL COMPLETE')
I get the following output (it's actually been consistent, but I understand that the output order may differ due to threading):
ALL PUT
1
2
3
No matter how long I wait I never see ALL PROCESSED output to the console, so why is my_queue.join() blocking indefinitely when all the items have been processed?
From the docs:
The count of unfinished tasks goes up whenever an item is added to the
queue. The count goes down whenever a consumer thread calls
task_done() to indicate that the item was retrieved and all work on it
is complete. When the count of unfinished tasks drops to zero, join()
unblocks.
You're never calling q.task_done() inside your foo function. The foo function should be something like the example:
def worker():
while True:
item = q.get()
if item is None:
break
do_work(item)
q.task_done()

How to set timeout for a block of code which is not a function python3

After spending a lot of hours looking for a solution in stackoverflow, I did not find a good solution to set a timeout for a block of code. There are approximations to set a timeout for a function. Nevertheless, I would like to know how to set a timeout without having a function. Let's take the following code as an example:
print("Doing different things")
for i in range(0,10)
# Doing some heavy stuff
print("Done. Continue with the following code")
So, How would you break the for loop if it has not finished after x seconds? Just continue with the code (maybe saving some bool variables to know that timeout was reached), despite the fact that the for loop did not finish properly.
i think implement this efficiently without using functions not possible , look this code ..
import datetime as dt
print("Doing different things")
# store
time_out_after = dt.timedelta(seconds=60)
start_time = dt.datetime.now()
for i in range(10):
if dt.datetime.now() > time_started + time_out:
break
else:
# Doing some heavy stuff
print("Done. Continue with the following code")
the problem : the timeout will checked in the beginning of every loop cycle, so it may be take more than the specified timeout period to break of the loop, or in worst case it maybe not interrupt the loop ever becouse it can't interrupt the code that never finish un iteration.
update :
as op replayed, that he want more efficient way, this is a proper way to do it, but using functions.
import asyncio
async def test_func():
print('doing thing here , it will take long time')
await asyncio.sleep(3600) # this will emulate heaven task with actual Sleep for one hour
return 'yay!' # this will not executed as the timeout will occur early
async def main():
# Wait for at most 1 second
try:
result = await asyncio.wait_for(test_func(), timeout=1.0) # call your function with specific timeout
# do something with the result
except asyncio.TimeoutError:
# when time out happen program will break from the test function and execute code here
print('timeout!')
print('lets continue to do other things')
asyncio.run(main())
Expected output:
doing thing here , it will take long time
timeout!
lets continue to do other things
note:
now timeout will happen after exactly the time you specify. in this example code, after one second.
you would replace this line:
await asyncio.sleep(3600)
with your actual task code.
try it and let me know what do you think. thank you.
read asyncio docs:
link
update 24/2/2019
as op noted that asyncio.run introduced in python 3.7 and asked for altrnative on python 3.6
asyncio.run alternative for python older than 3.7:
replace
asyncio.run(main())
with this code for older version (i think 3.4 to 3.6)
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
loop.run_until_complete(main())
loop.close()
You may try the following way:
import time
start = time.time()
for val in range(10):
# some heavy stuff
time.sleep(.5)
if time.time() - start > 3: # 3 is timeout in seconds
print('loop stopped at', val)
break # stop the loop, or sys.exit() to stop the script
else:
print('successfully completed')
I guess it is kinda viable approach. Actual timeout is greater than 3 seconds and depends on the single step execution time.

Additional loop when stoping while loop

I've created a function using the carriage return from this and threading trick to exit loop from this. The function will keep counting until a keystroke is detected.
Everything works fine except an additional line is printed whenever I kill the loop.
For example in console:
Press anything to stop it: 6 #<------------- pressed enter
Press anything to stop it: 7 #<------------- additional line produced
import _thread
import time
import sys
def input_thread(list):
input()
list.append(None)
def do_stuff():
counter = 0
list = []
_thread.start_new_thread(input_thread,(list,))
while not list:
time.sleep(0.1)
sys.stdout.write("Press anything to stop it: %d \r" % (counter))
sys.stdout.flush()
counter += 1
How can I prevent extra line being printed? I suspect it has something to do with the while loop has to finish additional loop in order to exit. If the answer to this question is too obvious please let me know the keyword to search for.
Thanks a million!

Resources