I am trying to make a CONTAINER class that maintains an array of CRITTER objects (that I have already created and tested. Note, there are various CRITTER subspecies, that are inheriting from the CRITTER super class). The aim is to add and remove CRITTER objects from this array. This is what the CONTAINER class looks like:
class
CONTAINER
create
make
feature
num: detachable INTEGER
list: ARRAY[CRITTER]
make
local
do
create list.make_empty
num := 0
end
addCritter(critter: CRITTER)
do
list.put(animal, num)
num := num + 1
end
removeCritter(critter: CRITTER)
do
list.put (list.at (num), ???) -- put last element in position of element to be removed
list.remove_tail (num) -- remove tail
num := num - 1
end
end
Two issues:
Firstly, I can instantiate the CONTAINER class inside APPLICATION, but when I call
create container.make
container.addCritter(myCritter)
I get a precondition, invalid index violation error on the second line. This may be because I have not set the upper and lower bounds of the array. However, when I try to do so, I get syntax errors. Which is the way to solve this issue?
Secondly, in order to remove an object from the array, it would help if I could get hold of the index value, but I can't see any function that does this, unless I am missing something.
ARRAYs are usually used for fixed-length containers. In your case, with lots of dynamic changes, it's better to use more dynamic structures, for example, ARRAYED_LIST. Similar to ARRAY it provides features to access items by their index, but there are also more convenient ones. New elements can be added by using feature extend. Old elements can be removed by using feature prune if only one element matching a given one needs to be removed, or prune_all, if all matching elements need to be removed. The word "matching" denotes either reference or object equality, depending on which comparison criteria is required: = or ~. The comparison criteria is changed using feature compare_objects.
Some general observations:
There is no need to track number of elements yourself, usually there is a feature count that provides this number.
Indexes in Eiffel usually start with 1, not 0.
The declaration detachable INTEGER is equivalent to INTEGER because INTEGER is expanded and all expanded types are attached regardless of any attachment marks.
The following discussion might also be useful:
How to initialise an array of objects in Eiffel?
Related
In javascript, does getting a length of a number type array vs. custom object type array take the same time?
First array has elements of type number. Second has custom type something like this but not limited to:
ISomeType: {
e1: string,
e2: ISomeOtherType,
..
e16: number
}
Thanks a lot
This is more a JavaScript question than a TypeScript question, since it's about runtime behavior.
No, there's no difference in the speed of reading the length property. It's just a property of the array object (an "own" property, not inherited), exactly the same in both cases.
Slightly tangential, but: Setting the length of an array could theoretically have surprising time characteristics. Array objects are "exotic" objects (ones that don't behave like normal objects) and one of the ways they're exotic is that although length is defined as a data property (not an accessor property with getter and setter methods), setting it has a side effect: If you set it so that some elements in the array will no longer be in the array, the properties for those elements are removed. Here's an example:
const a = ["a", "b", "c"];
console.log(a.length); // 3
console.log(a[2]); // c
a.length = 1; // Removes the "b" and "c" elements
console.log(a.length); // 1
console.log(a[2]); // undefined
In theory, then, if you have a really, really big array (say, millions of elements) and you set length such that you're removing a lot of elements from the array, you'd see a larger delay than if you did that with a small array where you were removing only a few elements. But you'd have to have a truly massive array, and JavaScript engines could optimize the process (for instance, not really removing the properties, but instead checking later on retrieval whether they should still exist).
Trying to do something like
a: ARRAY[STRING]
create a.make_empty
a.put("foo foo fool")
a.wipe_out
Do I have to? or is there another way as STRING doesn't seem to have a .has_default
create a.make_empty
a.put("foo foo fool")
create a.make_empty
The most straightforward way is to use keep_head (n). It keeps only first n items, therefore, when n = 0, all items are removed altogether:
a.keep_head (0)
Another way is to use a creation procedure, for example, make_empty as a regular one. It is going to set an array to the state of a newly created one:
a.make_empty
However, this approach looks a bit odd. And it can change lower index of the array. So, keep_head is preferable.
Note. ARRAYED_LIST is a good alternative to ARRAY: it has almost all features of ARRAY, is more flexible, has other features, and wipe_out among them.
I have several arrays like this (please ignore specific names):
static resource_t coap_cmp_res[MAX_CMPS];
e.g. [cmp1,cmp2,cmp3,cmp4,cmp5,0,0,0]
and a code that uses these elements, for example, coap_cmp_res[4] (cmp5) is associated with a REST resource, call it Res5.
At a certain point in time, I delete an element in that array at position x like this:
rest_deactivate_resource(&coap_cmp_res[x]);
e.g. for x = 2
[cmp1,cmp2,0,cmp4,cmp5,0,0,0]
What I then would like to do is have a single continuous array again like this
e.g. [cmp1,cmp2,cmp4,cmp5,0,0,0,0]
What I do currently is:
for(UInt8 i = x; i < MAX_CMPS; i++){
coap_cmp_res[i] = coap_cmp_res[i+1];
}
which gives [cmp1,cmp2,cmp4,cmp5,cmp5,0,0,0]
then I manually set the last non-zero element to 0.
e.g. [cmp1,cmp2,cmp4,cmp5,0,0,0,0]
So, this looks good, but the problem is that the Res5 is still associated with coap_cmp_res[4] and thus now the value 0, instead of cmp5, which is not what I desire.
I could deactivate and reactivate every resource after x in the array to have the associations working again, but was wondering if there was a more efficient way to go about this.
Hopefully this makes sense.
As the proverb says: "add a level of indirection". An array of resource_t* that point into coap_cmp_res and are stable. Then have Rea5 associated with a pointer, and use the indirection to reach into a valid entry.
static resource_t coap_cmp_res_data[MAX_CMPS];
static resource_t* coap_cmp_res_ptrs[MAX_CMPS]; // points into coap_cmp_res_data
When you remove an element, you update the entries in coap_cmp_res_ptrs, without moving them, and shrink coap_cmp_res_data. Any resource will still refer to the same position in coap_cmp_res_ptrs, and the indirection will take it to the current location of the resource.
An alternative approach, which may prove better in your case (you'd have to profile), is to use node based storage. I.e a linked list.
I have a class of objects known as blocks. Currently, I am creating an array of blocks using a for loop by simply tacking them unto an empty array
blockArray=[];
for ii=1:Size
blockArray=[blockArray block(....)];
end
In order to preallocate memory, how do I initialize an object array of blocks with dummy values?
For instance if instead of using block objects I used numbers, I could easily preallocate by using zeros(1,Size). Is there something similar that I could do?
The matlab documentation describes
To preallocate the object array, assign the last element of the array first. MATLAB® fills the first to penultimate array elements with default DocArrayExample objects.
So, to do this, instead of iterating over from 1:size, it is simpler to do...
blockArray = []
blockArray(size) = block(...)
The language does not really support this, there exists multiple solutions (or workarounds).
Replicating the first instance
When pushing the first element into the array, you can fill the whole array with this element to achieve a preallocation. This might look very bad, but it is actually the fastest possibility known to me.
for ii=1:S
%assumption e is a scalar, otherwise the code is totally screwed
e=block(....)
if ii==1
%to do preallocation, fill it with your first element
blockArray(1:S)=e
else
blockArray(ii)=e
end
end
Use cell arrays
Obvious simple solution, you can put any class into the fields
blockArray=cell(S,1);
for ii=1:S
%assumption e is a scalar, otherwise the code is totally screwed
e=block(....)
blockArray{ii}=e
end
This solution is very simple but slower than the first. You also lose some functionality which is not available for cell arras
Let your class implement array functionality
classdef A
properties
arg1
out
end
methods
function obj = A(varargin)
if nargin==0
%null object constructor
elseif strcmpi(varargin{1},'createarray')
sz=varargin(2:end);
%preallocate
obj(sz{:})=A;
else
%standard constructor
obj.arg1=varargin{1};
obj.out=[1 2 3;];
end
end
end
end
Constructor with no input argument creates an "empty" or "null" object, this is used to preallocate so it should be empty.
Constructor with first parameter makearray creates an array
Otherwise your constructor should be called.
Usage:
%create an empty object
A
%create an array of size 2,3,4
A('createarray',2,3,4)
%use the standard constructor
A(2)
Biggest downside is you have to modify your classes. Never tested this solution, but it should be close to the first in performance.
My project has classes which, unavoidably, contain hundreds upon hundreds of variables that I'm always having to keep straight. For example, I'm always having to keep track of specific kinds of variables for a recurring set of "items" that occur inside of a class, where placing those variables between multiple classes would cause a lot of confusion.
How do I better sort my variables to keep from going crazy, especially when it comes time to save my data?
Am I missing something? Actionscript is an Object Oriented language, so you might have hundreds of variables, but unless you've somehow treated it like a grab bag and dumped it all in one place, everything should be to hand. Without knowing what all you're keeping track of, it's hard to give concrete advice, but here's an example from a current project I'm working on, which is a platform for building pre-employment assessments.
The basic unit is a Question. A Question has a stem, text that can go in the status bar, a collection of answers, and a collection of measures of things we're tracking about what the user does in that particular type of questions.
The measures are, again, their own type of object, and come in two "flavors": one that is used to track a time limit and one that isn't. The measure has a name (so we know where to write back to the database) and a value (which tells us what). Timed ones also have a property for the time limit.
When we need to time the question, we hand that measure to yet another object that counts the time down and a separate object that displays the time (if appropriate for the situation). The answers, known as distractors, have a label and a value that they can impart to the appropriate measure based on the user selection. For example, if a user selects "d", its value, "4" is transferred to the measure that stores the user's selection.
Once the user submits his answer, we loop through all the measures for the question and send those to the database. If those were not treated as a collection (in this case, a Vector), we'd have to know exactly what specific measures are being stored for each question and each question would have a very different structure that we'd have to dig through. So if looping through collections is your issue, I think you should revisit that idea. It saves a lot of code and is FAR more efficient than "var1", "var2", "var3."
If the part you think is unweildy is the type checking you have to do because literally anything could be in there, then Vector could be a good solution for you as long as you're using at least Flash Player 10.
So, in summary:
When you have a lot of related properties, write a Class that keeps all of those related bits and pieces together (like my Question).
When objects have 0-n "things" that are all of the same or very similar, use a collection of some sort, such as an Array or Vector, to allow you to iterate through them as a group and perform the same operation on each (for example, each Question is part of a larger grouping that allows each question to be presented in turn, and each question has a collection of distractors and another of measures.
These two concepts, used together, should help keep your information tidy and organized.
While I'm certain there are numerous ways of keeping arrays straight, I have found a method that works well for me. Best of all, it collapses large amounts of information into a handful of arrays that I can parse to an XML file or other storage method. I call this method my "indexed array system".
There are actually multiple ways to do this: creating a handful of 1-dimensional arrays, or creating 2-dimensional (or higher) array(s). Both work equally well, so choose the one that works best for your code. I'm only going to show the 1-dimensional method here. Those of you who are familiar with arrays can probably figure out how to rewrite this to use higher dimensional arrays.
I use Actionscript 3, but this approach should work with almost any programming or scripting language.
In this example, I'm trying to keep various "properties" of different "activities" straight. In this case, we'll say these properties are Level, High Score, and Play Count. We'll call the activities Pinball, Word Search, Maze, and Memory.
This method involves creating multiple arrays, one for each property, and creating constants that hold the integer "key" used for each activity.
We'll start by creating the constants, as integers. Constants work for this, because we never change them after compile. The value we put into each constant is the index the corresponding data will always be stored at in the arrays.
const pinball:int = 0;
const wordsearch:int = 1;
const maze:int = 2;
const memory:int = 3;
Now, we create the arrays. Remember, arrays start counting from zero. Since we want to be able to modify the values, this should be a regular variable.
Note, I am constructing the array to be the specific length we need, with the default value for the desired data type in each slot. I've used all integers here, but you can use just about any data type you need.
var highscore:Array = [0, 0, 0, 0];
var level:Array = [0, 0, 0, 0];
var playcount:Array = [0, 0, 0, 0];
So, we have a consistent "address" for each property, and we only had to create four constants, and three arrays, instead of 12 variables.
Now we need to create the functions to read and write to the arrays using this system. This is where the real beauty of the system comes in. Be sure this function is written in public scope if you want to read/write the arrays from outside this class.
To create the function that gets data from the arrays, we need two arguments: the name of the activity and the name of the property. We also want to set up this function to return a value of any type.
GOTCHA WARNING: In Actionscript 3, this won't work in static classes or functions, as it relies on the "this" keyword.
public function fetchData(act:String, prop:String):*
{
var r:*;
r = this[prop][this[act]];
return r;
}
That queer bit of code, r = this[prop][this[act]], simply uses the provided strings "act" and "prop" as the names of the constant and array, and sets the resulting value to r. Thus, if you feed the function the parameters ("maze", "highscore"), that code will essentially act like r = highscore[2] (remember, this[act] returns the integer value assigned to it.)
The writing method works essentially the same way, except we need one additional argument, the data to be written. This argument needs to be able to accept any
GOTCHA WARNING: One significant drawback to this system with strict typing languages is that you must remember the data type for the array you're writing to. The compiler cannot catch these type errors, so your program will simply throw a fatal error if it tries to write the wrong value type.
One clever way around this is to create different functions for different data types, so passing the wrong data type in an argument will trigger a compile-time error.
public function writeData(act:String, prop:String, val:*):void
{
this[prop][this[act]] = val;
}
Now, we just have one additional problem. What happens if we pass an activity or property name that doesn't exist? To protect against this, we just need one more function.
This function will validate a provided constant or variable key by attempting to access it, and catching the resulting fatal error, returning false instead. If the key is valid, it will return true.
function validateName(ID:String):Boolean
{
var checkthis:*
var r:Boolean = true;
try
{
checkthis = this[ID];
}
catch (error:ReferenceError)
{
r = false;
}
return r;
}
Now, we just need to adjust our other two functions to take advantage of this. We'll wrap the function's code inside an if statement.
If one of the keys is invalid, the function will do nothing - it will fail silently. To get around this, just put a trace (a.k.a. print) statement or a non-fatal error in the else construct.
public function fetchData(act:String, prop:String):*
{
var r:*;
if(validateName(act) && validateName(prop))
{
r = this[prop][this[act]];
return r;
}
}
public function writeData(act:String, prop:String, val:*):void
{
if(validateName(act) && validateName(prop))
{
this[prop][this[act]] = val;
}
}
Now, to use these functions, you simply need to use one line of code each. For the example, we'll say we have a text object in the GUI that shows the high score, called txtHighScore. I've omitted the necessary typecasting for the sake of the example.
//Get the high score.
txtHighScore.text = fetchData("maze", "highscore");
//Write the new high score.
writeData("maze", "highscore", txtHighScore.text);
I hope ya'll will find this tutorial useful in sorting and managing your variables.
(Afternote: You can probably do something similar with dictionaries or databases, but I prefer the flexibility with this method.)