Search Results

Search found 9381 results on 376 pages for 'vs macros'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 119/376 | < Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >

  • Using an ActiveX control without a form/dialog/window in C++, VS 2008

    - by younevertell
    an ActiveX control generated by Visual Basic 6, very old stuff, it has a couple of methods and one event. now I have to use the control in C++, visual studio 2008, but I don't like to generate a form/dialog/window as constainer. I add some MFC class From ActiveX Control. Now the wrap class has all the methods defined in the ActiveX control. I definitely need add event handler to take care of the event fired by ActiveX control. With a form/dialgue/window, it could be done by below BEGIN_EVENTSINK_MAP ON_EVENT. My questions are 1. how to add the event handler without a form/dialgue/window. Is this impossible? 2. Could I manually add constructor in the ActiveX control wrap class, so I could use new operator to get an instance on the heap? Thanks Add the Event Sinks Map near the start of the definition (.cpp) file. The BEGIN_EVENTSINK_MAP macro takes the container's Class name, then the base class name as parameters. The container's class name is used again in the AFX_EVENTSINK_MAP macro and the ON_EVENT macro.

    Read the article

  • Performance of Managed C++ Vs UnManaged/native C++

    - by bsobaid
    I am writing a very high performance application that handles and processes hundreds of events every millisecond. Is Unmanaged C++ faster than managed c++? and why? Managed C++ deals with CLR instead of OS and CLR takes care of memory management, which simplifies the code and is probably also more efficient than code written by "a programmer" in unmanaged C++? or there is some other reason? When using managed, how can one then avoid dynamic memory allocation, which causes a performance hit, if it is all transparent to the programmer and handled by CLR? So coming back to my question, Is managed C++ more efficient in terms of speed than unmanaged C++ and why?

    Read the article

  • QuickBox2D poly behaviour vs box or circle

    - by Ben Kanizay
    Hi I've played a little with Box2D before and have just started using QuickBox2D which makes things heaps easier. I am however getting different behaviour with a specific poly shape than I am with a box. All other properties are the same. I've included 3 simple examples and their source below. What I really want to work is Example 1 with both objects as poly. As you can see, it seems like the 'paddle' poly is the one that's failing - the 'ball' (whether it's a poly or circle) just falls straight through it instead of bouncing off as it does with a box 'paddle' object. Would appreciate some help or insight. As I can only post one line at this stage, the swf previews of the 3 examples can be seen here Example 1 source: package { import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickBox2D; import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickObject; import flash.display.MovieClip; public class Eg1 extends MovieClip { private var sim:QuickBox2D; private var paddle:QuickObject; private var ball:QuickObject; public function Eg1() { this.sim = new QuickBox2D(this); this.paddle = this.sim.addPoly({ x:13, y:19, angle:0, density:0, draggable:false, isBullet:true, verts:[[-3.84,-0.67,-2.84,-1,-2.17,-0.33,2.17,-0.33,2.84,-1,3.84,-0.67,2.84,1,-2.51,1]] }); this.ball = this.sim.addPoly({ x:13, y:1, restitution:1, friction:1, draggable:false, isBullet:true, verts:[[-0.34,-1,0.34,-1,0.67,-0.33,0.67,0.33,0.34,1,-0.34,1,-0.67,0.33,-0.67,-0.33]] }); this.sim.start(); } }} Example 2 source: package { import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickBox2D; import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickObject; import flash.display.MovieClip; public class Eg2 extends MovieClip { private var sim:QuickBox2D; private var paddle:QuickObject; private var ball:QuickObject; public function Eg2() { this.sim = new QuickBox2D(this); this.paddle = this.sim.addBox({ x:13, y:19, angle:0, density:0, draggable:false, isBullet:true, width:8 }); this.ball = this.sim.addPoly({ x:13, y:1, restitution:1, friction:1, draggable:false, isBullet:true, verts:[[-0.34,-1,0.34,-1,0.67,-0.33,0.67,0.33,0.34,1,-0.34,1,-0.67,0.33,-0.67,-0.33]] }); this.sim.start(); } }} Example 3 source: package { import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickBox2D; import com.actionsnippet.qbox.QuickObject; import flash.display.MovieClip; public class Eg3 extends MovieClip { private var sim:QuickBox2D; private var paddle:QuickObject; private var ball:QuickObject; public function Eg3() { this.sim = new QuickBox2D(this); this.paddle = this.sim.addPoly({ x:13, y:19, angle:0, density:0, draggable:false, isBullet:true, verts:[[-3.84,-0.67,-2.84,-1,-2.17,-0.33,2.17,-0.33,2.84,-1,3.84,-0.67,2.84,1,-2.51,1]] }); this.ball = this.sim.addCircle({ x:13, y:1, restitution:1, friction:1, draggable:false, isBullet:true, radius:1 }); this.sim.start(); } }}

    Read the article

  • Generics vs inheritance (when no collection classes are involved)

    - by Ram
    This is an extension of this questionand probably might even be a duplicate of some other question(If so, please forgive me). I see from MSDN that generics are usually used with collections The most common use for generic classes is with collections like linked lists, hash tables, stacks, queues, trees and so on where operations such as adding and removing items from the collection are performed in much the same way regardless of the type of data being stored. The examples I have seen also validate the above statement. Can someone give a valid use of generics in a real-life scenario which does not involve any collections ? Pedantically, I was thinking about making an example which does not involve collections public class Animal<T> { public void Speak() { Console.WriteLine("I am an Animal and my type is " + typeof(T).ToString()); } public void Eat() { //Eat food } } public class Dog { public void WhoAmI() { Console.WriteLine(this.GetType().ToString()); } } and "An Animal of type Dog" will be Animal<Dog> magic = new Animal<Dog>(); It is entirely possible to have Dog getting inherited from Animal (Assuming a non-generic version of Animal)Dog:Animal Therefore Dog is an Animal Another example I was thinking was a BankAccount. It can be BankAccount<Checking>,BankAccount<Savings>. This can very well be Checking:BankAccount and Savings:BankAccount. Are there any best practices to determine if we should go with generics or with inheritance ?

    Read the article

  • Memory issues - Living vs. overall -> app is killed

    - by D33
    I'm trying to check my applications memory issues in Instruments. When I load the application I play some sounds and show some animations in UIImageViews. To save some memory I load the sounds only when I need it and when I stop playing it I free it from the memory. problem 1: My application is using about 5.5MB of Living memory. BUT The Overall section is growing after start to 20MB and then it's slowly growing (about 100kB/sec). But responsible Library is OpenAL (OAL::Buffer), dyld (_dyld_start)-I am not sure what this really is, and some other stuff like ft_mem_qrealloc, CGFontStrikeSetValue, … problem 2: When the overall section breaks about 30MB, application crashes (is killed). According to the facts I already read about overall memory, it means then my all allocations and deallocation is about 30MB. But I don't really see the problem. When I need some sound for example I load it to the memory and when I don't need it anymore I release it. But that means when I load 1MB sound, this operation increase overall memory usage with 2MB. Am I right? And when I load 10 sounds my app crashes just because the fact my overall is too high even living is still low??? I am very confused about it. Could someone please help me clear it up? (I am on iOS 5 and using ARC) SOME CODE: creating the sound OpenAL: MYOpenALSound *sound = [[MyOpenALSound alloc] initWithSoundFile:filename willRepeat:NO]; if(!sound) return; [soundDictionary addObject:sound]; playing: [sound play]; dispatch_after(dispatch_time(DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, ((sound.duration * sound.pitch) + 0.1) * NSEC_PER_SEC), dispatch_get_current_queue(), ^{ [soundDictionary removeObjectForKey:[NSNumber numberWithInt:soundID]]; }); } creating the sound with AVAudioPlayer: [musics replaceObjectAtIndex:ID_MUSIC_MAP withObject:[[Music alloc] initWithFilename:@"mapMusic.mp3" andWillRepeat:YES]]; pom = [musics objectAtIndex:musicID]; [pom playMusic]; and stop and free it: [musics replaceObjectAtIndex:ID_MUSIC_MAP withObject:[NSNull null]]; AND IMAGE ANIMATIONS: I load images from big PNG file (this is realated also to my other topic : Memory warning - UIImageView and its animations) I have few UIImageViews and by time I'm setting animation arrays to play Animations... UIImage *source = [[UIImage alloc] initWithCGImage:[[UIImage imageNamed:@"imageSource.png"] CGImage]]; cutRect = CGRectMake(0*dimForImg.width,1*dimForImg.height,dimForImg.width,dimForImg.height); image1 = [[UIImage alloc] initWithCGImage:CGImageCreateWithImageInRect([source CGImage], cutRect)]; cutRect = CGRectMake(1*dimForImg.width,1*dimForImg.height,dimForImg.width,dimForImg.height); ... image12 = [[UIImage alloc] initWithCGImage:CGImageCreateWithImageInRect([source CGImage], cutRect)]; NSArray *images = [[NSArray alloc] initWithObjects:image1, image2, image3, image4, image5, image6, image7, image8, image9, image10, image11, image12, image12, image12, nil]; and this array I just use simply like : myUIImageView.animationImages = images, ... duration -> startAnimating

