I'm working on a MATLAB app that programatically creates anonymous functions to evaluate any native MATLAB function and pass it a list of variables as argument. In the example below, 'formula' contains a string with the function and arguments to be evaluated (e.g., "sum( var1, var2 )" ). The formulas sometimes contain function calls nested within function calls, so the code below would be used recursively until obtaining the final result:
Func2 = str2func( sprintf( '#(%s) %s', strjoin( varNames, ',' ), formula ) );
This evaluates fine for native MATLAB functions. But there's a particular case of a function (named Func1) I made myself that not only needs the list of variables but also an object as argument, like this:
function output = Func1( anObject, varNames )
% do some stuff with the object and the vars
end
For this particular function, I've tried doing this:
Func2 = str2func( sprintf( '#(%s,%s) %s', "objectToPassToFunc1", strjoin( varNames, ',' ), "Func1(objectToPass,""" + strjoin( varNames, '","' ) +""")" ) )
...which doesn't throw an error, but Func1 doesn't receive the objectToPassToFunc1, instead it gets values from one of the variables in varNames. And I don't know why.
So how can I correctly pass the object to Func1????
Matlab doesn't care about the type of arguments you pass to a function. As a matter of fact, the input could be scalar, vector, matrix, and even an object of a class. See the following example.
classdef ClassA
methods
function print(~)
disp('method print() is called.');
end
end
end
This class has only one method. Now, let us define an anonymous function func which accepts one input.
func = #(arg) arg.print;
Notice that we explicitly assume that the input is an object of ClassA. If you pass another type of data to this function, Matlab will throw an error. To test the code,
obj = ClassA;
func = #(arg) arg.print;
func(obj)
To avoid the error, you may need to check the type of the input before using it. For example,
function [] = func(arg)
% check if arg is an object of ClassA
if isa(arg,'ClassA')
arg.print;
end
end
Now you can pass different types for the input without getting an error.
I'm trying to create a loop to read, for example, 4200 users from 1000 to 1000 but I can't get it to cut when it reaches the end. I tried it with if, for and I couldn't do it.
I have programmed in JAVA but with Groovy I see that the structure is different.
urlUsers = urlUsers.concat("/1/1000");
List<UserConnectorObject> usersList = null;
while({
gesdenResponse = GesdenUtils.sendHttpRequest(urlUsers, "LOOKUP", null,
request.getMetaData()?.getLogin(), request.getMetaData()?.getPassword());
log.info("Users data in JSON: "+gesdenResponse.getOutput())
usersList = GesdenUtils.fromJSON(gesdenResponse.getOutput(), GesdenConstants.USER_IDENTITY_KEY);
usersList.size() == 10;
log.info("List size in JSON "+usersList.size());
}()) continue
Groovy has lots of loop structures, but it is crucial to separate the regular ones (lang built-ins) and the api functions which take closure as an argument
take closure - no plain way to escape
If you want to iterate from A to B users, you can use, for instance,
(10..20).each { userNo -> // Here you will have all 10 iterations
if ( userNo == 5) {
return
}
}
If something outrageous happens in the loop body and you cannot use return to escape, as loop boddy is a closure (separate function) and this resurn just exits this closure. Next iteration will happen just after.
use regular lang built-in loop structures - make use of break/continue
for (int userNo in 1..10) { // Here you will have only 5 iterations
if (userNo == 5) {
break
}
}
It looks like your closure always return falsy because there is no explicit return, and the last statement evaluated is the call to log.info(String) which returns void.
Use an explicit return or move/delete the log statement.
I'm trying to write a custom validateParameter function with Perl.
I have the following code which also works:
sub validateParameter {
my ($args, $list) = #_;
if ( ref($list) eq "ARRAY" ) {
foreach my $key (#$list) {
if ( not defined $args->{$key} ) {
die "no $key given!";
}
}
}
#elsif ( check if string ) {
#}
}
I want to call my function the following way:
validateParameter({ hallo => "Welt", test => "Blup"}, ["hallo", "test"]);
But I also want to call my function like this:
validateParameter({ hallo => "Welt", test => "Blup"}, "hallo");
I know that Perl only has the following three data-types (scalars, hashes, arrays). But maybe there is a smart way to check if a variable is a string.
How can I check if the given arg is a string?
Update: I somehow missed the end of the question. Just testing ref($list) eq 'ARRAY' will work most of the time, but to properly allow even overloaded objects, you should just try dereferencing the parameter:
if ( eval { \#$list } ) {
# it was an array
}
else {
# assume it is a string
}
Original answer:
You can check a number of things about a parameter:
if ( ! defined $param ) {
# undefined
}
elsif ( defined Scalar::Util::blessed($param) ) {
# object
}
elsif ( ref $param ) {
# reference (return of ref will give the type)
}
elsif ( length do { no warnings "numeric"; $param & '' } ) {
# number
}
else {
# string
}
But all of that (except perhaps the defined check) kind of defeats the purpose of Perl's automatically converting to your desired type and will limit what can be passed (for instance, a string or dualvar where a number is wanted, or an overloaded object where a string, number, or reference is wanted, or tied variables or magic variables such as $!).
You may want to also just look at what Params::Validate can do.
Don't base behaviour on the "type" of arguments because there really isn't such a thing. You will run into problems if you use type-base polymorphism because Perl values often have more than one type.
For example,
The scalar produced by "123" is stored as as string, but Perl doesn't distinguish it from the scalar produced by 123 which isn't stored as a string.
Scalars can contain both a number and a cached stringification of that number. (e.g. my $i = 123; "".$i;)
Scalars can contain both a number and a string (that isn't a stringification of the number). Common examples of these are $! and !1.
A reference to an object that overloads stringification is also a useful string. (e.g. DateTime->now)
A reference to an array may overload %{} to usable as a hash reference. A reference to an hash may overload #{} to usable as an array reference.
And more.
No, there is no way to check if a scalar is a string, as Perl does implicit type conversions depending on context. If you give a number as the second argument to your function, and you use it in a context that requires a string, it will be automatically converted to a string. So, just check if ref($list) is empty - in such case, $list is not a reference, and therefore it is a string or a number, and you don't need to distinguish between those two.
I created a lot of functions in menu.vim.
I noted that in many functions the same code is used that's why I decided to clean up my file with the use of
subfunctions.
p.e this is code what often returns in my functions:
let zoek = #/
if a:type == "'<,'>"
let r = substitute(zoek, '\\%V', '', 'g')
elseif a:type == "%"
let r = zoek
endif
let a = substitute(r, '\', '', 'g')
if matchstr(d, '>') == '>' || matchstr(d, '<') == '<'
let e = substitute(d, '\zs>\(\d\+\)%<\ze', '\1-', 'g')
endif
How can I create a subfunction from it? How can I invoke it?
Does Vim have subfunctions?
You can have «local» functions by defining them in the dictionary: in the following code
function MyFunc()
let d={}
function d.function()
echo "Foo"
endfunction
call d.function()
endfunction
function d.function is accessible only inside s:MyFunc and is destroyed after s:MyFunc exits. I put «local» in quotes because d.function is really global function named 42 (or another number, it does not matter). It cannot be called without a reference to it and the only way to create a reference is to use function dict.key() (references may be copied after creation, but you can't create a reference using call to function(), though it is possible for MyFunc: function("MyFunc")). Note that number (in this case 42) is incremented each time you create a function and I know neither what is the maximum number nor what will happen when it will be reached. I personally use dictionary functions because they have two other advantages:
Dictionary function defined inside a script-local dictionary cannot be reached without a debugger or explicit passing the function reference (possibly as a part of its container) somewhere.
If more then one function is defined inside a dictionary in order to purge them all you need is to unlet this dictionary. Useful for reloading plugins.
There is only one type of function in Vimscript, but I'm not sure if this is what you are already using in your menu.vim. A user-defined function is defined thus:
function! MyNewFunction()
" your code here
endfunction
You can then call this function elsewhere in your scripts (and inside other functions) using
call MyNewFunction()
Or set a variable equal to the return value of your function using
let my_variable = MyNewFunction()
Of course this is an incredibly simplistic overview, since you say your are already using functions. Much more information, including the use of variables, here:
help user-functions
Apologies if I have not answered your question.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
When learning a new programming language, one of the possible roadblocks you might encounter is the question whether the language is, by default, pass-by-value or pass-by-reference.
So here is my question to all of you, in your favorite language, how is it actually done? And what are the possible pitfalls?
Your favorite language can, of course, be anything you have ever played with: popular, obscure, esoteric, new, old...
Here is my own contribution for the Java programming language.
first some code:
public void swap(int x, int y)
{
int tmp = x;
x = y;
y = tmp;
}
calling this method will result in this:
int pi = 3;
int everything = 42;
swap(pi, everything);
System.out.println("pi: " + pi);
System.out.println("everything: " + everything);
"Output:
pi: 3
everything: 42"
even using 'real' objects will show a similar result:
public class MyObj {
private String msg;
private int number;
//getters and setters
public String getMsg() {
return this.msg;
}
public void setMsg(String msg) {
this.msg = msg;
}
public int getNumber() {
return this.number;
}
public void setNumber(int number) {
this.number = number;
}
//constructor
public MyObj(String msg, int number) {
setMsg(msg);
setNumber(number);
}
}
public static void swap(MyObj x, MyObj y)
{
MyObj tmp = x;
x = y;
y = tmp;
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
MyObj x = new MyObj("Hello world", 1);
MyObj y = new MyObj("Goodbye Cruel World", -1);
swap(x, y);
System.out.println(x.getMsg() + " -- "+ x.getNumber());
System.out.println(y.getMsg() + " -- "+ y.getNumber());
}
"Output:
Hello world -- 1
Goodbye Cruel World -- -1"
thus it is clear that Java passes its parameters by value, as the value for pi and everything and the MyObj objects aren't swapped.
be aware that "by value" is the only way in java to pass parameters to a method. (for example a language like c++ allows the developer to pass a parameter by reference using '&' after the parameter's type)
now the tricky part, or at least the part that will confuse most of the new java developers: (borrowed from javaworld)
Original author: Tony Sintes
public void tricky(Point arg1, Point arg2)
{
arg1.x = 100;
arg1.y = 100;
Point temp = arg1;
arg1 = arg2;
arg2 = temp;
}
public static void main(String [] args)
{
Point pnt1 = new Point(0,0);
Point pnt2 = new Point(0,0);
System.out.println("X: " + pnt1.x + " Y: " +pnt1.y);
System.out.println("X: " + pnt2.x + " Y: " +pnt2.y);
System.out.println(" ");
tricky(pnt1,pnt2);
System.out.println("X: " + pnt1.x + " Y:" + pnt1.y);
System.out.println("X: " + pnt2.x + " Y: " +pnt2.y);
}
"Output
X: 0 Y: 0
X: 0 Y: 0
X: 100 Y: 100
X: 0 Y: 0"
tricky successfully changes the value of pnt1!
This would imply that Objects are passed by reference, this is not the case!
A correct statement would be: the Object references are passed by value.
more from Tony Sintes:
The method successfully alters the
value of pnt1, even though it is
passed by value; however, a swap of
pnt1 and pnt2 fails! This is the major
source of confusion. In the main()
method, pnt1 and pnt2 are nothing more
than object references. When you pass
pnt1 and pnt2 to the tricky() method,
Java passes the references by value
just like any other parameter. This
means the references passed to the
method are actually copies of the
original references. Figure 1 below
shows two references pointing to the
same object after Java passes an
object to a method.
(source: javaworld.com)
Conclusion or a long story short:
Java passes it parameters by value
"by value" is the only way in java to pass a parameter to a method
using methods from the object given as parameter will alter the object as the references point to the original objects. (if that method itself alters some values)
useful links:
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/javaqa/2000-05/03-qa-0526-pass.html
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-passbyval/
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-praxis/pr1.html
http://javadude.com/articles/passbyvalue.htm
Here is another article for the c# programming language
c# passes its arguments by value (by default)
private void swap(string a, string b) {
string tmp = a;
a = b;
b = tmp;
}
calling this version of swap will thus have no result:
string x = "foo";
string y = "bar";
swap(x, y);
"output:
x: foo
y: bar"
however, unlike java c# does give the developer the opportunity to pass parameters by reference, this is done by using the 'ref' keyword before the type of the parameter:
private void swap(ref string a, ref string b) {
string tmp = a;
a = b;
b = tmp;
}
this swap will change the value of the referenced parameter:
string x = "foo";
string y = "bar";
swap(x, y);
"output:
x: bar
y: foo"
c# also has a out keyword, and the difference between ref and out is a subtle one.
from msdn:
The caller of a method which takes an
out parameter is not required to
assign to the variable passed as the
out parameter prior to the call;
however, the callee is required to
assign to the out parameter before
returning.
and
In contrast ref parameters are
considered initially assigned by the
callee. As such, the callee is not
required to assign to the ref
parameter before use. Ref parameters
are passed both into and out of a
method.
a small pitfall is, like in java, that objects passed by value can still be changed using their inner methods
conclusion:
c# passes its parameters, by default, by value
but when needed parameters can also be passed by reference using the ref keyword
inner methods from a parameter passed by value will alter the object (if that method itself alters some values)
useful links:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/aa336814.aspx
http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/UploadFile/saragana/Willswapwork11162005012542AM/Willswapwork.aspx
http://en.csharp-online.net/Value_vs_Reference
Python uses pass-by-value, but since all such values are object references, the net effect is something akin to pass-by-reference. However, Python programmers think more about whether an object type is mutable or immutable. Mutable objects can be changed in-place (e.g., dictionaries, lists, user-defined objects), whereas immutable objects can't (e.g., integers, strings, tuples).
The following example shows a function that is passed two arguments, an immutable string, and a mutable list.
>>> def do_something(a, b):
... a = "Red"
... b.append("Blue")
...
>>> a = "Yellow"
>>> b = ["Black", "Burgundy"]
>>> do_something(a, b)
>>> print a, b
Yellow ['Black', 'Burgundy', 'Blue']
The line a = "Red" merely creates a local name, a, for the string value "Red" and has no effect on the passed-in argument (which is now hidden, as a must refer to the local name from then on). Assignment is not an in-place operation, regardless of whether the argument is mutable or immutable.
The b parameter is a reference to a mutable list object, and the .append() method performs an in-place extension of the list, tacking on the new "Blue" string value.
(Because string objects are immutable, they don't have any methods that support in-place modifications.)
Once the function returns, the re-assignment of a has had no effect, while the extension of b clearly shows pass-by-reference style call semantics.
As mentioned before, even if the argument for a is a mutable type, the re-assignment within the function is not an in-place operation, and so there would be no change to the passed argument's value:
>>> a = ["Purple", "Violet"]
>>> do_something(a, b)
>>> print a, b
['Purple', 'Violet'] ['Black', 'Burgundy', 'Blue', 'Blue']
If you didn't want your list modified by the called function, you would instead use the immutable tuple type (identified by the parentheses in the literal form, rather than square brackets), which does not support the in-place .append() method:
>>> a = "Yellow"
>>> b = ("Black", "Burgundy")
>>> do_something(a, b)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 3, in do_something
AttributeError: 'tuple' object has no attribute 'append'
Since I haven't seen a Perl answer yet, I thought I'd write one.
Under the hood, Perl works effectively as pass-by-reference. Variables as function call arguments are passed referentially, constants are passed as read-only values, and results of expressions are passed as temporaries. The usual idioms to construct argument lists by list assignment from #_, or by shift tend to hide this from the user, giving the appearance of pass-by-value:
sub incr {
my ( $x ) = #_;
$x++;
}
my $value = 1;
incr($value);
say "Value is now $value";
This will print Value is now 1 because the $x++ has incremented the lexical variable declared within the incr() function, rather than the variable passed in. This pass-by-value style is usually what is wanted most of the time, as functions that modify their arguments are rare in Perl, and the style should be avoided.
However, if for some reason this behaviour is specifically desired, it can be achieved by operating directly on elements of the #_ array, because they will be aliases for variables passed into the function.
sub incr {
$_[0]++;
}
my $value = 1;
incr($value);
say "Value is now $value";
This time it will print Value is now 2, because the $_[0]++ expression incremented the actual $value variable. The way this works is that under the hood #_ is not a real array like most other arrays (such as would be obtained by my #array), but instead its elements are built directly out of the arguments passed to a function call. This allows you to construct pass-by-reference semantics if that would be required. Function call arguments that are plain variables are inserted as-is into this array, and constants or results of more complex expressions are inserted as read-only temporaries.
It is however exceedingly rare to do this in practice, because Perl supports reference values; that is, values that refer to other variables. Normally it is far clearer to construct a function that has an obvious side-effect on a variable, by passing in a reference to that variable. This is a clear indication to the reader at the callsite, that pass-by-reference semantics are in effect.
sub incr_ref {
my ( $ref ) = #_;
$$ref++;
}
my $value = 1;
incr(\$value);
say "Value is now $value";
Here the \ operator yields a reference in much the same way as the & address-of operator in C.
There's a good explanation here for .NET.
A lot of people are surprise that reference objects are actually passed by value (in both C# and Java). It's a copy of a stack address. This prevents a method from changing where the object actually points to, but still allows a method to change the values of the object. In C# its possible to pass a reference by reference, which means you can change where an actual object points to.
Don't forget there is also pass by name, and pass by value-result.
Pass by value-result is similar to pass by value, with the added aspect that the value is set in the original variable that was passed as the parameter. It can, to some extent, avoid interference with global variables. It is apparently better in partitioned memory, where a pass by reference could cause a page fault (Reference).
Pass by name means that the values are only calculated when they are actually used, rather than at the start of the procedure. Algol used pass-by-name, but an interesting side effect is that is it very difficult to write a swap procedure (Reference). Also, the expression passed by name is re-evaluated each time it is accessed, which can also have side effects.
Whatever you say as pass-by-value or pass-by-reference must be consistent across languages. The most common and consistent definition used across languages is that with pass-by-reference, you can pass a variable to a function "normally" (i.e. without explicitly taking address or anything like that), and the function can assign to (not mutate the contents of) the parameter inside the function and it will have the same effect as assigning to the variable in the calling scope.
From this view, the languages are grouped as follows; each group having the same passing semantics. If you think that two languages should not be put in the same group, I challenge you to come up with an example that distinguishes them.
The vast majority of languages including C, Java, Python, Ruby, JavaScript, Scheme, OCaml, Standard ML, Go, Objective-C, Smalltalk, etc. are all pass-by-value only. Passing a pointer value (some languages call it a "reference") does not count as pass by reference; we are only concerned about the thing passed, the pointer, not the thing pointed to.
Languages such as C++, C#, PHP are by default pass-by-value like the languages above, but functions can explicitly declare parameters to be pass-by-reference, using & or ref.
Perl is always pass-by-reference; however, in practice people almost always copy the values after getting it, thus using it in a pass-by-value way.
by value
is slower than by reference since the system has to copy the parameter
used for input only
by reference
faster since only a pointer is passed
used for input and output
can be very dangerous if used in conjunction with global variables
Concerning J, while there is only, AFAIK, passing by value, there is a form of passing by reference which enables moving a lot of data. You simply pass something known as a locale to a verb (or function). It can be an instance of a class or just a generic container.
spaceused=: [: 7!:5 <
exectime =: 6!:2
big_chunk_of_data =. i. 1000 1000 100
passbyvalue =: 3 : 0
$ y
''
)
locale =. cocreate''
big_chunk_of_data__locale =. big_chunk_of_data
passbyreference =: 3 : 0
l =. y
$ big_chunk_of_data__l
''
)
exectime 'passbyvalue big_chunk_of_data'
0.00205586720663967
exectime 'passbyreference locale'
8.57957102144893e_6
The obvious disadvantage is that you need to know the name of your variable in some way in the called function. But this technique can move a lot of data painlessly. That's why, while technically not pass by reference, I call it "pretty much that".
PHP is also pass by value.
<?php
class Holder {
private $value;
public function __construct($value) {
$this->value = $value;
}
public function getValue() {
return $this->value;
}
}
function swap($x, $y) {
$tmp = $x;
$x = $y;
$y = $tmp;
}
$a = new Holder('a');
$b = new Holder('b');
swap($a, $b);
echo $a->getValue() . ", " . $b->getValue() . "\n";
Outputs:
a b
However in PHP4 objects were treated like primitives. Which means:
<?php
$myData = new Holder('this should be replaced');
function replaceWithGreeting($holder) {
$myData->setValue('hello');
}
replaceWithGreeting($myData);
echo $myData->getValue(); // Prints out "this should be replaced"
By default, ANSI/ISO C uses either--it depends on how you declare your function and its parameters.
If you declare your function parameters as pointers then the function will be pass-by-reference, and if you declare your function parameters as not-pointer variables then the function will be pass-by-value.
void swap(int *x, int *y); //< Declared as pass-by-reference.
void swap(int x, int y); //< Declared as pass-by-value (and probably doesn't do anything useful.)
You can run into problems if you create a function that returns a pointer to a non-static variable that was created within that function. The returned value of the following code would be undefined--there is no way to know if the memory space allocated to the temporary variable created in the function was overwritten or not.
float *FtoC(float temp)
{
float c;
c = (temp-32)*9/5;
return &c;
}
You could, however, return a reference to a static variable or a pointer that was passed in the parameter list.
float *FtoC(float *temp)
{
*temp = (*temp-32)*9/5;
return temp;
}