VTK Smartpointer New() - vtk

I am using VTK for Visualization and my code is full of their smartpointers, like:
vtkSmartPointer<vtkPolyDataMapper> mapper = vtkSmartPointer<vtkPolyDataMapper>::New();
vtkSmartPointer<vtkRenderer> renderer = vtkSmartPointer<vtkRenderer>::New();
what I was wondering about if this New() should not be followed later by Delete(). Or does
VTK destroy everything "automatically". Many times by using Delete() my code crashes. So, I was wondering if I should use it in first place and what is behind New(), a shared pointer or something like this?

vtkSmartPointer will destroy the object "automatically" when out of scope. The Delete() method is called in the dtor of it.
Without vtkSmartPointer, you need to take care the memory management issues by yourself and call Delete(), like following
vtkObject* MyObject = vtkObject::New();
MyObject->Delete();
vtkSmartPointer<vtkObject> MyObject = vtkSmartPointer<vtkObject>::New();
See the wiki page: http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK/Tutorials/SmartPointers

Another alternative to
vtkSmartPointer<vtkObject> MyObject = vtkSmartPointer<vtkObject>::New();
is
vtkNew<vtkObject> MyObject;
Just note that when passing MyObject to functions/methods that take in a vtkObject*, you have to use MyObject.GetPointer() e.g.
foo->SetObject(MyObject.GetPointer());

Related

Self referencing in global, static object in CoffeeScript

Is there any way to accomplish self referencing as below within a global, static object in CS?
#Obj
x: ['string']
y: [#x]
From what I've read, this doesn't seem possible. Mainly due to the object having not been created yet at time of assignment of y. Some form of getter and setter (e.g. __definedSetter__, __defineGetter__, etc.) seem like the most likely options but I would have to turn this object into a class and there are a whole slew of issues with that in CS and I have little reason to do this aside from this self referencing issue. Is there any workaround?
Thanks!
As you mentioned, this would be possible with a class (you can reference and assign Obj.x to Obj.y in the constructor). If it's a static object, I'd just assign it in a separate line with #Obj.y = [#Obj.x].

How to provide and consume require.js modules in scala.js (and extending classes)

I'm doing this Ensime package for Atom.io https://github.com/ensime/ensime-atom and I've been thinking about the possibility to use scala.js instead of writing Coffeescript.
Atom is a web based editor which is scripted with js and is node.js based. A plugin/package defines it's main entry point by pointing out a javascript object with a few specific.
I figured I should start out simple and try using scala.js replacing the simplest coffeescript file I have:
{View} = require 'atom-space-pen-views'
# View for the little status messages down there where messages from Ensime server can be shown
module.exports =
class StatusbarView extends View
#content: ->
#div class: 'ensime-status inline-block'
initialize: ->
serialize: ->
init: ->
#attach()
attach: =>
statusbar = document.querySelector('status-bar')
statusbar?.addLeftTile {item: this}
setText: (text) =>
#text("Ensime: #{text}").show()
destroy: ->
#detach()
As you can see this exports a require.js module and is a class extending a class fetched with require as well.
Sooo.
I'm thinking I'd just use Dynamic for the require dep as I've seen on SO How to invoke nodejs modules from scala.js?:
import js.Dynamic.{global => g}
import js.DynamicImplicits._
private[views] object SpacePen {
private val spacePenViews = require("atom-space-pen-views")
val view = spacePenViews.view
}
But if I wanted to type the super-class, could I just make a facade-trait and do asInstanceOf?
Secondly, I wonder how I can export my class as a node module. I found this:
https://github.com/rockymadden/scala-node/blob/master/main/src/main/coffeescript/example.coffee
Is this the right way? Do I need to do the sandboxing? Couldn't I just get moduleimported from global and write module.exports = _some_scala_object_?
I'm also wondering how I could extend existing js classes. The same problem as asked here, but I don't really understand the answer:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/scala-js/l0gSOSiqubs
My code so far:
private[views] object SpacePen {
private val spacePenViews = js.Dynamic.global.require("atom-space-pen-views")
type View = spacePenViews.view
}
class StatusBarView extends SpacePen.View {
override def content =
super.div()
}
gives me compile errors that I can't extend sealed trait Dynamic. Of course.
Any pointers highly appreciated!
I'm not particularly expert in Node per se, but to answer your first question, yes -- if you have a pointer to a JS object, and you know the details of its type, you can pretty much always define a facade trait and asInstanceOf to use it. That ought to work.
As for the last bit, you basically can't extend JS classes in Scala.js -- it just doesn't work. The way most of us get around that is by defining implicit classes, or using implicit def's, to get the appearance of extending without actually doing so.
For example, given JS class Foo, I can write
implicit class RichFoo(foo:Foo) {
def method1() = { ... }
}
This is actually a wrapper around Foo, but calling code can simply call foo.method1() without worrying about that detail.
You can see this approach in action very heavily in jquery-facade, particularly in the relationship between JQuery (the pure facade), JQueryTyped (some tweaked methods over JQuery to make them work better in Scala), and JQueryExtensions (some higher-level functions built around JQuery). These are held together using implicit def's in package.scala. As far as calling code is concerned, all of these simply look like methods on JQuery.

How to avoid creating objects to check or get content from Maps in Java

I am implementing my own Map in Java, using a custom class I made.
I already implemented the hashCode and equals without any problem.
I just have a question more related into performance and stuff like that.
So I will check many times in my application if a specific value is inside the map, for that, for that I have to create a object and then use the methods containsKey of Map.
My question is...
Is there any other way? without being always creating the object???
I cant have all the objects in my context universe, so that isn't a way...
I know I can just point the object to 'null' after using it, but still, it's not so elegant, creating objects just to check if there is the same object inside =S
Are there any other conventions?
Thank you very much in advance!
EDIT:
Stuff typed = new Stuff(stuff1, stuff2, (char) stuff3);
if(StuffWarehouse.containsKey(typed))
{
//do stuff
}
//after this I won't want to use that object again so...
typed = null;

Kohana helper attribute

I have a question that keeps bothering me. Currently, I have started using Kohana 3.2 Framework. I've written a helper to handle some functionality - I have a number of methods, which are (as it should be) declared STATIC. But, all of these methods are somehow working with the database, so I need to load a model. Currently, every method has a non-static variable like this:
$comment = new Model_Comments;
$comment->addComment("abc");
OK, it seems to be working, but then I wanted to get rid of this redundancy by using class attribute to hold the instance of the model (with is class as well).
Something like this:
private static $comment; // Declaring attribute
self::$comment = new Model_Comment; // This is done within helper __constuct method
self::$comment->addComment("abc"); // And call it within the method.
But, I got failed with: Call to a member function addComment() on a non-object
Question is: is it possible to do it ? Maybe there are some other approaches ?
Sorry for a long story and, thanks in advice! :P
A static method cannot call a non-static method without operating on an instance of the class. So, what you're proposing won't work. There may be a way do accomplish something similar, but what about trying the following:
You could implement the singleton or factory pattern for your "helper" class. Then, you could create the model (as an attribute) as you instantiate/return the instance. With an actual instance of your "helper" class, you won't have to worry about the static scope issues.
In other words, you can create a helper-like class as a "normal" class in your application that, upon creation, always has the necessary model available.
I'd be happy to help further if this approach makes sense.
David

Ninject - initialise objects

I am new to ninject, I am wondering how I can run custom initizlisation code when constructing the injected objects? ie. I have a Sword class which implements IWeapon, but I want to pass an hit point value to the Sword class constructor, how do I achieve that? Do I need to write my own provider?
A minor question, IKernel kernel = new StandardKernel(new Module1(), new Module2(), ...); what is the actual use of having multiple modules in Kernel? I sorta understand it, but could someone give me a formal explaination and use case?
Thanks a lot!
James
If you have a class Sword with this constructor:
public Sword(int hitPoints)
...
Rather than implementing a Provider, you may prefer to instantiate Swords like this:
IWeapon sword1 = kernel.Get<IWeapon>(With.Parameters.ConstructorArgument("hitPoints", 10));
IWeapon sword2 = kernel.Get<IWeapon>(With.Parameters.ConstructorArgument("hitPoints", 20));

Resources