C# Passing struct as parameter - c#

I have the following code in C#:
public class ELL
{
public struct RVector
{
private int ndim;
private double[] vector;
public RVector(double[] vector) => (ndim, this.vector) = (vector.Length, vector);
public double this[int i] { get => vector[i]; set => vector[i] = value; }
public override string ToString()
{
string str = "(";
for (int i = 0; i < ndim - 1; i++)
str += vector[i].ToString() + ", ";
str += vector[ndim - 1].ToString() + ")";
return str;
}
}
private static void SwapVectorEntries(RVector b, int m, int n)
{
double temp = b[m];
b[m] = b[n];
b[n] = temp;
}
public static void M(string[] args)
{
var a = new double[4] { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
var b = new RVector(a);
Console.WriteLine(b);
SwapVectorEntries(b, 1, 2); // Why after this command, b will be changed?
Console.WriteLine(b);
}
}
In this program, i creates a struct RVector. After that, i use a method SwapVectorEntries which have a struct parameter. Because, Struct is a value type, so i think the method SwapVectorEntries will not change the struct parameter. But, in the program, after the command SwapVectorEntries(b, 1, 2);, b has changed. Please explain me about this. Thank you !

Problem is in this.You have an array wich is reference type.When you create your
double[] a = new double[4] { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
RVector b = new RVector(a);
you have two references to that array.After when you pass your object into the method,
SwapVectorEntries(b, 1, 2);
your object is copied,BUT your new object have the same reference to that array.Here your have only one array and many references to it.

B itself is not passed as a reference, but the copy of b has a Reference to the same double[].

Related

How can I add objects Cbook to my class CBooks without using lists

Cbooks has an atribute "CTeam[] Teams" and it is of fixed size (8). If I want to add objects to it using this in the Main:
CBook A1 = new CBook("Title1", "Author1");
CBook A2 = new CBook("Title1", "Author2");
CBooks ArrayOfBooks = new CBooks(8);
ArrayOfBooks.Add(A1);
ArrayOfBooks.Add(A2);
then position 0 and 1 are ocuppied, and the positions from 2 to 7 are null. What I want to do is, using a variable "int aux=0", count the ocupied positions like this:
for (int k = 0; k < NumberOfTeams; k++)
{
if (Teams[k].Name=="")
Aux += 1;
}
So, Aux in this case would be 2, then I want to do "Teams[Aux] = A" so that A would be in the position 2 and now I should have three objects in my array. But I'm getting "Index out of bound"
Your implementation then should look similar to this:
public class Program
{
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
Element a = new Element("A");
Element b = new Element("B");
MyArray array = new MyArray(8);
array.Add(a);
array.Add(b);
Console.WriteLine(array.Count()); //2 Elements are in the array
}
}
//Sample element class.
public class Element{
public readonly String MyString;
public Element(String myString){
MyString = myString;
}
}
//Sample array class.
public class MyArray{
private readonly Element[] myArray;
private int count; //Use a property here
public MyArray(int size){
//Be careful -> check if size is >= 0.
myArray = new Element[size];
}
public bool Add(Element element){
if(myArray.Length == count) // return false if no more elements fit.
return false;
myArray[count] = element;
count++;
return true;
}
public int Count(){
return count;
}
}
So there is no need for creating an extra count loop. Your "count" variable in "MyArray" class holds always the correct value.
Anyway the implementation or use case of this code is a little bit clunky.
Why are you cant use directly a more safe list or something. That would be a better solution.
What do you need CBooks for? From what I understand, it's just an array of 8 CBook objects so why not use CBook[]?
CBook A1 = new CBook("Title1", "Author1");
CBook A2 = new CBook("Title1", "Author2");
CBooks[] ArrayOfBooks = new CBook[8];
ArrayOfBooks[0] = A1;
ArrayOfBooks[1] = A2;
int aux = 0;
for (int k = 0; k < ArrayOfBooks.Length; k++)
{
//break the loop because we know there are no more books
if (ArrayOfBooks[k] == null)
break;
aux++;
}
The question doesn't cover what the variables NumberOfTeams and Teams are for but could those be added to the implementation of CBook?

Using array initializer

I have a class called Matrix : IEnumerable<double>, (classic, mathematical matrix. It is basically a 2D array with some goodies).
The class is immutable, so there is no way to change its values after instance creation.
If want to create a matrix with pre-existing values I have to pass an array to the constructor like this:
double[,] arr = new double[,]
{
{1,2,3}, {4,5,6}, {7,8,9}
};
Matrix m = new Matrix(arr);
Is there a way to turn it into this: (?)
Matrix m = new Matrix
{
{1,2,3}, {4,5,6}, {7,8,9}
};
Update:
Found a hack-ish way yo make it work. I'm not sure if this solution is advisable, but it works.
class Matrix : ICloneable, IEnumerable<double>
{
// Height & Width are initialized in a constructor beforehand.
/*
* Usage:
* var mat = new Matrix(3, 4)
* {
* {1,2,3}, {4,5,6}, {7,8,9}, {10,11,12}
* };
*/
int rowIndex;
bool allowArrayInitializer;
double[,] tempData;
double[,] data;
public void Add(params double[] args)
{
if(!allowArrayInitializer)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Cannot use array initializer");
if(args.Length != Width || rowIndex >= Height)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid array initializer.");
for(int i = 0; i < Width; i++)
tempData[i, rowIndex] = args[i];
if(++rowIndex == Height)
data = tempData;
}
}
Not if it’s immutable; that syntactic sugar is implemented using Add().
You will not able to do it via initializer but should be able to do it via parameterized constructor.
You can see the sample code below :
class Matrix : IEnumerable<double>
{
double[,] input;
public Matrix(double[,] inputArray)
{
input = inputArray;
}
public IEnumerator<double> GetEnumerator()
{
return (IEnumerator<double>)input.GetEnumerator();
}
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return input.GetEnumerator();
}
}
In the main method :
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var m = new Matrix(new double[,] { { 1, 2, 3 }, { 4, 5, 6 }, { 7, 8, 9 } });
}
I hope this helps you!
instead of deriving from IEnumerable I would use a property:
class Matrix
{
public double[,] Arr { get; set; }
}
Matrix m = new Matrix
{
Arr = new double [,] { {1d,2d,3d}, { 4d,5d, 6d}}
};

C# Methods: Defined Parameter Default Value Issue

I am writing an app that requires the calculation of the Gamma function.
A code (part of a class) snippet is below:
namespace PB.Utilities.Math
{
// class definition
public class SpecialFunctions
{
// Private Fields
// Instance Constructor
public SpecialFunctions() {}
// Public Method for Gamma Function
// x = input value; x MUST BE > 0
// GammaLn = secondary output value equal to natural log of Gamma Function
public double Gamma(double x, out double GammaLn)
{
try
{
if (x <= 0) throw new System.ArgumentException("arg <= 0 in GammaFunction", "x");
}
catch
{
System.Console.WriteLine("argument <= 0 in GammaFunction");
System.Console.ReadKey();
}
double gammaln;
double _gamma = gamma(x, out gammaln);
GammaLn = gammaln;
return _gamma;
}
// private method for Gamma Function
private double gamma(double xx, out double gammaln)
{
// private constants
int j;
double x,tmp,y,ser;
const double k1 = 5.24218750000000000;
const double k2 = 0.999999999999997092;
const double k3 = 2.5066282746310005;
double[] cof = new double[14]
{
57.1562356658629235, -59.5979603554754912, 14.1360979747417471,
-0.491913816097620199, 0.339946499848118887e-4, 0.465236289270485756e-4,
-0.983744753048795646e-4, 0.158088703224912494e-3, -0.210264441724104883e-3,
0.217439618115212643e-3, -0.164318106536763890e-3, 0.844182239838527433e-4,
-0.261908384015814087e-4, 0.368991826595316234e-5
};
y = x = xx;
tmp = x + k1;
tmp = (x + 0.5) * System.Math.Log(tmp) - tmp;
ser = k2;
for (j = 0; j < 14; j++) ser += cof[j]/++y;
gammaln = tmp + System.Math.Log(k3*ser/x);
return System.Math.Exp(gammaln);
}
}
}
public class BSA
{
static void Main()
{
// Create an object of type PB.Utilities.Math.SpecialFunctions
PB.Utilities.Math.SpecialFunctions Function = new PB.Utilities.Math.SpecialFunctions();
// Call the public method GammaFunction.
double GammaLn1;
double GammaLn2;
double GammaLn3;
double g1 = Function.Gamma(3.5, out GammaLn1);
double g2 = Function.Gamma(1.5, out GammaLn2);
double g3 = Function.Gamma(1/7, out GammaLn3);
System.Console.WriteLine("g(7/2) = "+g1);
System.Console.WriteLine("g(3/2) = "+g2);
System.Console.WriteLine("g(1/7) = "+g3);
}
}
The issue is that at compilation, the parameter x in Gamma (even though x is being assigned the value 3.5 in the calling component) is assigned a value of 0 which triggers the exception. Can anyone please suggest how I can get around this? Thank you.
Seems to be 3.5 in my test cases. Are you sure you haven't excluded some information that might be the issue?
using System;
namespace Doubletesting
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
double d = Doubletesting.TestDouble(3.5);
Console.WriteLine(d.ToString());
Console.ReadKey();
}
public static double TestDouble(double x)
{
double result;
result = x;
return result;
}
}
}
Result
3.5
UPDATED
The Error is caused by your Function.Gamma(1 / 7, out GammaLn3). This is because both 1 and 7 are INT and dividing (int)1 by (int)7 is zero. Try Function.Gamma(1f / 7f, out GammaLn3).

Is swap method in C# whose parameters have value type not efficient?

Check this method:
public static void Swap(ref int i, ref int j)
{
int aux=i;
i=j;
j=aux;
}
Is it more efficient than this?
public static void Swap1(int[] a, int i, int j)
{
int aux=a[i];
a[i]= a[j];
a[j]=aux;
}
I'm using these methods like this:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] a = { 5, 4, 3, 1 };
Swap(a[1], a[2]);
Swap(a, 1, 2);
}
Which of these methods is more efficient and why?
Your method will not swap any parameters at all. I mean it will swap parameters inside your method, but it will not affect the values of source parameters. That's because value types are copied when they are passed into methods. Here's the example:
void IncorrectSwap(int a, int b)
{
int temp = a;
a = b;
b = temp;
}
void HereHappensNothing()
{
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
IncorrectSwap(a, b);
// a still = 1, and b = 2, nothing happens
}
To make your method work you have to pass value types by reference like that:
void CorrectSwap(ref int a, ref int b)
{
int temp = a;
a = b;
b = temp;
}
void HereSwapHappens()
{
int a = 1;
int b = 2;
CorrectSwap(ref a,ref b);
// a = 2, and b = 1, Ok.
}
Here you can read about value types and how to work with them.
Update
Following your update. I don't think there should be any significant difference in performance as long as value types don't get boxed when passed by ref. There can be some penalty when you pass more parameters, but I don't think it should be significant, you will not see the difference.
Not passing by ref will not work. As you will only be affecting the local parameters.
Your code does nothing!
When parameters are passed by value you can't change them.
So to correctly implement Swap you need to pass by ref.

How do I clone a range of array elements to a new array?

I have an array X of 10 elements. I would like to create a new array containing all the elements from X that begin at index 3 and ends in index 7. Sure I can easily write a loop that will do it for me but I would like to keep my code as clean as possible. Is there a method in C# that can do it for me?
Something like (pseudo code):
Array NewArray = oldArray.createNewArrayFromRange(int BeginIndex , int EndIndex)
Array.Copy doesn't fit my needs. I need the items in the new array to be clones. Array.copy is just a C-Style memcpy equivalent, it's not what I'm looking for.
You could add it as an extension method:
public static T[] SubArray<T>(this T[] data, int index, int length)
{
T[] result = new T[length];
Array.Copy(data, index, result, 0, length);
return result;
}
static void Main()
{
int[] data = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
int[] sub = data.SubArray(3, 4); // contains {3,4,5,6}
}
Update re cloning (which wasn't obvious in the original question). If you really want a deep clone; something like:
public static T[] SubArrayDeepClone<T>(this T[] data, int index, int length)
{
T[] arrCopy = new T[length];
Array.Copy(data, index, arrCopy, 0, length);
using (MemoryStream ms = new MemoryStream())
{
var bf = new BinaryFormatter();
bf.Serialize(ms, arrCopy);
ms.Position = 0;
return (T[])bf.Deserialize(ms);
}
}
This does require the objects to be serializable ([Serializable] or ISerializable), though. You could easily substitute for any other serializer as appropriate - XmlSerializer, DataContractSerializer, protobuf-net, etc.
Note that deep clone is tricky without serialization; in particular, ICloneable is hard to trust in most cases.
You can use Array.Copy(...) to copy into the new array after you've created it, but I don't think there's a method which creates the new array and copies a range of elements.
If you're using .NET 3.5 you could use LINQ:
var newArray = array.Skip(3).Take(5).ToArray();
but that will be somewhat less efficient.
See this answer to a similar question for options for more specific situations.
Have you considered using ArraySegment?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/1hsbd92d.aspx
I see you want to do Cloning, not just copying references.
In this case you can use .Select to project array members to their clones.
For example, if your elements implemented IClonable you could do something like this:
var newArray = array.Skip(3).Take(5).Select(eachElement => eachElement.Clone()).ToArray();
Note: This solution requires .NET Framework 3.5.
The following code does it in one line:
// Source array
string[] Source = new string[] { "A", "B", "C", "D" };
// Extracting a slice into another array
string[] Slice = new List<string>(Source).GetRange(2, 2).ToArray();
In C# 8, they've introduced a new Range and Index type, which can be used like this:
int[] a = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
Index i1 = 3; // number 3 from beginning
Index i2 = ^4; // number 4 from end
var slice = a[i1..i2]; // { 3, 4, 5 }
References:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/whats-new/dotnet-core-3-0#ranges-and-indices
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/building-c-8-0/
string[] arr = { "Parrot" , "Snake" ,"Rabbit" , "Dog" , "cat" };
arr = arr.ToList().GetRange(0, arr.Length -1).ToArray();
Building on Marc's answer but adding the desired cloning behaviour
public static T[] CloneSubArray<T>(this T[] data, int index, int length)
where T : ICloneable
{
T[] result = new T[length];
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
var original = data[index + i];
if (original != null)
result[i] = (T)original.Clone();
return result;
}
And if implementing ICloneable is too much like hard work a reflective one using Håvard Stranden’s Copyable library to do the heavy lifting required.
using OX.Copyable;
public static T[] DeepCopySubArray<T>(
this T[] data, int index, int length)
{
T[] result = new T[length];
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
var original = data[index + i];
if (original != null)
result[i] = (T)original.Copy();
return result;
}
Note that the OX.Copyable implementation works with any of:
For the automated copy to work, though, one of the following statements must hold for instance:
Its type must have a parameterless constructor, or
It must be a Copyable, or
It must have an IInstanceProvider registered for its type.
So this should cover almost any situation you have. If you are cloning objects where the sub graph contains things like db connections or file/stream handles you obviously have issues but that it true for any generalized deep copy.
If you want to use some other deep copy approach instead this article lists several others so I would suggest not trying to write your own.
You can do this fairly easially;
object[] foo = new object[10];
object[] bar = new object[7];
Array.Copy(foo, 3, bar, 0, 7);
I think that the code you are looking for is:
Array.Copy(oldArray, 0, newArray, BeginIndex, EndIndex - BeginIndex)
As an alternative to copying the data you can make a wrapper that gives you access to a part of the original array as if it was a copy of the part of the array. The advantage is that you don't get another copy of the data in memory, and the drawback is a slight overhead when accessing the data.
public class SubArray<T> : IEnumerable<T> {
private T[] _original;
private int _start;
public SubArray(T[] original, int start, int len) {
_original = original;
_start = start;
Length = len;
}
public T this[int index] {
get {
if (index < 0 || index >= Length) throw new IndexOutOfRangeException();
return _original[_start + index];
}
}
public int Length { get; private set; }
public IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator() {
for (int i = 0; i < Length; i++) {
yield return _original[_start + i];
}
}
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() {
return GetEnumerator();
}
}
Usage:
int[] original = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
SubArray<int> copy = new SubArray<int>(original, 2, 2);
Console.WriteLine(copy.Length); // shows: 2
Console.WriteLine(copy[0]); // shows: 3
foreach (int i in copy) Console.WriteLine(i); // shows 3 and 4
In C# 8.0, you can now do many fancier works including reverse indices and ranges like in Python, such as:
int[] list = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6};
var list2 = list[2..5].Clone() as int[]; // 3, 4, 5
var list3 = list[..5].Clone() as int[]; // 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
var list4 = list[^4..^0].Clone() as int[]; // reverse index
Array.ConstrainedCopy will work.
public static void ConstrainedCopy (
Array sourceArray,
int sourceIndex,
Array destinationArray,
int destinationIndex,
int length
)
It does not meet your cloning requirement, but it seems simpler than many answers to do:
Array NewArray = new ArraySegment(oldArray,BeginIndex , int Count).ToArray();
There's no single method that will do what you want. You will need to make a clone method available for the class in your array. Then, if LINQ is an option:
Foo[] newArray = oldArray.Skip(3).Take(5).Select(item => item.Clone()).ToArray();
class Foo
{
public Foo Clone()
{
return (Foo)MemberwiseClone();
}
}
How about useing Array.ConstrainedCopy:
int[] ArrayOne = new int[8] {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8};
int[] ArrayTwo = new int[5];
Array.ConstrainedCopy(ArrayOne, 3, ArrayTwo, 0, 7-3);
Below is my original post. It will not work
You could use Array.CopyTo:
int[] ArrayOne = new int[8] {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8};
int[] ArrayTwo = new int[5];
ArrayOne.CopyTo(ArrayTwo,3); //starts copy at index=3 until it reaches end of
//either array
How about this:
public T[] CloneCopy(T[] array, int startIndex, int endIndex) where T : ICloneable
{
T[] retArray = new T[endIndex - startIndex];
for (int i = startIndex; i < endIndex; i++)
{
array[i - startIndex] = array[i].Clone();
}
return retArray;
}
You then need to implement the ICloneable interface on all of the classes you need to use this on but that should do it.
I'm not sure how deep it really is, but:
MyArray.ToList<TSource>().GetRange(beginningIndex, endIndex).ToArray()
It's a bit of overhead, but it might cut out an unnecessary method.
As far as cloning goes, I don't think serialization calls your constructors. This may break class invariants if you're doing interesting things in the ctor's.
It seems the safer bet is virtual clone methods calling copy constructors.
protected MyDerivedClass(MyDerivedClass myClass)
{
...
}
public override MyBaseClass Clone()
{
return new MyDerivedClass(this);
}
Cloning elements in an array is not something that can be done in a universal way. Do you want deep cloning or a simple copy of all members?
Let's go for the "best effort" approach: cloning objects using the ICloneable interface or binary serialization:
public static class ArrayExtensions
{
public static T[] SubArray<T>(this T[] array, int index, int length)
{
T[] result = new T[length];
for (int i=index;i<length+index && i<array.Length;i++)
{
if (array[i] is ICloneable)
result[i-index] = (T) ((ICloneable)array[i]).Clone();
else
result[i-index] = (T) CloneObject(array[i]);
}
return result;
}
private static object CloneObject(object obj)
{
BinaryFormatter formatter = new BinaryFormatter();
using (MemoryStream stream = new MemoryStream())
{
formatter.Serialize(stream, obj);
stream.Seek(0,SeekOrigin.Begin);
return formatter.Deserialize(stream);
}
}
}
This is not a perfect solution, because there simply is none that will work for any type of object.
You can take class made by Microsoft:
internal class Set<TElement>
{
private int[] _buckets;
private Slot[] _slots;
private int _count;
private int _freeList;
private readonly IEqualityComparer<TElement> _comparer;
public Set()
: this(null)
{
}
public Set(IEqualityComparer<TElement> comparer)
{
if (comparer == null)
comparer = EqualityComparer<TElement>.Default;
_comparer = comparer;
_buckets = new int[7];
_slots = new Slot[7];
_freeList = -1;
}
public bool Add(TElement value)
{
return !Find(value, true);
}
public bool Contains(TElement value)
{
return Find(value, false);
}
public bool Remove(TElement value)
{
var hashCode = InternalGetHashCode(value);
var index1 = hashCode % _buckets.Length;
var index2 = -1;
for (var index3 = _buckets[index1] - 1; index3 >= 0; index3 = _slots[index3].Next)
{
if (_slots[index3].HashCode == hashCode && _comparer.Equals(_slots[index3].Value, value))
{
if (index2 < 0)
_buckets[index1] = _slots[index3].Next + 1;
else
_slots[index2].Next = _slots[index3].Next;
_slots[index3].HashCode = -1;
_slots[index3].Value = default(TElement);
_slots[index3].Next = _freeList;
_freeList = index3;
return true;
}
index2 = index3;
}
return false;
}
private bool Find(TElement value, bool add)
{
var hashCode = InternalGetHashCode(value);
for (var index = _buckets[hashCode % _buckets.Length] - 1; index >= 0; index = _slots[index].Next)
{
if (_slots[index].HashCode == hashCode && _comparer.Equals(_slots[index].Value, value))
return true;
}
if (add)
{
int index1;
if (_freeList >= 0)
{
index1 = _freeList;
_freeList = _slots[index1].Next;
}
else
{
if (_count == _slots.Length)
Resize();
index1 = _count;
++_count;
}
int index2 = hashCode % _buckets.Length;
_slots[index1].HashCode = hashCode;
_slots[index1].Value = value;
_slots[index1].Next = _buckets[index2] - 1;
_buckets[index2] = index1 + 1;
}
return false;
}
private void Resize()
{
var length = checked(_count * 2 + 1);
var numArray = new int[length];
var slotArray = new Slot[length];
Array.Copy(_slots, 0, slotArray, 0, _count);
for (var index1 = 0; index1 < _count; ++index1)
{
int index2 = slotArray[index1].HashCode % length;
slotArray[index1].Next = numArray[index2] - 1;
numArray[index2] = index1 + 1;
}
_buckets = numArray;
_slots = slotArray;
}
internal int InternalGetHashCode(TElement value)
{
if (value != null)
return _comparer.GetHashCode(value) & int.MaxValue;
return 0;
}
internal struct Slot
{
internal int HashCode;
internal TElement Value;
internal int Next;
}
}
and then
public static T[] GetSub<T>(this T[] first, T[] second)
{
var items = IntersectIteratorWithIndex(first, second);
if (!items.Any()) return new T[] { };
var index = items.First().Item2;
var length = first.Count() - index;
var subArray = new T[length];
Array.Copy(first, index, subArray, 0, length);
return subArray;
}
private static IEnumerable<Tuple<T, Int32>> IntersectIteratorWithIndex<T>(IEnumerable<T> first, IEnumerable<T> second)
{
var firstList = first.ToList();
var set = new Set<T>();
foreach (var i in second)
set.Add(i);
foreach (var i in firstList)
{
if (set.Remove(i))
yield return new Tuple<T, Int32>(i, firstList.IndexOf(i));
}
}
This is the optimal way, I found, to do this:
private void GetSubArrayThroughArraySegment() {
int[] array = { 10, 20, 30 };
ArraySegment<int> segment = new ArraySegment<int>(array, 1, 2);
Console.WriteLine("-- Array --");
int[] original = segment.Array;
foreach (int value in original)
{
Console.WriteLine(value);
}
Console.WriteLine("-- Offset --");
Console.WriteLine(segment.Offset);
Console.WriteLine("-- Count --");
Console.WriteLine(segment.Count);
Console.WriteLine("-- Range --");
for (int i = segment.Offset; i <= segment.Count; i++)
{
Console.WriteLine(segment.Array[i]);
}
}
Hope It Helps!
use extention method :
public static T[] Slice<T>(this T[] source, int start, int end)
{
// Handles negative ends.
if (end < 0)
{
end = source.Length + end;
}
int len = end - start;
// Return new array.
T[] res = new T[len];
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++)
{
res[i] = source[i + start];
}
return res;
}
and you can use it
var NewArray = OldArray.Slice(3,7);
Code from the System.Private.CoreLib.dll:
public static T[] GetSubArray<T>(T[] array, Range range)
{
if (array == null)
{
ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentNullException(ExceptionArgument.array);
}
(int Offset, int Length) offsetAndLength = range.GetOffsetAndLength(array.Length);
int item = offsetAndLength.Offset;
int item2 = offsetAndLength.Length;
if (default(T) != null || typeof(T[]) == array.GetType())
{
if (item2 == 0)
{
return Array.Empty<T>();
}
T[] array2 = new T[item2];
Buffer.Memmove(ref Unsafe.As<byte, T>(ref array2.GetRawSzArrayData()), ref Unsafe.Add(ref Unsafe.As<byte, T>(ref array.GetRawSzArrayData()), item), (uint)item2);
return array2;
}
T[] array3 = (T[])Array.CreateInstance(array.GetType().GetElementType(), item2);
Array.Copy(array, item, array3, 0, item2);
return array3;
}
array1 = [5,6,7,8];
int[] array2 = new int[2];
Array.ConstrainedCopy(array1, 1, array2, 0, 2);
array2 = [6,7];
Array.ConstrainedCopy takes five (5) parameters:
source array (sourceArray)
starting index of source array (sourceIndex)
destination array (destinationArray)
starting index of destination array (destinationIndex)
number of elements to copy (length)
public static T[] SubArray<T>(T[] data, int index, int length)
{
List<T> retVal = new List<T>();
if (data == null || data.Length == 0)
return retVal.ToArray();
bool startRead = false;
int count = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < data.Length; i++)
{
if (i == index && !startRead)
startRead = true;
if (startRead)
{
retVal.Add(data[i]);
count++;
if (count == length)
break;
}
}
return retVal.ToArray();
}

Categories

Resources