Re: Stay-Open Script Apps vs Cron
Re: Stay-Open Script Apps vs Cron
- Subject: Re: Stay-Open Script Apps vs Cron
- From: "Stockly, Ed" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 18:18:28 +0000
- Thread-topic: Stay-Open Script Apps vs Cron
> Smile is robust and tested. That is why I believe it was recommended to you.
> That's what smile is built for.
In this case, I'm not sure Smile would be any advantage over AppleScript,
since Smile would be using AppleScript.
I've found idle handlers to be very reliable for timed execution. I've got
several macs running scripts 24/7 executing idle handlers every minute.
I've had mac failures, system crashes and applications crash, but I've never
detected a single failure of an idle handler (I log handler calls, and would
be able to tell if the idle handler were called but never completed)
That said, because of all the other potential crashes I'm not sure how
reliable a system you could build for this purpose.
At the very least I would use more than one mac and have them monitor each
other. I think that's what Jörgen was referring to.
>Why not make it an stay-open script, guarded by Cron - to be double safe?
Or,
even better, guarded by a keep-alive launch agent.
ES
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
AppleScript-Users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users
This email sent to email@hidden