So the server sends the data just as packed structures, so what only need to decode is to overlay the structure pointer on the buffer. However one of the structure is a dynamic array kind of data, but I learned that flexible array member is not a C++ standard feature. How can I do it in standard C++ way, but without copying like a vector?
// on wire format: | field a | length | length of struct b |
// the sturcts are defined packed
__pragma(pack(1))
struct B {
//...
};
struct Msg {
int32_t a;
uint32_t length;
B *data; // how to declare this?
};
__pragma(pack())
char *buf = readIO();
// overlay, without copy and assignments of each field
const Msg *m = reinterpret_cast<const Msg *>(buf);
// access m->data[i] from 0 to length
The common way to do this in C was to declare data as an array of length one as the last struct member. You then allocate the space needed as if the array was larger.
Seems to work fine in C++ as well. You should perhaps wrap access to the data in a span or equivalent, so the implementation details don't leak outside your class.
#include <string>
#include <span>
struct B {
float x;
float y;
};
struct Msg {
int a;
std::size_t length;
B data[1];
};
char* readIO()
{
constexpr int numData = 3;
char* out = new char[sizeof(Msg) + sizeof(B) * (numData - 1)];
return out;
}
int main(){
char *buf = readIO();
// overlay, without copy and assignments of each field
const Msg *m = reinterpret_cast<const Msg *>(buf);
// access m->data[i] from 0 to length
std::span<const B> data(m->data, m->length);
for(auto& b: data)
{
// do something
}
return 0;
}
https://godbolt.org/z/EoMbeE8or
A standard solution is to not represent the array as a member of the message, but rather as a separate object.
struct Msg {
int a;
size_t length;
};
const Msg& m = *reinterpret_cast<const Msg*>(buf);
span<const B> data = {
reinterpret_cast<const B*>(buf + sizeof(Msg)),
m.length,
};
Note that reinterpretation / copying of bytes is not portable between systems with different representations (byte endianness, integer sizes, alignments, subobject packing etc.), and same representation is typically not something that can be assumed in network communication.
// on wire format: | field a | length | length of struct b |
You can't overlay the struct, because you can't guarantee that the binary representation of Msg will match the on wire format. Also int is at least 16 bits, can be any number of bits greater than 16, and size_t has various size depending on architecture.
Write actual accessors to the data. Use fixed width integer types. It will only work if the data actually point to a properly aligned region. This method allows you to write assertions and throw exceptions when stuff goes bad (for example, you can throw on out-of-bounds access to the array).
struct Msg {
constexpr static size_t your_required_alignment = alingof(uint32_t);
char *buf;
Msg (char *buf) : buf(buf) {
assert((uintptr_t)buf % your_required_alignment == 0);
}
int32_t& get_a() { return *reinterpret_cast<int32_t*>(buf); }
uint32_t& length() { return *reinterpret_cast<uint32_t *>(buf + sizeof(int32_t)); }
struct Barray {
char *buf;
Barray(char *buf) : buf(buf) {}
int16_t &operator[](size_t idx) {
return *reinterpret_cast<int16_t*>(buf + idx * sizeof(int16_t));
}
}
Barray data() {
return buf + sizeof(int32_t) + sizoef(uint32_t);
}
};
int main() {
Msg msg(readIO());
std::cout << msg.a() << msg.length();
msg.data()[1] = 5;
// or maybe even implement straight operator[]:
// msg[1] = 5;
}
If the data do not point to a properly aligned region, you have to copy the data, there is no possibility to access them using other types then char.
Related
I have an application where I need to save as much of memory as possible. I need to store a large amount of data that can take exactly three possible values. So, I have been trying to use a 2 bit sized type.
One possibility is using bit fields. I could do
struct myType {
uint8_t twoBits : 2;
}
This is a suggestion from this thread.
However, everywhere where I have used int variables prior to this, I would need to change their usage by appending a .twoBits. I checked if I can create a bit field outside of a struct, such as
uint8_t twoBits : 2;
but this thread says it is not possible. However,that thread is specific to C, so I am not sure if it applied to C++.
Is there a clean way I can define a 2-bit type, so that by simply replacing int with my type, I can run the program correctly? Or is using bit fields the only possible way?
CPU, and thus the memory, the bus, and the compiler too, uses only bytes or groups of bytes. There's no way to store a 2-bits type without storing also the other 6 remaining bits.
What you can so is define a struct that only uses some bits. But we aware that it will not save memory.
You can pack several x-bits types in a struct, as you already know. Or you can do bits operations to pack/unpack them into a integer type.
Is there a clean way I can define a 2-bit type, so that by simply
replacing int with my type, I can run the program correctly? Or is
using bit fields the only possible way?
You can try to make the struct as transparent as possible by providing implicit conversion operators and constructors:
#include <cstdint>
#include <iostream>
template <std::size_t N, typename T = unsigned>
struct bit_field {
T rep : N;
operator T() { return rep; }
bit_field(T i) : rep{ i } { }
bit_field() = default;
};
using myType = bit_field<2, std::uint8_t>;
int main() {
myType mt;
mt = 3;
std::cout << mt << "\n";
}
So objects of type my_type somewhat behave like real 3-bit unsigned integers, despite having more than 3 bits.
Of course, the residual bits are unused, but as single bits are not addressable on most systems, this is the best way to go.
I'm not convinced that you will save anything with your existing structure, as the surrounding structure still gets rounded up to a whole number of bytes.
You can write the following to squeeze 4 2-bit counters into 1 byte, but as you say, you have to name them myInst.f0:
struct MyStruct
{
ubyte_t f0:2,
f1:2,
f2:2,
f3:2;
} myInst;
In c and c++98, you can declare this anonymous, but this usage is deprecated. You can now access the 4 values directly by name:
struct
{ // deprecated!
ubyte_t f0:2,
f1:2,
f2:2,
f3:2;
};
You could declare some sort of template that wraps a single instance with an operator int and operator =(int), and then define a union to put the 4 instances at the same location, but again anonymous unions are deprecated. However you could then declare references to your 4 values, but then you are paying for the references, which are bigger than the bytes you were trying to save!
template <class Size,int offset,int bits>
struct Bitz
{
Size ignore : offset,
value : bits;
operator Size()const { return value; }
Size operator = (Size val) { return (value = val); }
};
template <class Size,int bits>
struct Bitz0
{ // I know this can be done better
Size value : bits;
operator Size()const { return value; }
Size operator = (Size val) { return (value = val); }
};
static union
{ // Still deprecated!
Bitz0<char, 2> F0;
Bitz<char, 2, 2> F1;
Bitz<char, 4, 2> F2;
Bitz<char, 6, 2> F3;
};
union
{
Bitz0<char, 2> F0;
Bitz<char, 2, 2> F1;
Bitz<char, 4, 2> F2;
Bitz<char, 6, 2> F3;
} bitz;
Bitz0<char, 2>& F0 = bitz.F0; /// etc...
Alternatively, you could simply declare macros to replace the the dotted name with a simple name (how 1970s):
#define myF0 myInst.f0
Note that you can't pass bitfields by reference or pointer, as they don't have a byte address, only by value and assignment.
A very minimal example of a bit array with a proxy class that looks (for the most part) like you were dealing with an array of very small integers.
#include <cstdint>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
class proxy
{
uint8_t & byte;
unsigned int shift;
public:
proxy(uint8_t & byte,
unsigned int shift):
byte(byte),
shift(shift)
{
}
proxy(const proxy & src):
byte(src.byte),
shift(src.shift)
{
}
proxy & operator=(const proxy &) = delete;
proxy & operator=(unsigned int val)
{
if (val <=3)
{
uint8_t wipe = 3 << shift;
byte &= ~wipe;
byte |= val << shift;
}
// might want to throw std::out_of_range here
return *this;
}
operator int() const
{
return (byte >> shift) &0x03;
}
};
Proxy holds a reference to a byte and knows how to extract two specific bits and look like an int to anyone who uses it.
If we wrap an array of bits packed into bytes with a class that returns this proxy object wrapped around the appropriate byte, we now have something that looks a lot like an array of very small ints.
class bitarray
{
size_t size;
std::vector<uint8_t> data;
public:
bitarray(size_t size):
size(size),
data((size + 3) / 4)
{
}
proxy operator[](size_t index)
{
return proxy(data[index/4], (index % 4) * 2);
}
};
If you want to extend this and go the distance, Writing your own STL Container should help you make a fully armed and operational bit-packed array.
There's room for abuse here. The caller can hold onto a proxy and get up to whatever manner of evil this allows.
Use of this primitive example:
int main()
{
bitarray arr(10);
arr[0] = 1;
arr[1] = 2;
arr[2] = 3;
arr[3] = 1;
arr[4] = 2;
arr[5] = 3;
arr[6] = 1;
arr[7] = 2;
arr[8] = 3;
arr[9] = 1;
std::cout << arr[0] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[1] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[2] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[3] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[4] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[5] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[6] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[7] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[8] << std::endl;
std::cout << arr[9] << std::endl;
}
Simply, build on top of bitset, something like:
#include<bitset>
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
template<int N>
class mydoublebitset
{
public:
uint_least8_t operator[](size_t index)
{
return 2 * b[index * 2 + 1] + b[index * 2 ];
}
void set(size_t index, uint_least8_t store)
{
switch (store)
{
case 3:
b[index * 2] = 1;
b[index * 2 + 1] = 1;
break;
case 2:
b[index * 2] = 0;
b[index * 2 + 1] = 1;
break;
case 1:
b[index * 2] = 0;
b[index * 2 + 1] = 1;
break;
case 0:
b[index * 2] = 0;
b[index * 2 + 1] = 0;
break;
default:
throw exception();
}
}
private:
bitset<N * 2> b;
};
int main()
{
mydoublebitset<12> mydata;
mydata.set(0, 0);
mydata.set(1, 2);
mydata.set(2, 2);
cout << (unsigned int)mydata[0] << (unsigned int)mydata[1] << (unsigned int)mydata[2] << endl;
system("pause");
return 0;
}
Basically use a bitset with twice the size and index it accordingly. its simpler and memory efficient as is required by you.
I have this c++ structure:
struct Packet
{
uint32 MessageCount;
uint32 Length;
uint32 FieldValue;
union PacketHeader
{
uint32 typeInfo;
struct MagicVersion
{
uint8 MagicNumber[3];
uint8 Version;
};
};
Data * Payload(void) { return reinterpret_cast< Data * >(this + 1U); }
Data const * Payload(void) const { return reinterpret_cast< Data const * >(this + 1U); }
Packet * nextPacket(void) { return reinterpret_cast< Packet * >(this + 1U) + Length; }
Packet const * nextPacket(void) const { return reinterpret_cast< Packet const * >(this + 1U) + Length; }
};
Then sizeof(Packet) in MSVC++ returns 12 instead of 16 which is what I expect.
The weird thing is of course that this is smaller that the expected value. Had it been bigger it could be because of alignment issues.
What am I missing?
TIA
Why do you think it should be bigger?
It contains 3 uint32 with no virtual methods, that's exactly 12 bytes.
The union doesn't count, since it's a type, it contains no member of that type.
If you want your class to contain a single instance of the union, which contains a single instance of the struct, you should write:
struct Packet
{
uint32 MessageCount;
uint32 Length;
uint32 FieldValue;
union
{
uint32 typeInfo;
struct
{
uint8 MagicNumber[3];
uint8 Version;
} /* MagicVersion */;
};
} /* PacketHeader */;
The names within /**/ are optional, you can either specify them or not. If you do, you have to access their members using the name of the union/struct, otherwise you'll have a flat Packet struct.
I'm using leveldb to store key-value pairs of integer and MyClass objects. Actually, a key can contain more then one of theses objects.
The problem I have appears when retrieving the data from the database. It compiles, however the values of the MyClass members are not the one I put into the database.
std::string value;
leveldb::Slice keySlice = ANYKEY;
levelDBObj->Get(leveldb::ReadOptions(), keySlice, &value);
The std::string value1 can now contain only one MyClass object or more. So how do I get them?
I already tried the following which didn't work;
1.) directly typecasting and memcpy
std::vector<MyClass> vObjects;
MyClass* obj = (MyClass*)malloc( value.size());
memcpy((void*)obj, (void*) (value.c_str()), value.size());
MyClass dummyObj;
int numValues = value.size()/sizeof(MyClass);
for( int i=0; i<numValues; ++i) {
dummyObj = *(obj+i);
vObjects.push_back(dummyObj);
}
2.) reinterpret_cast to void pointer
MyClass* obj = (MyClass*)malloc( value.size());
const void* vobj = reinterpret_cast<const void*>( value.c_str() );
int numValues = value.size()/sizeof(MyClass);
for( int i=0; i<numValues; ++i) {
const MyClass dummyObj = *(reinterpret_cast<const MyClass*>(vobj)+i);
vObjects.push_back(dummyObj);
}
MyClass is a collection of several public members, e.g. unsigned int and unsigned char and it has a stable size.
I know that there are similar problems with only one object. But in my case the vector can contain more then one and it comes from the leveldb database.
EDIT: SOLUTION
I wrote (de)serialization method for MyClass which then made it working. Thanks for the hint!
void MyClass::serialize( char* outBuff ) {
memcpy(outBuff, (const void*) &aVar, sizeof(aVar));
unsigned int c = sizeof(aVar);
memcpy(outBuff+c, (const void*) &bVar, sizeof(bVar));
c += sizeof(bVAr);
/* and so on */
}
void MyClass::deserialize( const char* inBuff ) {
memcpy((void*) &aVar, inBuff, sizeof(aVar));
unsigned int c = sizeof(aVar);
memcpy((void*) &aVar, inBuff+c, sizeof(aVar));
c += sizeof(aVar);
/* and so on */
}
The get method is as follows (put analogously):
int getValues(leveldb::Slice keySlice, std::vector<MyObj>& values) const {
std::string value;
leveldb::Status status = levelDBObj->Get(leveldb::ReadOptions(), keySlice, &value);
if (!status.ok()) {
values.clear();
return -1;
}
int nValues = value1.size()/sizeof(CHit);
MyObj dummyObj;
for( int i=0; i<nValues; ++i) {
dummyObj.deserialize(value.c_str()+i*sizeof(MyObj));
values.push_back(dummyObj);
}
return 0;
}
You have to serialize your class... otherwise, you're just taking some memory and writing it in leveldb. Whatever you get back is not only going to be different, but it will probably be completely useless too. Check out this question for more info on serialization: How do you serialize an object in C++?
LevelDB does support multiple objects under one key, however, try to avoid doing that unless you have a really good reason. I would recommend that you hash each object with a unique hash (see Google's CityHash if you want a hashing function) and store the serialized objects with their corresponding hash. If your objects is a collection in itself, then you have to serialize all of your objects to an array of bytes and have some method that allows you to determine where each object begins/ends.
Update
A serializable class would look something like this:
class MyClass
{
private:
int _numeric;
string _text;
public:
// constructors
// mutators
void SetNumeric(int num);
void SetText(string text);
static unsigned int SerializableSize()
{
// returns the serializable size of the class with the schema:
// 4 bytes for the numeric (integer)
// 4 bytes for the unsigned int (the size of the text)
// n bytes for the text (it has a variable size)
return sizeof(int) + sizeof(unsigned int) + _text.size();
}
// serialization
int Serialize(const char* buffer, const unsigned int bufferLen, const unsigned int position)
{
// check if the object can be serialized in the available buffer space
if(position+SerializableSize()>bufferLen)
{
// don't write anything and return -1 signaling that there was an error
return -1;
}
unsigned int finalPosition = position;
// write the numeric value
*(int*)(buffer + finalPosition) = _numeric;
// move the final position past the numeric value
finalPosition += sizeof(int);
// write the size of the text
*(unsigned int*)(buffer + finalPosition) = (unsigned int)_text.size();
// move the final position past the size of the string
finalPosition += sizeof(unsigned int);
// write the string
memcpy((void*)(buffer+finalPosition), _text.c_str(), (unsigned int)_text.size());
// move the final position past the end of the string
finalPosition += (unsigned int)_text.size();
// return the number of bytes written to the buffer
return finalPosition-position;
}
// deserialization
static int Deserialize(MyClass& myObject,
const char* buffer,
const unsigned int buffSize,
const unsigned int position)
{
insigned int currPosition = position;
// copy the numeric value
int numeric = *(int*)(buffer + currentPosition);
// increment the current position past the numeric value
currentPosition += sizeof(int);
// copy the size of the text
unsigned int textSize = *(unsigned int*)(buffer + currentPosition);
// increment the current position past the size of the text
currentPosition += sizeof(unsigned int);
// copy the text
string text((buffer+currentPosition), textSize);
if(currentPosition > buffSize)
{
// you decide what to do here
}
// Set your object's values
myObject.SetNumeric(numeric);
myObject.SetText(text);
// return the number of bytes deserialized
return currentPosition - position;
}
};
I've a class that consists basically of a matrix of vectors: vector< MyFeatVector<T> > m_vCells, where the outer vector represents the matrix. Each element in this matrix is then a vector (I extended the stl vector class and named it MyFeatVector<T>).
I'm trying to code an efficient method to store objects of this class in binary files.
Up to now, I require three nested loops:
foutput.write( reinterpret_cast<char*>( &(this->at(dy,dx,dz)) ), sizeof(T) );
where this->at(dy,dx,dz) retrieves the dz element of the vector at position [dy,dx].
Is there any possibility to store the m_vCells private member without using loops? I tried something like: foutput.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&(this->m_vCells[0])), (this->m_vCells.size())*sizeof(CFeatureVector<T>)); which seems not to work correctly. We can assume that all the vectors in this matrix have the same size, although a more general solution is also welcomed :-)
Furthermore, following my nested-loop implementation, storing objects of this class in binary files seem to require more physical space than storing the same objects in plain-text files. Which is a bit weird.
I was trying to follow the suggestion under http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=16465 but couldn't arrive into a proper solution.
Thanks!
Below a simplified example of my serialization and unserialization methods.
template < typename T >
bool MyFeatMatrix<T>::writeBinary( const string & ofile ){
ofstream foutput(ofile.c_str(), ios::out|ios::binary);
foutput.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&this->m_nHeight), sizeof(int));
foutput.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&this->m_nWidth), sizeof(int));
foutput.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&this->m_nDepth), sizeof(int));
//foutput.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&(this->m_vCells[0])), nSze*sizeof(CFeatureVector<T>));
for(register int dy=0; dy < this->m_nHeight; dy++){
for(register int dx=0; dx < this->m_nWidth; dx++){
for(register int dz=0; dz < this->m_nDepth; dz++){
foutput.write( reinterpret_cast<char*>( &(this->at(dy,dx,dz)) ), sizeof(T) );
}
}
}
foutput.close();
return true;
}
template < typename T >
bool MyFeatMatrix<T>::readBinary( const string & ifile ){
ifstream finput(ifile.c_str(), ios::in|ios::binary);
int nHeight, nWidth, nDepth;
finput.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&nHeight), sizeof(int));
finput.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&nWidth), sizeof(int));
finput.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&nDepth), sizeof(int));
this->resize(nHeight, nWidth, nDepth);
for(register int dy=0; dy < this->m_nHeight; dy++){
for(register int dx=0; dx < this->m_nWidth; dx++){
for(register int dz=0; dz < this->m_nDepth; dz++){
finput.read( reinterpret_cast<char*>( &(this->at(dy,dx,dz)) ), sizeof(T) );
}
}
}
finput.close();
return true;
}
A most efficient method is to store the objects into an array (or contiguous space), then blast the buffer to the file. An advantage is that the disk platters don't have waste time ramping up and also the writing can be performed contiguously instead of in random locations.
If this is your performance bottleneck, you may want to consider using multiple threads, one extra thread to handle the output. Dump the objects into a buffer, set a flag, then the writing thread will handle the output, releaving your main task to perform more important tasks.
Edit 1: Serializing Example
The following code has not been compiled and is for illustrative purposes only.
#include <fstream>
#include <algorithm>
using std::ofstream;
using std::fill;
class binary_stream_interface
{
virtual void load_from_buffer(const unsigned char *& buf_ptr) = 0;
virtual size_t size_on_stream(void) const = 0;
virtual void store_to_buffer(unsigned char *& buf_ptr) const = 0;
};
struct Pet
: public binary_stream_interface,
max_name_length(32)
{
std::string name;
unsigned int age;
const unsigned int max_name_length;
void load_from_buffer(const unsigned char *& buf_ptr)
{
age = *((unsigned int *) buf_ptr);
buf_ptr += sizeof(unsigned int);
name = std::string((char *) buf_ptr);
buf_ptr += max_name_length;
return;
}
size_t size_on_stream(void) const
{
return sizeof(unsigned int) + max_name_length;
}
void store_to_buffer(unsigned char *& buf_ptr) const
{
*((unsigned int *) buf_ptr) = age;
buf_ptr += sizeof(unsigned int);
std::fill(buf_ptr, 0, max_name_length);
strncpy((char *) buf_ptr, name.c_str(), max_name_length);
buf_ptr += max_name_length;
return;
}
};
int main(void)
{
Pet dog;
dog.name = "Fido";
dog.age = 5;
ofstream data_file("pet_data.bin", std::ios::binary);
// Determine size of buffer
size_t buffer_size = dog.size_on_stream();
// Allocate the buffer
unsigned char * buffer = new unsigned char [buffer_size];
unsigned char * buf_ptr = buffer;
// Write / store the object into the buffer.
dog.store_to_buffer(buf_ptr);
// Write the buffer to the file / stream.
data_file.write((char *) buffer, buffer_size);
data_file.close();
delete [] buffer;
return 0;
}
Edit 2: A class with a vector of strings
class Many_Strings
: public binary_stream_interface
{
enum {MAX_STRING_SIZE = 32};
size_t size_on_stream(void) const
{
return m_string_container.size() * MAX_STRING_SIZE // Total size of strings.
+ sizeof(size_t); // with room for the quantity variable.
}
void store_to_buffer(unsigned char *& buf_ptr) const
{
// Treat the vector<string> as a variable length field.
// Store the quantity of strings into the buffer,
// followed by the content.
size_t string_quantity = m_string_container.size();
*((size_t *) buf_ptr) = string_quantity;
buf_ptr += sizeof(size_t);
for (size_t i = 0; i < string_quantity; ++i)
{
// Each string is a fixed length field.
// Pad with '\0' first, then copy the data.
std::fill((char *)buf_ptr, 0, MAX_STRING_SIZE);
strncpy(buf_ptr, m_string_container[i].c_str(), MAX_STRING_SIZE);
buf_ptr += MAX_STRING_SIZE;
}
}
void load_from_buffer(const unsigned char *& buf_ptr)
{
// The actual coding is left as an exercise for the reader.
// Psuedo code:
// Clear / empty the string container.
// load the quantity variable.
// increment the buffer variable by the size of the quantity variable.
// for each new string (up to the quantity just read)
// load a temporary string from the buffer via buffer pointer.
// push the temporary string into the vector
// increment the buffer pointer by the MAX_STRING_SIZE.
// end-for
}
std::vector<std::string> m_string_container;
};
I'd suggest you to read C++ FAQ on Serialization and you can choose what best fits for your
When you're working with structures and classes, you've to take care of two things
Pointers inside the class
Padding bytes
Both of these could make some notorious results in your output. IMO, the object must implement to serialize and de-serialize the object. The object can know well about the structures, pointers data etc. So it can decide which format can be implemented efficiently.
You will have to iterate anyway or has to wrap it somewhere. Once you finished implementing the serialization and de-serialization function (either you can write using operators or functions). Especially when you're working with stream objects, overloading << and >> operators would be easy to pass the object.
Regarding your question about using underlying pointers of vector, it might work if it's a single vector. But it's not a good idea in the other way.
Update according to the question update.
There are few things you should mind before overriding STL members. They're not really a good candidate for inheritance because it doesn't have any virtual destructors. If you're using basic data types and POD like structures it wont make much issues. But if you use it truly object oriented way, you may face some unpleasant behavior.
Regarding your code
Why you're typecasting it to char*?
The way you serialize the object is your choice. IMO what you did is a basic file write operation in the name of serialization.
Serialization is down to the object. i.e the parameter 'T' in your template class. If you're using POD, or basic types no need of special synchronization. Otherwise you've to carefully choose the way to write the object.
Choosing text format or binary format is your choice. Text format has always has a cost at the same time it's easy to manipulate it rather than binary format.
For example the following code is for simple read and write operation( in text format).
fstream fr("test.txt", ios_base::out | ios_base::binary );
for( int i =0;i <_countof(arr);i++)
fr << arr[i] << ' ';
fr.close();
fstream fw("test.txt", ios_base::in| ios_base::binary);
int j = 0;
while( fw.eof() || j < _countof(arrout))
{
fw >> arrout[j++];
}
It seems to me, that the most direct root to generate a binary file containing a vector is to memory map the file and place it in the mapped region. As pointed out by sarat, you need to worry about how pointers are used within the class. But, boost-interprocess library has a tutorial on how to do this using their shared memory regions which include memory mapped files.
First off, have you looked at Boost.multi_array? Always good to take something ready-made rather than reinventing the wheel.
That said, I'm not sure if this is helpful, but here's how I would implement the basic data structure, and it'd be fairly easy to serialize:
#include <array>
template <typename T, size_t DIM1, size_t DIM2, size_t DIM3>
class ThreeDArray
{
typedef std::array<T, DIM1 * DIM2 * DIM3> array_t;
array_t m_data;
public:
inline size_t size() const { return data.size(); }
inline size_t byte_size() const { return sizeof(T) * data.size(); }
inline T & operator()(size_t i, size_t j, size_t k)
{
return m_data[i + j * DIM1 + k * DIM1 * DIM2];
}
inline const T & operator()(size_t i, size_t j, size_t k) const
{
return m_data[i + j * DIM1 + k * DIM1 * DIM2];
}
inline const T * data() const { return m_data.data(); }
};
You can serialize the data buffer directly:
ThreeDArray<int, 4, 6 11> arr;
/* ... */
std::ofstream outfile("file.bin");
outfile.write(reinterpret_cast<char*>(arr.data()), arr.byte_size());
I'm trying to write a byteswap routine for a C++ program running on Win XP. I'm compiling with Visual Studio 2008. This is what I've come up with:
int byteswap(int v) // This is good
{
return _byteswap_ulong(v);
}
double byteswap(double v) // This doesn't work for some values
{
union { // This trick is first used in Quake2 source I believe :D
__int64 i;
double d;
} conv;
conv.d = v;
conv.i = _byteswap_uint64(conv.i);
return conv.d;
}
And a function to test:
void testit() {
double a, b, c;
CString str;
for (a = -100; a < 100; a += 0.01) {
b = byteswap(a);
c = byteswap(b);
if (a != c) {
str.Format("%15.15f %15.15f %15.15f", a, c, a - c);
}
}
}
Getting these numbers not matching:
-76.789999999988126 -76.790000000017230 0.000000000029104
-30.499999999987718 -30.499999999994994 0.000000000007276
41.790000000014508 41.790000000029060 -0.000000000014552
90.330000000023560 90.330000000052664 -0.000000000029104
This is after having read through:
How do I convert between big-endian and little-endian values in C++?
Little Endian - Big Endian Problem
You can't use << and >> on double, by the way (unless I'm mistaken?)
Although a double in main memory is 64 bits, on x86 CPUs double-precision registers are 80 bits wide. So if one of your values is stored in a register throughout, but the other makes a round-trip through main memory and is truncated to 64 bits, this could explain the small differences you're seeing.
Maybe you can force variables to live in main memory by taking their address (and printing it, to prevent the compiler from optimizing it out), but I'm not certain that this is guaranteed to work.
b = byteswap(a);
That's a problem. After swapping the bytes, the value is no longer a proper double. Storing it back to a double is going to cause subtle problems when the FPU normalizes the value. You have to store it back into an __int64 (long long). Modify the return type of the method.
Try 3
Okay, found out there's a better way. The other way you have to worry about the order you pack/unpack stuff. This way you don't:
// int and float
static void swap4(void *v)
{
char in[4], out[4];
memcpy(in, v, 4);
out[0] = in[3];
out[1] = in[2];
out[2] = in[1];
out[3] = in[0];
memcpy(v, out, 4);
}
// double
static void swap8(void *v)
{
char in[8], out[8];
memcpy(in, v, 8);
out[0] = in[7];
out[1] = in[6];
out[2] = in[5];
out[3] = in[4];
out[4] = in[3];
out[5] = in[2];
out[6] = in[1];
out[7] = in[0];
memcpy(v, out, 8);
}
typedef struct
{
int theint;
float thefloat;
double thedouble;
} mystruct;
static void swap_mystruct(void *buf)
{
mystruct *ps = (mystruct *) buf;
swap4(&ps->theint);
swap4(&ps->thefloat);
swap8(&ps->thedouble);
}
Send:
char buf[sizeof (mystruct)];
memcpy(buf, &s, sizeof (mystruct));
swap_mystruct(buf);
Recv:
mystruct s;
swap_mystruct(buf);
memcpy(&s, buf, sizeof (mystruct));
Try 2
Okay, got it working! Hans Passant was right. They got me thinking with the "no longer a proper double" comment. So you can't byteswap a float into another float because then it might be in an improper format, so you have to byteswap to a char array and unswap back. This is the code I used:
int pack(int value, char *buf)
{
union temp {
int value;
char c[4];
} in, out;
in.value = value;
out.c[0] = in.c[3];
out.c[1] = in.c[2];
out.c[2] = in.c[1];
out.c[3] = in.c[0];
memcpy(buf, out.c, 4);
return 4;
}
int pack(float value, char *buf)
{
union temp {
float value;
char c[4];
} in, out;
in.value = value;
out.c[0] = in.c[3];
out.c[1] = in.c[2];
out.c[2] = in.c[1];
out.c[3] = in.c[0];
memcpy(buf, out.c, 4);
return 4;
}
int pack(double value, char *buf)
{
union temp {
double value;
char c[8];
} in, out;
in.value = value;
out.c[0] = in.c[7];
out.c[1] = in.c[6];
out.c[2] = in.c[5];
out.c[3] = in.c[4];
out.c[4] = in.c[3];
out.c[5] = in.c[2];
out.c[6] = in.c[1];
out.c[7] = in.c[0];
memcpy(buf, out.c, 8);
return 8;
}
int unpack(char *buf, int *value)
{
union temp {
int value;
char c[4];
} in, out;
memcpy(in.c, buf, 4);
out.c[0] = in.c[3];
out.c[1] = in.c[2];
out.c[2] = in.c[1];
out.c[3] = in.c[0];
memcpy(value, &out.value, 4);
return 4;
}
int unpack(char *buf, float *value)
{
union temp {
float value;
char c[4];
} in, out;
memcpy(in.c, buf, 4);
out.c[0] = in.c[3];
out.c[1] = in.c[2];
out.c[2] = in.c[1];
out.c[3] = in.c[0];
memcpy(value, &out.value, 4);
return 4;
}
int unpack(char *buf, double *value)
{
union temp {
double value;
char c[8];
} in, out;
memcpy(in.c, buf, 8);
out.c[0] = in.c[7];
out.c[1] = in.c[6];
out.c[2] = in.c[5];
out.c[3] = in.c[4];
out.c[4] = in.c[3];
out.c[5] = in.c[2];
out.c[6] = in.c[1];
out.c[7] = in.c[0];
memcpy(value, &out.value, 8);
return 8;
}
And a simple test function:
typedef struct
{
int theint;
float thefloat;
double thedouble;
} mystruct;
void PackStruct()
{
char buf[sizeof (mystruct)];
char *p;
p = buf;
mystruct foo, foo2;
foo.theint = 1;
foo.thefloat = 3.14f;
foo.thedouble = 400.5;
p += pack(foo.theint, p);
p += pack(foo.thefloat, p);
p += pack(foo.thedouble, p);
// Send or recv char array
p = buf;
p += unpack(p, &foo2.theint);
p += unpack(p, &foo2.thefloat);
p += unpack(p, &foo2.thedouble);
}
How to swap the bytes in any basic data type or array of bytes
ie: How to swap the bytes in place in any array, variable, or any other memory block, such as an int16_t, uint16_t, uint32_t, float, double, etc.:
Here's a way to improve the efficiency from 3 entire copy operations of the array to 1.5 entire copy operations of the array. See also the comments I left under your answer. I said:
Get rid of this: memcpy(in, v, 4); and just copy-swap straight into out from v, then memcpy the swapped values back from out into v. This saves you an entire unnecessary copy, reducing your copies of the entire array from 3 to 2.
There's also a further optimization to reduce the copies of the entire array from 2 to 1.5: copy the left half of the array into temporary variables, and the right-half of the array straight into the left-half, swapping as appropriately. Then copy from the temporary variables, which contain the old left-half of the array, into the right-half of the array, swapping as appropriately. This results in the equivalent of only 1.5 copy operations of the entire array, to be more efficient. Do all this in-place in the original array, aside from the temp variables you require for half of the array.
1. Here is my general C and C++ solution:
/// \brief Swap all the bytes in an array to convert from little-endian
/// byte order to big-endian byte order, or vice versa.
/// \note Works for arrays of any size. Swaps the bytes **in place**
/// in the array.
/// \param[in,out] byte_array The array in which to swap the bytes in-place.
/// \param[in] len The length (in bytes) of the array.
/// \return None
void swap_bytes_in_array(uint8_t * byte_array, size_t len)
{
size_t i_left = 0; // index for left side of the array
size_t i_right = len - 1; // index for right side of the array
while (i_left < i_right)
{
// swap left and right bytes
uint8_t left_copy = byte_array[i_left];
byte_array[i_left] = byte_array[i_right];
byte_array[i_right] = left_copy;
i_left++;
i_right--;
}
}
Usage:
// array of bytes
uint8_t bytes_array[16];
// Swap the bytes in this array of bytes in place
swap_bytes_in_array(bytes_array, sizeof(bytes_array));
double d;
// Swap the bytes in the double in place
swap_bytes_in_array((uint8_t*)(&d), sizeof(d));
uint64_t u64;
// swap the bytes in a uint64_t in place
swap_bytes_in_array((uint8_t*)(&u64), sizeof(u64));
2. And here is an optional C++ template wrapper around that to make it even easier to use in C++:
template <typename T>
void swap_bytes(T *var)
{
// Note that `sizeof(*var)` is the exact same thing as `sizeof(T)`
swap_bytes_in_array((uint8_t*)var, sizeof(*var));
}
Usage:
double d;
// Swap the bytes in the double in place
swap_bytes(&d);
uint64_t u64;
// swap the bytes in a uint64_t in place
swap_bytes(&u64);
Notes & unanswered questions
Note, however, that #Hans Passant seems to be onto something here. Although the above works perfectly on any signed or unsigned integer type, and seems to work on float and double for me too, it seems to be broken on long double. I think it's because when I store the swapped long double back into a long double variable, if it is determined to be not-a-valid long double representation anymore, something automatically changes a few of the swapped bytes or something. I'm not entirely sure.
On many 64-bit systems, long double is 16 bytes, so perhaps the solution is to keep the swapped version of the long double inside a 16-byte array and NOT attempt to use it or cast it back to a long double from the uint8_t 16-byte array until either A) it has been sent to the receiver (where the endianness of the system is opposite, so it's in good shape now) and/or B) byte-swapped back again so it's a valid long double again.
Keep the above in mind in case you see problems with float or double types too, as I see with only long double types.
Linux byteswap and endianness and host-to-network byte order utilities
Linux also has a bunch of built-in utilities via gcc GNU extensions that you can use. See:
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/bswap.3.html - #include <byteswap.h>
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/endian.3.html - #include <endian.h>
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/byteorder.3.html - #include <arpa/inet.h> - generally used for network sockets (Ethernet packets) and things; inet stands for "internet"