similar to: checking user interrupts in C(++) code

Hi, An R package on which I am working makes a series of very computationally-intensive and complex .C() calls, that I would like to make interruptible. However, calling R_CheckUserInterrupt() causes a non-local exit, so the memory allocated by malloc() is never freed. The way the code is structured, it might not be practical to replace all the malloc() calls with R_alloc() calls. The question

Hello, I am writing an R interface for one of my C++ programs. The computations in C++ are very time consuming (several hours), so the user needs to be able to interrupt them. Currently, the only way I found to do so is calling R_CheckUserInterrupt() frequently. Unfortunately, there are several problems with that: 1. Calling R_CheckUserInterrupt() interrupts immediately, so I have no

? Sat, 29 Apr 2023 00:00:02 +0000 Dario Strbenac via R-devel <r-devel at r-project.org> ?????: > Could save.image() be redesigned so that it promptly responds to > Ctrl+C? It prevents the command line from being used for a number of > hours if the contents of the workspace are large. This is ultimately caused by serialize() being non-interruptible. A relatively simple way to hang

Yeah, I get that they are async. What happens is that the background process is not doing anything when the process gets a SIGINT. I.e. the background process is just listening on its standard input. AFAICT for an interactive process such a SIGINT is just swallowed, with a newline outputted to the terminal. But apparently, for this background process, it is not swallowed, and it is triggered

Hi, As was discussed earlier in another thread and as documented in R-exts .Call() should not be interruptible by Ctrl-C. However the following code, which spends most of its time inside mkChar, turned out to be interruptible on RH-7.3 R-1.8.1 gcc-2.96: #include <Rinternals.h> #include <R.h> SEXP foo0(const SEXP nSexp) { int i, n; SEXP resSexp; if (!isInteger(nSexp))

Unfortunately --interactive also makes the session interactive(), which is bad for me, as it is a background session. In general, I don't want the interactive behavior, but was wondering if I could send as SIGINT to try to interrupt the computation of the background process, and if that does not work, then I would send a SIGKILL and start up another process. It all works nicely, except for

Dear R-devel, Some time ago I started a thread that boiled down to clean-up actions after non-local exits in R, see below. I wonder if there has been any progress on this? R-ext 2.6.1 doesn't say much on the subject. How, for example, do people deal with a situation where their C (C++) function opens a file and then receives a signal or longjump-s on error(), how do they make sure the

OK, I managed to create an example without callr, but it is still somewhat cumbersome. Anyway, here it is. Terminal 1: mkfifo fif R --no-readline --slave --no-save --no-restore < fif Terminal 2: cat > fif Sys.getpid() This will make Terminal 1 print the pid of the R process, so we can send a SIGINT: Terminal 3: kill -INT pid The R process is of course still running happily. Terminal 2

It seems benign, but has implications since checking time is actually not a cheap operation: adding jus ta time check alone incurs a penalty of ca. 700% compared with the time it takes to call R_CheckUserInterrupt(). Generally, it makes no sense to check interrupts at every iteration - you'll find code like if (++i % 10000 == 0) R_CheckUserInterrupt(); in loops to make sure it's not called

This seems like a great idea. Would it help to escalate this to a post on R-bugzilla, so it is less likely to fall through the cracks? On 12/17/24 09:51, Jeroen Ooms wrote: > A more generic solution would be for R to throttle calls to > R_CheckUserInterrupt(), because it makes no sense to check 1000 times > per second if a user has interrupted, but it is difficult for the > caller to

On 12/18/24 01:19, Simon Urbanek wrote: > It seems benign, but has implications since checking time is actually not a cheap operation: adding jus ta time check alone incurs a penalty of ca. 700% compared with the time it takes to call R_CheckUserInterrupt(). Generally, it makes no sense to check interrupts at every iteration - you'll find code like if (++i % 10000 == 0)

tl;dr: R_CheckUserInterrupt() can be a performance bottleneck within GUIs. This also affects functions in the 'stats' package, which could be improved by changing the position of calls to R_CheckUserInterrupt(). Dear all, Recently I was puzzled because some code in a package under development, which consisted almost entirely of a .Call() to a function written in

A more generic solution would be for R to throttle calls to R_CheckUserInterrupt(), because it makes no sense to check 1000 times per second if a user has interrupted, but it is difficult for the caller to know when R_CheckUserInterrupt() has been last called, or do it regularly without over-doing it. Here is a simple patch: https://github.com/r-devel/r-svn/pull/125 See also:

Hi, As the subject suggests, I am looking for the most robust way to call an (arbitrary) function from the R API from another but the main POSIX thread in a package's code. I know that, "[c]alling any of the R API from threaded code is ?for experts only? and strongly discouraged. Many functions in the R API modify internal R data structures and might corrupt these data structures if

Hi, I was wondering if anybody knew how to trap SIGINTs (ie Ctrl-C) in backend C++ code for R extensions? I'm writing a package that uses the GPU for some hefty matrix operations in a tightly coupled parallel algorithm implemented in CUDA. The problem is that once running, the C++ module cannot apparently be interrupted by a SIGINT, leaving the user sat waiting even if they realise

I have a continuous loop running in an external library that I am calling from C (R API). This loop is processing events in real time with the possibility of significant lag between events. When processing an event, I can make use of R_CheckUserInterrupt, but while the external library code is waiting on a new event, I don't have an opportunity to call this - my entry points are only on

On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 23:38:55 -0600 Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com> wrote: > I have a 4.54 GB file that I'm trying to read in chunks using > "scan(..., skip=__)". It works as expected for small values of > "skip" but goes into an infinite loop for "skip=1e11" and similar > large values of skip: I cannot even interrupt it; I

Hi, are there any (cross-platform) specs on what the saved filed is if save() is interrupted, e.g. by a user interrupt? It could be non-existing, empty, partly written, or completed. Thanks Henrik

With ?if?(!j--)?{ ?????R_CheckUserInterrupt(); ?????j?=?10000; ?} as?in?current?R?devel?(r83976),?j goes negative (-1) and interrupt is checked every 10001 instead of 10000. I?prefer ?if?(!--j)?{ ?????R_CheckUserInterrupt(); ?????j?=?10000; ?} . In?current?R?devel?(r83976),?if?EOF?is?reached,?the?outer?loop?keeps?going,?i?keeps?incrementing?until?nskip.

Hello, I apologized if this had already been addressed, and I also submitted this problem on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20268021/how-to-catch-warnings-sent-during-s4-method-selection Example code: setGeneric('my_method', function(x) standardGeneric('my_method') ) setMethod('my_method', 'ANY', function(x) invisible())