Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. GMail's sessions time out periodically. I forget the interval (or if it's random... it seems to be at times), but when it does, it has similar behavior to what you've described. Chat goes a little wonky, and then you're brought to the sign in page some moments later. I think the behavior is slightly worse if you have two accounts in GMail (I have a regular GMail account and one that's in the Apps for Business). They sometimes interact badly, especially around starting and ending sessions. -John -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
That shouldn't affect anything until the next time I try to navigate, say to the next thread with unread messages. Something caused the browser to spontaneously start navigating on its own. I didn't click a link and get redirected to the signin page at that time. It went there all by itself without my hands even being on the keyboard or mouse. Web browsers are not supposed to have minds of their own and start browsing around by themselves. Now it is possible that the session had timed out while I was reading those messages, and a prank navigation-triggering thingy thus triggered the signin page instead of doing something else ... which, if anything, is worrying. If the session had not been timed out at the time the prank input was generated, could it have taken gmail actions on my behalf such as deleting messages or even sending mail impersonating me? As it is it cost me my read/unread information for this thread at the time, and I had to review the whole thing to find the messages it had marked read that I hadn't actually read. Rather rude. I'd like to know how to protect myself against any message display triggering any kind of auto-navigation by the browser, partly because it clearly can cause inconvenience (what if this thread had been one of the real long ones, with 50+ messages, and I'd lost my place in that?) and partly because of the risk of the auto-navigation command being the equivalent of a phantom click on delete or send or something. Even if the cause in this case was something that would have been harmless even without a timed-out session preventing it from doing anything but send me to the gmail login prompt, the next time might be something more malicious, and might happen without the session being timed out. On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:20 AM, John Szakmeister j...@szakmeister.netwrote: On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. GMail's sessions time out periodically. I forget the interval (or if it's random... it seems to be at times), but when it does, it has similar behavior to what you've described. Chat goes a little wonky, and then you're brought to the sign in page some moments later. I think the behavior is slightly worse if you have two accounts in GMail (I have a regular GMail account and one that's in the Apps for Business). They sometimes interact badly, especially around starting and ending sessions. -John -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.dewrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Following up on this, will something terrible happen if: https://github.com/clojure/core.async/blob/master/src/main/clojure/clojure/core/async/impl/channels.clj#L59 was changed from (box nil) to (box :chan-closed) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:21 AM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.dewrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Hi, there is only one reason I can imagine to close a channel: the one in charge determined that there is not more input. And the one in charge is either the producing side, or a kind of supervisor. In the latter case a separate way of communication is needed to inform the sender, that they should stop sending. This could be done via the channel. Or something completely separate. I haven't used core.async much. I'm trying to understand myself what useful patterns are. Do you have a simple use case, where the pattern you describe (a supervisor closes an input channel without notifying senders about it) is the most straight-forward way? (All that doesn't mean that core.async couldn't be modified as you suggest.) Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
t x, these change you suggest are almost exactly what we have done in the put ret branch. I merged these changes into master this morning, and would be interested in your feedback. Within a few hours these changes should be available via the 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT version of core.async, or via downloading the core.async source and doing lein install from the directory. I just sent an email to this mailing list that explains these changes and the updated semantics. I hope this helps, Timothy Baldridge On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.dewrote: Hi, there is only one reason I can imagine to close a channel: the one in charge determined that there is not more input. And the one in charge is either the producing side, or a kind of supervisor. In the latter case a separate way of communication is needed to inform the sender, that they should stop sending. This could be done via the channel. Or something completely separate. I haven't used core.async much. I'm trying to understand myself what useful patterns are. Do you have a simple use case, where the pattern you describe (a supervisor closes an input channel without notifying senders about it) is the most straight-forward way? (All that doesn't mean that core.async couldn't be modified as you suggest.) Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that-lacking zero-they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs. (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
