Search Results

Search found 5842 results on 234 pages for 'compiler warnings'.

Page 204/234 | < Previous Page | 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211  | Next Page >

  • Does C# allow method overloading, PHP style (__call)?

    - by mr.b
    In PHP, there is a special method named __call($calledMethodName, $arguments), which allows class to catch calls to non-existing methods, and do something about it. Since most of classic languages are strongly typed, compiler won't allow calling a method that does not exist, I'm clear with that part. What I want to accomplish (and I figured this is how I would do it in PHP, but C# is something else) is to proxy calls to a class methods and log each of these calls. Right now, I have code similar to this: class ProxyClass { static logger; public AnotherClass inner { get; private set; } public ProxyClass() { inner = new AnotherClass(); } } class AnotherClass { public void A() {} public void B() {} public void C() {} // ... } // meanwhile, in happyCodeLandia... ProxyClass pc = new ProxyClass(); pc.inner.A(); pc.inner.B(); // ... So, how can I proxy calls to an object instance in extensible way? Extensible, meaning that I don't have to modify ProxyClass whenever AnotherClass changes. In my case, AnotherClass can have any number of methods, so it wouldn't be appropriate to overload or wrap all methods to add logging. I am aware that this might not be the best approach for this kind of problem, so if anyone has idea what approach to use, shoot. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • display multiple errors via bool flag c++

    - by igor
    Been a long night, but stuck on this and now am getting "segmentation fault" in my compiler.. Basically I'm trying to display all the errors (the cout) needed. If there is more than one error, I am to display all of them. bool validMove(const Square board[BOARD_SIZE][BOARD_SIZE], int x, int y, int value) { int index; bool moveError = true; const int row_conflict(0), column_conflict(1), grid_conflict(2); int v_subgrid=x/3; int h_subgrid=y/3; getCoords(x,y); for(index=0;index<9;index++) if(board[x][index].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this row\n"; moveError=false; } for(index=0;index<9;index++) if(board[index][y].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this column\n"; moveError=false; } for(int i=v_subgrid*3;i<(v_subgrid*3 +3);i++){ for(int j=h_subgrid*3;j<(h_subgrid*3+3);j++){ if(board[i][j].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this subgrid\n"; moveError=false; } } } return true; }

    Read the article

  • What are the lengths/limits C preprocessor as a language creation tool? Where can I learn more about

    - by Weston C
    In his FAQ @ http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#bootstrapping, Bjarne Stroustrup says: To build [Cfront, the first C++ compiler], I first used C to write a "C with Classes"-to-C preprocessor. "C with Classes" was a C dialect that became the immediate ancestor to C++... I then wrote the first version of Cfront in "C with Classes". When I read this, it piqued my interest in the C preprocessor. I'd seen its macro capabilities as suitable for simplifying common expressions but hadn't thought about its ability to significantly add to syntax and semantics on the level that I imagine bringing classes to C took. So now I have a couple of questions on my mind: 1) Are there other examples of this approach to bootstrapping a language off of C? 2) Is the source to Stroustrup's original work available anywhere? 3) Where could I learn more about the specifics of utilizing this technique? 4) What are the lengths/limits of that approach? Could one, say, create a set of preprocessor macros that let someone write in something significantly Lisp/Scheme like?

    Read the article

  • Why does GCC need extra declarations in templates when VS does not?

    - by Kyle
    template<typename T> class Base { protected: Base() {} T& get() { return t; } T t; }; template<typename T> class Derived : public Base<T> { public: Base<T>::get; // Line A Base<T>::t; // Line B void foo() { t = 4; get(); } }; int main() { return 0; } If I comment out lines A and B, this code compiles fine under Visual Studio 2008. Yet when I compile under GCC 4.1 with lines A and B commented, I get these errors: In member function ‘void TemplateDerived::foo()’: error: ‘t’ was not declared in this scope error: there are no arguments to ‘get’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘get’ must be available Why would one compiler require lines A and B while the other doesn't? Is there a way to simplify this? In other words, if derived classes use 20 things from the base class, I have to put 20 lines of declarations for every class deriving from Base! Is there a way around this that doesn't require so many declarations?

