I'm writing a simple QR code generator (just for fun and to learn some Obj-C), and I'm working on tracing the outline of connected "modules" (i.e. the black squares that make up a QR code). This is in order to have nicer vector output than simply making a bunch of rects for each module.
Long story short, my outline-tracing code works - BUT ONLY if I make sure to call NSLog in a specific place! If I remove the NSLog-call, the code loops! I'm literally doing nothing but logging. And it doesn't matter what I log; I just have to call NSLog or things break.
The tracing algorithm is simple enough: Go clockwise around the shape of connected modules. When you hit a corner, turn right until you're back to following the outline of the shape. Stop when you reach the starting point again. The shape can have two modules that share a corner-point. The tracing-loop will thus hit that point twice. This is expected, and the code handles it correctly - if I call NSLog.
Otherwise, the code will say that a certain point is a corner the first time it sees it, and not a corner the second time, which causes the tracing to loop around. Detecting if something's a corner-point is not dependent on anything except the x and the y coordinates of the point and an array of module objects - but neither the modules nor the array changes while the tracing is going on, so given the same x,y you should always get the same result. And it does – if I call NSLog.
Without NSLog, the coordinates – e.g. (10,9) – is corner on moment, and a moment later (10,9) is suddenly not a identified as a corner. But with an NSLog-call, (10,9) is correctly seen as a corner-point every time.
Again: I change absolutely nothing; I just log something - anything! And suddenly it works. It's like it's saying that 2 == 2 is true or false, unless I tell it to log 2 and 2, in which case 2 == 2 is always true, as it should be.
Here's the flaky code. It's hard to understand out of context, but there's a lot of context, so I hope this is enough. Everything is integers (no fuzzy floating point values).
do { // start going around the shape
// If this isn't here or simply commented out, the code loops.
NSLog(#"foobar"); // doesn't matter what I log - I just need to log something
// Branch: Is current x,y a corner-point? This should
// always return the same result given the same X and Y
// values, but it only does if NSLog is there!
if( [self cornerAtX:x Y:y] ) {
// add the point to the path
[path addPoint:NSMakePoint(x, y)];
// rotate the direction clockwise, until
// the direction is following the edge of the
// the shape again.
do {
dt = dx;
dx = -dy;
dy = dt;
} while( ![self boundaryFromX:x Y:y inDirectionX:dx Y:dy] );
}
// continue along direction
x += dx;
y += dy;
} while( !(sx == x && sy == y) ); // we're back to the start of the shape, so stop
If anyone can tell me why NSLog can make code work (or rather: Why not using NSLog makes working code break), I'd be happy to hear it! I hope someone can make sense of it.
Make sure cornerAtX:Y: always returns something—i.e., that there's no code path that fails to return a value.
Otherwise, it may very well “return” whatever the last function you called returns, in which case calling NSLog (which doesn't return a value, but may ultimately call a function that does) causes it to “return” something different, which may always be something that's considered true.
The compiler should warn you if you fail to return a value from a function or method that you declared as doing so. You should listen to it. Turn on all the warnings you can get away with and fix all of them.
You should also turn on the static analyzer (also included in that post), as it, too, may tell you about this bug, and if it does, it will tell you step-by-step how it's happening.
There's not much to go on here, but I'd guess that it's either an uninitialized variable or some sort of memory stomping. NSLog probably uses both stack and heap memory, so it could affect those.
Have you tried replacing NSLog with some other meaningless operation? If that will also work then I suppose problem is linked to [self cornerAtX: x Y: y].
Another possibility is that the problem is time-related. NSLog takes time to execute, so if QR code is loaded in another thread you can see this kind of behavior.
Related
I am trying to make a simple as2 shooter but when I try to shoot an enemy the bullet just go thru it and doesn't remove the enemy. I tried to put
if (hitTest(_root.vihollinen)==true
){
_root.vihollinen.remove();
this.removeMovieClip();
}
but nothing happens
Most of the code is just copy/paste because I don't know much about coding but I'm trying to learn!
https://www.dropbox.com/s/58u34tbeve6oile/game.zip
The most significant issue is that your enemy needs an Instance Name in order for the code to understand it. Simply click on your enemy movieclip, and add vihollinen to the Instance Name field at the top.
Next, your bullet code is close, but needs some adjustments. Here is your code:
_root["bullet" + bulletsFired].onEnterFrame = function(){
this._x += this.xmov;
this._y += this.ymov;
if (hitTest(_root.vihollinen)==true){
_root.vihollinen.remove();
this.removeMovieClip();
}
};
If you're ever using an onEnterFrame handler like that with a function, it's good practice to always refer to the current object with this, like so: if(this.hitTest(_root.vihollinen) == true){
remove() is not an ActionScript2 function. Try using unloadMovie() instead, like this: _root.vihollinen.unloadMovie()
Changing those three things will make your code function. Be sure that you try to go through each part of your code and understand it to the best of your ability - it'll make things much easier in the long run, even if it takes a long time to figure out why each part is there!
Okay, so apparently this works:
void foo(size_t s) {
int myArray[s];
// ... use myArray...
}
Is this really legal? I mean, it must be, because it compiles (where the C compiler would reject it as non-constant). The first part of my question is: how does this work? I assume it's allocating it on the stack? Is this different from using alloca()?
Practically, I found some code that does this:
void bar(size_t chunkSize) {
CFReadStreamRef foo = NULL;
// ...some stuff to init foo...
while (stuffToDo) {
UInt8 buffer[chunkSize];
// ...read some data from stream into buffer
// using CFReadStreamRead()...
}
}
This works. However, when I move the buffer allocation from inside the loop to the first line of the function (directly before foo is declared), the function... stops working. In the debugger it gets to the first access of local variables and then just... exits. I don't see any exceptions being thrown, it doesn't crash, it just program carries on running (in reality the function returns a string and that return value is NULL, which is what the return variable is initialized to). I'm not sure what's going on. The second part of my questions is, in light of the first part, what the heck is going on?
it is legal in C99, although dangerous, and yes -- it is like alloca.
because it's like alloca, you want reasonably sized arrays when allocating on the stack. i am not sure if this is defined if the length is zero, but you could definitely cause a stack overflow if the array is 'large enough' to do so.
as far as what is going on -- pulling it out of the loop should make no difference if the sizes are reasonable. i suspect you are seeing undefined behavior because a parameter value is too large (or perhaps 0) -- you should validate the chunkSize parameter. the assembly will tell you why pulling it out of the loop makes a difference (assuming everything else in the program is well-formed).
I'm trying to build something that will only fire a command once per keyboard input (as opposed to every frame like QC does natively). In order to do so, I'm trying to listen in on the keyboard inputs (via Freeboard) and compare the current input versus a previous version.
What seems to be happening is the previous version is getting wiped every time the patch executes, so my conditional to compare strings is failing every time. Here's some code to make it a bit clearer:
- (BOOL)execute:(id <QCPlugInContext>)context atTime:(NSTimeInterval)time withArguments:(NSDictionary *)arguments
{
self.outputPrevious=previousCharacter;
if ([self.inputCharacter caseInsensitiveCompare:previousCharacter]){
self.outputText=#"SAME";
}
else {
self.outputText=#"CHANGE";
}
previousCharacter = [NSString stringWithString:self.inputCharacter];
[previousCharacter retain];
return YES;
}
where self.outputText is the text that tells me the result of the if, self.outputPrevious is telling me what the previous character input was, and self.inputCharacter is the current keyboard input.
previousCharacter is defined in the header and instantiated in -init, so it shouldn't be being reset every time.
I've tried pretty much everything with this, so if you have any ideas or insights, that would be awesome. Thanks!
Figured it out eventually. Full solution can be found here
I'm wrestling with the concept of code "order of execution" and so far my research has come up short. I'm not sure if I'm phrasing it incorrectly, it's possible there is a more appropriate term for the concept. I'd appreciate it if someone could shed some light on my various stumbling blocks below.
I understand that if you call one method after another:
[self generateGrid1];
[self generateGrid2];
Both methods are run, but generateGrid1 doesn't necessarily wait for generateGrid2. But what if I need it to? Say generateGrid1 does some complex calculations (that take an unknown amount of time) and populate an array that generateGrid2 uses for it's calculations? This needs to be done every time an event is fired, it's not just a one time initialization.
I need a way to call methods sequentially, but have some methods wait for others. I've looked into call backs, but the concept is always married to delegates in all the examples I've seen.
I'm also not sure when to make the determinate that I can't reasonably expect a line of code to be parsed in time for it to be used. For example:
int myVar = [self complexFloatCalculation];
if (myVar <= 10.0f) {} else {}
How do I determine if something will take long enough to implement checks for "Is this other thing done before I start my thing". Just trial and error?
Or maybe I'm passing a method as parameter of another method? Does it wait for the arguments to be evaluated before executing the method?
[self getNameForValue:[self getIntValue]];
I understand that if you call one method after another:
[self generateGrid1];
[self generateGrid2];
Both methods are run, but generateGrid1 doesn't necessarily wait for generateGrid2. But what if I need it to?
False. generateGrid1 will run, and then generateGrid2 will run. This sequential execution is the very basis of procedural languages.
Technically, the compiler is allowed to rearrange statements, but only if the end result would be provably indistinguishable from the original. For example, look at the following code:
int x = 3;
int y = 4;
x = x + 6;
y = y - 1;
int z = x + y;
printf("z is %d", z);
It really doesn't matter whether the x+6 or the y-1 line happens first; the code as written does not make use of either of the intermediate values other than to calculate z, and that can happen in either order. So if the compiler can for some reason generate more efficient code by rearranging those lines, it is allowed to do so.
You'd never be able to see the effects of such rearranging, though, because as soon as you try to use one of those intermediate values (say, to log it), the compiler will recognize that the value is being used, and get rid of the optimization that would break your logging.
So really, the compiler is not required to execute your code in the order provided; it is only required to generate code that is functionally identical to the code you provided. This means that you actually can see the effects of these kinds of optimizations if you attach a debugger to a program that was compiled with optimizations in place. This leads to all sorts of confusing things, because the source code the debugger is tracking does not necessarily match up line-for-line with the code the compiled code the compiler generated. This is why optimizations are almost always turned off for debug builds of a program.
Anyway, the point is that the compiler can only do these sorts of tricks when it can prove that there will be no effect. Objective-c method calls are dynamically bound, meaning that the compiler has absolutely no guarantee about what will actually happen at runtime when that method is called. Since the compiler can't make any guarantees about what will happen, the compiler will never reorder Objective-C method calls. But again, this just falls back to the same principle I stated earlier: the compiler may change order of execution, but only if it is completely imperceptible to the user.
In other words, don't worry about it. Your code will always run top-to-bottom, each statement waiting for the one before it to complete.
In general, most method calls that you see in the style you described are synchronous, that means they'll have the effect you desire, running in the order the statements were coded, where the second call will only run after the first call finishes and returns.
Also, when a method takes parameters, its parameters are evaluated before the method is called.
I was wondering if there is an effective way to debug problems in xcode while coding in Objective-C. I create webpages constantly and code in jquery and javascript where you can set various alert boxes in different places in your code to determine if your script is properly executing sections. Can you do something like that in xcode to make sure that your script is executing methods properly and creating variables properly?
Thanks
Use the debugger - that's what it is there for! Set breakpoints by clicking in the grey are next to the line of code you want to break on. When this line of code is going to be excuted, the debugger will kick in and highlight the current place in execution. You can hover the cursor over variables in the IDE to examine their values, view the current call-stack (to see here this code has been called from) and get a list of local variables to help track program state. You can modify variable properties here too which often makes debugging simpler.
Execute code line by line by 'Stepping Over' (cmd+shift+o), which executes the current line, 'Stepping Into' (cmd_shift+i) which steps into the current line of code (if it is a function), or 'Stepping Out' to return back up the call stack.
If you want to stick to 'old-school' printf style debugging, go with NSLoging output to console.
NSLog(#"this text appears");
prints the following to the console:
this text appears
To print some basic variable values:
CGFloat pi = 3.14;
NSString *aFloatString = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"%.2f", pi];
NSLog(#"pi is equal to: %#", aFloatString);
Prints:
pi is equa to: 3.14
Standard c formatters can be used in NSLog i.e %d for int, %.2f for a float to 2 decimal places etc. Use %# for NSString*s.
Remember that NSLog will remain in production code unless you #IFDEF it out of release builds (or something similar), so if you don't want a performance hit, or embarrassing console logs to accompany the app you will want to remove them.
I've been known to litter functions that dump the following to console - and it isn't good:
OUTPUT:
Number of vertices is: 1200
<Requested reduction>
Can I kick it?
....
....
YES. I. CAN!
Number of vertices is: 800
Could have done with removing things like that :|
yes, the debugger can do all the things you want to do (just set some breakpoints - right click where you want them - then build&debug)
You can try writing to the console.
NSLog(#"Some status message here");
NSLog(#"The value of myObject is:%#", myObject);
To view the output of your application, while running with Xcode, click Run->Console and you will see all of the output from your application.