With apologies for my ignorance: Is there a way to tell lein: I want to pull the code state defined by this commit: ? https://github.com/clojure/core.async/commit/76b25bf91c670b0c3542ed9cb687ff29fb2183a7 (I tried 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT but it appears not updated yet.) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: t x, these change you suggest are almost exactly what we have done in the put ret branch. I merged these changes into master this morning, and would be interested in your feedback. Within a few hours these changes should be available via the 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT version of core.async, or via downloading the core.async source and doing lein install from the directory. I just sent an email to this mailing list that explains these changes and the updated semantics. I hope this helps, Timothy Baldridge On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.dewrote: Hi, there is only one reason I can imagine to close a channel: the one in charge determined that there is not more input. And the one in charge is either the producing side, or a kind of supervisor. In the latter case a separate way of communication is needed to inform the sender, that they should stop sending. This could be done via the channel. Or something completely separate. I haven't used core.async much. I'm trying to understand myself what useful patterns are. Do you have a simple use case, where the pattern you describe (a supervisor closes an input channel without notifying senders about it) is the most straight-forward way? (All that doesn't mean that core.async couldn't be modified as you suggest.) Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- “One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.” (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
This document should help you find the repo you need to add: http://dev.clojure.org/display/community/Maven+Settings+and+Repositories Timothy On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:49 PM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: With apologies for my ignorance: Is there a way to tell lein: I want to pull the code state defined by this commit: ? https://github.com/clojure/core.async/commit/76b25bf91c670b0c3542ed9cb687ff29fb2183a7 (I tried 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT but it appears not updated yet.) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: t x, these change you suggest are almost exactly what we have done in the put ret branch. I merged these changes into master this morning, and would be interested in your feedback. Within a few hours these changes should be available via the 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT version of core.async, or via downloading the core.async source and doing lein install from the directory. I just sent an email to this mailing list that explains these changes and the updated semantics. I hope this helps, Timothy Baldridge On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.de wrote: Hi, there is only one reason I can imagine to close a channel: the one in charge determined that there is not more input. And the one in charge is either the producing side, or a kind of supervisor. In the latter case a separate way of communication is needed to inform the sender, that they should stop sending. This could be done via the channel. Or something completely separate. I haven't used core.async much. I'm trying to understand myself what useful patterns are. Do you have a simple use case, where the pattern you describe (a supervisor closes an input channel without notifying senders about it) is the most straight-forward way? (All that doesn't mean that core.async couldn't be modified as you suggest.) Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- “One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.” (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- “One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.” (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Everything works as expected now. Thanks! On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: This document should help you find the repo you need to add: http://dev.clojure.org/display/community/Maven+Settings+and+Repositories Timothy On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:49 PM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: With apologies for my ignorance: Is there a way to tell lein: I want to pull the code state defined by this commit: ? https://github.com/clojure/core.async/commit/76b25bf91c670b0c3542ed9cb687ff29fb2183a7 (I tried 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT but it appears not updated yet.) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: t x, these change you suggest are almost exactly what we have done in the put ret branch. I merged these changes into master this morning, and would be interested in your feedback. Within a few hours these changes should be available via the 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT version of core.async, or via downloading the core.async source and doing lein install from the directory. I just sent an email to this mailing list that explains these changes and the updated semantics. I hope this helps, Timothy Baldridge On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.de wrote: Hi, there is only one reason I can imagine to close a channel: the one in charge determined that there is not more input. And the one in charge is either the producing side, or a kind of supervisor. In the latter case a separate way of communication is needed to inform the sender, that they should stop sending. This could be done via the channel. Or something completely separate. I haven't used core.async much. I'm trying to understand myself what useful patterns are. Do you have a simple use case, where the pattern you describe (a supervisor closes an input channel without notifying senders about it) is the most straight-forward way? (All that doesn't mean that core.async couldn't be modified as you suggest.) Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- “One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.” (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- “One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that–lacking zero–they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs.” (Robert Firth) -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
[meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That is non-negotiable. Anyone who willfully violates this edict *will* be added to my spam filter and I will not see any future post by that author. Is *that* clear? On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:21 AM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.dewrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Umwat? On Jan 23, 2014 7:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That is non-negotiable. Anyone who willfully violates this edict *will* be added to my spam filter and I will not see any future post by that author. Is *that* clear? On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:21 AM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.de wrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group,
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Which part didn't you understand? When I scrolled down to t x's message, after a short delay *something* wrested control of Firefox away from me and issued a sequence of navigation commands the effect of which was to log me out of gmail, much as if I'd clicked the little down arrow by my username and then clicked signout. I don't know if it was something in t x's message that triggered it (if so, it didn't have the same effect when I viewed it again after logging back in), but I do know that I do not appreciate having my computer hijacked. I'm sure you can understand how it's rather alarming to have your stuff just suddenly start acting on its own initiative, right in front of your eyes, when the damned thing isn't supposed to *have* its own initiative. In any event, if anyone can shed any light on this incident I'd appreciate information. (For example: does an expert on browser security see anything in t x's post, or any other in this thread, that could have triggered anything unusual in susceptible versions of Firefox? Should I wipe and reinstall this machine on the presumption that the seemingly superficial hijack left it infected with a nasty rootkit of some sort, or was it just a prank, or even a known software bug somewhere?) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: Umwat? On Jan 23, 2014 7:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That is non-negotiable. Anyone who willfully violates this edict *will* be added to my spam filter and I will not see any future post by that author. Is *that* clear? On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:21 AM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.de wrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
Which part didn't you understand? The part where you think that this is the appropriate channel for discussing general IT problems you are having with your computer I don't know if it was something in t x's message that triggered it Well you accused him of that pretty much right off the bat... In any event, if anyone can shed any light on this incident I'd appreciate information. Sure, it can be a number of things. a) a bug in your mouse driver. b) a failing mouse battery. c) dirt on/in the mouse d) a bug in your browser e) a virus on your computer. f) a bug in gmail. All of these are much, much more likely than what you originally suggested. The idea that someone posting to a google group can get a virus through a text email, and that that virus somehow affected your browser, is just laughable. Timothy On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: Which part didn't you understand? When I scrolled down to t x's message, after a short delay *something* wrested control of Firefox away from me and issued a sequence of navigation commands the effect of which was to log me out of gmail, much as if I'd clicked the little down arrow by my username and then clicked signout. I don't know if it was something in t x's message that triggered it (if so, it didn't have the same effect when I viewed it again after logging back in), but I do know that I do not appreciate having my computer hijacked. I'm sure you can understand how it's rather alarming to have your stuff just suddenly start acting on its own initiative, right in front of your eyes, when the damned thing isn't supposed to *have* its own initiative. In any event, if anyone can shed any light on this incident I'd appreciate information. (For example: does an expert on browser security see anything in t x's post, or any other in this thread, that could have triggered anything unusual in susceptible versions of Firefox? Should I wipe and reinstall this machine on the presumption that the seemingly superficial hijack left it infected with a nasty rootkit of some sort, or was it just a prank, or even a known software bug somewhere?) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: Umwat? On Jan 23, 2014 7:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That is non-negotiable. Anyone who willfully violates this edict *will* be added to my spam filter and I will not see any future post by that author. Is *that* clear? On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:21 AM, t x txrev...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
I didn't say a virus. I pointed out that it appeared to be triggered by viewing a particular message in this thread. It may be that there's some gimmick text you can embed in a mail that screws up gmail -- there's certainly precedent, anyone on a dialup connection will get their line dropped when they load this message because it contains +++ATH0. In any case, what the incident most resembled to me was a prank of a similar sort to that old classic from the BBS days and any of numerous commonplace college dorm pranks; in which case the place to address it is right here where the person who perpetrated the inappropriate prank can explain that that's what it was (if that *is* what it was) and apologize, and/or the group's moderators can take any appropriate action against the perpetrator. (I'd be happy with their receiving a warning, *if* this was a first offense.) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: Which part didn't you understand? The part where you think that this is the appropriate channel for discussing general IT problems you are having with your computer I don't know if it was something in t x's message that triggered it Well you accused him of that pretty much right off the bat... In any event, if anyone can shed any light on this incident I'd appreciate information. Sure, it can be a number of things. a) a bug in your mouse driver. b) a failing mouse battery. c) dirt on/in the mouse d) a bug in your browser e) a virus on your computer. f) a bug in gmail. All of these are much, much more likely than what you originally suggested. The idea that someone posting to a google group can get a virus through a text email, and that that virus somehow affected your browser, is just laughable. Timothy On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.comwrote: Which part didn't you understand? When I scrolled down to t x's message, after a short delay *something* wrested control of Firefox away from me and issued a sequence of navigation commands the effect of which was to log me out of gmail, much as if I'd clicked the little down arrow by my username and then clicked signout. I don't know if it was something in t x's message that triggered it (if so, it didn't have the same effect when I viewed it again after logging back in), but I do know that I do not appreciate having my computer hijacked. I'm sure you can understand how it's rather alarming to have your stuff just suddenly start acting on its own initiative, right in front of your eyes, when the damned thing isn't supposed to *have* its own initiative. In any event, if anyone can shed any light on this incident I'd appreciate information. (For example: does an expert on browser security see anything in t x's post, or any other in this thread, that could have triggered anything unusual in susceptible versions of Firefox? Should I wipe and reinstall this machine on the presumption that the seemingly superficial hijack left it infected with a nasty rootkit of some sort, or was it just a prank, or even a known software bug somewhere?) On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Timothy Baldridge tbaldri...@gmail.comwrote: Umwat? On Jan 23, 2014 7:17 PM, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That
Re: semantics of ! on closed channels
This is a common windows problem. On Thursday, January 23, 2014 9:17:09 PM UTC-5, Cedric Greevey wrote: [meta, but about something apparently triggered by the message, from this thread, that I'm quoting] Why did reading this post cause gmail to go bonkers? I saw this thread had new articles since earlier today, brought it up, and read the previous message, then just after I'd scrolled down to this one, leaned back, and started reading it the browser just suddenly began spinning on its own and navigated by itself. Apparently about 10 seconds after I sat back *something* input a click on the little down-triangle in the upper right corner of the page and then clicked sign out because it went to the gmail login page. And a second or so before that the chat thingy at the left crashed as a popup there distracted me by appearing suddenly and saying something like Oops, problem connecting to chat. I don't like having my stuff suddenly go spinning out of control like that. I wasn't touching the keyboard or the mouse at the time. The browser should not have done anything but sit there patiently displaying this page until *I* *CHOSE* to navigate away from it. If there is something in your message that hijacks the browsers of people reading it, then I would like you to know that I consider such a thing to be extremely poor etiquette and in extremely poor taste. Do not do it again. If it was not that particular message then I'd like to know what *did* reach into *MY* computer and start issuing instructions on *MY* behalf *without* *MY* permission, and how to stop that from ever happening again. This is *MY* copy of Firefox and it goes where *I* say it does, when *I* say it does it, and not a moment sooner. Is that absofrickinglutely clear? That is non-negotiable. Anyone who willfully violates this edict *will* be added to my spam filter and I will not see any future post by that author. Is *that* clear? On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:21 AM, t x txre...@gmail.com javascript:wrote: Hi, * This is the time I've heard the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it -- previously, my channel code was fairly ad-hoc and agressive (since I need to kill many (go-loop [msg (! ... )] (when msg ...)) blocks). * I still feel this breaks the conveyor belt metaphor -- when a conveyor belt shuts down, it's understandable that we after we take what's on the belt, in future takes, we get nothing. However, when putting items on a stopped conveyor belt, messages should not just *poof* vanish into the void. :-) * This existing semantics makes debugging annoying (perhaps this is due to my lack of skill). When something should be happening, and nothing is happening, I'm basically going around hunting for where did I do a put on a closed channel, whereas if it threw an exception of some form, it'd be easier to handle then this silent fail. On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:50 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) m...@kotka.de javascript: wrote: Hi, probably the idea is, that the one who's feeding the channel is the one in charge of closing it. After all, they know when there is no more input available. Do you have a use case where this problem manifests? Or is that just a vague fear that it might happen? Kind regards Meikel -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to