    Read the article

  • functional dependencies vs type families

    - by mhwombat
    I'm developing a framework for running experiments with artificial life, and I'm trying to use type families instead of functional dependencies. Type families seems to be the preferred approach among Haskellers, but I've run into a situation where functional dependencies seem like a better fit. Am I missing a trick? Here's the design using type families. (This code compiles OK.) {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies, FlexibleContexts #-} import Control.Monad.State (StateT) class Agent a where agentId :: a -> String liveALittle :: Universe u => a -> StateT u IO a -- plus other functions class Universe u where type MyAgent u :: * withAgent :: (MyAgent u -> StateT u IO (MyAgent u)) -> String -> StateT u IO () -- plus other functions data SimpleUniverse = SimpleUniverse { mainDir :: FilePath -- plus other fields } defaultWithAgent :: (MyAgent u -> StateT u IO (MyAgent u)) -> String -> StateT u IO () defaultWithAgent = undefined -- stub -- plus default implementations for other functions -- -- In order to use my framework, the user will need to create a typeclass -- that implements the Agent class... -- data Bug = Bug String deriving (Show, Eq) instance Agent Bug where agentId (Bug s) = s liveALittle bug = return bug -- stub -- -- .. and they'll also need to make SimpleUniverse an instance of Universe -- for their agent type. -- instance Universe SimpleUniverse where type MyAgent SimpleUniverse = Bug withAgent = defaultWithAgent -- boilerplate -- plus similar boilerplate for other functions Is there a way to avoid forcing my users to write those last two lines of boilerplate? Compare with the version using fundeps, below, which seems to make things simpler for my users. (The use of UndecideableInstances may be a red flag.) (This code also compiles OK.) {-# LANGUAGE MultiParamTypeClasses, FunctionalDependencies, FlexibleInstances, UndecidableInstances #-} import Control.Monad.State (StateT) class Agent a where agentId :: a -> String liveALittle :: Universe u a => a -> StateT u IO a -- plus other functions class Universe u a | u -> a where withAgent :: Agent a => (a -> StateT u IO a) -> String -> StateT u IO () -- plus other functions data SimpleUniverse = SimpleUniverse { mainDir :: FilePath -- plus other fields } instance Universe SimpleUniverse a where withAgent = undefined -- stub -- plus implementations for other functions -- -- In order to use my framework, the user will need to create a typeclass -- that implements the Agent class... -- data Bug = Bug String deriving (Show, Eq) instance Agent Bug where agentId (Bug s) = s liveALittle bug = return bug -- stub -- -- And now my users only have to write stuff like... -- u :: SimpleUniverse u = SimpleUniverse "mydir"

    Read the article

  • Python - calendar.timegm() vs. time.mktime()

    - by ibz
    I seem to have a hard time getting my head around this. What's the difference between calendar.timegm() and time.mktime()? Say I have a datetime.datetime with no tzinfo attached, shouldn't the two give the same output? Don't they both give the number of seconds between epoch and the date passed as a parameter? And since the date passed has no tzinfo, isn't that number of seconds the same? >>> import calendar >>> import time >>> import datetime >>> d = datetime.datetime(2010, 10, 10) >>> calendar.timegm(d.timetuple()) 1286668800 >>> time.mktime(d.timetuple()) 1286640000.0 >>>

    Read the article

  • StringBuilder/StringBuffer vs. "+" Operator

    - by matt.seil
    I'm reading "Better, Faster, Lighter Java" (by Bruce Tate and Justin Gehtland) and am familiar with the readability requirements in agile type teams, such as what Robert Martin discusses in his clean coding books. On the team I'm on now, I've been told explicitly not to use the "+" operator because it creates extra (and unnecessary) string objects during runtime. But this article: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp01274.html Written back in '04 talks about how object allocation is about 10 machine instructions. (essentially free) It also talks about how the GC also helps to reduce costs in this environment. What is the actual performance tradeoffs between using "+," "StringBuilder," or "StringBuffer?" (In my case it is StringBuffer only as we are limited to Java 1.4.2.) StringBuffer to me results in ugly, less readable code, as a couple of examples in Tate's book demonstrates. And StringBuffer is thread-synchronized which seems to have its own costs that outweigh the "danger" in using the "+" operator. Thoughts/Opinions?

    Read the article

  • Storing DateTime (UTC) vs. storing DateTimeOffset

    - by Frederico
    I usually have an "interceptor" that right before reading/writing from/to the database does datetime conversion (from UTC to localtime, and from localtime to utc), so I can use DateTime.Now (derivations and comparisions) throughout the system without worrying about timezones. Regarding serialization and moving data between computers, there is no need to bother, as the datetime is always UTC. Should I continue storing my dates (SQL 2008 - datetime) in UTC format or should I instead store it using DateTimeOffset (SQL 2008 - datetimeoffset)? UTC Dates in the database (datetime type) have been working and known for so long, why change it? What are the advantages? I have already looked into articles like this one, but I'm not 100% convinced though. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Interpreted vs. Compiled vs. Late-Binding

    - by zubin71
    Python is compiled into an intermediate bytecode(pyc) and then executed. So, there is a compilation followed by interpretation. However, long-time Python users say that Python is a "late-binding" language and that it should`nt be referred to as an interpreted language. How would Python be different from another interpreted language? Could you tell me what "late-binding" means, in the Python context? Java is another language which first has source code compiled into bytecode and then interpreted into bytecode. Is Java an interpreted/compiled language? How is it different from Python in terms of compilation/execution? Java is said to not have, "late-binding". Does this have anything to do with Java programs being slighly faster than Python? Itd be great if you could also give me links to places where people have already discussed this; id love to read more on this. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Huge page buffer vs. multiple simultaneous processes

    - by Andrei K.
    One of our customer has a 35 Gb database with average active connections count about 70-80. Some tables in database have more than 10M records per table. Now they have bought new server: 4 * 6 Core = 24 Cores CPU, 48 Gb RAM, 2 RAID controllers 256 Mb cache, with 8 SAS 15K HDD on each. 64bit OS. I'm wondering, what would be a fastest configuration: 1) FB 2.5 SuperServer with huge buffer 8192 * 3500000 pages = 29 Gb or 2) FB 2.5 Classic with small buffer of 1000 pages. Maybe some one has tested such case before and will save me days of work :) Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Script Speed vs Memory Usage

    - by Doug Neiner
    I am working on an image generation script in PHP and have gotten it working two ways. One way is slow but uses a limited amount of memory, the second is much faster, but uses 6x the memory . There is no leakage in either script (as far as I can tell). In a limited benchmark, here is how they performed: -------------------------------------------- METHOD | TOTAL TIME | PEAK MEMORY | IMAGES -------------------------------------------- One | 65.626 | 540,036 | 200 Two | 20.207 | 3,269,600 | 200 -------------------------------------------- And here is the average of the previous numbers (if you don't want to do your own math): -------------------------------------------- METHOD | TOTAL TIME | PEAK MEMORY | IMAGES -------------------------------------------- One | 0.328 | 540,036 | 1 Two | 0.101 | 3,269,600 | 1 -------------------------------------------- Which method should I use and why? I anticipate this being used by a high volume of users, with each user making 10-20 requests to this script during a normal visit. I am leaning toward the faster method because though it uses more memory, it is for a 1/3 of the time and would reduce the number of concurrent requests.

    Read the article

  • Static vs Non Static constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • Wildcards vs. generic methods

    - by FredOverflow
    Is there any practical difference between the following approaches to print all elements in a range? public static void printA(Iterable<?> range) { for (Object o : range) { System.out.println(o); } } public static <T> void printB(Iterable<T> range) { for (T x : range) { System.out.println(x); } } Apparently, printB involves an additional checked cast to Object (see line 16), which seems rather stupid to me -- isn't everything an Object anyway? public static void printA(java.lang.Iterable); Code: 0: aload_0 1: invokeinterface #18, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/lang/Iterable.iterator:()Ljava/util/Iterator; 6: astore_2 7: goto 24 10: aload_2 11: invokeinterface #24, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/util/Iterator.next:()Ljava/lang/Object; 16: astore_1 17: getstatic #30; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream; 20: aload_1 21: invokevirtual #36; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/Object;)V 24: aload_2 25: invokeinterface #42, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/util/Iterator.hasNext:()Z 30: ifne 10 33: return public static void printB(java.lang.Iterable); Code: 0: aload_0 1: invokeinterface #18, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/lang/Iterable.iterator:()Ljava/util/Iterator; 6: astore_2 7: goto 27 10: aload_2 11: invokeinterface #24, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/util/Iterator.next:()Ljava/lang/Object; 16: checkcast #3; //class java/lang/Object 19: astore_1 20: getstatic #30; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream; 23: aload_1 24: invokevirtual #36; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/Object;)V 27: aload_2 28: invokeinterface #42, 1; //InterfaceMethod java/util/Iterator.hasNext:()Z 33: ifne 10 36: return

    Read the article

  • SEO Google - Navigation Title vs. Page Heading

    - by louism
    Hi, i was wondering if anyone knows if theres a connection between what a navigation item is named and the page heading it goes to - does this have an impact on SEO? so for example, if i had in my navigation menu an item called About Us, but when you click it you come to a page with the heading Learn Who We Are (i.e. wrapped in [h1] heading tags) because there isnt an exact one-to-one match, is that a bad thing in terms of SEO? thanks

    Read the article

  • Performance characteristics of pthreads vs ucontext

    - by Robert Mason
    I'm trying to port a library that uses ucontext over to a platform which supports pthreads but not ucontext. The code is pretty well written so it should be relatively easy to replace all the calls to the ucontext API with a call to pthread routines. However, does this introduce a significant amount of additional overhead? Or is this a satisfactory replacement. I'm not sure how ucontext maps to operating system threads, and the purpose of this facility is to make coroutine spawning fairly cheap and easy. So, question is: Does replacing ucontext calls with pthread calls significantly change the performance characteristics of a library?

    Read the article

  • Postgres vs Firebird

    - by Tedi
    I'm looking to use either Firebird or Postgres in my next development project ... largely because both are available under a BSD-like license. I found a great comparison of the two database at http://www.amsoftwaredesign.com/pg_vs_fb But this comparison is a good 2+ years old and both databases have come a long ways since. Does anyone mind updating the comparison table to be relevant for the current versions of both Firebird and Postgres ... or have a link to a site that does a good recent comparison between the two database?

    Read the article

  • SPAN vs DIV (inline-block)

    - by blackjid
    Hi, Is there any reason to use a <div style="display:inline-block"> instead of a <span> to layout a webpage? Can I put content nested inside the span? What is valid and what isn't? Thanks! It's ok to use this to make a 3x2 table like layout? <div> <span> content1(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> <span> content2(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> <span> content3(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> </div> <div> <span> content4(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> <span> content5(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> <span> content6(divs,p, spans, etc) </span> </div>

    Read the article

  • xgettext vs gettext

    - by Kentor
    I have a few questions: I know what gettext is. I've read a few posts where they mentioned xgettext and was curious as to what is the difference between the two. How can I install xgettext on Windows? And finally, does anybody have a tutorial on how to install the library php-gettext http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/php-gettext/ (this one usually doesn't come with PHP) I've read about it in an article but I'm not sure how to get it working in Windows. The thing is, sometimes when you make changes, you need to restart Apache to see the new data with the gettext that comes with PHP (but with the library you don't need to restart it) so I wanted to use the library for development. Thanks!

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >