I am trying to inject a method into another method.
Problem is the local variables indexes.
Example-
public void Method1()
{
var tes = "anything";
}
public void Method2()
{
var spring = 40;
}
I want to inject method1 into method2 but the problem is it throws invalid IL code because for method1 local variable at index 0 is of type string and for method2 local variable at index 0 is of type int.
What I do is I fetch method1 methodDefinition and takes its instructuions through-
var Method1_Instructions= MethodDefinition.Body.Instructions.ToList();// method1 methodDefinition
var Method1_localVariables= Method1_MethodDefinition.Body.Variables
for (var I = 0; I < Method1_localVariables.Count; I++)
{
Method2_MethodDefinition.Body.Variables.Insert(I,
Method1_localVariables[I]);
}
I add the local variables of method1 to method2 variables list and also insert instructions before it.
But I know its wrong IL code because of the local variables index issue.
So, How can I fix it without writing the IL code myself?
Related
I am new to Java 8 and was trying to rewrite an existing code snippet logic using the Java 8 features.
However I am not sure how to use an existing arrayList defined outside the block to get values from it when it is placed inside the lambda block. It complains that it has to be final or effectively final.
I started with converting the inner traditional for loop and encountered the same issues with a counter variable which I was able to sort using AtomicInteger but am not sure how to do that for arrayList as well as I cannot also define the arrayList inside the lambda block since it has a dependency of an i variable that is present in the outer while loop.
Any help will be much appreciated !!! Thanks in advance.
Below is my code snippet :-
public String somemethod(ArrayList someValues){
int i=0;
String status="Failed";
ArrayList someOtherValues = new ArrayList();
try
{
while ( i < (someValues.size()))
{
someOtherValues = (ArrayList) someValues.get(i);
someOtherValues.replaceAll(t -> Objects.isNull(t) ? "" : t); //converting every null to "" within the arrayList someOtherValues
int count=4;
AtomicInteger counter=new AtomicInteger(5);
if(!someOtherValues.get(0).toString().equals(""))
{
while ( count < (someOtherValues.size()))
{
IntStream.range(0, 3).forEach(k -> {
someObjectClass someObject=new someObjectClass();
someOtherObjectClass id = new someOtherObjectClass(someOtherValues.get(0).toString(),someOtherValues.get(count).toString()) //Line where the error is
someObject=new someObjectClass(id);
someObject.setId(id);
if(someCondition)
{
try
{
someObject.setSomething(someValue);
counter.incrementAndGet()
}
}
someObject.setsomeOtherValues1(someOtherValues.get(1).toString());
someObject.setsomeOtherValues2(someOtherValues.get(3).toString())
}
count=counter.get();
counter.incrementAndGet();
}
}
i++;
}
catch(Exception e)
{
return status;
}
}
Right now where it is pending is it complains that someOtherValues, which is an existing arrayList defined outside the lambda block needs to be final or effectively final in order to fetch elements.
Is it literally not possible to change/optimize the above function into a fewer lines of code using Java 8 streams/lambdas/forEach ?
As a general rule it is not a good idea to try and change outside variables inside a lambda definition. But since Java's very loose concept of final fields and variables only applies to assigning values, it can still be done.
The only thing you cannot do in a lambda expression with variable defined outside is assigning new values.
So this does not compile:
List<String> lst = new ArrayList<>();
myLambda = e -> {
lst = new ArrayList<>(); //this violates the 'final' rule
lst.add(e);
}
It is however possible to call any method of the outside variable, even if it changes the state of the variable. This will work:
myLambda = e -> {
lst.add(e);
}
Even though you're still changed the state of the variable lst, this is legal code.
But I strongly advise against it. Lambdas are meant to used in a functional matter and should not change any variables defined elsewhere. It's a better choice to create a list inside the lambda, return it from the lambda and then add it to the outside list.
Hi there I have a c native library that is returning me json as char*. What I would like to do in c# is to use this pointer and write it straight to the
this.ControllerContext.HttpContext.Response.BodyWriter;
I'm able to create ReadOnlySpan from the ptr but as far as I can tell PipeWriter only accepts ReadOnlyMemory<byte> which does not have a constructor from IntPtr. Is there a way to create ReadOnlyMemory<byte> from IntPtr or some other way to writer my string from native library withou copying it one extra time?
This answer provides a solution that does not need to copy the entire buffer:
Marshalling pointer to array P/Invoke
TL;DR: Take UnmanagedMemoryManager from Pipelines.Sockets.Unofficial by Marc Gravell.
int* ptr = ...
int len = ...
var memory = new UnmanagedMemoryManager<int>(ptr, len).Memory;
Unfortunately, you still need to allocate the MemoryManager (it must be a class, not a struct).
Thank you for your answers but none of them was without extra copy. I was finally figure it out so in case somebody struggle with it, here is the solution.
So the only way I as able to achieve this is like.
await Response.StartAsync(HttpContext.RequestAborted);
var dest = Response.BodyWriter.GetMemory((int)jsonLen).Pin();
unsafe { memcpy(dest.Pointer), srcPtr, srcLen); }
Response.BodyWriter.Advance(srcLen);
await Response.BodyWriter.FlushAsync(HttpContext.RequestAborted);
Maybe use something like this?
public class Utility
{
public System.ReadOnlyMemory<T> ConvertToReadOnlyMemory(System.ReadOnlySpan<T> input) {
var tmp = new System.Memory<T>();
input.CopyTo(tmp.Span);
return (System.ReadOnlyMemory<T>)tmp;
}
}
However, I think this will involve completely copying the stream into heap storage, which is probably not what you want...
I glad if this could speed up and match to what you wants.
namespace Helper
{
using System;
using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
public static class CStringMapper
{
// convert unmanaged c string to managed c# string
public string toCSharpString(char* unmanaged_c_string)
{
return Marshal.PtrToStringAnsi((IntPtr)unmanaged_c_string);
}
// Free unmanaged c pointer
public void free(char* unmanaged_c_string)
{
Marshal.FreeHGlobal((IntPtr)unmanaged_c_string);
}
}
}
Usage:
using Helper;
/* generate your unmanaged c string here */
try
{
// eg. char* OO7c = cLibFunc();
string cSharpString = CStringMapper.toCSharpString(OO7c);
}
finally
{
// Make sure to freeing the pointer
CStringMapper.free(OO7c);
}
I wish to access many classes and variables, I would like to do this by dynamically setting the class name and variable name. Currently I am using
MyClass["myVariable1"]
to dynamically access the variable name
MyClass.myVariable1
I want to also dynanmically acces the class name, something like
["MyClass"]["myVariable1"]
But this does not work.
The purpose is that I have shared object with many user settings, I want to iterate through the shared object and set all the user settings across all the classes. I think if I cant dynamically access the class I must have a statement for each and every class name/variable.
I advise against such a practice. Although technically possible, it is like welcoming a disaster into the app architecture:
You rely on something you have no apparent control of: on the way Flash names the classes.
You walk out of future possibility to protect your code with identifier renaming obfuscation because it will render your code invalid.
Compile time error checks is better than runtime, and you are leaving it to runtime. If it happens to fail in non-debug environment, you will never know.
The next developer to work with your code (might be you in a couple of years) will have hard time finding where the initial data coming from.
So, having all of above, I encourage you to switch to another model:
package
{
import flash.net.SharedObject;
public class SharedData
{
static private var SO:SharedObject;
static public function init():void
{
SO = SharedObject.getLocal("my_precious_shared_data", "/");
}
static public function read(key:String):*
{
// if (!SO) init();
return SO.data[key];
}
static public function write(key:String, value:*):void
{
// if (!SO) init();
SO.data[key] = value;
SO.flush();
}
// Returns stored data if any, or default value otherwise.
// A good practice of default application values that might
// change upon user activity, e.g. sound volume or level progress.
static public function readSafe(key:String, defaultValue:*):*
{
// if (!SO) init();
return SO.data.hasOwnProperty(key)? read(key): defaultValue;
}
}
}
In the main class you call
SharedData.init();
// So now your shared data are available.
// If you are not sure you can call it before other classes will read
// the shared data, just uncomment // if (!SO) init(); lines in SharedData methods.
Then each class that feeds on these data should have an initialization block:
// It's a good idea to keep keys as constants
// so you won't occasionally mistype them.
// Compile time > runtime again.
static private const SOMAXMANA:String = "maxmana";
static private const SOMAXHP:String = "maxhp";
private var firstTime:Boolean = true;
private var maxmana:int;
private var maxhp:int;
// ...
if (firstTime)
{
// Make sure it does not read them second time.
firstTime = false;
maxhp = SharedData.readSafe(SOMAXHP, 100);
maxmana = SharedData.readSafe(SOMAXMANA, 50);
}
Well, again. The code above:
does not employ weird practices and easy to understand
in each class anyone can clearly see where the data come from
will be checked for errors at compile time
can be obfuscated and protected
You can try getting the class into a variable and going from there:
var myClass:Class = getDefinitionByName("MyClass") as Class;
myClass["myVariable1"] = x;
For measuring execution time of methods, I've seen suggestions to use
public class PerformanceInterceptor {
#AroundInvoke
Object measureTime(InvocationContext ctx) throws Exception {
long beforeTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
Object obj = null;
try {
obj = ctx.proceed();
return obj;
}
finally {
time = System.currentTimeMillis() - beforeTime;
// Log time
}
}
Then put
#Interceptors(PerformanceInterceptor.class)
before whatever method you want measured.
Anyway I tried this and it seems to work fine.
I also added a
public static long countCalls = 0;
to the PerformanceInterceptor class and a
countCalls++;
to the measureTime() which also seems to work o.k.
With my newby hat on, I will ask if my use of the countCalls is o.k. i.e
that Glassfish/JEE6 is o.k. with me using static variables in a Java class that is
used as an Interceptor.... in particular with regard to thread safety. I know that
normally you are supposed to synchronize setting of class variables in Java, but I
don't know what the case is with JEE6/Glassfish. Any thoughts ?
There is not any additional thread safety provided by container in this case. Each bean instance does have its own instance of interceptor. As a consequence multiple thread can access static countCalls same time.
That's why you have to guard both reads and writes to it as usual. Other possibility is to use AtomicLong:
private static final AtomicLong callCount = new AtomicLong();
private long getCallCount() {
return callCount.get();
}
private void increaseCountCall() {
callCount.getAndIncrement();
}
As expected, these solutions will work only as long as all of the instances are in same JVM, for cluster shared storage is needed.
In my title screen, i have a code saying that the first controller using A is the PlayerIndex.one.
Here is the code:
public override void HandleInput(InputState input)
{
for (int anyPlayer = 0; anyPlayer <4; anyPlayer++)
{
if (GamePad.GetState((PlayerIndex)anyPlayer).Buttons.A == ButtonState.Pressed)
{
FirstPlayer = (PlayerIndex)anyPlayer;
this.ExitScreen();
AddScreen(new Background());
}
}
}
My question is: How can i use the "FirstPlayer" in other classes? (without this, there is no interest in this code)
I tried the Get Set thing but i can't make it work. Does i need to put my code in another class? Do you use other code to make this?
Thanks.
You can make a static variable say : SelectedPlayer,
and assign first player to it!
then you can call the first player through this class,
for example
class GameManager
{
public static PlayerIndex SelectedPlayer{get;set;}
..
..
..
}
and right after the loop in your code, you can say:
GameManager.SelectedPlayer = FirstPlayer;
I hope this helps, if your code cold be clearer that would be easier to help :)
Ok, so to do this properly you're going to have to redesign a little.
First off, you should be checking for a new gamepad input (i.e. you should be exiting the screen only when 'A' has been newly pressed). To do this you should be storing previous and current gamepad states:
private GamePadState currentGamePadState;
private GamePadState lastGamePadState;
// in your constructor
currentGamePadState = new GamePadState();
lastGamePadState = new GamePadState();
// in your update
lastGamePadState = currentGamePadState;
currentGamePadState = GamePad.GetState(PlayerIndex.One);
Really what you need to do is modify your class that deals with input. The basic functionality from your HandleInput function should be moved into your input class. Input should have a collection of functions that test for new/current input. For example, for the case you posted:
public Bool IsNewButtonPress(Buttons buton)
{
return (currentGamePadState.IsButtonDown(button) && lastGamePadState.IsButtonUp(button));
}
Then you can write:
public override void HandleInput(InputState input)
{
if (input.IsNewButtonPress(Buttons.A)
{
this.ExitScreen();
AddScreen(new Background());
}
}
Note: this will only work for one controller. To extend the implementation, you'll need to do something like this:
private GamePadState[] currentGamePadStates;
private GamePadState[] lastGamePadStates;
// in your constructor
currentGamePadStates = new GamePadState[4];
currentGamePadStates[0] = new GamePadState(PlayerIndex.One);
currentGamePadStates[1] = new GamePadController(PlayerIndex.Two);
// etc.
lastGamePadStates[0] = new GamePadState(PlayerIndex.One);
// etc.
// in your update
foreach (GamePadState s in currentGamePadStates)
{
// update all of this as before...
}
// etc.
Now, you want to test every controller for input, so you'll need to generalise by writing a function that returns a Bool after checking each GamePadState in the arrays for a button press.
Check out the MSDN Game State Management Sample for a well developed implementation. I can't remember if it supports multiple controllers, but the structure is clear and can easily be adapted if not.