This post shows that Objective-C do not have "real" private methods or properties, which means that even if you do not expose them in the header file, you can still access them at runtime. Is this the case in Swift properties and methods marked with private?
While the compiler prevents you from accessing private properties directly, you still have read-only access to their values via Swift's nascent introspection. Consider a structure with two private variables:
// FileOne.swift
struct Secret {
private var password = "Password"
private var secretNumber = 42
}
In a different file, we create an instance. The compiler won't let us access secretNumber or password directly, but we can use reflect to get what we want:
// FileTwo.swift
var a = Secret()
var b = reflect(a)
for i in 0..<b.count {
println("\(b[i].0): \(b[i].1.value)")
}
// password: Password
// secretNumber: 42
Private methods are unreachable this way, for now.
Related
I need to get types from an interface by doing something like below, but I need to do it inside a function. Is there any way to do this using typescript generics?
I need the function to pass request bodies, along with an interface specifying their types and verify that the request body has the necessary items as well as correct format.
Note: I am using tsoa with express, so any other library or technique to properly validate request bodies would be fine.
interface someInterface {
foo: string;
bar: number;
}
const testObject: someInterface = req.body;
verifyObject(testObject);
/*
ensure foo and bar are of correct type, length etc.
(I will verify types, I just need a way of
getting the interface keys in a reusable function.)
*/
function verifyObject<T>(obj: T): void {
class temp implements T {} // does not work
const keys = Object.keys(new temp());
// use keys
}
You almost have it - made a generic function, so its param will be the object of the Interface, and accessing keys of the object is, well, you know it:
function verifyObject<T>(obj: T): void {
const keys = Object.keys(obj);
}
verifyObject<someInterface>(someObj);
In some rare cases where this would actually be acceptable, like in unit tests, you may want to get or set the value of a private attribute, or call a private method of a type where it shouldn't be possible. Is it really impossible? If not, how can you do it?
There are two ways you can access a private method of a type, and one way to get private attributes. All require meta-programming except for the first way to invoke private methods, whose explanation still involves meta-programming anyway.
As an example, we will be implementing a Hidden class that hides a value using a private attribute, and a Password class that uses Hidden to store a password. Do not copy this example to your own code. This is not how you would reasonably handle passwords; this is solely for example's sake.
Calling private methods
Trusting other classes
Metamodel::Trusting is the meta-role that implements the behaviour needed for higher-order workings (types of types, or kinds, referred to from hereon out as HOWs) to be able to trust other types. Metamodel::ClassHOW (classes, and by extension, grammars) is the only HOW that's builtin to Rakudo that does this role.
trusts is a keyword that can be used from within packages to permit another package to call its private methods (this does not include private attributes). For example, a rough implementation of a password container class could look like this using trusts:
class Password { ... }
class Hidden {
trusts Password;
has $!value;
submethod BUILD(Hidden:D: :$!value) {}
method new(Hidden:_: $value) {
self.bless: :$value
}
method !dump(Hidden:D: --> Str:D) {
$!value.perl
}
}
class Password {
has Hidden:_ $!value;
submethod BUILD(Password:D: Hidden:D :$!value) {}
method new(Password:_: Str:D $password) {
my Hidden:D $value .= new: $password;
self.bless: :$value
}
method !dump(Password:D: --> Str:D) {
qc:to/END/;
{self.^name}:
$!value: {$!value!Hidden::dump}
END
}
method say(Password:D: --> Nil) {
say self!dump;
}
}
my Password $insecure .= new: 'qwerty';
$insecure.say;
# OUTPUT:
# Password:
# $!value: "qwerty"
#
Using the ^find_private_method meta-method
Metamodel::PrivateMethodContainer is a meta-role that implements the behaviour for HOWs that should be able to contain private methods. Metamodel::MethodContainer and Metamodel::MultiMethodContainer are the other meta-roles that implement the behaviour for methods, but those won't be discussed here. Metamodel::ClassHOW (classes, and by extension, grammars), Metamodel::ParametricRoleHOW and Metamodel::ConcreteRoleHOW (roles), and Metamodel::EnumHOW (enums) are the HOWs builtin to Rakudo that do this role. One of Metamodel::PrivateMethodContainer's methods is find_private_method, which takes an object and a method name as parameters and either returns Mu when none is found, or the Method instance representing the method you're looking up.
The password example can be rewritten not to use the trusts keyword by removing the line that makes Hidden trust Password and changing Password!dump to this:
method !dump(Password:D: --> Str:D) {
my Method:D $dump = $!value.^find_private_method: 'dump';
qc:to/END/;
{self.^name}:
$!value: {$dump($!value)}
END
}
Getting and setting private attributes
Metamodel::AttributeContainer is the meta-role that implements the behaviour for types that should contain attributes. Unlike with methods, this is the only meta-role needed to handle all types of attributes. Of the HOWs builtin to Rakudo, Metamodel::ClassHOW (classes, and by extension, grammars), Metamodel::ParametricRoleHOW and Metamodel::ConcreteRoleHOW (roles), Metamodel::EnumHOW (enums), and Metamodel::DefiniteHOW (used internally as the value self is bound to in accessor methods for public attributes) do this role.
One of the meta-methods Metamodel::AttributeContainer adds to a HOW is get_attribute_for_usage, which given an object and an attribute name, throws if no attribute is found, otherwise returns the Attribute instance representing the attribute you're looking up.
Attribute is how attributes are stored internally by Rakudo. The two methods of Attribute we care about here are get_value, which takes an object that contains the Attribute instance and returns its value, and set_value, which takes an object that contains the Attribute instance and a value, and sets its value.
The password example can be rewritten so Hidden doesn't implement a dump private method like so:
class Hidden {
has $!value;
submethod BUILD(Hidden:D: :$!value) {}
method new(Hidden:_: $value) {
self.bless: :$value;
}
}
class Password {
has Hidden:_ $!value;
submethod BUILD(Password:D: Hidden:D :$!value) {}
method new(Password:_: Str:D $password) {
my Hidden:D $value .= new: $password;
self.bless: :$value
}
method !dump(Password:D: --> Str:D) {
my Attribute:D $value-attr = $!value.^get_attribute_for_usage: '$!value';
my Str:D $password = $value-attr.get_value: $!value;
qc:to/END/;
{self.^name}:
$!value: {$password.perl}
END
}
method say(Password:D: --> Nil) {
say self!dump;
}
}
my Password:D $secure .= new: 'APrettyLongPhrase,DifficultToCrack';
$secure.say;
# OUTPUT:
# Password:
# $!value: "APrettyLongPhrase,DifficultToCrack"
#
F.A.Q.
What does { ... } do?
This stubs a package, allowing you to declare it before you actually define it.
What does qc:to/END/ do?
You've probably seen q:to/END/ before, which allows you to write a multiline string. Adding c before :to allows closures to be embedded in the string.
Why are grammars classes by extension?
Grammars use Metamodel::GrammarHOW, which is a subclass of Metamodel::ClassHOW.
You say ^find_private_method and ^get_attribute_for_usage take an object as their first parameter, but you omit it in the example. Why?
Calling a meta-method on an object passes itself as the first parameter implicitly. If we were calling them directly on the object's HOW, we would be passing the object as the first parameter.
I have this code:
use schnorrkel;
use schnorrkel::{
derive::{ChainCode, Derivation, CHAIN_CODE_LENGTH},
signing_context, Keypair, MiniSecretKey, PublicKey, SecretKey,
};
use substrate_primitives::crypto::Pair as PairT;
use substrate_primitives::sr25519;
use substrate_primitives::sr25519::Pair;
fn main() {
let keypair = sr25519::Pair::generate();
let private_key = keypair.somehow_get_the_private_key_func();
}
I tried to use the SecretKey trait (imported at the beginning), but it says SecretKey is private, so the only way I am thinking of is to modify Substrate's sources to add a function that gives me the private key, but I don't want to do it by source code alteration.
What would be the way to go?
What do you actually need to do? You shouldn't be getting a private key in the runtime at all.
If you want to sign something in your runtime, there are helper functions that will sign a message, if you just pass in the public key, with its corresponding private key.
https://substrate.dev/rustdocs/master/sp_io/crypto/fn.sr25519_sign.html
testing: https://substrate.dev/rustdocs/master/sp_core/testing/struct.KeyStore.html
var method = 'serviceName.MethodName'
I Just want to call it like
serviceName.methodName(function(output callback){
});
Is there any approach to call it.thanks
There are two methods that I can think of now.
JS eval
You can use the javascript eval function to convert any string into code snippet like below. Although eval is a quick solution but should not be used unless you dont have any other option by your side.
var method = 'UserService.getData';
eval(method)();
Factory pattern
Use a below pattern to get the service
You would need to define the services in such a manner that you can access them using a pattern.
var Services = {
// UserService and AccountsService are again objects having some callable functions.
UserService : {getData: function(){}, getAge: function(){}},
AccountsService : {getData: function(){}, getAge: function(){}},
// getService is the heart of the code which will get you the required service depending on the string paramter you pass.
getService : function(serviceName){
var service = '';
switch(serviceName){
case 'User':
service = this.UserService;
break;
case 'Accounts':
service = this.AccountsService;
break;
}
return service;
}
}
You can use get the required service with below code
Services.getService('User')
I'm not aware of any way you can resolve the serviceName part of that string to an object, without using eval. So obviously you need to be extremely careful.
Perhaps:
if (method.match(/^[a-zA-Z0-9_]+\.[a-zA-Z0-9_]+$/) {
var servicePart = eval(method.split('.')[0]);
var methodPart = method.split('.')[1];
servicePart[methodPart](...)
}
There are two separate problems in your question:
How to access object property by property name (string)?
How to access object by it's name (string)?
Regarding the first problem - it is easy to access object property by string using the following notation:
const myObject = {
myProp: 1,
};
console.log(myObject['myProp']);
And regarding the second problem - it depends on what serviceName is:
if it is a property of some other object, then use someObject['serviceName']['MethodName']
if it is a local variable, consider using a Map (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Map) to associate strings with objects;
How do we use 'inheritance' in Node.JS? I heard that prototype is similar to interfaces in java. But I have no idea how to use it!
Although there are various ways of performing inheritance and OO in javascript, in Node.js you would typically use the built in util.inherits function to create a constructor which inherits from another.
See http://book.mixu.net/ch6.html for a good discussion on this subject.
for example:
var util = require("util");
var events = require("events");
function MyOwnClass() {
// ... your code.
}
util.inherits(MyOwnClass, events.EventEmitter);
Creating an object constructor in pure JS:
They're just functions like any other JS function but invoked with the new keyword.
function Constructor(){ //constructors are typically capitalized
this.public = function(){ alert(private); }
var private = "Untouchable outside of this func scope.";
}
Constructor.static = function(){ alert('Callable as "Constructor.static()"'); }
var instance = new Constructor();
Inheritance:
function SubConstructor(){
this.anotherMethod(){ alert('nothing special'); }
}
function SubConstructor.prototype = new Constructor();
var instance = new SubConstructor();
instance.public(); //alerts that private string
The key difference is that prototypal inheritance comes from objects, rather than the things that build them.
One disadvantage is that there's no pretty way to write something that makes inheritance of instance vars like private possible.
The whopping gigantor mega-advantage, however, is that we can mess with the prototype without impacting the super constructor, changing a method or property for every object even after they've been built. This is rarely done in practice in higher-level code since it would make for an awfully confusing API but it can be handy for under-the-hood type stuff where you might want to share a changing value across a set of instances without just making it global.
The reason we get this post-instantiated behavior is because JS inheritance actually operates on a lookup process where any method call runs up the chain of instances and their constructor prototype properties until it finds the method called or quits. This can actually get slow if you go absolutely insane with cascading inheritance (which is widely regarded as an anti-pattern anyway).
I don't actually hit prototype specifically for inheritacne a lot myself, instead preferring to build up objects via a more composited approach but it's very handy when you need it and offers a lot of less obvious utility. For instance when you have an object that would be useful to you if only one property were different, but you don't want to touch the original.
var originInstance = {
originValue:'only on origin',
theOneProperty:'that would make this old object useful if it were different'
}
function Pseudoclone(){
this.theOneProperty = "which is now this value";
}
Pseudoclone.prototype = originInstance;
var newInstance = new Psuedoclone();
//accesses originInstance.originValue but its own theOneProperty
There are more modern convenience methods like Object.create but only function constructors give you the option to encapsulate private/instance vars so I tend to favor them since 9 times out of 10 anything not requiring encapsulation will just be an object literal anyway.
Overriding and Call Object Order:
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"undefined"
Note: the parens around the constructor allow it to be defined and evaluated in one spot so I could treat it like an object on the same line.
myMethod is alerting "undefined" because an externally overwritten method is defined outside of the constructor's closure which is what effective makes internal vars private-like. So you can replace the method but you won't have access to what it did.
Now let's do some commenting.
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
//instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"public referencing private"
and...
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
//this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
//instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"prototype"
Note that prototype methods also don't have access to that internal private var for the same reason. It's all about whether something was defined in the constructor itself. Note that params passed to the constructor will also effectively be private instance vars which can be handy for doing things like overriding a set of default options.
Couple More Details
It's actually not necessary to use parens when invoking with new unless you have required parameters but I tend to leave them in out of habit (it works to think of them as functions that fire and then leave an object representing the scope of that firing behind) and figured it would be less alien to a Java dev than new Constructor;
Also, with any constructor that requires params, I like to add default values internally with something like:
var param = param || '';
That way you can pass the constructor into convenience methods like Node's util.inherit without undefined values breaking things for you.
Params are also effectively private persistent instance vars just like any var defined in a constructor.
Oh and object literals (objects defined with { key:'value' }) are probably best thought of as roughly equivalent to this:
var instance = new Object();
instance.key = 'value';
With a little help from Coffeescript, we can achieve it much easier.
For e.g.: to extend a class:
class Animal
constructor: (#name) ->
alive: ->
false
class Parrot extends Animal
constructor: ->
super("Parrot")
dead: ->
not #alive()
Static property:
class Animal
#find: (name) ->
Animal.find("Parrot")
Instance property:
class Animal
price: 5
sell: (customer) ->
animal = new Animal
animal.sell(new Customer)
I just take the sample code Classes in CoffeeScript. You can learn more about CoffeeScript at its official site: http://coffeescript.org/