Is it safe to use extern data qualifier for a variable in an ISR?
Assuming C: yes, but you need to mark the variable wth keyword volatile to let the compiler know its value can change in more than one thread (the interrupt is basically a different thread).
Related
Here's an interesting one for the objective-C gurus out there...
Is there a way to declare an objective-C block typedef that contains an argument of that typedef?
typedef BOOL (^SSCellAction) ( UITableViewController* inTVC, SSCellAction inChainedAction );
The idea is that I wanted to used chained menu action system that allows a chain of work/response to occur (usually 1-3 items). When the last action invokes, it passes nil for inChainedAction. Since this seems relatively trivial to imagine, I'll be dammed if I can't figure out how to declare it without llvm saying no. :)
rmaddy's comment is correct. Just as in C, a typedef cannot use itself. Basically, a typedef does not make a real type, but just makes an alias that the compiler expands out at compile-time. It is always possible to manually expand all typedefs in your program yourself (which is sometimes an instructive exercise), so that your program is written without typedefs. However, a recursive typedef cannot be expanded.
Some possible workarounds:
Use id as the parameter type, and cast back into the right type inside the block. This loses type safety.
Or, use a struct type of one member, the block. A struct is a real type, so it can be used within its definition. The downside of this is that you explicitly "wrap" the block into the struct type to pass it, and explicitly "unwrap" the struct into the block by accessing the field when you need to call it. This way is type-safe.
I have this problem. This the external library that i must use in .h file:
typedef struct _IPCSSContext IPCSSContext;
IPCSSContext * ipcssnew(const IPCSSCfg *_config, const IPCSSCallbacks *_callbacks, void *_user);
How can I use? Thanx
First you define a variable of type IPCSSCallbacks whatever that might be, but it's probably a struct of function pointers.
Then you fill in the fields of the variable with pointers to your callback functions.
Then you call icssnew() passing the IPCSSCallbacks, the config and a pointer to anything you like. This pointer will be passed untouched to your callback functions when they are called and you can do what you like with it in the callbacks (including nothing).
This is a pretty standard pattern in C for performing callbacks.
In code that uses blocks, you frequently see declarations such as:
typedef void(^Thunk)(void);
Thunk block1 = ^{NSLog(#"%d %p",i, &i);};
instead of
typedef void(^Thunk)(void);
Thunk *block1 = ^{NSLog(#"%d %p",i, &i);};
Blocks seem to be the only Objective-C object that is handled directly, instead of through a pointer. Why is this? Aren't they regular objects?
If you're wondering about the missing *: In your example you typedef'd the block which is hiding the syntax. You can do this with other objects as well:
typedef NSNumber *Number;
Number foo = #42;
When assigning a block to a variable that's actually assigning a pointer.
Blocks are a bit like C arrays: Block literals are structures created by the compiler. Block variables are pointers behind the scenes.
You're not handling a block “directly”. You're handling it indirectly.
The syntax void (^)(void) declares a pointer to a block. There is no syntax for type “block”; there is only syntax for type “pointer to a block”.
From the Language Specification for Blocks:
The abstract declarator,
int (^)(char, float)
describes a reference to a Block that, when invoked, takes two parameters, the first of type char and the second of type float, and returns a value of type int. The Block referenced is of opaque data that may reside in automatic (stack) memory, global memory, or heap memory.
The relevant bit is “describes a reference to a Block”.
The specification isn't entirely consistent, since (for example) it refers to a “variable with Block type” and “Block variable declarations“. But in fact a variable always holds a reference (pointer) to a block, and never holds a block directly as its value.
If you look at the block implementation, you will see that blocks are ObjC objects.
If you inspect a stack block (like in your example), you'll see something like this:
(lldb) po myBlock
<__NSStackBlock__: 0xbfffc940>
And you will notice in the public header _Block_copy() and _Block_release() take void* arguments.
The non-pointeryness is just syntactic sugar the compiler provides to shield you from the dirty bits of blocks.
Blocks are a C extension. You can use blocks in C (where the extension is supported).
Apple just happens to have implemented blocks using ObjC types.
Implementation details: Blocks are one of the few ObjC types which may be allocated on the stack using clang. Normally, this is not an option because almost every API expects that an objc_object is a heap allocation which supports reference counting.
Is it possible to have a static variable of a "block type"?
I have a class that only does stuff in static methods. Upon execution of those methods i'm calling statusChangedBlock. Just for that i create a shared instance of the class, and use its single block property. I wonder if it's possible to have a static block variable; so i wouldn't have to create a instance with a single property, just for notifying that my status changed.
I know there is an option of NSNotification, but i don't like using it, with some rare exceptions.
...this question somehow sounds stupid, i can't tell why. I hope someone points that out.
to declare a static variable of block type
typedef ReturnType (^MyBlockType)(ArgumentType, ArgumentType2);
static MyBlockType myblock;
static MyBlockType myblock2;
or
static ReturnType (^myblock)(ArgumentType, ArgumentType2);
A block type variable is actually a pointer, similar to an object. You can have a static block variable, but you must assign its value at runtime, perhaps using a dispatch_once block.
I frequently see a code snippet like this in class instance methods:
static NSString *myString = #"This is a string.";
I can't seem to figure out why this works. Is this simply the objc equivalent of a #define that's limited to the method's scope? I (think) I understand the static nature of the variable, but more specifically about NSStrings, why isn't it being alloc'd, init'd?
Thanks~
I think the question has two unrelated parts.
One is why isn't it being alloc'ed and init'ed. The answer is that when you write a Objective-C string literal of the #"foo" form, the Objective-C compiler will create an NSString instance for you.
The other question is what the static modifier does. It does the same that it does in a C function, ensuring that the myString variable is the same each time the method is used (even between different object instances).
A #define macro is something quite different: It's "programmatic cut and paste" of source code, executed before the code arrives at the compiler.
Just stumbled upon the very same static NSString declaration. I wondered how exactly this static magic works, so I read up a bit. I'm only gonna address the static part of your question.
According to K&R every variable in C has two basic attributes: type (e.g. float) and storage class (auto, register, static, extern, typedef).
The static storage class has two different effects depending on whether it's used:
inside of a block of code (e.g. inside of a function),
outside of all blocks (at the same level as a function).
A variable inside a block that doesn't have it's storage class declared is by default considered to be auto (i.e. it's local). It will get deleted as soon as the block exits. When you declare an automatic variable to be static it will keep it's value upon exit. That value will still be there when the block of code gets invoked again.
Global variables (declared at the same level as a function) are always static. Explicitly declaring a global variable (or a function) to be static limits its scope to just the single source code file. It won't be accessible from and it won't conflict with other source files. This is called internal linkage.
If you'd like to find out more then read up on internal and external linkage in C.
You don't see a call to alloc/init because the #"..." construct creates a constant string in memory (via the compiler).
In this context, static means that the variable cannot be accessed out of the file in which it is defined.
For the part of NSString alloc, init:
I think first, it can be thought as a convenience, but it is not equally the same for [[NSString alloc] init].
I found a useful link here. You can take a look at that
NSString and shortcuts
For the part of static and #define:
static instance in the class means you can access using any instance of the class. You can change the value of static. For the function, it means variable's value is preserved between function calls
#define is you put a macro constant to avoid magic number and string and define function macros. #define MAX_NUMBER 100. then you can use int a[MAX_MUMBER]. When the code is compiled, it will be copied and pasted to int a[100]
It's a special case init case for NSString which simply points the NSString pointer to an instance allocated and inited at startup (or maybe lazily, I'm not sure.) There is one one of these NSString instances created in this fashion for each unique #"" you use in your program.
Also I think this is true even if you don't use the static keyword. Furthermore I think all other NSStrings initialized with this string will point to the same instance (not a problem because they are immutable.)
It's not the same as a #define, because you actually have an NSString variable by creating the string with the = #"whatever" initialization. It seems more equivalent to c's const char* somestr = "blah blah blah".