How to input strings in Julia from command line - compilation

I am building a shippable app with Julia using the PackageCompiler.jl library.
https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl
I have followed the example here and got it to run as expected:
https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl
I am now trying to modify the code piece by piece to replace the toy function with my own function. It involves reading a CSV file into a dataframe whose path is taken from the command line. For now, I am just trying to accomplish this task.
I have this code in MyApp.jl:
module MyApp
using Example
using HelloWorldC_jll
using Pkg.Artifacts
using DataFrames, CSV, Statistics
fooifier_path() = joinpath(artifact"fooifier", "bin", "fooifier" * (Sys.iswindows() ? ".exe" : ""))
function julia_main()
try
real_main()
catch
Base.invokelatest(Base.display_error, Base.catch_stack())
return 1
end
return 0
end
function real_main()
# #show ARGS
# #show Base.PROGRAM_FILE
# #show DEPOT_PATH
# #show LOAD_PATH
# #show pwd()
# #show Base.active_project()
# #show Threads.nthreads()
# #show Sys.BINDIR
# display(Base.loaded_modules)
for arg in ARGS
println(arg)
end
println("this part worked!")
df = CSV.read(string(ARGS[1]), DataFrame)[10:end-10,:];
println(df)
return
end
if abspath(PROGRAM_FILE) == #__FILE__
real_main()
end
I compile the code with:
using PackageCompiler;
create_app("MyApp", "MyAppCompiled")
and it compiles just fine.
I run it with:
julia MyAppCompiled/bin/MyApp <absolute path to csv>
and it works up until the dataframe portion, where I get this error:
it worked!
MyApp(66457,0x115997dc0) malloc: *** error for object 0x1117d9510: pointer being realloc'd was not allocated
MyApp(66457,0x115997dc0) malloc: *** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug
signal (6): Abort trap: 6
in expression starting at none:0
__pthread_kill at /usr/lib/system/libsystem_kernel.dylib (unknown line)
Allocations: 47484171 (Pool: 47468051; Big: 16120); GC: 49
Abort trap: 6
Can anyone help me figure out what I am doing wrong? I know I am putting in the proper path because if I incorrectly type the path I get the " is not a proper file..." message. I've tried calling with relative and absolute paths.

Related

Bash Script - Not collateral after echo due to new line [duplicate]

I want to write a function that will execute a shell command and return its output as a string, no matter, is it an error or success message. I just want to get the same result that I would have gotten with the command line.
What would be a code example that would do such a thing?
For example:
def run_command(cmd):
# ??????
print run_command('mysqladmin create test -uroot -pmysqladmin12')
# Should output something like:
# mysqladmin: CREATE DATABASE failed; error: 'Can't create database 'test'; database exists'
In all officially maintained versions of Python, the simplest approach is to use the subprocess.check_output function:
>>> subprocess.check_output(['ls', '-l'])
b'total 0\n-rw-r--r-- 1 memyself staff 0 Mar 14 11:04 files\n'
check_output runs a single program that takes only arguments as input.1 It returns the result exactly as printed to stdout. If you need to write input to stdin, skip ahead to the run or Popen sections. If you want to execute complex shell commands, see the note on shell=True at the end of this answer.
The check_output function works in all officially maintained versions of Python. But for more recent versions, a more flexible approach is available.
