A Simple Cron

EasyCron.md

Here's something I wrote for guifa a couple of days ago. I am thinking of turning it into a simple Rakuish event loop for my projects.

Is this a fairly decent implementation, or is this just NIH for cron?

Please share your thoughts.

my %suppliers;
our %shifts is export;
my %times;

my $master = DateTime.now;

class TimeEvent {
  has $.time is built;
}

my $minute-time = $master;
for <minute hour day week month year> {
  %suppliers{$_} = Supplier::Preserving.new;
  %shifts{$_}    = -> { %suppliers{$_}.Supply };
  %times{$_}     =  $master;
  start loop {
    await Promise.at(
      Instant.from-posix: (
        %times{$_} = %times{$_}.later( |("{ $_ }" => 1) ).truncated-to($_)
      ).posix
    );

    %suppliers{$_}.emit: TimeEvent.new( time => %times{$_} );
  }
}

react {
  whenever %shifts<minute>() -> $e {
    CATCH { default { .message.say } }

    say "Minute shifted for event { $e.gist }";
  }
}

The start loop. Though it would look a little weird. :) BTW, another solution is to have a single looping thread and use Supply.interval. The whole point is to minimize hidden usages of our otherwise limited thread pool.

Huh! So you think a better way is to drop the start loop and replace the hash items with Supply.intervals representing the various time periods?

Let me clear this out: my primary point is to prevent extra consumption of threads. Yet, it is not even possible to get rid of at least one thread without enforcing user code to run within some kind of event loop, and let's not be that extreme! :)

Speaking of possible single-threaded implementations I have the following options in mind for the moment:

• await Promise.any(@promises-for-each-interval) – this one I just've came up with, but it would be rather cumbersome to implement.
• Individual Supply.internval for each option. Probably too much considering that most usages would stick to 1-2 options.
• Single Supply.interval and events produced based on seconds passed since some reference point.
• Just a loop with sleep 1 and then the same as above.

Not sure which approach would be the best for the task, but tend to see the last one as the most simplistic and easy to comprehend.

I think I would prefer the second, as it wouldn't impose too much change over the listed code, and would be more flexible. What do you see as the drawbacks of this?

Thanks.