class Record{
int data;
Record(this.data);
}
class BigRecord{
Record record;
BigRecord(this.record);
}
void main(){
BigRecord big1 = BigRecord(Record(20));
BigRecord big = BigRecord(Record(23));
big1 = big;
big.record.data=22;
print(big1.record.data); //22
}
How can I copy the object without just referring to the same location?
I just want to pass the value of big to big1. But it passes the location of big. And when I change big it also changes the big1. What can I do to just change big without changing big1?
Passing big.record.data works but that's not what I want. Because this is just a small reference for my issue.
If you want to pass a copy of an object, you must create a copy. Assignment in Dart doesn't create copies, it just passes around references to the same object.
So, add a copy/clone/something method to your class an use it when you need a copy.
Make it deep-copy if that's what you need.
class Record{
int data;
Record(this.data);
Record clone() => Record(data);
}
class BigRecord{
Record record;
BigRecord(this.record);
BigRecord clone() => BigRecord(record.clone());
}
void main(){
BigRecord big1 = BigRecord(Record(20));
BigRecord big = BigRecord(Record(23));
big1 = big.clone();
big.record.data = 22;
print(big1.record.data); // 23!
}
Related
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;
I have a struct that looks something like this:
struct MultipartMessage {
ubyte[] mime, data;
Header header;
void setSender(string sender) {
header.sender = sender;
}
void setId(int id) {
header.id = id;
}
}
and I would like to iterate over it, in another class with something like this:
struct Socket {
...
void send(MultipartMessage msg) {
foreach (part; msg) {
sendPart(part);
}
}
...
}
Is this possible? I'd like to use something analogous to Python's __iter__ in the MultipartMessage that can return the fields in a specific order, and ideally even run some additional code, like header.serialize().
Ideally I would add a function to MultipartMessage that would look something like this (pseudocode):
ubyte[] __iter__() {
yield mime;
yield data;
yield header.serialize(); //header.serialize returns a ubyte[]
}
Use tupleof:
foreach (ref part; msg.tupleof)
sendPart(part);
This will call sendPart with mime, data and header (the struct's fields, in the order they were declared). You can filter fields by checking their type with e.g. static if (!is(typeof(part) == Header)).
To get the field's name, you can use __traits(identifier):
foreach (i, ref part; msg.tupleof)
writeln(__traits(identifier, msg.tupleof[i]));
(__traits(identifier, part) would return part.)
There's also __traits(allMembers), which also returns methods.
The closest thing to what you want is probably opApply.
See http://dlang.org/spec/statement.html , Section Foreach over Structs and Classes wit opApply
This will work:
int opApply(int delegate(ref ubyte[]) dg) {
int result = 0;
result = dg(mime);
result = dg(data);
ubyte[] header_bytes = header.serialize();
result = dg(header_bytes);
return result;
}
There are several ways to do iterate over objects in D.
One is to implement the InputRange API. Input ranges are similar to iterators, but have a different API. Implementing a range interface means that you can use all of the std.range/std.algorithm functions on your object, such as map, array, joiner and so on.
D doesn't have an __iter__ function to get an iterator from arbitrary collections, so you will need to implement a function that returns an input range.
import std.range;
auto bytes() {
return chain(mime, data, header.serialize);
}
This will return a ubyte input range, consisting of the bytes in mime, followed by the bytes in data, then in header.serialize.
You can also implement the opApply method on your struct. opApply will only work with foreach, so you can't use range methods with it, but it allows you to do things like execute the loop body in separate threads.
The gist of opApply is that D passes the loop body to opApply as a function; that is, foreach(x; myObj) { body } is transformed into myObj.opApply((x) { body }).
void opApply(void delegate(ubyte[] part) loopbody) {
loopbody(mime);
loopbody(data);
loopbody(header.serialize());
}
However, instead of either of those options, I recommend that you implement a function on your object that takes an output range and writes the data to it.
An output range is an object that accepts other objects, and does something to them. In this case, the output range should accept ubytes, making it similar to an output stream.
void serialize(Range)(ref Range outRange) if(isOutputRange!(Range, ubyte)) {
put(outRange, mime); -- `put` simply feeds data into the output range
put(outRange, data);
header.serialize(outRange); // No longer have to allocate/return a ubyte array
}
Example usage, that stores the output into an Appender, which can be converted into an array:
import std.array;
auto serializedDataAppender = appender!ubyte();
myMsg.serialize(serializedDataAppender);
auto serializedData = serializedDataAppender.data;
If you implement an output range on top of your socket, then that means that the output range solution does not have to allocate any memory from the heap.
Check out the Programming in D book (specifically, the Ranges and More Ranges sections) for info on how to implement your own ranges.
How to I create a generic List<String> object using mono embedded calls? I can get List's MonoClass:
MonoClass* list = mono_class_from_name(mscorlibimage,
"System.Collections.Generic", "List`1");
and I see in docs that there's
mono_class_from_generic_parameter(MonoGenericParam*...)
but I have no idea where and how to get the MonoGenericParam. Or perhaps I need to construct a valid name for mono_class_from_name? I think this can be a bit slower but I'd accept that for now. I tried
MonoClass* list = mono_class_from_name(mscorlib::get().image, "System.Collections.Generic", "List`1[System.String]");
but no luck.
UPDATE:
OK I found a way. Still I'd like to see if there's an official way of doing thing, as this hack looks too dirty to me.
Basically I searched mono sources for generic methods and found mono_class_bind_generic_parameters (see https://raw.github.com/mono/mono/master/mono/metadata/reflection.c). I had to link to libmono-2.0.a in addition to .so to use it. But it worked:
extern "C" MonoClass*
mono_class_bind_generic_parameters(MonoClass *klass,
int type_argc, MonoType **types, bool is_dynamic);
MonoClass* list = mono_class_from_name(mscorlib::get().image,
"System.Collections.Generic", "List`1");
MonoClass* strcls = mono_class_from_name(mscorlib::get().image, "System", "String");
printf("str class: %p\n", strcls);
MonoType* strtype = mono_class_get_type(strcls);
printf("str type: %p\n", strtype);
MonoType* types[1];
types[0] = strtype;
list = mono_class_bind_generic_parameters(list, 1, types, false);
printf("list[string] class: %p\n", list);
MonoObject* obj = mono_object_new(domain, list);
printf("list[string] created: %p\n", obj);
I suppose I can take sources (UPDATE: hardly so) of these methods and reimplement them (they parse metadata, etc) - if I don't want to link to .a - but I wonder if there's a simpler way. Mono docs just don't answer anything, as they use to.
UPDATE: found this thread: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Embedded-API-Method-signature-not-found-with-generic-parameter-td4660157.html which seems to say that no embedded API exists for what I want (i.e. they do not bother to expose mono_class_bind_generic_parameters). Can someone prove that it's correct? With that method, by the way, I get MonoReflectionType* and no way to get back MonoType* from it - while it is as easy to as getting ->type from the structure - which is internal and access via functions to it is internal. Mono Embedded should be called "Mono Internal" instead.
UPDATE: another method is to hack mono_class_inflate_generic_type using copy of internal structures:
struct _MonoGenericInst {
uint32_t id; /* unique ID for debugging */
uint32_t type_argc : 22; /* number of type arguments */
uint32_t is_open : 1; /* if this is an open type */
MonoType *type_argv [1];
};
struct _MonoGenericContext {
/* The instantiation corresponding to the class generic parameters */
MonoGenericInst *class_inst;
/* The instantiation corresponding to the method generic parameters */
void *method_inst;
};
_MonoGenericInst clsctx;
clsctx.type_argc = 1;
clsctx.is_open = 0;
clsctx.type_argv[0] = mono_class_get_type(System::String::_SClass());
MonoGenericContext ctx;
ctx.method_inst = 0;
ctx.class_inst = &clsctx;
MonoType* lt = mono_class_inflate_generic_type(
mono_class_get_type(System::Collections::Generic::List<System::String>::_SClass()),
&ctx);
This doesn't require static link to .a but is even a worse hack. And mono_class_inflate_generic_type is marked as DEPRECATED - so, if this is deprecated, then which is the modern one?
In many cases a mono embedding conundrum can be resolved by using a managed helper method. This is the approach used here.
So we have:
A managed helper method that accepts a generic type definition and an array of generic parameter types.
A client method that accepts a generic type definition name (e.g.: System.Collections.Generic.List`1), an assembly image that contains the type (or use an Assembly Qualified name) and an object of the required generic parameter type. We retrieve the underlying monoType for the object.
Note that when passing type info into the managed layer it has to be an instance of MonoReflectionType as obtained from mono_type_get_object().
The managed helper method is trivial and does the actual instantiation:
public static object CreateInstanceOfGenericType(Type genericTypeDefinition, Type[] parms)
{
// construct type from definition
Type constructedType = genericTypeDefinition.MakeGenericType(parms);
// create instance of constructed type
object obj = Activator.CreateInstance(constructedType);
return obj;
}
The helper code is called, in this case, from Objective-C:
+ (id)createInstanceOfGenericTypeDefinition:(char *)genericTypeDefinitionName monoImage:(MonoImage *)monoImage itemObject:(id)itemObject
{
// get the contained item monoType
MonoType *monoType = [DBType monoTypeForMonoObject:[itemObject monoObject]];
MonoReflectionType *monoReflectionType = mono_type_get_object([DBManagedEnvironment currentDomain], monoType);
// build a System.Array of item types
DBManagedObject *argType = [[DBManagedObject alloc] initWithMonoObject:(MonoObject *)monoReflectionType];
NSArray *argTypes = #[argType];
DBSystem_Array *dbsAargTypes = [argTypes dbsArrayWithTypeName:#"System.Type"];
// get the generic type definition
//
// Retrieves a MonoType from given name. If the name is not fully qualified,
// it defaults to get the type from the image or, if image is NULL or loading
// from it fails, uses corlib.
// This is the embedded equivalent of System.Type.GetType();
MonoType *monoGenericTypeDefinition = mono_reflection_type_from_name(genericTypeDefinitionName, monoImage);
// create instance using helper method
MonoMethod *helperMethod = [DBManagedEnvironment dubrovnikMonoMethodWithName:"CreateInstanceOfGenericType" className:"Dubrovnik.FrameworkHelper.GenericHelper" argCount:2];
void *hargs [2];
hargs[0] = mono_type_get_object([DBManagedEnvironment currentDomain], monoGenericTypeDefinition);
hargs[1] = [dbsAargTypes monoArray]; // a monoArray *
MonoObject *monoException = NULL;
MonoObject *monoObject = mono_runtime_invoke(helperMethod, NULL, hargs, &monoException);
if (monoException) NSRaiseExceptionFromMonoException(monoException);
id object = [System_Object subclassObjectWithMonoObject:monoObject];
return object;
}
For the complete code see Dubrovnik on Github
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.