    Read the article

  • map operator [] operands

    - by Jamie Cook
    Hi all I have the following in a member function int tt = 6; vector<set<int>>& temp = m_egressCandidatesByDestAndOtMode[tt]; set<int>& egressCandidateStops = temp.at(dest); and the following declaration of a member variable map<int, vector<set<int>>> m_egressCandidatesByDestAndOtMode; However I get an error when compiling (Intel Compiler 11.0) 1>C:\projects\svn\bdk\Source\ZenithAssignment\src\Iteration\PtBranchAndBoundIterationOriginRunner.cpp(85): error: no operator "[]" matches these operands 1> operand types are: const std::map<int, std::vector<std::set<int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<int>>, std::allocator<std::set<int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<int>>>>, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<const int, std::vector<std::set<int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<int>>, std::allocator<std::set<int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<int>>>>>>> [ const int ] 1> vector<set<int>>& temp = m_egressCandidatesByDestAndOtMode[tt]; 1> ^ I know it's got to be something silly but I can't see what I've done wrong.

    Read the article

  • Why is Func<T> ambiguous with Func<IEnumerable<T>>?

    - by Matt Hamilton
    This one's got me flummoxed, so I thought I'd ask here in the hope that a C# guru can explain it to me. Why does this code generate an error? class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Foo(X); // the error is on this line } static String X() { return "Test"; } static void Foo(Func<IEnumerable<String>> x) { } static void Foo(Func<String> x) { } } The error in question: Error 1 The call is ambiguous between the following methods or properties: 'ConsoleApplication1.Program.Foo(System.Func<System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<string>>)' and 'ConsoleApplication1.Program.Foo(System.Func<string>)' C:\Users\mabster\AppData\Local\Temporary Projects\ConsoleApplication1\Program.cs 12 13 ConsoleApplication1 It doesn't matter what type I use - if you replace the "String" declarations with "int" in that code you'll get the same sort of error. It's like the compiler can't tell the difference between Func<T> and Func<IEnumerable<T>>. Can someone shed some light on this?

    Read the article

  • C++ Implicit Conversion Operators

    - by Imbue
    I'm trying to find a nice inheritance solution in C++. I have a Rectangle class and a Square class. The Square class can't publicly inherit from Rectangle, because it cannot completely fulfill the rectangle's requirements. For example, a Rectangle can have it's width and height each set separately, and this of course is impossible with a Square. So, my dilemma. Square obviously will share a lot of code with Rectangle; they are quite similar. For examlpe, if I have a function like: bool IsPointInRectangle(const Rectangle& rect); it should work for a square too. In fact, I have a ton of such functions. So in making my Square class, I figured I would use private inheritance with a publicly accessible Rectangle conversion operator. So my square class looks like: class Square : private Rectangle { public: operator const Rectangle&() const; }; However, when I try to pass a Square to the IsPointInRectangle function, my compiler just complains that "Rectangle is an inaccessible base" in that context. I expect it to notice the Rectangle operator and use that instead. Is what I'm trying to do even possible? If this can't work I'm probably going to refactor part of Rectangle into MutableRectangle class. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do actually castings work at the CLR level?

    - by devoured elysium
    When doing an upcast or downcast, what does really happen behind the scenes? I had the idea that when doing something as: string myString = "abc"; object myObject = myString; string myStringBack = (string)myObject; the cast in the last line would have as only purpose tell the compiler we are safe we are not doing anything wrong. So, I had the idea that actually no casting code would be embedded in the code itself. It seems I was wrong: .maxstack 1 .locals init ( [0] string myString, [1] object myObject, [2] string myStringBack) L_0000: nop L_0001: ldstr "abc" L_0006: stloc.0 L_0007: ldloc.0 L_0008: stloc.1 L_0009: ldloc.1 L_000a: castclass string L_000f: stloc.2 L_0010: ret Why does the CLR need something like castclass string? There are two possible implementations for a downcast: You require a castclass something. When you get to the line of code that does an castclass, the CLR tries to make the cast. But then, what would happen had I ommited the castclass string line and tried to run the code? You don't require a castclass. As all reference types have a similar internal structure, if you try to use a string on an Form instance, it will throw an exception of wrong usage (because it detects a Form is not a string or any of its subtypes). Also, is the following statamente from C# 4.0 in a Nutshell correct? Upcasting and downcasting between compatible reference types performs reference conversions: a new reference is created that points to the same object. Does it really create a new reference? I thought it'd be the same reference, only stored in a different type of variable. Thanks

    Read the article

  • not able to run c/cpp execs in eclipse cdt

    - by user1658323
    i installed eclipse and then cdt on an ubuntu system recently and was trying to make the first runnable c/c++ proj.. i installed g++ also, and then created the first executable cpp 'Hello World' project some files are created... then some issues... 1) even though Build Automatically is selected, I have to goto the project n do a Build Project to build it manually, and this i have to do everytime i make a change 2) After Building manually, there are some new folders created with Binaries and Debug files and i can see g++ commands in the console being executed. The project binary is output both to debug n binaries folder. But i am not able to run these through the Green Play Button or any other way in eclipse. Even Run configuration is not showing any option for c/C++ proj.. though i can goto terminal and run the binary myself through ./ But i want to be able to run n debug this through eclipse. plz help in fixing me this problem as i really love eclipse n have some c/cpp assignments coming soon.. Console info on doing a manual project build - Build of configuration Debug for project qwe ** make all Building file: ../src/qwe.cpp Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler g++ -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"src/qwe.d" -MT"src/qwe.d" -o "src/qwe.o" "../src/qwe.cpp" Finished building: ../src/qwe.cpp Building target: qwe Invoking: GCC C++ Linker g++ -o "qwe" ./src/qwe.o Finished building target: qwe Build Finished **

    Read the article

  • How can I modified the value of a string defined in a struc?

    - by Eric
    Hi, I have the following code in c++: define TAM 4000 define NUMPAGS 512 struct pagina { bitset<12 direccion; char operacion; char permiso; string *dato; int numero; }; void crearPagina(pagina* pag[], int pos, int dir) { pagina * paginas = (pagina*)malloc(sizeof(char) * TAM); paginas - direccion = bitset<12 (dir); paginas - operacion = 'n'; paginas - permiso = 'n'; string **tempDato = &paginas - dato; char *temp = " "; **tempDato = temp; paginas - numero = 0; pag[pos] = paginas; } I want to modify the value of the variable called "string *dato" in the struct pagina but, everytime I want to assing a new value, the compiler throws a segmentation fault. In this case I'm using a pointer to string, but I have also tried with a string. In a few words I want to do the following: pagina - dato = "test"; Any idea? Thanks in advance!!!

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest way to do division in C for 8bit MCUs?

    - by Jordan S
    I am working on the firmware for a device that uses an 8bit mcu (8051 architecture). I am using SDCC (Small Device C Compiler). I have a function that I use to set the speed of a stepper motor that my circuit is driving. The speed is set by loading a desired value into the reload register for a timer. I have a variable, MotorSpeed that is in the range of 0 to 1200 which represents pulses per second to the motor. My function to convert MotorSpeed to the correct 16bit reload value is shown below. I know that float point operations are pretty slow and I am wondering if there is a faster way of doing this... void SetSpeed() { float t = MotorSpeed; unsigned int j = 0; t = 1/t ; t = t / 0.000001; j = MaxInt - t; TMR3RL = j; // Set reload register for desired freq return; }

    Read the article

  • multiple definition in header file

    - by Jérôme
    Here is a small code-example from which I'd like to ask a question : complex.h : #ifndef COMPLEX_H #define COMPLEX_H #include <iostream> class Complex { public: Complex(float Real, float Imaginary); float real() const { return m_Real; }; private: friend std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& o, const Complex& Cplx); float m_Real; float m_Imaginary; }; std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& o, const Complex& Cplx) { return o << Cplx.m_Real << " i" << Cplx.m_Imaginary; } #endif // COMPLEX_H complex.cpp : #include "complex.h" Complex::Complex(float Real, float Imaginary) { m_Real = Real; m_Imaginary = Imaginary; } main.cpp : #include "complex.h" #include <iostream> int main() { Complex Foo(3.4, 4.5); std::cout << Foo << "\n"; return 0; } When compiling this code, I get the following error : multiple definition of operator<<(std::ostream&, Complex const&) I've found that making this fonction inline solves the problem, but I don't understand why. Why does the compiler complain about multiple definition ? My header file is guarded (with #define COMPLEX_H). And, if complaining about the operator<< fonction, why not complain about the public real() fonction, which is defined in the header as well ? And is there another solution as using the inline keyword ?

    Read the article

  • Beginner C++ - Trouble using global constants in a header file

    - by Francisco P.
    Hello! Yet another Scrabble project question... This is a simple one. It seems I am having trouble getting my global constants recognized: My board.h: http://pastebin.com/R10HrYVT Errors returned: 1>C:\Users\Francisco\Documents\FEUP\1A2S\PROG\projecto3\projecto3\Board.h(34): error: variable "TOTAL_ROWS" is not a type name 1> vector< vector<Cell> > _matrix(TOTAL_ROWS , vector<Cell>(TOTAL_COLUMNS)); 1> 1>main.cpp 1>compilation aborted for .\Game.cpp (code 2) 1>Board.cpp 1>.\Board.h(34): error: variable "TOTAL_ROWS" is not a type name 1> vector< vector<Cell> > _matrix(TOTAL_ROWS , vector<Cell>(TOTAL_COLUMNS)); 1> ^ 1> Why does this happen? Why is the compiler expecting types? Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • Java Generics Class Type Parameter Inference

    - by Pindatjuh
    Given the interface: public interface BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> { public T getOther(); public void staticStatisfied(final U list); } The BasedOnOther<T, U extends BasedList<T>> looks very ugly in my use-cases. It is because the T type parameter is already defined in the BasedList<T> part, so the "uglyness" comes from that T needs to be typed twice. Problem: is it possible to let the Java compiler infer the generic T type from BasedList<T> in a generic class/interface definition? Ultimately, I'd like to use the interface like: class X extends BasedOnOther<BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } } Instead: class X extends BasedOnOther<SomeType, BasedList<SomeType>> { public SomeType getOther() { ... } public void staticStatisfied(final BasedList<SomeType> list) { ... } }

    Read the article

  • What's a good way to make a Flex component with placeholders in it?

    - by Daniel Brockman
    I want to create a component that has a couple of "holes" that are to be filled in differently on each use. Currently, I'm doing it like this (using the Flex 4 framework in this example --- it would look almost the same for Flex 3): public var fooComponent : IVisualElement; public var barComponent : IVisualElement; override protected function createChildren() : void { super.createChildren(); fooContainer.addElement(fooComponent); barContainer.addElement(barComponent); } <Group id="fooContainer"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Group id="barContainer"/> This works well, but it's kind of a lot of code to write for something so simple. What I'd like is something like this: [Bindable] public var fooComponent : IVisualElement; [Bindable] public var barComponent : IVisualElement; <Placeholder content="{fooComponent}"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Placeholder content="{barComponent}"/> Now, I could implement the Placeholder component myself, but I can't help wondering if there isn't a better way to do this using the existing tools in the Flex framework. Theoretically, with the proper compiler support, it could even be boiled down to something like this: <Placeholder id="fooComponent"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Placeholder id="barComponent"/>

    Read the article

  • Please help with C++ syntax for const accessor by reference.

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    Right not my implementation returns the thing by value. The member m_MyObj itself is not const - it's value changes depending on what the user selects with a Combo Box. I am no C++ guru, but I want to do this right. If I simply stick a & in front of GetChosenSourceSystem in both decl. and impl., I get one sort of compiler error. If I do one but not another - another error. If I do return &m_MyObj;. I will not list the errors here for now, unless there is a strong demand for it. I assume that an experienced C++ coder can tell what is going on here. I could omit constness or reference, but I want to make it tight and learn in the process as well. Thanks! // In header file MyObj GetChosenThingy() const; // In Implementation file. MyObj MyDlg::GetChosenThingy() const { return m_MyObj; }

    Read the article

  • User defined literal arguments are not constexpr?

    - by Pubby
    I'm testing out user defined literals. I want to make _fac return the factorial of the number. Having it call a constexpr function works, however it doesn't let me do it with templates as the compiler complains that the arguments are not and cannot be constexpr. I'm confused by this - aren't literals constant expressions? The 5 in 5_fac is always a literal that can be evaluated during compile time, so why can't I use it as such? First method: constexpr int factorial_function(int x) { return (x > 0) ? x * factorial_function(x - 1) : 1; } constexpr int operator "" _fac(unsigned long long x) { return factorial_function(x); // this works } Second method: template <int N> struct factorial { static const unsigned int value = N * factorial<N - 1>::value; }; template <> struct factorial<0> { static const unsigned int value = 1; }; constexpr int operator "" _fac(unsigned long long x) { return factorial_template<x>::value; // doesn't work - x is not a constexpr }

    Read the article

  • Native Endians and Auto Conversion

    - by KnickerKicker
    so the following converts big endians to little ones uint32_t ntoh32(uint32_t v) { return (v << 24) | ((v & 0x0000ff00) << 8) | ((v & 0x00ff0000) >> 8) | (v >> 24); } works. like a charm. I read 4 bytes from a big endian file into char v[4] and pass it into the above function as ntoh32 (* reinterpret_cast<uint32_t *> (v)) that doesn't work - because my compiler (VS 2005) automatically converts the big endian char[4] into a little endian uint32_t when I do the cast. AFAIK, this automatic conversion will not be portable, so I use uint32_t ntoh_4b(char v[]) { uint32_t a = 0; a |= (unsigned char)v[0]; a <<= 8; a |= (unsigned char)v[1]; a <<= 8; a |= (unsigned char)v[2]; a <<= 8; a |= (unsigned char)v[3]; return a; } yes the (unsigned char) is necessary. yes it is dog slow. there must be a better way. anyone ?

