I have this base class:
// put the display in a macro on a .h file for less headache.
class Gadget {
protected:
int x, y;
U8GLIB * u8g;
virtual int f_focus() {return 0;};
virtual int f_blur() {return 0;};
virtual void f_draw() {};
virtual void f_select() {};
public:
Gadget(U8GLIB * u8g, int x, int y) :
u8g(u8g),
x(x),
y(y)
{
Serial.println(F("Gadget(U8GLIB * u8g, int x, int y)"));
};
Gadget() {
Serial.println(F("Gadget()"));
};
int focus(){return f_focus();};
int blur(){return f_blur();};
void draw(){f_draw();};
void operator()(){f_select();};
};
And this derived class:
class WakeUp :
public Gadget
{
public:
WakeUp(U8GLIB * u8g) :
Gadget(u8g, 0, 0)
{
Serial.println(F("WakeUp(U8GLIB * u8g)"));
};
};
Then I instantiate the WakeUp class inside an array like this:
Gadget gadgets[1] = {
WakeUp(&u8g)
};
Then I try to access this member like this:
void focus() {
Serial.println(gadgets[0].focus());
}
It is supposed to display 0. However it is displaying -64. Even if I override the f_focus() method on WakeUp class. If I remove the virtual specifier from f_focus() it works fine, displaying 0, but I will not be able to access the derived class implementation of this method.
I wish to understand what is causing this strange behavior and what can I do to avoid it.
EDIT:
The function runs fine if I call it from the Gadget Constructor.
You're slicing your WakeUp object.
You essentially have the following:
Gadget g = WakeUp(...);
What this code does is the following:
Construct a WakeUp object.
Call Gadget(const Gadget& other) with the base from the WakeUp object.
Destroy the temporary WakeUp object, leaving only the copy of the Gadget base.
In order to avoid this, you need to create an array of pointers (this is better if they are smart pointers).
Gadget* gadgets[1] = { new WakeUp(&u8g) }; // If you choose this method, you need to call
// delete gadget[0] or you will leak memory.
Using a pointer will correctly preserve the Gadget and WakeUp instances instead of slicing them away.
With smart pointers:
std::shared_ptr<Gadget> gadgets[1] = { std::make_shared<WakeUp>(&u8g) };
What is the most efficient way of getting the symbol for a single member of a class?
import 'dart:mirrors';
class TestClass{
void iWantThisSymbol(){}
void butNotThisOne(){}
}
/**
* I can get all the symbols and filter down but this isn't nice
*/
void main(){
var allSymbols = reflectClass(TestClass).instanceMembers.keys;
var justTheSymbolIWant = allSymbols.where((symbol) => symbol.toString().contains('iWantThisSymbol')); // this doesnt seem very efficient or maintainable
}
var justTheSymbolIWant = reflectClass(TestClass).instanceMembers[#iWantThisSymbol]
Although, to be a bit pedantic, you're not get getting a Symbol, you're using a Symbol (#iWantThisSymbol) to get a member, which in this case is a method. So I would rewrite this as:
import 'dart:mirrors';
class TestClass{
void iWantThisMethod(){}
void butNotThisOne(){}
}
void main(){
var justTheMethodIWant = reflectClass(TestClass).instanceMembers[#iWantThisMethod];
}
Also, a few things about that use of where():
If you do want to filter a list of Symbols, you don't need to them convert to a String, you can just compare symbol instances directly.
.where() returns an iterable, even if there's only one item that matches. You probably want firstWhere() which always returns a single item.
var justTheSymbolIWant = allSymbols.firstWhere((symbol) => symbol == #iWantThisSymbol);
When you deploy a dart app so the code is minified, will the following code still work? as I read that strings are maintained but all symbols are minified, so how will the symbol in the invoke method call be created properly if the method name is minified but the string is left as 'sayHi'?
import 'dart:mirrors';
void main() {
var inst = new MyClass(33);
var instMirror = reflect(inst);
var res = instMirror.invoke(new Symbol('sayHi'), []).reflectee;
}
class MyClass{
int x;
MyClass(this.x);
int sayHi(){
print('this class has x = $x');
return x;
}
}
You can write the symbol as a constant as either const Symbol('sayHi') or the shorter #sayHi. That will be minified to match the minified method name. It's possible that new Symbol() with a constant argument might also get minified. Obviously new Symbol with a dynamic argument won't.
Is there any way to implement specialized IComparer for the base class type so a child class could still use it for sorting in speciliazed collections?
Example
public class A
{
public int X;
}
public class B:A
{
public int Y;
}
public AComparer:IComparer<A>
{
int Compare(A p1, A p2)
{
//...
}
}
so following code will work:
List<A> aList = new List<A>();
aList.Sort(new AComparer());
List<B> bList = new List<B>();
bList.Sort(new AComparer()); // <- this line fails due to type cast issues
How to approach this issue to have both - inheritance of sorting and specialized collections (and do not copy IComparer classes for each of children classes?
Thanks in advance!
Firstly, note that this is fixed in .NET 4 via generic contravariance - your code would simply work. EDIT: As noted in comments, generic variance was first supported in CLR v2, but various interfaces and delegates only became covariant or contravariant in .NET 4.
However, in .NET 2 it's still fairly easy to create a converter:
public class ComparerConverter<TBase, TChild> : IComparer<TChild>
where TChild : TBase
{
private readonly IComparer<TBase> comparer;
public ComparerConverter(IComparer<TBase> comparer)
{
this.comparer = comparer;
}
public int Compare(TChild x, TChild y)
{
return comparer.Compare(x, y);
}
}
You can then use:
List<B> bList = new List<B>();
IComparer<B> bComparer = new ComparerConverter<A, B>(new AComparer());
bList.Sort(bComparer);
EDIT: There's nothing you can do without changing the way of calling it at all. You could potentially make your AComparer generic though:
public class AComparer<T> : IComparer<T> where T : A
{
int Compare(T p1, T p2)
{
// You can still access members of A here
}
}
Then you could use:
bList.Sort(new AComparer<B>());
Of course, this means making all your comparer implementations generic, and it's somewhat ugly IMO.
I have BigDecimal objects serialized with BlazeDS to Actionscript. Once they hit Actionscript as Number objects, they have values like:
140475.32 turns into 140475.31999999999998
How do I deal with this? The problem is that if I use a NumberFormatter with precision of 2, then the value is truncated to 140475.31. Any ideas?
This is my generic solution for the problem (I have blogged about this here):
var toFixed:Function = function(number:Number, factor:int) {
return Math.round(number * factor)/factor;
}
For example:
trace(toFixed(0.12345678, 10)); //0.1
Multiply 0.12345678 by 10; that gives us 1.2345678.
When we round 1.2345678, we get 1.0,
and finally, 1.0 divided by 10 equals 0.1.
Another example:
trace(toFixed(1.7302394309234435, 10000)); //1.7302
Multiply 1.7302394309234435 by 10000; that gives us 17302.394309234435.
When we round 17302.394309234435 we get 17302,
and finally, 17302 divided by 10000 equals 1.7302.
Edit
Based on the anonymous answer below, there is a nice simplification for the parameter on the method that makes the precision much more intuitive. e.g:
var setPrecision:Function = function(number:Number, precision:int) {
precision = Math.pow(10, precision);
return Math.round(number * precision)/precision;
}
var number:Number = 10.98813311;
trace(setPrecision(number,1)); //Result is 10.9
trace(setPrecision(number,2)); //Result is 10.98
trace(setPrecision(number,3)); //Result is 10.988 and so on
N.B. I added this here just in case anyone sees this as the answer and doesn't scroll down...
Just a slight variation on Frasers Function, for anyone who is interested.
function setPrecision(number:Number, precision:int) {
precision = Math.pow(10, precision);
return (Math.round(number * precision)/precision);
}
So to use:
var number:Number = 10.98813311;
trace(setPrecision(number,1)); //Result is 10.9
trace(setPrecision(number,2)); //Result is 10.98
trace(setPrecision(number,3)); //Result is 10.988 and so on
i've used Number.toFixed(precision) in ActionScript 3 to do this: http://livedocs.adobe.com/flex/3/langref/Number.html#toFixed%28%29
it handles rounding properly and specifies the number of digits after the decimal to display - unlike Number.toPrecision() that limits the total number of digits to display regardless of the position of the decimal.
var roundDown:Number = 1.434;
// will print 1.43
trace(roundDown.toFixed(2));
var roundUp:Number = 1.436;
// will print 1.44
trace(roundUp.toFixed(2));
I converted the Java of BigDecimal to ActionScript.
We had no choices since we compute for financial application.
http://code.google.com/p/bigdecimal/
You can use property: rounding = "nearest"
In NumberFormatter, rounding have 4 values which you can choice: rounding="none|up|down|nearest". I think with your situation, you can chose rounding = "nearest".
-- chary --
I discovered that BlazeDS supports serializing Java BigDecimal objects to ActionScript Strings as well. So if you don't need the ActionScript data to be Numbers (you are not doing any math on the Flex / ActionScript side) then the String mapping works well (no rounding weirdness). See this link for the BlazeDS mapping options: http://livedocs.adobe.com/blazeds/1/blazeds_devguide/help.html?content=serialize_data_2.html
GraniteDS 2.2 has BigDecimal, BigInteger and Long implementations in ActionScript3, serialization options between Java / Flex for these types, and even code generation tools options in order to generate AS3 big numbers variables for the corresponding Java ones.
See more here: http://www.graniteds.org/confluence/display/DOC22/2.+Big+Number+Implementations.
guys, just check the solution:
protected function button1_clickHandler(event:MouseEvent):void
{
var formatter:NumberFormatter = new NumberFormatter();
formatter.precision = 2;
formatter.rounding = NumberBaseRoundType.NEAREST;
var a:Number = 14.31999999999998;
trace(formatter.format(a)); //14.32
}
I ported the IBM ICU implementation of BigDecimal for the Actionscript client. Someone else has published their nearly identical version here as a google code project. Our version adds some convenience methods for doing comparisons.
You can extend the Blaze AMF endpoint to add serialization support for BigDecimal. Please note that the code in the other answer seems incomplete, and in our experience it fails to work in production.
AMF3 assumes that duplicate objects, traits and strings are sent by reference. The object reference tables need to be kept in sync while serializing, or the client will loose sync of these tables during deserialization and start throwing class cast errors, or corrupting the data in fields that don't match, but cast ok...
Here is the corrected code:
public void writeObject(final Object o) throws IOException {
if (o instanceof BigDecimal) {
write(kObjectType);
if(!byReference(o)){ // if not previously sent
String s = ((BigDecimal)o).toString();
TraitsInfo ti = new TraitsInfo("java.math.BigDecimal",false,true,0);
writeObjectTraits(ti); // will send traits by reference
writeUTF(s);
writeObjectEnd(); // for your AmfTrace to be correctly indented
}
} else {
super.writeObject(o);
}
}
There is another way to send a typed object, which does not require Externalizable on the client. The client will set the textValue property on the object instead:
TraitsInfo ti = new TraitsInfo("java.math.BigDecimal",false,false,1);
ti.addProperty("textValue");
writeObjectTraits(ti);
writeObjectProperty("textValue",s);
In either case, your Actionscript class will need this tag:
[RemoteClass(alias="java.math.BigDecimal")]
The Actionscript class also needs a text property to match the one you chose to send that will initialize the BigDecimal value, or in the case of the Externalizable object, a couple of methods like this:
public function writeExternal(output:IDataOutput):void {
output.writeUTF(this.toString());
}
public function readExternal(input:IDataInput):void {
var s:String = input.readUTF();
setValueFromString(s);
}
This code only concerns data going from server to client. To deserialize in the other direction from client to server, we chose to extend AbstractProxy, and use a wrapper class to temporarily store the string value of the BigDecimal before the actual object is created, due to the fact that you cannot instantiate a BigDecimal and then assign the value, as the design of Blaze/LCDS expects should be the case with all objects.
Here's the proxy object to circumvent the default handling:
public class BigNumberProxy extends AbstractProxy {
public BigNumberProxy() {
this(null);
}
public BigNumberProxy(Object defaultInstance) {
super(defaultInstance);
this.setExternalizable(true);
if (defaultInstance != null)
alias = getClassName(defaultInstance);
}
protected String getClassName(Object instance) {
return((BigNumberWrapper)instance).getClassName();
}
public Object createInstance(String className) {
BigNumberWrapper w = new BigNumberWrapper();
w.setClassName(className);
return w;
}
public Object instanceComplete(Object instance) {
String desiredClassName = ((BigNumberWrapper)instance).getClassName();
if(desiredClassName.equals("java.math.BigDecimal"))
return new BigDecimal(((BigNumberWrapper)instance).stringValue);
return null;
}
public String getAlias(Object instance) {
return((BigNumberWrapper)instance).getClassName();
}
}
This statement will have to execute somewhere in your application, to tie the proxy object to the class you want to control. We use a static method:
PropertyProxyRegistry.getRegistry().register(
java.math.BigDecimal.class, new BigNumberProxy());
Our wrapper class looks like this:
public class BigNumberWrapper implements Externalizable {
String stringValue;
String className;
public void readExternal(ObjectInput arg0) throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException {
stringValue = arg0.readUTF();
}
public void writeExternal(ObjectOutput arg0) throws IOException {
arg0.writeUTF(stringValue);
}
public String getStringValue() {
return stringValue;
}
public void setStringValue(String stringValue) {
this.stringValue = stringValue;
}
public String getClassName() {
return className;
}
public void setClassName(String className) {
this.className = className;
}
}
We were able to reuse one of the available BigDecimal.as classes on the web and extended blazeds by sublassing from AMF3Output, you'll need to specify your own endpoint class in the flex xml files, in that custom endpoint you can insert your own serializer that instantiates an AMF3Output subclass.
public class EnhancedAMF3Output extends Amf3Output {
public EnhancedAMF3Output(final SerializationContext context) {
super(context);
}
public void writeObject(final Object o) throws IOException {
if (o instanceof BigDecimal) {
write(kObjectType);
writeUInt29(7); // write U290-traits-ext (first 3 bits set)
writeStringWithoutType("java.math.BigDecimal");
writeAMFString(((BigDecimal)o).toString());
} else {
super.writeObject(o);
}
}
}
as simple as that! then you have native BigDecimal support using blazeds, wooohoo!
Make sure your BigDecimal as3 class implements IExternalizable
cheers, jb
Surprisingly the round function in MS Excel gives us different values then you have presented above.
For example in Excel
Round(143,355;2) = 143,36
So my workaround for Excel round is like:
public function setPrecision(number:Number, precision:int):Number {
precision = Math.pow(10, precision);
const excelFactor : Number = 0.00000001;
number += excelFactor;
return (Math.round(number * precision)/precision);
}
If you know the precision you need beforehand, you could store the numbers scaled so that the smallest amount you need is a whole value. For example, store the numbers as cents rather than dollars.
If that's not an option, how about something like this:
function printTwoDecimals(x)
{
printWithNoDecimals(x);
print(".");
var scaled = Math.round(x * 100);
printWithNoDecimals(scaled % 100);
}
(With however you print with no decimals stuck in there.)
This won't work for really big numbers, though, because you can still lose precision.
You may vote and watch the enhancement request in the Flash PLayer Jira bug tracking system at https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-3315
And meanwhile use the Number.toFixed() work-around see :
(http://livedocs.adobe.com/flex/3/langref/Number.html#toFixed%28%29)
or use the open source implementations out there : (http://code.google.com/p/bigdecimal/) or (http://www.fxcomps.com/money.html)
As for the serialization efforts, well, it will be small if you use Blazeds or LCDS as they do support Java BigDecimal serialization (to String) cf. (http://livedocs.adobe.com/livecycle/es/sdkHelp/programmer/lcds/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/wwhelp.htm?context=LiveDocs_Parts&file=serialize_data_3.html)
It seems more like a transport problem, the number being correct but the scale ignored. If the number has to be stored as a BigDecimal on the server you may want to convert it server side to a less ambiguous format (Number, Double, Float) before sending it.