Search Results

Search found 12229 results on 490 pages for 'django templates tags'.

Page 174/490 | < Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >

  • [C++] Multiple inheritance from template class

    - by Tom P.
    Hello, I'm having issues with multiple inheritance from different instantiations of the same template class. Specifically, I'm trying to do this: template <class T> class Base { public: Base() : obj(NULL) { } virtual ~Base() { if( obj != NULL ) delete obj; } template <class T> T* createBase() { obj = new T(); return obj; } protected: T* obj; }; class Something { // ... }; class SomethingElse { // ... }; class Derived : public Base<Something>, public Base<SomethingElse> { }; int main() { Derived* d = new Derived(); Something* smth1 = d->createBase<Something>(); SomethingElse* smth2 = d->createBase<SomethingElse>(); delete d; return 0; } When I try to compile the above code, I get the following errors: 1>[...](41) : error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'SomethingElse *' to 'Something *' 1> Types pointed to are unrelated; conversion requires reinterpret_cast, C-style cast or function-style cast 1> [...](71) : see reference to function template instantiation 'T *Base<Something>::createBase<SomethingElse>(void)' being compiled 1> with 1> [ 1> T=SomethingElse 1> ] 1>[...](43) : error C2440: 'return' : cannot convert from 'Something *' to 'SomethingElse *' 1> Types pointed to are unrelated; conversion requires reinterpret_cast, C-style cast or function-style cast The issue seems to be ambiguity due to member obj being inherited from both Base< Something and Base< SomethingElse , and I can work around it by disambiguating my calls to createBase: Something* smth1 = d->Base<Something>::createBase<Something>(); SomethingElse* smth2 = d->Base<SomethingElse>::createBase<SomethingElse>(); However, this solution is dreadfully impractical, syntactically speaking, and I'd prefer something more elegant. Moreover, I'm puzzled by the first error message. It seems to imply that there is an instantiation createBase< SomethingElse in Base< Something , but how is that even possible? Any information or advice regarding this issue would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • overloading new/delete problem

    - by hidayat
    This is my scenario, Im trying to overload new and delete globally. I have written my allocator class in a file called allocator.h. And what I am trying to achieve is that if a file is including this header file, my version of new and delete should be used. So in a header file "allocator.h" i have declared the two functions extern void* operator new(std::size_t size); extern void operator delete(void *p, std::size_t size); I the same header file I have a class that does all the allocator stuff, class SmallObjAllocator { ... }; I want to call this class from the new and delete functions and I would like the class to be static, so I have done this: template<unsigned dummy> struct My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl { static SmallObjAllocator myAlloc; }; template<unsigned dummy> SmallObjAllocator My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl<dummy>::myAlloc(DEFAULT_CHUNK_SIZE, MAX_OBJ_SIZE); typedef My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl<0> My_SmallObjectAllocator; and in the cpp file it looks like this: allocator.cc void* operator new(std::size_t size) { std::cout << "using my new" << std::endl; if(size > MAX_OBJ_SIZE) return malloc(size); else return My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.allocate(size); } void operator delete(void *p, std::size_t size) { if(size > MAX_OBJ_SIZE) free(p); else My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.deallocate(p, size); } The problem is when I try to call the constructor for the class SmallObjAllocator which is a static object. For some reason the compiler are calling my overloaded function new when initializing it. So it then tries to use My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.deallocate(p, size); which is not defined so the program crashes. So why are the compiler calling new when I define a static object? and how can I solve it?

    Read the article

  • Function template accepting nothing less than a bidirectional iterator or a pointer

    - by san
    I need a function template that accepts two iterators that could be pointers. If the two arguments are random_access iterators I want the return type to be an object of std::iterator<random_access_iterator_tag, ...> type else a std::iterator<bidirectional_iterator_tag, ...> type. I also want the code to refuse compilation if the arguments are neither a bidirectional iterator, nor a pointer. I cannot have dependency on third party libraries e.g. Boost Could you help me with the signature of this function so that it accepts bidirectional iterators as well as pointers, but not say input_iterator, output_iterator, forward_iterators. One partial solution I can think of is the following template<class T> T foo( T iter1, T iter2) { const T tmp1 = reverse_iterator<T>(iter1); const T tmp2 = reverse_iterator<T>(iter2); // do something } The idea is that if it is not bidirectional the compiler will not let me construct a reverse_iterator from it.

    Read the article

  • question about c++ template functions taking any type as long that type meets at least one of the re

    - by smerlin
    Since i cant explain this very well, i will start with a small example right away: template <class T> void Print(const T& t){t.print1();} template <class T> void Print(const T& t){t.print2();} This does not compile: error C2995: 'void Print(const T &)' : function template has already been defined So, how can i create a template function which takes any type T as long as that type has a print1 memberfunction OR a print2 memberfunction (no polymorphism) ?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to find out whether a class is a direct base of another class?

