How to merge clib functions into a table using LuaJIT and FFI? - lua

I have a table/object defined in Lua. I'm trying to add some methods from a C-API dll. I could attach the methods one at a time, but there are a lot of them. The last line of the code below is how I would like to do it. It is supposed to merge the methods into the Utilities object so that I don't have to do them one at a time. I'm getting the following error:
bad argument #1 to 'pairs' (table expected, got userdata)" const char *
Here is some sample code:
Utilities = {}
--
-- Other Code that defines/attaches methods to Utilities
--
-- Define some methods from my utilities.dll
local ffi = require("ffi")
ffi.cdef[[
void LogThis(const char * format, ...);
]]
local utilities_ffi = ffi.load("utilities")
-- This works
utilities_ffi.LogThis("hello world")
-- merge the two tables together (this fails)
for k,v in pairs(utilities_ffi) do Utilities[k] = v end
FFI must be returning a userdata object.

FFI library objects don't support iteration; you can't run pairs over them. You'll have to write an assignment for each function manually.
Also keep in mind that it's faster to access C functions directly from the library object, rather than storing them in a table (or even a local variable) and accessing them there. See the last section of the FFI tutorial.

Try this:
local function get(C, k)
return C[k]
end
function merge(C1, C2)
return setmetatable({}, {__index = function(t, k)
local ok, ret = pcall(get, C, k)
local v = ok and ret or C2[k]
t[k] = v --cache it
end})
end
Utilities = merge(utilities_ffi, other_ffi)

Related

Is there a way to duplicate a table in lua that is alterable without it affecting the original? [duplicate]

Recently I wrote a bit of Lua code something like:
local a = {}
for i = 1, n do
local copy = a
-- alter the values in the copy
end
Obviously, that wasn't what I wanted to do since variables hold references to an anonymous table not the values of the table themselves in Lua. This is clearly laid out in Programming in Lua, but I'd forgotten about it.
So the question is what should I write instead of copy = a to get a copy of the values in a?
Table copy has many potential definitions. It depends on whether you want simple or deep copy, whether you want to copy, share or ignore metatables, etc. There is no single implementation that could satisfy everybody.
One approach is to simply create a new table and duplicate all key/value pairs:
function table.shallow_copy(t)
local t2 = {}
for k,v in pairs(t) do
t2[k] = v
end
return t2
end
copy = table.shallow_copy(a)
Note that you should use pairs instead of ipairs, since ipairs only iterate over a subset of the table keys (ie. consecutive positive integer keys starting at one in increasing order).
Just to illustrate the point, my personal table.copy also pays attention to metatables:
function table.copy(t)
local u = { }
for k, v in pairs(t) do u[k] = v end
return setmetatable(u, getmetatable(t))
end
There is no copy function sufficiently widely agreed upon to be called "standard".
To play a little readable-code-golf, here's a short version that handles the standard tricky cases:
tables as keys,
preserving metatables, and
recursive tables.
We can do this in 7 lines:
function copy(obj, seen)
if type(obj) ~= 'table' then return obj end
if seen and seen[obj] then return seen[obj] end
local s = seen or {}
local res = setmetatable({}, getmetatable(obj))
s[obj] = res
for k, v in pairs(obj) do res[copy(k, s)] = copy(v, s) end
return res
end
There is a short write-up of Lua deep-copy operations in this gist.
Another useful reference is this Lua-users wiki page, which includes an example on how to avoid the __pairs metamethod.
The full version of deep copy, handling all the 3 situations:
Table circular reference
Keys which are also tables
Metatable
The general version:
local function deepcopy(o, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if o == nil then return nil end
if seen[o] then return seen[o] end
local no
if type(o) == 'table' then
no = {}
seen[o] = no
for k, v in next, o, nil do
no[deepcopy(k, seen)] = deepcopy(v, seen)
end
setmetatable(no, deepcopy(getmetatable(o), seen))
else -- number, string, boolean, etc
no = o
end
return no
end
Or the table version:
function table.deepcopy(o, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if o == nil then return nil end
if seen[o] then return seen[o] end
local no = {}
seen[o] = no
setmetatable(no, deepcopy(getmetatable(o), seen))
for k, v in next, o, nil do
k = (type(k) == 'table') and k:deepcopy(seen) or k
v = (type(v) == 'table') and v:deepcopy(seen) or v
no[k] = v
end
return no
end
Based on the lua-users.org/wiki/CopyTable's and Alan Yates' functions.
An optionally deep, graph-general, recursive version:
function table.copy(t, deep, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if t == nil then return nil end
if seen[t] then return seen[t] end
local nt = {}
for k, v in pairs(t) do
if deep and type(v) == 'table' then
nt[k] = table.copy(v, deep, seen)
else
nt[k] = v
end
end
setmetatable(nt, table.copy(getmetatable(t), deep, seen))
seen[t] = nt
return nt
end
Perhaps metatable copy should be optional also?
Here's what I actually did:
for j,x in ipairs(a) do copy[j] = x end
As Doub mentions, if your table keys are not strictly monotonically increasing, it should be pairs not ipairs.
I also found a deepcopy function that is more robust:
function deepcopy(orig)
local orig_type = type(orig)
local copy
if orig_type == 'table' then
copy = {}
for orig_key, orig_value in next, orig, nil do
copy[deepcopy(orig_key)] = deepcopy(orig_value)
end
setmetatable(copy, deepcopy(getmetatable(orig)))
else -- number, string, boolean, etc
copy = orig
end
return copy
end
It handles tables and metatables by calling itself recursively (which is its own reward). One of the clever bits is that you can pass it any value (whether a table or not) and it will be copied correctly. However, the cost is that it could potentially overflow the stack. So and even more robust (non-recursive) function might be needed.
But that's overkill for the very simple case of wanting to copy an array into another variable.
The (unfortunately lightly documented) stdlib project has a number of valuable extensions to several of the libraries shipped with the standard Lua distribution. Among them are several variations on the theme of table copying and merging.
This library is also included in the Lua for Windows distribution, and should probably be a part of any serious Lua user's toolbox.
One thing to make sure of when implementing things like this by hand is the proper handling of metatables. For simple table-as-structure applications you probably don't have any metatables, and a simple loop using pairs() is an acceptable answer. But if the table is used as a tree, or contains circular references, or has metatables, then things get more complex.
Don't forget that functions are also references, so if you wanted to completely 'copy' all of the values you'd need to get separate functions, too; however, the only way I know to copy a function is to use loadstring(string.dump(func)), which according to the Lua reference manual, doesn't work for functions with upvalues.
do
local function table_copy (tbl)
local new_tbl = {}
for key,value in pairs(tbl) do
local value_type = type(value)
local new_value
if value_type == "function" then
new_value = loadstring(string.dump(value))
-- Problems may occur if the function has upvalues.
elseif value_type == "table" then
new_value = table_copy(value)
else
new_value = value
end
new_tbl[key] = new_value
end
return new_tbl
end
table.copy = table_copy
end
I think the reason why Lua doesn't have 'table.copy()' in its standard libraries is because the task is not precise to define. As shown already here, one can either make a copy "one level deep" (which you did), a deepcopy with or without caring of possible duplicate references. And then there's metatables.
Personally, I would still like them to offer a built-in function. Only if people wouldn't be pleased with its semantics, they would need to go do it themselves. Not very often, though, one actually has the copy-by-value need.
Warning: the marked solution is INCORRECT!
When the table contains tables, references to those tables will still be used instead. I have been searching two hours for a mistake that I was making, while it was because of using the above code.
So you need to check if the value is a table or not. If it is, you should call table.copy recursively!
This is the correct table.copy function:
function table.copy(t)
local t2 = {};
for k,v in pairs(t) do
if type(v) == "table" then
t2[k] = table.copy(v);
else
t2[k] = v;
end
end
return t2;
end
Note: This might also be incomplete when the table contains functions or other special types, but that is possible something most of us don't need. The above code is easily adaptable for those who need it.
That's as good as you'll get for basic tables. Use something like deepcopy if you need to copy tables with metatables.
In most of the cases when I needed to copy a table, I wanted to have a copy that doesn't share anything with the original, such that any modification of the original table has no impact on the copy (and vice versa).
All the snippets that have been shown so far fail at creating a copy for a table that may have shared keys or keys with tables as those are going to be left pointing to the original table. It's easy to see if you try to copy a table created as: a = {}; a[a] = a. deepcopy function referenced by Jon takes care of that, so if you need to create a real/full copy, deepcopy should be used.
Use penlight library here:
https://stevedonovan.github.io/Penlight/api/libraries/pl.tablex.html#deepcopy
local pl = require 'pl.import_into'()
local newTable = pl.tablex.deepcopy(oldTable)
Just use the
local unpack = unpack or table.unpack
list2 = {unpack (list)}
This might be the simplest method:
local data = {DIN1 = "Input(z)", DIN2 = "Input(y)", AINA1 = "Input(x)"}
function table.copy(mytable) --mytable = the table you need to copy
newtable = {}
for k,v in pairs(mytable) do
newtable[k] = v
end
return newtable
end
new_table = table.copy(data) --copys the table "data"
In my situation, when the information in the table is only data and other tables (excluding functions, ...), is the following line of code the winning solution:
local copyOfTable = json.decode( json.encode( sourceTable ) )
I'm writing Lua code for some home automation on a Fibaro Home Center 2. The implementation of Lua is very limited with no central library of functions you can refer to. Every function needs to be declared in the code so to keep the code serviceable, so one line solutions like this are favorable.

Use of _ENV in Lua function does not have effect

I'm reviewing some toy examples from Lua and I found the following one over there with respect to environments:
M = {} -- the module
complex = {} -- global complex numbers registry
mt = {} --metatable for complex numbers
function new (r, i)
local cp = {}
cp = {r=r, i=i}
return setmetatable(cp,mt)
end
M.new = new -- add 'new' to the module
function M.op (...)
--Why does not it work?
local _ENV = complex
return ...
end
function M.add (c1, c2)
return new(c1.r + c2.r, c1.i + c2.i)
end
function M.tostring (c)
return string.format("(%g,%g)", c.r, c.i) --to avoid +-
end
mt.__tostring = M.tostring
mt.__add = M.add
complex.a = M.new(4,3)
complex.b = N.new(6,2)
--nil
M.op(a+b)
--It works
M,op(complex.a+complex.b)
The use of _ENV has no effect. However, if I use complex = _G, both lines work. How do set a local environment for M.op. I'm not asking for specific libraries, I just want to know why it does not work and how to fix it.
M.op(a+b)
This line doesn't do what you expect, because it uses values of a and b that are available when this method is called. It doesn't matter that you set _ENV value inside the method, as by the time the control gets there, the values referenced by a and b have already been retrieved and since both values are nil in your code, you probably get "attempt to perform arithmetic on global..." error.
how to fix it.
I'm not sure what exactly you want to fix, as you already reference the example that works. If you assign complex.a you can't assume that a will have the same value without mapping complex table to _ENV.

Lua equals function and tables [duplicate]

Recently I wrote a bit of Lua code something like:
local a = {}
for i = 1, n do
local copy = a
-- alter the values in the copy
end
Obviously, that wasn't what I wanted to do since variables hold references to an anonymous table not the values of the table themselves in Lua. This is clearly laid out in Programming in Lua, but I'd forgotten about it.
So the question is what should I write instead of copy = a to get a copy of the values in a?
Table copy has many potential definitions. It depends on whether you want simple or deep copy, whether you want to copy, share or ignore metatables, etc. There is no single implementation that could satisfy everybody.
One approach is to simply create a new table and duplicate all key/value pairs:
function table.shallow_copy(t)
local t2 = {}
for k,v in pairs(t) do
t2[k] = v
end
return t2
end
copy = table.shallow_copy(a)
Note that you should use pairs instead of ipairs, since ipairs only iterate over a subset of the table keys (ie. consecutive positive integer keys starting at one in increasing order).
Just to illustrate the point, my personal table.copy also pays attention to metatables:
function table.copy(t)
local u = { }
for k, v in pairs(t) do u[k] = v end
return setmetatable(u, getmetatable(t))
end
There is no copy function sufficiently widely agreed upon to be called "standard".
To play a little readable-code-golf, here's a short version that handles the standard tricky cases:
tables as keys,
preserving metatables, and
recursive tables.
We can do this in 7 lines:
function copy(obj, seen)
if type(obj) ~= 'table' then return obj end
if seen and seen[obj] then return seen[obj] end
local s = seen or {}
local res = setmetatable({}, getmetatable(obj))
s[obj] = res
for k, v in pairs(obj) do res[copy(k, s)] = copy(v, s) end
return res
end
There is a short write-up of Lua deep-copy operations in this gist.
Another useful reference is this Lua-users wiki page, which includes an example on how to avoid the __pairs metamethod.
The full version of deep copy, handling all the 3 situations:
Table circular reference
Keys which are also tables
Metatable
The general version:
local function deepcopy(o, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if o == nil then return nil end
if seen[o] then return seen[o] end
local no
if type(o) == 'table' then
no = {}
seen[o] = no
for k, v in next, o, nil do
no[deepcopy(k, seen)] = deepcopy(v, seen)
end
setmetatable(no, deepcopy(getmetatable(o), seen))
else -- number, string, boolean, etc
no = o
end
return no
end
Or the table version:
function table.deepcopy(o, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if o == nil then return nil end
if seen[o] then return seen[o] end
local no = {}
seen[o] = no
setmetatable(no, deepcopy(getmetatable(o), seen))
for k, v in next, o, nil do
k = (type(k) == 'table') and k:deepcopy(seen) or k
v = (type(v) == 'table') and v:deepcopy(seen) or v
no[k] = v
end
return no
end
Based on the lua-users.org/wiki/CopyTable's and Alan Yates' functions.
An optionally deep, graph-general, recursive version:
function table.copy(t, deep, seen)
seen = seen or {}
if t == nil then return nil end
if seen[t] then return seen[t] end
local nt = {}
for k, v in pairs(t) do
if deep and type(v) == 'table' then
nt[k] = table.copy(v, deep, seen)
else
nt[k] = v
end
end
setmetatable(nt, table.copy(getmetatable(t), deep, seen))
seen[t] = nt
return nt
end
Perhaps metatable copy should be optional also?
Here's what I actually did:
for j,x in ipairs(a) do copy[j] = x end
As Doub mentions, if your table keys are not strictly monotonically increasing, it should be pairs not ipairs.
I also found a deepcopy function that is more robust:
function deepcopy(orig)
local orig_type = type(orig)
local copy
if orig_type == 'table' then
copy = {}
for orig_key, orig_value in next, orig, nil do
copy[deepcopy(orig_key)] = deepcopy(orig_value)
end
setmetatable(copy, deepcopy(getmetatable(orig)))
else -- number, string, boolean, etc
copy = orig
end
return copy
end
It handles tables and metatables by calling itself recursively (which is its own reward). One of the clever bits is that you can pass it any value (whether a table or not) and it will be copied correctly. However, the cost is that it could potentially overflow the stack. So and even more robust (non-recursive) function might be needed.
But that's overkill for the very simple case of wanting to copy an array into another variable.
The (unfortunately lightly documented) stdlib project has a number of valuable extensions to several of the libraries shipped with the standard Lua distribution. Among them are several variations on the theme of table copying and merging.
This library is also included in the Lua for Windows distribution, and should probably be a part of any serious Lua user's toolbox.
One thing to make sure of when implementing things like this by hand is the proper handling of metatables. For simple table-as-structure applications you probably don't have any metatables, and a simple loop using pairs() is an acceptable answer. But if the table is used as a tree, or contains circular references, or has metatables, then things get more complex.
Don't forget that functions are also references, so if you wanted to completely 'copy' all of the values you'd need to get separate functions, too; however, the only way I know to copy a function is to use loadstring(string.dump(func)), which according to the Lua reference manual, doesn't work for functions with upvalues.
do
local function table_copy (tbl)
local new_tbl = {}
for key,value in pairs(tbl) do
local value_type = type(value)
local new_value
if value_type == "function" then
new_value = loadstring(string.dump(value))
-- Problems may occur if the function has upvalues.
elseif value_type == "table" then
new_value = table_copy(value)
else
new_value = value
end
new_tbl[key] = new_value
end
return new_tbl
end
table.copy = table_copy
end
I think the reason why Lua doesn't have 'table.copy()' in its standard libraries is because the task is not precise to define. As shown already here, one can either make a copy "one level deep" (which you did), a deepcopy with or without caring of possible duplicate references. And then there's metatables.
Personally, I would still like them to offer a built-in function. Only if people wouldn't be pleased with its semantics, they would need to go do it themselves. Not very often, though, one actually has the copy-by-value need.
Warning: the marked solution is INCORRECT!
When the table contains tables, references to those tables will still be used instead. I have been searching two hours for a mistake that I was making, while it was because of using the above code.
So you need to check if the value is a table or not. If it is, you should call table.copy recursively!
This is the correct table.copy function:
function table.copy(t)
local t2 = {};
for k,v in pairs(t) do
if type(v) == "table" then
t2[k] = table.copy(v);
else
t2[k] = v;
end
end
return t2;
end
Note: This might also be incomplete when the table contains functions or other special types, but that is possible something most of us don't need. The above code is easily adaptable for those who need it.
That's as good as you'll get for basic tables. Use something like deepcopy if you need to copy tables with metatables.
In most of the cases when I needed to copy a table, I wanted to have a copy that doesn't share anything with the original, such that any modification of the original table has no impact on the copy (and vice versa).
All the snippets that have been shown so far fail at creating a copy for a table that may have shared keys or keys with tables as those are going to be left pointing to the original table. It's easy to see if you try to copy a table created as: a = {}; a[a] = a. deepcopy function referenced by Jon takes care of that, so if you need to create a real/full copy, deepcopy should be used.
Use penlight library here:
https://stevedonovan.github.io/Penlight/api/libraries/pl.tablex.html#deepcopy
local pl = require 'pl.import_into'()
local newTable = pl.tablex.deepcopy(oldTable)
Just use the
local unpack = unpack or table.unpack
list2 = {unpack (list)}
This might be the simplest method:
local data = {DIN1 = "Input(z)", DIN2 = "Input(y)", AINA1 = "Input(x)"}
function table.copy(mytable) --mytable = the table you need to copy
newtable = {}
for k,v in pairs(mytable) do
newtable[k] = v
end
return newtable
end
new_table = table.copy(data) --copys the table "data"
In my situation, when the information in the table is only data and other tables (excluding functions, ...), is the following line of code the winning solution:
local copyOfTable = json.decode( json.encode( sourceTable ) )
I'm writing Lua code for some home automation on a Fibaro Home Center 2. The implementation of Lua is very limited with no central library of functions you can refer to. Every function needs to be declared in the code so to keep the code serviceable, so one line solutions like this are favorable.

How can I detect when the Lua scripts access a global variable?

I started to work with a C++/Lua codebase that is somewhat a mess, and when I dump the contents of _G in the middle of the application execution, there are hundreds of variables that I am sure were only initialized somewhere, but are not used anywhere else in the code anymore. To clean this up, I would like to setup a mechanism that will log whenever Lua accesses a global variable.
This was my idea of how to achieve this – I wanted to setup a proxy _G that would only pass all read and write accesses via __index and __newindex along to its own copy of the original _G. However this simple script doesn't work and only outputs:
C:\Programs\lua-5.1.5_Win32_bin\lua5.1: error in error handling
GProx =
{
vars = _G
}
setmetatable(GProx, {
__index = function (t, name)
print("Read> " .. name)
return t.vars[name]
end,
__newindex = function (t, name, val)
print("Write> " .. name .. ' = ' .. val)
t.vars[name] = val
end
})
setfenv(0, GProx)
a = 1 --> Expected to print 'Write> a'
print(a) --> Expected to print 'Read> print', 'Read> a', and '1'
Is this a good approach or is there a better way to do this?
If this is a valid line of thought, then what is the problem with my snippet?
Try this snippet instead, it will work with reads and writes:
do
-- Use local variables
local old_G, new_G = _G, {}
-- Copy values if you want to silence logging
-- about already set fields (eg. predeclared globals).
-- for k, v in pairs(old_G) do new_G[k] = v end
setmetatable(new_G, {
__index = function (t, key)
print("Read> " .. tostring(key))
return old_G[key]
end,
__newindex = function (t, key, val)
print("Write> " .. tostring(key) .. ' = ' .. tostring(val))
old_G[key] = val
end,
})
-- Set it at level 1 (top-level function)
setfenv(1, new_G)
end
Here's a rundown of the changes:
A block is used to have a local reference to the old _G. In your proposed implementation, if a global variable named vars is set, it will override GProx.vars and break the proxy.
key and val should go through tostring before printing, since most values (ie. tables) aren't implicitly converted to strings.
Setting the environment at level 1 is usually enough and will not mess with Lua's internal workings.
You can set a metatable directly on the _G table, as explained in PIL section 14.2, so you are really close. There are also a couple of existing Lua modules on the web that do this (perhaps penlight contains one).

Create Lua function from string

I am creating functions (of x) from a string in Lua. The code I am using is
function fcreate(fs)
return assert(loadstring("return function (x) return " .. fs.." end"))()
end
This works for globals, e.g.
u=fcreate("math.sin(x)")
does the right thing.
However, it does not seem to like local variables. So
local c=1
u=fcreate("math.sin(x)+c")
will not work because c is local.
Is this fixable?
"loadstring does not compile with lexical scoping", so no, it can't see locals outside the loadstring call.
Is this fixable?
That depends. Why are you using loadstring in the first place? Lua supports closures as first class values, so I can't see from your example why you'd need loadstring.
Your example:
u = fcreate("math.sin(x)+c")
Can be rewritten without the need for loadstring or your fcreate function:
u = function(x) return math.sin(x)+c end
Which of course is the same as:
function u(x) return math.sin(x) + c end
I can see a case for loadstring if you have user-configurable expressions that you wanted to compile into some other function, but your case with the local c suggests that's not the case. Are you trying to make some kinda of home-rolled lamda syntax?
Can't be done in any reasonable way. For an example of why, look at this:
function makefunction(name)
local a = 1
local b = 2
local c = 3
-- ...
return assert(loadstring("return " .. name))
end
local a = 4
local func = makefunction("a")
print(func())
If this worked, what is printed? 1 or 4? Does it capture the variable from the place where the function was loaded, even though that function doesn't exist anymore? Or does it look it up from the place where it was called?
The first would mean that the function is lexically scoped wherever it's created. Being able to access the variable after the function has exited means that the variable would need to be promoted into an upvalue dynamically, which is not something that Lua can do at the moment. As it is now, Lua can see every access to a local variable during compilation, so it knows which variables to turn into upvalues (at a performance hit) and which to keep as locals.
The second would mean that variable accesses inside a loadstring'd function would work completely different than every other access in Lua: Lua uses lexical scoping, not dynamic scoping. It'd be a huge implementation change in Lua, and an extremely inconsistent one.
So, neither is supported. You can control the environment of a dynamically loaded function, using setfenv in Lua 5.1 or the env parameter of load(...) in Lua 5.2, but neither of those let you access local variables automatically.
Something you could do if you don't need to mutate the local variables is to pass those values as arguments to the generated function. You would still need to manually specify the variables to close over but its better then nothing.
For example, you can build up your closure to look like
return (function(a,b,c)
return function(x) return print(a, x) end
end)(...)
We might do that by changing your function to look like
function fcreate(variables, fs)
local varnames = {}
local varvalues = {}
local nvars = 0
for n,v in pairs(variables) do
nvars = nvars + 1
table.insert(varnames, n)
table.insert(varvalues, v)
end
local chunk_str = (
'return (function(' .. table.concat(varnames, ',') .. ') ' ..
'return function(x) return ' .. fs .. ' end ' ..
'end)(...)'
)
return assert( loadstring(chunk_str) )( unpack(varvalues, 1, nvars) )
end
local a = 1;
local f = fcreate({a=a}, 'x+a')
print(f(1), f(2))

Resources