Suppose I have a need for multiple block "calls", for instance a loop in which the block is passed to a another function in each iteration. Do I need to make a new block instance each time I call the function (like Example 1) or can I make one block instance that is called each time (like Example 2)?
//Example 1:
while(true){
void (^block)(NSString* test)=^(NSString* test){
//do something
};
[self callWithBlock: block];
}
//Example 2
void (^block)(NSString* test)=^(NSString* test){
//do something
};
while(true){
[self callWithBlock: block];
}
It compiles and runs fine the second way, but I suspect that any concurrency issues may not be immediately obvious.
You can call blocks as often as you want. But you need to be careful about the context that is captured by the block.
If you have any values that are captured by your block, keep in mind, that unless when specifying them as __block variables, they will be copied.
So for example, this code:
int anInteger = 42;
void (^testBlock)(void) = ^{
NSLog(#"Integer is: %i", anInteger);
};
anInteger = 84;
testBlock();
will print 42, not 84.
If you declare anInteger as __block int anInteger = 42, the storage will be shared and the code will print 84.
So, if you have code that is something like:
int foo = 42;
void (^block)(void) = ^{
NSLog(#"%i", foo);
}
while (true) {
block();
foo++;
}
the behavior will be different from
int foo = 42;
while (true) {
void (^block)(void) = ^{
NSLog(#"%i", foo);
}
block();
foo++;
}
This will also apply to pointers and NSObject variables, when you reassign the variable that holds the pointer or object.
To find out more, have a look at Working with Blocks from the Apple developer documentation.
Related
This is the most minimal example I could think of:
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
#interface ObjCClass:NSObject
#property void (^aBlockInner) ();
-(void)method;
-initWithBlock:(void (^)())aBlock;
#end
#implementation ObjCClass
- (void)method{
self->_aBlockInner();
}
-(instancetype)initWithBlock:(void (^)())aBlock
{
self->_aBlockInner = aBlock;
return self;
}
#end
struct cppClass{
cppClass(){
objCClassInstance = [[ObjCClass alloc] initWithBlock:^{
modifyY();
}];
[objCClassInstance method];
}
void modifyY() {
y++;
}
int y = 0;
ObjCClass* objCClassInstance;
};
int main()
{
cppClass a{};
NSLog(#"Y is:%d",a.y);
}
The member variable y is supposed to stay untouched as blocks are supposed to copy their “captures”. Though, the final print outputs:
Y is:1
Have I misunderstood Objective-C blocks?
To compile on a macOS do: clang++ main.mm -framework Foundation
Much more minimal example would be as follows:
struct MClass {
int i{};
MClass() {
void(^block)() = ^{
++i;
};
block();
}
};
int main() {
MClass var;
NSLog(#"%d", var.i);
}
This snippet has exactly the same "problem", and i member variable gets changed within a block. This happens, because when you refer to member variables from inside member functions, this implicitly adds this pointer to the expression, so it's not actually i member variable that gets captured, but this pointer which encompasses it. The block above can be equivalently rewritten like this:
void(^block)() = ^{
++this->i;
};
The block makes a copy of the pointer to the same object, not object itself. However, if you had the owning object referred to by value, and not a pointer, you would not be able in fact, alter the object, because the copies a block makes are constant:
struct MClass {
int i{};
};
int main() {
MClass var;
void(^block)() = ^{
// Compile-time error: Read-only variable is not assignable
++var.i;
};
block();
NSLog(#"%d", var.i);
}
And this can only be done with use of the __block modifier:
__block MClass var;
void(^block)() = ^{
++var.i;
};
I often find myself creating a "wrapper" block which just serves to execute a number of other blocks, usually with the same type signature.
Say I have 2 blocks with the same type signature:
MyBlockT block1 = ^(NSString *string, id object) {
//1 does some work
};
MyBlockT block2 = ^(NSString *string, id object) {
//2 does some other work
};
Is there some way to implement the magic function Combine() which would take 2 blocks:
MyBlockT combinedBlock = Combine(block1, block2); //hypothetical function
and be equivalent to doing:
MyBlockT combinedBlock = ^(NSString *string, id object) {
block1(string, object);
block2(string, object);
};
I know this only makes sense with blocks that return void, but that's all I'm interested in.
The Combine function needs only take in 2 blocks, if I have more I can just chain them. I'm at wits end on how to go about implementing this or whether it's even possible.
P.S. I wouldn't mind if the solution involved C macros
EDIT
I'd like to be able to use the resulting block as a method argument, e.g.:
[UIView animateWithDuration:1 animations:someCombinedBlock];
Is this what you are looking for?
MyBlockT CombineBlocks(MyBlockT block1, MyBlockT block2)
{
return [^(NSString *string, id object) {
block1(string, object);
block2(string, object);
} copy];
}
The function creates a new block that calls the two given blocks sequentially.
Now up on GitHub, WoolBlockInvocation!
This is a pair of classes, WSSBlockInvocation and WSSBlockSignature, along with some supporting code, that leverage libffi and the ObjC #encode strings which the compiler generates for Blocks to allow you to invoke a whole list of Blocks with the same set of arguments.
Any number of Blocks can be added to an invocation object, provided their signatures -- meaning return type and number and types of arguments -- match. After setting arguments on the invocation object, the Blocks can be invoked in turn, with the return values, if any, stored for later access.
The piece that you're particularly interested in, sewing that list of Blocks up into a single Block, is provided by the invocationBlock method of WSSBlockInvocation.
- (id)invocationBlock
{
return [^void (void * arg1, ...){
[self setRetainsArguments:YES];
va_list args;
va_start(args, arg1);
void * arg = arg1;
NSUInteger numArguments = [blockSignature numberOfArguments];
for( NSUInteger idx = 1; idx < numArguments; idx++ ){
[self setArgument:&arg atIndex:idx];
arg = va_arg(args, void *);
}
va_end(args);
[self invoke];
} copy];
}
This returns a Block that (ab)uses varargs functionality to defer assigning arguments until that encapsulating Block is actually invoked itself. You can thus do the following:
WSSBlockInvocation * invocation = [WSSBlockInvocation invocationWithBlocks:#[animationBlockOne, animationBlockTwo]];
void (^combinedAnimation)(void) = [invocation invocationBlock];
[UIView animateWithDuration:1 animations:combinedAnimation];
Of course, if you're just worried about Blocks for animations, that take no arguments and have no return value, constructing a wrapper Block is trivial:
void (^combinedAnimation)(void) = ^{
animationBlock();
anotherAnimationBlock();
// etc.
};
You only need my code if you need to wrap a set of Blocks and invoke them all with the same set of arguments.
N.B. I have tested this on OS X on x86_64, but not on any other platform. I hope it works on ARM under iOS, but varargs is famously "not portable" and it may not. Caveat compilor, and let me know if something breaks.
Here is a fun abuse of varargs:
id combine(id block, ...)
{
NSMutableArray *blocks = [NSMutableArray array];
//[blocks addObject:block];
va_list objlist;
va_start(objlist, block);
//while((obj = va_arg(ap, id))) { // }
for(id obj = block; obj; obj = va_arg(objlist, id)) {
[blocks addObject:[obj copy]];
}
va_end(objlist);
void (^wrapper)(id,...) = ^(id arg, ...) {
NSMutableArray *args = [NSMutableArray array];
va_list arglist;
va_start(arglist, arg);
for(id x = arg; x; x = va_arg(arglist, id)) {
[args addObject:x];
}
va_end(arglist);
for(void (^blk)() in blocks) {
blk(args);
}
};
return [wrapper copy];
}
int main() {
NSString *fmt = #"-%d-\n%#\n---";
void (^foo)() = combine(^(NSArray *a){ NSLog(fmt, 1, a); },
^(NSArray *a){ NSLog(fmt, 2, a); }, nil);
foo(#"first", #"second", nil);
return 0;
}
You must define each block to accept an NSArray of arguments, and both the combine and resulting block invocation must have at least one argument and end in nil.
If you know the method signature ahead of time, you can work around the NSArray and block arguments restriction by altering the wrapper block appropriately.
Since you don't mind macros
#define combinedBlock(string, object) \
block1((string), (object) ) \
block2((string), (object) )
if you need to perform 2 or more animations simultaneously then RZViewActions is everything you need. Its code looks like almost as animateWithDuration:... calls but with additional features.
If you need to perform ANY blocks simultaneously then you need something like ReactiveCocoa. But I suggest you PromiseKit (simply because it is easier).
This is primarily a curiosity, I'm not really sure what's the practical use of this but here goes.
Since blocks are also Objective-C objects, is it possible to check their type? That is, does it respond to the isKindOfClass: message and how to use that message with respect to blocks?
My naive thought that it's probably like this:
-(void) aMethod {
typedef int (^BlockA)(int x, int y);
id blockVar = ...; // get a block from somewhere
if([blockVar isKindOfClass:BlockA]) {
BlockA blockVarA = blockVar;
int result = blockVarA(1,2);
}
}
The code above probably won't work. But if it is possible to check a block's type, what is the correct way to do it?
Can do, kinda sorta.
But first, let's disambiguate. -[NSObject isKindOfClass:] can tell you it's a block, and that's about it. E.g. I believe this line of code -- ostensibly & unfortunately A BAD IDEA -- will return YES for blocks on present Lion & iOS 5.x:
[myBlock isKindOfClass:NSClassFromString(#"NSBlock")]
That won't help you distinguish the block's function signature.
But it can be done, by snagging the signature from the block's documented internal struct. Code follows for an example OS X command-line app, much of which ripped from Mike Ash's MABlockClosure (great detailed explanation). (UPDATE: Github project CTObjectiveCRuntimeAdditions also apparently provides library code for just this purpose.)
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
struct BlockDescriptor {
unsigned long reserved;
unsigned long size;
void *rest[1];
};
struct Block {
void *isa;
int flags;
int reserved;
void *invoke;
struct BlockDescriptor *descriptor;
};
static const char *BlockSig(id blockObj)
{
struct Block *block = (void *)blockObj;
struct BlockDescriptor *descriptor = block->descriptor;
int copyDisposeFlag = 1 << 25;
int signatureFlag = 1 << 30;
assert(block->flags & signatureFlag);
int index = 0;
if(block->flags & copyDisposeFlag)
index += 2;
return descriptor->rest[index];
}
int main(int argc, const char * argv[])
{
#autoreleasepool {
int (^block)(NSNumber *) = ^(NSNumber *num) {
NSLog(#"%# %#", NSStringFromClass([num class]), num);
return [num intValue];
};
NSLog(#"signature %s", BlockSig(block));
NSLog(#"retval %d", (int)block([NSNumber numberWithInt:42]));
}
return 0;
}
Run this and you should get something like:
[58003:403] signature i16#?0#8
[58003:403] __NSCFNumber 42
[58003:403] retval 42
The numbers in the signature (I'm told they are offsets) can be stripped for simpler i#?#.
The signature is in the #encode format, which isn't perfect (e.g. most objects map to same #), but should afford you some ability to distinguish blocks with different signatures at runtime.
While it's not documented in the Apple link, my testing points to #? being the code for a block type, which makes sense of the signature above. I found a clang-developers discussion on this issue which seems to back this up.
The "BlockA" in (^BlockA) is the variable name (in this case a typedef), not its class.
Blocks are objects, but not regular subclasses of NSObject. They only implement a subset of the methods. -isKindOfClass: will probably just crash.
Blocks are of the type NSMallocBlock or NSConcreteGlobalBlock, ... depending on where they were created (heap, stack, ...).
It seems that blocks are of classes like __NSGlobalBlock__, __NSStackBlock__, or __NSMallocBlock__, etc., whose inheritance chain eventually goes to NSBlock and then NSObject. So you could test whether something is a block by doing [... isKindOfClass:NSClassFromString(#"NSBlock")]. However, there doesn't seem to be any way to query a block's signature (return type and argument types) at runtime, so you wouldn't be able to distinguish between blocks of different signatures.
As well as Apple having nothing I can find to say on the matter, poking at a block with class_copyMethodList and method_getName reveals no obvious exposed methods. So I'm going to say that it isn't possible to check their type.
A old question, but anyway:
If you want a simple way of doing this: (Compile it with -fno-objc-arc)
Class __NSGlobalBlock__CLASS () {
static Class result = nil;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
dispatch_block_t thisIsAGlobalBlock = ^{// a block with no variables will be a __NSGlobalBlock__
};
result = [[thisIsAGlobalBlock class] retain];
});
return result;
};
Class __NSStackBlock__CLASS () {
static Class result = nil;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
__block dispatch_block_t thisIsAStackBlock = ^{
return ;// we really DON'T want infinate recursion
thisIsAStackBlock();// including a reference to __block var makes this a __NSStackBlock__
};
result = [[thisIsAStackBlock class] retain];
});
return result;
};
Class __NSMallocBlock__CLASS () {
static Class result = nil;
static dispatch_once_t onceToken;
dispatch_once(&onceToken, ^{
__block dispatch_block_t thisIsAMallocBlock = Block_copy(// << turns the __NSStackBlock__ Block into a __NSMallocBlock__
^{
return ;// we really DON'T want infinate recursion
thisIsAMallocBlock();// including a reference to __block var makes this a __NSStackBlock__
});
result = [[thisIsAMallocBlock class] retain];
Block_release(thisIsAMallocBlock);
});
return result;
};
Test Code:
#autoreleasepool {
__block dispatch_block_t iAmAGlobalBlock = ^{
};
__block dispatch_block_t iAmAStackBlock = ^{
return;
iAmAStackBlock();
};
dispatch_block_t iAmHeapBlock = Block_copy(iAmAStackBlock);
dispatch_block_t iAmNotAHeapBlock = Block_copy(iAmAGlobalBlock);
if ([iAmAGlobalBlock isKindOfClass:__NSGlobalBlock__CLASS()]) {
NSLog(#"very great success!");
}
if ([iAmAStackBlock isKindOfClass:__NSStackBlock__CLASS()]) {
NSLog(#"another great success!");
}
if ([iAmHeapBlock isKindOfClass:__NSMallocBlock__CLASS()]) {
NSLog(#"also great success!");
}
if ([iAmNotAHeapBlock isKindOfClass:__NSGlobalBlock__CLASS()]) {
NSLog(#"yet another great success!");
}
NSLog (#"Block classes, as reported by NSStringFromClass():\n__NSGlobalBlock__CLASS() = %#\n__NSStackBlock__CLASS() = %#\n__NSMallocBlock__CLASS() = %#\n[iAmAGlobalBlock class] = %#\n[iAmAStackBlock class] = %#\n[iAmHeapBlock class] = %#\n[iAmNotAHeapBlock class] = %#\n",
NSStringFromClass(__NSGlobalBlock__CLASS()),
NSStringFromClass(__NSStackBlock__CLASS()),
NSStringFromClass(__NSMallocBlock__CLASS()),
NSStringFromClass([iAmAGlobalBlock class]),
NSStringFromClass([iAmAStackBlock class]),
NSStringFromClass([iAmHeapBlock class]),
NSStringFromClass([iAmNotAHeapBlock class])
);
Block_release(iAmHeapBlock);
Block_release(iAmNotAHeapBlock);// not really needed, but since we did "Block_copy" it...
}
Is it possible to implement something like a Smalltalk-style whileTrue: method in Objective-C using blocks? Specifically, instead of:
int count = 0;
while (count < 10)
{
NSLog(count);
count++;
}
I'd like to be able to do (via a wrapper on the bool primitive called OOBoolean) something like...
__block int count = 0;
[[OOBoolean booleanWithBool: count < 10] whileTrueDo: ^() {
NSLog(count);
count++;
}];
I'm having trouble understanding how this would be implemented though...
Here you have a couple of ideas,
Assuming your bool wrapper implements boolValue, a naive implementation could be:
-(void) whileTrueDo:(void (^)(void)) block{
while ([self boolValue]) {
block();
}
}
In order for the wrapper to change its bool value after each iteration, the block must be able to actually change the variable that is used to calculate the boolean condition. So, in your case, by setting the __block type modifier to count, and increasing count in each block execution, you should be able to make it work.
The problem is, if you create your wrapper by sending the evaluated condition, as you stated in your question, you wont be able to change its bool value in each iteration. So, I would change the way the wrapper is created and the whileTrueDo: naive implementation so the boolean wrapper uses an evaluation block.
__block int count = 0;
OOBooleanBlock evaluationBlock = ^BOOL{
return count < 10;
};
[[OOBoolean booleanWithBlock:evaluationBlock] whileTrueDo: ^() {
NSLog(count);
count++;
}];
//In OOBoolean
+(OOBoolean*) booleanWithBlock:(OOBooleanBlock) evaluationBlock{
//Instantiate, set the evaluationBlock ivar and return the ooboolean object.
}
-(void) whileTrueDo:(void (^)(void)) block{
while (self.evaluationBlock()) {
block();
}
}
Remember to use the __block type modifier, otherwise you will enter in an infinite loop.
I haven't tested this, I hope this helps you though.
Cheers
How to assign and subsequently call a function that returns a function to a local variable in Objective-C?
UPDATE:
I've come up with the following but it's still not right I'm afraid:
(void (^)()) (^loadedCallback) () = (void (^)()) ^(){
#synchronized (synchronizer) {
semaphore++;
}
return Block_copy(^{
#synchronized (synchronizer) {
semaphore--;
if (semaphore == 0) {
onAllLoaded();
}
}
}); };
First, you need to understand the function pointer declaration syntax. It's the same for blocks, except that it's a ^ instead of a *.
Then, you need to create a block and return a copy of it, and assign that to a correctly-declared variable.
typedef NSArray* (^my_block_type_t)(int, float);
my_block_type_t createBlock()
{
my_block_type_t block = ^(int a, float b)
{
return [NSArray array];
};
return Block_copy(block);
}
/* snip */
my_block_type_t theBlock = createBlock();
theBlock();
Block_release(theBlock);
EDIT to address OP's edit: typedefs are typically used to make code easier to read. In the case of blocks and function pointers, it also makes it easier to write. There is a built-in typedef (dispatch_block_t) for blocks that accept no arguments and return void; you should use it. You should also make as many typedefs as you need to avoid having to use the ugly declaration syntax function pointers otherwise force onto your code.
typedef dispatch_block_t (^block_creator_t)();
block_creator_t loadedCallback = ^{
#synchronized (synchronizer)
{
semaphore++;
}
dispatch_block_t result = ^{
#synchronized (synchronizer)
{
semaphore--;
if (semaphore == 0)
onAllLoaded();
}
};
return Block_copy(result);
};