CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c#pointersfixed
reza
reza

Reputation: 1369

Requirement of 'fixed' seems inconsistent in C#

I have an ordered struct which contains fields..

[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit)]
public unsafe struct RunBlock_t {
    [System.Runtime.InteropServices.FieldOffset(0)]  public fixed byte raw[512];
}

If I declare this inside a function and want to use the pointer, it works fine..

{
  RunBlock_t r = new RunBlock_t();
  for (int i=0; i<512; i++) r.raw[i]=0;
}

But if I declare the variable outside the scope, it requires a fixed implementation

RunBlock_t r;
{
  r = new RunBlock_t();
  fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i=0; i<510; i++) ptr[i]=0;
}

Why this difference in behavior?

--- EDITED -----

Just want to state again that any other permutation does not work. 

    unsafe void foo() {
        RunBlock_t r = new RunBlock_t();
        fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i = 0; i < 512; i++) ptr[i] = 0;
    }

Generates You cannot use the fixed statement to take the address of an already fixed expression and does not compile.

    RunBlock_t r;
    unsafe void foo() {
      r = new RunBlock_t();
      for (int i=0; i<512; i++) r.raw[i]=0;
    }

Generates You cannot use fixed size buffers contained in unfixed expressions. Try using the fixed statement. and does not compile.

Upvotes: 3

Views: 2289

Answers (2)

Marc Gravell
Marc Gravell

Reputation: 1063013

You have, unfortunately, confused the question slightly. If I copy from the question exactly, then this works fine:

    {
        RunBlock_t r = new RunBlock_t();
        for (int i = 0; i < 512; i++) r.raw[i] = 0;
    }

and this:

    RunBlock_t r;
    {
        r = new RunBlock_t();
        fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i = 0; i < 510; i++) ptr[i] = 0;
    }

raises:

You cannot use the fixed statement to take the address of an already fixed expression

And if we remove the fixed, it works.

What you should have shown was the function signature, i.e.

RunBlock_t r;
unsafe void Bar()
{
    {
        r = new RunBlock_t();
        fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i = 0; i < 510; i++) ptr[i] = 0;
    }
}

Now the meaning becomes clearer. You see, when you use fixed to access a fixed-buffer in a value, you aren't actually fixing the buffer, nor are you fixing the value; what you are actually fixing is the containing object, i.e. the object that has the r field. This is to prevent GC from moving it around on the stack, which would be bad if we are accessing it as a pointer at the time. In our example above, our expression is really fixed (byte* ptr = this.r.raw), and the thing that gets pinned is: this.

This is different if we only have a struct as a local. Locals are on the stack; they are (as the earlier message hinted) already fixed; the stack is never relocated by GC.

So:

  • if you have a struct as a local variable, you do not need to use fixed - you are just accessing it as a pointer directly (via ldloca)
  • if you have a struct that is a field in an object, you need to use fixed, to pin the object in place for the duration of your manipulations
  • in cases where you're passing a reference to the struct (i.e. a ref RunBlock_t parameter), then you must use fixed just in case it is a field on an object; if the reference turns out to resolve to the stack, then it doesn't need to do anything
  • note that everything here about "field on an object" also applies equally to "value in an array", i.e. if we are talking about someArray[8] (since you can manipulate the contents of arrays in-situ)

Upvotes: 6

Ben Voigt
Ben Voigt

Reputation: 283694

Your question doesn't make any sense. You're confusing arrays with pointers, probably because in C and C++, and array quickly degrades to a pointer in most contexts, including the [] subscript operator.

But this is C#. Arrays and pointers are completely separate beasts (although you can coerce an array to a pointer, you have to do so in a fixed statement, in order to make sure the pointer remains valid). You should be comparing

{
  RunBlock_t r = new RunBlock_t();
  for (int i=0; i<512; i++) r.raw[i]=0;
}

to

RunBlock_t r;
{
  r = new RunBlock_t();
  for (int i=0; i<512; i++) r.raw[i]=0;
}

where both use arrays. Or else 

{
  RunBlock r = new RunBlock_t();
  fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i=0; i<512; i++) ptr[i]=0;
}

to

RunBlock_t r;
{
  r = new RunBlock_t();
  fixed (byte* ptr = r.raw) for (int i=0; i<512; i++) ptr[i]=0;
}

where both use pointers.

And then you will see that the scope the variable is declared in has absolutely no relationship to needing fixed.

Upvotes: 5

Related Questions