For example, consider the following C# code:
interface IBase { void f(int); }
interface IDerived : IBase { /* inherits f from IBase */ }
...
void SomeFunction()
{
IDerived o = ...;
o.f(5);
}
I know how to get a MethodDefinition object corresponding to SomeFunction.
I can then loop through MethodDefinition.Instructions:
var methodDef = GetMethodDefinitionOfSomeFunction();
foreach (var instruction in methodDef.Body.Instructions)
{
switch (instruction.Operand)
{
case MethodReference mr:
...
break;
}
yield return memberRef;
}
And this way I can find out that the method SomeFunction calls the function IBase.f
Now I would like to know the declared type of the object on which the function f is called, i.e. the declared type of o.
Inspecting mr.DeclaringType does not help, because it returns IBase.
This is what I have so far:
TypeReference typeRef = null;
if (instruction.OpCode == OpCodes.Callvirt)
{
// Identify the type of the object on which the call is being made.
var objInstruction = instruction;
if (instruction.Previous.OpCode == OpCodes.Tail)
{
objInstruction = instruction.Previous;
}
for (int i = mr.Parameters.Count; i >= 0; --i)
{
objInstruction = objInstruction.Previous;
}
if (objInstruction.OpCode == OpCodes.Ldloc_0 ||
objInstruction.OpCode == OpCodes.Ldloc_1 ||
objInstruction.OpCode == OpCodes.Ldloc_2 ||
objInstruction.OpCode == OpCodes.Ldloc_3)
{
var localIndex = objInstruction.OpCode.Op2 - OpCodes.Ldloc_0.Op2;
typeRef = locals[localIndex].VariableType;
}
else
{
switch (objInstruction.Operand)
{
case FieldDefinition fd:
typeRef = fd.DeclaringType;
break;
case VariableDefinition vd:
typeRef = vd.VariableType;
break;
}
}
}
where locals is methodDef.Body.Variables
But this is, of course, not enough, because the arguments to a function can be calls to other functions, like in f(g("hello")). It looks like the case above where I inspect previous instructions must repeat the actions of the virtual machine when it actually executes the code. I do not execute it, of course, but I need to recognize function calls and replace them and their arguments with their respective returns (even if placeholders). It looks like a major pain.
Is there a simpler way? Maybe there is something built-in already?
I am not aware of an easy way to achieve this.
The "easiest" way I can think of is to walk the stack and find where the reference used as the target of the call is pushed.
Basically, starting from the call instruction go back one instruction at a time taking into account how each one affects the stack; this way you can find the exact instruction that pushes the reference used as the target of the call (a long time ago I wrote something like that; you can use the code at https://github.com/lytico/db4o/blob/master/db4o.net/Db4oTool/Db4oTool/Core/StackAnalyzer.cs as inspiration).
You'll need also to consider scenarios in which the pushed reference is produced through a method/property; for example, SomeFunction().f(5). In this case you may need to evaluate that method to find out the actual type returned.
Keep in mind that you'll need to handle a lot of different cases; for example, imagine the code bellow:
class Utils
{
public static T Instantiate<T>() where T : new() => new T();
}
class SomeType
{
public void F(int i) {}
}
class Usage
{
static void Main()
{
var o = Utils.Instantiate<SomeType>();
o.F(1);
}
}
while walking the stack you'll find that o is the target of the method call; then you'll evaluate Instantiate<T>() method and will find that it returns new T() and knowing that T is SomeType in this case, that is the type you're looking for.
So the answer of Vagaus helped me come up with a working implementation.
I published it on github - https://github.com/MarkKharitonov/MonoCecilExtensions
Included many unit tests, but I am sure I missed some cases.
Related
I've got a GUI with a TabControl. Each new TabPage is created via a new Thread. I want to call this->tabControl->TabCount, but the tabControl is owned by a thread other than the one I'm calling from. Therefore, I need to Invoke a delegate. However, all the examples I find online show printing to std::cout from each of the delegate methods. I need a return value, in this case an int.
delegate int MyDel();
int InvokeTabCount()
{
if (this->InvokeRequired)
{
MyDel^ del = gcnew MyDel(this, &MyTabControl::InvokeTabCount);
auto temp = this->Invoke(del); // can't just "return this->Invoke(del)"
return temp; // Invoke() returns a System::Object^
}
else
{
return this->tabControl->TabCount;
}
}
void CreateNewTab()
{
// do stuff
this->tabControl->TabPages->Insert(InvokeTabCount() - 1, myNewTab); // insert a tab
this->tabControl->SelectTab(InvokeTabCount() - 2); // OutOfBounds and tabPageNew
}
System::Void MethodToAddNewTabPage() //actually a click event but whatever
{
System::Threading::Thread^ newThread =
gcnew System::Threading::Thread(
gcnew System::Threading::ThreadStart(this, &MyTabControl::CreateNewTab));
newThread->Start();
}
Currently, my InvokeTabCount() method is returning -1 when I simply this->Invoke(del) without returning it. And I am unable to return it because my method expects to return an int instead of a System::Object^ which is what Invoke() returns. However, when debugging I find that auto temp contains the value 2 which is correct. And temp->ToString() contains the value "2" which would also be correct.
How do I return this->Invoke(del)?
Do I need to set the value of a global variable from within my InvokeTabCount() method? I suppose I could find a way to translate from System::String^ to std::string to utilize std::stoi(), but that seems like an odd workaround.
Current solution:
delegate int MyDel();
int InvokeTabCount()
{
if (this->InvokeRequired)
{
MyDel^ del = gcnew MyDel(this, &MyTabControl::InvokeTabCount);
auto temp = this->Invoke(del);
return int::Parse(temp->ToString());
}
else
{
return this->tabControl->TabCount;
}
}
The result is an integer, boxed and contained in an Object^ reference. You should be able to simply cast it to int.
If you want to be extra safe, do a null check and verify that temp->GetType() returns int::typeid, but that's probably overkill since you're creating the delegate (still in the typed form) right there.
I am getting started with Haxe and OpenFl, and have some experience with Javascript and Lua.
It was going pretty well, till I got to a point where I needed a function similar to wait() in Lua, etc, which stops the script until the number of seconds you set is over.
How would I go about doing this?
EDIT: To clarify, I am building to Flash.
Although this is old, I wanted to add another point for reference. The OP mentioned in a comment this was for a game. One method I often use is (and could probably be put in a library):
var timerCount:Float = 0;
var maxTimerCounter:Float = 5;
function update () {
timerCounter += elapsedTime;
if (timerCounter > maxTimerCounter){
onTimerComplete();
timerCount = 0;
}
}
In SYS you are looking for:
static function sleep( seconds : Float ) : Void
Suspend the current execution for the given time (in seconds).
Example: Sys.sleep(.5);
http://haxe.org/api/sys/
Edit: User is porting to flash.
So the suggestion is to use Timer
http://haxe.org/api/haxe/timer
In Timer the suggestion is to use
static function delay( f : Void -> Void, time_ms : Int ) : Timer
Someone on stack overflow has an example that looks like this: haxe.Timer.delay(callback(someFunction,"abc"), 10); located here... Pass arguments to a delayed function with Haxe
For the Flash compile target, the best you can do is use a timer, and something like this setTimeout() function.
This means slicing your function into two - everything before the setTimeout(), and everything after that, which is in a separate function that the timeout can call.
so somethine like, eg:
tooltipTimerId = GlobalTimer.setTimeout(
Tooltip.TOOLTIP_DELAY_MS,
handleTooltipAppear,
tootipParams
);
[...]
class GlobalTimer {
private static var timerList:Array<Timer>;
public static function setTimeout(milliseconds:Int, func:Dynamic, args:Array<Dynamic>=null):Int {
var timer:Timer = new Timer(milliseconds);
var id = addTimer(timer, timerList);
timer.run = function() {
Reflect.callMethod(null, func, args);
clearTimeout(id);
}
return id;
}
private static function addTimer(timer:Timer, arr:Array<Timer>):Int {
for (i in 0...arr.length) {
if (null == arr[i]) {
arr[i] = timer;
return i;
}
}
arr.push(timer);
return arr.length -1;
}
public static function clearTimeout(id:Int) {
var timers:Array<Timer> = GlobalTimer.getInstance().timerList;
try {
timers[id].stop();
timers[id] = null;
} catch(e:Error) {/* Nothing we can do if it fails, really. */}
}
}
I ran into a rather odd closure issue related to spock unit testing and wondered if anyone could explain this.
If we imagine a dao, model, and service as follows:
interface CustomDao {
List<Integer> getIds();
Model getModelById(int id);
}
class CustomModel {
int id;
}
class CustomService {
CustomDao customDao
public List<Object> createOutputSet() {
List<Model> models = new ArrayList<Model>();
List<Integer> ids = customDao.getIds();
for (Integer id in ids) {
models.add(customDao.getModelById(id));
}
return models;
}
}
I would like to unit test the CustomService.createOutputSet. I have created the following specification:
class TestSpec extends Specification {
def 'crazy closures'() {
def mockDao = Mock(CustomDao)
def idSet = [9,10]
given: 'An initialized object'
def customService = new CustomService
customService.customDao = mockDao
when: 'createOutput is called'
def outputSet = customService.createOutputSet()
then: 'the following methods should be called'
1*mockDao.getIds() >> {
return idSet
}
for (int i=0; i<idSet.size(); i++) {
int id = idSet.get(i)
1*mockDao.getModelById(idSet.get(i)) >> {
def tmp = new Model()
int tmpId = id // idSet.get(i)
return tmp
}
}
and: 'each compute package is accurate'
2 == outputSet.size()
9 == outputSet.get(0).getId()
10 == outputSet.get(1).getId()
}
}
Notice that in here I test two things. First, I initialize the dao with my mock, verify that the daos are correctly called and return the proper data, and then I verify that I get the proper output (i.e. "and:").
The tricky part is the for loop, in which I wanted to return models from the mock dao that are related to the method parameter. In the above example, if I use a simple for (__ in idSet), the models only return with id 10: outputSet.get(0).getId() == outputSet.get(1).getId() == 10. If I use the traditional for loop, and set the model with idSet.get(i), I get an IndexOutOfBoundsException . The only way to make this work is by retrieving the value in a local variable (id) and setting with variable, as above.
I know this is related to groovy closures and I suspect that spock captures the mock calls into a set of closures before executing them, which means that the model creation depends on the outer state of the closure. I understand why I would get the IndexOutOfBoundsException, but I don't understand why int id = idSet.get(i) is captured by the closure whereas i is not.
What is the difference?
Note: this is not the live code but rather simplified to demonstrate the crux of my challenge. I would not and do not make two subsequent dao calls on getIds() and getModelById().
While stubbing getModelById by a closure, the arguments to the closure has to match with that of the method. If you try something like below, you would not need the local variable id inside for anymore.
for (int i=0; i<idSet.size(); i++) {
//int id = idSet.get(i)
mockDao.getModelById(idSet.get(i)) >> {int id ->
def tmp = new Model()
tmp.id = id // id is closure param which represents idSet.get(i)
return tmp
}
}
Simplified version would be to use each
idSet.each {
mockDao.getModelById(it) >> {int id ->
def tmp = new Model()
tmp.id = id // id is closure param which represents idSet.get(i)
tmp
}
}
Do we need to worry about how many times method is called if it is being stubbed?
Accessing mutable local variables from a closure whose execution is deferred is a common source of errors not specific to Spock.
I don't understand why int id = idSet.get(i) is captured by the closure whereas i is not.
The former gives rise to a separate hoisted variable per iteration whose value is constant. The latter gives rise to a single hoisted variable whose value changes over time (and before the result generator executes).
Instead of solving the problem by introducing a temporary variable, a better solution (already given by #dmahapatro) is to declare an int id -> closure parameter. If it's deemed good enough to stub the calls without enforcing them, the loop can be omitted altogether. Yet another potential solution is to construct the return values eagerly:
idSet.each { id ->
def model = new Model()
model.id = id
1 * mockDao.getModelById(id) >> model
}
In MonoTouch I need to process each object in an NSSet. My attempt, using Enumerate, is as follows:
public override void ReturnResults ( BarcodePickerController picker, NSSet results )
{
var n = results.Count; // Debugging - value is 3
results.Enumerate( delegate( NSObject obj, ref bool stop )
{
var foundCode = ( obj as BarcodeResult ); // Executed only once, not 3 times
if ( foundCode != null )
{
controller.BarcodeScannedResult (foundCode);
}
});
// Etc
}
Although the method is invoked with three objects in results, only one object is processed in the delegate. I would have expected the delegate to be executed three times, but I must have the wrong idea of how it works.
Unable to find any documentation or examples. Any suggestion much appreciated.
You have to set the ref parameter to false. This instructs the handler to continue enumerating:
if ( foundCode != null )
{
controller.BarcodeScannedResult (foundCode);
stop = false; // inside the null check
}
Here is the ObjC equivalent from Apple documentation.
Or you could try this extension method to make it easier..
public static class MyExtensions {
public static IEnumerable<T> ItemsAs<T>(this NSSet set) where T : NSObject {
List<T> res = new List<T>();
set.Enumerate( delegate( NSObject obj, ref bool stop ) {
T item = (T)( obj ); // Executed only once, not 3 times
if ( item != null ) {
res.Add (item);
stop = false; // inside the null check
}
});
return res;
}
}
Then you can do something like:
foreach(BarcodeResult foundCode in results.ItemsAs<BarcodeResult>()) {
controller.BarcodeScannedResult (foundCode);
}
Note: Keep in mind this creates another list and copies everything to it, which is less efficient. I did this because "yield return" isn't allowed in anonymous methods, and the alternative ways I could think of to make it a real enumerator without the copy were much much more code. Most of the sets I deal with are tiny so this doesn't matter, but if you have a big set this isn't ideal.
Consider the following struct:
public struct vip
{
string email;
string name;
int category;
public vip(string email, int category, string name = "")
{
this.email = email;
this.name = name;
this.category = category;
}
}
Is there a performance difference between the following two calls?
var e = new vip(email: "foo", name: "bar", category: 32);
var e = new vip("foo", 32, "bar");
Is there a difference if there are no optional parameters defined?
I believe none. It's only a language/compiler feature, call it syntactic sugar if you like. The generated CLR code should be the same.
There's a compile-time cost, but not a runtime one...and the compile time is very, very minute.
Like extension methods or auto-implemented properties, this is just magic the compiler does, but in reality generates the same IL we're all familiar with and have been using for years.
Think about it this way, if you're using all the parameters, the compiler would call the method using all of them, if not, it would generate something like this behind the scenes:
var e = new vip(email: "foo", category: 32); //calling
//generated, this is what it's actually saving you from writing
public vip(string email, int category) : this(email, category, "bar") { }
No it is a compile-time feature only. If you inspect the generated IL you'll see no sign of the named parameters. Likewise, optional parameters is also a compile-time feature.
One thing to keep in mind regarding named parameters is that the names are now part of the signature for calling a method (if used obviously) at compile time. I.e. if names change the calling code must be changed as well if you recompile. A deployed assembly, on the other hand, will not be affected until recompiled, as the names are not present in the IL.
There shouldn't be any. Basically, named parameters and optional parameters are syntactic sugar; the compiler writes the actual values or the default values directly into the call site.
EDIT: Note that because they are a compiler feature, this means that changes to the parameters only get updated if you recompile the "clients". So if you change the default value of an optional parameter, for example, you will need to recompile all "clients", or else they will use the old default value.
Actually, there is cost at x64 CLR
Look at here http://www.dotnetperls.com/named-parameters
I am able to reproduce the result: named call takes 4.43 ns, and normal call takes 3.48 ns
(program runs in x64)
However, in x86, both take around 0.32 ns
The code is attached below, compile and run it yourself to see the difference.
Note that in VS2012 the default targat is AnyCPU x86 prefered, you have to switch to x64 to see the difference.
using System;
using System.Diagnostics;
class Program
{
const int _max = 100000000;
static void Main()
{
Method1();
Method2();
var s1 = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < _max; i++)
{
Method1();
}
s1.Stop();
var s2 = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int i = 0; i < _max; i++)
{
Method2();
}
s2.Stop();
Console.WriteLine(((double)(s1.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds * 1000 * 1000) /
_max).ToString("0.00 ns"));
Console.WriteLine(((double)(s2.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds * 1000 * 1000) /
_max).ToString("0.00 ns"));
Console.Read();
}
static void Method1()
{
Method3(flag: true, size: 1, name: "Perl");
}
static void Method2()
{
Method3(1, "Perl", true);
}
static void Method3(int size, string name, bool flag)
{
if (!flag && size != -1 && name != null)
{
throw new Exception();
}
}
}