Search Results

Search found 47200 results on 1888 pages for 'null object pattern'.

Page 23/1888 | < Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >

  • Can a conforming C implementation #define NULL to be something wacky

    - by janks
    I'm asking because of the discussion that's been provoked in this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2597142/when-was-the-null-macro-not-0/2597232 Trying to have a serious back-and-forth discussion using comments under other people's replies is not easy or fun. So I'd like to hear what our C experts think without being restricted to 500 characters at a time. The C standard has precious few words to say about NULL and null pointer constants. There's only two relevant sections that I can find. First: 3.2.2.3 Pointers An integral constant expression with the value 0, or such an expression cast to type void * , is called a null pointer constant. If a null pointer constant is assigned to or compared for equality to a pointer, the constant is converted to a pointer of that type. Such a pointer, called a null pointer, is guaranteed to compare unequal to a pointer to any object or function. and second: 4.1.5 Common definitions <stddef.h> The macros are NULL which expands to an implementation-defined null pointer constant; The question is, can NULL expand to an implementation-defined null pointer constant that is different from the ones enumerated in 3.2.2.3? In particular, could it be defined as: #define NULL __builtin_magic_null_pointer Or even: #define NULL ((void*)-1) My reading of 3.2.2.3 is that it specifies that an integral constant expression of 0, and an integral constant expression of 0 cast to type void* must be among the forms of null pointer constant that the implementation recognizes, but that it isn't meant to be an exhaustive list. I believe that the implementation is free to recognize other source constructs as null pointer constants, so long as no other rules are broken. So for example, it is provable that #define NULL (-1) is not a legal definition, because in if (NULL) do_stuff(); do_stuff() must not be called, whereas with if (-1) do_stuff(); do_stuff() must be called; since they are equivalent, this cannot be a legal definition of NULL. But the standard says that integer-to-pointer conversions (and vice-versa) are implementation-defined, therefore it could define the conversion of -1 to a pointer as a conversion that produces a null pointer. In which case if ((void*)-1) would evaluate to false, and all would be well. So what do other people think? I'd ask for everybody to especially keep in mind the "as-if" rule described in 2.1.2.3 Program execution. It's huge and somewhat roundabout, so I won't paste it here, but it essentially says that an implementation merely has to produce the same observable side-effects as are required of the abstract machine described by the standard. It says that any optimizations, transformations, or whatever else the compiler wants to do to your program are perfectly legal so long as the observable side-effects of the program aren't changed by them. So if you are looking to prove that a particular definition of NULL cannot be legal, you'll need to come up with a program that can prove it. Either one like mine that blatantly breaks other clauses in the standard, or one that can legally detect whatever magic the compiler has to do to make the strange NULL definition work. Steve Jessop found an example of way for a program to detect that NULL isn't defined to be one of the two forms of null pointer constants in 3.2.2.3, which is to stringize the constant: #define stringize_helper(x) #x #define stringize(x) stringize_helper(x) Using this macro, one could puts(stringize(NULL)); and "detect" that NULL does not expand to one of the forms in 3.2.2.3. Is that enough to render other definitions illegal? I just don't know. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Protected object this object on the rompager server is protected

    - by Sami-L
    I have a windows home server, when I connect to any web site in it I get an authentication window with the next message: "http://mydomain.com site requires user name and password, the site says: "SmartAX". Then when I close the window I get an error page saying: Protected object this object on the rompager server is protected Could you please have an idea on this, have it relation with ADSL router ?

    Read the article

  • Create a JSON Array using Java

    - by Ankur
    Hi I want to create a JSON array. I have tried using: JSONArray jArray = new JSONArray(); while(itr.hasNext()){ int objId = itr.next(); jArray.put(objId, odao.getObjectName(objId)); } results = jArray.toString(); Note: odao.getObjectName(objId) retrieves a name based on the "object Id" which is called objId However I get a very funny looking array like [null,null,null,"SomeValue",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"AnotherValue",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"SomethingElse","AnotherOne","LastOne"] With only "LastOne" being displayed when I retrieve it using jQuery. The Array SHould look like {["3":"SomeValue"],["40":"AnotherValue"],["23":"SomethingElse"],["9":"AnotherOne"],["1":"LastOne"]} The numbers aren't showing up at all for some reason in the array that I am getting

    Read the article

  • linq hierarchy problem

    - by Pratik
    I reterive a result from sql server as ProjectDetailID,ProjectID,ParentID,...,C1,C2,C3,... where C1 implies(=) companyOne, C2=CompanyTwo ... etc and dynamically can have 'n' companies For time being lets consider only 3 companies, So I get : ProjectDetailID,ProjectID,ParentID,C1,C2,C3 10,1,0,NULL,NULL,NULL 10,2,1,NULL,NULL,NULL 10,3,2,90,NULL,NULL 10,4,2,NULL,60,NULL 10,10,1,70,NULL,NULL 10,5,10,20,40,NULL 10,13,2,NULL,NULL,NULL I want from this following result using LINQ (C#) ProjectDetailID,ProjectID,ParentID,C1,C2,C3 10,1,0,180,100,NULL 10,2,1,90,60,NULL 10,3,2,90,NULL,NULL 10,4,2,NULL,60,NULL 10,10,1,90,40,NULL 10,5,10,20,40,NULL 10,13,2,NULL,NULL,NULL The problem is that at parent level i have null value for a company but at its child i have some value, which i keep on adding and have placed that in parent corresponding to that company only. I am not getting from where to start. Please share your ideas. And i am looking to do this in LINQ using C#

    Read the article

  • C# Reflection - Casting private Object field

    - by alhazen
    I have the following classes: public class MyEventArgs : EventArgs { public object State; public MyEventArgs (object state) { this.State = state; } } public class MyClass { // ... public List<string> ErrorMessages { get { return errorMessages; } } } When I raise my event, I set 'State' of the MyEventArgs object to an object of type MyClass. I'm trying to retrieve ErrorMessages by reflection in my event handler: public static void OnEventEnded(object sender, EventArgs args) { Type type = args.GetType(); FieldInfo stateInfo = type.GetField("State"); PropertyInfo errorMessagesInfo = stateInfo.FieldType.GetProperty("ErrorMessages"); object errorMessages = errorMessagesInfo.GetValue(null, null); } But this returns errorMessagesInfo as null (even though stateInfo is not null). Is it possible to retrieve ErrorMessages ? Thank you

    Read the article

  • How to have multiple tables with multiple joins

    - by williamsdb
    I have three tables that I need to join together and get a combination of results. I have tried using left/right joins but they don't give the desired results. For example: Table 1 - STAFF id name 1 John 2 Fred Table 2 - STAFFMOBILERIGHTS id staffid mobilerightsid rights --this table is empty-- Table 3 - MOBILERIGHTS id rightname 1 Login 2 View and what I need is this as the result... id name id staffid mobilerightsid rights id rightname 1 John null null null null 1 login 1 John null null null null 2 View 2 Fred null null null null 1 login 2 Fred null null null null 2 View I have tried the following : SELECT * FROM STAFFMOBILERIGHTS SMR RIGHT JOIN STAFF STA ON STA.STAFFID = SMR.STAFFID RIGHT JOIN MOBILERIGHTS MRI ON MRI.ID = SMR.MOBILERIGHTSID But this only returns two rows as follows: id name id staffid mobilerightsid rights id rightname null null null null null null 1 login null null null null null null 2 View Can what I am trying to achieve be done and if so how? Thanks

    Read the article

  • object representation and value representation

    - by FredOverflow
    3.9 §4 says: The object representation of an object of type T is the sequence of N unsigned char objects taken up by the object of type T, where N equals sizeof(T). The value representation of an object is the set of bits that hold the value of type T. For trivially copyable types, the value representation is a set of bits in the object representation that determines a value, which is one discrete element of an implementation-defined set of values. Does "The value representation of an object" imply that values are always stored in objects? What is the value representation of non-trivially copyable types?

    Read the article

  • Does command/query separation apply to a method that creates an object and returns its ID?

    - by Gilles
    Let's pretend we have a service that calls a business process. This process will call on the data layer to create an object of type A in the database. Afterwards we need to call again on another class of the data layer to create an instance of type B in the database. We need to pass some information about A for a foreign key. In the first method we create an object (modify state) and return it's ID (query) in a single method. In the second method we have two methods, one (createA) for the save and the other (getId) for the query. public void FirstMethod(Info info) { var id = firstRepository.createA(info); secondRepository.createB(id); } public void SecondMethod(Info info) { firstRepository.createA(info); var key = firstRepository.getID(info); secondRepository.createB(key); } From my understanding the second method follows command query separation more fully. But I find it wasteful and counter-intuitive to query the database to get the object we have just created. How do you reconcile CQS with such a scenario? Does only the second method follow CQS and if so is it preferable to use it in this case?

    Read the article

  • If an entity is composed, is it still a god object?

    - by Telastyn
    I am working on a system to configure hardware. Unfortunately, there is tons of variety in the hardware, which means there's a wide variety of capabilities and configurations depending on what specific hardware the software connects to. To deal with this, we're using a Component Based Entity design where the "hardware" class itself is a very thin container for components that are composed at runtime based on what capabilities/configuration are available. This works great, and the design itself has worked well elsewhere (particularly in games). The problem is that all this software does is configure the hardware. As such, almost all of the code is a component of the hardware instance. While the consumer only ever works against the strongly typed interfaces for the components, it could be argued that the class that represents an instance of the hardware is a God Object. If you want to do anything to/with the hardware, you query an interface and work with it. So, even if the components of an object are modular and decoupled well, is their container a God Object and the downsides associated with the anti-pattern?

    Read the article

  • A PHP design pattern for the model part [PHP Zend Framework]

    - by Matthieu
    I have a PHP MVC application using Zend Framework. As presented in the quickstart, I use 3 layers for the model part : Model (business logic) Data mapper Table data gateway (or data access object, i.e. one class per SQL table) The model is UML designed and totally independent of the DB. My problem is : I can't have multiple instances of the same "instance/record". For example : if I get, for example, the user "Chuck Norris" with id=5, this will create a new model instance wich members will be filled by the data mapper (the data mapper query the table data gateway that query the DB). Then, if I change the name to "Duck Norras", don't save it in DB right away, and re-load the same user in another variable, I have "synchronisation" problems... (different instances for the same "record") Right now, I use the Multiton pattern : like Singleton, but multiple instances indexed by a key (wich is the user ID in our example). But this is complicating my developpement a lot, and my testings too. How to do it right ?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for parsing data that will be grouped to two different ways and flipped

    - by lewisblackfan
    I'm looking for an easily maintainable and extendable design model for a script to parse an excel workbook into two separate workbooks after pulling data from other locations like the command line, and a database. The high level details are as follows. I need to parse an excel workbook containing a sheet that lists unique question names, the only reliable information that can be parsed from the question name is the book code that identifies the title and edition of the textbook the question is associated with, the rest of the question name is not standardized well enough to be reliably parsed by computer. The general form of the question name is best described by the following regular expression. '^(\w+)\s(\w{1,2})\.(\w{1,2})\.(\w{1,3})\.(\w{1,3}\.)*$' The first sub-pattern is the book code, the second sub-pattern is 90% of the time the chapter, and the rest of the sub-patterns could be section, problem type, problem number, or question type information. There is no simple logic, at least not one I can find. There will be a minimum of three other columns in this spreadsheet; one column will be the chapter the question is associated with, the second will be the section within the chapter the question is associated with, and the third will be some kind of asset indicated by a uniform resource locator. 1 | 1 | qname1 | url | description | url | description ... 1 | 1 | qname2 | url | description 1 | 1 | qname3 | url | description | url | description | url | The asset can be indicated by a full or partial uniform resource locator, the partial url will need to be completed before it can be fed into the application. There theoretically could be no limit to the number of asset columns, the assets will be grouped in columns by type. Some times additional data will have to be retrieved from a database or combined with the book code before the asset url is complete and can be understood by the application that will be using the asset. The type is an abstraction, there are eight types right now, each with their own logic in how the uniform resource locator is handled and or completed, and I have to add a new type and its logic every three or four months. For each asset url there is the possibility of a description column, a character string for display in the application, but not always. (I've already worked out validating the description text, and squashing MSs obscure code page down to something 7-bit ascii can handle.) Now that all the details are filled-in I can get to the actual problem of parsing the file. I need to split the information in this excel workbook into two separate workbooks. The first workbook will group all the questions by section in rows. With the first cell being the section doublet and the rest of the cells in the row are the question names. 1.1 | qname1 | qname2 | qname3 | qname4 | 1.2 | qname1 | qname2 | qname3 | 1.3 | qname1 | qname2 | qname3 | qname4 | qname5 There is no set number of questions for each section as you can see from the above example. The second workbook is more complicated, there is one row per asset, and question names that have more than one asset will be duplicated. There will be four or five columns on this sheet. The first is the question name for the asset, the second is a media type used to select the correct icon for the asset in the application, the third is string representing the asset type, the four is the full and complete uniform resource locator for the asset, and the fifth columns is the optional text description for the asset. q1 | mtype1 | atype1 | url | description q1 | mtype2 | atype2 | url | description q1 | mtype2 | atype3 | url | description q2 | mtype1 | atype1 | url | description q2 | mtype2 | atype3 | url | description For the original six types I did have a script that parsed the source excel workbook into the other two excel workbooks, and I was able to add two more types until I ran aground on the implementation of the ninth type and tenth types. What broke my script was the fact that the ninth type is actually a sub-type of one of the original six, but with entirely different logic, and my mostly procedural script could not accommodate without duplicating a lot of code. I also had a lot of bugs in the script and will be writing the test first on this time around. I'm stuck with the format for the resulting two workbooks, this script is glue code, development went ahead with the project without bothering to get a complete spec from the sponsor. I work for the same company as the developers but in the editorial department, editorial is co-sponsor of the project, and am expected to fix pesky details like this (I'm foaming at the mouth as I type this). I've tried factories, I've tried different object models, but each resulting workbook is so different when I find a design that works for generating one workbook the code is not really usable for generating the other. What I would really like are ideas about a maintainable and extensible design for parsing the source workbook into both workbooks with maximum code reuse, and or sympathy.

    Read the article

  • How to make this OO?

    - by John
    Hello, Sorry for the poor title,I'm new to OOP so I don't know what is the term for what I need to do. I have, say, 10 different Objects that inherit one Object.They have different amount and type of class members,but all of them have one property in common - Visible. type TObj1=class(TObject) private a:integer; ...(More members) Visible:Boolean; end; TObj2=class(TObject) private b:String; ...(More members) Visible:Boolean; end; ...(Other 8 objects) For each of them I have a variable. var Obj1:TObj1; Obj2:TObj2; Obj3:TObj3; ....(Other 7 objects) Rule 1: Only one object can be initialized at a time(others have to be freed) to be visible. For this rule I have a global variable var CurrentVisibleObj:TObject; //Because they all inherit TObject Finally there is a procedure that changes visibility. procedure ChangeObjVisibility(newObj:TObject); begin CurrentVisibleObj.Free; //Free the old object CurrentVisibleObj:=newObj; //assign the new object CurrentVisibleObj:= ??? //Create new object CurrentVisibleObj.Visible:=true; //Set visibility to new object end; There is my problem,I don't know how to initialize it,because the derived class is unknown. How do I do this? I simplified the explanation,in the project there are TFrames each having different controls and I have to set visible/not visible the same way(By leaving only one frame initialized). Sorry again for the title,I'm very new to OOP.

