Search Results

Search found 37348 results on 1494 pages for 'agile project management'.

Page 288/1494 | < Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >

  • Why would I get a bus error or segmentation fault when calling free() normally?

    - by chucknelson
    I have a very simple test program, running on Solaris 5.8: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(void) { char *paths; paths = getenv("PATH"); printf("Paths: %s\n", paths); free(paths); // this causes a bus error return 0; } If I don't call free() at the end, it displays the message fine and exits. If I include the free() call, it crashes with a bus error. I've had other calls to free(), in other programs, cause segmentation faults as well. Even if I allocate the memory for *paths myself, free() will cause a bus error. Is there some reason trying to free up the memory is causing a crash?

    Read the article

  • Changing memory address of a char*

    - by Randall Flagg
    I have the following code: str = "ABCD"; //0x001135F8 newStr = "EFGH"; //0x008F5740 *str after realloc at 5th position - //0x001135FC I want it to point to: 0x008F5740 void str_cat(char** str, char* newStr) { int i; realloc(*str, strlen(*str) + strlen(newStr) + 1); //*str is now 9 length long // I want to change the memory reference value of the 5th char in *str to point to newStr. // Is this possible? // &((*str) + strlen(*str)) = (char*)&newStr; //This is my problem (I think) }

    Read the article

  • How do I get C# to garbage collect aggressively?

    - by mmr
    I have an application that is used in image processing, and I find myself typically allocating arrays in the 4000x4000 ushort size, as well as the occasional float and the like. Currently, the .NET framework tends to crash in this app apparently randomly, almost always with an out of memory error. 32mb is not a huge declaration, but if .NET is fragmenting memory, then it's very possible that such large continuous allocations aren't behaving as expected. Is there a way to tell the garbage collector to be more aggressive, or to defrag memory (if that's the problem)? I realize that there's the GC.Collect and GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers calls, and I've sprinkled them pretty liberally through my code, but I'm still getting the errors. It may be because I'm calling dll routines that use native code a lot, but I'm not sure. I've gone over that C++ code, and make sure that any memory I declare I delete, but still I get these C# crashes, so I'm pretty sure it's not there. I wonder if the C++ calls could be interfering with the GC, making it leave behind memory because it once interacted with a native call-- is that possible? If so, can I turn that functionality off?

    Read the article

  • C++ Storing variables and inheritance

    - by Kaa
    Hello Everyone, Here is my situation: I have an event driven system, where all my handlers are derived from IHandler class, and implement an onEvent(const Event &event) method. Now, Event is a base class for all events and contains only the enumerated event type. All actual events are derived from it, including the EventKey event, which has 2 fields: (uchar) keyCode and (bool)isDown. Here's the interesting part: I generate an EventKey event using the following syntax: Event evt = EventKey(15, true); and I ship it to the handlers: EventDispatch::sendEvent(evt); // void EventDispatch::sendEvent(const Event &event); (EventDispatch contains a linked list of IHandlers and calls their onEvent(const Event &event) method with the parameter containing the sent event. Now the actual question: Say I want my handlers to poll the events in a queue of type Event, how do I do that? x Dynamic pointers with reference counting sound like too big of a solution. x Making copies is more difficult than it sounds, since I'm only receiving a reference to a base type, therefore each time I would need to check the type of event, upcast to EventKey and then make a copy to store in a queue. Sounds like the only solution - but is unpleasant since I would need to know every single type of event and would have to check that for every event received - sounds like a bad plan. x I could allocate the events dynamically and then send around pointers to those events, enqueue them in the array if wanted - but other than having reference counting - how would I be able to keep track of that memory? Do you know any way to implement a very light reference counter that wouldn't interfere with the user? What do you think would be a good solution to this design? I thank everyone in advance for your time. Sincerely, Kaa

    Read the article

  • overview/history of resident memory usage

    - by kapet
    I have a fairly complicated program (Python with SWIG'ed C++ code, long running server) that shows a constantly growing resident memory usage. I've been digging with the usual tools for the leak (valgrind, Pythons gc module, etc.) but to no avail so far. I'm a bit afraid that the actual problem is memory fragmentation within Python and/or libc managed memory. Anyway, my question is more specific right now: Is there a tool to visualize resident memory usage and ideally show how it develops over time? I think the raw data is in /proc/$PID/smaps but I was hoping there's some tool that shows me a nice graph of the amounts used by mmap'ed files vs. anonymous mmap'ed memory vs. heap over time so that it's easier to see (literally) what's changing. I couldn't find anything though. Does anybody know of a ready to use tool that graphs memory usage over space and time in an intuitive way?

    Read the article

  • C++: Trouble with Pointers, loop variables, and structs

    - by Rosarch
    Consider the following example: #include <iostream> #include <sstream> #include <vector> #include <wchar.h> #include <stdlib.h> using namespace std; struct odp { int f; wchar_t* pstr; }; int main() { vector<odp> vec; ostringstream ss; wchar_t base[5]; wcscpy_s(base, L"1234"); for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) { odp foo; foo.f = i; wchar_t loopStr[1]; foo.pstr = loopStr; // wchar_t* = wchar_t ? Why does this work? foo.pstr[0] = base[i]; vec.push_back(foo); } for (vector<odp>::iterator iter = vec.begin(); iter != vec.end(); iter++) { cout << "Vec contains: " << iter->f << ", " << *(iter->pstr) << endl; } } This produces: Vec contains: 0, 52 Vec contains: 1, 52 Vec contains: 2, 52 Vec contains: 3, 52 I would hope that each time, iter->f and iter->pstr would yield a different result. Unfortunately, iter->pstr is always the same. My suspicion is that each time through the loop, a new loopStr is created. Instead of copying it into the struct, I'm only copying a pointer. The location that the pointer writes to is getting overwritten. How can I avoid this? Is it possible to solve this problem without allocating memory on the heap?

    Read the article

  • Make sense of Notification Watcher source objective-c

    - by Chris
    From Notification Watcher source. - (void)selectNotification:(NSNotification*)aNotification { id sender = [aNotification object]; [selectedDistNotification release]; selectedDistNotification = nil; [selectedWSNotification release]; selectedWSNotification = nil; NSNotification **targetVar; NSArray **targetList; if (sender == distNotificationList) { targetVar = &selectedDistNotification; targetList = &distNotifications; } else { targetVar = &selectedWSNotification; targetList = &wsNotifications; } if ([sender selectedRow] != -1) { [*targetVar autorelease]; *targetVar = [[*targetList objectAtIndex:[sender selectedRow]] retain]; } if (*targetVar == nil) { [objectText setStringValue:@""]; } else { id obj = [*targetVar object]; NSMutableAttributedString *objStr = nil; if (obj == nil) { NSFont *aFont = [objectText font]; NSDictionary *attrDict = italicAttributesForFont(aFont); objStr = [[NSMutableAttributedString alloc] initWithString:@"(null)" attributes:attrDict]; } else { /* Line 1 */ objStr = [[NSMutableAttributedString alloc] initWithString: [NSString stringWithFormat:@" (%@)", [obj className]]]; [objStr addAttributes:italicAttributesForFont([objectText font]) range:NSMakeRange(1,[[obj className] length]+2)]; if ([obj isKindOfClass:[NSString class]]) { [objStr replaceCharactersInRange:NSMakeRange(0,0) withString:obj]; } else if ([obj respondsToSelector:@selector(stringValue)]) { [objStr replaceCharactersInRange:NSMakeRange(0,0) withString:[obj performSelector:@selector(stringValue)]]; } else { // Remove the space since we have no value to display [objStr replaceCharactersInRange:NSMakeRange(0,1) withString:@""]; } } [objectText setObjectValue:objStr]; /* LINE 2 */ [objStr release]; } [userInfoList reloadData]; } Over at //LINE 2 objStr is being released. Is this because we are assigning it with alloc in //LINE 1? Also, why is //LINE 1 not: objStr = [NSMutableAttributedString* initWithString:@"(null)" attributes:attrDict] If I create a new string like (NSString*) str = [NSString initWithString:@"test"]; ... str = @"another string"; Would I have to release str, or is this wrong and if I do that I have to use [[NSString alloc] initWithString:@"test"]? Why isn't the pointer symbol used as in [[NSString* alloc] ...? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Combining FileStream and MemoryStream to avoid disk accesses/paging while receiving gigabytes of data?

    - by w128
    I'm receiving a file as a stream of byte[] data packets (total size isn't known in advance) that I need to store somewhere before processing it immediately after it's been received (I can't do the processing on the fly). Total received file size can vary from as small as 10 KB to over 4 GB. One option for storing the received data is to use a MemoryStream, i.e. a sequence of MemoryStream.Write(bufferReceived, 0, count) calls to store the received packets. This is very simple, but obviously will result in out of memory exception for large files. An alternative option is to use a FileStream, i.e. FileStream.Write(bufferReceived, 0, count). This way, no out of memory exceptions will occur, but what I'm unsure about is bad performance due to disk writes (which I don't want to occur as long as plenty of memory is still available) - I'd like to avoid disk access as much as possible, but I don't know of a way to control this. I did some testing and most of the time, there seems to be little performance difference between say 10 000 consecutive calls of MemoryStream.Write() vs FileStream.Write(), but a lot seems to depend on buffer size and the total amount of data in question (i.e the number of writes). Obviously, MemoryStream size reallocation is also a factor. Does it make sense to use a combination of MemoryStream and FileStream, i.e. write to memory stream by default, but once the total amount of data received is over e.g. 500 MB, write it to FileStream; then, read in chunks from both streams for processing the received data (first process 500 MB from the MemoryStream, dispose it, then read from FileStream)? Another solution is to use a custom memory stream implementation that doesn't require continuous address space for internal array allocation (i.e. a linked list of memory streams); this way, at least on 64-bit environments, out of memory exceptions should no longer be an issue. Con: extra work, more room for mistakes. So how do FileStream vs MemoryStream read/writes behave in terms of disk access and memory caching, i.e. data size/performance balance. I would expect that as long as enough RAM is available, FileStream would internally read/write from memory (cache) anyway, and virtual memory would take care of the rest. But I don't know how often FileStream will explicitly access a disk when being written to. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • logic before dispatcher + controller?

    - by Spoonface
    I believe for a typical MVC web application the router / dispatcher routine is used to decide which controller is loaded based primarily on the area requested in the url by the user. However, in addition to checking the url query string, I also like to use the dispatcher to check whether the user is currently logged in or not to decide which controller is loaded. For example if they are logged in and request the login page, the dispatcher would load their account instead. But is this a fairly non-standard design? Would it violate MVC in any way? I only ask as the examples I've read through this weekend have had no major calculations performed before the dispatcher routine, and commonly check whether the user is logged in or not per controller, and then redirect where necessary. But to me it seems odd to redirect a logged in user from the login area to account area if you could just load the account controller in the first place? I hope I've explained my consternation well enough, but could anyone offer some details on how they handle logged in users, and similar session data?

    Read the article

  • Allocated Private Bytes keeps going up in one computer but not the other

    - by Jacob
    OK, this may sound weird, but here goes. There are 2 computers, A (Pentium D) and B (Quad Core) with almost the same amount of RAM. If I run the same code on both computers, the allocated private bytes in A never goes down resulting in a crash later on. In B it looks like the private bytes is constantly deallocated and everything looks fine. In both computers, the working set is deallocated and allocated similarly. Could this be an issue with manifests or DLLs (system)? I'm clueless. Note: I observed the utilized memory with Process Explorer.

    Read the article

  • Read the "Human friendly" text of a WebPage

    - by oidfrosty
    I need to read the final user page text, for example : "&#x73;&#x74;&#x61;&#x63;&#x6B;&#x6F;&#x76;&#x65;&#x72;&#x66;&#x6C;&#x6F;&#x77;&#x2E;&#x63;&#x6F;&#x6D;" is displayed as "stackoverflow.com". the aim is to avoid the use of script/encoding to avoid my filters it will be done with a content filtering proxy. i was thinking about injecting a script in the page

    Read the article

  • UIVIewController not released when view is dismissed

    - by Nelson Ko
    I have a main view, mainWindow, which presents a couple of buttons. Both buttons create a new UIViewController (mapViewController), but one will start a game and the other will resume it. Both buttons are linked via StoryBoard to the same View. They are segued to modal views as I'm not using the NavigationController. So in a typical game, if a person starts a game, but then goes back to the main menu, he triggers: [self dismissViewControllerAnimated:YES completion:nil ]; to return to the main menu. I would assume the view controller is released at this point. The user resumes the game with the second button by opening another instance of mapViewController. What is happening, tho, is some touch events will trigger methods on the original instance (and write status updates to them - therefore invisible to the current view). When I put a breakpoint in the mapViewController code, I can see the instance will be one or the other (one of which should be released). I have tried putting a delegate to the mainWindow clearing the view: [self.delegate clearMapView]; where in the mainWindow - (void) clearMapView{ gameWindow = nil; } I have also tried self.view=nil; in the mapViewController. The mapViewController code contains MVC code, where the model is static. I wonder if this may prevent ARC from releasing the view. The model.m contains: static CanShieldModel *sharedInstance; + (CanShieldModel *) sharedModel { @synchronized(self) { if (!sharedInstance) sharedInstance = [[CanShieldModel alloc] init]; return sharedInstance; } return sharedInstance; } Another post which may have a lead, but so far not successful, is UIViewController not being released when popped I have in ViewDidLoad: // checks to see if app goes inactive - saves. [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] addObserver:self selector:@selector(resignActive) name:UIApplicationWillResignActiveNotification object:nil]; with the corresponding in ViewDidUnload: [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver:self name:UIApplicationWillResignActiveNotification object:nil]; Does anyone have any suggestions? EDIT: - (void) prepareForSegue:(UIStoryboardSegue *)segue sender:(id)sender{ NSString *identifier = segue.identifier; if ([identifier isEqualToString: @"Start Game"]){ gameWindow = (ViewController *)[segue destinationViewController]; gameWindow.newgame=-1; gameWindow.delegate = self; } else if ([identifier isEqualToString: @"Resume Game"]){ gameWindow = (ViewController *)[segue destinationViewController]; gameWindow.newgame=0; gameWindow.delegate = self;

    Read the article

  • Should developers *really* have private offices?

    - by Aron Rotteveel
    We will probably be moving within a year, so we have to make some decisions regarding office layout. At the moment, our company is basically one big office. When our developers can't bother to be disturbed at all, we all have our own headphones to mute the outside world. Still, it seems a lot of people feel that private offices are no doubt the way to go. From Joel's article Private Offices Redux: Not every programmer in the world wants to work in a private office. In fact quite a few would tell you unequivocally that they prefer the camaradarie and easy information sharing of an open space. Don't fall for it. They also want M&Ms for breakfast and a pony. Open space is fun but not productive. Even though I can understand the benefit on productivity, does having a private office really result in more net productivity? There seem to be plenty of companies that create wide open spaces and still maintain good productivity. Or so it seems. (I should mention many of them use cubicles, though) What is your opinion on this? What does your company do? Is there some middle ground in this? Some more related information on this matter: Private Offices Redux The new Fog Creek office A Field Guide to Developers Gmail recruitment page. Found this last one somewhat remarkable since the Gmail recruitment page promotes the "wide open space" idea.

    Read the article

  • Does variable = null set it for garbage collection

    - by manyxcxi
    Help me settle a dispute with a coworker: Does setting a variable or collection to null in Java aid in garbage collection and reducing memory usage? If I have a long running program and each function may be iteratively called (potentially thousands of times): Does setting all the variables in it to null before returning a value to the parent function help reduce heap size/memory usage?

    Read the article

  • Question about unions and heap allocated memory

    - by Dennis Miller
    I was trying to use a union to so I could update the fields in one thread and then read allfields in another thread. In the actual system, I have mutexes to make sure everything is safe. The problem is with fieldB, before I had to change it fieldB was declared like field A and C. However, due to a third party driver, fieldB must be alligned with page boundary. When I changed field B to be allocated with valloc, I run into problems. Questions: 1) Is there a way to statically declare fieldB alligned on page boundary. Basically do the same thing as valloc, but on the stack? 2) Is it possible to do a union when field B, or any field is being allocated on the heap?. Not sure if that is even legal. Here's a simple Test program I was experimenting with. This doesn't work unless you declare fieldB like field A and C, and make the obvious changes in the public methods. #include <iostream> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdio.h> class Test { public: Test(void) { // field B must be alligned to page boundary // Is there a way to do this on the stack??? this->field.fieldB = (unsigned char*) valloc(10); }; //I know this is bad, this class is being treated like //a global structure. Its self contained in another class. unsigned char* PointerToFieldA(void) { return &this->field.fieldA[0]; } unsigned char* PointerToFieldB(void) { return this->field.fieldB; } unsigned char* PointerToFieldC(void) { return &this->field.fieldC[0]; } unsigned char* PointerToAllFields(void) { return &this->allFields[0]; } private: // Is this union possible with field B being // allocated on the heap? union { struct { unsigned char fieldA[10]; //This field has to be alligned to page boundary //Is there way to be declared on the stack unsigned char* fieldB; unsigned char fieldC[10]; } field; unsigned char allFields[30]; }; }; int main() { Test test; strncpy((char*) test.PointerToFieldA(), "0123456789", 10); strncpy((char*) test.PointerToFieldB(), "1234567890", 10); strncpy((char*) test.PointerToFieldC(), "2345678901", 10); char dummy[11]; dummy[10] = '\0'; strncpy(dummy, (char*) test.PointerToFieldA(), 10); printf("%s\n", dummy); strncpy(dummy, (char*) test.PointerToFieldB(), 10); printf("%s\n", dummy); strncpy(dummy, (char*) test.PointerToFieldC(), 10); printf("%s\n", dummy); char allFields[31]; allFields[30] = '\0'; strncpy(allFields, (char*) test.PointerToAllFields(), 30); printf("%s\n", allFields); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Is it OK to write code after [super dealloc]? (Objective-C)

    - by Richard J. Ross III
    I have a situation in my code, where I cannot clean up my classes objects without first calling [super dealloc]. It is something like this: // Baseclass.m @implmentation Baseclass ... -(void) dealloc { [self _removeAllData]; [aVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [anotherVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [super dealloc]; } ... @end This works great. My problem is, when I went to subclass this huge and nasty class (over 2000 lines of gross code), I ran into a problem: when I released my objects before calling [super dealloc] I had zombies running through the code that were activated when I called the [self _removeAllData] method. // Subclass.m @implementation Subclass ... -(void) deallloc { [super dealloc]; [someObjectUsedInTheRemoveAllDataMethod release]; } ... @end This works great, and It didn't require me to refactor any code. My question Is this: Is it safe for me to do this, or should I refactor my code? Or maybe autorelease the objects? I am programming for iPhone if that matters any.

    Read the article

  • P-invoke call fails if too much memory is assigned beforehand

    - by RandomEngy
    I've got a p-invoke call to an unmanaged DLL that was failing in my WPF app but not in a simple, starter WPF app. I tried to figure out what the problem was but eventually came to the conclusion that if I assign too much memory before making the call, the call fails. I had two separate blocks of code, both of which would succeed on their own, but that would cause failure if both were run. (They had nothing to do with what the p-invoke call is trying to do). What kind of issues in the unmanaged library would cause such an issue? I thought that the managed and unmanaged heaps were supposed to be automatically separated. The crash as far as I can tell is happening in a dynamically loaded secondary DLL from the one p-invoked into. Could that have something to do with it?

    Read the article

  • CoreData leak when reading a property

    - by Kamchatka
    Hello, I have the following code in a loop iterating over the different document objects: NSAutoreleasePool* pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init]; [document primitiveValueForKey:@"data"]; [data writeToFile:filename atomically:NO]; [document.managedObjectContext refreshObject:document mergeChanges:NO]; [pool release]; The "data" property is a large blob (a 1MB image). And as I monitor the memory with the Allocation Instrument memory usage is increasing. I cannot find where the leak is coming from and how to remove it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Preallocating memory with C++ in realtime environment

    - by Elazar Leibovich
    I'm having a function which gets an input buffer of n bytes, and needs an auxillary buffer of n bytes in order to process the given input buffer. (I know vector is allocating memory at runtime, let's say that I'm using a vector which uses static preallocated memory. Imagine this is NOT an STL vector.) The usual approach is void processData(vector<T> &vec) { vector<T> &aux = new vector<T>(vec.size()); //dynamically allocate memory // process data } //usage: processData(v) Since I'm working in a real time environment, I wish to preallocate all the memory I'll ever need in advance. The buffer is allocated only once at startup. I want that whenever I'm allocating a vector, I'll automatically allocate auxillary buffer for my processData function. I can do something similar with a template function static void _processData(vector<T> &vec,vector<T> &aux) { // process data } template<size_t sz> void processData(vector<T> &vec) { static aux_buffer[sz]; vector aux(vec.size(),aux_buffer); // use aux_buffer for the vector _processData(vec,aux); } // usage: processData<V_MAX_SIZE>(v); However working alot with templates is not much fun (now let's recompile everything since I changed a comment!), and it forces me to do some bookkeeping whenever I use this function. Are there any nicer designs around this problem?

    Read the article

  • How do i free objects in C#

    - by assassin
    Hi, Can anyone please tell me how I can free objects in C#? For example, I have an object: Object obj1 = new Object(); //Some code using obj1 //Here I would like to free obj1, after it is no longer required and also more importantly its scope is the full run time of the program. Thanks for all your help

    Read the article

  • Objective-C ref count and autorelease

    - by turbovince
    Hey guys, suppose the following code: int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) { //[...] Rectangle* myRect = [[Rectangle alloc] init]; Vector2* newOrigin = [[[Vector2 alloc] init] autorelease]; // ref count 1 [newOrigin setX: 50.0f]; [myRect setOrigin: newOrigin]; // ref count 2 [myRect.origin setXY: 25.0f :100.0f]; // ref count goes to 3... why ? [myRect release]; [pool drain]; return 0; } Rectangle's origin is declared as a (retain) synthesized property. Just wondering 2 things: Why does ref count goes to 3 when using the getter accessor of Rectangle's origin? Am I doing something wrong ? With a ref count of 3, I don't understand how this snippet of code cannot leak. Calling release on myRect will make it go down to 2 since I call release on the origin in dealloc(). But then, when does autorelease take effect? Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >