compiler dependent - Page 171

How to use #ifdef entities as part of functions in header files

- by Crazyjavahacking

I would like to ask if it is possible to use the entities defined in #ifdef block in header files. To be clear, I have following code: #ifdef #include <winsock2.h> #define SOCKET_HANDLE SOCKET #define CONNECTION_HANDLE SOCKET #endif SOCKET_HANDLE createServerSocket(const char* hostAddress, short port); I am Java developer and this seems completely fine for me. However compiler has a problem with this. Can you explain why is that code a problem? Also how can I force to compile it. (The idea is to have generic interface and conditional compilation to determine real types according to running platform at compile time.) Thanks

Read the article

Create a modifiable string literal in C++

- by Anne

Is it possible to create a modifiable string literal in C++? For example: char* foo[] = { "foo", "foo" }; char* afoo = foo[0]; afoo[2] = 'g'; // access violation This produces an access violation because the "foo"s are allocated in read only memory (.rdata section I believe). Is there any way to force the "foo"s into writable memory (.data section)? Even via a pragma would be acceptable! (Visual Studio compiler) I know I can do strdup and a number of other things to get around the problem, but I want to know specifically if I can do as I have asked. :)

Read the article

slow mysql count because of subselect

- by frgt10

Read the article

Does C++ require a destructor call for each placement new?

- by Josh Haberman

I understand that placement new calls are usually matched with explicit calls to the destructor. My question is: if I have no need for a destructor (no code to put there, and no member variables that have destructors) can I safely skip the explicit destructor call? Here is my use case: I want to write C++ bindings for a C API. In the C API many objects are accessible only by pointer. Instead of creating a wrapper object that contains a single pointer (which is wasteful and semantically confusing). I want to use placement new to construct an object at the address of the C object. The C++ object will do nothing in its constructor or destructor, and its methods will do nothing but delegate to the C methods. The C++ object will contain no virtual methods. I have two parts to this question. Is there any reason why this idea will not work in practice on any production compiler? Does this technically violate the C++ language spec?

Read the article

C Struct : typedef Doubt !

- by Mahesh

In the given code snippet, I expected the error symbol Record not found. But it compiled and ran fine on Visual Studio 2010 Compiler. I ran it as a C program from Visual Studio 2010 Command Prompt in the manner - cl Record.c Record Now the doubt is, doesn't typedef check for symbols ? Does it work more like a forward declaration ? #include "stdio.h" #include "conio.h" typedef struct Record R; struct Record { int a; }; int main() { R obj = {10}; getch(); return 0; }

Read the article

Can I use a static var to "cache" the result? C++

- by flyout

I am using a function that returns a char*, and right now I am getting the compiler warning "returning address of local variable or temporary", so I guess I will have to use a static var for the return, my question is can I make something like if(var already set) return var else do function and return var? This is my function: char * GetUID() { TCHAR buf[20]; StringCchPrintf(buf, 20*sizeof(char), TEXT("%s"), someFunction()); return buf; } And this is what I want to do: char * GetUID() { static TCHAR buf[20]; if(strlen(buf)!=0) return buf; StringCchPrintf(buf, 20*sizeof(char), TEXT("%s"), someFunction()); return buf; } Is this a well use of static vars? And should I use ZeroMemory(&buf, 20*sizeof(char))? I removed it because if I use it above the if(strlen...) my TCHAR length is never 0, should I use it below?

Read the article

When to use try/catch

- by coffeeaddict

I'm always finding myself wanting to put a try/catch around the lets say Business Layer methods. But I feel though that I don't need a try/catch if I'm simply rethrowing it up to the Presentation Layer. Is that right? I should not be rethrowing an exception from code that's wrapped in a try/catch in a BL method and should be letting the caller which would be from the Presentation Layer code be using a try/catch to handle it there? The BL method will throw an error without the try/catch anyway..the compiler will. So it wouldn't make sense to use a try/catch in a BL method that's to be consumed by a layer higher up correct?

Read the article

Strange behaviour when collapsing lines in XML bound WPF Datagrid

- by Flossn

i am using a wpf datagrid with a xml file as DataContext. All working good except for iterating thorough the table and collapsing individual rows. There are several checkboxes where the user can decide which kinds of rows he wants to see, dependent on their error level string. If a checkbox is checked, some of the rows are collapsed, others not. You need to uncheck the checkbox and check it again to collapse the ones of the first try and some of the others. If you recheck it again more rows are collapsed every time. I guess it has something to do with how much of the list is actually visible and how much not because of the window size. Thanks in advance. foreach (DataGridRow r in rows) { bool showRow = true; var tb = Datagrid.GetCell(dataGridEvents, r, 2).Content; string level = ((TextBlock)tb).Text; switch (level) { case "Warning": showRow = checkBoxWarnings.IsChecked.HasValue ? checkBoxWarnings.IsChecked.Value : false; break; case "Critical": showRow = checkBoxCritical.IsChecked.HasValue ? checkBoxCritical.IsChecked.Value : false; break; case "OK": showRow = checkBoxOK.IsChecked.HasValue ? checkBoxOK.IsChecked.Value : false; break; case "Unknown": showRow = checkBoxUnknown.IsChecked.HasValue ? checkBoxUnknown.IsChecked.Value : false; break; } r.Visibility = showRow ? Visibility.Visible : Visibility.Collapsed; }

Read the article

How to avoid "incomplete implementation" warning in partial base class

- by garph0

I have created a protocol that my classes need to implement, and then factored out some common functionality into a base class, so I did this: @protocol MyProtocol - (void) foo; - (void) bar; @end @interface Base <MyProtocol> @end @interface Derived_1 : Base @end @interface Derived_2 : Base @end @implementation Base - (void) foo{ //something foo } @end @implementation Derived_1 - (void) bar{ //something bar 1 } @end @implementation Derived_2 - (void) bar{ //something bar 2 } @end In this way in my code I use a generic id<MyProtocol>. The code works (as long as Base is not used directly) but the compiler chokes at the end of the implementation of Base with a warning: Incomplete implementation of class Base Is there a way to avoid this warning or, even better, a more proper way to obtain this partially implemented abstract base class behavior in Objc?

Read the article

Help Me: Loading Qt dialogs from python Scripts

- by krishnanunni

Hello, im a novice into developing an application using backend as Python (2.5) and Qt(3) as front end GUI designer. I have 5 diffrent dialogs to implement the scripts. i just know to load the window (main window) from qt import * from dialogselectkernelfile import * from formcopyextract import * import sys if __name__ == "__main__": app = QApplication(sys.argv) f = DialogSelectKernelFile() f.show() app.setMainWidget(f) app.exec_loop() main dialog opens on running. i have a set of back,Next,Cancel buttons pusing on each should open the next or previous dialogs. i use the pyuic compiler to source translation.how can i do this from python. please reply i`m running out of time.i dont know how to load another dialog from a signal of push button in another dialog. Help me pls Thanks a Lot

Read the article

What is the Effect of Declaring 'extern "C"' in the Header to a C++ Shared Library?

- by Adam

Based on this question I understand the purpose of the construct in linking C libraries with C++ code. Now suppose the following: I have a '.so' shared library compiled with a C++ compiler. The header has a 'typedef stuct' and a number of function declarations. If the header includes the extern "C" declaration... #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" { #endif // typedef struct ...; // function decls #ifdef __cplusplus } #endif ... what is the effect? Specifically I'm wondering if there are any detrimental side effects of that declaration since the shared library is compiled as C++, not C. Is there any reason to have the extern "C" declaration in this case?

Read the article

C/C++: Scanning a TIFF file using LIBTIFF

- by Matt07

My problem is to scan a tiff image in C and get all the pixel value (let's say for saving them in a txt file) in C/C++. I scanned the web and i found a library named "TIFFLIB" that should do what i was looking for. I downloaded it using the ubuntu package manager, but the gcc doesn't recognize the library. How do i link the library to the compiler? Have I installed it correctly? Is there any better/easier way to do that?

Read the article

c++ when to put method out side the class

- by user63898

i saw that some times in c++ applications using only namespace declarations with header and source file like this : #ifndef _UT_ #define _UT_ #include <string> #include <windows.h> namespace UT { void setRootPath(char* program_path, char* file_path); char * ConvertStringToCharP(std::string str); }; #endif //and then in UT.cpp #include "UT.h" namespace UT { char * ConvertStringToCharP(std::string str) { char * writable = new char[str.size() + 1]; std::copy(str.begin(), str.end(), writable); writable[str.size()] = '\0'; return writable; } void setRootPath(char* program_path, char* file_path) { //... } } is it better then defining classic class with static methods? or just simple class ? dose this method has something better for the compiler linker ? the methods in this namespace are called allot of times .

Read the article

Prevent Erroneous Property Assignment

- by Gordon

Porting android applications to iphone applications always gives me the following pattern that I accidentally create: - (void) myFunc:(id)prop { self.property = property; } Which instead should be: - (void) myFunc:(id)prop { self.property = prop; } This always causes my program to quietly break because property gets reset to its existing value rather than being set to the new value, 'prop'. I cannot name the parameter 'prop' to 'property' since the compile complains that the parameter masks the instance variables visibility. Is there a good way to avoid this situation? There are no compiler warnings. Is there a way to make xcode prevent this? I cannot see very many situations where you would set a property to the value of its underlying instance variable (maybe to trigger a KVO binding?), but I don't see myself doing that in majority of cases. I understand the above code is synthetic and should be done with @synthesize, but I am just using it as a simplified example to illustrate my point.

Read the article

How can I determine the "correct" number of steps in a questionnaire where branching is used?

- by Mike Kingscott

I have a potential maths / formula / algorithm question which I would like help on. I've written a questionnaire application in ASP.Net that takes people through a series of pages. I've introduced conditional processing, or branching, so that some pages can be skipped dependent on an answer, e.g. if you're over a certain age, you will skip the page that has Teen Music Choice and go straight to the Golden Oldies page. I wish to display how far along the questionnaire someone is (as a percentage). Let's say I have 10 pages to go through and my first answer takes me straight to page 9. Technically, I'm now 90% of the way through the questionnaire, but the user can think of themselves as being on page 2 of 3: the start page (with the branching question), page 9, then the end page (page 10). How can I show that I'm on 66% and not 90% when I'm on page 9 of 10? For further information, each Page can have a number of questions on that can have one or more conditions on them that will send the user to another page. By default, the next page will be the next one in the collection, but that can be over-ridden (e.g. entire sets of pages can be skipped). Any thoughts? :-s

Read the article

doubt in Exceptions

- by Ajay Singh

class MyException extends Exception { MyException() {} MyException(String msg) { super(msg);} } public class NewException { static void f() throws MyException { System.out.println("throwing exception from f()"); throw new ClassCastException(); } static void g() throws MyException { System.out.println("throwing exception from g()"); throw new MyException("parametrized "); } public static void main(String ...strings ) { try { f(); } catch(MyException e) { e.printStackTrace(System.out); } try { g(); } catch(MyException e) { e.printStackTrace(System.out); } } } In the function f() iam specifying that "MyException " exception will be thrown and actually iam throwing some other exception which has no relation with MyException but still the compiler does not report any complain.Why is it so??

Read the article

Why can I derived from a templated/generic class based on that type in C# / C++

- by stusmith

Title probably doesn't make a lot of sense, so I'll start with some code: class Foo : public std::vector<Foo> { }; ... Foo f; f.push_back( Foo() ); Why is this allowed by the compiler? My brain is melting at this stage, so can anyone explain whether there are any reasons you would want to do this? Unfortunately I've just seen a similar pattern in some production C# code and wondered why anyone would use this pattern.

Read the article

Whether to put method code in a VB.Net data storage class, or put it in a separate class?

- by Alan K

TLDR summary: (a) Should I include (lengthy) method code in classes which may spawn multiple objects at runtime, (b) does doing so cause memory usage bloat, (c) if so should I "outsource" the code to a class that is loaded only once and have the class methods call that, or alternatively (d) does the code get loaded only once with the object definition anyway and I'm worrying about nothing? ........ I don't know whether there's a good answer to this but if there is I haven't found it yet by searching in the usual places. In my VB.Net (2010 if it matters) WinForms project I have about a dozen or so class objects in an object model. Some of these are pretty simple and do little more than act as data storage repositories. The ones further up the object model, however, have an increasing number of methods. There can be a significant number of higher level objects in use though the exact number will be runtime dependent so I can't be more precise than that. As I was writing the method code for one of the top level ones I noticed that it was starting to get quite lengthy. Memory optimisation is something of a lost art given how much memory the average PC has these days but I don't want to make my application a resource hog. So my questions for anyone who knows .Net way better than I do (of which there will be many) are: Is the code loaded into memory with each instance of the class that's created? Alternatively is it loaded only once with the definition of the class, and all derived objects just refer to that definition? (I'm not really sure how that could be possible given that, for example, event handlers can be assigned dynamically, but no harm asking.) If the answer to the first one is yes, would it be more efficient to write the code in a "utility" object which is loaded only once and called from the real class' methods? Any thoughts appreciated.

Read the article

How to generate a specific CPPDEFINE such as -DOEM="FOO BAR" using Scons

- by Vineet

My intention is to end up with a compiler command line including -DOEM="FOO BAR" I have the following in my SConstruct file: opts = Options( 'overrides.py', ARGUMENTS ) opts.Add( 'OEM_NAME', 'Any string can be used here', 'UNDEFINED' ) . . . if (env.Dictionary('OEM_NAME') != 'UNDEFINED'): OEM_DEFINE = 'OEM=' + str(env.Dictionary('OEM_NAME')) env.Append( CPPDEFINES=[ OEM_DEFINE ] ) Then I put the following in the "overrides.py" file: OEM_NAME = "FOO BAR" I seem to end up with "-DOEM=FOO BAR" in the command line that gets generated. Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.

Read the article

Design pattern: Polymorphism for list of objects

- by ziang

Suppose I have a class A, and A1, A2 inherits from A. There are 2 functions: List<A1> getListA1(){...} List<A2> getListA2(){...} Now I want to do something similar to both A1 and A2 in another function public void process(List<A>){...} If I want to pass the instance of either ListA1 or ListA2, of course the types doesn't match because the compiler doesn't allow the coercion from List< A1 to List< A. I can't do something like this: List<A1> listA1 = getListA1(); List<A> newList = (List<A>)listA1; //this is not allowed. So what is the best approach to the process()? Is there any way to do it in a universal way rather than write the similar code to both List and List?

Read the article

Why "constructor-way" of declaring variable in "for-loop" allowed but in "if-statement" not allowed?

- by PiotrNycz

Consider this simple example: /*1*/ int main() { /*2*/ for (int i(7); i;){break;} /*3*/ if (int i(7)) {} /*4*/ } Why line-2 compiles just fine, whilst line-3 gives the error? This is little strange to me why if-statement is in this aspect treated worse than for-loop? If this is compiler specific - I tested with gcc-4.5.1: prog.cpp: In function 'int main()': prog.cpp:3:7: error: expected primary-expression before 'int' prog.cpp:3:7: error: expected ')' before 'int' I was inspired by this question [UPDATE] I know this compiles just fine: /*1*/ int main() { /*2*/ for (int i = 7; i;){break;} /*3*/ if (int i = 7) {} /*4*/ }

Read the article

C++ assignment - stylish or performance?

- by joejax

Having been writing Java code for many years, I was amazed when I see this C++ statement: int a,b; int c = (a=1, b=a+2, b*3); My question is: Is this a choice of coding style, or it has real benefit? (looking for a practicle use case) I think the compiler will see it the same as following: int a=1, b=a+2; int c = b*3; (What's the offical name for this? I assume it's a standard C/C++ syntax.)

Read the article

C++ template overloading - wrong function called

- by DeadMG

template<typename T> T* Push(T* ptr); template<typename T> T* Push(T& ref); template<typename T, typename T1> T* Push(T1&& ref); I have int i = 0; Push<int>(i); But the compiler calls it ambiguous. How is that ambiguous? The second function is clearly the preferred match since it's more specialized. Especially since the T1&& won't bind to an lvalue unless I explicitly forward/move it. Sorry - i is an int. Otherwise, the question would make no sense, and I thought people would infer it since it's normally the loop iterator.

Read the article

Precision problems of real numbers in Fortran

- by saladoil

I've been trying to use Fortran for my research project, with the GNU Fortran compiler (gfortran), latest version, but I've been encountering some problems in the way it processes real numbers. If you have for example the code: program test implicit none real :: y = 23.234, z z = y * 100000 write(*,*) y, z end program You'll get as output: 23.23999 2323400.0. I find this really strange. Can someone tell me what's exactly happening here? Looking at z I can see that y does retain its precision, so for calculations that shouldn't be a problem I suppose. But why is the output of y not exactly the same as the value that I've specified, and what can I do to make it exactly the same?

Read the article

C++0x implementation guesstimates?

- by dsimcha

The C++0x standard is on its way to being complete. Until now, I've dabbled in C++, but avoided learning it thoroughly because it seems like it's missing a lot of modern features that I've been spoiled by in other languages. However, I'd be very interested in C++0x, which addresses a lot of my complaints. Any guesstimates, after the standard is ratified, as to how long it will take for major compiler vendors to provide reasonably complete, production-quality implementations? Will it happen soon enough to reverse the decline in C++'s popularity, or is it too little, too late? Do you believe that C++0x will become "the C++" within a few years, or do you believe that most people will stick to the earlier standard in practice and C++0x will be somewhat of a bastard stepchild, kind of like C99?

Search Results

Search found 5729 results on 230 pages for 'compiler dependent'.

Page 171/230 | < Previous Page | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 | Next Page >

- by Crazyjavahacking

- by Anne

- by frgt10

- by Josh Haberman

- by Mahesh

- by flyout

- by coffeeaddict

- by Flossn

- by garph0

- by krishnanunni

- by Adam

- by Matt07

- by user63898

- by Gordon

- by Mike Kingscott

- by Ajay Singh

- by stusmith

- by Alan K

- by Vineet

- by ziang

- by PiotrNycz

- by joejax

- by DeadMG

- by saladoil

- by dsimcha

< Previous Page | 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 | Next Page >