This question has been asked and answered for a couple other coding languages, but I think I may have a unique problem anyway. So, I want to duplicate a three dimensional array (filled with arbitrary objects). I believe I found that this:
var duplicateArray = originalArray
Does not work, since, for whatever reason, they thought it would a nice safety measure to have this create a duplicate array, but filled with pointers as sub-arrays instead of duplicating the sub-arrays as well. This seems like a strange design choice, since if duplicateArray and originalArray were one-dimensional, this would work as intended. Anyway, so I tried this (where object is some arbitrary object):
var duplicateArray = [[[object]]]()
for x in 0..<originalArray.count {
var tempArrYZ = [[object]]()
for y in 0..<originalArray[x].count {
var tempArrZ = [object]()
for z in 0..<originalArray[x][y].count {
let copiedObj = originalArray[x][y][z]
tempArrZ.append(copiedObj)
}
tempArrYZ.append(tempArrZ)
}
duplicateArray.append(tempArrYZ)
}
This still does not work; all the values in duplicateArray will act like a pointer for their values in originalArray. Perhaps someone has a simple way of deeply duplicating multidimensional arrays, or perhaps someone can find my error?
EDIT: How is this a duplicate of that other question? I'm asking specifically how to "deeply" duplicate. The question that's being referred to nebulously asked about duplicating arrays.
var duplicateArray = originalArray
Would work if the objects are not of reference type. However, for the reference type you need to actually create the copy of the object with copy. Your original code was pretty close.
var duplicateArray = [[[object]]]()
for x in 0..<originalArray.count {
var tempArrYZ = [[object]]()
for y in 0..<originalArray[x].count {
var tempArrZ = [object]()
for z in 0..<originalArray[x][y].count {
let copiedObj = originalArray[x][y][z].copy()
tempArrZ.append(copiedObj)
}
tempArrYZ.append(tempArrZ)
}
duplicateArray.append(tempArrYZ)
}
As already stated, your problem isn't really the copying of the array, it's the copying of Objects. Arrays, like all structs, are copied by value. Objects are copied by reference.
When you copy an array of objects, it's a brand new array with brand new references to the contained objects. Your code is simply creating additional references to the same objects then organizing them in a similar fashion.
Anyway, here's my simpler/functional implementation for copying arrays:
func copyArrayWithObjects <T: Copying>(items: [T]) -> [T]{
return items.map { $0.copy() }
}
func copy2DArrayWithObjects <T: Copying>(items: [[T]]) -> [[T]] {
return items.map(copyObjectsInArray)
}
func copy3DArrayWithObjects<T: Copying>(items: [[[T]]]) -> [[[T]]] {
return items.map(copy2DObjectInArray)
}
Then you can simply do this:
let copiedArray = copy3DArrayWithObjects(originalArray)
Theoretically I think it's possible to create a function to do this for an n-dimension array, but I haven't found a solution yet.
I think it would be best to write an extension on Array that adds conformance to NSCopying, which recursively copies the elements. This solution would be very elegant because it could scale to any number of dimmensions.
Swift arrays are value types so the snippet you provided is fine.
var duplicateArray = originalArray
See this example in a Playground as proof:
var array = [[["test"]]]
var newarray = array
// print different memory addresses
print(unsafeAddressOf(array[0][0][0])) // 0x00007ff7a302a760
print(unsafeAddressOf(newarray[0][0][0])) // 0x00007ff7a33000e0
If you use NSArray or reference types inside the Swift array, then they will no longer copy implicitly and will be treated with the same address - this can also be proved in the Playground. You would need to call copy() explicitly on reference types.
Related
I'm new to Swift, so I appreciate any feedback or suggestions on my approach. For reference, I'm using Xcode 12.1 and Swift 5.3. Essentially, I have a series of structs, one of which has an array of strings. What I'd like to do, is to append a string to that array. Consider the following code:
struct Collection {
var things: [Thing] = []
mutating func add(_ thing: Thing) {
things.append(thing)
}
}
struct Thing {
var messages: [String] = []
mutating func add(_ message: String) {
messages.append(message)
}
}
var collection = Collection()
collection.add(Thing())
var thing = collection.things.first
thing!.add("test")
print(collection.things.first!.messages.count)
I was expecting the final line to print 1, but instead it prints 0! The compile does not display any errors either. If I change the code so that struct Thing is class Thing and drop the mutating keyword from its add method, then the code works.
Having said that, I don't understand why my original code does not work as I would expect. I'm able to append a Thing instance to Collection, but not a string to that same Thing instance after the fact.
Have I misunderstood how the mutating keyword works?
You would get your expected 1 if you did:
print(thing!.messages.count)
because you have added the "test" to thing.messages, not collection.things.first!.messages.
"Now hold on a second!" I hear you say, "I just said var thing = collection.things.first on the previous line! How come adding to thing.messages doesn't imply adding to collection.things.first!.messages?".
This is because structs have value semantics. When you do var thing = collection.things.first, you are saying "copy the value of collection.things.first to a variable called thing". You are not saying "the variable thing now refers to the same thing as collection.things.first". To say that, Thing has to be a reference type (class).
So now you have two copies of the same value, one in thing and one in collection.things.first. You change the copy stored in thing. The other copy is unaffected.
Is there a more efficient way to retrieve all the names/titles of attributes of a NSManagedObject than this:
func getAllAttributeTitles(_ myStatSheet:StatSheet) -> Array<String> {
let dictAttributes = myStatSheet.entity.attributesByName
var arrAttributeTitles:Array<String> = []
for (key, _) in dictAttributes {
arrAttributeTitles.append(key)
}
return arrAttributeTitles
}
As I mentioned, what you've got is the right way to do it. There are other ways but I wasn't at a Mac earlier and couldn't try them out.
A more "Swift-y" way to get the array would be something like
let arrAttributeTitles = myStatSheet.entity.attributesByName.enumerated().map { $0.element.key }
This won't be any more efficient, since it's really doing the same things, but it might be more what you were thinking of when you asked. It's still getting attributesByName and iterating over the result to get strings naming the attributes.
It might be worth noting that the argument type on your method could be NSManagedObject instead of StatSheet, since the code will work for any managed object of any entity type.
I'd like to create a function that will iterate over an array (or collection or sequence). Then I will call that function with an array, and the reversed version of the array (but efficiently: without creating a new array to hold the reverse).
If I do this:
func doIteration(points: [CGPoint]) {
for p in points {
doSomethingWithPoint(p)
}
// I also need random access to points
doSomethingElseWithPoint(points[points.count-2]) // ignore obvious index error
}
And if I have this:
let points : [CGPoint] = whatever
I can do this just fine:
doIteration(points)
But then if I do this:
doIteration(points.reverse())
I get 'Cannot convert value of type 'ReverseRandomAccessCollection<[CGPoint]> to expected argument type [_]'
Now, I DON'T want to do this:
let reversedPoints : [CGPoint] = points.reverse()
doIteration(reversedPoints)
even though it will work, because that will (correct me if I'm wrong) create a new array, initializing it from the ReverseRandomAccessCollection returned by reverse().
So I guess I'd like to write my doIteration function to take some sort of sequence type, so I can pass in the result of reverse() directly, but ReverseRandomAccessCollection doesn't conform to anything at all. I think I'm missing something - what's the accepted pattern here?
If you change your parameter's type to a generic, you should get the functionality you need:
func doIteration
<C: CollectionType where C.Index: RandomAccessIndexType, C.Generator.Element == CGPoint>
(points: C) {
for p in points {
doSomethingWithPoint(p)
}
doSomethingElseWithPoint(points[points.endIndex - 2])
}
More importantly, this won't cause a copy of the array to be made. If you look at the type generated by the reverse() method:
let points: [CGPoint] = []
let reversed = points.reverse() // ReverseRandomAccessCollection<Array<__C.CGPoint>>
doIteration(reversed)
You'll see that it just creates a struct that references the original array, in reverse. (although it does have value-type semantics) And the original function can accept this new collection, because of the correct generic constraints.
You can do this
let reversedPoints : [CGPoint] = points.reverse()
doIteration(reversedPoints)
or this
doIteration(points.reverse() as [CGPoint])
but I don't think there is any real difference by the point of view of a the footprint.
Scenario 1
let reversedPoints : [CGPoint] = points.reverse()
doIteration(reversedPoints)
Infact in this case a new Array containing references to the CGPoint(s) present in the original array is created. This thanks to the Copy-on-write mechanism that Swift used to manage structures.
So the memory allocated is the following:
points.count * sizeOf(pointer)
Scenario 2
On the other hand you can write something like this
doIteration(points.reverse() as [CGPoint])
But are you really saving memory? Let's see.
A temporary variable is created, that variable is available inside the scope of the function doIteration and requires exactly a pointer for each element contained in points so again we have:
points.count * sizeOf(pointer)
So I think you can safely choose one of the 2 solutions.
Considerations
We should remember that Swift manages structures in a very smart way.
When I write
var word = "Hello"
var anotherWord = word
On the first line Swift create a Struct and fill it with the value "Hello".
On the second line Swift detect that there is no real reason to create a copy of the original String so writes inside the anotherWord a reference to the original value.
Only when word or anotherWord is modified Swift really create a copy of the original value.
I'm basically trying to do what this guy is trying to do, but with Swift:
Declaring a random amount of objects in c++
I'm pretty new to programming and very new to Swift so I'm a little fuzzy on how to do some things. Basically, I just want to declare a random amount of enemies that my player has to weave through and to register when he's hit one of them. I've been looking every where for an answer and either this is a really stupid question, so stupid no one has ever needed to put it on the internet, or Sift is too new for it to have been a problem for someone else. I'm guessing it's a stupid question, but regardless I'm out of ideas on how to figure this out.
Thanks.
Swift arrays are dynamic, at least the mutable type that are declared with var array.
So you can just add objects to your array until you have enough objects.
e.g.:
var objects = [String]()
//let numberOfObjects = arc4random_uniform(10) // between 0 and 9
let numberOfObjects = arc4random_uniform(5) + 5 // between 5 and 9
for i in 0..<numberOfObjects {
let object = String()
objects.append(object)
}
println("we have \(countElements(objects)) objects")
Maybe I'm too dense to understand the question, but it seems to me that simply declaring an NSMutableArray would do what you want:
let myArray:NSMutableArray = NSMutableArray()
You would have all the flexibility to add or remove objects as you please.
In any given loop, you could remove all objects, then use a random number generator to add back a random number of objects if that's what you're trying to do.
My additional comment on the other answer to this is that I would explicitly type cast everything in the statement that generates the random number:
var randomNumber:Int = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(5)))
Here's an example using a simple Enemy class:
class Enemy : NSObject {
override init() {
super.init()
}
}
let range = (5, 20)
let numEnemies = Int(arc4random_uniform(UInt32(range.1 - range.0) + 1) + UInt32(range.0))
var enemyArray = [Enemy]()
for i in 0..<numEnemies {
enemyArray.append(Enemy())
}
You want a random number of objects in an array. Assume:
class MyObject {}
and that you have an upper bound on the number of objects:
let theObjectLimit = 10
then you can create a random number of new, distinct instances of MyObject with simply:
let theObjects = (1...arc4random_uniform(theObjectLimit)).map {
_ -> MyObject in return MyObject ()
}
When learning a language like Swift, that has first class functions (aka closures), you'll want to use functions like map and reduce wherever possible - especially instead of iteration.
I'm trying to implement a basic multimap in Swift. Here's a relevant (non-functioning) snippet:
class Multimap<K: Hashable, V> {
var _dict = Dictionary<K, V[]>()
func put(key: K, value: V) {
if let existingValues = self._dict[key] {
existingValues += value
} else {
self._dict[key] = [value]
}
}
}
However, I'm getting an error on the existingValues += value line:
Could not find an overload for '+=' that accepts the supplied arguments
This seems to imply that the value type T[] is defined as an immutable array, but I can't find any way to explicitly declare it as mutable. Is this possible in Swift?
The problem is that you are defining existingValues as a constant with let. However, I would suggest changing the method to be:
func put(key: K, value: V) {
var values = [value]
if let existingValues = self._dict[key] {
values.extend(existingValues)
}
self._dict[key] = values
}
}
I feel that the intent of this is clearer as it doesn't require modifying the local array and reassigning later.
if var existingValues = self._dict[key] { //var, not let
existingValues += value;
// should set again.
self._dict[key] = existingValues
} else {
self._dict[key] = [value]
}
Assignment and Copy Behavior for Arrays
The assignment and copy behavior for Swift’s Array type is more complex than for its Dictionary type. Array provides C-like performance when you work with an array’s contents and copies an array’s contents only when copying is necessary.
If you assign an Array instance to a constant or variable, or pass an Array instance as an argument to a function or method call, the contents of the array are not copied at the point that the assignment or call takes place. Instead, both arrays share the same sequence of element values. When you modify an element value through one array, the result is observable through the other.
For arrays, copying only takes place when you perform an action that has the potential to modify the length of the array. This includes appending, inserting, or removing items, or using a ranged subscript to replace a range of items in the array. If and when array copying does take place, the copy behavior for an array’s contents is the same as for a dictionary’s keys and values, as described in Assignment and Copy Behavior for Dictionaries.
See: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/the-swift-programming-language/id881256329?mt=11
Buckets is a data structures library for swift. It provides a multimap and allows subscript notation.
One easy way to implement a multi-map is to use a list of pairs (key, value) sorted by key, using binary search to find ranges of entries. This works best when you need to get a bunch of data, all at once. It doesn't work so well when you are constantly deleting and inserting elements.
See std::lower_bound from C++ for a binary search implementation which can be easily written in swift.