    - by user176168
    Hi I'm wondering whether there is a way to find out whether a class is a direct base of another class i.e. in boost type trait terms a is_direct_base_of function. As far as I can see boost doesn't see to support this kind of functionality which leads me to think that its impossible with the current C++ standard. The reason I want it is to do some validation checking on two macro's that are used for a reflection system to specify that one class is derived from another e.g. header.h: #define BASE A #define DERIVED B class A {}; class B : public A { #include <rtti.h> }; rtti.h: // I want to check that the two macro's are correct with a compile time assert Rtti<BASE, DERIVED> m_rtti; Although the macro's seem unnecessary in this simple example in my real world scenario rtti.h is a lot more complex. One possible avenue would be to compare the size of the this pointer with the size of a this pointer cast to the base type and some how trying to figure out whether its the size of the base class itself away or something (yeah your right I don't know how that would work either! lol)

    Read the article

  • Drupal - Search box not working - custom theme template

    - by vr3690
    Hello, I am using a customised version of search-theme-from.tpl When I use the search box, I do get transferred to the search page. But the search does not actually take place. The search box on the search results page does work though. This is my search-them-form.tpl.php file (demo : <input type="text" name="search_theme_form_keys" id="edit-search-theme-form-keys" value="Search" title="Enter the terms you wish to search for" class="logininput" height="24px" onblur="restoreSearch(this)" onfocus="clearInput(this)" /> <input type="submit" name="op" id="edit-submit" value="" class="form-submit" style="display: none;" /> <input type="hidden" name="form_token" id="edit-search-theme-form-form-token" value="<?php print drupal_get_token('search_theme_form'); ?>" /> <input type="hidden" name="form_id" id="edit-search-theme-form" value="search_theme_form" /> There is also a javascript file involved. I guess it's use is pretty clear from the code: function trim(str) { return str.replace(/^\s+|\s+$/g, ''); } function clearInput(e) { e.value=""; // clear default text when clicked e.className="longininput_onfocus"; //change class } function restoreSearch(e) { if (trim(e.value) == '') { { e.value="Search"; // reset default text onBlur e.className="logininput"; //reset class } } } What can be the problem and how can I fix it?

    Read the article

  • Portfolio problem on a flash template

    - by Nikko
    Hi guys! I have another question about the same template as before. in my website. (www.nikstudio.cl) I need to show in the webpage's portfolio (menu "trabajos") show a few pictures. If you click the thumbnail picture you can see the full size version of that thumbnail. My problem are two: First the picture one and two are the same as five a six ( and i can't change it cause i don't find the place to do this.) And the second is when I copy and paste (in a new layer) of the movieclip "sprite 656" i get in the swf a new picture on the portfolio but i can't click it. Can you help me why is that??? pd: the full template is here. (the .fla an all the files) http://www.2shared.com/file/xbGOYnzC/TM20653ByWMForce.html thanks

    Read the article

  • Multiset without Compare?

    - by nimcap
    I want to use multiset to count some custom defined keys. The keys are not comparable numerically, comparing two keys does not mean anything, but their equality can be checked. I see that multiset template wants a Compare to order the multiset. The order is not important to me, only the counts are important. If I omit Compare completely what happens? Does multiset work without any problems for my custom keys?

    Read the article

  • C++ ambiguous template instantiation

    - by aaa
    the following gives me ambiguous template instantiation with nvcc (combination of EDG front-end and g++). Is it really ambiguous, or is compiler wrong? I also post workaround à la boost::enable_if template<typename T> struct disable_if_serial { typedef void type; }; template<> struct disable_if_serial<serial_tag> { }; template<int M, int N, typename T> __device__ //static typename disable_if_serial<T>::type void add_evaluate_polynomial1(double *R, const double (&C)[M][N], double x, const T &thread) { // ... } template<size_t M, size_t N> __device__ static void add_evaluate_polynomial1(double *R, const double (&C)[M][N], double x, const serial_tag&) { for (size_t i = 0; i < M; ++i) add_evaluate_polynomial1(R, C, x, i); } // ambiguous template instantiation here. add_evaluate_polynomial1(R, C, x, serial_tag());

    Read the article

  • Strange Template error : error C2783: could not deduce template argument

    - by osum
    Hi, I have created a simple function with 2 diffrernt template arguments t1, t2 and return type t3. So far no compilation error. But when Itry to call the function from main, I encounter error C2783. I needed to know If the following code is legally ok? If not how is it fixed? please help! template <typename t1, typename t2, typename t3> t3 adder1 (t1 a , t2 b) { return int(a + b); }; int main() { int sum = adder1(1,6.0); // error C2783 could not deduce template argument for t3 return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Providing *implicit* conversion operator for template specialization

    - by Neil G
    I have a templated sparse_vector<T> class, and I am also using Boost UBLAS. How would I provide implicit conversions between sparse_vector<double> and boost::numeric::ublas::compressed_vector<double>? I would also like to provide similar conversions between std::vector<double> and boost::numeric::ublas::vector<double>. (I am using gcc 4.4 with C++0x enabled.)

    Read the article

  • Why size_t arguments in template declaration need to be const?

    - by ArunSaha
    I can have std::bitset< 10 > bitsetA; or const size_t LengthB = 20; std::bitset< LengthB > bitsetB; without any problem. But, if the length is not const size_t LengthC = 30; std::bitset< LengthC > bitsetC; // Line 30, say I face the following compilation error 'LengthC' cannot appear in a constant-expression template argument 1 is invalid What is the reason for that? What would be the problem, for compiler and for user code, if line 30 was to be accepted? Is it because LengthC might have some alias?

    Read the article

  • Why is this std::bind not converted to std::function?

    - by dauphic
    Why is the nested std::bind in the below code not implicitly converted to an std::function<void()> by any of the major compilers (VS2010/2012, gcc, clang)? Is this standard behavior, or a bug? #include <functional> void bar(int, std::function<void()>) { } void foo() { } int main() { std::function<void(int, std::function<void()>)> func; func = std::bind(bar, 5, std::bind(foo)); std::cin.get(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Template Child Class Overriding a Parent Class's Virtual Function

    - by user334066
    The below code compiles with gcc v4.3.3 and the templated child class seems to be overriding a virtual function in the parent, but doesn't that break the rule that you cannot have a virtual template function? Or is something else happening that I don't understand? class BaseClass { public: virtual void Func(int var) { std::cout<<"Base int "<<var<<std::endl; } virtual void Func(double var) { std::cout<<"Base double "<<var<<std::endl; } }; template <class TT> class TemplateClass : public BaseClass { public: using BaseClass::Func; virtual void Func(TT var) { std::cout<<"Child TT "<<var<<std::endl; } }; int main(int argc, char **argv) { BaseClass a; TemplateClass<int> b; BaseClass *c = new TemplateClass<int>; int intVar = 3; double doubleVar = 5.5; a.Func(intVar); a.Func(doubleVar); b.Func(intVar); b.Func(doubleVar); c->Func(intVar); c->Func(doubleVar); delete c; } This then outputs: Base int 3 Base double 5.5 Child TT 3 Base double 5.5 Child TT 3 Base double 5.5 as I hoped, but I'm not sure why it works.

    Read the article

  • Template inheritance: X is not a template

    - by user2923917
    I am trying to build a inheritance-structure which looks like: Base - template Grandpa - template Father class Base {}; template <int x> class Grandpa: public Base {}; template <int x> class Father: public Grandpa<x> {}; However, the compiler complains when compiling Father, that Grandpa is not a template. I guess it is just some synthatic issue, however everything I've tried so far led to even more compiler complaints ;) Any idea whats wrong?

    Read the article

  • Derived template override return type of member function C++

    - by Ruud v A
    I am writing matrix classes. Take a look at this definition: template <typename T, unsigned int dimension_x, unsigned int dimension_y> class generic_matrix { ... generic_matrix<T, dimension_x - 1, dimension_y - 1> minor(unsigned int x, unsigned int y) const { ... } ... } template <typename T, unsigned int dimension> class generic_square_matrix : public generic_matrix<T, dimension, dimension> { ... generic_square_matrix(const generic_matrix<T, dimension, dimension>& other) { ... } ... void foo(); } The generic_square_matrix class provides additional functions like matrix multiplication. Doing this is no problem: generic_square_matrix<T, 4> m = generic_matrix<T, 4, 4>(); It is possible to assign any square matrix to M, even though the type is not generic_square_matrix, due to the constructor. This is possible because the data does not change across children, only the supported functions. This is also possible: generic_square_matrix<T, 4> m = generic_square_matrix<T, 5>().minor(1,1); Same conversion applies here. But now comes the problem: generic_square_matrix<T, 4>().minor(1,1).foo(); //problem, foo is not in generic_matrix<T, 3, 3> To solve this I would like generic_square_matrix::minor to return a generic_square_matrix instead of a generic_matrix. The only possible way to do this, I think is to use template specialisation. But since a specialisation is basically treated like a separate class, I have to redefine all functions. I cannot call the function of the non-specialised class as you would do with a derived class, so I have to copy the entire function. This is not a very nice generic-programming solution, and a lot of work. C++ almost has a solution for my problem: a virtual function of a derived class, can return a pointer or reference to a different class than the base class returns, if this class is derived from the class that the base class returns. generic_square_matrix is derived from generic_matrix, but the function does not return a pointer nor reference, so this doesn't apply here. Is there a solution to this problem (possibly involving an entirely other structure; my only requirements are that the dimensions are a template parameter and that square matrices can have additional functionality). Thanks in advance, Ruud

    Read the article

  • Where are the function literals c++?

    - by academicRobot
    First of all, maybe literals is not the right term for this concept, but its the closest I could think of (not literals in the sense of functions as first class citizens). The idea is that when you make a conventional function call, it compiles to something like this: callq <immediate address> But if you make a function call using a function pointer, it compiles to something like this: mov <memory location>,%rax callq *%rax Which is all well and good. However, what if I'm writing a template library that requires a callback of some sort with a specified argument list and the user of the library is expected to know what function they want to call at compile time? Then I would like to write my template to accept a function literal as a template parameter. So, similar to template <int int_literal> struct my_template {...};` I'd like to write template <func_literal_t func_literal> struct my_template {...}; and have calls to func_literal within my_template compile to callq <immediate address>. Is there a facility in C++ for this, or a work around to achieve the same effect? If not, why not (e.g. some cataclysmic side effects)? How about C++0x or another language? Solutions that are not portable are fine. Solutions that include the use of member function pointers would be ideal. I'm not particularly interested in being told "You are a <socially unacceptable term for a person of low IQ>, just use function pointers/functors." This is a curiosity based question, and it seems that it might be useful in some (albeit limited) applications. It seems like this should be possible since function names are just placeholders for a (relative) memory address, so why not allow more liberal use (e.g. aliasing) of this placeholder. p.s. I use function pointers and functions objects all the the time and they are great. But this post got me thinking about the don't pay for what you don't use principle in relation to function calls, and it seems like forcing the use of function pointers or similar facility when the function is known at compile time is a violation of this principle, though a small one.

    Read the article

  • Why `is_base_of` works with private inheritance?

    - by Alexey Malistov
    Why the following code works? typedef char (&yes)[1]; typedef char (&no)[2]; template <typename B, typename D> struct Host { operator B*() const; operator D*(); }; template <typename B, typename D> struct is_base_of { template <typename T> static yes check(D*, T); static no check(B*, int); static const bool value = sizeof(check(Host<B,D>(), int())) == sizeof(yes); }; //Test sample class B {}; class D : private B {}; //Exspression is true. int test[is_base_of<B,D>::value && !is_base_of<D,B>::value]; Note that B is private base. Note that operator B*() is const. How does this work? Why this works? Why static yes check(D*, T); is better than static yes check(B*, int); ?

    Read the article

  • Conversion between different template instantiation of the same template

    - by Naveen
    I am trying to write an operator which converts between the differnt types of the same implementation. This is the sample code: template <class T = int> class A { public: A() : m_a(0){} template <class U> operator A<U>() { A<U> u; u.m_a = m_a; return u; } private: int m_a; }; int main(void) { A<int> a; A<double> b = a; return 0; } However, it gives the following error for line u.m_a = m_a;. Error 2 error C2248: 'A::m_a' : cannot access private member declared in class 'A' d:\VC++\Vs8Console\Vs8Console\Vs8Console.cpp 30 Vs8Console I understand the error is because A<U> is a totally different type from A<T>. Is there any simple way of solving this (may be using a friend?) other than providing setter and getter methods? I am using Visual studio 2008 if it matters.

    Read the article

  • Initializing static pointer in templated class.

    - by Anthony
    This is difficult for me to formulate in a Google query (at least one that gives me what I'm looking for) so I've had some trouble finding an answer. I'm sure I'm not the first to ask though. Consider a class like so: template < class T > class MyClass { private: static T staticObject; static T * staticPointerObject; }; ... template < class T > T MyClass<T>::staticObject; // <-- works ... template < class T > T * MyClass<T>::staticPointerObject = NULL; // <-- cannot find symbol staticPointerObject. I am having trouble figuring out why I cannot successfully create that pointer object. Edit: The above code is all specified in the header, and the issue I mentioned is an error in the link step, so it is not finding the specific symbol.

    Read the article

  • Can we have an anonymous struct as template argument?

    - by nonoitall
    The title is pretty self-explanatory, but here's a simplified example: #include <cstdio> template <typename T> struct MyTemplate { T member; void printMemberSize() { printf("%i\n", sizeof(T)); } }; int main() { MyTemplate<struct { int a; int b; }> t; // <-- compiler doesn't like this t.printMemberSize(); return 0; } The compiler complains when I try to use an anonymous struct as a template argument. What's the best way to achieve something like this without having to have a separate, named struct definition?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >