I have an instance of NSMutableString called MyMutableStr and I want access its character at index 7.
For example:
unsigned char cMy = [(NSString*) MyMutableStr characterAtIndex:7];
I think this is an ugly way; it's too much code.
My question is: Are there more simple ways in Objective-C to access the character in NSMutableString?
Like, in C language we can access a character of a string using [ ] operator:
unsigned char cMy = MyMutableStr[7];
The way of doing it is to use characterAtIndex:, but you don't need to cast it to a NSString pointer, since NSMutableString is a subclass of NSString. So it isn't that long, but if you still don't find it comfortable, I suggest to use UTF8String to obtain a C string over which you can iterate using the brackets operator:
const char* cString= [MyMutableStr UTF8String];
char first= cString[0];
But remember this (taken from NSString class reference):
The returned C string is automatically freed just as a returned object would be released; you should copy the C string if it needs to store it outside of the autorelease context in which the C string is created.
As others said characterAtIndex: but a few things you might want to consider carefully.
First you're dealing with an mutable string. You want to be careful to avoid it changing out from under you. One way is to an immutable copy and use that for the op.
Second, you're dealing with Unicode so you may want to consider normalizing your string to get a precomposed form as some visual representations may be more than one actual unichar. That's often a stumbling block for folks.
Related
So I have done some searching around so that I could see what it was I was doing with my code, and I couldn't find any answers as to what this very one specific line of code does.
NSString* name = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:countryName];
I know what the rest does (I only had to google how to do this part), it is supposed to take my char* (countryName) and turn it into an NSString so later on I can compare it with the
isEqualToString:
thing. I would just like to know what the following is actually doing to the char, and what does the UTF8String even mean?
I have barely any Objective C programming experience so any feedback is helpful :D
you are not totally right.
this method
Returns a string created by copying the data from a given C array of UTF8-encoded bytes.
so, UTF-8 string here is just a C array of bytes.
Check the documentation here.
It doesn't do anything to the char * string. It's just the input to the method. stringWithUTF8String takes a C-style string (in UTF-8 encoding), and creates an NSString using it as a template.
I have a c string and need it to break it up into lines (I wont make a NSString of them at this moment).
Is there something like an NSMutableArray where I can put this char * in?
Or how can I achieve it to make something from the strings what I can access later by index?
Currently I make
char *cline = strtok(data, "\n");
while(cline)
{
...
}
Or is it easier todo this when I read the file from disk?
Use an NSValue to store your char* in an NSMutableArray
Overview
An NSValue object is a simple container for a single C or Objective-C data item. It can hold any of the scalar types such as int, float, and char, as well as pointers, structures, and object ids. The purpose of this class is to allow items of such data types to be added to collections such as instances of NSArray and NSSet, which require their elements to be objects. NSValue objects are always immutable.
You cannot insert a C/C++ pointer into an NSMutableArray, unless it is wrapped in a container like an NSValue or other Objective-C class.
It would be a lot easier, if you want an NSMutableArray, to just convert it to an NSString.
NSArray* strings = [[NSString initWithCString:data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding] componentsSeparatedByCharactersInSet:[NSCharacterSet newlineCharacterSet]]];
Your other options, if you strictly want to stay in the C/C++ realm would be to have a vector of strings or an array of char*.
As others have already pointed out, to store primitive C types such as a in an Obj-C object such as an instance of NSMutableArray, you would need to wrap them in NSValue objects first.
As an alternative to doing this - if you are wanting to work with pure C strings in Obj-C, don't forget that you can freely mix C with Objective-C source code, so using a normal C array is a perfectly legitimate solution too.
By wrapping the values into an obj-c array you gain the bounds checking and mutability, but if you keep unwrapping the values to work on them as a C string, you might be better sticking with a plain old C string to begin with, to save the overhead.
If you then want to make an NSString, you can simply use the NSString convenience method stringWithFormat:, like so:
char str[50];
// read characters into the buffer from a file...
// When done, convert to an NSString:
NSString *string = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%s", str];
I am coming to Objective-C from C# without any intermediate knowledge of C. (Yes, yes, I will need to learn C at some point and I fully intend to.) In Apple's Certificate, Key, and Trust Services Programming Guide, there is the following code:
static const UInt8 publicKeyIdentifier[] = "com.apple.sample.publickey\0";
static const UInt8 privateKeyIdentifier[] = "com.apple.sample.privatekey\0";
I have an NSString that I would like to use as an identifier here and for the life of me I can't figure out how to get that into this data structure. Searching through Google has been fruitless also. I looked at the NSString Class Reference and looked at the UTF8String and getCharacters methods but I couldn't get the product into the structure.
What's the simple, easy trick I'm missing?
Those are C strings: Arrays (not NSArrays, but C arrays) of characters. The last character is a NUL, with the numeric value 0.
“UInt8” is the CoreServices name for an unsigned octet, which (on Mac OS X) is the same as an unsigned char.
static means that the array is specific to this file (if it's in file scope) or persists across function calls (if it's inside a method or function body).
const means just what you'd guess: You cannot change the characters in these arrays.
\0 is a NUL, but including it explicitly in a "" literal as shown in those examples is redundant. A "" literal (without the #) is NUL-terminated anyway.
C doesn't specify an encoding. On Mac OS X, it's generally something ASCII-compatible, usually UTF-8.
To convert an NSString to a C-string, use UTF8String or cStringUsingEncoding:. To have the NSString extract the C string into a buffer, use getCString:maxLength:encoding:.
I think some people are missing the point here. Everyone has explained the two constant arrays that are being set up for the tags, but if you want to use an NSString, you can simply add it to the attribute dictionary as-is. You don't have to convert it to anything. For example:
NSString *publicTag = #"com.apple.sample.publickey";
NSString *privateTag = #"com.apple.sample.privatekey";
The rest of the example stays exactly the same. In this case, there is no need for the C string literals at all.
Obtaining a char* (C string) from an NSString isn't the tricky part. (BTW, I'd also suggest UTF8String, it's much simpler.) The Apple-supplied code works because it's assigning a C string literal to the static const array variables. Assigning the result of a function or method call to a const will probably not work.
I recently answered an SO question about defining a constant in Objective-C, which should help your situation. You may have to compromise by getting rid of the const modifier. If it's declared static, you at least know that nobody outside the compilation unit where it's declared can reference it, so just make sure you don't let a reference to it "escape" such that other code could modify it via a pointer, etc.
However, as #Jason points out, you may not even need to convert it to a char* at all. The sample code creates an NSData object for each of these strings. You could just do something like this within the code (replacing steps 1 and 3):
NSData* publicTag = [#"com.apple.sample.publickey" dataUsingEncoding:NSUnicodeStringEncoding];
NSData* privateTag = [#"com.apple.sample.privatekey" dataUsingEncoding:NSUnicodeStringEncoding];
That sure seems easier to me than dealing with the C arrays if you already have an NSString.
try this
NSString *newString = #"This is a test string.";
char *theString;
theString = [newString cStringWithEncoding:[NSString defaultCStringEncoding]];
Does Objective-C have raw strings like Python's?
Clarification: a raw string doesn't interpret escape sequences like \n: both the slash and the "n" are separate characters in the string. From the linked Python tutorial:
>>> print 'C:\some\name' # here \n means newline!
C:\some
ame
>>> print r'C:\some\name' # note the r before the quote
C:\some\name
Objective-C is a superset of C. So, the answer is yes. You can write
char* string="hello world";
anywhere. You can then turn it into an NSString later by
NSString* nsstring=[NSString stringWithUTF8String:string];
From your link explaining what you mean by "raw string", the answer is: there is no built in method for what you are asking.
However, you can replace occurrences of one string with another string, so you can replace #"\n" with #"\\n", for example. That should get you close to what you're seeking.
You can use stringize macro.
#define MAKE_STRING(x) ##x
NSString *expendedString = MAKE_STRING(
hello world
"even quotes will be escaped"
);
The preprocess result is
NSString *expendedString = #"hello world \"even quotes will be escaped\"";
As you can see, double quotes are escaped, however new lines are ignored.
This feature is very suitable to paste some JS code in Objective-C files. Using this feature is safe if you are using C99.
source:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Stringizing.html
How, exactly, does the double-stringize trick work?
Like everyone said, raw ANSI strings are very easy. Just use simple C strings, or C++ std::string if you feel like compiling Objective C++.
However, the native string format of Cocoa is UCS-2 - fixed-width 2-byte characters. NSStrings are stored, internally, as UCS-2, i. e. as arrays of unsigned short. (Just like in Win32 and in Java, by the way.) The systemwide aliases for that datatype are unichar and UniChar. Here's where things become tricky.
GCC includes a wchar_t datatype, and lets you define a raw wide-char string constant like this:
wchar_t *ws = L"This a wide-char string.";
However, by default, this datatype is defined as 4-byte int and therefore is not the same as Cocoa's unichar! You can override that by specifying the following compiler option:
-fshort-wchar
but then you lose the wide-char C RTL functions (wcslen(), wcscpy(), etc.) - the RTL was compiled without that option and assumes 4-byte wchar_t. It's not particularly hard to reimplement these functions by hand. Your call.
Once you have a truly 2-byte wchar_t raw strings, you can trivially convert them to NSStrings and back:
wchar_t *ws = L"Hello";
NSString *s = [NSString stringWithCharacters:(const unichar*)ws length:5];
Unlike all other [stringWithXXX] methods, this one does not involve any codepage conversions.
Objective-C is a strict superset of C so you are free to use char * and char[] wherever you want (if that's what you call raw strings).
If you mean C-style strings, then yes.
I'm learning objective-C and Cocoa and have come across this statement:
The Cocoa frameworks expect that global string constants rather than string literals are used for dictionary keys, notification and exception names, and some method parameters that take strings.
I've only worked in higher level languages so have never had to consider the details of strings that much. What's the difference between a string constant and string literal?
