Feature - Fine tune control over processing

[washcycle]

I was thinking about creating a pull request to take the _serverProcess function and the ability to run the process outside in a while loop at the parent thread process.

def _serverProcess(self) :
    self._started = True
    while True :
        try :
            client, cliAddr = self._server.accept()
        except Exception as ex :
            if ex.args and ex.args[0] == 113 :
                break
            continue
        self._client(self, client, cliAddr)
    self._started = False

Proposed Addition

def serverProcessOneCycle(self) :
    try :
        client, cliAddr = self._server.accept()
    except Exception as ex :
        if ex.args and ex.args[0] == 113 :
            return
    self._client(self, client, cliAddr)

Example Usage

from microWebSrv import MicroWebSrv
mws = MicroWebSrv()                                    # TCP port 80 and files in /flash/www
mws.MaxWebSocketRecvLen     = 256                      # Default is set to 1024
mws.WebSocketThreaded       = False                    # WebSockets without new threads
mws.AcceptWebSocketCallback = _acceptWebSocketCallback # Function to receive WebSockets

mws.Init() ## not sure about this first init part

def some_process():
    #something awesome

whilte True:
    some_process()
    try:
        mws.serverProcessOneCycle()
   except:
       print("something went wrong")

Any thoughts, perhaps I didn't consider an already present micropythonic way to do this.

[jczic]

Hi,
If you want to do that, without thread, you just can stop the server in the client connection callback event, no ? :)

[washcycle]

Is there any excessive overhead if I do that? Otherwise that sounds like an excellent idea, didn't even think of it. Thanks.

…

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 11:25 J-Christophe Bos ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, If you want to do that, without thread, you just can stop the server in the client connection callback event, no ? :) — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#50 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBp_g0z8Nj0J5z4sFVTMBg-6ah5umomks5vJxtrgaJpZM4agJ-B> .

[jczic]

No, because in any case, this is in the processing of the reception of the client socket that allows to close the server properly. The loop then comes out immediately (err #113) :)
No problem.

[jczic]

Hello, I released a fully new version (v2.0) of my web server here : github.com/jczic/MicroWebSrv2. Open source MIT, fully asynchronous, more robust, more fast and more efficient! It is delivered with a good documentation. Thank you for your support and feedback. ☺️ Jean-Christophe Bos Le lun. 4 févr. 2019 à 15:21, Matt <[email protected]> a écrit :

…

Is there any excessive overhead if I do that? Otherwise that sounds like an excellent idea, didn't even think of it. Thanks. On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 11:25 J-Christophe Bos ***@***.***> wrote: > Hi, > If you want to do that, without thread, you just can stop the server in > the client connection callback event, no ? :) > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#50 (comment)>, > or mute the thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBp_g0z8Nj0J5z4sFVTMBg-6ah5umomks5vJxtrgaJpZM4agJ-B > > . > — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#50 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAegLOFRwM78aMjfz91azlBS6lEsAwF0ks5vKEH_gaJpZM4agJ-B> .

-- *Sincèrement,*