//MyWrapper.h
#include "arithmetic.h"
#include "mathematics.h"
namespace MyWrapper {
public ref class ClassA
{
public:
ClassA();
~ClassA();
int add(int, int);
private:
MyEngine::Arithmetic *nativeClassA;
}
public ref class ClassB
{
public:
ClassB(ClassA^ arith);
~ClassB();
int pow(int, int);
private:
MyEngine::Mathematics *nativeClassB;
}
}
//MyWrapper.cpp
#include "MyWrapper.h"
My::ClassA::ClassA()
{
nativeClassA = new MyEngine::Arithmetic();
}
My::ClassA::~ClassA()
{
delete nativeClassA;
}
int My::ClassA::add(int a, int b)
{
return nativeClassA->add(a, b);
}
My::ClassB::ClassB(ClassA^ classA)
{
nativeClassB = new MyEngine::Mathematics(classA->nativeClassA); //***Error***
}
My::ClassB::~ClassB()
{
delete nativeClassB;
}
int My::ClassB::pow(int a, int b)
{
int result = nativeClassB->pow(a, b);
return result;
}
Here, Mathematics class need to init with Arithmetic class.
But nativeClassA is private variable in ClassA.
So nativeClassB = new MyEngine::Mathematics(classA->nativeClassA); , it will occurs compile error.
So I changed the nativeClassA to public.
But at that time, nativeClassA will export to c#.
I don't want to export nativeClassA variable to c#.
How can I fix it?
Thanks in advice.
Since you're writing a managed class, you can use all the access modifiers that C# has. This seems like a perfect scenario for internal. (The linked documentation is for C#, but it's the same keyword in C++/CLI.)
I've been dabbling in Dlang recently as C++ just wasn't quite sitting right with me after having used Python for so long. While dabbling, I came across what I thought would be a very simple exercise in polymorphism. I suppose how you would expect something to work and what it actually does are two entirely different things for reasons an end user probably can't comprehend. That being said, here is the source code of my "sandbox.D":
import std.stdio;
class Animal {
string voice = "--silence--";
void speak() {
writeln(this.voice);
}
}
class Dog : Animal {
string voice = "Whoof!";
}
int main() {
auto a = new Animal();
auto d = new Dog();
writeln(a.voice); // Prints "--silence--"
writeln(d.voice); // Prints "Whoof!"
a.speak(); // Prints "--silence--"
d.speak(); // Prints "--silence--" NOT "Whoof!"
return 0;
}
I guess my issue is why the "this" keyword just doesn't seem to be functioning how you would expect it to in the C++ successor language.
Methods are polymorphic, variables aren't. So instead of making the voice a variable, you want to override speak in the child.
Also, the auto return type doesn't work with polymorphism, you need to actually specify the types. (The reason is that auto return makes a function template in the compiler, which in theory could have multiple overridable slots in the function table, so it just doesn't try to put it in.)
So try this out:
import std.stdio;
class Animal {
void speak() { // changed to void instead of auto
writeln("--silence--");
}
}
class Dog : Animal {
override void speak() { // the override tells it to override the base method
writeln("woof");
}
}
int main() {
auto d = new Dog();
d.speak();
return 0;
}
If you have a lot of shared functionality and want to reuse one function with slight changes in child classes, you might make a method instead of a variable that just returns something.
Like string voice() { return "woof"; }, then it can be overridden in children.
Another way is to use template this parameter:
import std.stdio;
class Animal {
string voice;
void speak(this C)() {
writeln((cast(C)this).voice);
}
}
class Dog : Animal {
string voice = "Whoof!";
}
int main() {
auto a = new Animal();
auto d = new Dog();
a.speak(); // Prints ""
d.speak(); // Prints "Whoof!"
return 0;
}
Or when you do not need to have voice as a member:
import std.stdio;
class Animal {
static immutable voice = "";
void speak(this C)() {
writeln(C.voice);
}
}
class Dog : Animal {
static immutable voice = "Whoof!";
}
int main() {
auto a = new Animal();
auto d = new Dog();
a.speak(); // Prints ""
d.speak(); // Prints "Whoof!"
return 0;
}
I have a large solution with 50+ unmanaged projects in it. I have recently added a project with managed code in it to the solution. The managed code accesses Windows.Devices.Sensors in a .NET dll. This dll is eventually wrapped by unmanaged code and called from another unmanaged project.
My problem is that I get the following access violation before main() even executes.
Unhandled exception at 0x744b8ea0 in myApplication.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation.
Managed code:
#using <Windows.winmd>
using namespace Windows::Devices::Sensors;
#include <math.h>
namespace TabletSensors
{
namespace NET
{
public ref class DotNetDllClass
{
public:
DotNetDllClass()
{
Initialization();
}
~DotNetDllClass()
{
}
float* GetQuaternion()
{
OrientationSensorReading^ reading = _orientation->GetCurrentReading();
if( reading != nullptr )
{
float* quat = new float[4];
quat[0] = reading->Quaternion->X;
quat[1] = reading->Quaternion->Y;
quat[2] = reading->Quaternion->Z;
quat[3] = reading->Quaternion->W;
return quat;
}
else
{
return NULL;
}
}
private:
void Initialization()
{
_orientation = OrientationSensor::GetDefault();
if( _orientation != nullptr )
{
_orientation->ReportInterval = 16;
}
else
{
// not good ... throw exception or something
}
}
OrientationSensor^ _orientation;
};
}
}
Wrapper header file:
namespace TabletSensors
{
namespace NETWrapper
{
class DLLEXPORT_SENSORS WrapperClass
{
public:
__stdcall WrapperClass();
__stdcall ~WrapperClass();
float* __stdcall GetQuaternion();
};
}
}
Wrapper cpp file:
#define MIXSENSORS_BUILD
#include <gcroot.h>
#include "DotNetWrapper.h"
#include "DotNetDll.h"
using namespace TabletSensors::NETWrapper;
using namespace TabletSensors::NET;
static gcroot<TabletSensors::NET::DotNetDllClass^> Sensors = nullptr;
static System::UInt16 refCount = 0;
#pragma managed
inline TabletSensors::NET::DotNetDllClass^ GetSensors(void)
{
return (TabletSensors::NET::DotNetDllClass^)Sensors;
}
void Init()
{
++refCount;
if(GetSensors() == nullptr)
{
Sensors = gcnew TabletSensors::NET::DotNetDllClass();
}
}
void CleanUp()
{
if( refCount > 0 )
{
--refCount;
}
}
float* GetQuaternion_()
{
return Sensors->GetQuaternion();
}
#pragma unmanaged
TabletSensors::NETWrapper::WrapperClass::WrapperClass()
{
Init();
}
TabletSensors::NETWrapper::WrapperClass::~WrapperClass()
{
CleanUp();
}
float* TabletSensors::NETWrapper::WrapperClass::GetQuaternion()
{
float* x = new float[4];
return GetQuaternion_();
}
#pragma managed
Unmanaged project referencing my wrapper class:
#include "DotNetWrapper.h"
.
.
.
void UnmanagedProject::Update()
{
// if this line is present, I get an access violation without hitting any breakpoints.
TabletSensors::NETWrapper::WrapperClass _tabletSensors;
.
.
.
}
Since the managed code is trying to access Tablet Sensors I understand why it doesn't work on my Windows 7 desktop. What I don't understand it why it won't even allow me to debug my code at all. No breakpoints are hit before the Access Violation occurs.
What I would really like to figure out is how to use exception handling or #ifdefs to keep this crash from happening. But I have had very little luck.
Any ideas?
The fix is to Delay Load the managed DLL. The allows the application to run until that DLL is explicitly called. Thanks to Ben Voight for his answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/28467701/1454861
I have this code for the C# in Visual Studio 2012.
public Task SwitchLaserAsync(bool on)
{
return Task.Run(new Action(() => SwitchLaser(on)));
}
This will execute SwitchLaser method (public nonstatic member of a class MyClass) as a task with argument bool on.
I would like to do something similar in managed C++/CLI. But I am not able to find out any way how to run a task, which will execute a member method taking one parameter.
Current solution is like this:
Task^ MyClass::SwitchLaserAsync( bool on )
{
laserOn = on; //member bool
return Task::Run(gcnew Action(this, &MyClass::SwitchLaserHelper));
}
Implementation of SwitchLaserHelper function:
void MyClass::SwitchLaserHelper()
{
SwitchLaser(laserOn);
}
There must be some solution like in C# and not to create helper functions and members (this is not threadsafe).
There isn't yet any way to do this.
In C# you have a closure. When your C++/CLI compiler was written, the standardized syntax for closures in C++ was still being discussed. Thankfully, Microsoft chose to wait and use the standard lambda syntax instead of introducing yet another unique syntax. Unfortunately, it means the feature isn't yet available. When it is, it will look something like:
gcnew Action([this, on](){ SwitchLaser(on) });
The current threadsafe solution is to do what the C# compiler does -- put the helper function and data members not into the current class, but into a nested subtype. Of course you'll need to save the this pointer in addition to your local variable.
ref class MyClass::SwitchLaserHelper
{
bool laserOn;
MyClass^ owner;
public:
SwitchLaserHelper(MyClass^ realThis, bool on) : owner(realThis), laserOn(on) {}
void DoIt() { owner->SwitchLaser(laserOn); }
};
Task^ MyClass::SwitchLaserAsync( bool on )
{
return Task::Run(gcnew Action(gcnew SwitchLaserHelper(this, on), &MyClass::SwitchLaserHelper::DoIt));
}
The C++ lamdba syntax will simply create that helper class for you (currently it works for native lambdas, but not yet for managed ones).
Here's generic code I wrote this afternoon which might help (although it's not an exact match for this question). Maybe this will help the next person who stumbles onto this question.
generic<typename T, typename TResult>
ref class Bind1
{
initonly T arg;
Func<T, TResult>^ const f;
TResult _() { return f(arg); }
public:
initonly Func<TResult>^ binder;
Bind1(Func<T, TResult>^ f, T arg) : f(f), arg(arg) {
binder = gcnew Func<TResult>(this, &Bind1::_);
}
};
ref class Binder abstract sealed // static
{
public:
generic<typename T, typename TResult>
static Func<TResult>^ Create(Func<T, TResult>^ f, T arg) {
return (gcnew Bind1<T, TResult>(f, arg))->binder;
}
};
Usage is
const auto f = gcnew Func<T, TResult>(this, &MyClass::MyMethod);
return Task::Run(Binder::Create(f, arg));
Here's the working answer.. Have tested it.. Passing an argument (int) to the action sampleFunction.
#include "stdafx.h"
#include "CLRSamples.h"
using namespace System;
using namespace System::Threading;
using namespace System::Threading::Tasks;
using namespace System::Collections;
using namespace System::Collections::Generic;
void CLRSamples::sampleFunction(Object^ number)
{
Console::WriteLine(number->ToString());
Thread::Sleep((int)number * 100);
}
void CLRSamples::testTasks()
{
List<Task^>^ tasks = gcnew List<Task^>();
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
tasks->Add(Task::Factory->StartNew((Action<Object^>^)(gcnew Action<Object^>(this, &CLRSamples::sampleFunction)), i));
}
Task::WaitAll(tasks->ToArray());
Console::WriteLine("Completed...");
}
int main(array<System::String ^> ^args)
{
CLRSamples^ samples = gcnew CLRSamples();
samples->testTasks();
Console::Read();
return 0;
}
I had a similar problem when I wanted to provide a parameter to a task executing a method which does not return a value (retuns void). Because of that Func<T, TResult> was not an option I could use. For more information, please check the page Using void return types with new Func.
So I ended up with a solution where I created a helper class
template <typename T>
ref class ActionArguments
{
public:
ActionArguments(Action<T>^ func, T args) : m_func(func), m_args(args) {};
void operator()() { m_func(m_args); };
private:
Action<T>^ m_func;
T m_args;
};
which is using Action<T> delegate to encapsulate a method that has a single parameter and does not return a value.
I would then use this helper class in a following way
ref class DisplayActivationController
{
public:
DisplayActivationController();
void StatusChanged(EventArgs^ args) { };
}
Action<EventArgs^>^ action =
gcnew Action<EventArgs^>(this, &DisplayActivationController::StatusChanged);
ActionArguments<EventArgs^>^ action_args =
gcnew ActionArguments<EventArgs^>(action, args);
Threading::Tasks::Task::Factory->
StartNew(gcnew Action(action_args, &ActionArguments<EventArgs^>::operator()));
Approach using the helper class is probably not the most elegant solution, but is the best one I could find to be used in C++/CLI which does not support lambda expressions.
If you are using c++/ CLR, then make a C# dll and add reference to it
namespace TaskClrHelper
{
public static class TaskHelper
{
public static Task<TResult> StartNew<T1, TResult>(
Func<T1, TResult> func,
T1 arg)
=> Task.Factory.StartNew(() => func(arg));
public static Task<TResult> StartNew<T1, T2, TResult>(
Func<T1, T2, TResult> func,
T1 arg1, T2 arg2)
=> Task.Factory.StartNew(() => func(arg1, arg2));
}
}
bool Device::Stop(int timeout)
{
_ResetEvent_Running->Set();
return _ResetEvent_Disconnect->WaitOne(timeout);
}
Task<bool>^ Device::StopAsync(int timeout)
{
auto func = gcnew Func<int, bool>(this, &Device::Stop);
return TaskClrHelper::TaskHelper::StartNew<int,bool>(func,timeout);
}
In my program, I have a class that I want to be allocated before entering main(). I'd like to tuck these away in a separate module to keep the clutter out of my code; However, as soon as the module goes out of scope (before main() is entered), the objects are deallocated, leaving me trying to use a null reference in main. A short example:
// main.d
import SceneData;
int main(string[] argv)
{
start.onSceneEnter();
readln();
return 0;
}
// SceneData.d
import Scene;
public
{
Scene start;
}
static this()
{
Scene start = new Scene("start", "test", "test";
}
// Scene.d
import std.stdio;
class Scene
{
public
{
this(string name)
{
this.name = name;
}
this(string name, string descriptionOnEnter, string descriptionOnConnect)
{
this.name = name;
this.descriptionOnEnter = descriptionOnEnter;
this.descriptionOnConnect = descriptionOnConnect;
}
void onSceneEnter()
{
writeln(name);
writeln(descriptionOnEnter);
}
}
private
{
string name;
string descriptionOnEnter;
string descriptionOnConnect;
}
}
I'm still getting used to the concept of modules being the basic unit of encapsulation, as opposed to the class in C++ and Java. Is this possible to do in D, or must I move my initializations to the main module?
Here:
static this()
{
Scene start = new Scene("start", "test", "test");
}
"start" is a local scope variable that shadows global one. Global one is not initialized.
After I have changed this to:
static this()
{
start = new Scene("start", "test", "test");
}
Program crashed no more.