    Read the article

  • Using Stub Objects

    - by user9154181
    Having told the long and winding tale of where stub objects came from and how we use them to build Solaris, I'd like to focus now on the the nuts and bolts of building and using them. The following new features were added to the Solaris link-editor (ld) to support the production and use of stub objects: -z stub This new command line option informs ld that it is to build a stub object rather than a normal object. In this mode, it accepts the same command line arguments as usual, but will quietly ignore any objects and sharable object dependencies. STUB_OBJECT Mapfile Directive In order to build a stub version of an object, its mapfile must specify the STUB_OBJECT directive. When producing a non-stub object, the presence of STUB_OBJECT causes the link-editor to perform extra validation to ensure that the stub and non-stub objects will be compatible. ASSERT Mapfile Directive All data symbols exported from the object must have an ASSERT symbol directive in the mapfile that declares them as data and supplies the size, binding, bss attributes, and symbol aliasing details. When building the stub objects, the information in these ASSERT directives is used to create the data symbols. When building the real object, these ASSERT directives will ensure that the real object matches the linking interface presented by the stub. Although ASSERT was added to the link-editor in order to support stub objects, they are a general purpose feature that can be used independently of stub objects. For instance you might choose to use an ASSERT directive if you have a symbol that must have a specific address in order for the object to operate properly and you want to automatically ensure that this will always be the case. The material presented here is derived from a document I originally wrote during the development effort, which had the dual goals of providing supplemental materials for the stub object PSARC case, and as a set of edits that were eventually applied to the Oracle Solaris Linker and Libraries Manual (LLM). The Solaris 11 LLM contains this information in a more polished form. Stub Objects A stub object is a shared object, built entirely from mapfiles, that supplies the same linking interface as the real object, while containing no code or data. Stub objects cannot be used at runtime. However, an application can be built against a stub object, where the stub object provides the real object name to be used at runtime, and then use the real object at runtime. When building a stub object, the link-editor ignores any object or library files specified on the command line, and these files need not exist in order to build a stub. Since the compilation step can be omitted, and because the link-editor has relatively little work to do, stub objects can be built very quickly. Stub objects can be used to solve a variety of build problems: Speed Modern machines, using a version of make with the ability to parallelize operations, are capable of compiling and linking many objects simultaneously, and doing so offers significant speedups. However, it is typical that a given object will depend on other objects, and that there will be a core set of objects that nearly everything else depends on. It is necessary to impose an ordering that builds each object before any other object that requires it. This ordering creates bottlenecks that reduce the amount of parallelization that is possible and limits the overall speed at which the code can be built. Complexity/Correctness In a large body of code, there can be a large number of dependencies between the various objects. The makefiles or other build descriptions for these objects can become very complex and difficult to understand or maintain. The dependencies can change as the system evolves. This can cause a given set of makefiles to become slightly incorrect over time, leading to race conditions and mysterious rare build failures. Dependency Cycles It might be desirable to organize code as cooperating shared objects, each of which draw on the resources provided by the other. Such cycles cannot be supported in an environment where objects must be built before the objects that use them, even though the runtime linker is fully capable of loading and using such objects if they could be built. Stub shared objects offer an alternative method for building code that sidesteps the above issues. Stub objects can be quickly built for all the shared objects produced by the build. Then, all the real shared objects and executables can be built in parallel, in any order, using the stub objects to stand in for the real objects at link-time. Afterwards, the executables and real shared objects are kept, and the stub shared objects are discarded. Stub objects are built from a mapfile, which must satisfy the following requirements. The mapfile must specify the STUB_OBJECT directive. This directive informs the link-editor that the object can be built as a stub object, and as such causes the link-editor to perform validation and sanity checking intended to guarantee that an object and its stub will always provide identical linking interfaces. All function and data symbols that make up the external interface to the object must be explicitly listed in the mapfile. The mapfile must use symbol scope reduction ('*'), to remove any symbols not explicitly listed from the external interface. All global data exported from the object must have an ASSERT symbol attribute in the mapfile to specify the symbol type, size, and bss attributes. In the case where there are multiple symbols that reference the same data, the ASSERT for one of these symbols must specify the TYPE and SIZE attributes, while the others must use the ALIAS attribute to reference this primary symbol. Given such a mapfile, the stub and real versions of the shared object can be built using the same command line for each, adding the '-z stub' option to the link for the stub object, and omiting the option from the link for the real object. To demonstrate these ideas, the following code implements a shared object named idx5, which exports data from a 5 element array of integers, with each element initialized to contain its zero-based array index. This data is available as a global array, via an alternative alias data symbol with weak binding, and via a functional interface. % cat idx5.c int _idx5[5] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 }; #pragma weak idx5 = _idx5 int idx5_func(int index) { if ((index 4)) return (-1); return (_idx5[index]); } A mapfile is required to describe the interface provided by this shared object. % cat mapfile $mapfile_version 2 STUB_OBJECT; SYMBOL_SCOPE { _idx5 { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=4[5] }; }; idx5 { ASSERT { BINDING=weak; ALIAS=_idx5 }; }; idx5_func; local: *; }; The following main program is used to print all the index values available from the idx5 shared object. % cat main.c #include <stdio.h> extern int _idx5[5], idx5[5], idx5_func(int); int main(int argc, char **argv) { int i; for (i = 0; i The following commands create a stub version of this shared object in a subdirectory named stublib. elfdump is used to verify that the resulting object is a stub. The command used to build the stub differs from that of the real object only in the addition of the -z stub option, and the use of a different output file name. This demonstrates the ease with which stub generation can be added to an existing makefile. % cc -Kpic -G -M mapfile -h libidx5.so.1 idx5.c -o stublib/libidx5.so.1 -zstub % ln -s libidx5.so.1 stublib/libidx5.so % elfdump -d stublib/libidx5.so | grep STUB [11] FLAGS_1 0x4000000 [ STUB ] The main program can now be built, using the stub object to stand in for the real shared object, and setting a runpath that will find the real object at runtime. However, as we have not yet built the real object, this program cannot yet be run. Attempts to cause the system to load the stub object are rejected, as the runtime linker knows that stub objects lack the actual code and data found in the real object, and cannot execute. % cc main.c -L stublib -R '$ORIGIN/lib' -lidx5 -lc % ./a.out ld.so.1: a.out: fatal: libidx5.so.1: open failed: No such file or directory Killed % LD_PRELOAD=stublib/libidx5.so.1 ./a.out ld.so.1: a.out: fatal: stublib/libidx5.so.1: stub shared object cannot be used at runtime Killed We build the real object using the same command as we used to build the stub, omitting the -z stub option, and writing the results to a different file. % cc -Kpic -G -M mapfile -h libidx5.so.1 idx5.c -o lib/libidx5.so.1 Once the real object has been built in the lib subdirectory, the program can be run. % ./a.out [0] 0 0 0 [1] 1 1 1 [2] 2 2 2 [3] 3 3 3 [4] 4 4 4 Mapfile Changes The version 2 mapfile syntax was extended in a number of places to accommodate stub objects. Conditional Input The version 2 mapfile syntax has the ability conditionalize mapfile input using the $if control directive. As you might imagine, these directives are used frequently with ASSERT directives for data, because a given data symbol will frequently have a different size in 32 or 64-bit code, or on differing hardware such as x86 versus sparc. The link-editor maintains an internal table of names that can be used in the logical expressions evaluated by $if and $elif. At startup, this table is initialized with items that describe the class of object (_ELF32 or _ELF64) and the type of the target machine (_sparc or _x86). We found that there were a small number of cases in the Solaris code base in which we needed to know what kind of object we were producing, so we added the following new predefined items in order to address that need: NameMeaning ...... _ET_DYNshared object _ET_EXECexecutable object _ET_RELrelocatable object ...... STUB_OBJECT Directive The new STUB_OBJECT directive informs the link-editor that the object described by the mapfile can be built as a stub object. STUB_OBJECT; A stub shared object is built entirely from the information in the mapfiles supplied on the command line. When the -z stub option is specified to build a stub object, the presence of the STUB_OBJECT directive in a mapfile is required, and the link-editor uses the information in symbol ASSERT attributes to create global symbols that match those of the real object. When the real object is built, the presence of STUB_OBJECT causes the link-editor to verify that the mapfiles accurately describe the real object interface, and that a stub object built from them will provide the same linking interface as the real object it represents. All function and data symbols that make up the external interface to the object must be explicitly listed in the mapfile. The mapfile must use symbol scope reduction ('*'), to remove any symbols not explicitly listed from the external interface. All global data in the object is required to have an ASSERT attribute that specifies the symbol type and size. If the ASSERT BIND attribute is not present, the link-editor provides a default assertion that the symbol must be GLOBAL. If the ASSERT SH_ATTR attribute is not present, or does not specify that the section is one of BITS or NOBITS, the link-editor provides a default assertion that the associated section is BITS. All data symbols that describe the same address and size are required to have ASSERT ALIAS attributes specified in the mapfile. If aliased symbols are discovered that do not have an ASSERT ALIAS specified, the link fails and no object is produced. These rules ensure that the mapfiles contain a description of the real shared object's linking interface that is sufficient to produce a stub object with a completely compatible linking interface. SYMBOL_SCOPE/SYMBOL_VERSION ASSERT Attribute The SYMBOL_SCOPE and SYMBOL_VERSION mapfile directives were extended with a symbol attribute named ASSERT. The syntax for the ASSERT attribute is as follows: ASSERT { ALIAS = symbol_name; BINDING = symbol_binding; TYPE = symbol_type; SH_ATTR = section_attributes; SIZE = size_value; SIZE = size_value[count]; }; The ASSERT attribute is used to specify the expected characteristics of the symbol. The link-editor compares the symbol characteristics that result from the link to those given by ASSERT attributes. If the real and asserted attributes do not agree, a fatal error is issued and the output object is not created. In normal use, the link editor evaluates the ASSERT attribute when present, but does not require them, or provide default values for them. The presence of the STUB_OBJECT directive in a mapfile alters the interpretation of ASSERT to require them under some circumstances, and to supply default assertions if explicit ones are not present. See the definition of the STUB_OBJECT Directive for the details. When the -z stub command line option is specified to build a stub object, the information provided by ASSERT attributes is used to define the attributes of the global symbols provided by the object. ASSERT accepts the following: ALIAS Name of a previously defined symbol that this symbol is an alias for. An alias symbol has the same type, value, and size as the main symbol. The ALIAS attribute is mutually exclusive to the TYPE, SIZE, and SH_ATTR attributes, and cannot be used with them. When ALIAS is specified, the type, size, and section attributes are obtained from the alias symbol. BIND Specifies an ELF symbol binding, which can be any of the STB_ constants defined in <sys/elf.h>, with the STB_ prefix removed (e.g. GLOBAL, WEAK). TYPE Specifies an ELF symbol type, which can be any of the STT_ constants defined in <sys/elf.h>, with the STT_ prefix removed (e.g. OBJECT, COMMON, FUNC). In addition, for compatibility with other mapfile usage, FUNCTION and DATA can be specified, for STT_FUNC and STT_OBJECT, respectively. TYPE is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. SH_ATTR Specifies attributes of the section associated with the symbol. The section_attributes that can be specified are given in the following table: Section AttributeMeaning BITSSection is not of type SHT_NOBITS NOBITSSection is of type SHT_NOBITS SH_ATTR is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. SIZE Specifies the expected symbol size. SIZE is mutually exclusive to ALIAS, and cannot be used in conjunction with it. The syntax for the size_value argument is as described in the discussion of the SIZE attribute below. SIZE The SIZE symbol attribute existed before support for stub objects was introduced. It is used to set the size attribute of a given symbol. This attribute results in the creation of a symbol definition. Prior to the introduction of the ASSERT SIZE attribute, the value of a SIZE attribute was always numeric. While attempting to apply ASSERT SIZE to the objects in the Solaris ON consolidation, I found that many data symbols have a size based on the natural machine wordsize for the class of object being produced. Variables declared as long, or as a pointer, will be 4 bytes in size in a 32-bit object, and 8 bytes in a 64-bit object. Initially, I employed the conditional $if directive to handle these cases as follows: $if _ELF32 foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=4 } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=20 } }; $elif _ELF64 foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=8 } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=40 } }; $else $error UNKNOWN ELFCLASS $endif I found that the situation occurs frequently enough that this is cumbersome. To simplify this case, I introduced the idea of the addrsize symbolic name, and of a repeat count, which together make it simple to specify machine word scalar or array symbols. Both the SIZE, and ASSERT SIZE attributes support this syntax: The size_value argument can be a numeric value, or it can be the symbolic name addrsize. addrsize represents the size of a machine word capable of holding a memory address. The link-editor substitutes the value 4 for addrsize when building 32-bit objects, and the value 8 when building 64-bit objects. addrsize is useful for representing the size of pointer variables and C variables of type long, as it automatically adjusts for 32 and 64-bit objects without requiring the use of conditional input. The size_value argument can be optionally suffixed with a count value, enclosed in square brackets. If count is present, size_value and count are multiplied together to obtain the final size value. Using this feature, the example above can be written more naturally as: foo { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=addrsize } }; bar { ASSERT { TYPE=data; SIZE=addrsize[5] } }; Exported Global Data Is Still A Bad Idea As you can see, the additional plumbing added to the Solaris link-editor to support stub objects is minimal. Furthermore, about 90% of that plumbing is dedicated to handling global data. We have long advised against global data exported from shared objects. There are many ways in which global data does not fit well with dynamic linking. Stub objects simply provide one more reason to avoid this practice. It is always better to export all data via a functional interface. You should always hide your data, and make it available to your users via a function that they can call to acquire the address of the data item. However, If you do have to support global data for a stub, perhaps because you are working with an already existing object, it is still easilily done, as shown above. Oracle does not like us to discuss hypothetical new features that don't exist in shipping product, so I'll end this section with a speculation. It might be possible to do more in this area to ease the difficulty of dealing with objects that have global data that the users of the library don't need. Perhaps someday... Conclusions It is easy to create stub objects for most objects. If your library only exports function symbols, all you have to do to build a faithful stub object is to add STUB_OBJECT; and then to use the same link command you're currently using, with the addition of the -z stub option. Happy Stubbing!

    Read the article

  • using "IS" is better or checking for "NOT NULL"

    - by BDotA
    In C#.NET language: This style of coding is recommended or the one below it? if (sheet.Models.Data is GroupDataModel) { GroupDataModel gdm = (GroupDataModel)sheet.Models.Data; Group group = gdm.GetGroup(sheet.ActiveCell.Row.Index); if (group!=null && controller != null) { controller.CheckApplicationState(); } } or this one: var gdm = sheet.Models.Data as GroupDataModel; if (gdm != null) { Group group = gdm.GetGroup(sheet.ActiveCell.Row.Index); if (@group!=null && controller != null) { controller.CheckApplicationState(); } }

    Read the article

  • constructor function's object literal returns toString() method but no other method

    - by JohnMerlino
    I'm very confused with javascript methods defined in objects and the "this" keyword. In the below example, the toString() method is invoked when Mammal object instantiated: function Mammal(name){ this.name=name; this.toString = function(){ return '[Mammal "'+this.name+'"]'; } } var someAnimal = new Mammal('Mr. Biggles'); alert('someAnimal is '+someAnimal); Despite the fact that the toString() method is not invoked on the object someAnimal like this: alert('someAnimal is '+someAnimal.toString()); It still returns 'someAnimal is [Mammal "Mr. Biggles"]' . That doesn't make sense to me because the toString() function is not being called anywhere. Then to add even more confusion, if I change the toString() method to a method I make up such as random(): function Mammal(name){ this.name=name; this.random = function(){ return Math.floor(Math.random() * 15); } } var someAnimal = new Mammal('Mr. Biggles'); alert(someAnimal); It completely ignores the random method (despite the fact that it is defined the same way was the toString() method was) and returns: [object object] Another issue I'm having trouble understanding with inheritance is the value of "this". For example, in the below example function person(w,h){ width.width = w; width.height = h; } function man(w,h,s) { person.call(this, w, h); this.sex = s; } "this" keyword is being send to the person object clearly. However, does "this" refer to the subclass (man) or the super class (person) when the person object receives it? Thanks for clearing up any of the confusion I have with inheritance and object literals in javascript.

    Read the article

  • java: assigning object reference IDs for custom serialization

    - by Jason S
    For various reasons I have a custom serialization where I am dumping some fairly simple objects to a data file. There are maybe 5-10 classes, and the object graphs that result are acyclic and pretty simple (each serialized object has 1 or 2 references to another that are serialized). For example: class Foo { final private long id; public Foo(long id, /* other stuff */) { ... } } class Bar { final private long id; final private Foo foo; public Bar(long id, Foo foo, /* other stuff */) { ... } } class Baz { final private long id; final private List<Bar> barList; public Baz(long id, List<Bar> barList, /* other stuff */) { ... } } The id field is just for the serialization, so that when I am serializing to a file, I can write objects by keeping a record of which IDs have been serialized so far, then for each object checking whether its child objects have been serialized and writing the ones that haven't, finally writing the object itself by writing its data fields and the IDs corresponding to its child objects. What's puzzling me is how to assign id's. I thought about it, and it seems like there are three cases for assigning an ID: dynamically-created objects -- id is assigned from a counter that increments reading objects from disk -- id is assigned from the number stored in the disk file singleton objects -- object is created prior to any dynamically-created object, to represent a singleton object that is always present. How can I handle these properly? I feel like I'm reinventing the wheel and there must be a well-established technique for handling all the cases.

    Read the article

  • c#Repository pattern: One repository per subclass?

    - by Alex
    I am wondering if you would create a repository for each subclass of a domain model. There are two classes for example: public class Person { public virtual String GivenName { set; get; } public virtual String FamilyName { set; get; } public virtual String EMailAdress { set; get; } } public class Customer : Person { public virtual DateTime RegistrationDate { get; set; } public virtual String Password { get; set; } } Would you create both a PersonRepository and a CustomerRepository or just the PersonRepository which would also be able to execute Customer related queries?

    Read the article

  • pattern matching in Bash

    - by Tim
    Hi, Here is an example to get different parts of a filename bash-3.2$ pathandfile=/tmp/ff.txt bash-3.2$ filename=$(basename $pathandfile) bash-3.2$ echo $filename ff.txt bash-3.2$ echo ${filename##*.} txt bash-3.2$ echo ${filename%.*} ff I was wondering what does ## and % mean in the patterns. How is the patten matching working? Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • Looking for ideas for a simple pattern matching algorithm to run on a microcontroller

    - by pic_audio
    I'm working on a project to recognize simple audio patterns. I have two data sets, each made up of between 4 and 32 note/duration pairs. One set is predefined, the other is from an incoming data stream. The length of the two strongly correlated data sets is often different, but roughly the same "shape". My goal is to come up with some sort of ranking as to how well the two data sets correlate/match. I have converted the incoming frequencies to pitch and shifted the incoming data stream's pitch so that it's average pitch matches that of the predefined data set. I also stretch/compress the incoming data set's durations to match the overall duration of the predefined set. Here are two graphical examples of data that should be ranked as strongly correlated: http://s2.postimage.org/FVeG0-ee3c23ecc094a55b15e538c3a0d83dd5.gif (Sorry, as a new user I couldn't directly post images) I'm doing this on a 8-bit microcontroller so resources are minimal. Speed is less an issue, a second or two of processing isn't a deal breaker. It wouldn't surprise me if there is an obvious solution, I've just been staring at the problem too long. Any ideas? Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • Is it a bad idea if equals(null) throws NullPointerException instead?

    - by polygenelubricants
    The contract of equals with regards to null, is as follows: For any non-null reference value x, x.equals(null) should return false. This is rather peculiar, because if o1 != null and o2 == null, then we have: o1.equals(o2) // returns false o2.equals(o1) // throws NullPointerException The fact that o2.equals(o1) throws NullPointerException is a good thing, because it alerts us of programmer error. And yet, that error would not be catched if for various reasons we just switched it around to o1.equals(o2), which would just "silently fail" instead. So the questions are: Why is it a good idea that o1.equals(o2) should return false instead of throwing NullPointerException? Would it be a bad idea if wherever possible we rewrite the contract so that anyObject.equals(null) always throw NullPointerException instead?

    Read the article

  • ocaml pattern match question

    - by REALFREE
    I'm trying to write a simple recursive function that look over list and return a pair of integer. This is easy to write in c/c++/java but i'm new to ocaml so somehow hard to find out the solution due to type conflict it goes like.. let rec test l = match l with [] - 0 | x::xs - if x 0 then (1+test, 0) else (0, 1+test);; I kno this is not correct one and kinda awkward.. but any help will be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Pattern matching in Perl ala Haskell

    - by Paul Nathan
    In Haskell (F#, Ocaml, and others), I can do this: sign x | x > 0 = 1 | x == 0 = 0 | x < 0 = -1 Which calculates the sign of a given integer. This can concisely express certain logic flows; I've encountered one of these flows in Perl. Right now what I am doing is sub frobnicator { my $frob = shift; return "foo" if $frob eq "Foomaticator"; return "bar" if $frob eq "Barmaticator"; croak("Unable to frob legit value: $frob received"); } Which feels inexpressive and ugly. This code has to run on Perl 5.8.8, but of course I am interested in more modern techniques as well.

    Read the article

  • Need a design pattern for representing multiple information sources

    - by hsmit
    I'm building a Java application that retrieves information from differing information sources. I'm using a sensor, a set of RecordStores and a few online web services. In the basic application all these resources are loaded by default. Some of these sources are directly read in a separate thread (load database, read sensor etc.). From this basic application some functions are started that use these sources. The classes that contain these functions (usually combining multiple sources information) are currently paramterized with a set of resources like this: AppPart a1 = new AppPart(source1, source2, source3); I could also do it like this AppPart a1 = new AppPart(this); ..where I need to make my sources public in order to read them. I'm also thinking about a kind of stage/collection to publish all sources on, e.g: public SourceCollectionStage sStage = new SourceCollectionStage(); and later: sStage.getSensor(); .. for example. What do you guys think is the best or most often used way to do this? Btw: the user interface is often implemented by the specific funtion classes, not by the main class. Should I do this in another way?

    Read the article

  • "Pattern matching" of algebraic type data constructors

    - by jetxee
    Let's consider a data type with many constructors: data T = Alpha Int | Beta Int | Gamma Int Int | Delta Int I want to write a function to check if two values are produced with the same constructor: sameK (Alpha _) (Alpha _) = True sameK (Beta _) (Beta _) = True sameK (Gamma _ _) (Gamma _ _) = True sameK _ _ = False Maintaining sameK is not much fun, it is potentially buggy. For example, when new constructors are added to T, it's easy to forget to update sameK. I omitted one line to give an example: -- it’s easy to forget: -- sameK (Delta _) (Delta _) = True The question is how to avoid boilerplate in sameK? Or how to make sure it checks for all T constructors? The workaround I found is to use separate data types for each of the constructors, deriving Data.Typeable, and declaring a common type class, but I don't like this solution, because it is much less readable and otherwise just a simple algebraic type works for me: {-# LANGUAGE DeriveDataTypeable #-} import Data.Typeable class Tlike t where value :: t -> t value = id data Alpha = Alpha Int deriving Typeable data Beta = Beta Int deriving Typeable data Gamma = Gamma Int Int deriving Typeable data Delta = Delta Int deriving Typeable instance Tlike Alpha instance Tlike Beta instance Tlike Gamma instance Tlike Delta sameK :: (Tlike t, Typeable t, Tlike t', Typeable t') => t -> t' -> Bool sameK a b = typeOf a == typeOf b

    Read the article

  • Is a "factory" method the right pattern?

    - by jdt141
    Hey all - So I'm working to improve an existing implementation. I have a number of polymorphic classes that are all composed into a higher level container class. The problem I'm dealing with at the moment is that the higher level container class, well, sucks. It looks something like this, which I really don't have a problem with (as the polymorphic classes in the container should be public). My real issue is the constructor... /* * class1 and class 2 derive from the same superclass */ class Container { public: boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass1> class1; boost::shared_ptr<ComposedClass2> class2; private: ... } /* * Constructor - builds the objects that we need in this container. */ Container::Container(some params) { class1.reset(new ComposedClass1(...)); class2.reset(new ComposedClass2(...)); } What I really need is to make this container class more re-usable. By hard-coding up the member objects and instantiating them, it basically isn't and can only be used once. A factory is one way to build what I need (potentially by supplying a list of objects and their specific types to be created?) Other ways to get around this problem? Seems like someone should have solved it before... Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >