Are multi-dimensional arrays filled with null values when defined implicitly? - c#

I have:
public static BlockQuadrant[] EditModeBlocks = new BlockQuadrant[9];
but when I try to use them I get a null value exception, and apparently all of the values are equal to null. I thought this was a value inside my BlockQuadrant class, but I defined everything in the constructor. If this is the case, is there a way I can make it fill up the array with actual instances of BlockQuadrant instead of null values?

When you construct an array of reference objects, it constructs only an array, not the objects inside it. You need to initialize the individual objects by calling constructors.
You can take a shortcut using LINQ, like this:
public static BlockQuadrant[] EditModeBlocks = Enumerable
.Range(0, 9)
.Select(i => new BlockQuadrant())
.ToArray();

Do you have a problem with looping through your array and newing the elements?
for (int ii = 0; ii < EditModeBlocks.Length; ii++)
{
EditModeBlocks[ii] = new BlockQuadrant();
}
With your initial statement, you've created an array with default values. For reference types, the default value is null.

You will have to instantiate the each element in array before you use as the array contains null in its element.
public static BlockQuadrant[] EditModeBlocks = new BlockQuadrant[9];
In some static method use loop to instantiate them.
private static someMethod()
{
for (int i = 0; i < EditModeBlocks.Length; i++)
{
EditModeBlocks[i] = new BlockQuadrant();
}
}

Related

How to deal with arrays inside a struct?

I'm looking for a way to replace some of my List objects with arrays in my project to boost performance. The reasoning is that the List I would replace do not change size often (sometimes only once), so it would make sense to swap them out with arrays. Also, I would like to prevent allocations on the heap as much as possible.
So my idea is to create a struct (ArrayStruct) with two members "Count" and "Array". The struct would have some functions to add/remove/get/set/ect... elements in the array. The count would keep count of the elements that are usable in the array, and the array would only increase in size, never decrease.
Note that this is for a very particular case because I know the array size won't be very big.
The main problem I have is when I pass the reference to an already existing ArrayStruct object (named a in the example) to another (named b in the example) - I can edit the array in it, but once I resize it in a, I get an out of range exception in b. Is this because of the way I'm updating the reference via System.Array.Resize, so that the object b somehow does not attribute this change?
The only thing I could come up with as an idea was trying to override the assignment operator so that it would create a new array on assignment... but obviously that does not work.
My ArrayStruct
public struct ArrayStruct<T>
{
[SerializeField] private int m_Count;
[SerializeField] private T[] m_Array;
public int Count => m_Count;
public void Initialize(int startSize)
{
m_Count = 0;
m_Array = new T[startSize];
}
public T GetAt(int index)
{
return m_Array[index];
}
public void SetAt(int index, T newValue)
{
m_Array[index] = newValue;
}
public void Add(T newElement)
{
if (m_Array == null) {
m_Array = new T[1];
} else if (m_Array.Length == m_Count) {
System.Array.Resize(ref m_Array, m_Count + 1);
}
m_Array[m_Count] = newElement;
m_Count++;
}
public void Remove(T element)
{
for (int i = 0; i < m_Count; ++i) {
if (!element.Equals(m_Array[i])) {
continue;
}
for (int j = index; j < m_Count - 1; ++j) {
m_Array[j] = m_Array[j + 1];
}
m_Count--;
m_Array[m_Count] = default(T);
break;
}
}
//Trying to overload the = operating by creating a auto cast, this gives a compile error
/*public static implicit operator ArrayStruct<T>(ArrayStruct<T> otherArray)
{
var newArray = new ArrayStruct<T>();
newArray.m_Count = otherArray.Count;
newArray.m_Array = new T[otherArray.Length];
otherArray.m_Array.CopyTo(newArray.m_Array);
return newArray;
}*/
An example showcasing the problem
var a = new ArrayStruct<string>()
a.Add("hello");
var b = a;
print (b.GetAt(0)); //"hello"
a.SetAt(0, "new value for a");
print(b.GetAt(0));//"new value for a" , changing a changed b because the array is the same in both, this is bad
a.Add("resizing array");
print (b.GetAt(1)); //"Out of range exception" , because the array was resized for a but not for b therefore the connection broke
So do any of you have an idea of how I could make a new copy the array when I assign the struct to another variable?
Of course, I know I could use a function to do something like so
b = new ArrayStruct(a);
But I want it to be implicit. Or if there was a way to prevent assignments that would also work for me.
var a = new ArrayStruct();//let this work
var b = a; //Prevent this from happening
If you have any other solutions for replacing Lists with arrays conveniently please let me know
So do any of you have an idea of how I could make a new copy the array when I assign the struct to another variable? Of course, I know I could use a function to do something like so b = new ArrayStruct(a); But I want it to be implicit.
You can't do that. If a is a struct and you execute var b = a, then it will always just set b to a shallow copy of a; there's no way to change that behavior.
Doing something like b = new ArrayStruct(a) is the best you can do.
You're not understanding what the "=" operator is doing there. Objects are defined by reference, meaning when you write var b = a; you are actually asking for what you wish to avoid to happen, that is - object "b", pointing to the same object, which is "a".
You're passing the object "b" to point to the reference of object "a", which object holds the address to the object in question you defined, using the new keyword var a = new ArrayStruct<string>()
Your operator overloading does not work because you can't use it for conversions of the same type as the class you're writing the operator in. You'd either have to make a separate object (class), which would defeat the point you're trying to fix, or pass the m_array instead: public static implicit operator ArrayStruct<T>(T[] array)
You can also do something like this:
public static ArrayStruct<T> CopyFrom (ArrayStruct<T> array)
{
var newArray = new ArrayStruct<T>();
newArray.m_Array = new T[array.Count + 1];
newArray.Count = array.Count;
Array.Copy(array.m_Array, 0, newArray.m_Array, 0, array.m_Array.Length);
return newArray;
}
Now it should work exactly as you wanted.
var a = new ArrayStruct<string>();
a.Add("hello");
var b = ArrayStruct<string>.CopyFrom(a);
a.SetAt(0, "new value for a");
a.Add("resizing array");
Console.WriteLine(b.Count); // b returns 1
Console.WriteLine(a.Count); // a returns 2
As to why your index was going out of bounds, i.e it did not preserve the reference found in "a", this is all in correlation with references, yet again.
In the following code System.Array.Resize(ref m_Array, Count + 1); you're changing the reference found for object m_array in "a", when you're adding the new element with the line a.Add("resizing array");. That essentially means that your "a" object's m_array (which is another object of type array[]) is now pointing to a new object (of type array[]), which is of a new size.
Okay, but object "a" is now using the new reference, whilst object "b" is still using the old one. m_array in object "b" only has a single element, while the new m_array object in "a" has the newly added element "resizing array", along with any previously added ones.
I believe that's how System.Array.Resize works? Edit me if I'm wrong.
Below is a resource explaining how to do a deep cloning of an object, if that's what you truly wish to do (i.e create a completely new copy of an object, as well as any other objects inside)
Deep cloning of objects

Generics and Types and Arrays

Can a 'generic type' be an array?
And in the cases where it is, how can one access that array?
Can you access a given generic type T as an array, when it is one, and as a non-array when it is not one?
For instance:
If I had a method like ->
void MustBeOfType<T>(T value){}
Can I have ->
MustBeOfType<int>(10);
And Also ->
MustBeOfType<int[]>( new int[] { 1, 2, 3 } );
And within those generic methods, can they access the values as one would expect? - one as an int and one as an int[]?
I think there might be something with typeof(T).IsArray()... but I just can't for the life of me figure out how to cast the parameter as an array when it is one.
Thanks!
You could...but, I'm not sure you should:
void MustBeOfType<T>(T value)
{
Array array = value as Array;
if (array != null) //It is an array
{
foreach (var arrayItem in array)
{
}
for (int i = 0; i < array.Length; i++)
{
var arrayItem = array.GetValue(i);
}
}
else //It is not an array
{
}
}
I am not sure what you are trying to do but Generic types can be anything. You can put restrictions to your generic type with where clause, but this is up to you and up to functionality and context.
Lets take List as example. Let say that we have List inside List. Then we define it as:
List<List<string>> myListOfList = new List<List<string>>();
your must be of type can also be anything ( if you didnt put restriction with where clause)
MustBeOfType<int[][]>()
MustBeOfType<List<List<string>>>()
MustBeOfType<AnyOtherGenericClass<List<string>>>()
and to be able to access it:
class MustBeOfType<T>
{
private T _value;
MustBeofType(T value)
{
_value = value;
}
}
to be able to make operation on , you can use reflection or if you put where restriction and your where restriction has Type, then you can see properties of that Type.

NullReferenceException on trying to use my first user-defined type

What I'm trying to do is define my own type that contains 2 ints to use in a 2-dimensional array. The application for this is using the array indexes as x,y coordinates for objects in 2-d space to be displayed. So object with data stored at array[13,5] would be displayed at x=13,y=5, and the properties of that object could be retrieved with array[13,5].property1, for example. The type I've defined is extremely simple:
chunkBlocks.cs:
public class chunkBlocks {
public int blockType;
public int isLoaded;
}
then, I initialize the array:
chunkBlocks[,] _bData = new chunkBlocks[17, 17];
This all compiles/runs without error. The NRE is thrown when I try to assign a value to one of the properties of the type. For debugging, I have the code written as:
_bData[i, n].blockType = 5;
and the NRE is thrown specifically on the .blockType portion. I've tried changing the type to initialize with 0 values for both ints to no avail:
public class chunkBlocks {
public int blockType = 0;
public int isLoaded = 0;
}
I've Googled around and searched SO, and I've not been able to turn up anything. I'm sure it's a relatively simple matter, but I'm not experienced enough to be able to pinpoint it.
Thanks!
You need to initialize every instance of the array:
_bData[i, n] = new chunkBlocks();
Now assign the value to it:
_bData[i, n].blockType = 5;
You will have to initialize every instance, you just have declared them in the array.
I think you should do this:
for(int i = 0;i<17;i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < 17; j++)
{
_bData[i, j] = new chunkBlocks ();
}
}

Generic way to send an array collection containing only a part of a more complex structure

Let's say a program like this:
class MyClass
{
public int Numbers;
public char Letters;
}
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
var mc = new MyClass[5];
for (var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
mc[i].Numbers = i + 1;
mc[i].Letters = (char) (i + 65);
}
}
}
Now, let's suppose an 'X' method that requires ALL the numbers contained in the object mc, in a separate array, that's sent as a parameter.
My first idea is a for, a new integers array, and copy one by one onto its respective position. But, what if the MyClass gets different, now it has strings and floats, and I wanna pull out the strings, now the for has to be completely redefined in its inside part to create the needed array for another 'X' method.
I know of cases where Linq helps a lot, for example, generics for Sum, Average, Count and another numeric functions, and of course, it's combination with lambda expressions.
I'm wondering if something similar exists to make the above arrays of MyClass (and anothers of course) in a faster-generic way?
If you want to use LINQ, you can do something like the following:
int [] numbers = mc.Select<MyClass, int>(m => mc.Number).ToArray();
To make it more generic than that, it gets a bit more complicated, and you may need reflection, or dynamic objects. A simple example with reflection would be:
private TValue[] ExtractFields<TClass, TValue>(TClass[] classObjs, string fieldName)
{
FieldInfo fInfo = typeof(TClass).GetField(fieldName, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance);
if (fInfo != null && fInfo.FieldType.Equals(typeof(TValue)))
return classObjs.Select<TClass, TValue>(c => (TValue)fInfo.GetValue(c)).ToArray();
else
throw new NotSupportedException("Unidentified field, or different field type");
}
And then just call it like:
int [] fields = ExtractField<MyClass, int>(mc, "Number");
If you are using C# 4.0, then you may use dynamic
class MyClass
{
public dynamic Numbers;
public char Letters;
}
EDIT: based on comments
I am not sure if this is what you want:
int[] arr = mc.Select(a => a.Numbers).ToArray<int>();
or without casting
int[] arr = mc.Select(a => a.Numbers).ToArray();
Why not just use Dictionary<int, char>, or if the data type is unknown then simply Dictionary<object, object>
If your goal is to generate a new array which is detached from the original array, but contains data copied from it, the most generic thing you could do would be to define a method like:
T my_array[]; // The array which holds the real things
U[] CopyAsConvertedArray<U>(Func<T,U> ConversionMethod);
That would allow one to generate a new array which extracts items from the original using any desired method.

Instantiate an array of objects, in simpliest way?

Given a class:
class clsPerson { public int x, y; }
Is there some way to create an array of these classes with each element initialized to a (default) constructed instance, without doing it manually in a for loop like:
clsPerson[] objArr = new clsPerson[1000];
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; ++i)
objArr[i] = new clsPerson();
Can I shorten the declaration and instantiation of an array of N objects?
The constructor must be run for every item in the array in this scenario. Whether or not you use a loop, collection initializers or a helper method every element in the array must be visited.
If you're just looking for a handy syntax though you could use the following
public static T[] CreateArray<T>(int count) where T : new() {
var array = new T[count];
for (var i = 0; i < count; i++) {
array[i] = new T();
}
return array;
}
clsPerson[] objArary = CreateArray<clsPerson>(1000);
You must invoke the constructor for each item. There is no way to allocate an array and invoke your class constructors on the items without constructing each item.
You could shorten it (a tiny bit) from a loop using:
clsPerson[] objArr = Enumerable.Range(0, 1000).Select(i => new clsPerson()).ToArray();
Personally, I'd still allocate the array and loop through it (and/or move it into a helper routine), though, as it's very clear and still fairly simple:
clsPerson[] objArr = new clsPerson[1000];
for (int i=0;i<1000;++i)
clsPerson[i] = new clsPerson();
If it would make sense to do so, you could change class clsPerson to struct Person. structs always have a default value.

Categories

Resources