LEAVE and TRAP, part II: NewL and NewLC

 

At this time, I will try to show you how (and why) to create the methods NewL and NewLC. Commonly, Symbian OS classes offers these two static method implementations. A lot of classes defines and implements these two methods, and there is a reason for that...

The process used to create and define is called "two-phased construction". This process is described as a effort to prevent that a object creation throw an exception. The object construction process is divided in two-phases:
-  On the first phase, the object is instantiated (using new (ELeave), for example) and a memory chunk is reserved for that object;
-  The second phase is where the object data and member variables are initiated (ConstructL phase).

The two-phased construction is an interesting solution, because we can separately threat 2 critical phases in the object initialization. Between these two phases, we will use the CleanupStack::PushL, to guarantee that this temporary class instance would eventually be disposed and cleaned from memory. The next stage, the ConstructL method is called. The piece of code below will try to show you how to make it:

EXPORT_C CUser* CUser::NewLC( MUserStateObserver* aObserver )
{
   CUser* self = new (ELeave) CUser( aObserver );
   CleanupStack::PushL(self);
   self->ConstructL();
   return self;
}

The NewLC method is very simple: it only calls a new operator that can LEAVE (ELeave constant), pushs this temporary class instance to the Cleanup Stack, and follows with a call to ConstructL defined in this temporary instance. After that, is preconceived that the object is well initialized.

Below you will find a NewL implementation code example:

EXPORT_C CUser* CUser::NewL( MUserStateObserver* aObserver )
{
   CUser* self = new (ELeave) CUser( aObserver );
   CleanupStack::PushL(self);
   self->ConstructL();
   CleanupStack::Pop(self);
   return self;
}

Perceive a Pop() method call after ConstructL() is called. This guarantees that this variable reference was "well-initialized", and the CleanupStack already can clean its reference from heap memory space.

The code below is a optimized NewL, which uses the NewLC implementation in it. Tha main advantage from this new code is that the code is smaller than last one...

EXPORT_C CUser* CUser::NewL( MUserStateObserver* aObserver )
{
   CUser* self = NewLC( aObserver );
   CleanupStack::Pop(self);
   return self;
}

And a ConstructL example implementation:

void CUser::ConstructL()
{
        iObserver = CUserStateObserver::NewL( this );

        iName = TBufC::NewL( 100 );

        iAge = 0;

        LoadPluginsL();
}

The NewL and NewLC methods are declared as the following code (located in CUser.h):

class CUser : public CBase
{
public:
   static CUser* NewL( MUserStateObserver* aObserver );

   static CUser* NewLC( MUserStateObserver* aObserver );
.
.
.

But, the MAIN question: when should we choose between a NewL and a NewLC? What's the main difference?

I should say you that you can ALWAYS call NewL for member variables (class or instance variables), and NewLC for automatic variables (variables declared inside a method's body). It's happen because the member variables aren't immediately cleaned from CleanupStack, unless the object maintaining these members was disposed from CleanupStack space. The member variables have a longer life time, and is desired that its CleanupStack reference may be cleaned as soon as possible. The opposite occurs with the automatic variables: they will always be cleaned by CleanupStack when the method reachs the last instruction from method's body. So, if this method, containg NewLC references, can "Leave", the external trap harness will clean this automatic variables references, and pops it.

So, everytime in our code we call NewL inside a function that can LEAVE, we are wasting performance, because this object reference will be cleaned two times, one time by NewL (CleanupStack::Pop()), and another time by the TRAP harness that is related to this function call.

  • 0
    点赞
  • 0
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 0
    评论
在信号处理领域,DOA(Direction of Arrival)估计是一项关键技术,主要用于确定多个信号源到达接收阵列的方向。本文将详细探讨三种ESPRIT(Estimation of Signal Parameters via Rotational Invariance Techniques)算法在DOA估计中的实现,以及它们在MATLAB环境中的具体应用。 ESPRIT算法是由Paul Kailath等人于1986年提出的,其核心思想是利用阵列数据的旋转不变性来估计信号源的角度。这种算法相比传统的 MUSIC(Multiple Signal Classification)算法具有较低的计算复杂度,且无需进行特征值分解,因此在实际应用中颇具优势。 1. 普通ESPRIT算法 普通ESPRIT算法分为两个主要步骤:构造等效旋转不变系统和估计角度。通过空间平移(如延时)构建两个子阵列,使得它们之间的关系具有旋转不变性。然后,通过对子阵列数据进行最小二乘拟合,可以得到信号源的角频率估计,进一步转换为DOA估计。 2. 常规ESPRIT算法实现 在描述中提到的`common_esprit_method1.m`和`common_esprit_method2.m`是两种不同的普通ESPRIT算法实现。它们可能在实现细节上略有差异,比如选择子阵列的方式、参数估计的策略等。MATLAB代码通常会包含预处理步骤(如数据归一化)、子阵列构造、旋转不变性矩阵的建立、最小二乘估计等部分。通过运行这两个文件,可以比较它们在估计精度和计算效率上的异同。 3. TLS_ESPRIT算法 TLS(Total Least Squares)ESPRIT是对普通ESPRIT的优化,它考虑了数据噪声的影响,提高了估计的稳健性。在TLS_ESPRIT算法中,不假设数据噪声是高斯白噪声,而是采用总最小二乘准则来拟合数据。这使得算法在噪声环境下表现更优。`TLS_esprit.m`文件应该包含了TLS_ESPRIT算法的完整实现,包括TLS估计的步骤和旋转不变性矩阵的改进处理。 在实际应用中,选择合适的ESPRIT变体取决于系统条件,例如噪声水平、信号质量以及计算资源。通过MATLAB实现,研究者和工程师可以方便地比较不同算法的效果,并根据需要进行调整和优化。同时,这些代码也为教学和学习DOA估计提供了一个直观的平台,有助于深入理解ESPRIT算法的工作原理。
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值