void UpdateCollisionObjects(ToolContext &in_ctxt)
{
m_pickedObjects .Clear();
CRefArray l_moveableObjects;
// fill l_moveableObjects with cref()s...
m_pickedObjects = l_moveableObjects;
}
So why this one is working? If it's just referencing to local class, not
making deep copy, and local class is destroyed on function's end?
-----Oryginalna wiadomość-----
From: Marc-Andre Belzile
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: CRefArray doesn't respect C++ copy semantics
I say .... CRefArray copy ctor is buggy!
thanks for reporting.
-mab
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nicolas
Burtnyk
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CRefArray doesn't respect C++ copy semantics
I opened a case with support for this. We'll see what they say...
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Alok Gandhi
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
You are right Jo, I mentioned the wrong prototype, what I wanted to quote
was the Copy Constructor and the assignment operator. Sorry about the
confusion. I clicked on the wrong link. Of course what Nicolas was using was
a copy constructor, since both the class methods one after another in the
docs, I copy-pasted in haste the wrong one. Anyways, yes Nicolas what you
are saying is true regarding the unexpected behavior.
The problem is they're treating CRefArray like it's a reference to an array
of CRefs rather than just a straight-up array of CRefs.
That is exactly what is happening here for sure, I concur.
Maybe the new dev team could explain this better for the benefit of all the
developers as this could seriously cause big time debugging headaches.
Thanks for finding this out Nicolas !
Error! Filename not specified.
On 4/30/2012 8:03 PM, jo benayoun wrote:
in this case,
"""
CRefArray a1;
a1.Add(CRef());
a1.Add(CRef());
CRefArray a2(a1);
a2.Add(CRef());
"""
The copy constructor is invoked and is not the one you mentioned Alok but
this one "CRefArray(const CRefArray &other)" which have different behaviors
and purposes than the overloaded assignment operator.
"""Copy constructor is called every time a copy of an object is made. When
you pass an object by value, either into a function or as a function's
return value, a temporary copy of that object is made.
Assignment operator is called whenever you assign to an object. Assignment
operator must check to see if the right-hand side of the assignment operator
is the object itself. It executes only the two sides are not equal
"""
Referring to the docs : "Constructs a
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>
object from another
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>
object." which is the expected behavior.
For completeness, the copy constructor in the case of an array, a string, a
ptr or whatever container has a main purpose to "pass" an implicit shared
memory block to save memory specially in
the case of "passing arguments by value". A deep copy is done only at the
first call of a method non-const which should create a brand new underlying
object (concept called copy-on-write).
In this case, it seems its not what happens ... which is a bug in all case
unless its a wanted behavior and it should be specified in the doc !
A more comprehensible example is the python "list" example:
doing an assignment "mylist = myotherlist" creates a shallow copy and
returns the "myotherlist" object to the mylist which is not the case of
calling the ctor directly with "mylist = list(myotherlist)". That's a
behavior that could be implemented here.
"""
mylist = [1, 2]
print mylist
myotherlist = mylist
mylist.append(6)
print mylist
print myotherlist
myoolist = list(mylist)
mylist.append(9)
print mylist
print myotherlist
print myoolist
"""
"Set<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html#acb58b1fecf704752ebcf59a50444cf37>
(const
CValueArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CValueArray.html>
&in_valarray)"
I dont see any overloaded cast method nor ctors for a CRefArray to
CValueArray. Even if there was, it would mean that your CValueArray have to
be built from a CRefArray before being passed by reference. Which is an
overhead instead of using the copy ctor.
"const" is a keyword that we use to assure to the compiler, we will not try
to modify the underlying memory block nor call any procedures that could do
this. Of course, the compiler takes this as serious and do optimizations in
consequences which is a good thing for us.
jo
2012/4/30 piotrek marczak
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Maybe a2.Set(a1) or a2+=a1 would work?
newbie question
isn't "const" keyword a hint that we won't change input array?
From: Alok Gandhi<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:31 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CRefArray doesn't respect C++ copy semantics
The docs say that:
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>&
operator=
(
const
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>
&
in_refArray
)
Assigns a
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>
object to this one.
Parameters:
in_refArray
A constant
CRefArray<http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2012/en_us/sdkguide/si_cpp/classXSI_1_1CRefArray.html>
object.
Returns:
A new reference object.
So what I think is happening is that the copy constructor is doing exactly
what it is supposed to do and returns the new CRefArray object which still
points to a1, 'assigns' is the operative word here. To keep them separate I
would rather do:
CRefArray a1;
a1.Add(CRef());
a1.Add(CRef());
CRefArray a2;
for(int i=0; i<a1.GetCount(); i++)
{
a2.Add(a1[i]);
}
a2.Add(CRef());
//a2.Add(CRef());
LONG n1 = a1.GetCount(); // expected n1 == 2
LONG n2 = a2.GetCount(); // expected n2 == 3
which gives me correctly:
# VERBOSE : cRefArrayTest_Execute called
# VERBOSE : Count a1: 2
# VERBOSE : Count a2: 3
Error! Filename not specified.
On 4/30/2012 7:13 PM, Nicolas Burtnyk wrote:
Yeah, exactly as I unfortunately discovered :(
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Alok Gandhi
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
A quick test gives me following result:
# VERBOSE : cRefArrayTest_Execute called
# VERBOSE : Count a1: 3
# VERBOSE : Count a2: 3
Error! Filename not specified.
On 4/30/2012 6:24 PM, Nicolas Burtnyk wrote:
I ran into this today while trying to figure out why my code was broken.
Thought I'd pass this along and hopefully save someone some wasted time in
the future...
CRefArray a1;
a1.Add(CRef());
a1.Add(CRef());
CRefArray a2(a1);
a2.Add(CRef());
LONG n1 = a1.GetCount(); // expected n1 == 2
LONG n2 = a2.GetCount(); // expected n2 == 3
I expected a2 to be a copy of a1 before the last add and so I assumed a1
would have 2 elements.
Instead, I was surprised to find that n1 == n2 == 3!
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.1831 / Virus Database: 2090/4557 - Release Date: 10/17/11
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.1831 / Virus Database: 2090/4557 - Release Date: 10/17/11
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.1831 / Virus Database: 2090/4557 - Release Date: 10/17/11
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
