Someone reports that given a stream of strings on the serial port which is pipelined to the OCaml program below, the output of the program is not continuous, but instead it appears in chunks (of a few tens of lines), as if buffered.
What can be the cause of the non-continuous output?
(The output buffer should be flushed after each new line due to the use of '%!'. So this shouldn't be the cause, right?)
let tp = ref 0
let get_next_entry ic =
try
let (ts, pred, v) = Scanf.fscanf ic " @%d %s@(%d)\n" (fun x y z -> (x,y,z)) in
Printf.printf "at timepoint %d (timestamp %d): %s(%d)\n%!" !tp ts pred v;
incr tp;
true
with End_of_file ->
false
let _ =
while get_next_entry stdin do
()
done
The OCaml version used is 4.05.
It is a threefold problem. From the least likely to the most likely.
It is all in the eye of the beholder, as how the program output will look like depends on the environment in which it is run, i.e., on a program that runs your program and renders this on a visual device. In other words, it involves a lot of variables that are beyond the context of this program.
With that said, let me explain what flush means for the printf function. The printf facility relies on buffered channels. And each channel is roughly a pair of a buffer and system-specific file descriptor. When someone (including printf) outputs to a channel, the information first goes into the buffer and remains there until the next portion of information overrides the buffer (i.e., there is no more space in the buffer) or until the flush function is called explicitly. Then the buffer is flushed, which means that the information in the buffer is transferred to the operating system (e.g., using the write system call or library function).
What happens afterward is system dependent. If the file descriptor was associated with a regular file, then you might expect that the information will be passed to it entirely(though the file system has its own hierarchy of caches, so there're caveats also). If the descriptor was associated with a Unix-style shell process through a pipe, then it will go into the pipe's buffer, extracted from it by the shell and printed using a terminal interface, usually fulfilled with some terminal emulator. By default shells are line-buffered, so the line should be printed as a whole unless the user of the shell changes its parameters somehow.
Basically, I hope you get the idea, it is not your program which is actually manipulating with the terminal and lighting up pixels on your monitors. Your program is just outputting data and some other program is receiving this data and drawing it on the screen. And this some other program (a terminal, or terminal emulator, e.g., minicom) is making this output glitchy, not your program. Your program is doing its best to be printed correctly - full line or nothing.
And it is. The in_channel is also buffered, so it will accumulate a few bytes before calling sprintf. Therefore, you can just read from the buffered channel and expect a realtime response to it. The most reliable way for you would be to use the Unix module and process the input using your own buffering.
Finally, the input program can also give you the information in chunks. This is especially true for serial interfaces, so make sure that you have correctly set up your terminal interface using the Unix.tcsetattr function. In particular, when your program is blocked on the input, the operating system may decide not to wake it up on each arrived character or line. This behavior is controlled by the terminal interface (see the Canonical and Non-canonical modes. If your input doesn't have newlines, then you shall use the non-canonical mode).
Finally, the device itself could be acting jittering, and if you have an oscilloscope nearby you can observe the signals it is sending. And make sure that you have configured your serial port as prescribed in the user manual of your device.