How to use "javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem.getSequence" in Octave - octave

I have been using Matlab for some time, but have just started using Octave. I am trying to read a midi file using the following code on my Windows machine:
javaaddpath('C:/Program Files/Java/jdk1.8.0_45/jre/lib/rt.jar');
midiFile = javaObject('java.io.File', file_name);
if ~midiFile.exists
error('Unable to find file %s',file_name);
end
seq = javaObject('javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem.getSequence', midiFile);
But I am getting the following error:
error: [java] java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem.getSequence
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks!

The function javaObject() is used to call a class constructor. However, getSequence() is a "normal" method of the javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem class.
octave> help javaObject
-- Built-in Function: JOBJ = javaObject (CLASSNAME)
-- Built-in Function: JOBJ = javaObject (CLASSNAME, ARG1, ...)
Create a Java object of class CLASSSNAME, by calling the class
constructor with the arguments ARG1, ...
octave> man javaMethod
-- Built-in Function: RET = javaMethod (METHODNAME, OBJ)
-- Built-in Function: RET = javaMethod (METHODNAME, OBJ, ARG1, ...)
Invoke the method METHODNAME on the Java object OBJ with the
arguments ARG1, ....
For static methods, OBJ can be a string representing the fully
qualified name of the corresponding class.
Note that typically, the second argument to javaMethod is an object, but can also be a string with the class name. Therefore, you need to do:
octave> midiFile = javaObject ("java.io.File", "Downloads/MIDI_sample.mid");
octave> seq = javaMethod ("getSequence", "javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem", midiFile )
seq =
<Java object: javax.sound.midi.Sequence>

Related

How to write function of Fortran f90 in a separate file?

I want to write function in a separate file myfunction.f90 and how to modify test.f90 to call it
program test
implicit none
external myfunc
real :: x,myfunc
x = 5
write(*,*) myfunc(x)
end program test
function myfunc(x)
implicit none
real :: myfunc,x
myfunc = x**2
end function myfunc
I separate into 2 files test.f90
program test
implicit none
external myfunc
real :: x,myfunc
x = 5
write(*,*) myfunc(x)
end program test
and myfunc.f90
function myfunc(x)
implicit none
real :: myfunc,x
myfunc = x**2
end function myfunc
But it does not work
The canonical solution is to create a file with a module that includes all your functions after the contains keyword.
Then reference the module in your program with use mymodule and include both files to the compiler command.

Fortran generic functions based on the return kind

I am trying to create a generic function in Fortran based on the value to be returned, that is, depending on if the output of the function is to be assigned to a single precision real or to a double precision real. The code is:
MODULE kk_M
USE ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: sp = REAL32
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp = REAL64
INTERFACE use_func
MODULE PROCEDURE use_sp_func
MODULE PROCEDURE use_dp_func
END INTERFACE use_func
INTERFACE use_sub
MODULE PROCEDURE use_sp_sub
MODULE PROCEDURE use_dp_sub
END INTERFACE use_sub
CONTAINS
FUNCTION use_sp_func() RESULT(res)
REAL(KIND=sp) :: res
res = 5._sp
END FUNCTION use_sp_func
FUNCTION use_dp_func() RESULT(res)
REAL(KIND=dp) :: res
res = 5._dp
END FUNCTION use_dp_func
SUBROUTINE use_sp_sub(res)
REAL(KIND=sp), INTENT(OUT) :: res
res = 5._sp
END SUBROUTINE use_sp_sub
SUBROUTINE use_dp_sub(res)
REAL(KIND=dp), INTENT(OUT) :: res
res = 5._dp
END SUBROUTINE use_dp_sub
END MODULE kk_M
PROGRAM kk
USE kk_M
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL(KIND=sp) :: num_sp
REAL(KIND=dp) :: num_dp
num_sp = use_func()
WRITE(*,*) num_sp
num_dp = use_func()
WRITE(*,*) num_dp
CALL use_sub(num_sp)
WRITE(*,*) num_sp
CALL use_sub(num_dp)
WRITE(*,*) num_dp
END PROGRAM kk
With the generic subroutines the code compiles and works, but when I add the generic functions it does not compile. I get the following error message with gfortran:
kk.f90:22:3:
FUNCTION use_sp_func() RESULT(res)
1
kk.f90:27:3:
FUNCTION use_dp_func() RESULT(res)
2
Error: Ambiguous interfaces in generic interface 'use_func' for ‘use_sp_func’ at (1) and ‘use_dp_func’ at (2)
kk.f90:46:7:
USE kk_M
1
Fatal Error: Can't open module file ‘kk_m.mod’ for reading at (1): No existe el archivo o el directorio
compilation terminated.
It looks like the compiler cannot distinguish between both functions based on the value to be returned. Is there some way to achieve this?
You cannot distinguish specific functions in a generic interface by their return value. There is no way how the compiler can see what return value type is to be used. A Fortran expression is always evaluated without the surrounding context. Fortran generic disambiguation is based by TKR (type, kind, rank) resolution only using the procedure arguments, not using the return value.
When you have
use_func()
there is no way for the compiler to know which of those two functions should be called. Even when it is used directly in an assignment
x = use_func()
it is evaluated separately. In general, function calls can appear in various complicated expressions. E.g. use_func(use_func()) + use_func(), which one would be which?
This is the reason why several intrinsic functions have another argument that specifies the return type. For example, the transfer() function has a second argument that specifies which type should be returned. Otherwise the compiler would not be able to find out.
Following the advice by Vladimir F, I had a look at the transfer intrisic function and added a mold parameter to my functions to set the return type.
If any input argument to the functions were real they could be used to set the return type as High Performace Mark stated, but since this is not my case I finally used the mold variable.
Now it compiles and work. The code is:
MODULE kk_M
USE ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: sp = REAL32
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp = REAL64
INTERFACE use_func
MODULE PROCEDURE use_sp_func
MODULE PROCEDURE use_dp_func
END INTERFACE use_func
INTERFACE use_sub
MODULE PROCEDURE use_sp_sub
MODULE PROCEDURE use_dp_sub
END INTERFACE use_sub
CONTAINS
FUNCTION use_sp_func(mold) RESULT(res)
REAL(KIND=sp),INTENT(IN) :: mold
REAL(KIND=sp) :: res
IF (.FALSE.) res = mold !To avoid compilation warning about unused variable
res = 5._sp
END FUNCTION use_sp_func
FUNCTION use_dp_func(mold) RESULT(res)
REAL(KIND=dp),INTENT(IN) :: mold
REAL(KIND=dp) :: res
IF (.FALSE.) res = mold !To avoid compilation warning about unused variable
res = 5._dp
END FUNCTION use_dp_func
SUBROUTINE use_sp_sub(res)
REAL(KIND=sp), INTENT(OUT) :: res
res = 5._sp
END SUBROUTINE use_sp_sub
SUBROUTINE use_dp_sub(res)
REAL(KIND=dp), INTENT(OUT) :: res
res = 5._dp
END SUBROUTINE use_dp_sub
END MODULE kk_M
PROGRAM kk
USE kk_M
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL(KIND=sp) :: num_sp
REAL(KIND=dp) :: num_dp
num_sp = use_func(1._sp)
WRITE(*,*) num_sp
num_dp = use_func(1._dp)
WRITE(*,*) num_dp
CALL use_sub(num_sp)
WRITE(*,*) num_sp
CALL use_sub(num_dp)
WRITE(*,*) num_dp
END PROGRAM kk

Constructor of derived types

I am trying to write a constructor for a derived type of an abstract one to solve this other question, but it seems that it's not working, or better, it isn't called at all.
The aim is to have a runtime polymorphism setting the correct number of legs of an animal.
These are the two modules:
animal
module animal_module
implicit none
type, abstract :: animal
private
integer, public :: nlegs = -1
contains
procedure :: legs
end type animal
contains
function legs(this) result(n)
class(animal), intent(in) :: this
integer :: n
n = this%nlegs
end function legs
cat
module cat_module
use animal_module, only : animal
implicit none
type, extends(animal) :: cat
private
contains
procedure :: setlegs => setlegs
end type cat
interface cat
module procedure init_cat
end interface cat
contains
type(cat) function init_cat(this)
class(cat), intent(inout) :: this
print *, "Cat!"
this%nlegs = -4
end function init_cat
main program
program oo
use animal_module
use cat_module
implicit none
type(cat) :: c
type(bee) :: b
character(len = 3) :: what = "cat"
class(animal), allocatable :: q
select case(what)
case("cat")
print *, "you will see a cat"
allocate(cat :: q)
q = cat() ! <----- this line does not change anything
case default
print *, "ohnoes, nothing is prepared!"
stop 1
end select
print *, "this animal has ", q%legs(), " legs."
print *, "cat animal has ", c%legs(), " legs."
end program
The constructor isn't called at all, and the number of legs still remains to -1.
The available non-default constructor for the cat type is given by the module procedure init_cat. This function you have defined like
type(cat) function init_cat(this)
class(cat), intent(inout) :: this
end function init_cat
It is a function with one argument, of class(cat). In your later reference
q = cat()
There is no specific function under the generic cat which matches that reference: the function init_cat does not accept a no-argument reference. The default structure constructor is instead used.
You must reference the generic cat in a way matching your init_cat interface to have that specific function called.
You want to change your init_cat function to look like
type(cat) function init_cat()
! print*, "Making a cat"
init_cat%nlegs = -4
end function init_cat
Then you can reference q=cat() as desired.
Note that in the original, you are attempting to "construct" a cat instance, but you aren't returning this constructed entity as the function result. Instead, you are modifying an argument (already constructed). Structure constructors are intended to be used returning such useful things.
Note also that you don't need to
allocate (cat :: q)
q = cat()
The intrinsic assignment to q already handles q's allocation.
FWIW, here is some sample code comparing three approaches (method = 1: sourced allocation, 2: polymorphic assignment, 3: mixed approach).
module animal_module
implicit none
type, abstract :: animal_t
integer :: nlegs = -1
contains
procedure :: legs !! defines a binding to some procedure
endtype
contains
function legs(this) result(n)
class(animal_t), intent(in) :: this
!! The passed variable needs to be declared as "class"
!! to use this routine as a type-bound procedure (TBP).
integer :: n
n = this % nlegs
end
end
module cat_module
use animal_module, only : animal_t
implicit none
type, extends(animal_t) :: cat_t
endtype
interface cat_t !! overloads the definition of cat_t() (as a procedure)
module procedure make_cat
end interface
contains
function make_cat() result( ret ) !! a usual function
type(cat_t) :: ret !<-- returns a concrete-type object
ret % nlegs = -4
end
end
program main
use cat_module, only: cat_t, animal_t
implicit none
integer :: method
type(cat_t) :: c
class(animal_t), allocatable :: q
print *, "How to create a cat? [method = 1,2,3]"
read *, method
select case ( method )
case ( 1 )
print *, "1: sourced allocation"
allocate( q, source = cat_t() )
!! An object created by a function "cat_t()" is used to
!! allocate "q" with the type and value taken from source=.
!! (Empirically most stable for different compilers/versions.)
case ( 2 )
print *, "2: polymorphic assignment"
q = cat_t()
!! Similar to sourced allocation. "q" is automatically allocated.
!! (Note: Old compilers may have bugs, so tests are recommended...)
case ( 3 )
print *, "3: mixed approach"
allocate( cat_t :: q )
q = cat_t()
!! First allocate "q" with a concrete type "cat_t"
!! and then assign a value obtained from cat_t().
case default ; stop "unknown method"
endselect
c = cat_t()
!! "c" is just a concrete-type variable (not "allocatable")
!! and assigned with a value obtained from cat_t().
print *, "c % legs() = ", c % legs()
print *, "q % legs() = ", q % legs()
end
--------------------------------------------------
Test
$ gfortran test.f90 # using version 8 or 9
$ echo 1 | ./a.out
How to create a cat? [method = 1,2,3]
1: sourced allocation
c % legs() = -4
q % legs() = -4
$ echo 2 | ./a.out
How to create a cat? [method = 1,2,3]
2: polymorphic assignment
c % legs() = -4
q % legs() = -4
$ echo 3 | ./a.out
How to create a cat? [method = 1,2,3]
3: mixed approach
c % legs() = -4
q % legs() = -4
--------------------------------------------------
Side notes
* It is also OK to directly use make_cat() to generate a value of cat_t:
e.g., allocate( q, source = make_cat() ) or q = make_cat().
In this case, we do not need to overload cat_t() via interface.
* Another approach is to write an "initializer" as a type-bound procedure,
and call it explicitly as q % init() (after allocating it via
allocate( cat_t :: q )). If the type contains pointer components,
this approach may be more straightforward by avoiding copy of
components (which can be problematic for pointer components).

In a Haskell script, how does one programatically obtain the type signature of a function?

In Haskell (GHC), how can one obtain the type signature of the list of functions shown below?
[tail,init,reverse]
I unsuccessfully tried using the typeOf function of the Data.Typeable module. Specifically, I try to run the following Haskell script:
import Data.Typeable
import Test.HUnit
myTest = TestCase
( assertEqual "\n\nShould have been \"[[a] -> [a]]\""
"[[a] -> [a]]"
(show ( typeOf [tail,init,reverse] )) )
tests = TestList [ (TestLabel "myTest" myTest) ]
However, GHC responds with the following error:
C:\>ghci my_script.hs
GHCi, version 8.0.2: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ :? for help
[1 of 1] Compiling Main ( my_script.hs, interpreted )
my_script.hs:7:21: error:
* No instance for (Typeable a0) arising from a use of `typeOf'
* In the first argument of `show', namely
`(typeOf [tail, init, reverse])'
In the third argument of `assertEqual', namely
`(show (typeOf [tail, init, reverse]))'
In the first argument of `TestCase', namely
`(assertEqual
"\n\
\\n\
\Should have been \"[[a] -> [a]]\""
"[[a] -> [a]]"
(show (typeOf [tail, init, reverse])))'
Failed, modules loaded: none.
Prelude>
Update: The following HUnit test case isn't quite what I wanted, but I did get it to pass (based on David Young's suggestion). This test case at least forces the compiler to confirm that [tail,init,reverse] is of type [ [a] -> [a] ].
import Data.Typeable
import Test.HUnit
myTest = TestCase
( assertEqual "\n\nShould have been 3"
3
( length ( [tail,init,reverse] :: [[a]->[a]] ) ) )
tests = TestList [ (TestLabel "myTest" myTest) ]
C:\>my_script.hs
GHCi, version 8.0.2: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ :? for help
[1 of 1] Compiling Main ( my_script.hs, interpreted )
Ok, modules loaded: Main.
*Main> runTestTT tests
Cases: 1 Tried: 1 Errors: 0 Failures: 0
You don't need a unit test to check a function's type. A unit tests runs after the code has been compiled, it's a dynamic test. However, type checking is a static test: all types are tested during the compilation of your program. Therefore, we can use GHC as a minimal static type checker and reduce your program to:
main :: IO ()
main = return ()
where
tailInitReverseAreListFunctions :: [[a] -> [a]]
tailInitReverseAreListFunctions = [tail, init, reverse]
You don't even need that test anymore the moment you actually test your functions with real data, because that application will (statically) test the function's type too.
Remember, Haskell is a statically typed language. The types are checked during compilation, before your code is run. Any type checking unit-test is therefore more or less a code-smell, because it can only pass.

couldn't match type 'ByteString o0 m0 Value' Vs 'ByteString Data.Void.Void IO Value'

I am trying the haskell-json-service. When I run the code, it throws error here:
app req sendResponse = handle (sendResponse . invalidJson) $ do
value <- sourceRequestBody req $$ sinkParser json
newValue <- liftIO $ modValue value
sendResponse $ responseLBS
status200
[("Content-Type", "application/json")]
$ encode newValue
Error is,
Couldn't match type ‘conduit-1.2.4:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.ConduitM
ByteString o0 m0 Value’
with ‘conduit-1.2.4.1:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.ConduitM
ByteString Data.Void.Void IO Value’
NB: ‘conduit-1.2.4:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.ConduitM’
is defined in ‘Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit’
in package ‘conduit-1.2.4’
‘conduit-1.2.4.1:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.ConduitM’
is defined in ‘Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit’
in package ‘conduit-1.2.4.1’
Expected type: conduit-1.2.4.1:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.Sink
ByteString IO Value
Actual type: conduit-1.2.4:Data.Conduit.Internal.Conduit.ConduitM
ByteString o0 m0 Value
In the second argument of ‘($$)’, namely ‘sinkParser json’
In a stmt of a 'do' block:
value <- sourceRequestBody req $$ sinkParser json
What does double dollar do? And what is this type - ByteString o0 m0 Value?
This appears to be the problem:
conduit-1.2.4:...
conduit-1.2.4.1:...
Your code is using a ByteString type from two different versions of the conduit library. From the point of view of GHC, these two types are unrelated: for instance, you can not pass the first type to a library function which expects the second one.
A cause for this could be using a library X which was compiled against the "old" conduit and a library Y which instead was compiled against the newer version. If your program imports X and Y, you will get in trouble when passing bytestrings from X to Y or vice versa. I have no idea about what X or Y actually are.
Maybe you can recompile X or Y so that they use the same version of conduit.