New parameter to FindValueInArray to compare with number of cells #966

TheDS1337 · 2019-03-15T07:54:18Z

/**
 * Returns the index for the first occurrence of the provided value. If the value
 * cannot be located, -1 will be returned.
 *
 * @param array				Array Handle.
 * @param item				Value to search for
 * @param block				Optionally which block to search in
 * @param cellsToCompare	Optionally the number of cells to compare, 0 stands for the rest of the cells (Example: if you have a blocksize of 4 cells, and you want to compare the last 3 cells then: block = 1 and cellsToCompare should be 3)
 * @return					Array index, or -1 on failure
 * @error					Invalid Handle or invalid block
 */
native int FindValueInArray(Handle array, any item, int block=0, int cellsToCompare=0);

The new parameter 'cellsToCompare' will allow us to compare a certain number of cells, starting from 'block', since FindValue only compares a single cell right now,

It is very useful when working with structures that have array as members. Here's an example with an array of 2:
`#include

#pragma newdecls required

enum struct SomeStructure
{
int firstMember;
int otherMembers[3];
}

ArrayList g_Array;

public void OnClientSayCommand_Post(int client, const char[] command, const char[] sArgs)
{
int pos = -1;

if( strcmp(sArgs, "array_create", false) == 0 )
{
	g_Array = new ArrayList(sizeof(SomeStructure));

	if( g_Array )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Created array g_Array[x][%d] with success!", sizeof(SomeStructure));
	}
	
}
else if( strcmp(sArgs, "array_push", false) == 0 )
{
	SomeStructure data;
	data.firstMember = 6;
	data.otherMembers[0] = 1;
	data.otherMembers[1] = 0;
	
	if( g_Array.PushArray(data) != -1 )
	{	
		pos = g_Array.Length - 1;

		PrintToChat(client, "Pushed some structure into the entry %d", pos);			
		PrintToChat(client, "Expected values: firstMember = %d, otherMembers[2] = {%d, %d}", data.firstMember, data.otherMembers[0], data.otherMembers[1]);	
	}
}
// Adding  this just because I want more than 1 entry....
else if( strcmp(sArgs, "array_push_dummy", false) == 0 )
{
	SomeStructure data;
	data.firstMember = GetRandomInt(-1337, 1337);
	data.otherMembers[0] = GetRandomInt(-1337, 1337);
	data.otherMembers[1] = GetRandomInt(-1337, 1337);
	
	if( g_Array.PushArray(data) != -1 )
	{
		pos = g_Array.Length - 1;
		
		PrintToChat(client, "Pushed some structure into the entry %d", pos);			
		PrintToChat(client, "Expected values: firstMember = %d, otherMembers[2] = {%d, %d}", data.firstMember, data.otherMembers[0], data.otherMembers[1]);			
	}
}
else if( strcmp(sArgs, "array_find", false) == 0 )
{
	// Search starting from 1th cell
	if( (pos = g_Array.FindValue(6)) != -1 )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Found 6 at the entry %d", pos);
	}
	
	// Search starting from 2nd cell
	if( (pos = g_Array.FindValue(1, 1)) != -1 )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Found 1 at the entry %d", pos);
	}
	
	// Search starting from 3rd cell
	if( (pos = g_Array.FindValue(0, 2)) != -1 )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Found 0 at the entry %d", pos);
	}		
	
	// Works alright, but what if we want to compare a bigger number of cells? say 32 > 2?

	// comparing Array[X].otherMembers[1] and Array[X].otherMembers[2] parts of the blocksize
	if( (pos = g_Array.FindValue(1, 1)) != -1 && (pos = g_Array.FindValue(0, 2)) != -1 )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Found otherMembers[2] = {0, 1} at the entry %d", pos);
	}
	
	// comparing Array[X].firstMember and Array[X].otherMembers[0] parts of the blocksize
	if( (pos = g_Array.FindValue(6)) != -1 && (pos = g_Array.FindValue(1, 1)) != -1 )
	{
		PrintToChat(client, "Found firstMember = 6, otherMembers[0] = 1 at the entry %d", pos);
	}
}

}`

Output from chat:
DS‎ : array_create
Created array g_Array[x][4] with success!

DS‎ : array_push_dummy
Pushed some structure into the entry 0
Expected values: firstMember = -365, otherMembers[2] = {337, -269}

DS‎ : array_push_dummy
Pushed some structure into the entry 1
Expected values: firstMember = 131, otherMembers[2] = {738, 954}

DS‎ : array_push_dummy
Pushed some structure into the entry 2
Expected values: firstMember = -1279, otherMembers[2] = {-610, 440}

DS‎ : array_push_dummy
Pushed some structure into the entry 3
Expected values: firstMember = 762, otherMembers[2] = {426, -323}

DS‎ : array_push
Pushed some structure into the entry 4
Expected values: firstMember = 6, otherMembers[2] = {1, 0}

DS‎ : array_find
Found 6 at the entry 4
Found 1 at the entry 4
Found 0 at the entry 4
Found otherMembers[2] = {0, 1} at the entry 4
Found firstMember = 6, otherMembers[0] = 1 at the entry 4

It works fine, yes. but, imagine having an array with size bigger than 2?

…e number of cells The new parameter 'cellsToCompare' will allow us to compare a certain number of cells, starting from 'block', since FindValue only compares a single cell right now, It is very useful when working with structures that have array as members. Here's an example with an array of 2:

asherkin · 2019-03-15T10:48:10Z

The default behaviour here appears to be a breaking change - looks like it should be 1 by default.

That said, I'm not sold on the feature.

EDIT: memcmp also doesn't do what you want and would be reading out-of-bounds if it even compiled.

TheDS1337 · 2019-03-15T11:04:05Z

The default behaviour here appears to be a breaking change - looks like it should be 1 by default.

That said, I'm not sold on the feature.

EDIT: memcmp also doesn't do what you want and would be reading out-of-bounds if it even compiled.

You're right, It should be 1 by default. On the other thing about memcmp... stupid me used the variables instead of their addresses, is that why it would fail?

MitchDizzle · 2019-04-06T18:53:26Z

This is interesting, I was also thinking of a "FindCellInArray" which would look through every entry and specifically at a cell index, along with being able to sort by cell index also.

KyleSanderson

Solid start, can you throw the include changes in here too?

With this being said, I'm in the same boat as Asher: a trie seems more natural for this usage.

core/logic/smn_adt_array.cpp

TheDS1337 · 2019-04-06T20:44:39Z

Just updated, should be pretty now

I just noticed that I forgot to get the physical address of 2nd param, since it can be an array and that's the main purpose here.

asherkin

Could you please add a test suite for this to plugins/testsuite/, looking at the implementation here the memcmp issue still seems to be present and doing invalid access to the plugin memory, so I'm not convinced this has been exhaustively tested.

Given the complexity this is adding to a common use case, and the limitations this has it seems it'll likely need extending in the future, I think it might be best to add a new FindArrayInArray native that takes an array of bytes to search for along with an offset to start matching from.

FindValueInArray(arr, 42, 1, 2); would become FindArrayInArray(arr, { 42, 42 }, 2, 1);

But this design also allows more flexible combinations such as FindArrayInArray(arr, { 11, 42 }, 2, 1);

And if we specify an additional limit param and wrap access to the input array, the first example can be simplified to: FindArrayInArray(arr, { 42 }, 1, 1, 2);

native int FindArrayInArray(Handle array, any[] needle, int needleLength, int start = 0, int limit = 0);

Where:

needle = the bytes to search.
start = the byte offset in each block to start searching.
limit = the number of bytes of the block to match, looping needle as needed, with the following special values:
- -1 = the block size - start
- 0 = needleLength
needleLength > limit would be an error.
limit > (block size - start) would be an error.
0 < start <= block size would be an error.

What do you think? Also @Headline.

asherkin · 2019-04-22T22:00:21Z

core/logic/smn_adt_array.cpp

-
-	for (unsigned int i = 0; i < array->size(); i++)
+
+	size_t cellsToCompare = 0;	


Default value still needs changing here.

I've just built the fork for windows, and did a test.. using this :

#include <sourcemod> #pragma newdecls required enum struct SomeBlock // 3 cells, 12 bytes, different memory representations { int i; float f; bool b; } #define INSTANCE_INT 1337 #define INSTANCE_FLOAT 1337.0 #define INSTANCE_BOOL true // Almost duplicate to instance1, just to test that it'll fall on this one if I compared the entirety of instance1 #define INSTANCE2_INT INSTANCE_INT #define INSTANCE2_FLOAT INSTANCE_FLOAT #define INSTANCE2_BOOL false #define INSTANCE3_INT 10 #define INSTANCE3_FLOAT 0.0 #define INSTANCE3_BOOL false ArrayList g_ArrayOfArrays; public void OnPluginStart() { RegServerCmd("test_create_array", test_create_array); RegServerCmd("test_fill_array", test_fill_array); RegServerCmd("test_search_array1", test_search_array1); } public Action test_create_array(int argc) { const int blockSize = sizeof(SomeBlock); g_ArrayOfArrays = new ArrayList(blockSize) if( g_ArrayOfArrays ) { PrintToServer("Created an array with a block size of: %d", blockSize); } return Plugin_Continue; } public Action test_fill_array(int argc) { static SomeBlock instance; instance.i = INSTANCE_INT; instance.f = INSTANCE_FLOAT; instance.b = INSTANCE_BOOL; g_ArrayOfArrays.PushArray(instance); static SomeBlock instance2; instance2.i = INSTANCE2_INT; instance2.f = INSTANCE2_FLOAT; instance2.b = INSTANCE2_BOOL; g_ArrayOfArrays.PushArray(instance2); static SomeBlock instance3; instance3.i = INSTANCE3_INT; instance3.f = INSTANCE3_FLOAT; instance3.b = INSTANCE3_BOOL; g_ArrayOfArrays.PushArray(instance3); PrintToServer("Added 3 arrays to g_ArrayOfArrays"); return Plugin_Continue; } public Action test_search_array1(int argc) { SomeBlock instance; int pos = -1; /////// Search for the first instance, instance.i = INSTANCE_INT; instance.f = INSTANCE_FLOAT; instance.b = false; // modified from "true" to false PrintToServer("Search for first array using SomeBlock::i and SomeBlock::b"); // The search should start from the very first block because we are comparing the first 2 members (2 cells in this case) only if( (pos = g_ArrayOfArrays.FindValue(instance.i, 0, 2)) != -1 ) { PrintToServer("* Found it at the position: %d", pos); // Expectation: pos = 0 } else { PrintToServer("* Could not find the array with this pattern."); } /////// Search for the third instance instance.i = INSTANCE_INT; instance.f = INSTANCE3_FLOAT; // Modified float this time too instance.b = INSTANCE3_BOOL; // modified from "true" to false, so it should fall back on the 3rd item PrintToServer("Search for third array using SomeBlock::f and SomeBlock::b"); // We do the exact same, except this time we start from the 2nd block if( (pos = g_ArrayOfArrays.FindValue(instance.i, 1, 2)) != -1 ) { PrintToServer("* Found it at the position: %d", pos); // Expectation: pos = 2 } else { PrintToServer("* Could not find the array with this pattern."); } /////// Search for the second instance instance.i = INSTANCE2_INT; instance.f = INSTANCE2_FLOAT; instance.b = INSTANCE2_BOOL; // modified from "true" to false PrintToServer("Search for second array using SomeBlock::i, SomeBlock::f and SomeBlock::b!"); // We compare the entire structure if( (pos = g_ArrayOfArrays.FindValue(instance.i, 0, 0)) != -1 ) { PrintToServer("* Found it at the position: %d", pos); // Expectation: pos = 1 } else { PrintToServer("* Could not find the array with this pattern."); } return Plugin_Continue; }

