209 lines
9.2 KiB
Markdown
209 lines
9.2 KiB
Markdown
Notes, thoughts, or questions that arose as I implemented the solutions. Hopefully I am able to go back and answer these questions as I keep learning!
|
|
|
|
# Useful references
|
|
|
|
* [Zig Notes](https://github.com/david-vanderson/zig-notes) - particularly on Arrays vs. Slices, and Strings.
|
|
|
|
# Things I like
|
|
|
|
* [Continue expressions](https://zig-by-example.com/while)
|
|
* Built in optionals (with `orelse`)
|
|
* Better error-handling than GoLang's (though that bar is set _real_ low). I have only just scratched the surface, though, it looks interestingly powerful - might well be even better than I've realized at this point!
|
|
* Creation of "bare" structs - i.e. you can do `myFunction(.{thing})` rather than `myFunction(StructName{thing})` (looking at you, GoLang)
|
|
* [Continue expressions](https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#while) - don't need to remember to put the index-incrementing code at the end of every branch!
|
|
* Great powerful `switch` syntax (though not as powerful as Rust's)
|
|
* Labelled loops - _usually_ should be avoided, but helpful on occasion!
|
|
* `defer` - though, unlike in GoLang where it's a nice-to-have that allows one to do cleanup, here it is _absolutely essential_ for all the manual `deinit`s and `free`s
|
|
|
|
# Things that I've found missing from this language
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm, right now it seems even worse than GoLang. Though the Error handling is _so_ much better that I can forgive much of this (which can be hacked-in to personal taste with utility functions, whereas you cannot fix GoLang's Errors as they are built-in language features).
|
|
|
|
* [String concatenation](https://old.reddit.com/r/Zig/comments/bfcsul/concatenating_zig_strings/)
|
|
* [String equality](https://nofmal.github.io/zig-with-example/string-handling/#string-equal)
|
|
* Switching on strings
|
|
* [Iterating over values of an enum](https://zig.guide/language-basics/enums) - [this](https://ziggit.dev/t/iterating-over-a-packed-enum/6530) suggests that it's possible, but testing indicates that that only works at comptime.
|
|
* [Sets](https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/6919) (though, as the top comment points out, that's not _too_ bad as you can abuse a HashMap for it)
|
|
* [Descending ranges](https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/14701) - i.e. `for (10..0)`. Not a big deal, tbf, but annoying when needed!
|
|
|
|
## Not "missing", but...
|
|
|
|
It irritates me that Zig - like GoLang - has continued C's demonstrably-incorrect inversion of the addressing/dereferencing operators. If `*T` is the type-symbol for "_a pointer to a type `T`_", then, for a value `t`, the symbol for "_a pointer to the value `t`_" should be `*t`, not `&t`.
|
|
|
|
Plus, needing semi-colons on the end of every line? Come _on_, my guy.
|
|
|
|
# Questions
|
|
|
|
## (From Ziglings)
|
|
|
|
[Problem 40](https://codeberg.org/ziglings/exercises/src/commit/8da60edb82b25ac913033b2f0edb63eea212c0d0/exercises/040_pointers2.zig) says "_You can always make a const pointer to a mutable value (var), but you cannot make a var pointer to an immutable value (const)._" - which, sure, fair enough (I mean, not really, but I'm not going to argue with it...), but that's not what's presented in the problem - the original code is:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
const a: u8 = 12;
|
|
const b: *u8 = &a; // fix this!
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
which is a constant pointer to a _constant_ value - which shouldn't be an issue?
|
|
|
|
## What's the idiomatic way to run Zig tests?
|
|
|
|
I've tried - using references like [this](https://zig.guide/build-system/zig-build), [this](https://old.reddit.com/r/Zig/comments/y65qa6/how_to_test_every_file_in_a_simple_zig_project/), and [this](https://www.openmymind.net/Using-A-Custom-Test-Runner-In-Zig/) - to set up `build.zig` so that I could run `zig build test` and thus run every test in my files, but that didn't work:
|
|
|
|
```zig
|
|
// build.zig
|
|
const std = @import("std");
|
|
|
|
pub fn build(b: *std.Build) void {
|
|
const main_tests = b.addTest(.{ .root_source_file = b.path("main.zig") });
|
|
const build_mode = b.standardReleaseOptions();
|
|
main_tests.setBuildMode(build_mode);
|
|
|
|
const test_step = b.step("test", "Run library tests");
|
|
test_step.dependOn(&main_tests.step);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// main.zig
|
|
pub const one = @import("solutions/01.zig");
|
|
|
|
test {
|
|
@import("std").testing.refAllDecls(@This());
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
As-written, `zig build test` gives:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
/Users/scubbo/Code/advent-of-code-2024/build.zig:19:25: error: no field or member function named 'standardReleaseOptions' in 'Build'
|
|
const build_mode = b.standardReleaseOptions();
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
With that line (and the following one deleted), `zig build test` completes silently, even with a failing test.
|
|
|
|
And this setup _still_ isn't great, because it's necessary to manually import every file to `main.zig`'s imports.
|
|
|
|
Hence the `test.sh` workaround script. It's not great, because it will error-out on the first failure (rather than accumulating failures from all files) - but it does the job!
|
|
|
|
Refer to [here](https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#Zig-Test) for more info - which I only found after writing that hacky script.
|
|
|
|
## Why can't a string-literal be passed to a function that accepts a `[]8`?
|
|
|
|
That is, why is this illegal?
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
fn doIt(string: []u8) []u8 {
|
|
return "prefix" + string;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const expect = @import("std").testing.expect;
|
|
|
|
test {
|
|
expect(std.mem.eql(u8, doIt("foo"), "prefixfoo"));
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
I can fix it by changing the type signature to accept `[]const u8`, but (I think?) that then means that I can't call the function with non-const-length strings - including strings read from files.
|
|
|
|
[This](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72736997/how-to-pass-a-c-string-into-a-zig-function-expecting-a-zig-string) link refers to `[]const u8` as a "Zig-style string-slice", but also refers to `[*c]const u8` as a "c_string", so...:shrug:?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Further questioning on this [here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/79298713/how-can-i-write-a-zig-function-that-can-accept-and-return-strings).
|
|
|
|
## Why can't I iterate over a HashMap?
|
|
|
|
The following code:
|
|
|
|
```zig
|
|
const std = @import("std");
|
|
const print = std.debug.print;
|
|
|
|
pub fn main() !void {
|
|
var gpa = std.heap.GeneralPurposeAllocator(.{}){};
|
|
defer _ = gpa.deinit();
|
|
const allocator = gpa.allocator();
|
|
var hashMap = std.AutoHashMap(u32, u32).init(allocator);
|
|
|
|
try hashMap.put(2, 5);
|
|
try hashMap.put(1, 35);
|
|
try hashMap.put(4, 20);
|
|
|
|
const iter = hashMap.keyIterator();
|
|
while (try iter.next()) |key| {
|
|
print("{}\n", .{key});
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
gives:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
scratch.zig:15:20: error: expected type '*hash_map.HashMapUnmanaged(u32,u32,hash_map.AutoContext(u32),80).FieldIterator(u32)', found '*const hash_map.HashMapUnmanaged(u32,u32,hash_map.AutoContext(u32),80).FieldIterator(u32)'
|
|
while (try iter.next()) |key| {
|
|
~~~~^~~~~
|
|
scratch.zig:15:20: note: cast discards const qualifier
|
|
/Users/scubbo/zig/zig-macos-x86_64-0.14.0-dev.2362+a47aa9dd9/lib/std/hash_map.zig:894:35: note: parameter type declared here
|
|
pub fn next(self: *@This()) ?*T {
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
I _think_ this means that the pointer to the Iterator is a Const-pointer and `.next()` expects a mutable pointer. But, if so - how do we get a mutable pointer from a const? I tried `@ptrCast` but that gave a similar error.
|
|
|
|
## How to return items accumulated into an ArrayList without causing a memory leak or a segementation fault?
|
|
|
|
Trimming down the issues that I first saw in problem 05, here's some example code:
|
|
|
|
```zig
|
|
const std = @import("std");
|
|
const print = std.debug.print;
|
|
|
|
test "Demo accumulation" {
|
|
const accumulated = try accumulate();
|
|
print("DEBUG - accumulated values are {any}\n", .{accumulated});
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
fn accumulate() ![]u32 {
|
|
var gpa = std.heap.GeneralPurposeAllocator(.{}){};
|
|
defer _ = gpa.deinit();
|
|
const allocator = gpa.allocator();
|
|
|
|
var list = std.ArrayList(u32).init(allocator);
|
|
// defer list.deinit(); <-- this is the problem line
|
|
try list.append(1);
|
|
try list.append(2);
|
|
try list.append(3);
|
|
return list.items;
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If the "problem line" is commented out, then I get warnings about a memory leak (unsurprisingly); but if it's left in, then I get a segmentation fault when trying to reference the response of the function.
|
|
|
|
This is all, in some sense, "working as expected" (the compiler is correct to warn about the memory leak) - but it seems like a cumbersom way to work. I suspect that the response would be "_don't return a bare `[]u32`, then_", which feels pretty unsatisfying.
|
|
|
|
You can't even work around this by creating a buffer (within `accumulate`), copying values into it, `deinit`-ing `list`, and returning the copy - because you can't create an array-buffer without pre-specifying how large it should be, and creating a slice has the same memory-leak issue - see below for example:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
test "Demo accumulation" {
|
|
const accumulated = try accumulate();
|
|
print("DEBUG - accumulated values are {any}\n", .{accumulated});
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
fn accumulate() ![]u32 {
|
|
var gpa = std.heap.GeneralPurposeAllocator(.{}){};
|
|
defer _ = gpa.deinit();
|
|
const allocator = gpa.allocator();
|
|
|
|
var list = std.ArrayList(u32).init(allocator);
|
|
defer list.deinit();
|
|
try list.append(1);
|
|
try list.append(2);
|
|
try list.append(3);
|
|
|
|
const response = try allocator.alloc(u32, list.items.len);
|
|
@memcpy(response, list.items);
|
|
return response;
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## What's the point in `HashMap.getOrPut`?
|
|
|
|
`getOrPut` _doesn't_ actually `put` anything, it _only_ `get`s. See https://ziggit.dev/t/whats-the-point-in-hashmap-getorput/7547.
|