Jumping straight to code, this is what I would like to do:
size_t len = obj->someLengthFunctionThatReturnsTypeSizeT();
array<int>^ a = gcnew array<int>(len);
When I try this, I get the error
conversion from size_t to int, possible loss of data
Is there a way I can get this code to compile without explicitly casting to int? I find it odd that I can't initialize an array to this size, especially because there is a LongLength property (and how could you get a length as a long - bigger than int - if you can only initialize a length as an int?).
Thanks!
P.S.: I did find this article that says that it may be impractical to allocate an array that is truly size_t, but I don't think that is a concern. The point is that the length I would like to initialize to is stored in a size_t variable.
Managed arrays are implemented for using Int32 as indices, there is no way around that. You cannot allocate arrays larger than Int32.MaxValue.
You could use the static method Array::CreateInstance (the overload that takes a Type and an array of Int64), and then cast the resulting System::Array to the appropriate actual array type (e.g. array<int>^). Note that the passed values must not be larger than Int32.MaxValue. And you would still need to cast.
So you have at least two options. Either casting:
// Would truncate the value if it is too large
array<int>^ a = gcnew array<int>((int)len);
or this (no need to cast len, but the result of CreateInstance):
// Throws an ArgumentOutOfRangeException if len is too large
array<int>^ a = (array<int>^)Array::CreateInstance(int::typeid, len);
Personally, i find the first better. You still might want to check the actual size of len so that you don't run into any of the mentioned errors.
Related
I am making a project in Vulkan, and I want to use an SSBO modified in the GPU on CPU; but Vulkan doesn't have a function to map the buffer, only have a memory function. I tried everything about MemoryMapping, but nothing worked.
With Vulkan, after creating the SSBO memory buffer and specifying memory property flag VK_MEMORY_PROPERTY_HOST_VISIBLE_BIT (which will create the buffer from memory accessible by the system/CPU), use command vkMapMemory() and pass it the void *pointer to use to access the shader block.
The memcpy() command can then be used to read and write data to and from the block (be sure to use fences and avoid reading/writing while the GPU is still using the SSBO).
A quick note on casting and offsetting - whilst using the void pointer to write data to an SSBO with a single memcpy() call is fine, it can't be used to read in the same manner. The pointer has to be cast to the data type in use.
Also, offset arithmetic cannot be performed on void pointers to reach individual structs either.
The data type or struct to which the pointer is cast defines how increment/decrement works - it will do so by the size of said data type and not by bytes in the address (the latter may seem more intuitive).
For example:
(copy the fifth int from a block of ints...)
int theInt;
int *ssboBlockPointer = (int*)vTheSSBOMappedPointer;
memcpy(&theInt, ssboBlockPointer + 5, sizeof(int));
(or copy the 5th struct from a block of structs - offset will move 5 structs)
theStruct oneStruct;
theStruct *ssboBlockPointer = (theStruct*)vTheSSBOMappedPointer;
memcpy(&theStruct , ssboBlockPointer + 5, sizeof(theStruct));
I clearly see the need to deepen my knowledge in RenderScript memory allocation and data types (I'm still confused about the sheer number of data types and finding the correct corresponding types on either side - allocations and elements. (or when to refer the forEach to input, to output or to both, etc.) Therefore I will read and re-read the documentation, which is really not bad - but it needs some time to get the necessary "intuition" how to use it correctly. But for now, please help me with this basic one (and I will return later with hopefully less stupid questions...). I need a very simple kernel that takes an ARGB Color Bitmap and returns an integer Array of gray-values. My attempt was the following:
#pragma version(1)
#pragma rs java_package_name(com.example.xxxx)
#pragma rs_fp_relaxed
uint __attribute__((kernel)) grauInt(uchar4 in) {
uint gr= (uint) (0.2125*in.r + 0.7154*in.g + 0.0721*in.b);
return gr;
}
and Java side:
int[] data1 = new int[width*height];
ScriptC_gray graysc;
graysc=new ScriptC_gray(rs);
Type.Builder TypeOut = new Type.Builder(rs, Element.U8(rs));
TypeOut.setX(width).setY(height);
Allocation outAlloc = Allocation.createTyped(rs, TypeOut.create());
Allocation inAlloc = Allocation.createFromBitmap(rs, bmpfoto1,
Allocation.MipmapControl.MIPMAP_NONE, Allocation.USAGE_SCRIPT);
graysc.forEach_grauInt(inAlloc, outAlloc);
outAlloc.copyTo(data1);
This crashed with the message cannot locate symbol "convert_uint". What's wrong with this conversion? Is the code otherwise correct?
UPDATE: isn't that ridiculous? I don't get this "easy one" run, even after 2 hours trying. I still struggle with the different Element- and variable-types. Let's recap: Input is a Bitmap. Output is an int[] Array. So, why doesnt it work when I use U8 in the Java-side Out-allocation, createFromBitmap in the Java-side In-allocation, uchar4 as kernel Input and uint as the kernel Output (RSRuntimeException: Type mismatch with U32) ?
There is no convert_uint() function. How about simple casting? Other than that, the code looks alright (assuming width and height have correct values).
UPDATE: I have just noticed that you allocate Element.I32 (i.e. signed integer type), but return uint from the kernel. These should match. And in any case, unless you need more than 8-bit precision, you should be able to fit your result in U8.
UPDATE: If you are changing the output type, make sure you change it in all places, e.g. if the kernel returns an uint, the allocation should use U32. If the kernel returns a char, the allocation should use I8. And so on...
You can't use a Uint[] directly because the input Bitmap is actually 2-dimensional. Can you create the output Allocation with a proper width/height and try that? You should still be able to extract the values into a Java array when you are finished.
How can I force Realloc to behave like calloc?
For instance:
I have the following structs:
typedef struct bucket0{
int hashID;
Registry registry;
}Bucket;
typedef struct table0{
int tSize;
int tElements;
Bucket** content;
}Table;
and I have the following code in order to grow the table:
int grow(Table* table){
Bucket** tempPtr;
//grow will add 1 to the number available buckets, and double it.
table->tSize++; //add 1
table->tSize *= 2; //double element
if(!table->content){
//table will be generated for the first time
table->content = (Bucket**)(calloc(sizeof(Bucket*), table->tSize));
} else {
//realloc content
tempPtr = (Bucket**)realloc(table->content, sizeof(Bucket)*table->tSize);
if(tempPtr){
table->content = tempPtr;
return 0;
}else{
return 1000;//table could not grow
}
}
}
When I execute it, the table grows properly, and MOST of the "Buckets" in it are initialized as a NULL ptr. However, not all of them are.
How can I make Realloc behave like calloc? in the sense that when it creates new "buckets" they initialize to NULL
Strictly speaking, you shouldn't be relying on calloc (or memset, for that matter) to set pointers to null. C doesn't guarantee that null pointers are represented by all-zero bytes in memory.
Quoting from the comp.lang.C FAQ question 7.31:
Don't rely on calloc's zero fill too much (see below); usually, it's best to initialize data structures yourself, on a field-by-field basis, especially if there are pointer fields.
calloc's zero fill is all-bits-zero, and is therefore guaranteed to yield the value 0 for all integral types (including '\0' for character types). But it does not guarantee useful null pointer values (see section 5 of this list) or floating-point zero values.
It's safer to initialize the individual structure fields yourself. You can create a static const one as a template, with its content initialized to NULL, and then memcpy it to each element of your dynamically-allocated array.
I have a query about using memset and memcopy on structures and their reliablity. For eg:
I have a code looks like this
typedef struct
{
short a[10];
short b[10];
}tDataStruct;
tDataStruct m,n;
memset(&m, 2, sizeof(m));
memcpy(&n,&m,sizeof(m));
My question is,
1): in memset if i set to 0 it is fine. But when setting 2 i get m.a and m.b as 514 instead of 2. When I make them as char instead of short it is fine. Does it mean we cannot use memset for any initialization other than 0? Is it a limitation on short for eg
2): Is it reliable to do memcopy between two structures above of type short. I have a huge
strings of a,b,c,d,e... I need to make sure copy is perfect one to one.
3): Am I better off using memset and memcopy on individual arrays rather than collecting in a structure as above?
One more query,
In the structue above i have array of variables. But if I am passed pointer to these arrays
and I want to collect these pointers in a structure
typedef struct
{
short *pa[10];
short *pb[10];
}tDataStruct;
tDataStruct m,n;
memset(&m, 2, sizeof(m));
memcpy(&n,&m,sizeof(m));
In this case if i or memset of memcopy it only changes the address rather than value. How do i change the values instead? Is the prototype wrong?
Please suggest. Your inputs are very imp
Thanks
dsp guy
memset set's bytes, not shorts. always. 514 = (256*2) + (1*2)... 2s appearing on byte boundaries.
1.a. This does, admittedly, lessen it's usefulness for purposes such as you're trying to do (array fill).
reliable as long as both structs are of the same type. Just to be clear, these structures are NOT of "type short" as you suggest.
if I understand your question, I don't believe it matters as long as they are of the same type.
Just remember, these are byte level operations, nothing more, nothing less. See also this.
For the second part of your question, try
memset(m.pa, 0, sizeof(*(m.pa));
memset(m.pb, 0, sizeof(*(m.pb));
Note two operations to copy from two different addresses (m.pa, m.pb are effectively addresses as you recognized). Note also the sizeof: not sizeof the references, but sizeof what's being referenced. Similarly for memcopy.
Does it make any difference if I use e.g. short or char type of variable instead of int as a for-loop initializer?
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {}
for (short i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {}
for (char i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {}
Or maybe there is no difference? Maybe I make the things even worse and efficiency decreases? Does using different type saves memory and increases speed? I am not sure, but I suppose that ++ operator may need to widen the type, and as a result: slow down the execution.
It will not make any difference you should be caring about, provided the range you iterate over fits into the type you choose. Performance-wise, you'll probably get the best results when the size of the iteration variable is the same as the platform's native integer size, but any decent compiler will optimize it to use that anyway. On a managed platform (e.g. C# or Java), you don't know the target platform at compile time, and the JIT compiler is basically free to optimize for whatever platform it is running on.
The only thing you might want to watch out for is when you use the loop counter for other things inside the loop; changing the type may change the way these things get executed, up to the point (in C++ at least) that a different overload for a function or method may get called because the loop variable has a different type. An example would be when you output the loop variable through a C++ stream, like so: cout << i << endl;. Similarly, the type of the loop variable can infest the implicit types of (sub-)expressions that contain it, and lead to hidden overflows in numeric calculations, e.g.: int j = i * i;.