Output from console:

test_create_array Created an array with a block size of: 3 test_fill_array Added 3 arrays to g_ArrayOfArrays test_search_array1 Search for first array using SomeBlock::i and SomeBlock::b * Found it at the position: 0 Search for third array using SomeBlock::f and SomeBlock::b * Could not find the array with this pattern. Search for second array using SomeBlock::i, SomeBlock::f and SomeBlock::b! * Found it at the position: 0

It doesn't work, you're right... it could be the memcmp implementation I'm doing is wrong. or it could be that 'instant.i' passed instead of 'instant' in the FindArray functions, from a C perspective I guess its totally okay, but I dunno how SP really handles them, I expect the same.

Headline · 2019-04-23T22:32:12Z

FindArrayInArray sounds like a much better option, in my opinion. Good call @asherkin

KyleSanderson · 2020-08-16T23:17:36Z

@TheDS1337 so this needs to be rebased. There's still what feels like (readas: destroying) memory corruption / invalidity for what's being passed through memcmp. Is this still desired?

TheDS1337 · 2020-08-17T07:22:17Z

desired

Hello @KyleSanderson, I've been away from games and gaming for a time now, so I have become also inactive in the SM community. This implementation might be useful for some in the future, thought I am not sure if I'm ever gonna code again to use it.

TheDS1337 added 2 commits March 15, 2019 08:46

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

c064697

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

5bad9a2

KyleSanderson requested changes Apr 6, 2019

View reviewed changes

core/logic/smn_adt_array.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

core/logic/smn_adt_array.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Headline reviewed Apr 6, 2019

View reviewed changes

core/logic/smn_adt_array.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

TheDS1337 added 2 commits April 6, 2019 21:41

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

4593216

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

e2bcd47

TheDS1337 added 5 commits April 6, 2019 21:48

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

b40562e

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

31508d6

Update adt_array.inc

c7221fb

Update adt_array.inc

cf2b245

Update smn_adt_array.cpp

2b25212

I just noticed that I forgot to get the physical address of 2nd param, since it can be an array and that's the main purpose here.

Headline added the Feature Request user requested feature label Apr 21, 2019

asherkin requested changes Apr 22, 2019

View reviewed changes

asherkin mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2021

Add an ArrayList native for searching for byte sequences #1539

Open

asherkin closed this Jul 17, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

New parameter to FindValueInArray to compare with number of cells #966

New parameter to FindValueInArray to compare with number of cells #966

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Mar 15, 2019

Uh oh!

asherkin commented Mar 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Mar 15, 2019

Uh oh!

MitchDizzle commented Apr 6, 2019

Uh oh!

KyleSanderson left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Apr 6, 2019

Uh oh!

asherkin left a comment

Uh oh!

asherkin Apr 22, 2019

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 Apr 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Headline commented Apr 23, 2019

Uh oh!

KyleSanderson commented Aug 16, 2020

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Aug 17, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!


		for (unsigned int i = 0; i < array->size(); i++)

		size_t cellsToCompare = 0;

Uh oh!

New parameter to FindValueInArray to compare with number of cells #966

New parameter to FindValueInArray to compare with number of cells #966

Uh oh!

Conversation

TheDS1337 commented Mar 15, 2019

Uh oh!

asherkin commented Mar 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Mar 15, 2019

Uh oh!

MitchDizzle commented Apr 6, 2019

Uh oh!

KyleSanderson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Apr 6, 2019

Uh oh!

asherkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asherkin Apr 22, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 Apr 23, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Headline commented Apr 23, 2019

Uh oh!

KyleSanderson commented Aug 16, 2020

Uh oh!

TheDS1337 commented Aug 17, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

asherkin commented Mar 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

TheDS1337 Apr 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading