Re: OT: Switch it off and back on ...
I think the stuff I read about crash-only said that it's normally implemented in a hierarchy. So you try to restart little processes. If they come back up and work correctly then nothing else is affected. If they don't, then you crash the larger process. And so on. On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > Matt Maier wrote: > > > I was reading about "crash only" programming a while ago. It like > > using the "turn it off and back on again"approach as a part of normal > > business. Since all of your systems need to be able to recover from a > > crash anyway, why bother programming a graceful shutdown? Just set > > them up so that they can pick up where they left off and crash them > > if anything isn't running perfectly. > > http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2016-July/228647.html > > :) > > I like the simplicity of crash-only. But I currently enjoy a > below-industry-average support cost; I can't imagine how big of a multiple > of that average my support costs would be if I rebooted the user's machine > instead of providing a more graceful degradation. > > Still, tempting > > -- > Richard Gaskin > Fourth World Systems > Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web > > ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com > > > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
OT: Switch it off and back on
Hi from Beautiful Brittany, I've always been in favour of this practice, without questioning why ! I run an old version lof LiveCode (5.5). Quite often, I save a modified version of my stack, and then try to Quit LiveCode. I get the same message asking me to Save or Cancel, and LiveCode is now totally blocked. I have to Force Quit (on my Mac), and then reload LiveCode. My first Save worked OK, so I never lost anything. I waste about one minute of my life Force Quitting and reloading LiveCode. This happens regularly, but I live with it. For the same reason when I select a button and by mistake hit backspace, and my button (and its script) disappears into thin air (recent question to you), doesn't bother me in the least. I save my stack after every few lines of script and so if I absent-mindedly delete my button, I have a backup taken a few minutes earlier. Software was never perfect - I know ! I've been writing it for 50 years ! Reminds me of the joke where 4 software engineers were in their car, and suddenly it stopped for no apparent reason ! They discussed the options (engineers do this !) and then decided that if they all got out of the car and got back in again, the problem would disappear. That's life - Live with it ! ... -Francis ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: OT: Switch it off and back on ...
On 09/08/2016 06:08, Matt Maier wrote: Because we're capable of building systems more complex than we can understand. So there are always ghost states it can get into that we didn't prepare for. I was reading about "crash only" programming a while ago. It like using the "turn it off and back on again"approach as a part of normal business. Since all of your systems need to be able to recover from a crash anyway, why bother programming a graceful shutdown? Just set them up so that they can pick up where they left off and crash them if anything isn't running perfectly. At the conference, the "vulcanbot" continuous integration service was mentioned several times. This is a microservice I created to facilitate our development workflow by linking our GitHub repositories to our build farm. vulcanbot uses _exactly_ crash-only error handling; whenever something unexpected happens, it quits (generating informative log messages), and then gets automatically restarted by systemd. In practice, this works incredibly well. Peter -- Dr Peter Brett LiveCode Technical Project Manager LiveCode 2016 Conference: https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/ ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: OT: Switch it off and back on ...
Matt Maier wrote: > I was reading about "crash only" programming a while ago. It like > using the "turn it off and back on again"approach as a part of normal > business. Since all of your systems need to be able to recover from a > crash anyway, why bother programming a graceful shutdown? Just set > them up so that they can pick up where they left off and crash them > if anything isn't running perfectly. http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2016-July/228647.html :) I like the simplicity of crash-only. But I currently enjoy a below-industry-average support cost; I can't imagine how big of a multiple of that average my support costs would be if I rebooted the user's machine instead of providing a more graceful degradation. Still, tempting -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: OT: Switch it off and back on ...
Because we're capable of building systems more complex than we can understand. So there are always ghost states it can get into that we didn't prepare for. I was reading about "crash only" programming a while ago. It like using the "turn it off and back on again"approach as a part of normal business. Since all of your systems need to be able to recover from a crash anyway, why bother programming a graceful shutdown? Just set them up so that they can pick up where they left off and crash them if anything isn't running perfectly. On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Alex Tweedly wrote: > My wife is always annoyed / amused that my stock response to any > non-trivial computer / broadband / phone problem is the magic "power-cycle" > method. As she says "4 years getting a BSc in Computer Science, 25 years in > the electronics design and software business - and that's the best you can > do". I suspect the most annoying part for her is that it nearly always > works :-) > > Anyway, today that technique just worked again - when even I didn't expect > it to. Her new iPhone (two weeks old) was in trouble - it wouldn't charge. > We tried multiple different connector cables, and power sources just to be > sure - but it just wouldn't register the power supply, and power was down > to around 10%. So I made sure we had a current iCloud backup, installed > Telegram on her iPad while she still had some charge left (to get the SMS > to confirm the main phone number) so she could still get/send messages (and > let the main contacts know via What's App). And then (with NO expectations > of success) switched it off and back on - and the darn thing is now happily > charging. > > Why can't we build tech items that don't suffer such problems and get > fixed by this solution > > -- Alex. > > > > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: OT: Switch it off and back on ...
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Alex Tweedly wrote: > Why can't we build tech items that don't suffer such problems and get fixed > by this solution > Well God couldn't do it with all his creations but instead ensured there was an impossible to ignore signal of when to switch off at the end of the day and when to get back to work next morning. Of course only man tries to ignore the unignorable, burns the candle from both ends, and tries to work non-stop for stupidly long periods of time but the effect is inevitable, like the objects man makes, they stop responding like they should and must be given the opportunity to be 'reset'. So if 'man' is the most complex of all creations, maybe we should take the hint and just build in an unignorable signal that our lesser creation needs to be turned off and back on every so often ;-) ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
OT: Switch it off and back on ...
My wife is always annoyed / amused that my stock response to any non-trivial computer / broadband / phone problem is the magic "power-cycle" method. As she says "4 years getting a BSc in Computer Science, 25 years in the electronics design and software business - and that's the best you can do". I suspect the most annoying part for her is that it nearly always works :-) Anyway, today that technique just worked again - when even I didn't expect it to. Her new iPhone (two weeks old) was in trouble - it wouldn't charge. We tried multiple different connector cables, and power sources just to be sure - but it just wouldn't register the power supply, and power was down to around 10%. So I made sure we had a current iCloud backup, installed Telegram on her iPad while she still had some charge left (to get the SMS to confirm the main phone number) so she could still get/send messages (and let the main contacts know via What's App). And then (with NO expectations of success) switched it off and back on - and the darn thing is now happily charging. Why can't we build tech items that don't suffer such problems and get fixed by this solution -- Alex. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode