Search Results

Search found 253 results on 11 pages for 'portability'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 3/11 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >

  • Could Grand Central Dispatch (`libdispatch`) ever be available on Windows?

    - by elliottcable
    I’m looking into multithreading, and GCD seems like a much better option than manually writing a solution using pthread.h and pthreads-win32. However, although it looks like libdispatch is either working on, or soon going to be working on, most newer POSIX-compatible systems… I have to ask, what about Windows? What are the chances of libdispatch being ported to Windows? What are the barriers preventing that from happening? If it came down to it, what would I need to do to preform that portage?

    Read the article

  • About enumerations in Delphi and c++ in 64-bit environments

    - by sum1stolemyname
    I recently had to work around the different default sizes used for enumerations in Delphi and c++ since i have to use a c++ dll from a delphi application. On function call returns an array of structs (or records in delphi), the first element of which is an enum. To make this work, I use packed records (or aligned(1)-structs). However, since delphi selects the size of an enum-variable dynamically by default and uses the smallest datatype possible (it was a byte in my case), but C++ uses an int for enums, my data was not interpreted correctly. Delphi offers a compiler switch to work around this, so the declaration of the enum becomes {$Z4} TTypeofLight = ( V3d_AMBIENT, V3d_DIRECTIONAL, V3d_POSITIONAL, V3d_SPOT ); {$Z1} My Questions are: What will become of my structs when they are compiled on/for a 64-bit environment? Does the default c++ integer grow to 8 Bytes? Are there other memory alignment / data type size modifications (other than pointers)?

    Read the article

  • Endianness and C API's: Specifically OpenSSL.

    - by Hassan Syed
    I have an algorithm that uses the following OpenSSL calls: HMAC_update() / HMAC_final() // ripe160 EVP_CipherUpdate() / EVP_CipherFinal() // cbc_blowfish These algorithm take a unsigned char * into the "plain text". My input data is comes from a C++ std::string::c_str() which originate from a protocol buffer object as a encoded UTF-8 string. UTF-8 strings are meant to be endian neutrial. However I'm a bit paranoid about how OpenSSL may perform operations on the data. My understanding is that encryption algorithms work on 8-bit blocks of data, and if a unsigned char * is used for pointer arithmetic when the operations are performed the algorithms should be endian neutral and I do not need to worry about anything. My uncertainty is compounded by the fact that I am working on a little-endian machine and have never done any real cross-architecture programming. My beliefs/reasoning are/is based on the following two properties std::string (not wstring) internally uses a 8-bit ptr and a the resulting c_str() ptr will itterate the same way regardless of the CPU architecture. Encryption algorithms are either by design, or by implementation, endian neutral. I know the best way to get a definitive answer is to use QEMU and do some cross-platform unit tests (which I plan to do). My question is a request for comments on my reasoning, and perhaps will assist other programmers when faced with similar problems.

    Read the article

  • When to choose C over C++?

    - by aaa
    Hi. I have become a fond of C++ thanks to this website. Before, I programmed exclusively in C/Fortran, thinking that C++ was too slow (not anymore). Is there a reason to write new project purely in C? this is besides obvious things like low-level kernel/system components. What about intermediate things, like communication libraries, for example MPI? Is C still more portable than C++? I have messed with pretty exotic systems, like Cray, but have yet to see non-embedded system without C++. thanks

    Read the article

  • Looking at the C++ new[] cookie. How portable is this code?

    - by carleeto
    I came up with this as a quick solution to a debugging problem - I have the pointer variable and its type, I know it points to an array of objects allocated on the heap, but I don't know how many. So I wrote this function to look at the cookie that stores the number of bytes when memory is allocated on the heap. template< typename T > int num_allocated_items( T *p ) { return *((int*)p-4)/sizeof(T); } //test #include <iostream> int main( int argc, char *argv[] ) { using std::cout; using std::endl; typedef long double testtype; testtype *p = new testtype[ 45 ]; //prints 45 std::cout<<"num allocated = "<<num_allocated_items<testtype>(p)<<std::endl; delete[] p; return 0; } I'd like to know just how portable this code is.

    Read the article

  • c++ Initializing a struct with an array as a member

    - by Drew Shafer
    I've got the following reduced testcase: typedef struct TestStruct { int length; int values[]; }; TestStruct t = {3, {0, 1, 2}}; This works with Visual C++, but doesn't compile with g++ under linux. Can anyone help me make this specific kind of initializer portable? Additional details: the actual structure I'm working with has several other int values, and the array can range in length from a single entry to over 1800 entries. Any help much appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • portable way to deal with 64/32 bit time_t

    - by MK
    I have some code which is built both on Windows and Linux. Linux at this point is always 32bit but Windows is 32 and 64bit. Windows wants to have time_t be 64 bit and Linux still has it as 32 bit. I'm fine with that, except in some places time_t values are converted to strings. So when time_T is 32 bit it should be done with %d and when it is 64bit with %lld... what is the smart way to do this? Also: any ideas how I may find all places where time_t's are passed to printf-style functions to address this issue?

    Read the article

  • Is PThread a good choice for multi-platorm C/C++ multi-threading program?

    - by RogerV
    Been doing mostly Java and smattering of .NET for last five years and haven't written any significant C or C++ during that time. So have been away from that scene for a while. If I want to write a C or C++ program today that does some multi-threading and is source code portable across Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux/Unix - is PThread a good choice? The C or C++ code won't be doing any GUI, so won't need to worry with any of that. For the Windows platform, I don't want to bring a lot of Unix baggage, though, in terms of unix emulation runtime libraries. Would prefer a PThread API for Windows that is a thin-as-possible wrapper over existing Windows threading APIs. ADDENDUM EDIT: Am leaning toward going with boost:thread - I also want to be able to use C++ try/catch exception handling too. And even though my program will be rather minimal and not particularly OOPish, I like to encapsulate using class and namespace - as opposed to C disembodied functions.

    Read the article

  • A step-up from TiddlyWiki that is still 100% portable?

    - by Smandoli
    TiddlyWiki is a great idea, brilliantly implemented. I'm using it as a portable personal "knowledge manager," and these are the prize virtues: It travels on my USB flash memory stick and runs on any computer, regardless of operating system No software installation is needed on the computer (TiddlyWiki merely uses the Internet browser) No Internet connection is needed In terms of data retrieval functionality, it mimics a relational database (use of tags and internal links) Let's say I've got a million words of prose in 4,000 tiddlers (posts). I'm still testing, but it looks like TiddlyWiki gets very slow. Is there an app like TiddlyWiki that keeps all the virtues I listed above, and allows more storage? NOTE: Separation of content and presentation would be ideal. It's nifty that TiddlyWiki has everything in a single HTML document, but it's unhelpful in many ways. I don't care if a directory of assorted docs is needed (SQLite, XML?), as long as it's functionally self-contained.

    Read the article

  • Is there a fundamental difference between malloc and HeapAlloc (aside from the portability)?

    - by Lambert
    Hi, I'm having code that, for various reasons, I'm trying to port from the C runtime to one that uses the Windows Heap API. I've encountered a problem: If I redirect the malloc/calloc/realloc/free calls to HeapAlloc/HeapReAlloc/HeapFree (with GetProcessHeap for the handle), the memory seems to be allocated correctly (no bad pointer returned, and no exceptions thrown), but the library I'm porting says "failed to allocate memory" for some reason. I've tried this both with the Microsoft CRT (which uses the Heap API underneath) and with another company's run-time library (which uses the Global Memory API underneath); the malloc for both of those works well with the library, but for some reason, using the Heap API directly doesn't work. I've checked that the allocations aren't too big (= 0x7FFF8 bytes), and they're not. The only problem I can think of is memory alignment; is that the case? Or other than that, is there a fundamental difference between the Heap API and the CRT memory API that I'm not aware of? If so, what is it? And if not, then why does the static Microsoft CRT (included with Visual Studio) take some extra steps in malloc/calloc before calling HeapAlloc? I'm suspecting there's a difference but I can't think of what it might be. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM)

    Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM) is a methodology used to determine how specific application quality attributes were achieved and how possible changes in the future will affect quality attributes based on hypothetical cases studies. Common quality attributes that can be utilized by this methodology include modifiability, robustness, portability, and extensibility. Quality Attribute: Application Modifiability The Modifiability quality attribute refers to how easy it changing the system in the future will be. This to me is a very open-ended attribute because a business could decide to transform a Point of Sale (POS) system in to a Lead Tracking system overnight. (Yes, this did actually happen to me) In order for SAAM to be properly applied for checking this attribute specific hypothetical case studies need to be created and review for the modifiability attribute due to the fact that various scenarios would return various results based on the amount of changes. In the case of the POS change out a payment gateway or adding an additional payment would have scored very high in comparison to changing the system over to a lead management system. I personally would evaluate this quality attribute based on the S.O.I.L.D Principles of software design. I have found from my experience the use of S.O.I.L.D in software design allows for the adoption of changes within a system. Quality Attribute: Application Robustness The Robustness quality attribute refers to how an application handles the unexpected. The unexpected can be defined but is not limited to anything not anticipated in the originating design of the system. For example: Bad Data, Limited to no network connectivity, invalid permissions, or any unexpected application exceptions. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on how the system handled the exceptions. Robustness Considerations Did the system stop or did it handle the unexpected error? Did the system log the unexpected error for future debugging? What message did the user receive about the error? Quality Attribute: Application Portability The Portability quality attribute refers to the ease of porting an application to run in a new operating system or device. For example, It is much easier to alter an ASP.net website to be accessible by a PC, Mac, IPhone, Android Phone, Mini PC, or Table in comparison to desktop application written in VB.net because a lot more work would be involved to get the desktop app to the point where it would be viable to port the application over to the various environments and devices. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on each new environment for which the hypothetical case study identifies. I would pay particular attention to the following items. Portability Considerations Hardware Dependencies Operating System Dependencies Data Source Dependencies Network Dependencies and Availabilities  Quality Attribute: Application Extensibility The Extensibility quality attribute refers to the ease of adding new features to an existing application without impacting existing functionality. I would personally evaluate this quality attribute based on each new environment for the following Extensibility  Considerations Hard coded Variables versus Configurable variables Application Documentation (External Documents and Codebase Documentation.) The use of Solid Design Principles

    Read the article

  • Why Aren't Programs Written In Assembly More Often?

    - by mudge
    It seems to be a mainstream opinion that assembly programming takes longer and is more difficult to program in than a higher level language such as C. Therefore it seems to be recommend or assumed that it is better to write in a higher level language for these reasons and for the reason of better portability. Recently I've been writing in x86 assembly and it has dawned on me that perhaps these reasons are not really true, except perhaps portability. Perhaps it is more of a matter of familiarity and knowing how to write assembly well. I also noticed that programming in assembly is quite different than programming in an HLL. Perhaps a good and experienced assembly programmer could write programs just as easily and as quickly as an experienced C programmer writing in C. Perhaps it is because assembly programming is quite different than HLLs, and so requires different thinking, methods and ways, which makes it seem very awkward to program in for the unfamiliar, and so gives it its bad name for writing programs in. If portability isn't an issue, then really, what would C have over a good assembler such as NASM?

    Read the article

  • C++ : Lack of Standardization at the Binary Level

    - by Nawaz
    Why ISO/ANSI didn't standardize C++ at the binary level? There are many portability issues with C++, which is only because of lack of it's standardization at the binary level. Don Box writes, (quoting from his book Essential COM, chapter COM As A Better C++) C++ and Portability Once the decision is made to distribute a C++ class as a DLL, one is faced with one of the fundamental weaknesses of C++, that is, lack of standardization at the binary level. Although the ISO/ANSI C++ Draft Working Paper attempts to codify which programs will compile and what the semantic effects of running them will be, it makes no attempt to standardize the binary runtime model of C++. The first time this problem will become evident is when a client tries to link against the FastString DLL's import library from a C++ developement environment other than the one used to build the FastString DLL. Are there more benefits Or loss of this lack of binary standardization?

    Read the article

  • C++ : Lack of Standardization at the Binary Level

    - by Nawaz
    Why ISO/ANSI didn't standardize C++ at the binary level? There are many portability issues with C++, which is only because of lack of it's standardization at the binary level. Don Box writes, (quoting from his book Essential COM, chapter COM As A Better C++) C++ and Portability Once the decision is made to distribute a C++ class as a DLL, one is faced with one of the fundamental weaknesses of C++, that is, lack of standardization at the binary level. Although the ISO/ANSI C++ Draft Working Paper attempts to codify which programs will compile and what the semantic effects of running them will be, it makes no attempt to standardize the binary runtime model of C++. The first time this problem will become evident is when a client tries to link against the FastString DLL's import library from a C++ developement environment other than the one used to build the FastString DLL. Are there more benefits Or loss of this lack of binary standardization?

    Read the article

  • Which API for cross platform mobile audio?

    - by deft_code
    This question focuses on the API's available on phones. I'd been planning to use OpenAL in my game for maximum portability. It runs great on Linux so I can quickly develop the Game and leverage it's superior debugging tools. However I've recently heard that Android doesn't support OpenAL well. Instead they've gone with a OpenSL ES library. What I'm looking for is a free Audio library that I can use with minimal custom code on iPhone, Android, and my Linux desktop. Does such an API exists? Some extra details: The game is written in C++ with custom minimal front ends. ObjC for iPhone, Java for Android, and SFML for Desktops. I'm using OpenGL ES for portability as iPhone doesn't support the more advanced OpenGL APIs.

    Read the article

  • Requiring multithreading/concurrency for implementation of scripting language

    - by Ricky Stewart
    Here's the deal: I'm looking at designing my own scripting/interpreted language for fun. I'm only in the planning stages right now; I want to make sure I have a very strong hold on exactly how I will implement everything before I start coding. What I'm currently struggling with is concurrency. It seems to me like an easy way to avoid the unpredictable performance that comes with garbage collection would be to put the garbage collector in its own thread, and have it run concurrently with the interpreter itself. (To be clear, I don't plan to allow the scripts to be multithreaded themselves; I would simply put a garbage collector to work in a different thread than the interpreter.) This doesn't seem to be a common strategy for many popular scripting languages, probably for portability reasons; I would probably write the interpreter in the UNIX/POSIX threading framework initially and then port it to other platforms (Windows, etc.) if need be. Does anyone have any thoughts in this issue? Would whatever gains I receive by exploiting concurrency be nullified by the portability issues that will inevitably arise? (On that note, am I really correct in my assumption that I would experience great performance gains with a concurrent garbage collector?) Should I move forward with this strategy or step away from it?

    Read the article

  • Cross Platform build

    - by Neeraj
    I have an application in which we use a hand-made build system.The reason for this is portability, the application should be portable on Linux/Mac/Windows. There are some port-specific files that are not updated by the deafult build system. What I do now is update the files manually or have a script do this. However I am thinking of switching to cross platform build system like cmake or scons. Are their associated problems wrt portability? Will it pay in long run? and if so what should be my choice "cmake", "scons" or some other(if any?). Thanks,

    Read the article

  • C++ : Lack of Standardization at the Binary Level

    - by Nawaz
    Why ISO/ANSI didn't standardize C++ at the binary level? There are many portability issues with C++, which is only because of lack of it's standardization at the binary level. Don Box writes, (quoting from his book Essential COM, chapter COM As A Better C++) C++ and Portability Once the decision is made to distribute a C++ class as a DLL, one is faced with one of the fundamental weaknesses of C++, that is, lack of standardization at the binary level. Although the ISO/ANSI C++ Draft Working Paper attempts to codify which programs will compile and what the semantic effects of running them will be, it makes no attempt to standardize the binary runtime model of C++. The first time this problem will become evident is when a client tries to link against the FastString DLL's import library from a C++ developement environment other than the one used to build the FastString DLL. Are there more benefits Or loss of this lack of binary standardization?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >