I want to perform some simple arithmetic on NSNumbers and preserve the type. Is this possible?
For example:
- (NSNumber *)add:(NSNumber *)firstNumber to:(NSNumber *)secondNumber;
Is my method definition, and firstNumber and secondNumber are integers then I would like to return an integer that is the integer addition of them both. Equally if both are doubles then to return the result as a double.
It looks like I can get the type (except for boolean) using [NSNumber objCType] as found in this question: get type of NSNumber but I can't seem to extract those types and do the calculation without lots of code to extract the values do the calculation and return the result for every possible type.
Is there a short and concise way of doing this?
If you want to perform arithmetic the best bet would be using an NSDecimalNumber.
NSDecimalNumber have methods to perform arithmetic operations like :
– decimalNumberByAdding:
– decimalNumberBySubtracting:
– decimalNumberByMultiplyingBy:
– decimalNumberByDividingBy:
– decimalNumberByRaisingToPower:
– decimalNumberByMultiplyingByPowerOf10:
– decimalNumberByAdding:withBehavior:
– decimalNumberBySubtracting:withBehavior:
– decimalNumberByMultiplyingBy:withBehavior:
– decimalNumberByDividingBy:withBehavior:
– decimalNumberByRaisingToPower:withBehavior:
– decimalNumberByMultiplyingByPowerOf10:withBehavior:
And since NSDecimalNumber extends NSNumber it also have all methods of an NSNumber, so i think that you could use it in your case without any problem.
For nearly all applications it will be fine to convert to double and back using -doubleValue and –initWithDouble:. This will let you use the standard C symbols (+, -, ...) and functions (exp(), sin()). The only way you would run into trouble is if you were using close to the full precision for 64-bit integer values.
If you want to stick with Objective-C class operations you can use NSDecimalNumber instead.
See also: How to add two NSNumber objects?
How about calculating the expression value as a double (with all the inputs as double values), and then checking if the result is an integer? Then you just use NSNumber numberWithInt: or NSNumber numberWithDouble: to return the result.
When you check if the result value is an integer, be sure to account for the rounding error (e.g. when 1 is expressed as 0.99999999, etc).
EDIT: Just noticed in the docs for NSNumber this phrase:
Note that number objects do not necessarily preserve the type they are
created with.
I think this means you can't reliably do what you're trying to do.
Related
I am facing issue while comparing NSNumber. Below is my code:
NSNumberFormatter *formatter = [[NSNumberFormatter alloc] init];
[formatter setNumberStyle:NSNumberFormatterDecimalStyle];
NSNumber *avgRating= [formatter numberFromString:attemptedQuizDetailsModel.avgRating];
NSNumber *firstMinVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:0.6];
NSNumber *firstMaxVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:1.5];
NSNumber *secondMinVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:1.6];
NSNumber *secondMaxVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:2.5];
NSNumber *thirdMinVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:2.6];
NSNumber *thirdMaxVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:3.5];
NSNumber *fourthMinVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:3.6];
NSNumber *fourthMaxVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:4.5];
NSNumber *fifthMinVal=[NSNumber numberWithFloat:4.6];
if(avgRating >= firstMinVal && avgRating <= firstMaxVal){
} else if (avgRating>=fifthMinVal) {
}
if avgRating=4.6 and fifthMinVal=4.60,my comparison check is returning they are not equal. How to handle this type of comparison?
You have two issues, one to do with objects and the other floating-point arithmetic.
First, the expression:
avgRating>=firstMinVal&&avgRating<=firstMaxVal
does not do what you think it does.
Every variable in this expression is of type NSNumber *, that is it is a pointer to an object containing a number, and the comparisons you are doing are between pointers – which is perfectly legal in (Objective-)C.
To compare two NSNumber objects you should use the compare: method, this returns an NSComparisonResult value indicating the order of the two values.
However you would be better off in your case simply sticking with double or float values throughout and not using object types.
In either case you must be careful about comparing floating-point values, comparing for equality (== or !=) may not give the results you expect due to limited precision and number base issues (a topic you should study if programming with floating-point). Ordering comparisons (>, <, >=, <=) are generally better, and you appear to be using only those, but may still give unexpected results for two "equal" values. To test for (in)equality it is usual to test for the absolute difference (abs(), fabs()) to be less than a small value – the magnitude of which depends on the application.
HTH
This is a classic problem with comparing floating-point values; due to the way floating-point works, you can't reliably test them for equality.
What you should do instead is to compare the absolute value of the difference between the two floating-point values, and see if the difference is less than some suitably small value (say, 0.001). What value you use for the delta depends on what precision you need.
In my app, I accidentally used "==" when comparing two NSNumber objects like so:
NSNumber *number1;
NSNumber *number2;
Later on, after these objects' int values were set, I accidentally did this:
if (number1 == number2) {
NSLog(#"THEY'RE EQUAL");
}
And, confusingly, it worked! I could have sworn I was taught to do it this way:
if (number1.intValue == number2.intValue) {
NSLog(#"THEY'RE EQUAL");
}
How did using "==" between the two NSNumber objects work, and why? Does that mean it's okay to compare them that way, or was it just a fluke and this is generally not guaranteed to work every time? It really confused me :(
It's not a fluke.
It's due to the tagged pointers feature of the Objective-C runtime while using an ARM64 CPU.
In Mac OS X 10.7, Apple introduced tagged pointers. Tagged pointers allow certain classes with small amounts of per-instance data to be stored entirely within the pointer. This can eliminate the need for memory allocations for many uses of classes like NSNumber, and can make for a good performance boost.[…] on ARM64, the Objective-C runtime includes tagged pointers, with all of the same benefits they've brought to the Mac
Source
That is possibly a fluke.
From NSHipster :
Two objects may be equal or equivalent to one another, if they share a common set of observable properties. Yet, those two objects may still be thought to be distinct, each with their own identity. In programming, an object’s identity is tied to its memory address.
Its possible that your statement evaluated to YES because number1 and number2 were pointing to the same object. This would not work if they had the same value but were two different objects.
The obvious reason NSNumber variables would point to the same would be that you explicitly assigned one to the other, like so:
number1 = number2;
But there's one other thing. From this answer :
This is likely either a compiler optimisation or an implementation detail: as NSNumber is immutable there's no need for them be separate instances. probably an implementation optimisation thinking about it. Likely numberWithInt returns a singleton when called subsequently with the same integer.
But anyways, its safest to use isEqualToNumber:, as there is no telling what other "things" are lurking in the depths of code that may or may not cause it to evaluate YES
From RyPress :
While it’s possible to directly compare NSNumber pointers, the isEqualToNumber: method is a much more robust way to check for equality. It guarantees that two values will compare equal, even if they are stored in different objects.
There two concepts of equality at work here:
Object identity: Comparing that two pointers point to the same objects
Value equality: That the contents of two objects are equal.
In this case, you want value equality. In your code you declare two pointers to NSNumber objects:
NSNumber *number1;
NSNumber *number2;
But at no point show assignment of a value to them. This means the contents of the pointers can be anything, and quite by chance you have two pointers pointing to the memory locations (not necessarily the same ones) where (number1.intValue == number2.intValue) happens to be true.
You can expect the behaviour to change in unstable ways - for instance as soon as you add any more code.
Of course you can compare two NSNumber* with ==. This will tell you whether the pointers are equal. Of course if the pointers are equal then the values must be the same. The values can be the same without the pointers being equal.
Now you need to be aware that MaxOS X and iOS do some significant optimisations to save storage, especially in 64 bit code. Many NSNumbers representing the same integer value will actually be the same pointer.
NSNumber* value1 = [[NSNumber alloc] initWithInteger:1];
NSNumber* value2 = [[NSNumber alloc] initWithInteger:1];
These will be the same pointers. In 64 bit, many others will be the same pointers. There are only ever two NSNumber objects with boolean values. There is only ever one empty NSArray object, and only one [NSNull null] object.
Don't let that lull you into any wrong assumptions. If you want to see if two NSNumbers have the same value, use isEqualToNumber: You may say "if (number1 == number2 || [number1 isEqualToNumber:number2])"; that's fine (didn't check if I got the names right).
Yes, I've read the other posts on stackoverflow about comparing NSNumber and none of them seem to quite address this particular situation.
This solution was particularly bad ... NSNumber compare: returning different results
Because the suggested solution doesn't work at all.
Using abs(value1 - value2) < tolerance is flawed from the start because fractional values are stripped off, making the tolerance irrelevant.
And from Apple documentation... NSNumber explicitly doesn't guarantee that the returned type will match the method used to create it. In other words, if you're given an NSNumber, you have no way of determining whether it contains a float, double, int, bool, or whatever.
Also, as best I can tell, NSNumber isEqualToNumber is an untrustworthy method to compare two NSNumbers.
So given these definitions...
NSNumber *float1 = [NSNumber numberWithFloat:1.00001];
NSNumber *double1 = [NSNumber numberWithDouble:1.00001];
If you run the debugger and then do 2 comparisons of these identical numbers using ==, one fails, and the other does not.
p [double1 floatValue] == [float1 floatValue] **// returns true**
p [double1 doubleValue] == [float1 doubleValue] **// returns false**
If you compare them using isEqualToNumber
p [float1 isEqualToNumber:double1] **// returns false**
So if isEqualToNumber is going to return false, given that the creation of an NSNumber is a black box that may give you some other type on the way out, I'm not sure what good that method is.
So if you're going to make a test for dirty, because an existing value has been changed to a new value... what's the simplest way to do that that will handle all NSNumber comparisons.. not just float and double, but all NSNumbers?
It seems that converting to a string value, then compariing would be most useful, or perhaps a whole lot of extra code using NSNumberFormatter.
What are your thoughts?
It is not possible to reliably compare two IEEE floats or doubles. This has nothing to do with NSNumber. This is the nature of floating point. This is discussed in the context of simple C types at Strange problem comparing floats in objective-C. The only correct way to compare floating point numbers is by testing against a tolerance. I don't know what you mean by "fractional values are stripped off." Some digits are always lost in a floating point representation.
The particular test value you've provided demonstrates the problems quite nicely. 1.00001 cannot be expressed precisely in a finite number of binary digits. Wolfram Alpha is a nice way to explore this, but as a double, 1.00001 rounds to 1.0000100000000001. As a float, it rounds to 1.00001001. These numbers, obviously, are not equal. If you roundtrip them in different ways, it should not surprise you that isEqualToNumber: fails. This should make clear why your two floatValue calls do turn out to be equal. Rounded to the precision of float, they're "close enough."
If you want to compare floating point numbers, you must compare against an epsilon. Given recent advances in compiler optimization, even two identical pieces of floating point C code can generate slightly different values in their least-significant digits if you use -Ofast (we get big performance benefits by allowing that).
If you need some specific number of significant fractional digits, then it is usually better to work in fixed point notation. Just scale everything by the number of digits you need and work in integers. If you need floating point, but just want base-10 to work well (rather than base-2), then use NSDecimalNumber or NSDecimal. That will move your problems to things that round badly in base-10. But if you're working in floating point, you must deal with rounding errors.
For a much more extensive discussion, see "What Every Programmer Should Know About Floating-Point Arithmetic."
I'm just going through Apple's iOS development tutorial at the moment and reading the chapter on the Foundation framework and value objects.
Just on the NSNumber class, it says:
You can even use NSNumber literals to create encapsulated Boolean and
character values.
NSNumber *myBoolValue = #YES; NSNumber *myCharValue = #'V';
I'm just wondering, when, or why, or in what scenario, might you want to use NSNumber for a character value rather than using NSString, say?
An NSNumber is useful for encapsulating primitive values to be inserted into Objective-C collection classes such as NSArray, NSSet, NSDictionary, etc.
Image a scenario where you would want to iterate over each character in an ASCII string and extract a unique set of vowels used. You can evaluate each character and add it to an NSMutableSet. To do so, you would need to encapsulate each character in an NSNumber as NSMutableSet expects an Objective-C object. This is just one example, but the concept applies to many situations where primitives need to be added into a collection.
Well, one case is where you're using KVC to set a value for a key, and the property type is char:
[object setValue:#'a' forKey:someCharPropertyName];
You can use NSNumber with characters to return its ASCII Code, so V would return 86.
I don't think many people use it that much, but you could probably use it for character validation. I think it just one of those things where Apple went, yeah, lets put that in for the heck of it.
It's really not used for much else. The #YES and #NO is the same as YES and NO, so its kinda inelegant in some places.
Currently I am pulling data from a webservice and populating the data into a custom object.
I am storing decimals such as 4.56 etc.
I am slightly confused by NSDecimal and NSDecimalNumber. I have read that NSDecimalNumber should be used when dealing with money, which I am. So the question is whether or not my properties should be NSDecimal or NSDecimalNumber. I have read cases where your model would be NSDecimal and that you would use NSDecimalNumber for any arithmetic with the numbers.
I basically want to create behavior like such in ObjectiveC
private decimal thirtyYear;
public decimal getThirtyYear(){
return thirtyYear/100.0;
}
public void setThrityYear(decimal rate){
thirtyYear = rate;
}
So, should my thirtyYear property be NSDecimal or NSDecimalNumber. Also, when doing the dividing within the getThirtyYear() method should I use NSDecimalNumber for the arithmetic.
Question #1: Should my thirtyYear property be NSDecimal or NSDecimalNumber?
As you stated if you're dealing with any financial calculations always use NSDecimalNumber and NSDecimalNumber provides predictable rounding behavior and precision when performing base 10 calculations.
If you want more detailed information this is from the Apple Documentation directly:
NSDecimalNumber is an immutable subclass of NSNumber that provides an
object-oriented wrapper for doing base-10 arithmetic. An instance can
represent any number that can be expressed as mantissa x 10 exponent
where mantissa is a decimal integer up to 38 digits long, and exponent
is an integer between -128 and 127.
Now in regards to NSDecimal, this is a C struct and not as easy to work with in Objective C. As stated above that's where the NSDecimalNumber object comes in which is made to work with object oriented languages. In short NSDecimalNumber is the way to go. It is easier to work with.
Question #2: When dividing within the getThirtyYear() method should I use NSDecimalNumber for the arithmetic?
If precision calculations are crucial in your app then yes use NSDecimalNumber since they're guaranteed to be accurate.
Since you will be using NSDecimalNumber I suggest checking out the NSDecimalNumber Class Reference because the class has a number (no pun intended) of useful methods. Hope this helps.