Modern versions of Python (3.5 or higher): run
If you're using Python 3.5+, and do not need backwards compatibility, the new run function is recommended by the official documentation for most tasks. It provides a very general, high-level API for the subprocess module. To capture the output of a program, pass the subprocess.PIPE flag to the stdout keyword argument. Then access the stdout attribute of the returned CompletedProcess object:
>>> import subprocess
>>> result = subprocess.run(['ls', '-l'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
>>> result.stdout
b'total 0\n-rw-r--r-- 1 memyself staff 0 Mar 14 11:04 files\n'
The return value is a bytes object, so if you want a proper string, you'll need to decode it. Assuming the called process returns a UTF-8-encoded string:
>>> result.stdout.decode('utf-8')
'total 0\n-rw-r--r-- 1 memyself staff 0 Mar 14 11:04 files\n'
This can all be compressed to a one-liner if desired:
>>> subprocess.run(['ls', '-l'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE).stdout.decode('utf-8')
'total 0\n-rw-r--r-- 1 memyself staff 0 Mar 14 11:04 files\n'
If you want to pass input to the process's stdin, you can pass a bytes object to the input keyword argument:
>>> cmd = ['awk', 'length($0) > 5']
>>> ip = 'foo\nfoofoo\n'.encode('utf-8')
>>> result = subprocess.run(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, input=ip)
>>> result.stdout.decode('utf-8')
'foofoo\n'
You can capture errors by passing stderr=subprocess.PIPE (capture to result.stderr) or stderr=subprocess.STDOUT (capture to result.stdout along with regular output). If you want run to throw an exception when the process returns a nonzero exit code, you can pass check=True. (Or you can check the returncode attribute of result above.) When security is not a concern, you can also run more complex shell commands by passing shell=True as described at the end of this answer.
Later versions of Python streamline the above further. In Python 3.7+, the above one-liner can be spelled like this:
>>> subprocess.run(['ls', '-l'], capture_output=True, text=True).stdout
'total 0\n-rw-r--r-- 1 memyself staff 0 Mar 14 11:04 files\n'
Using run this way adds just a bit of complexity, compared to the old way of doing things. But now you can do almost anything you need to do with the run function alone.
Older versions of Python (3-3.4): more about check_output
If you are using an older version of Python, or need modest backwards compatibility, you can use the check_output function as briefly described above. It has been available since Python 2.7.
subprocess.check_output(*popenargs, **kwargs)
It takes takes the same arguments as Popen (see below), and returns a string containing the program's output. The beginning of this answer has a more detailed usage example. In Python 3.5+, check_output is equivalent to executing run with check=True and stdout=PIPE, and returning just the stdout attribute.
You can pass stderr=subprocess.STDOUT to ensure that error messages are included in the returned output. When security is not a concern, you can also run more complex shell commands by passing shell=True as described at the end of this answer.
If you need to pipe from stderr or pass input to the process, check_output won't be up to the task. See the Popen examples below in that case.
Complex applications and legacy versions of Python (2.6 and below): Popen
If you need deep backwards compatibility, or if you need more sophisticated functionality than check_output or run provide, you'll have to work directly with Popen objects, which encapsulate the low-level API for subprocesses.
The Popen constructor accepts either a single command without arguments, or a list containing a command as its first item, followed by any number of arguments, each as a separate item in the list. shlex.split can help parse strings into appropriately formatted lists. Popen objects also accept a host of different arguments for process IO management and low-level configuration.
To send input and capture output, communicate is almost always the preferred method. As in:
output = subprocess.Popen(["mycmd", "myarg"],
stdout=subprocess.PIPE).communicate()[0]
Or
>>> import subprocess
>>> p = subprocess.Popen(['ls', '-a'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
... stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>>> out, err = p.communicate()
>>> print out
.
..
foo
If you set stdin=PIPE, communicate also allows you to pass data to the process via stdin:
>>> cmd = ['awk', 'length($0) > 5']
>>> p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
... stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
... stdin=subprocess.PIPE)
>>> out, err = p.communicate('foo\nfoofoo\n')
>>> print out
foofoo
Note Aaron Hall's answer, which indicates that on some systems, you may need to set stdout, stderr, and stdin all to PIPE (or DEVNULL) to get communicate to work at all.
In some rare cases, you may need complex, real-time output capturing. Vartec's answer suggests a way forward, but methods other than communicate are prone to deadlocks if not used carefully.
As with all the above functions, when security is not a concern, you can run more complex shell commands by passing shell=True.
Notes
1. Running shell commands: the shell=True argument
Normally, each call to run, check_output, or the Popen constructor executes a single program. That means no fancy bash-style pipes. If you want to run complex shell commands, you can pass shell=True, which all three functions support. For example:
>>> subprocess.check_output('cat books/* | wc', shell=True, text=True)
' 1299377 17005208 101299376\n'
However, doing this raises security concerns. If you're doing anything more than light scripting, you might be better off calling each process separately, and passing the output from each as an input to the next, via
run(cmd, [stdout=etc...], input=other_output)
Or
Popen(cmd, [stdout=etc...]).communicate(other_output)
The temptation to directly connect pipes is strong; resist it. Otherwise, you'll likely see deadlocks or have to do hacky things like this.
This is way easier, but only works on Unix (including Cygwin) and Python2.7.
import commands
print commands.getstatusoutput('wc -l file')
It returns a tuple with the (return_value, output).
For a solution that works in both Python2 and Python3, use the subprocess module instead:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
output = Popen(["date"],stdout=PIPE)
response = output.communicate()
print response
I had the same problem but figured out a very simple way of doing this:
import subprocess
output = subprocess.getoutput("ls -l")
print(output)
Note: This solution is Python3 specific as subprocess.getoutput() doesn't work in Python2
Something like that:
def runProcess(exe):
p = subprocess.Popen(exe, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
while(True):
# returns None while subprocess is running
retcode = p.poll()
line = p.stdout.readline()
yield line
if retcode is not None:
break
Note, that I'm redirecting stderr to stdout, it might not be exactly what you want, but I want error messages also.
This function yields line by line as they come (normally you'd have to wait for subprocess to finish to get the output as a whole).
For your case the usage would be:
for line in runProcess('mysqladmin create test -uroot -pmysqladmin12'.split()):
print line,
This is a tricky but super simple solution which works in many situations:
import os
os.system('sample_cmd > tmp')
print(open('tmp', 'r').read())
A temporary file(here is tmp) is created with the output of the command and you can read from it your desired output.
Extra note from the comments:
You can remove the tmp file in the case of one-time job. If you need to do this several times, there is no need to delete the tmp.
os.remove('tmp')
Vartec's answer doesn't read all lines, so I made a version that did:
def run_command(command):
p = subprocess.Popen(command,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
return iter(p.stdout.readline, b'')
Usage is the same as the accepted answer:
command = 'mysqladmin create test -uroot -pmysqladmin12'.split()
for line in run_command(command):
print(line)
You can use following commands to run any shell command. I have used them on ubuntu.
import os
os.popen('your command here').read()
Note: This is deprecated since python 2.6. Now you must use subprocess.Popen. Below is the example
import subprocess
p = subprocess.Popen("Your command", shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE).communicate()[0]
print p.split("\n")
I had a slightly different flavor of the same problem with the following requirements:
Capture and return STDOUT messages as they accumulate in the STDOUT buffer (i.e. in realtime).
#vartec solved this Pythonically with his use of generators and the 'yield'
keyword above
Print all STDOUT lines (even if process exits before STDOUT buffer can be fully read)
Don't waste CPU cycles polling the process at high-frequency
Check the return code of the subprocess
Print STDERR (separate from STDOUT) if we get a non-zero error return code.
I've combined and tweaked previous answers to come up with the following:
import subprocess
from time import sleep
def run_command(command):
p = subprocess.Popen(command,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
shell=True)
# Read stdout from subprocess until the buffer is empty !
for line in iter(p.stdout.readline, b''):
if line: # Don't print blank lines
yield line
# This ensures the process has completed, AND sets the 'returncode' attr
while p.poll() is None:
sleep(.1) #Don't waste CPU-cycles
# Empty STDERR buffer
err = p.stderr.read()
if p.returncode != 0:
# The run_command() function is responsible for logging STDERR
print("Error: " + str(err))
This code would be executed the same as previous answers:
for line in run_command(cmd):
print(line)
Your Mileage May Vary, I attempted #senderle's spin on Vartec's solution in Windows on Python 2.6.5, but I was getting errors, and no other solutions worked. My error was: WindowsError: [Error 6] The handle is invalid.
I found that I had to assign PIPE to every handle to get it to return the output I expected - the following worked for me.
import subprocess
def run_command(cmd):
"""given shell command, returns communication tuple of stdout and stderr"""
return subprocess.Popen(cmd,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE).communicate()
and call like this, ([0] gets the first element of the tuple, stdout):
run_command('tracert 11.1.0.1')[0]
After learning more, I believe I need these pipe arguments because I'm working on a custom system that uses different handles, so I had to directly control all the std's.
To stop console popups (with Windows), do this:
def run_command(cmd):
"""given shell command, returns communication tuple of stdout and stderr"""
# instantiate a startupinfo obj:
startupinfo = subprocess.STARTUPINFO()
# set the use show window flag, might make conditional on being in Windows:
startupinfo.dwFlags |= subprocess.STARTF_USESHOWWINDOW
# pass as the startupinfo keyword argument:
return subprocess.Popen(cmd,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
startupinfo=startupinfo).communicate()
run_command('tracert 11.1.0.1')
On Python 3.7+, use subprocess.run and pass capture_output=True:
import subprocess
result = subprocess.run(['echo', 'hello', 'world'], capture_output=True)
print(repr(result.stdout))
This will return bytes:
b'hello world\n'
If you want it to convert the bytes to a string, add text=True:
result = subprocess.run(['echo', 'hello', 'world'], capture_output=True, text=True)
print(repr(result.stdout))
This will read the bytes using your default encoding:
'hello world\n'
If you need to manually specify a different encoding, use encoding="your encoding" instead of text=True:
result = subprocess.run(['echo', 'hello', 'world'], capture_output=True, encoding="utf8")
print(repr(result.stdout))
Splitting the initial command for the subprocess might be tricky and cumbersome.
Use shlex.split() to help yourself out.
Sample command
git log -n 5 --since "5 years ago" --until "2 year ago"
The code
from subprocess import check_output
from shlex import split
res = check_output(split('git log -n 5 --since "5 years ago" --until "2 year ago"'))
print(res)
>>> b'commit 7696ab087a163e084d6870bb4e5e4d4198bdc61a\nAuthor: Artur Barseghyan...'
Without shlex.split() the code would look as follows
res = check_output([
'git',
'log',
'-n',
'5',
'--since',
'5 years ago',
'--until',
'2 year ago'
])
print(res)
>>> b'commit 7696ab087a163e084d6870bb4e5e4d4198bdc61a\nAuthor: Artur Barseghyan...'
Here a solution, working if you want to print output while process is running or not.
I added the current working directory also, it was useful to me more than once.
Hoping the solution will help someone :).
import subprocess
def run_command(cmd_and_args, print_constantly=False, cwd=None):
"""Runs a system command.
:param cmd_and_args: the command to run with or without a Pipe (|).
:param print_constantly: If True then the output is logged in continuous until the command ended.
:param cwd: the current working directory (the directory from which you will like to execute the command)
:return: - a tuple containing the return code, the stdout and the stderr of the command
"""
output = []
process = subprocess.Popen(cmd_and_args, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, cwd=cwd)
while True:
next_line = process.stdout.readline()
if next_line:
output.append(str(next_line))
if print_constantly:
print(next_line)
elif not process.poll():
break
error = process.communicate()[1]
return process.returncode, '\n'.join(output), error
For some reason, this one works on Python 2.7 and you only need to import os!
import os
def bash(command):
output = os.popen(command).read()
return output
print_me = bash('ls -l')
print(print_me)
If you need to run a shell command on multiple files, this did the trick for me.
import os
import subprocess
# Define a function for running commands and capturing stdout line by line
# (Modified from Vartec's solution because it wasn't printing all lines)
def runProcess(exe):
p = subprocess.Popen(exe, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
return iter(p.stdout.readline, b'')
# Get all filenames in working directory
for filename in os.listdir('./'):
# This command will be run on each file
cmd = 'nm ' + filename
# Run the command and capture the output line by line.
for line in runProcess(cmd.split()):
# Eliminate leading and trailing whitespace
line.strip()
# Split the output
output = line.split()
# Filter the output and print relevant lines
if len(output) > 2:
if ((output[2] == 'set_program_name')):
print filename
print line
Edit: Just saw Max Persson's solution with J.F. Sebastian's suggestion. Went ahead and incorporated that.
According to #senderle, if you use python3.6 like me:
def sh(cmd, input=""):
rst = subprocess.run(cmd, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, input=input.encode("utf-8"))
assert rst.returncode == 0, rst.stderr.decode("utf-8")
return rst.stdout.decode("utf-8")
sh("ls -a")
Will act exactly like you run the command in bash
Improvement for better logging.
For better output you can use iterator.
From below, we get better
from subprocess import Popen, getstatusoutput, PIPE
def shell_command(cmd):
result = Popen(cmd, shell=True, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)
output = iter(result.stdout.readline, b'')
error = iter(result.stderr.readline, b'')
print("##### OutPut ###")
for line in output:
print(line.decode("utf-8"))
print("###### Error ########")
for line in error:
print(error.decode("utf-8")) # Convert bytes to str
status, terminal_output = run_command(cmd)
print(terminal_output)
shell_command("ls") # this will display all the files & folders in directory
Other method using getstatusoutput ( Easy to understand)
from subprocess import Popen, getstatusoutput, PIPE
status_Code, output = getstausoutput(command)
print(output) # this will give the terminal output
# status_code, output = getstatusoutput("ls") # this will print the all files & folder available in the directory
If you use the subprocess python module, you are able to handle the STDOUT, STDERR and return code of command separately. You can see an example for the complete command caller implementation. Of course you can extend it with try..except if you want.
The below function returns the STDOUT, STDERR and Return code so you can handle them in the other script.
import subprocess
def command_caller(command=None)
sp = subprocess.Popen(command, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, shell=False)
out, err = sp.communicate()
if sp.returncode:
print(
"Return code: %(ret_code)s Error message: %(err_msg)s"
% {"ret_code": sp.returncode, "err_msg": err}
)
return sp.returncode, out, err
I would like to suggest simppl as an option for consideration. It is a module that is available via pypi: pip install simppl and was runs on python3.
simppl allows the user to run shell commands and read the output from the screen.
The developers suggest three types of use cases:
The simplest usage will look like this:
from simppl.simple_pipeline import SimplePipeline
sp = SimplePipeline(start=0, end=100):
sp.print_and_run('<YOUR_FIRST_OS_COMMAND>')
sp.print_and_run('<YOUR_SECOND_OS_COMMAND>') ```
To run multiple commands concurrently use:
commands = ['<YOUR_FIRST_OS_COMMAND>', '<YOUR_SECOND_OS_COMMAND>']
max_number_of_processes = 4
sp.run_parallel(commands, max_number_of_processes) ```
Finally, if your project uses the cli module, you can run directly another command_line_tool as part of a pipeline. The other tool will
be run from the same process, but it will appear from the logs as
another command in the pipeline. This enables smoother debugging and
refactoring of tools calling other tools.
from example_module import example_tool
sp.print_and_run_clt(example_tool.run, ['first_number', 'second_nmber'],
{'-key1': 'val1', '-key2': 'val2'},
{'--flag'}) ```
Note that the printing to STDOUT/STDERR is via python's logging module.
Here is a complete code to show how simppl works:
import logging
from logging.config import dictConfig
logging_config = dict(
version = 1,
formatters = {
'f': {'format':
'%(asctime)s %(name)-12s %(levelname)-8s %(message)s'}
},
handlers = {
'h': {'class': 'logging.StreamHandler',
'formatter': 'f',
'level': logging.DEBUG}
},
root = {
'handlers': ['h'],
'level': logging.DEBUG,
},
)
dictConfig(logging_config)
from simppl.simple_pipeline import SimplePipeline
sp = SimplePipeline(0, 100)
sp.print_and_run('ls')
Here is a simple and flexible solution that works on a variety of OS versions, and both Python 2 and 3, using IPython in shell mode:
from IPython.terminal.embed import InteractiveShellEmbed
my_shell = InteractiveShellEmbed()
result = my_shell.getoutput("echo hello world")
print(result)
Out: ['hello world']
It has a couple of advantages
It only requires an IPython install, so you don't really need to worry about your specific Python or OS version when using it, it comes with Jupyter - which has a wide range of support
It takes a simple string by default - so no need to use shell mode arg or string splitting, making it slightly cleaner IMO
It also makes it cleaner to easily substitute variables or even entire Python commands in the string itself
To demonstrate:
var = "hello world "
result = my_shell.getoutput("echo {var*2}")
print(result)
Out: ['hello world hello world']
Just wanted to give you an extra option, especially if you already have Jupyter installed
Naturally, if you are in an actual Jupyter notebook as opposed to a .py script you can also always do:
result = !echo hello world
print(result)
To accomplish the same.
The output can be redirected to a text file and then read it back.
import subprocess
import os
import tempfile
def execute_to_file(command):
"""
This function execute the command
and pass its output to a tempfile then read it back
It is usefull for process that deploy child process
"""
temp_file = tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile(delete=False)
temp_file.close()
path = temp_file.name
command = command + " > " + path
proc = subprocess.run(command, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
if proc.stderr:
# if command failed return
os.unlink(path)
return
with open(path, 'r') as f:
data = f.read()
os.unlink(path)
return data
if __name__ == "__main__":
path = "Somepath"
command = 'ecls.exe /files ' + path
print(execute(command))
eg, execute('ls -ahl')
differentiated three/four possible returns and OS platforms:
no output, but run successfully
output empty line, run successfully
run failed
output something, run successfully
function below
def execute(cmd, output=True, DEBUG_MODE=False):
"""Executes a bash command.
(cmd, output=True)
output: whether print shell output to screen, only affects screen display, does not affect returned values
return: ...regardless of output=True/False...
returns shell output as a list with each elment is a line of string (whitespace stripped both sides) from output
could be
[], ie, len()=0 --> no output;
[''] --> output empty line;
None --> error occured, see below
if error ocurs, returns None (ie, is None), print out the error message to screen
"""
if not DEBUG_MODE:
print "Command: " + cmd
# https://stackoverflow.com/a/40139101/2292993
def _execute_cmd(cmd):
if os.name == 'nt' or platform.system() == 'Windows':
# set stdin, out, err all to PIPE to get results (other than None) after run the Popen() instance
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, shell=True)
else:
# Use bash; the default is sh
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, shell=True, executable="/bin/bash")
# the Popen() instance starts running once instantiated (??)
# additionally, communicate(), or poll() and wait process to terminate
# communicate() accepts optional input as stdin to the pipe (requires setting stdin=subprocess.PIPE above), return out, err as tuple
# if communicate(), the results are buffered in memory
# Read stdout from subprocess until the buffer is empty !
# if error occurs, the stdout is '', which means the below loop is essentially skipped
# A prefix of 'b' or 'B' is ignored in Python 2;
# it indicates that the literal should become a bytes literal in Python 3
# (e.g. when code is automatically converted with 2to3).
# return iter(p.stdout.readline, b'')
for line in iter(p.stdout.readline, b''):
# # Windows has \r\n, Unix has \n, Old mac has \r
# if line not in ['','\n','\r','\r\n']: # Don't print blank lines
yield line
while p.poll() is None:
sleep(.1) #Don't waste CPU-cycles
# Empty STDERR buffer
err = p.stderr.read()
if p.returncode != 0:
# responsible for logging STDERR
print("Error: " + str(err))
yield None
out = []
for line in _execute_cmd(cmd):
# error did not occur earlier
if line is not None:
# trailing comma to avoid a newline (by print itself) being printed
if output: print line,
out.append(line.strip())
else:
# error occured earlier
out = None
return out
else:
print "Simulation! The command is " + cmd
print ""

Tracing program/function execution on source line level

Is there a way, to record the execution of a particular function (or the entire program) in terms of the executed source code lines?
Consdier I set a breakpoint in gdb to function foo, and then repetedly call step, and it will tell me something like this:
(gdb) break foo
Thread 1 "main" hit Breakpoint 1, foo () at foo.cpp:10
(gdb) step
foo () at foo.cpp:12
(gdb) step
foo () at foo.cpp:13
(gdb) step
foo () at foo.cpp:12
(gdb) step
foo () at foo.cpp:14
Then I repeat that until foo is no longer in the output of bt. This gives me a trace of execution (foo.cpp:10->12->13->12->14), that is particularly useful to compare long control flows.
Is there a way to do this with gdb or is there another tool that does this? I am only interested in deterministic traces, not sampling. Ideally this could also be done for stepi (on instruction level) / next (without entering subroutines).
Based on this similar question, I was able to put together a quick python script for my purpose. Fortunately with less required bug-workarounds:
import sys
import gdb
import os
import re
def in_frames(needle):
""" Check if the passed frame is still on the current stack """
hay = gdb.newest_frame()
while hay:
if hay == needle:
return True
hay = hay.older()
return False
# Use this to reduce any kind of unwanted noise
def filter_step(output):
output = re.sub(r'^.*No such file or directory\.\n', r'', output, flags=re.M)
output = re.sub(r'^\d+\s+in\s+.*\n', r'', output, flags=re.M)
return output
def step_trace(filename=None, step="step"):
counter = 0
if filename:
output = ""
frame = gdb.newest_frame()
print("Stepping until end of {} # {}:{}".format(frame.name(), frame.function().symtab, frame.function().line))
while in_frames(frame):
counter += 1
if filename:
output += filter_step(gdb.execute(step, to_string=True))
else:
gdb.execute(step)
if filename:
with open(filename, "w") as file:
file.write(output)
print("Done stepping through {} lines.".format(counter))
To output a trace to a file
(gdb) source step_trace.py
(gdb) python step_trace("filename.log")
or directly
(gdb) source step_trace.py
(gdb) python step_trace()

Using addprocs() and pmap() inside a function in Julia

In Julia, I want to use addprocs and pmap inside a function that is defined inside a module. Here's a silly example:
module test
using Distributions
export g, f
function g(a, b)
a + rand(Normal(0, b))
end
function f(A, b)
close = false
if length(procs()) == 1 # If there are already extra workers,
addprocs() # use them, otherwise, create your own.
close = true
end
W = pmap(x -> g(x, b), A)
if close == true
rmprocs(workers()) # Remove the workers you created.
end
return W
end
end
test.f(randn(5), 1)
This returns a very long error
WARNING: Module test not defined on process 4
WARNING: Module test not defined on process 3
fatal error on fatal error on WARNING: Module test not defined on process 2
43: : WARNING: Module test not defined on process 5
fatal error on fatal error on 5: 2: ERROR: UndefVarError: test not defined
in deserialize at serialize.jl:504
in handle_deserialize at serialize.jl:477
in deserialize at serialize.jl:696
...
in message_handler_loop at multi.jl:878
in process_tcp_streams at multi.jl:867
in anonymous at task.jl:63
Worker 3 terminated.
Worker 2 terminated.ERROR (unhandled task failure): EOFError: read end of file
WARNING: rmprocs: process 1 not removed
Worker 5 terminated.ERROR (unhandled task failure): EOFError: read end of file
4-element Array{Any,1}:Worker 4 terminated.ERROR (unhandled task failure): EOFError: read end of file
ERROR (unhandled task failure): EOFError: read end of file
ProcessExitedException()
ProcessExitedException()
ProcessExitedException()
ProcessExitedException()
What I'm trying to do is write a package that contains functions that perform operations that can be optionally parallelized at the user's discretion. So a function like f might take an argument par::Bool that does something like I've shown above if the user calls f with par = true and loops otherwise. So from within the definition of f (and within the definition of the module test), I want to create workers and broadcast the Distributions package and the function g to them.
What's wrong with using #everywhere in your function? The following, for example, works fine on my computer.
function f(A, b)
close = false
if length(procs()) == 1 # If there are already extra workers,
addprocs() # use them, otherwise, create your own.
#everywhere begin
using Distributions
function g(a, b)
a + rand(Normal(0, b))
end
end
close = true
end
W = pmap(x -> g(x, b), A)
if close == true
rmprocs(workers()) # Remove the workers you created.
end
return W
end
f(randn(5), 1)
Note: when I first ran this, I needed to recompile the Distributions package since it had been updated since I had last used it. When I first tried the above script right after the recompiling, it failed. But, I then quit Julia and reopened it and it worked fine. Perhaps that was what is causing your error?

How to find the line causing error in Julia?

Suppose there is a script A that calls function B, both in Julia.
There are some errors in function B, which cause the script to be stopped at runtime.
Is there a neat way to find out which line is causing the error?
It does not make any sense, to have to put messages like println manually in each line to find out upto which line the code survives, and in which line error happens.
Edit: I am using Linux Red Hat 4.1.2 and Julia version 0.3.6. directly. With no IDE.
Reading the backtrace:
juser#juliabox:~$ cat foo.jl
# line 1 empty comment
foo() = error("This is line 2")
foo() # line 3
juser#juliabox:~$ julia foo.jl
ERROR: This is line 2
in foo at /home/juser/foo.jl:2
in include at ./boot.jl:245
in include_from_node1 at loading.jl:128
in process_options at ./client.jl:285
in _start at ./client.jl:354
while loading /home/juser/foo.jl, in expression starting on line 3
This lines in foo at /home/juser/foo.jl:2 ... while loading /home/juser/foo.jl, in expression starting on line 3 reads as: "there was an error at line 2 in /home/juser/foo.jl file ... while loading /home/juser/foo.jl, in expression starting on line 3"
Looks pretty clear to me!
Edit: /home/juser/foo.jl:2 means; file: /home/juser/foo.jl, line number: 2.
Also you could use #show macro instead of println function for debugging purposes:
julia> println(1 < 5 < 10)
true
julia> #show 1 < 5 < 10
(1<5<10) => true
true

dynamic usage of attribute in recipe

I am trying to increment the value and use in another resource dynamically in recipe but still failing to do that.
Chef::Log.info("I am in #{cookbook_name}::#{recipe_name} and current disk count #{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]}")
bash "beforeTest" do
code lazy{ echo #{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]} }
end
ruby_block "test current disk count" do
block do
node.set[:oracle][:asm][:test] = "#{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]}".to_i+1
end
end
bash "test" do
code lazy{ echo #{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]} }
end
However I'm still getting the error bellow:
NoMethodError ------------- undefined method echo' for Chef::Resource::Bash
Cookbook Trace: ---------------
/var/chef/cache/cookbooks/Oracle11G/recipes/testSplit.rb:3:in block (2 levels) in from_file'
Resource Declaration: ---------------------
# In /var/chef/cache/cookbooks/Oracle11G/recipes/testSplit.rb
1: bash "beforeTest" do
2: code lazy{
3: echo "#{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]}"
4: }
5: end
Please can you help how lazy should be used in bash? If not lazy is there any other option?
bash "beforeTest" do
code lazy { "echo #{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]}" }
end
You should quote the command for the interpolation to work; if not, ruby would search for an echo command, which is unknown in ruby context (thus the error you get in log).
Warning: lazy has to be for the whole resource attribute; something like this WON'T work:
bash "beforeTest" do
code "echo node asm test is: #{lazy { node[:oracle][:asm][:test]} }"
end
The lazy evaluation takes a block of ruby code, as decribed here
You may have a better result with the log resource like this:
log "print before" do
message lazy { "node asm test is #{node[:oracle][:asm][:test]}" }
end
I've been drilling my head solving this problem until I came up with lambda expressions. But yet just using lambda didn't help me at all. So I thought of using both lambda and lazy evaluation. Though lambda is already lazy loading, when compiling chef recipe's, the resource where you call the lambda expression is still being evaluated. So to prevent it to being evaluated (somehow), I've put it inside a lazy evaluation string.
The lambda expression
app_version = lambda{`cat version`}
then the resource block
file 'tmp/validate.version' do
user 'user'
group 'user_group'
content lazy { app_version.call }
mode '0755'
end
Hope this can help others too :) or if you have some better solution please do let me know :)

Resources