I have a recursive function which iterates though directory trees listing the file names located in them.
Here is the function:
void WINAPI SearchFile(PSTR Directory)
{
HANDLE hFind;
WIN32_FIND_DATA FindData;
char SearchName[1024],FullPath[1024];
memset(SearchName,0,sizeof(SearchName));
memset(&FindData,0,sizeof(WIN32_FIND_DATA));
sprintf(SearchName,"%s\\*",Directory);
hFind=FindFirstFile(SearchName,&FindData);
if(hFind!=INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE)
{
while(FindNextFile(hFind,&FindData))
{
if(FindData.cFileName[0]=='.')
{
continue;
}
memset(FullPath,0,sizeof(FullPath));
sprintf(FullPath,"%s\\%s",Directory,FindData.cFileName);
if(FindData.dwFileAttributes & FILE_ATTRIBUTE_DIRECTORY)
{
MessageBoxA(NULL, FullPath, "Directory", MB_OK);
SearchFile(FullPath);
}
else
{
MessageBoxA(NULL, FullPath, "File", MB_OK);
}
}
FindClose(hFind);
}
}
There are obviously differences between both functions but I don't understand what's making them act differently. Does anyone know why I am having this problem?
for fast understand error need look for line
goto label;
//SearchFile(FullPath);
at this point hFind containing valid data and FindClose(hFind); need be called for it. but after goto label; executed - your overwrite hFind with hFind = FindFirstFile(SearchName, &FindData); - so you already never close original hFind, never can return to iterate folder after such go to sub-folder. this is key point - need save original hFind before go to sub directory and restore it after. when you do recursive function call - this is done auto - because every sub directory in this case enumerated in self stack frame, which have separate hFind. this is native solution use recursion here.
but possible convert recursion to loop here because we call self always from the single place and as result to this single place. so we can not save return address in stack but do unconditional jump (goto) to known place.
then code have some extra errors, you never check for string buffers overflow, why 1024 as max length is hard-coded when file path can be up to 32768 chars, you not check for reparse point as result can enter to infinite loop, use FindFirstFile instead FindFirstFileEx, etc.
correct code for enumerate sub-folder in loop can be next
void DoEnum(PCWSTR pcszRoot)
{
SIZE_T FileNameLength = wcslen(pcszRoot);
// initial check for . and ..
switch (FileNameLength)
{
case 2:
if (pcszRoot[1] != '.') break;
case 1:
if (pcszRoot[0] == '.') return;
}
static const WCHAR mask[] = L"\\*";
WCHAR FileName[MAXSHORT + 1];
if (_countof(FileName) < FileNameLength + _countof(mask))
{
return;
}
ULONG dwError;
HANDLE hFindFile = 0;
WIN32_FIND_DATA FindData{};
enum { MaxDeep = 0x200 };
//++ stack
HANDLE hFindFileV[MaxDeep];
PWSTR pszV[MaxDeep];
char prefix[MaxDeep+1];
//--stack
ULONG Level = MaxDeep;
memset(prefix, '\t', MaxDeep);
prefix[MaxDeep] = 0;
PWSTR psz = FileName;
goto __enter;
__loop:
hFindFile = FindFirstFileEx(FileName, FindExInfoBasic, &FindData, FindExSearchNameMatch, 0, FIND_FIRST_EX_LARGE_FETCH);
if (hFindFile != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE)
{
do
{
pcszRoot = FindData.cFileName;
// skip . and ..
switch (FileNameLength = wcslen(pcszRoot))
{
case 2:
if (pcszRoot[1] != '.') break;
case 1:
if (pcszRoot[0] == '.') continue;
}
if (FindData.dwFileAttributes & FILE_ATTRIBUTE_DIRECTORY)
{
if ((SIZE_T)(FileName + _countof(FileName) - psz) < FileNameLength + _countof(mask))
{
continue;
}
__enter:
memcpy(psz, pcszRoot, (1 + FileNameLength) * sizeof(WCHAR));
if (FindData.dwFileAttributes & FILE_ATTRIBUTE_REPARSE_POINT)
{
DbgPrint("%sreparse point: <%S>\n", prefix + Level, pcszRoot);
}
else
{
if (Level)
{
DbgPrint("%s<%S>\n", prefix + Level, psz);
hFindFileV[--Level] = hFindFile;
pszV[Level] = psz;
memcpy(psz += FileNameLength, mask, sizeof(mask));
psz++;
goto __loop;
__return:
*--psz = 0;
psz = pszV[Level];
hFindFile = hFindFileV[Level++];
DbgPrint("%s</%S>\n", prefix + Level, psz);
}
}
}
else
{
DbgPrint("%s[%u%u] %S\n", prefix + Level, FindData.nFileSizeLow, FindData.nFileSizeHigh, pcszRoot);
}
if (!hFindFile)
{
// top level exit
return ;
}
} while (FindNextFile(hFindFile, &FindData));
if ((dwError = GetLastError()) == ERROR_NO_MORE_FILES)
{
dwError = NOERROR;
}
FindClose(hFindFile);
}
else
{
dwError = GetLastError();
}
if (dwError)
{
DbgPrint("<%S> err = %u\n", FileName, dwError);
}
goto __return;
}
The reason for the difference is actually the confusion brought to you by goto label.If you are using the recursive version, after the recursive execution is completed, it will return to the recursive place to continue execution.
In your code, you continue to execute while (FindNextFile(hFind, &FindData)), but when you use goto label, it will jump out of the original loop and restart the program from the label, which leads to what you said list a single directory tree before ending.
If you modify the modified code to the following iterative version, you can understand why there is such a problem.
void fun()
{
char* Directory = "D:\\test";
HANDLE hFind;
WIN32_FIND_DATA FindData;
char SearchName[1024], FullPath[1024];
char LastName[1024] = "";
while (1)
{
memset(SearchName, 0, sizeof(SearchName));
memset(&FindData, 0, sizeof(WIN32_FIND_DATA));
sprintf(SearchName, "%s\\*", Directory);
if (strcmp(SearchName, LastName) == 0)
{
return;
}
strcpy(LastName, SearchName);
hFind = FindFirstFile(SearchName, &FindData);
if (hFind != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE)
{
while (FindNextFile(hFind, &FindData))
{
if (FindData.cFileName[0] == '.')
{
continue;
}
memset(FullPath, 0, sizeof(FullPath));
sprintf(FullPath, "%s\\%s", Directory, FindData.cFileName);
if (FindData.dwFileAttributes & FILE_ATTRIBUTE_DIRECTORY)
{
MessageBoxA(NULL, Directory, "Directory", MB_OK);
char cArray[1024];
memset(cArray, 0, sizeof(cArray));
sprintf(cArray, "%s", FullPath);
Directory = cArray;
break;
}
else
{
MessageBoxA(NULL, FullPath, "File", MB_OK);
}
}
FindClose(hFind);
}
}
}
So you cannot achieve the same purpose as recursion by using goto, here you can only use recursion. Of course, I have provided a way to traverse directories non-recursively using queues, which is a more scientific way.
One of the key things that you obtain from recursion is a separate set of local variables for each call to the recursive function. When a function calls itself, and in the recursive call modifies local variables, those local-variable changes do not (directly) affect the local variables of the caller. In your original program, this applies to variables hFind, FindData, SearchName, and FullPath.
If you want similar behavior in a non-recursive version of the function then you need to manually preserve the state of your traversal of one level of the tree when you descend to another level. The goto statement doesn't do any such thing -- it just redirects the control flow of your program. Although there are a few good use cases for goto in C, they are uncommon, and yours is not one of them.
There are several ways to implement manually preserving state, but I would suggest
creating a structure type in which to store those data that characterize the state of your traversal of a particular level. Those appear to be only hFind and FindData -- it looks like the other locals don't need to be preserved. Maybe something like this, then:
struct dir_state {
HANDLE hFind;
WIN32_FIND_DATA FindData;
};
Dynamically allocating an array of structures of that type.
unsigned depth_limit = DEFAULT_DEPTH_LIMIT;
struct dir_state *traversal_states
= malloc(depth_limit * sizeof(*traversal_states));
if (traversal_states == NULL) // ... handle allocation error ...
Tracking the depth of your tree traversal, and for each directory you process, using the array element whose index is the relative depth of that directory.
// For example:
traversal_states[depth].hFind
= FindFirstFile(SearchName, &traversal_states[depth].FindData);
// etc.
Remembering the size of the array, so as to be able to reallocate it larger if the traversal descends too deep for its current size.
// For example:
if (depth >= depth_limit) {
depth_limit = depth_limit * 3 / 2;
struct dir_state *temp
= realloc(traversal_states, depth_limit * sizeof(*traversal_states));
if (temp == NULL) {
// handle error, discontinuing traversal
}
traversal_states = temp;
}
Also, use an ordinary for, while, or do loop instead of a backward-jumping goto. There will be a few details to work out to track when to use FindFirstFile and when FindNextFile (which you would still have with goto), but I'm sure you can sort it out.
Details are left as an exercise.
Unless necessary due to memory or processing constraints or infinite recursion tail conditions that would be complication to introduce there really isn't much need to not use recursion here, since it leads to a readable and elegant solution.
I also want to point out that in "modern" C, any solution using a GOTO is likely not a solution you want since they are so often confusing to use and leads to memory issues (we have loops now to make all of that so much simpler).
Instead of the GOTOs I would suggest implementing a stack of the directories. Wrap the printing logic a while or do-while, and as you are iterating over the files add any directories to the stack. At every new iteration pop and walk the directory at the head of the stack. The loop condition just needs to check if the directory stack is empty, before continuing its block.
I am in the process of replacing a redis KEYS command in favor of SCAN. However, the keyspace is about 3 Million Keys. What would be a good COUNT parameter to use without affecting I/O performance?
I am also kind of facing the same problem. But I tried this. Hope, this will help...
getKeyList (pattern) {
console.log('pattern', pattern)
let found = []
let cursor = '0'
while(true){
const getAsync = promisify(this.client.scan).bind(this.client)
const reply = getAsync(cursor, 'MATCH', pattern)
cursor = reply[0];
if(reply[1] != false){
found.push(reply[1])
}
if(cursor == 0){
break
}
}
return found
}
*Note that you have to manipulate the return as you want.
Does Scala support something like dynamic properties? Example:
val dog = new Dynamic // Dynamic does not define 'name' nor 'speak'.
dog.name = "Rex" // New property.
dog.speak = { "woof" } // New method.
val cat = new Dynamic
cat.name = "Fluffy"
cat.speak = { "meow" }
val rock = new Dynamic
rock.name = "Topaz"
// rock doesn't speak.
def test(val animal: Any) = {
animal.name + " is telling " + animal.speak()
}
test(dog) // "Rex is telling woof"
test(cat) // "Fluffy is telling meow"
test(rock) // "Topaz is telling null"
What is the closest thing from it we can get in Scala? If there's something like "addProperty" which allows using the added property like an ordinary field, it would be sufficient.
I'm not interested in structural type declarations ("type safe duck typing"). What I really need is to add new properties and methods at runtime, so that the object can be used by a method/code that expects the added elements to exist.
Scala 2.9 will have a specially handled Dynamic trait that may be what you are looking for.
This blog has a big about it: http://squirrelsewer.blogspot.com/2011/02/scalas-upcoming-dynamic-capabilities.html
I would guess that in the invokeDynamic method you will need to check for "name_=", "speak_=", "name" and "speak", and you could store values in a private map.
I can not think of a reason to really need to add/create methods/properties dynamically at run-time unless dynamic identifiers are also allowed -and/or- a magical binding to an external dynamic source (JRuby or JSON are two good examples).
Otherwise the example posted can be implemented entirely using the existing static typing in Scala via "anonymous" types and structural typing. Anyway, not saying that "dynamic" wouldn't be convenient (and as 0__ pointed out, is coming -- feel free to "go edge" ;-).
Consider:
val dog = new {
val name = "Rex"
def speak = { "woof" }
}
val cat = new {
val name = "Fluffy"
def speak = { "meow" }
}
// Rock not shown here -- because it doesn't speak it won't compile
// with the following unless it stubs in. In both cases it's an error:
// the issue is when/where the error occurs.
def test(animal: { val name: String; def speak: String }) = {
animal.name + " is telling " + animal.speak
}
// However, we can take in the more general type { val name: String } and try to
// invoke the possibly non-existent property, albeit in a hackish sort of way.
// Unfortunately pattern matching does not work with structural types AFAIK :(
val rock = new {
val name = "Topaz"
}
def test2(animal: { val name: String }) = {
animal.name + " is telling " + (try {
animal.asInstanceOf[{ def speak: String }).speak
} catch { case _ => "{very silently}" })
}
test(dog)
test(cat)
// test(rock) -- no! will not compile (a good thing)
test2(dog)
test2(cat)
test2(rock)
However, this method can quickly get cumbersome (to "add" a new attribute one would need to create a new type and copy over the current data into it) and is partially exploiting the simplicity of the example code. That is, it's not practically possible to create true "open" objects this way; in the case for "open" data a Map of sorts is likely a better/feasible approach in the current Scala (2.8) implementation.
Happy coding.
First off, as #pst pointed out, your example can be entirely implemented using static typing, it doesn't require dynamic typing.
Secondly, if you want to program in a dynamically typed language, program in a dynamically typed language.
That being said, you can actually do something like that in Scala. Here is a simplistic example:
class Dict[V](args: (String, V)*) extends Dynamic {
import scala.collection.mutable.Map
private val backingStore = Map[String, V](args:_*)
def typed[T] = throw new UnsupportedOperationException()
def applyDynamic(name: String)(args: Any*) = {
val k = if (name.endsWith("_=")) name.dropRight(2) else name
if (name.endsWith("_=")) backingStore(k) = args.first.asInstanceOf[V]
backingStore.get(k)
}
override def toString() = "Dict(" + backingStore.mkString(", ") + ")"
}
object Dict {
def apply[V](args: (String, V)*) = new Dict(args:_*)
}
val t1 = Dict[Any]()
t1.bar_=("quux")
val t2 = new Dict("foo" -> "bar", "baz" -> "quux")
val t3 = Dict("foo" -> "bar", "baz" -> "quux")
t1.bar // => Some(quux)
t2.baz // => Some(quux)
t3.baz // => Some(quux)
As you can see, you were pretty close, actually. Your main mistake was that Dynamic is a trait, not a class, so you can't instantiate it, you have to mix it in. And you obviously have to actually define what you want it to do, i.e. implement typed and applyDynamic.
If you want your example to work, there are a couple of complications. In particular, you need something like a type-safe heterogenous map as a backing store. Also, there are some syntactic considerations. For example, foo.bar = baz is only translated into foo.bar_=(baz) if foo.bar_= exists, which it doesn't, because foo is a Dynamic object.
I am porting over some Java code into Google's Go language and I converting all code except I am stuck on just one part after an amazingly smooth port. My Go code looks like this and the section I am talking about is commented out:
func main() {
var puzzleHistory * vector.Vector;
puzzleHistory = vector.New(0);
var puzzle PegPuzzle;
puzzle.InitPegPuzzle(3,2);
puzzleHistory.Push(puzzle);
var copyPuzzle PegPuzzle;
var currentPuzzle PegPuzzle;
currentPuzzle = puzzleHistory.At(0).(PegPuzzle);
isDone := false;
for !isDone {
currentPuzzle = puzzleHistory.At(0).(PegPuzzle);
currentPuzzle.findAllValidMoves();
for i := 0; i < currentPuzzle.validMoves.Len(); i++ {
copyPuzzle.NewPegPuzzle(currentPuzzle.holes, currentPuzzle.movesAlreadyDone);
copyPuzzle.doMove(currentPuzzle.validMoves.At(i).(Move));
// There is no function in Go's Vector that will remove an element like Java's Vector
//puzzleHistory.removeElement(currentPuzzle);
copyPuzzle.findAllValidMoves();
if copyPuzzle.validMoves.Len() != 0 {
puzzleHistory.Push(copyPuzzle);
}
if copyPuzzle.isSolutionPuzzle() {
fmt.Printf("Puzzle Solved");
copyPuzzle.show();
isDone = true;
}
}
}
}
If there is no version available, which I believe there isn't ... does anyone know how I would go about implementing such a thing on my own?
How about Vector.Delete( i ) ?
Right now Go doesn't support generic equality operators. So you'll have to write something that iterates over the vector and removes the correct one.
Is it possible to sort an XMLList? All the examples I can find on it create a new XMLListCollection like this:
MyXMLListCol = new XMLListCollection(MyXMLList);
I don't think the XMLListCollection in this case has any reference to the XMLList so sorting it would leave my XMLList unsorted, is this correct?
How can I sort the XMLList directly?
Thanks
~Mike
So I finally got my search terms altered enough I actually churned up an answer to this.
Using the technique I got from here:
http://freerpad.blogspot.com/2007/07/more-hierarchical-sorting-e4x-xml-for.html
I was able to come up with this:
public function sortXMLListByAttribute(parentNode:XML,xList:XMLList,attr:String):void{
//attr values must be ints
var xListItems:int = xList.length();
if(xListItems !=0){
var sortingArray:Array = new Array();
var sortAttr:Number = new Number();
for each (var item:XML in xList){
sortAttr = Number(item.attribute(attr));
if(sortingArray.indexOf(sortAttr)==-1){
sortingArray.push(sortAttr);
}
//piggy back the removal, just have to remove all of one localName without touching items of other localNames
delete parentNode.child(item.localName())[0];
}
if( sortingArray.length > 1 ) {
sortingArray.sort(Array.NUMERIC);
}
var sortedList:XMLList = new XMLList();
for each(var sortedAttr:Number in sortingArray){
for each (var item2:XML in xList){
var tempVar:Number = Number(item2.attribute(attr));
if(tempVar == sortedAttr){
sortedList += item2
}
}
}
for each(var item3:XML in sortedList){
parentNode.appendChild(item3);
}
}
}
Works pretty fast and keeps my original XML variable updated. I know I may be reinventing the wheel just to not use an XMLListCollection, but I think the ability to sort XML and XMLLists can be pretty important
While there is no native equivalent to the Array.sortOn function, it is trivial enough to implement your own sorting algorithm:
// Bubble sort.
// always initialize variables -- it save memory.
var ordered:Boolean = false;
var l:int = xmlList.length();
var i:int = 0;
var curr:XML = null;
var plus:XML = null;
while( !ordered )
{
// Assume that the order is correct
ordered = true;
for( i = 0; i < l; i++ )
{
curr = xmlList[ i ];
plus = xmlList[ i + 1 ];
// If the order is incorrect, swap and set ordered to false.
if( Number( curr.#order ) < Number( plus.#order ) )
{
xmlList[ i ] = plus;
xmlList[ i + 1 ] = curr;
ordered = false;
}
}
}
but, realistically, it is far easier and less buggy to use XMLListCollection. Further, if someone else is reading your code, they will find it easier to understand. Please do yourself a favor and avoid re-inventing the wheel on this.