Allow to change a structure of a pointer

[infratec]

Hi,

it would be nice if something like this is possible:

Code: Select all

If Type = 1
  *ptr.Type1Str = *Buffer
else
  *ptr.Type2Str = *Buffer
endif

Bernd

[ts-soft]

This is possible

//edit
not to create a structure at runtime, but to use different structures

[Fred]

Well, if you can change the structure at runtime, how will you access the fields if the structure have different fiels ? It needs to known at compile time, as PB isn't an interpreted language.

[STARGÅTE]

use structure union:

Code: Select all

Structure BothTypes
	StructureUnion
		Type1.Type1Str
		Type2.Type2Str
	EndStructureUnion
EndStructure

*ptr.BothTypes = *Buffer
If Type = 1
  *ptr\Type1\...
Else
  *ptr\Type2\...
EndIf 

[infratec]

@Stargate

That's clear, but not what I need.
In your case I have to use the whole time a different name to access the structure.

At the moment I solve it this way:

Code: Select all

If ChannelRecordSize = 100
  ReadChannel.Prototype_ReadChannel = @ReadChannel100()
ElseIf ChannelRecordSize = 476
  ReadChannel.Prototype_ReadChannel = @ReadChannel476()
EndIf

Than I can call the 'same' procedure: ReadChannel(*Buffer + Ptr) for the rest of the program

But I need 2 procedures which are completely identical up to the structure which I use for the pointer:

Code: Select all

Procedure ReadChannel100(*Channel.Channel100Str)

Code: Select all

Procedure ReadChannel476(*Channel.Channel476Str)

Bernd

[helpy]

Hi,

I do not see any way to do this in PureBasic, if both structures are completely different.

If both structures are extended from a base structure and the procedure only uses the base elements, you could do the following:

Code: Select all

Structure ChannelBase
	; base elements
EndStructure

Structure Channel100Str Extends ChannelBase
	; 100Str specific elements
EndStructure

Structure Channel476Str Extends ChannelBase
	; 476Str specific elements
EndStructure

Procedure ReadChannel( *Channel.ChannelBase )
	; ....
EndProcedure

; ....

ReadChannel( *ptr100Str )

; ....

ReadChannel( *ptr476Str )

; ....

After all there maybe is a way ... hmmm ....
You could create a standardized structure and COPY all elements from the original structure to the standardized one, which is handled by the Procedure ReadChannel(*Channel.ChannelStandardized).

cu,
guido

[breeze4me]

I think anonymous structure union will be more useful.

Something like this.

Code: Select all

Structure BothTypes
  StructureUnion
    AnonymousStructure Type1Str
    AnonymousStructure Type2Str
  EndStructureUnion
EndStructure

*ptr.BothTypes = *Buffer

or

Code: Select all

Structure BothTypes
  StructureUnion
    AnonymousStructure   ;Type1Str
      ......
    EndAnonymousStructure
    AnonymousStructure   ;Type2Str
      ......
    EndAnonymousStructure
  EndStructureUnion
EndStructure

Edit:
Never mind.
This way has a problem.

[Trond]

But I need 2 procedures which are completely identical up to the structure which I use for the pointer:

Code: Select all

Procedure ReadChannel100(*Channel.Channel100Str)

Code: Select all

Procedure ReadChannel476(*Channel.Channel476Str)

Bernd

If what you say is true (the procedures are actually, truly, identical) then, by definition, one structure must be a subset of the other, else field lookup wouldn't work. In this case, just pass in the address of the variable + the offset in the structure where the subset starts, and it will work regardless of declared structure.

It would help if you showed us the structures.

If you want runtime duck typing then make your structure contain a single map and shove all your members in there.

[infratec]

Hi Trond,

Here is what you want:

Code: Select all

Structure Channel100Str
  Name.s{32}
  Dummy0.a[12]
  Transponder.a
  Dummy1.a[15]
  ServiceID.u
EndStructure

Structure Channel476Str
  Name.s{32}
  Dummy0.a[12]
  Transponder.a
  Dummy1.a[391]
  ServiceID.u
EndStructure

Prototype Prototype_ReadChannel(*Channel)
Global ReadChannel.Prototype_ReadChannel

Procedure ReadChannel100(*Channel.Channel100Str)
  Channel$ = *Channel\Name + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\Transponder) + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\ServiceID)
  AddGadgetItem(0, -1, Channel$)
EndProcedure


Procedure ReadChannel476(*Channel.Channel476Str)
  Channel$ = *Channel\Name + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\Transponder) + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\ServiceID)
  AddGadgetItem(0, -1, Channel$)
EndProcedure

Depending on the 'version' of the file which I process, I use one or the other:

Code: Select all

:
:
:
If ChannelRecordSize = 100
  ReadChannel.Prototype_ReadChannel = @ReadChannel100()
ElseIf ChannelRecordSize = 476
  ReadChannel.Prototype_ReadChannel = @ReadChannel476()
EndIf

ClearGadgetItems(0)
For i = 1 To Channels
  ReadChannel(*Buffer + Ptr)
  Ptr + ChannelRecordSize
Next i
:
:
:

My solution works, but it's 'ugly'.

Bernd

[Trond]

If it's coming from somewhere, the format is fixed and you can't do much about it.

But If you can swap the two last fields in both structures, or make both structures extend from one, with the field Dummy1 as the only field in each used structure, this can be solved elegantly:

Code: Select all

Structure ChannelStr
  Name.s{32}
  Dummy0.a[12]
  Transponder.a
  ServiceID.u
  Dummy1_.a[0]
EndStructure

Structure Channel100Str Extends ChannelStr
  Dummy1.a[15]
EndStructure

Structure Channel476Str Extends ChannelStr
  Dummy1.a[391]
EndStructure

Procedure ReadChannel(*Channel.ChannelStr)
  Channel$ = *Channel\Name + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\Transponder) + #LF$
  Channel$ + Str(*Channel\ServiceID)
  AddGadgetItem(0, -1, Channel$)
EndProcedure

ClearGadgetItems(0)
For i = 1 To Channels
  ReadChannel(*Buffer + Ptr)
  Ptr + ChannelRecordSize
Next i

[skywalk]

Code: Select all

Structure ChannelStr
  Name.s{32}
  Dummy0.a[12]
  Transponder.a
  ServiceID.u
  ;
  Dummy1_.a[0]    ;<-- If you omit this, I assume the code will fail?
  ;
EndStructure

Structure Channel100Str Extends ChannelStr
  Dummy1.a[15]
EndStructure

Structure Channel476Str Extends ChannelStr
  Dummy1.a[391]
EndStructure

Nice. I noticed this behavior a while back and thought it was a mistake.
Even though you don't reference the extended structure, the fields are there for the taking.