In Lua, you can convert a function to a string where it returns what appears to be an address
print(print)
function: 0x41a360
Is it possible to do the reverse? e.g.
local aliasPrint = function: 0x41a360
aliasPrint("Hello, World!")
Hello, World!
I looked around online for a solution, but my google-fu may be lacking.
Actually, you are not converting a function to a string. string.dump does that in limited cases. And, load is the inverse.
local function f()
print("I'm a function")
end
local d = string.dump(f)
print(string.format("%q", d))
local g = load(d);
g()
As to your approach, I can only ask, "Why?"
tostring is a function that gives a notional representation of an object with essential information. In many cases, (functions and tables), uniqueness is an essential property. So, tostring includes that in its representation. Many languages have something similar but don't always show uniqueness. (Some do show more properties in a debugger.)
Lua does not have reflection, but the function names are stored as string in memory as a "key". You can achieve in a similar way
local aliasPrint = _ENV["print"]
aliasPrint("Hello, World!")
output:
Hello, World!
_ENV is the lookup table of the running environment of Lua global variables (for Lua v5.1-, use _env instead)
If you are using a function in an object, just substitude _ENV["print"] by table_or_object["function_name"].
Related
Lua will write the code of a function out as bytes using string.dump, but warns that this does not work if there are any upvalues. Various snippets online describe hacking around this with debug. It looks like 'closed over variables' are called 'upvalues', which seems clear enough. Code is not data etc.
I'd like to serialise functions and don't need them to have any upvalues. The serialised function can take a table as an argument that gets serialised separately.
How do I detect attempts to pass closures to string.dump, before calling the broken result later?
Current thought is debug.getupvalue at index 1 and treat nil as meaning function, as opposed to closure, but I'd rather not call into the debug interface if there's an alternative.
Thanks!
Even with debug library it's very difficult to say whether a function has a non-trivial upvalue.
"Non-trivial" means "upvalue except _ENV".
When debug info is stripped from your program, all upvalues look almost the same :-)
local function test()
local function f1()
-- usual function without upvalues (except _ENV for accessing globals)
print("Hello")
end
local upv = {}
local function f2()
-- this function does have an upvalue
upv[#upv+1] = ""
end
-- display first upvalues
print(debug.getupvalue (f1, 1))
print(debug.getupvalue (f2, 1))
end
test()
local test_stripped = load(string.dump(test, true))
test_stripped()
Output:
_ENV table: 00000242bf521a80 -- test f1
upv table: 00000242bf529490 -- test f2
(no name) table: 00000242bf521a80 -- test_stripped f1
(no name) table: 00000242bf528e90 -- test_stripped f2
The first two lines of the output are printed by test(), the last two lines by test_stripped().
As you see, inside test_stripped functions f1 and f2 are almost undistinguishable.
I recently read about lua and addons for the game "World of Warcraft". Since the interface language for addons is lua and I want to learn a new language, I thought this was a good idea.
But there is this one thing I can't get to know. In almost every addon there is this line on the top which looks for me like a constructor that creates a object on which member I can have access to. This line goes something like this:
object = {...}
I know that if a function returns several values (which is IMHO one huge plus for lua) and I don't want to store them seperatly in several values, I can just write
myArray = {SomeFunction()}
where myArray is now a table that contains the values and I can access the values by indexing it (myArray[4]). Since the elements are not explicitly typed because only the values themselfe hold their type, this is fine for lua. I also know that "..." can be used for a parameter array in a function for the case that the function does not know how many parameter it gets when called (like String[] args in java). But what in gods name is this "curly bracket - dot, dot, dot - curly bracket" used for???
You've already said all there is to it in your question:
{...} is really just a combination of the two behaviors you described: It creates a table containing all the arguments, so
function foo(a, b, ...)
return {...}
end
foo(1, 2, 3, 4, 5) --> {3, 4, 5}
Basically, ... is just a normal expression, just like a function call that returns multiple values. The following two expressions work in the exact same way:
local a, b, c = ...
local d, e, f = some_function()
Keep in mind though that this has some performance implications, so maybe don't use it in a function that gets called like 1000 times a second ;)
EDIT:
Note that this really doesn't apply just to "functions". Functions are actually more of a syntax feature than anything else. Under the hood, Lua only knows of chunks, which are what both functions and .lua files get turned into. So, if you run a Lua script, the entire script gets turned into a chunk and is therefore no different than a function.
In terms of code, the difference is that with a function you can specify names for its arguments outside of its code, whereas with a file you're already at the outermost level of code; there's no "outside" a file.
Luckily, all Lua files, when they're loaded as a chunk, are automatically variadic, meaning they get the ... to access their argument list.
When you call a file like lua script.lua foo bar, inside script.lua, ... will actually contain the two arguments "foo" and "bar", so that's also a convenient way to access arguments when using Lua for standalone scripts.
In your example, it's actually quite similar. Most likely, somewhere else your script gets loaded with load(), which returns a function that you can call—and, you guessed it, pass arguments to.
Imagine the following situation:
function foo(a, b)
print(b)
print(a)
end
foo('hello', 'world')
This is almost equivalent to
function foo(...)
local a, b = ...
print(b)
print(a)
end
foo('hello', 'world')
Which is 100% (Except maybe in performance) equivalent to
-- Note that [[ string ]] is just a convenient syntax for multiline "strings"
foo = load([[
local a, b = ...
print(b)
print(a)
]])
foo('hello', 'world')
From the Lua 5.1 Reference manual then {...} means the arguments passed to the program. In your case those are probably the arguments passed from the game to the addon.
You can see references to this in this question and this thread.
Put the following text at the start of the file:
local args = {...}
for __, arg in ipairs(args) do
print(arg)
end
And it reveals that:
args[1] is the name of the addon
args[2] is a (empty) table passed by reference to all files in the same addon
Information inserted to args[2] is therefore available to different files.
I want to know how to get the table hex id. I know that doing:
local some_var = {}
print (some_var)
the result is (for instance):
table: 0x21581c0
I want the hex without the table: string. I know that maybe some of you suggest me to make a regular expression (or something similar) to remove those chars, but I want to avoid that, and just get the 0x21581c0
Thanks
This is simpler and works for all types that are associated with pointers:
local function getId(t)
return string.format("%p", t)
end
print("string:", getId("hi"))
print("table:", getId({}))
print("userdata:", getId(io.stdin))
print("function:", getId(print))
print("number:", getId(1))
print("boolean:", getId(false))
print("nil:", getId(nil))
Result:
string: 0x0109f04638
table: 0x0109f0a270
userdata: 0x01098076c8
function: 0x0109806018
number: NULL
boolean: NULL
nil: NULL
In the standard implementation, there is the global 'print' variable that refers to a standard function that calls, through the global variable 'tostring', a standard function described here. The stanard 'tostring' function is the only way to retrieve the hexadecimal number it shows for a table.
Unfortunately, there is no configuration for either of the functions to do anything differently for all tables.
Nonetheless, there are several points for modification. You can create you own function and call that every time instead, or point either of the the global variables print or tostring to you own functions. Or, set a __tostring metamethod on each table you need tostring to return a different answer for. The advantage to this is it gets you the format you want with only one setup step. The disadvantage is that you have to set up each table.
local function simplifyTableToString(t)
local answer = tostring(t):gsub("table: ", "", 1)
local mt = getmetatable(t)
if not mt then
mt = {}
setmetatable(t, mt)
end
mt.__tostring = function() return answer end
end
local a = {}
local b = {}
print(a, b)
simplifyTableToString(a)
print(a, b)
Without complex patterns, you can just search for the first space, and grab the substring of what follows.
function get_mem_addr (object)
local str = tostring(object)
return str:sub(str:find(' ') + 1)
end
print(get_mem_addr({})) -- 0x109638
print(get_mem_addr(function () end)) -- 0x108cf8
This function will work with tables and functions, but expect errors if you pass it anything else.
Or you can use a little type checking:
function get_mem_addr (o)
return tostring(o):sub(type(o):len() + 3)
end
The table id stated by the OP is invalid in the version of Lua I am using (5.1 in Roblox). A valid ID is length 8, not 9 as in your example. Either way, just use string.sub to get the sub-string you are after.
string.sub(tostring({}), 8)
The reason is, 'table: ' is 7 characters long, so we take from index 8 through the end of the string which returns the hex value.
I've noticed that strings, numbers, bool and nil data seem to be straight forward to work with. But when it comes to functions, tables, etc. you get a reference instead of the actual object.
Is there a name for this phenomenon? Is there terminology that describes the distinction between the way these 2 sets of types are handled?
a = "hi"
b = 1
c = true
d = nil
e = {"joe", "mike"}
f = function () end
g = coroutine.create(function () print("hi") end)
print(a) --> hi
print(b) --> 1
print(c) --> true
print(d) --> nil
print(e) --> table: 0x103350
print(f) --> function: 0x1035a0
print(g) --> thread: 0x103d30
What you're seeing here is an attempt by the compiler to return a string representation of the object. For simple object types the __tostring implementation is provided already, but for other more complex types there is no intuitive way of returning a string representation.
See Lua: give custom userdata a tostring method for more information which might help!
.Net (Microsoft Visual Basic, Visual C++ and C#) would describe them as value types and reference types, where reference types refer to a value by reference and value types hold the actual values.
I don't think lua puts too much thought into it given that it's supposed to be a simpler interpreted language and ultimately it doesn't matter as much because lua is a fairly weakly typed language (ie it doesn't enforce type safety beyond throwing an error when you try to use operations on types they can't be used on).
Either way, most programmers in my experience understand them as 'value types' and 'reference types', so I'd say they're the two terms it's best to stick with.
In Lua, numbers are values, everything else is accessible by reference only. But the different behavior on print is just because there's no way to actually print functions (and while tables could have a default behavior for print, they don't - possibly because they're allowed to have cyclic references).
What you are seeing is the behavior of the print function. It will its arguments by using tostring on them. print could be implemented by using io.write like this (simplified a bit):
function print(...)
local args = {n = select('#',...), ...}
for i=1,args.n do
io.write(tostring(args[i]), '\t')
end
io.write('\n')
end
You should notice the call to tostring. By default it returns the representation of numbers, booleans and strings. Since there is no sane default way to convert other types to a string, it only displays the type and a useless internal pointer to the object (so that you can differentiate instances). You can view the source here.
You will be surprised, but there is no value/reference distinction in Lua. :-)
Please read here and here.
Sorry if this is too obvious, but I am a total newcomer to lua, and I can't find it in the reference.
Is there a NAME_OF_FUNCTION function in Lua, that given a function gives me its name so that I can index a table with it? Reason I want this is that I want to do something like this:
local M = {}
local function export(...)
for x in ...
M[NAME_OF_FUNCTION(x)] = x
end
end
local function fun1(...)
...
end
local function fun2(...)
...
end
.
.
.
export(fun1, fun2, ...)
return M
There simply is no such function. I guess there is no such function, as functions are first class citizens. So a function is just a value like any other, referenced to by variable. Hence the NAME_OF_FUNCTION function wouldn't be very useful, as the same function can have many variable pointing to it, or none.
You could emulate one for global functions, or functions in a table by looping through the table (arbitrary or _G), checking if the value equals x. If so you have found the function name.
a=function() print"fun a" end
b=function() print"fun b" end
t={
a=a,
c=b
}
function NameOfFunctionIn(fun,t) --returns the name of a function pointed to by fun in table t
for k,v in pairs(t) do
if v==fun then return k end
end
end
print(NameOfFunctionIn(a,t)) -- prints a, in t
print(NameOfFunctionIn(b,t)) -- prints c
print(NameOfFunctionIn(b,_G)) -- prints b, because b in the global table is b. Kind of a NOOP here really.
Another approach would be to wrap functions in a table, and have a metatable set up that calls the function, like this:
fun1={
fun=function(self,...)
print("Hello from "..self.name)
print("Arguments received:")
for k,v in pairs{...} do print(k,v) end
end,
name="fun1"
}
fun_mt={
__call=function(t,...)
t.fun(t,...)
end,
__tostring=function(t)
return t.name
end
}
setmetatable(fun1,fun_mt)
fun1('foo')
print(fun1) -- or print(tostring(fun1))
This will be a bit slower than using bare functions because of the metatable lookup. And it will not prevent anyone from changing the name of the function in the state, changing the name of the function in the table containing it, changing the function, etc etc, so it's not tamper proof. You could also strip the tables of just by indexing like fun1.fun which might be good if you export it as a module, but you loose the naming and other tricks you could put into the metatable.
Technically this is possible, here's an implementation of the export() function:
function export(...)
local env = getfenv(2);
local funcs = {...};
for i=1, select("#", ...) do
local func = funcs[i];
for local_index = 1, math.huge do
local local_name, local_value = debug.getlocal(2, local_index);
if not local_name then
break;
end
if local_value == func then
env[local_name] = local_value;
break;
end
end
end
return env;
end
It uses the debug API, would require some changes for Lua 5.2, and finally I don't necessarily endorse it as a good way to write modules, I'm just answering the question quite literally.
Try this:
http://pgl.yoyo.org/luai/i/tostring
tostring( x ) should hopefully be what you are looking for
If I am not wrong (and I probably will, because I actually never programmed in Lua, just read a bunch of papers and articles), internally there is already a table with function names (like locals and globals in Python), so you should be able to perform a reverse-lookup to see what key matches a function reference.
Anyway, just speculating.
But the fact is that looking at your code, you already know the name of the functions, so you are free to construct the table. If you want to be less error prone, it would be easier to use the name of the function to get the function reference (with eval or something like that) than the other way around.