    Read the article

  • Some questions about special operators i've never seen in C++ code.

    - by toto
    I have downloaded the Phoenix SDK June 2008 (Tools for compilers) and when I'm reading the code of the Hello sample, I really feel lost. public ref class Hello { //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- // // Description: // // Class Variables. // // Remarks: // // A normal compiler would have more flexible means for holding // on to all this information, but in our case it's simplest (if // somewhat inelegant) if we just keep references to all the // structures we'll need to access as classstatic variables. // //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- static Phx::ModuleUnit ^ module; static Phx::Targets::Runtimes::Runtime ^ runtime; static Phx::Targets::Architectures::Architecture ^ architecture; static Phx::Lifetime ^ lifetime; static Phx::Types::Table ^ typeTable; static Phx::Symbols::Table ^ symbolTable; static Phx::Phases::PhaseConfiguration ^ phaseConfiguration; 2 Questions : What's that ref keyword? What is that sign ^ ? What is it doing protected: virtual void Execute ( Phx::Unit ^ unit ) override; }; override is a C++ keyword too? It's colored as such in my Visual Studio. I really want to play with this framework, but this advanced C++ is really an obstacle right now. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Would an immutable keyword in Java be a good idea?

    - by berry120
    Generally speaking, the more I use immutable objects in Java the more I'm thinking they're a great idea. They've got lots of advantages from automatically being thread-safe to not needing to worry about cloning or copy constructors. This has got me thinking, would an "immutable" keyword go amiss? Obviously there's the disadvantages with adding another reserved word to the language, and I doubt it will actually happen primarily for the above reason - but ignoring that I can't really see many disadvantages. At present great care has to be taken to make sure objects are immutable, and even then a dodgy javadoc comment claiming a component object is immutable when it's in fact not can wreck the whole thing. There's also the argument that even basic objects like string aren't truly immutable because they're easily vunerable to reflection attacks. If we had an immutable keyword the compiler could surely recursively check and give an iron clad guarantee that all instances of a class were immutable, something that can't presently be done. Especially with concurrency becoming more and more used, I personally think it'd be good to add a keyword to this effect. But are there any disadvantages or implementation details I'm missing that makes this a bad idea?

    Read the article

  • Run arbitrary subprocesses on Windows and still terminate cleanly?

    - by Weeble
    I have an application A that I would like to be able to invoke arbitrary other processes as specified by a user in a configuration file. Batch script B is one such process a user would like to be invoked by A. B sets up some environment variables, shows some messages and invokes a compiler C to do some work. Does Windows provide a standard way for arbitrary processes to be terminated cleanly? Suppose A is run in a console and receives a CTRL+C. Can it pass this on to B and C? Suppose A runs in a window and the user tries to close the window, can it cancel B and C? TerminateProcess is an option, but not a very good one. If A uses TerminateProcess on B, C keeps running. This could cause nasty problems if C is long-running, since we might start another instance of C to operate on the same files while the first instance of C is still secretly at work. In addition, TerminateProcess doesn't result in a clean exit. GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent sounds nice, and might work when everything's running in a console, but the documentation says that you can only send CTRL+C to your own console, and so wouldn't help if A were running in a window. Is there any equivalent to SIGINT on Windows? I would love to find an article like this one: http://www.cons.org/cracauer/sigint.html for Windows.

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to static methods on interfaces for enforcing consistency

    - by jayshao
    In Java, I'd like to be able to define marker interfaces, that forced implementations to provide static methods. For example, for simple text-serialization/deserialization I'd like to be able to define an interface that looked something like this: public interface TextTransformable<T>{ public static T fromText(String text); public String toText(); Since interfaces in Java can't contain static methods though (as noted in a number of other posts/threads: here, here, and here this code doesn't work. What I'm looking for however is some reasonable paradigm to express the same intent, namely symmetric methods, one of which is static, and enforced by the compiler. Right now the best we can come up with is some kind of static factory object or generic factory, neither of which is really satisfactory. Note: in our case our primary use-case is we have many, many "value-object" types - enums, or other objects that have a limited number of values, typically carry no state beyond their value, and which we parse/de-parse thousands of time a second, so actually do care about reusing instances (like Float, Integer, etc.) and its impact on memory consumption/g.c. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Can C++ do something like an ML case expression?

    - by Nathan Andrew Mullenax
    So, I've run into this sort of thing a few times in C++ where I'd really like to write something like case (a,b,c,d) of (true, true, _, _ ) => expr | (false, true, _, false) => expr | ... But in C++, I invariably end up with something like this: bool c11 = color1.count(e.first)>0; bool c21 = color2.count(e.first)>0; bool c12 = color1.count(e.second)>0; bool c22 = color2.count(e.second)>0; // no vertex in this edge is colored // requeue if( !(c11||c21||c12||c22) ) { edges.push(e); } // endpoints already same color // failure condition else if( (c11&&c12)||(c21&&c22) ) { results.push_back("NOT BICOLORABLE."); return true; } // nothing to do: nodes are already // colored and different from one another else if( (c11&&c22)||(c21&&c12) ) { } // first is c1, second is not set else if( c11 && !(c12||c22) ) { color2.insert( e.second ); } // first is c2, second is not set else if( c21 && !(c12||c22) ) { color1.insert( e.second ); } // first is not set, second is c1 else if( !(c11||c21) && c12 ) { color2.insert( e.first ); } // first is not set, second is c2 else if( !(c11||c21) && c22 ) { color1.insert( e.first ); } else { std::cout << "Something went wrong.\n"; } I'm wondering if there's any way to clean all of those if's and else's up, as it seems especially error prone. It would be even better if it were possible to get the compiler complain like SML does when a case expression (or statement in C++) isn't exhaustive. I realize this question is a bit vague. Maybe, in sum, how would one represent an exhaustive truth table with an arbitrary number of variables in C++ succinctly? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Trying to make a plugin system in C++

    - by Pirate for Profit
    I'm making a task-based program that needs to have plugins. Tasks need to have properties which can be easily edited, I think this can be done with Qt's Meta-Object Compiler reflection capabilities (I could be wrong, but I should be able to stick this in a QtPropertyBrowser?) So here's the base: class Task : public QObject { Q_OBJECT public: explicit Task(QObject *parent = 0) : QObject(parent){} virtual void run() = 0; signals: void taskFinished(bool success = true); } Then a plugin might have this task: class PrinterTask : public Task { Q_OBJECT public: explicit PrinterTask(QObject *parent = 0) : Task(parent) {} void run() { Printer::getInstance()->Print(this->getData()); // fictional emit taskFinished(true); } inline const QString &getData() const; inline void setData(QString data); Q_PROPERTY(QString data READ getData WRITE setData) // for reflection } In a nutshell, here's what I want to do: // load plugin // find all the Tasks interface implementations in it // have user able to choose a Task and edit its specific Q_PROPERTY's // run the TASK It's important that one .dll has multiple tasks, because I want them to be associated by their module. For instance, "FileTasks.dll" could have tasks for deleting files, making files, etc. The only problem with Qt's plugin setup is I want to store X amount of Tasks in one .dll module. As far as I can tell, you can only load one interface per plugin (I could be wrong?). If so, the only possible way to do accomplish what I want is to create a FactoryInterface with string based keys which return the objects (as in Qt's Plug-And-Paint example), which is a terrible boilerplate that I would like to avoid. Anyone know a cleaner C++ plugin architecture than Qt's to do what I want? Also, am I safely assuming Qt's reflection capabilities will do what I want (i.e. able to edit an unknown dynamically loaded tasks' properties with the QtPropertyBrowser before dispatching)?

    Read the article

  • On C++ global operator new: why it can be replaced

    - by Jimmy
    I wrote a small program in VS2005 to test whether C++ global operator new can be overloaded. It can. #include "stdafx.h" #include "iostream" #include "iomanip" #include "string" #include "new" using namespace std; class C { public: C() { cout<<"CTOR"<<endl; } }; void * operator new(size_t size) { cout<<"my overload of global plain old new"<<endl; // try to allocate size bytes void *p = malloc(size); return (p); } int main() { C* pc1 = new C; cin.get(); return 0; } In the above, my definition of operator new is called. If I remove that function from the code, then operator new in C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\crt\src\new.cpp gets called. All is good. However, in my opinion, my implementations of operator new does NOT overload the new in new.cpp, it CONFLICTS with it and violates the one-definition rule. Why doesn't the compiler complain about it? Or does the standard say since operator new is so special, one-definition rule does not apply here? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211  | Next Page >