I'm currently testing some simple AngelScript stuff, and noticed something I find a bit strange when it comes to how objects are initialized from classes.
Let's say I define a class like this:
class MyClass {
int i;
MyClass(int i) {
this.i = i;
}
}
I can create an object of this class by doing this:
MyClass obj = MyClass(5);
However it seems I can also create an object by doing this:
MyClass obj;
The problem here is that obj.i becomes a default value as it is undefined.
Additionally, adding a default constructor to my class and a print function call in each one reveals that when I do MyClass obj = MyClass(5); BOTH constructors are called, not just the one with the matching parameter. This seems risky to me, as it could initialize a lot of properties unnecessarily for this "ghost" instance.
I can avoid this double-initialization by using a handle, but this seems more like a work-around rather than a solution:
MyClass# obj = MyClass(5);
So my question sums up to:
Can I require a specific constructor to be called?
Can I prevent a default constructor from running?
What's the proper way to deal with required parameters when creating objects?
Mind that this is purely in the AngelScript script language, completely separate from the C++ code of the host application. The host is from 2010 and is not open-source, and my knowledge of their implementation is very limited, so if the issue lies there, I can't change it.
In order to declare class and send the value you choose to constructor try:
MyClass obj(5);
To prevent using default constructor create it and use:
.
MyClass()
{
abort("Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
exit(1);
}
or
{
assert(1>2,"Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
engine.Exit();
}
in case that any of those is working in you environment.
declaring the constructor as private seems not to work in AS, unlike other languages.
What does it mean in Coffeescript when a variable name begins with an "#" sign?
For example, I've been looking through the hubot source code and just in the first few lines I've looked at, I found
class Brain extends EventEmitter
# Represents somewhat persistent storage for the robot. Extend this.
#
# Returns a new Brain with no external storage.
constructor: (robot) ->
#data =
users: { }
_private: { }
#autoSave = true
robot.on "running", =>
#resetSaveInterval 5
I've seen it several other places, but I haven't been able to guess what it means.
The # symbol is a shorcut for this as you can see in Operators and Aliases.
As a shortcut for this.property, you can use #property.
It basically means that the “#” variables are instance variables of the class, that is, class members. Which souldn't be confused with class variables, that you can compare to static members.
Also, you can think of #variables as the this or self operators of OOP languages, but it's not the exact same thing as the old javascript this. That javascript this refer to the current scope, which causes some problems when your are trying to refer to the class scope inside a callback for example, that's why coffescript have introduced the #variables, to solve this kind of problem.
For example, consider the following code:
Brain.prototype = new EventEmitter();
function Brain(robot){
// Represents somewhat persistent storage for the robot. Extend this.
//
// Returns a new Brain with no external storage.
this.data = {
users: { },
_private: { }
};
this.autoSave = true;
var self = this;
robot.on('running', fucntion myCallback() {
// here is the problem, if you try to call `this` here
// it will refer to the `myCallback` instead of the parent
// this.resetSaveInterval(5);
// therefore you have to use the cached `self` way
// which coffeescript solved using #variables
self.resetSaveInterval(5);
});
}
Final thought, the # these days means that you are referring to the class instance (i.e., this or self). So, #data basically means this.data, so, without the #, it would refer to any visible variable data on scope.
I have a .NET API that uses a lot of delegates. My API has a couple methods similar to the following:
public static class MyClass
{
public static void DoSomethingWithString(Func<object> myFunc)
{
string myStringValue = myFunc().ToString();
Console.WriteLine(myStringValue);
}
public static void DoSomethingWithDouble(Func<object> myFunc)
{
object unparsedValue = myFunc();
double parsedValue = Convert.ToDouble(unparsedValue);
Console.WriteLine(parsedValue);
}
}
Now in PowerShell I have the following:
[MyClass]::DoSomethingWithString({ "Hello" }); # No error here
[MyClass]::DoSomethingWithDouble({ 123.4 }); # InvalidCastException - can't convert a PSObject to double
The problem is that my PowerShell scriptblock is returning a PSObject instead of the actual double value. My .NET API doesn't know anything about PowerShell, and I don't want to add a reference to PowerShell DLLs just so I can add special handling for this particular scenario.
Is there a way to get my scriptblocks to return actual value types rather than PSObjects? Or is there a PowerShell-agnostic way for my .NET library to handle PSObjects?
PowerShell will wrap things in PSObject as it sees fit, there's no clean way to avoid that when accepting arbitrary script blocks. With some discipline, you can write script blocks that unwrap the PSObject, for example the following might work fine:
[MyClass]::DoSomethingWithDouble({ (123.4).PSObject.BaseObject })
If possible, a better option is to have your api take a delegate with a more specific return type.
public static void DoSomethingWithDouble(Func<double> myFunc)
In this case, PowerShell will convert the return value to the type expected by the delegate. When the return type is PSObject, PowerShell knows PSObject trivially converts to object so it doesn't unwrap, but if the return type is pretty much anything else, PowerShell is forced to do the conversion by unwrapping the PSObject.
For completeness, another option if you're using PowerShell V3 is to use the C# keyword dynamic, something like:
public static void DoSomethingWithDouble(Func<object> myFunc)
{
dynamic unparsedValue = myFunc();
double parsedValue = (double)(unparsedValue);
Console.WriteLine(parsedValue);
}
When unparsedValue is a PSObject, PowerShell will perform the conversion from to double on the second line even though you don't reference any PowerShell assemblies in your C# code.
Note these last two options may not fit well with your real API, but they are options that are worth understanding.
I am starting studying OOP and I want to learn what constitutes a class. I am a little confused at how loosely some core elements are being used and thus adding to my confusion.
I have looked at the C++ class, the java class and I want to know enough to write my own pseudo class to help me understand.
For instance in this article I read this (.. class attribute (or class property, field, or data member)
I have seen rather well cut out questions that show that there is a difference between class property and class field for instance What is the difference between a Field and a Property in C#?
Depending on what language I am studying, is the definition of
Property
Fields
Class variables
Attributes
different from language to language?
"Fields", "class variables", and "attributes" are more-or-less the same - a low-level storage slot attached to an object. Each language's documentation might use a different term consistently, but most actual programmers use them interchangeably. (However, this also means some of the terms can be ambiguous, like "class variable" - which can be interpreted as "a variable of an instance of a given class", or "a variable of the class object itself" in a language where class objects are something you can manipulate directly.)
"Properties" are, in most languages I use, something else entirely - they're a way to attach custom behaviour to reading / writing a field. (Or to replace it.)
So in Java, the canonical example would be:
class Circle {
// The radius field
private double radius;
public Circle(double radius) {
this.radius = radius;
}
// The radius property
public double getRadius() {
return radius;
}
public void setRadius(double radius) {
// We're doing something else besides setting the field value in the
// property setter
System.out.println("Setting radius to " + radius);
this.radius = radius;
}
// The circumference property, which is read-only
public double getCircumference() {
// We're not even reading a field here.
return 2 * Math.PI * radius;
}
}
(Note that in Java, a property foo is a pair of accessor methods called getFoo() and setFoo() - or just the getter if the property is read-only.)
Another way of looking at this is that "properties" are an abstraction - a promise by an object to allow callers to get or set a piece of data. While "fields" etc. are one possible implementation of this abstraction. The values for getRadius() or getCircumference() in the above example could be stored directly, or they could be calculated, it doesn't matter to the caller; the setters might or might not have side effects; it doesn't matter to the caller.
I agree with you, there's a lot of unnecessary confusion due to the loose definitions and inconsistent use of many OO terms. The terms you're asking about are used somewhat interchangeably, but one could say some are more general than others (descending order): Property -> Attributes -> Class Variables -> Fields.
The following passages, extracted from "Object-Oriented Analysis and Design" by Grady Booch help clarify the subject. Firstly, it's important to understand the concept of state:
The state of an object encompasses all of the (usually static) properties of the object plus the current (usually dynamic) values of each of these properties. By properties, we mean the totality of the object's attributes and relationships with other objects.
OOP is quite generic regarding certain nomenclature, as it varies wildly from language to language:
The terms field (Object Pascal), instance variable (Smalltalk), member object (C++), and slot (CLOS) are interchangeable, meaning a repository for part of the state of an object. Collectively, they constitute the object's structure.
But the notation introduced by the author is precise:
An attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class. Using the language-independent syntax, an attribute may have a name, a class, or both, and optionally a default expression: A:C=E.
Class variable: Part of the state of a class. Collectively, the class variables of a class constitute its structure. A class variable is shared by all instances of the same class. In C++, a class variable is declared as a static member.
In summary:
Property is a broad concept used to denote a particular characteristic of a class, encompassing both its attributes and its relationships to other classes.
Attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class.
Class variable is an attribute defined in a class of which a single copy exists, regardless of how many instances of the class exist. So all instances of that class share its value as well as its declaration.
Field is a language-specific term for instance variable, that is, an attribute whose value is specific to each object.
I've been doing oop for more than 20 years, and I find that people often use different words for the same things. My understanding is that fields, class variables and attributes all mean the same thing. However, property is best described by the stackoverflow link that you included in your question.
Generally fields, methods, static methods, properties, attributes and class (or static variables) do not change on a language basis... Although the syntax will probably change on a per language basis, they will be function in the way you would expect across languages (expect terms like fields/data members to be used interchangably across languages)
In C#....
A field is a variable that exists for a given instance of a class.
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field
protected int GetField
{
get
{
return _field;
}
}
}
Fields have a "visibility" this determines what other classes can see the field, so in the above example a private field can only be used by the class that contains it, but the property accessor provides readonly access to the field by subclasses.
A property lets you get (sometimes called an accessor) or set (sometimes called a mutator) the value of field... Properties let you do a couple of things, prevent writing a field for example from outside the class, change the visibility of the field (eg private/protected/public). A mutator allows you to provide some custom logic before setting the value of a field
So properties are more like methods to get/set the value of a field but provide more functionality
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field, but since it's visibility
// is protected only subclasses will know about this property
// (and through it the field) - The field and property in this case
// will be hidden from other classes.
protected int GetField
{
// This is an accessor
get
{
return _field;
}
// This is a mutator
set
{
// This can perform some more logic
if (_field != value)
{
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field changed");
_field = value;
OnChanged; // Call some imaginary OnChange method
} else {
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field was not changed");
}
}
}
}
A class or static variable is a variable which is the same for all instances of a class..
So, for example, if you wanted a description for a class that description would be the same for all instance of the class and could be accessed by using the class
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// A static (or class variable) can be accessed from anywhere by writing
// BaseClass.DESCRIPTION
public static string DESCRIPTION = "BaseClass";
}
public class TestClass
{
public void Test()
{
string BaseClassDescription = BaseClass.DESCRIPTION;
}
}
I'd be careful when using terminology relating to an attribute. In C# it is a class that can be applied to other classes or methods by "decorating" the class or method, in other context's it may simply refer to a field that a class contains.
// The functionality of this attribute will be documented somewhere
[Test]
public class TestClass
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod()
{
}
}
Some languages do not have "Attributes" like C# does (see above)
Hopefully that all makes sense... Don't want to overload you!
Firstly, you need to select a language. For example, I would recommend you to select Ruby language and community. Until you select a language, you cannot escape confusion, as different communities use different terms for the same things.
For example, what is known as Module in Ruby, Java knows as abstract class. What is known as attributes in some languages, is known as instance variables in Ruby. I recommend Ruby especially for its logical and well-designed OOP system.
Write the following in a *.rb file, or on the command line in irb (interactive Ruby interpreter):
class Dog # <-- Here you define a class representing all dogs.
def breathe # <-- Here you teach your class a method: #breathe
puts "I'm breathing."
end
def speak # <-- Here you teach your class another method: #speak
puts "Bow wow!"
end
end
Now that you have a class, you can create an instance of it:
Seamus = Dog.new
You have just created an instance, a particular dog of class Dog, and stored it in the constant Seamus. Now you can play with it:
Seamus.breathe # <-- Invoking #breathe instance method of Seamus
#=> I'm breathing.
Seamus.speak # <-- Invoking #speak instance method of Seamus
#=> Bow wow!
As for your remaining terminology questions, "property" or "attribute" is understood as "variable" in Ruby, almost always an instance variable. And as for the term "data member", just forget about it. The term "field" is not really used in Ruby, and "class variable" in Ruby means something very rarely used, which you definitely don't need to know at this moment.
So, to keep the world nice and show you that OOP is really simple and painless in Ruby, let us create an attribute, or, in Ruby terminology, an instance variable of Dog class. As we know, every dog has some weight, and different dogs may have different weights. So, upon creation of a new dog, we will require the user to tell us dog's weight:
class Dog
def initialize( weight ) # <-- Defining initialization method with one argument 'weight'
#weight = weight # <-- Setting the dog's attribute (instance variable)
end
attr_reader :weight # <-- Making the dog's weight attribute visible to the world.
end
Drooly = Dog.new( 16 ) # <-- Weight now must provide weight upon initialization.
Drooly.weight # <-- Now we can ask Drooly about his weight.
#=> 16
Remember, with Ruby (or Python), things are simple.
I discovered in my question that Properties as defined in .Net are just a convenience syntax for code, and they are not tied to underlying variables at all (except for Auto-Implemented Properties, of course). So, saying "what is the difference between class property and class field" is like saying: what is the difference between a method and an attribute. No difference, one is code and the other is data. And, they need not have anything to do with each other.
It is really too bad that the same words, like "attribute" and "property", are re-used in different languages and ideologies to have starkly different meanings. Maybe someone needs to define an object-oriented language to talk about concepts in OOP? UML?
In The Class
public class ClassSample
{
private int ClassAttribute;
public int Property
{
get { return ClassAttribute; }
set { ClassAttribute = value; }
}
}
In the Program
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var objectSample = new ClassSample();
//Get Object Property
var GetProperty = objectSample.Property;
}
}
I'm wondering if someone can explain the difference between the functions below. They are both static, but require different signature syntaxes. I'm wondering how these are handled at runtime, and why you would use one over the other?
+ (int) returnInt:(NSString *)myString1 withString2:(NSString *)myString2
{
if ([myString1 isEqualToString:myString2])
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
vs.
static int returnInt(NSString *myString1, NSString *myString2)
{
if ([myString1 isEqualToString:myString2])
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
Thanks!
Unlike in (say) C++, where static member functions are just ordinary functions in the class' namespace, Objective-C has proper class methods.
Since classes are objects, calling a class method is really like calling an instance method on the class. The main consequences of this are:
1) Calling a class method incurs a slight (although generally inconsequential) overhead, since method calls are resolved at runtime.
2) Class methods have an implicit 'self' argument, just like instance methods. In their case, 'self' is a pointer to the class object.
3) Class methods are inherited by subclasses.
together, 2 and 3 mean that you can do stuff like this with a class method:
+ (id) instance
{
return [[[self alloc] init] autorelease];
}
then create a new class that inherits the method and returns a new instance of itself, rather than the superclass.
I believe that marking an ordinary c function static will just make it unavailable to files other than the one it's defined in. You'd generally do this if you wanted to make a helper function that is only relevant to one class and you wanted to avoid polluting the global namespace.