i would like to have one identifier responsible for several values for one time. if i had one this is what i could do:
if (myVariable == IDENTIFIER)//instead of if(myVariable == 5 || myVariable == 7) if i need A LOT of values
[myObject doSomething];
Is there a possibility to implement it somehow?
I think the closest you can come is by using bitmasks, so that you represent the set of allowable values with a mask that has all of the values set:
const int ALL_VALUES = (1 << 5) | (1 << 7);
if ((1 << myVariable) & ALL_VALUES)
[myObject doSomething];
Above, bit-wise AND is used to compute the intersection between the current value (seen as a 1-bit mask) and the mask of all allowed values. Note that this will only work if the number of values (and their actual values) is less than the number of bits in an int.
You could have a NSSet of possible values:
NSSet *possibleValues = [NSSet setWithObjects:#"Value1", #"Value2", #"Value3", nil];
if ([possibleValues containsObject:myVariable])
If you need something that works with a raw integer, let me know.
This is what methods are for:
- (BOOL)isFoo(int identifier) {
return identifier == 5 || identifier == 7;
}
Combine the answers. First use a function (variant of grahamparks):
BOOL isFoo(int identifier)
{
...
return ...;
}
For something this simple a function is probably better than a method - calling is a lot quicker and there is no need to ever override. Further if the function is only ever required in the current file declare it static BOOL isFoo... to limit the visibility of isFoo to just the file.
Now pick the body which suits the data - a couple of values, comparisons (grahamparks); more than a few values but all within 0-31 (uint32_t) or 0-63 (uint64_t) consider the bit-mask (unwind); many values all over the range consider sets (Richard J. Ross III); or roll your own. The important point which ever algorithm you choose is isolated within the function and can be changed easily if needed without affecting the rest of your code.
As existing similar examples consider isDigit() et al in the standard C library. Some implementations of these use a pre-allocated arrays of booleans (256 elements as the argument is a character) so testing for membership of the set is just an array index operation.
Related
So I have this Objective-C code it does something that I had been trying to wrap my head around with plain Applescript, and also tried and failed with some python that I tried (and failed at). I'd post the Applescript I have already tried, but it is essentially worthless. So I am turning to the AppleScript/ASOBJC gurus here to help with a solution. The code is to reverse engineer an instagram media ID to a post ID (so if you have a photo that you know is from IG you can find the post ID for that photo).
-(NSString *) getInstagramPostId:(NSString *)mediaId {
NSString *postId = #"";
#try {
NSArray *myArray = [mediaId componentsSeparatedByString:#"_"];
NSString *longValue = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%#",myArray[0]];
long itemId = [longValue longLongValue];
NSString *alphabet = #"ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789-_";
while (itemId > 0) {
long remainder = (itemId % 64);
itemId = (itemId - remainder) / 64;
unsigned char charToUse = [alphabet characterAtIndex:(int)remainder];
postId = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%c%#",charToUse , postId];
}
} #catch(NSException *exception) {
NSLog(#"%#",exception);
}
return postId;}
The code above comes from an answer on another SO question, which can be found here:
Link
I realize it is probably asking a lot but I suck at math so I don't really "get" this code, which is probably why I can't translate it to some form of Applescript myself! Hopefully I will learn something in this process.
Here is an example of the media ID the code is looking for:
45381714_262040461144618_1442077673155810739_n.jpg
And here is the post ID that the code above is supposed to translate into
BqvS62JHYH3
A lot of the research that went into these "calculators" is from this post from 5 years ago. It looks like the 18 digit to 10 digit ratio that they point out in the post is now an 11 to 19 ratio. I tried to test the code in Xcode but got an build error when I attempted to run it. Given that I am an Xcode n00b that is not surprising.
Thanks for your help with this!
Here's an (almost) "word-for-word" translation of your Objective-C code into ASObjC:
use framework "Foundation"
use scripting additions
on InstagramPostIdFromMediaId:mediaId
local mediaId
set postId to ""
set mediaId to my (NSString's stringWithString:mediaId)
set myArray to mediaId's componentsSeparatedByString:"_"
set longValue to my NSString's stringWithFormat_("%#", myArray's firstObject())
set itemId to longValue's longLongValue()
set alphabet to my (NSString's stringWithString:(("ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" & ¬
"abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789-_")))
repeat while (itemId > 0)
set remainder to itemId mod 64
set itemId to itemId div 64
set unichar to (alphabet's characterAtIndex:remainder) as small integer
set postId to character id unichar & postId
end repeat
return postId
end InstagramPostIdFromMediaId:
By "almost", I mean that every Objective-C method utilised in the original script has been utilised by an equivalent call to the same Objective-C method by way of the ASObjC bridge, with two exceptions. I also made a trivial edit of a mathematical nature to one of the lines. Therefore, in total, I made three operational changes, two of these technically being functional changes but which end up to yielding identical results:
to replace (itemId - remainder) / 64 with itemId div 64
The AppleScript div command performs integer division, which is where a number given by regular division is truncated to remove everything after the decimal point. This is mathematically identical to what is being done when the remainder is subtracted from itemId before performing regular dividing.
to avoid the instance where stringWithFormat: is used to translate a unicode character index to a string representation
NSString objects store strings as a series of UTF-16 code points, and characterAtIndex: will retrieve a particular code point from a string, e.g. 0x0041, which refers to the character "A". stringWithFormat: uses the %c format specifier to translate an 8-bit unsigned integer (i.e. those in the range 0x0000 to 0x00FF) into its character value. AppleScript bungles this up, although I'm uncertain how or why this presents a problem. Unwrapping the value returned by charactertAtIndex: yields an opaque raw AppleScript data object that, for example, looks like «data ushr4100». This can happily be coerced into a small integer type, correctly returning the number 65 in denary. Therefore, whatever goes wrong is likely something stringWithFormat: is doing, so I used AppleScript's character id ... function to perform the same operation that stringWithFormat: was intended to do.
myArray[0] was replaced with myArray's firstObject()
Both of these are used in Objective-C to retrieve the first element in an array. myArray[0] is the very familiar C syntax that can happily be used in native Objective-C programming, but is not available to AppleScript. firstObject is an Objective-C method wrapping the underlying function and making it accessible for use in any Objective-C context, but also likely performs some additional checks to make it suitably safe to use without too much thought. As far as we're concerned in the AppleScript context, the result is identical.
With all that being said, supplying a mediaId of "45381714_262040461144618_1442077673155810739_n.jpg" to our new ASObjC handler gives this result:
"CtHhS"
rather than what you stated as the expected result, namely "BqvS62JHYH3". However, it's easy to see why. Both scripts are splitting the mediaId into components ("text items") at every occurrence of an underscore. Then only the first of these goes on to be used by either script to determine the postId. With the given mediaId above, the first text item is "45381714", which is far too short to be valid for our needs, hence the short length of the erroneous result above. The second text item is only 15 digits (characters) long so, too, is not viable. The third text item is 19 characters long, which is of the correct length.
Therefore, I replaced firstObject() in the script with item 3. As you can guess, instead of retrieving the first item from the array of text items (components) stored in myArray, it retrieves the third, namely "1442077673155810739". This produces the following result:
"BQDSgDW-VYA"
Similar, but not the identical to what you were expecting.
For now, I'll leave this with you. At this point, I would usually have compared this with your own previous attempts, but you said they were "worthless" so I'm assuming that this at least provides you with a piece of translated code that works in so far as it performs the same operations as its Objective-C counterpart. If you tell us what the nature of the actual hurdles you were facing are, that potentially lets me or someone else help further.
But since I can say with confidence that these two scripts are doing the same thing, then if the original is producing a different output with identical input, then that tells us that the data must be mutating at some point during its processing. Given that we are dealing with a number with an order of magnitude of 10¹⁹, I think it's very likely that the error is a result of floating-point precision. AppleScript stores any integers with absolute value up to and including 536870911 as type class integer, and anything exceeding this as type class real (floating point), so will be subject to floating-point errors.
The goal of this post is to find a more efficient way to create this method. Right now, as I start adding more and more values, I'm going to have a very messy and confusing app. Any help is appreciated!
I am making a workout app and assign an integer value to each workout. For example:
Where the number is exersiceInt:
01 is High Knees
02 is Jumping Jacks
03 is Jog in Place
etc.
I am making it so there is a feature to randomize the workout. To do this I am using this code:
-(IBAction) setWorkoutIntervals {
exerciseInt01 = 1 + (rand() %3);
exerciseInt02 = 1 + (rand() %3);
exerciseInt03 = 1 + (rand() %3);
}
So basically the workout intervals will first be a random workout (between high knees, jumping jacks, and jog in place). What I want to do is make a universal that defines the following so I don't have to continuously hard code everything.
Right now I have:
-(void) setLabelText {
if (exerciseInt01 == 1) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"High Knees"];
}
if (exerciseInt01 == 2) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Jumping Jacks"];
}
if (exerciseInt01 == 3) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Jog in Place"];
}
}
I can already tell this about to get really messy once I start specifying images for each workout and start adding workouts. Additionally, my plan was to put the same code for exercise02Label, exercise03Label, etc. which would become extremely redundant and probably unnecessary.
What I'm thinking would be perfect if there would be someway to say
exercise01Label.text = exercise01Int; (I want to to say that the Label's text equals Jumping Jacks based on the current integer value)
How can I make it so I only have to state everything once and make the code less messy and less lengthy?
Three things for you to explore to make your code easier:
1. Count from zero
A number of things can be easier if you count from zero. A simple example is if your first exercise was numbered 0 then your random calculation would just be rand() % 3 (BTW look up uniform random number, there are much better ways to get a random number).
2. Learn about enumerations
An enumeration is a type with a set of named literal values. In (Objective-)C you can also think of them as just a collection of named integer values. For example you might declare:
typedef enum
{
HighKnees,
JumpingJacks,
JogInPlace,
ExerciseKindCount
} ExerciseCount;
Which declares ExerciseCount as a new type with 4 values. Each of these is equivalent to an integer, here HighKnees is equivalent to 0 and ExerciseKindCount to 3 - this should make you think of the first thing, count from zero...
3. Discover arrays
An array is an ordered collection of items where each item has an index - which is usually an integer or enumeration value. In (Objective-)C there are two basic kinds of arrays: C-style and object-style represented by NSArray and NSMutableArray. For example here is a simple C-style array:
NSString *gExerciseLabels[ExerciseKindCount] =
{ #"High Knees",
#"Jumping Jacks",
#"Jog in Place"
}
You've probably guessed by now, the first item of the above array has index 0, back to counting from zero...
Exploring these three things should quickly show you ways to simplify your code. Later you may wish to explore structures and objects.
HTH
A simple way to start is by putting the exercise names in an array. Then you can access the names by index. eg - exerciseNames[exerciseNumber]. You can also make the list of exercises in an array (of integers). So you would get; exerciseNames[exerciseTable[i]]; for example. Eventually you will want an object to define an exercise so that you can include images, videos, counts, durations etc.
I have an MPMoviePlayerController instance. I wish to check its playbackState property for one of a number of values. As such I do something like this:
if (moviePlayer.playbackState == (MPMoviePlaybackStateStopped ||
MPMoviePlaybackStatePlaying ||
MPMoviePlaybackStatePaused)) {
// ...
// Perform some logic
// ...
}
This works as expected but causes a compiler warning:
Use of logical '||' with constant operand.
The compiler's fix is to use the bitwise | operator instead. Searching on Stack Overflow you will find a couple of answers suggesting the same thing. BUT using the bitwise OR really isn't what I need here.
MPMoviePlaybackState is declared in MPMoviePlayerController.h:
enum {
MPMoviePlaybackStateStopped,
MPMoviePlaybackStatePlaying,
MPMoviePlaybackStatePaused,
MPMoviePlaybackStateInterrupted,
MPMoviePlaybackStateSeekingForward,
MPMoviePlaybackStateSeekingBackward
};
typedef NSInteger MPMoviePlaybackState;
This isn't a bitmask (and nor would it make much sense for it to be so — the enumerated values are mutually exclusive modes, not flags to be combined). I really do want to use the logical ||.
(In my particular case, with the underlying values being 0,1,2 the bitwise example might work but that's just a coincidence.)
How should I rephrase to avoid the warning or what #pragma clang diagnostic ignored ... can I use to silence the warning?
(Bonus points for pointing to a list of all such diagnostics — I cannot seem to locate one in the manual.)
Thanks in advance!
Obviously, the (enumval1 || enumval2 || ..) is wrong. You can't use the || operator like this, but only with logical expressions.
The | operator works, because it's a simple bitwise OR, which will do job for you only and only if your enum members are different powers of 2 (e.g. 1, 2, 4, 8, ...).
It's connected with bitwise representation of numbers in binary, which , if the number if the power of 2, is like this: 2->10, 4->100, 8->1000 etc. So, for 2 | 8 it will be like 0010 | 1000 = 1010, which isn't zero, and if statement will proceed.
The compiler warnings are fully right and helping at this point. Use the switch(..) or if(..) else if(..) statements, or make your enum like this:
enum yourEnum
{
enumval1 = 1 << 0;
enumval2 = 1 << 1;
enumval3 = 1 << 2;
// ...
}
why wouldn't you just do this?
if ((moviePlayer.playbackState == MPMoviePlaybackStateStopped) ||
(moviePlayer.playbackState == MPMoviePlaybackStatePlaying) ||
(moviePlayer.playbackState == MPMoviePlaybackStatePaused)) {
// ...
// Perform some logic
// ...
}
I suggest using a switch/case block with fall trough logic like that:
switch(moviePlayer.playbackState){
case MPMoviePlaybackStateStopped: /* falls through */
case MPMoviePlaybackStatePlaying: /* falls through */
case MPMoviePlaybackStatePaused: /* falls through */
// your stuff
}
This will result in the intended behaviour with as less code as possible. Enums are made for exact the switch case kind of business. And they are performance optimized more than "if" statements, becuase the CPU does not even have to test the values when reaching the code. The compiler calculates the correct ASM jump offset at that location. So its as fast as lighning :)
I have a method that needs to do a different thing when given an unset float than a float with the value of 0. Basically, I need to check whether or not a variable has been, counting it as set if it has a value of 0.
So, what placeholder should I use as an unset value (nil, NULL, NO, etc) and how can test to see if a variable is unset without returning true for a value of 0?
You can initialize your floats to NaN (e.g. by calling nan() or nanf()) and then test with isnan() if they have been changed to hold a number. (Note that testing myvalue == nan() will not work.)
This is both rather simple (you will probably include math.h in any case) and conceptually sensible: Any value that is not set to a number is "not a number"...
Using a constant value to indicate the unset state often leads to errors when the variable legitimately obtains the value of that constant.
Consider using NSNumber to store your float. That way it can not only be nil, it will default to that state.
This assumes that you only need a small number of floats. If you need millions of them, NSNumber may be too slow and memory-intensive.
Instead of overloading these float properties (let's call them X and Y), create a separate isValid flag for each property. Initialize the flags to indicate that the floats haven't been set, and provide your own setters to manage the flags appropriately. So your code might look something like:
if (self.isXValid == YES) {
self.Y = ... // assigning to Y sets isYValid to YES
}
else if (self.isYValid == YES) {
self.X = ... // assigning to Y sets isXValid to YES
}
You could actually go a step further and have the setter for X also assign Y and vice versa. Or, if X and Y are so closely linked that you can calculate one based on the value of the other, you really only need one variable for both properties.
I'm looking over the diffs submitted to a project by another developer, and they have a lot of code that does !!<some BOOL value>. In fact, this seems to be their standard pattern for implementing boolean getters and setters. They've implemented their code like:
- (BOOL) hasId {
return !!hasId_;
}
- (void) setHasId:(BOOL) value {
hasId_ = !!value;
}
I've never seen this pattern before, and am wondering if there is any benefit in using it. Is the double-negation doing anything useful?
The double boolean operator just makes sure that the value returned is either a 1 or a 0. That's all : )
! is a logical negation operator. So if setHasId: was passed, eg., 0x2 then the double negation would store 0x1.
It is equivalent to:
hasId_ = value ? 1 : 0;
It is useful in some cases because if you do this:
BOOL x = y & MY_FLAG;
You might get 0 if MY_FLAG is set, because the result gets truncated to the size of a BOOL (8 bits). This is unexpected. For the same reasons, people sometimes prefer that BOOL is either 0 or 1 (so bit operations work as expected). It is usually unnecessary.
In languages with a built-in bool type such as C (as of C99) and C++, converting an integer to bool does this automatically.
It makes more sense in some other cases for example where you are returning BOOL but don't want to put an if statement in.
- (BOOL)isMyVarSet
{
return !!myVar;
}
In this case I can't just return myVar because it's not a BOOL (this is a very contrived example - I can't dig out a decent one from my projects).
I've used this before and I believe:
if (!!myVar)
is equivalent to:
if (myVar != nil)
Basically, I use it to verify the value of SOMETHING.
I will admit... this is probably not the best practice or most-understood way to accomplish this goal.