In Objective-C, the syntax #"foo" is an immutable, literal instance of NSString. It does not make a constant string from a string literal as Mike assume.
Objective-C compilers typically do intern literal strings within compilation units — that is, they coalesce multiple uses of the same literal string — and it's possible for the linker to do additional interning across the compilation units that are directly linked into a single binary. (Since Cocoa distinguishes between mutable and immutable strings, and literal strings are always also immutable, this can be straightforward and safe.)
Constant strings on the other hand are typically declared and defined using syntax like this:
// MyExample.h - declaration, other code references this
extern NSString * const MyExampleNotification;
// MyExample.m - definition, compiled for other code to reference
NSString * const MyExampleNotification = #"MyExampleNotification";
The point of the syntactic exercise here is that you can make uses of the string efficient by ensuring that there's only one instance of that string in use even across multiple frameworks (shared libraries) in the same address space. (The placement of the const keyword matters; it guarantees that the pointer itself is guaranteed to be constant.)
While burning memory isn't as big a deal as it may have been in the days of 25MHz 68030 workstations with 8MB of RAM, comparing strings for equality can take time. Ensuring that most of the time strings that are equal will also be pointer-equal helps.
Say, for example, you want to subscribe to notifications from an object by name. If you use non-constant strings for the names, the NSNotificationCenter posting the notification could wind up doing a lot of byte-by-byte string comparisons when determining who is interested in it. If most of these comparisons are short-circuited because the strings being compared have the same pointer, that can be a big win.
Some definitions
A literal is a value, which is immutable by definition. eg: 10
A constant is a read-only variable or pointer. eg: const int age = 10;
A string literal is a expression like #"". The compiler will replace this with an instance of NSString.
A string constant is a read-only pointer to NSString. eg: NSString *const name = #"John";
Some comments on the last line:
That's a constant pointer, not a constant object1. objc_sendMsg2 doesn't care if you qualify the object with const. If you want an immutable object, you have to code that immutability inside the object3.
All #"" expressions are indeed immutable. They are replaced4 at compile time with instances of NSConstantString, which is a specialized subclass of NSString with a fixed memory layout5. This also explains why NSString is the only object that can be initialized at compile time6.
A constant string would be const NSString* name = #"John"; which is equivalent to NSString const* name= #"John";. Here, both syntax and programmer intention are wrong: const <object> is ignored, and the NSString instance (NSConstantString) was already immutable.
1 The keyword const applies applies to whatever is immediately to its left. If there is nothing to its left, it applies to whatever is immediately to its right.
2 This is the function that the runtime uses to send all messages in Objective-C, and therefore what you can use to change the state of an object.
3 Example: in const NSMutableArray *array = [NSMutableArray new]; [array removeAllObjects]; const doesn't prevent the last statement.
4 The LLVM code that rewrites the expression is RewriteModernObjC::RewriteObjCStringLiteral in RewriteModernObjC.cpp.
5 To see the NSConstantString definition, cmd+click it in Xcode.
6 Creating compile time constants for other classes would be easy but it would require the compiler to use a specialized subclass. This would break compatibility with older Objective-C versions.
Back to your quote
The Cocoa frameworks expect that global string constants rather than
string literals are used for dictionary keys, notification and
exception names, and some method parameters that take strings. You
should always prefer string constants over string literals when you
have a choice. By using string constants, you enlist the help of the
compiler to check your spelling and thus avoid runtime errors.
It says that literals are error prone. But it doesn't say that they are also slower. Compare:
// string literal
[dic objectForKey:#"a"];
// string constant
NSString *const a = #"a";
[dic objectForKey:a];
In the second case I'm using keys with const pointers, so instead [a isEqualToString:b], I can do (a==b). The implementation of isEqualToString: compares the hash and then runs the C function strcmp, so it is slower than comparing the pointers directly. Which is why constant strings are better: they are faster to compare and less prone to errors.
If you also want your constant string to be global, do it like this:
// header
extern NSString *const name;
// implementation
NSString *const name = #"john";
Let's use C++, since my Objective C is totally non-existent.
If you stash a string into a constant variable:
const std::string mystring = "my string";
Now when you call methods, you use my_string, you're using a string constant:
someMethod(mystring);
Or, you can call those methods with the string literal directly:
someMethod("my string");
The reason, presumably, that they encourage you to use string constants is because Objective C doesn't do "interning"; that is, when you use the same string literal in several places, it's actually a different pointer pointing to a separate copy of the string.
For dictionary keys, this makes a huge difference, because if I can see the two pointers are pointing to the same thing, that's much cheaper than having to do a whole string comparison to make sure the strings have equal value.
Edit: Mike, in C# strings are immutable, and literal strings with identical values all end pointing at the same string value. I imagine that's true for other languages as well that have immutable strings. In Ruby, which has mutable strings, they offer a new data-type: symbols ("foo" vs. :foo, where the former is a mutable string, and the latter is an immutable identifier often used for Hash keys).