I have a problem (and I think it can be resolved easily, but it is driving me crazy). I have checked other posts, but I was not able to find the solution.
I would like to read a binary file into a struct using C++/CLI. The problem is that after reading it, some of the values do not fit with the correct ones. In the example below, all the struct fields are well read until "a" (included) (at around byte 100). From that field, the rest have wrong values. I know that they have wrong values and the source file is right, since I previously used python, and FileStream and BinaryReader from C++/CLI. However, I am not using them anymore, given that I would like to read the binary file into a struct.
In addition, in some cases I also have a value of -1 for variable "size" (size of the file), but not always. I am not sure if it could get a wrong value when the file is too big.
Therefore, my question if you can see something that I cannot, or I am doing something wrong.
struct LASheader
{
unsigned short x;
char y[16];
unsigned char v1;
unsigned char v2;
char y1[68];
unsigned short a;
unsigned long b;
unsigned long c;
unsigned char z;
unsigned short d;
unsigned long e;
}
void main()
{
FILE *ptr = fopen("E:\\Pablo\\file.las", "rb");
//I go at the end of the file to get the size
fseek(ptr, 0L, SEEK_END);
unsigned long long size = ftell(ptr);
struct LASheader lasHeader;
//I want an offset of 6 bytes
fseek(ptr, 6, SEEK_SET);
fread(&lasHeader, sizeof(lasHeader), 1, ptr);
unsigned short a1 = lasHeader.a;
unsigned long b1 = lasHeader.b;
unsigned long c1 = lasHeader.c;
unsigned short d1 = lasHeader.d;
unsigned long e1 = lasHeader.e;
}
Thank you!
Pablo.
There's a couple things here. I'll tackle the direct problem first.
You didn't say how this binary format was being written, but I think it's an alignment issue.
Without a #pragma pack directive, unsigned long b will align to a 4-byte boundary. Struct members x through a are 90 bytes total, so two padding bytes are inserted between a and b so that b is aligned properly.
To fix the alignment, you can surround the struct with #pragma pack(push, 1) and #pragma pack(pop).
Second, a more overall issue:
You called this C++/CLI code, and you tagged it C++/CLI, but you're not actually using any managed features in this code. Also, you said you have some C# code that works using BinaryReader, and BinaryReader works fine in C++/CLI, so you technically already had a C++/CLI solution in-hand.
If the rest of your C++/CLI project is this way (not using managed code), consider switching your project to C++, or perhaps splitting it. If your project is largely making use of managed code, then I would strongly consider using BinaryReader instead of fopen to read this data.
Related
Some C function return aCPointer to a C struct.
The C struct is known.
Now i want to put the C struct into a ByteArray. Basically copy the contents of the struct to a ByteArray.
In GemStone/S this can be done with:
CByteArray fromCPointer: aCPointer numBytes: 120.
"this create aCByteArray with the contents of the struct referenced by CPointer (copying only 120 bytes)"
Is there something similar on Visual Works ?
I did not find it yet.
It could be possible to replicate C struct at Visual Works level but is only one struct and it is ok to handle it at low level.
There's only the rather ugly #copyAt:to:size:startingAt: that you can send to a pointer. You need to allocate a ByteArray yourself (make sure it's big enough).
answer := ByteArray new: size.
pointer
copyAt: 0
to: answer
size: size
startingAt: 1.
The other way (ByteArray -> Pointer) would be done using #copyAt:from:size:startingAt:.
This method works for both ByteArray and UninterpretedBytes. If you want to read data from the bytes, UninterpretedBytes may be more helpful as you can send things like #longAt: to read a long from an offset.
If aCPointer points to a struct of char * for example:
struct Names
{char * name;
char * longname;} name;
Then:
(aCPointer at: 0) copyCStringFromHeap. "answer [name]"
(aCPointer at: 1) copyCStringFromHeap. "answer [longname]"
For structs with char * it work nicely not tested with other C types.
I am beginning with CGAL. What I would like to do is to create point that coordinates are number ~ 2^51.
typedef CGAL::Exact_predicates_exact_constructions_kernel K;
typedef K::Point_2 P;
uint_64 x,y;
//init them somehow
P sp0(x,y);
Then I got a long template error. Someone could help?
I guess you realize that changing the kernel may have other effects on your program.
Concerning your original question, if your integer values are smaller than 2^51, then they fit exactly in doubles (with 53 bit mantissa), so one simple option is to cast them to double, as in :
P sp0((double)x,(double)y);
Otherwise, the Exact_predicates_exact_construction_kernel should have its main number type be able to read your uint64 values (maybe cast them to unsigned long long if it's OK on your platform) :
typedef K::FT FT;
P sp0((FT)x,(FT)y);
CGAL Number types are only documented to interoperate with int and double. I recently added some code so we can construct more numbers from long (required for Eigen), and your code will work in the next version of CGAL (except that you typo-ed uint64_t) on platforms where uint64_t is unsigned int or unsigned long (not windows). For long long support, since many of our number types are based on other libraries (GMP) that do not support long long themselves yet, it may have to wait a bit.
Ok. I think that I found solution. The problem was that I used exact Kernel that supports only double, switching to inexact kernel solved the problem. It was also possible to use just double. (one of the requirements was to use data type that supports intergers up to 2^48).
I had an interesting problem today. As part of practice with my fluency with objective-c, as I sit in math class, I write programs for each problem done on the board in hopes to increase my math and programming capabilities.
However, today I encountered a problem. One of the questions was something like "Find the greatest prime number that 10564245 (<-- example number) is divisible by"
So, I went in and made the program. I got as far as doing the loop for values to check, and then began to code the part where it checks the reminder, and if it's 0, it logs it, and if it isn't, it skips it.
However, since the number is too big to be an int, it had to be a double. When I tried to plug the number in, the program gave me errors when I wanted to use the % operator with the double. Is there any way to find remainders if you have a very large number?
Thanks
ERROR: Invalid operands to binary expression
EDIT: SOLVED!
I took a little from each answer. We have the fmod capability, but I ended up using long instead of int, I don't know why I didn't think of the origionally
Use fmod().
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
double a = 77879878978942312315687897;
double b = 10;
printf("%.f",fmod(a, b));
}
Double values aren't precise for integer values and so probably shouldn't be used for this sort of thing. Instead, you can use a long into or even a long long int to do your calculations
I am using PIC18F2550. Programming it with C18 language.
I need a function that converts double to string like below:
void dtoa( char *szString, // Output string
double dbDouble, // Input number
unsigned char ucFPlaces) // Number of digits in the resulting fractional part
{
// ??????????????
}
To be called like this in the main program:
void main (void)
{
// ...
double dbNumber = 123.45678;
char szText[9];
dtoa(szText, dbNumber, 3); // szText becomes "123.456" or rounded to "123.457"
// ...
}
So write one!
5mins, a bit of graph paper and a coffee is all it should take.
In fact it's a good interview question
Tiny printf might work for you: http://www.sparetimelabs.com/tinyprintf/index.html
Generally, the Newlib C library (BSD license, from RedHat, part of Cygwin as well as used in many many "bare-metal" embedded-systems compilers) is a good place to start for usefuls sources for things that would be in the standard C library.
The Newlib dtoa.c sources are in the src/newlib/libc/stdlib subdirectory of the source tree:
Online source browser: http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/newlib/libc/stdlib/?cvsroot=src#dirlist
Direct link to the current version of the dtoa.c file: http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/newlib/libc/stdlib/dtoa.c?rev=1.5&content-type=text/plain&cvsroot=src
The file is going to be a little odd, in that Newlib uses some odd macros for the function declarations, but should be straightforward to adapt -- and, being BSD-licensed, you can pretty much do whatever you want with it if you keep the copyright notice on it.
iOS / Objective-C: I have a large array of boolean values.
This is an inefficient way to store these values – at least eight bits are used for each element when only one is needed.
How can I optimise?
see CFMutableBitVector/CFBitVector for a CFType option
Try this:
#define BITOP(a,b,op) \
((a)[(size_t)(b)/(8*sizeof *(a))] op ((size_t)1<<((size_t)(b)%(8*sizeof *(a)))))
Then for any array of unsigned integer elements no larger than size_t, the BITOP macro can access the array as a bit array. For example:
unsigned char array[16] = {0};
BITOP(array, 40, |=); /* sets bit 40 */
BITOP(array, 41, ^=); /* toggles bit 41 */
if (BITOP(array, 42, &)) return 0; /* tests bit 42 */
BITOP(array, 43, &=~); /* clears bit 43 */
etc.
You use the bitwise logical operations and bit-shifting. (A Google search for these terms might give you some examples.)
Basically you declare an integer type (including int, char, etc.), then you "shift" integer values to the bit you want, then you do an OR or an AND with the integer.
Some quick illustrative examples (in C++):
inline bool bit_is_on(int bit_array, int bit_number)
{
return ((bit_array) & (1 << bit_number)) ? true : false;
}
inline void set_bit(int &bit_array, int bit_number)
{
bit_array |= (1 << bit_number);
}
inline void clear_bit(int &bit_array, int bit_number)
{
bit_array &= ~(1 << bit_number);
}
Note that this provides "bit arrays" of constant size (sizeof(int) * 8 bits). Maybe that's OK for you, or maybe you will want to build something on top of this. (Or re-use whatever some library provides.)
This will use less memory than bool arrays... HOWEVER... The code the compiler generates to access these bits will be larger and slower. So unless you have a large number of objects that need to contain these bit arrays, it might have a net-negative impact on both speed and memory usage.
#define BITOP(a,b,op) \
((a)[(size_t)(b)/(8*sizeof *(a))] op (size_t)1<<((size_t)(b)%(8*sizeof *(a))))
will not work ...
Fix:
#define BITOP(a,b,op) \
((a)[(size_t)(b)/(8*sizeof *(a))] op ((size_t)1<<((size_t)(b)%(8*sizeof *(a)))))
I came across this question as I am writing a bit array framework that is intent to manage large amounts of 'bits' similar to Java BitSet. I was looking to see if the name I decided on was in conflict with other Objective-C frameworks.
Anyway, I'm just starting this and am deciding whether to post it on SourceForge or other open source hosting sites.
Let me know if you are interested
Edit: I've created the project, called BitArray, on SourceForge. The source is in the SF SVN repository and I've also uploaded a compiled framework. This LINK will get your there.
Frank