What is a equivalent of Delphi FillChar in C#? - c#

What is the C# equivalent of Delphi's FillChar?

I'm assuming you want to fill a byte array with zeros (as that's what FillChar is mostly used for in Delphi).
.NET is guaranteed to initialize all the values in a byte array to zero on creation, so generally FillChar in .NET isn't necessary.
So saying:
byte[] buffer = new byte[1024];
will create a buffer of 1024 zero bytes.
If you need to zero the bytes after the buffer has been used, you could consider just discarding your byte array and declaring a new one (that's if you don't mind having the GC work a bit harder cleaning up after you).

If I understand FillChar correctly, it sets all elements of an array to the same value, yes?
In which case, unless the value is 0, you probably have to loop:
for(int i = 0 ; i < arr.Length ; i++) {
arr[i] = value;
}
For setting the values to the type's 0, there is Array.Clear
Obviously, with the loop answer you can stick this code in a utility method if you need... for example, as an extension method:
public static void FillChar<T>(this T[] arr, T value) {...}
Then you can use:
int[] data = {1,2,3,4,5};
//...
data.FillChar(7);
If you absolutely must have block operations, then Buffer.BlockCopy can be used to blit data between array locatiosn - for example, you could write the first chunk, then blit it a few times to fill the bulk of the array.

Try this in C#:
String text = "hello";
text.PadRight(10, 'h').ToCharArray();

Related

Can I have multiple arrays on the same memory in C#? [duplicate]

I know in C# we can always get the sub-array of a given array by using Array.Copy() method. However, this will consume more memory and processing time which is unnecessary in read-only situation. For example, I'm writing a heavy load network program which exchanges messages with other nodes in the cluster very frequently. The first 20 bytes of every message is the message header while the rest bytes make up the message body. Therefore, I will divide the received raw message into header byte array and body byte array in order to process them separately. However, this will obviously consume double memory and extra time. In C, we can easily use a pointer and assign offset to it to access different parts of the array.
For instance, in C language, if we have a char a[] = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMN", we can declare a char* ptr = a + 3 to represent the array DEFGHIJKLMN.
Is there a way to accomplish this in C#?
You might be interested in ArraySegments or unsafe.
ArraySegments delimits a section of a one-dimensional array.
Check ArraySegments in action
ArraySegments usage example:
int[] array = { 10, 20, 30 };
ArraySegment<int> segment = new ArraySegment<int>(array, 1, 2);
// The segment contains offset = 1, count = 2 and range = { 20, 30 }
Unsafe define an unsafe context in which pointers can be used.
Unsafe usage example:
int[] a = { 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 };
unsafe
{
fixed (int* c = a)
{
// use the pointer
}
}
First of all you must consider this as a premature optimization.
But you may use several ways to reduce memory consumption, if you sure you really need it:
1) You may use Flyweight pattern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyweight_pattern to pool duplicated resources.
2) You may try to use unsafe directive and manual pointer management.
3) You may just switch to C for this functionality and just call native code from your C# program.
From my experience memory consumption for short-lived objects is not a big problem and I'd just write code with flyweight pattern and profile application afterwards.
Assuming you have a Message wrapper class in C#? Why not just add a property on it called header that returns the top 20 bytes.
You can easily accomplish this using skip and take suggested by Jonathon Reinhart above if you have the entire initial array in a memory array, but it sounds like you may have it in a network stream, which means the property might be a little more involved by doing a read of the initial 20 bytes from the the stream.
Something along the lines of:
class Message
{
private readonly Stream _stream;
private byte[] _inMemoryBytes;
public Message(Stream stream)
{
_stream = stream;
}
public IEnumerable<byte> Header
{
get
{
if (_inMemoryBytes.Length >= 20)
return _inMemoryBytes.Take(20);
_stream.Read(_inMemoryBytes, 0, 20);
return _inMemoryBytes.Take(20);
}
}
public IEnumerable<byte> FullMessage
{
get
{
// Read and return the whole message. You might want amend to data already read.
}
}
}

how to create an array without objects initialized to null or 0?

byte[] buffer = new byte[500000];
initializes buffer with 0 values. As it is a buffer, I dont want any initialization, is it possible in C# as in C?
I don't think it is possible... Even FormatterServices.GetUninitializedObject that doesn't run constructors:
Because the new instance of the object is initialized to zero and no constructors are run, the object might not represent a state that is regarded as valid by that object.
Note that if you want unmanaged (memory taken from the OS that isn't GC-managed), that can be allocated without zeroing it, but it wouldn't be a byte[].
A way in C# to do what malloc does in C is to use Marshal.AllocHGlobal in an unsafe context:
unsafe
{
var ptr = Marshal.AllocHGlobal(50000 * sizeof(int));
int* values = (int*)ptr;
// lists uninitialized ints
for (int i = 0; i < 50000; i++)
Console.WriteLine(values[i]);
Marshal.FreeHGlobal(ptr);
}
Fill it with random numbers or use DllImport and VirtualAlloc from Win32 API.

Safely access data in MemoryStream

Assume that I have a MemoryStream and function that operates on bytes.
Current code is something like this:
void caller()
{
MemoryStream ms = // not important
func(ms.GetBuffer(), 0, (int)ms.Length);
}
void func(byte[] buffer, int offset, int length)
{
// not important
}
I can not change func but I would like to minimize possibility of changing stream data from within the func.
How could / should I rewrite the code to be sure that stream data won't be changed?
Or this can't be done?
EDIT:
I am sorry, I didn't mention that a I would like to not make copies of data.
Call .ToArray.
func(ms.GetBuffer().ToArray(), 0, (int)ms.Length);
From MSDN (emphasis mine):
Note that the buffer contains allocated bytes which might be unused.
For example, if the string "test" is written into the MemoryStream
object, the length of the buffer returned from GetBuffer is 256, not
4, with 252 bytes unused. To obtain only the data in the buffer, use
the ToArray method; however, ToArray creates a copy of the data in
memory.
Ideally you would change func to take an IEnumerable<byte>. Once a method has the array, you're trusting they won't modify the data if you don't want them to. If the contract was to provide IEnumerable<byte>, the implementer would have to decide if they need a copy to edit or not.
If you can't make a copy (ToArray as suggested in other answers) and can't change signature of the func function the only thing left is try to validate that function did not change the data.
You may compute some sort of hash before/after call and check if it is the same. It will not guarantee that func did not changed the underlying data (due to hash collisions), but at least will give you good chance to know if it happened. May be useful for non-production code...
The real solution is to either provide copy of the data to untrusted code OR pass some wrapper interface/object that does not allow data changes (requires signature changes/rewrite for func).
Copy the data out of the stream by using ms.ToArray(). Obviously, there'll be a performance hit.
You cannot pass only a 'slice' of an array to a method. Either you pass a copy of the array to the method and copy the result back:
byte[] slice = new byte[length];
Buffer.BlockCopy(bytes, offset, slice, 0, length);
func(slice, 0, length);
Buffer.BlockCopy(slice, 0, bytes, offset, length);
or, if you can change the method, you pass some kind of proxy object that wraps the array and checks for each access if it's within the allowed range:
class ArrayView<T>
{
private T[] array;
private int offset;
private int length;
public T this[int index]
{
get
{
if (index < offset || index >= offset + length)
throw new ArgumentOutOfRange("index");
return array[index];
}
set
{
if (index < offset || index >= offset + length)
throw new ArgumentOutOfRange("index");
array[index] = value;
}
}
}
Are you trying to make sure that func() is never actually able to change the memory stream, or is it enough if your code can throw an exception if something is changed? Sounds like you want to do something like:
void caller()
{
MemoryStream ms = // not important
var checksum = CalculateMyChecksum(ms);
func(ms.GetBuffer(), 0, (int)ms.Length);
if(checksum != CalculateMyChecksum(ms)){
throw new Exception("Hey! Someone has been fiddling with my memory!");
}
}
I would not feel comfortable recommending this for anything important / critical though. Could you give some more information? Maybe there is a better solution to your problem, and a way to avoid this issue completely.

In C# how can I truncate a byte[] array

I have a byte[] array of one size, and I would like to truncate it into a smaller array?
I just want to chop the end off.
Arrays are fixed-size in C# (.NET).
You'll have to copy the contents to a new one.
byte[] sourceArray = ...
byte[] truncArray = new byte[10];
Array.Copy(sourceArray , truncArray , truncArray.Length);
You could use Array.Resize, but all this really does is make a truncated copy of the original array and then replaces the original array with the new one.
private static void Truncate() {
byte[] longArray = new byte[] {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10};
Array.Resize(ref longArray, 5);//longArray = {1,2,3,4,5}
//if you like linq
byte[] shortArray = longArray.Take(5).ToArray();
}
I usually create an extension method:
public static byte[] SubByteArray(this byte[] byteArray, int len)
{
byte[] tmp = new byte[len];
Array.Copy(byteArray, tmp, len);
return tmp;
}
Which can be called on the byte array easily like this:
buffer.SubByteArray(len)
You can't truncate an array in C#. They are fixed in length.
If you want a data structure that you can truncate and acts like an array, you should use List<T>. You can use the List<T>.RemoveRange method to achieve this.
By the way, Array.Resize method takes much more time to complete. In my simple case, I just needed to resize array of bytes (~8000 items to ~20 items):
Array.Resize // 1728 ticks
Array.Copy // 8 ticks
You can now use ellipse notation in C#.
var truncArray = sourceArray[..10];

Working with byte arrays in C#

I have a byte array that represents a complete TCP/IP packet. For clarification, the byte array is ordered like this:
(IP Header - 20 bytes)(TCP Header - 20 bytes)(Payload - X bytes)
I have a Parse function that accepts a byte array and returns a TCPHeader object. It looks like this:
TCPHeader Parse( byte[] buffer );
Given the original byte array, here is the way I'm calling this function right now.
byte[] tcpbuffer = new byte[ 20 ];
System.Buffer.BlockCopy( packet, 20, tcpbuffer, 0, 20 );
TCPHeader tcp = Parse( tcpbuffer );
Is there a convenient way to pass the TCP byte array, i.e., bytes 20-39 of the complete TCP/IP packet, to the Parse function without extracting it to a new byte array first?
In C++, I could do the following:
TCPHeader tcp = Parse( &packet[ 20 ] );
Is there anything similar in C#? I want to avoid the creation and subsequent garbage collection of the temporary byte array if possible.
A common practice you can see in the .NET framework, and that I recommend using here, is specifying the offset and length. So make your Parse function also accept the offset in the passed array, and the number of elements to use.
Of course, the same rules apply as if you were to pass a pointer like in C++ - the array shouldn't be modified or else it may result in undefined behavior if you are not sure when exactly the data will be used. But this is no problem if you are no longer going to be modifying the array.
I would pass an ArraySegment<byte> in this case.
You would change your Parse method to this:
// Changed TCPHeader to TcpHeader to adhere to public naming conventions.
TcpHeader Parse(ArraySegment<byte> buffer)
And then you would change the call to this:
// Create the array segment.
ArraySegment<byte> seg = new ArraySegment<byte>(packet, 20, 20);
// Call parse.
TcpHeader header = Parse(seg);
Using the ArraySegment<T> will not copy the array, and it will do the bounds checking for you in the constructor (so that you don't specify incorrect bounds). Then you change your Parse method to work with the bounds specified in the segment, and you should be ok.
You can even create a convenience overload that will accept the full byte array:
// Accepts full array.
TcpHeader Parse(byte[] buffer)
{
// Call the overload.
return Parse(new ArraySegment<byte>(buffer));
}
// Changed TCPHeader to TcpHeader to adhere to public naming conventions.
TcpHeader Parse(ArraySegment<byte> buffer)
If an IEnumerable<byte> is acceptable as an input rather than byte[], and you're using C# 3.0, then you could write:
tcpbuffer.Skip(20).Take(20);
Note that this still allocates enumerator instances under the covers, so you don't escape allocation altogether, and so for a small number of bytes it may actually be slower than allocating a new array and copying the bytes into it.
I wouldn't worry too much about allocation and GC of small temporary arrays to be honest though. The .NET garbage collected environment is extremely efficient at this type of allocation pattern, particularly if the arrays are short lived, so unless you've profiled it and found GC to be a problem then I'd write it in the most intuitive way and fix up performance issues when you know you have them.
If you really need these kind of control, you gotta look at unsafe feature of C#. It allows you to have a pointer and pin it so that GC doesn't move it:
fixed(byte* b = &bytes[20]) {
}
However this practice is not suggested for working with managed only code if there are no performance issues. You could pass the offset and length as in Stream class.
If you can change the parse() method, change it to accept the offset where the processing should begin.
TCPHeader Parse( byte[] buffer , int offset);
You could use LINQ to do something like:
tcpbuffer.Skip(20).Take(20);
But System.Buffer.BlockCopy / System.Array.Copy are probably more efficient.
This is how I solved it coming from being a c programmer to a c# programmer. I like to use MemoryStream to convert it to a stream and then BinaryReader to break apart the binary block of data. Had to add the two helper functions to convert from network order to little endian. Also for building a byte[] to send see
Is there a way cast an object back to it original type without specifing every case? which has a function that allow for converting from an array of objects to a byte[].
Hashtable parse(byte[] buf, int offset )
{
Hashtable tcpheader = new Hashtable();
if(buf.Length < (20+offset)) return tcpheader;
System.IO.MemoryStream stm = new System.IO.MemoryStream( buf, offset, buf.Length-offset );
System.IO.BinaryReader rdr = new System.IO.BinaryReader( stm );
tcpheader["SourcePort"] = ReadUInt16BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["DestPort"] = ReadUInt16BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["SeqNum"] = ReadUInt32BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["AckNum"] = ReadUInt32BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["Offset"] = rdr.ReadByte() >> 4;
tcpheader["Flags"] = rdr.ReadByte() & 0x3f;
tcpheader["Window"] = ReadUInt16BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["Checksum"] = ReadUInt16BigEndian(rdr);
tcpheader["UrgentPointer"] = ReadUInt16BigEndian(rdr);
// ignoring tcp options in header might be dangerous
return tcpheader;
}
UInt16 ReadUInt16BigEndian(BinaryReader rdr)
{
UInt16 res = (UInt16)(rdr.ReadByte());
res <<= 8;
res |= rdr.ReadByte();
return(res);
}
UInt32 ReadUInt32BigEndian(BinaryReader rdr)
{
UInt32 res = (UInt32)(rdr.ReadByte());
res <<= 8;
res |= rdr.ReadByte();
res <<= 8;
res |= rdr.ReadByte();
res <<= 8;
res |= rdr.ReadByte();
return(res);
}
I don't think you can do something like that in C#. You could either make the Parse() function use an offset, or create 3 byte arrays to begin with; one for the IP Header, one for the TCP Header and one for the Payload.
There is no way using verifiable code to do this. If your Parse method can deal with having an IEnumerable<byte> then you can use a LINQ expression
TCPHeader tcp = Parse(packet.Skip(20));
Some people who answered
tcpbuffer.Skip(20).Take(20);
did it wrong. This is excellent solution, but the code should look like:
packet.Skip(20).Take(20);
You should use Skip and Take methods on your main packet, and tcpbuffer should not be exist in the code you posted. Also you don't have to use then System.Buffer.BlockCopy.
JaredPar was almost correct, but he forgot the Take method
TCPHeader tcp = Parse(packet.Skip(20));
But he didn't get wrong with tcpbuffer.
Your last line of your posted code should look like:
TCPHeader tcp = Parse(packet.Skip(20).Take(20));
But if you want to use System.Buffer.BlockCopy anyway instead Skip and Take, because maybe it is better in performance as Steven Robbins answered : "But System.Buffer.BlockCopy / System.Array.Copy are probably more efficient", or your Parse function cannot deal with IEnumerable<byte>, or you are more used to System.Buffer.Block in your posted question, then I would recommend to simply just make tcpbuffer not local variable, but private or protected or public or internal and static or not field (in other words it should be defined and created outside method where your posted code is executed). Thus tcpbuffer will be created only once, and his values (bytes) will be set every time you pass the code you posted at System.Buffer.BlockCopy line.
This way your code can look like:
class Program
{
//Your defined fields, properties, methods, constructors, delegates, events and etc.
private byte[] tcpbuffer = new byte[20];
Your unposted method title(arguments/parameters...)
{
//Your unposted code before your posted code
//byte[] tcpbuffer = new byte[ 20 ]; No need anymore! this line can be removed.
System.Buffer.BlockCopy( packet, 20, this.tcpbuffer, 0, 20 );
TCPHeader tcp = Parse( this.tcpbuffer );
//Your unposted code after your posted code
}
//Your defined fields, properties, methods, constructors, delegates, events and etc.
}
or simply only the necessary part:
private byte[] tcpbuffer = new byte[20];
...
{
...
//byte[] tcpbuffer = new byte[ 20 ]; No need anymore! This line can be removed.
System.Buffer.BlockCopy( packet, 20, this.tcpbuffer, 0, 20 );
TCPHeader tcp = Parse( this.tcpbuffer );
...
}
If you did:
private byte[] tcpbuffer;
instead, then you must on your constructor/s add the line:
this.tcpbuffer = new byte[20];
or
tcpbuffer = new byte[20];
You know that you don't have to type this. before tcpbuffer, it is optional, but if you defined it static, then you cannot do that. Instead you'll have to type the class name and then the dot '.', or leave it (just type the name of the field and that's it all).
Why not flip the problem and create classes that overlay the buffer to pull bits out?
// member variables
IPHeader ipHeader = new IPHeader();
TCPHeader tcpHeader = new TCPHeader();
// passing in the buffer, an offset and a length allows you
// to move the header over the buffer
ipHeader.SetBuffer( buffer, 0, 20 );
if( ipHeader.Protocol == TCP )
{
tcpHeader.SetBuffer( buffer, ipHeader.ProtocolOffset, 20 );
}

Categories