Say I have the following variable
myClassName = 'myClass';
And I want to call an instance of the myClass constructor function, ie.
myObject = myClass(arg1, arg2, ..., argn);
Let's say I want to call it using myClassName.
myObject = (myClassName)(arg1, arg2, ..., argn); % something like that
How do I do that?
Got it. I found that this:
myFunc = str2func(myClassName);
myClass = myFunc(arg1, arg2, ..., argn);
Does the job.
eval can also be used:
eval([myClassName '(arg1,arg2,arg3)']);
Does the initial variable myClassName actually need to be a string? I would implement this as:
myClassName = #myClass;
myObject = myClassName(arg1, arg2, arg3);
This is pretty similar to using the str2func call from your selfanswer, bit without the string operations which make some people (for example, me) feel wrong.
Related
I encountered an unfamiliar pattern of initialization from Objective-C that I'm struggling to replicate in Swift.
Objective-C
In the example code, they defined a C struct such as this (abbreviated, original here):
struct AQPlayerState {
AudioFileID mAudioFile;
}
Here's an example that uses AQPlayerState:
AQPlayerState aqData; // 1
OSStattus result =
AudioFileOpenURL(
audioFileURL,
fsRdPerm,
0,
&aqData.mAudioFile // 2
);
The key takeaway from above is that aqData currently has uninitialized properties, and AudioFileOpenURL is initializing aqData.mAudioFile on it's behalf.
Swift
I'm trying to replicate this behaviour in Swift. Here's what I've tried so far:
Models:
class Person {
var name: String
init(name: String) {
self.name = name
}
}
class Foo {
var person: Person?
}
My idea was to replicate the Objective-C code by passing a reference of Foo.person into a function that would instantiate it on it's behalf.
Initialization Function:
func initializeWithBob(_ ptr: UnsafeMutablePointer<Person?>) {
ptr.pointee = Person(name: "Bob")
}
initializeWithBob takes a pointer to an address for a Person? type and initializes it with a Person(name: "Bob") object.
Here's my test code:
let foo = Foo()
let ptr = UnsafeMutablePointer<Person?>.allocate(capacity: 1)
ptr.initialize(to: foo.person)
defer {
ptr.deinitialize()
ptr.deallocate(capacity: 1)
}
initializeWithBob(ptr)
print(foo.person) // outputs nil
initializeWithBob failed to "install" an instance of type Person in my Foo instance. I presume some of my assumptions are wrong. Looking for help in correcting my assumptions and understanding of this situation.
Thanks in advance!
You can achieve what you are looking for via withUnsafeMutablePointer(to:_:) like so:
let foo = Foo()
withUnsafeMutablePointer(to: &foo.person) { (ptr) -> Void in
initializeWithBob(ptr)
}
print(foo.person!.name) // outputs Bob
However, I wouldn't recommend this approach. IMHO it makes more sense to wrap the APIs you are working with in a C function that you can make 'nice' to call from Swift. The problem with your current approach is that this type of Swift is hard to read for Swift developers and also hard to read for Audio Toolbox developers.
#kelvinlau Is this what you were thinking of trying to achieve?
func initializeWithBob(_ ptr: UnsafeMutablePointer<Foo>) {
ptr.pointee.person = Person(name: "Bob")
}
let foo = Foo()
let ptr = UnsafeMutablePointer<Foo>.allocate(capacity: 1)
ptr.initialize(to: foo)
initializeWithBob(ptr)
print(foo.person?.name ?? "nil")
ptr.deinitialize()
ptr.deallocate(capacity: 1)
print(foo.person?.name ?? "nil")
The code pattern you have in Objective-C is for out parameters, that is parameters which return a value, or in out parameters, that is parameters which both pass a value in and return one. Objective-C does not directly support these so pointers are used to produce the semantics.
Swift has in out parameters indicated by the keyword inout in the function declaration. Within the function an assignment to an inout parameters effectively assigns a value to the variable that was passed as the argument. At the function call site the variable must be prefixed by & to indicate it is the variable itself and not its value which is effectively being passed.
Keeping your Person and Foo as is your function becomes:
func initializeWithBob(_ ptr: inout Person?)
{
ptr = Person(name: "Bob")
}
and it may be used, for example, like:
var example = Foo()
initializeWithBob(&example.person)
Using inout in Swift is better than trying to build the same semantics using pointers.
HTH
Note: You can skip this unless you are curious
"Effectively" was used a few times above. Typically out parameters are implemented by the parameter passing method call-by-result, while in out use call-by-value-result. Using either of these methods the returned value is only assigned to the passed variable at the point the function returns.
Another parameter passing method is call-by-reference, which is similar to call-by-value-result except that each and every assignment to the parameter within the function is immediately made to passed variable. This means changes to the passed variable may be visible before the function returns.
Swift by design does not specify whether its inout uses call-by-value-result or call-by-reference. So rather than specify the exact semantics in the answer "effectively" is used.
Can someone please tell what the following line of VB.Net is initializing:
Dim x As SomeType() = New SomeType(0) {}
What holds x variable? Is it an array? How can it be translated to C# for example?
I guess SomeType is probably an anonymous type, but still have no clue...
The line:
Dim x As SomeType() = New SomeType(0) {}
declares an array of SomeType objects, which can hold one instance of SomeType.
When declaring an array of objects the value that is passed into the constructor is the max index of the array. So this declaration is basically declaring an array with a length of 1. The {} portion of the line is where you could define the values that should be stored in the array. If you were to change SomeType to integer you could instantiate and fill your array like:
Dim intArray as Integer() = New Integer(0) {7}
and that would give the first instance stored in the intArray variable a value of 7.
SomeType is not an anonymous type. SomeType would be a class that would have to be defined somewhere in your app.
In C# I think the sytax would look like:
SomeType[] x = new SomeType[0];
I'm not exactly sure how you would accomplish the {} portion of the VB.NET line in C#.
It's simply declaring and initializing an array of a given type. In C# I think it would be, quite similarly:
SomeType[] x = new SomeType[0] { };
Is it an array?
Yes. VB uses () for arrays instead of C#'s [].
I guess SomeType is probably an anonymous type
No, it's a defined static type like any other.
I have a method that accepts a string as a parameter.
The string I need to pass is the property of an instantiated object.
I don't need the object to stick around once I get the value of that property.
I know I can do this like so:
Dim x As New myClass1
foo.thing1 = MyMethod(x.Name)
x = New MyClass2
foo.thing2 = MyMethod(x.Name)
'etc...
But I would prefer to do this inline if possible, since I have to do this several times in a row with different MyClass types.
EDIT:
Figured it out:
foo.thing = MyMethod(new MyClass().Name)
Try
foo.thing1 = MyMethod((New myClass1).Name)
foo.thing2 = MyMethod((New MyClass2).Name)
You need the braces around New myClass1, otherwise VB thinks you are trying to create an object of type myClass1.Name, which, of course, does not exist.
foo.thing = MyMethod(new MyClass().Name)
I don't have much experience with VB.NET and although I've searched, I can't find an answer to the following:
Say I have a Dim myVar As MyClass, and then a function in which I intend to initialize it such as Public Sub MyInit(ByRef myVar As MyClass). Attempting to call this method is giving me a null reference error in the compiler, stating that I should initialize the variable first (but I intend to put that functionality in my method!).
Any thoughts in how I could achieve what I'm attempting here?
PS: I reckon it'd make more sense to create an Initialize() method in MyClass, or to make a Public Function MyClassInitialize() As MyClass, but in my particular scenario this is not possible.
If you're just worried about the Variable 'myVar' is passed by reference before it has been assigned a value warning, you can just change the declaration to Dim myVar as MyClass = Nothing.
If you're writing the MyInit sub, you could also turn it into a function that returns an instance of MyClass:
Public Function MyInit() As MyClass
Dim myLocalVar As New MyClass()
'... initialization here
Return myLocalVar
End Function
...
Dim myVar As MyClass = MyInit()
I'm trying to grab a method handle from within an object in MATLAB, yet something in the sort of str2func('obj.MethodName') is not working
The answer is to get a function handle as #Pablo has shown.
Note that your class should be derived from the handle class for this to work correctly (so that the object is passed by reference).
Consider the following example:
Hello.m
classdef hello < handle
properties
name = '';
end
methods
function this = hello()
this.name = 'world';
end
function say(this)
fprintf('Hello %s!\n', this.name);
end
end
end
Now we get a handle to the member function, and use it:
obj = hello(); %# create object
f = #obj.say; %# get handle to function
obj.name = 'there'; %# change object state
obj.say()
f()
The output:
Hello there!
Hello there!
However if we define it as a Value Class instead (change first line to classdef hello), the output would be different:
Hello there!
Hello world!
One could also write
fstr = 'say';
obj.(fstr)();
This has the advantage that it does not require a handle class to work if the object (obj) is modified.
Use #. The following code works for me:
f = #obj.MethodName
No other answer mimics str2func('obj.MethodName'). Actually, this one doesn't either, not exactly. But you can define an auxillary function like so:
function handle = method_handle(obj, mstr)
handle = #(varargin) obj.(mstr)(varargin{:});
end
Then method_handle(obj, 'MethodName') returns a handle to obj.MethodName. Unfortunately, you cannot pass the variable name of obj as a string - eval("obj") will be undefined in the function's scope.