Search Results

Search found 2664 results on 107 pages for 'operator precedence'.

Page 50/107 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

• non-scalar type requested

  - by lego69

  can somebody please help me with an error conversion from `A' to non-scalar type `B' requested I have class A and derived from it B, but I have problems with these rows: A a(1); A *pb = new B(a); B b = *pb; //here I have an error thanks in advance for any help class A { protected: int player; public: A(int initPlayer = 0); A(const A&); A& operator=(const A&); virtual ~A(){}; virtual void foo(); void foo() const; operator int(); }; class B: public A { public: B(int initPlayer): A(initPlayer){}; ~B(){}; virtual void foo(); };

  Read the article

• Using a class with const data members in a vector

  - by Max

  Given a class like this: class Foo { const int a; }; Is it possible to put that class in a vector? When I try, my compiler tells me it can't use the default assignment operator. I try to write my own, but googling around tells me that it's impossible to write an assignment operator for a class with const data members. One post I found said that "if you made [the data member] const that means you don't want assignment to happen in the first place." This makes sense. I've written a class with const data members, and I never intended on using assignment on it, but apparently I need assignment to put it in a vector. Is there a way around this that still preserves const-correctness?

  Read the article

• Why are there two implementations of std::sort (with and without a comparator) rather than one implementation with a default template parameter?

  - by PolyVox

  In my code I'm adopting a design strategy which is similar to some standard library algorithms in that the exact behavior can be customized by a function object. The simplest example is std::sort, where a function object can control how the comparison is made between objects. I notice that the Visual C++ provides two implementations of std::sort, which naturally involves code duplication. I would have imagined that it was instead possible to have only one implementation, and provide a default comparator (using operator< ) as a default template parameter. What is the rational behind two separate versions? Would my suggestion make the interface more complex in some way? Or result in confusing error messages when the object does not provide operator Thanks, David

  Read the article

• C++ enumaration

  - by asli

  Hi,my question is about enumaration,my codes are : #include<iostream> using namespace std; int main() { enum bolumler{programcilik,donanim,muhasebe,motor,buro} bolum; bolum = donanim; cout<<bolum<<endl; bolum+=2; /* bolum=motor */ cout<<bolum; return 0; } The output should be 1 3 but according to these codes the error is: error C2676: binary '+=' : 'enum main::bolumler' does not define this operator or a conversion to a type acceptable to the predefined operator Error executing cl.exe. 111.obj - 1 error(s), 0 warning(s) Can you help me ?The other question is what can I do if I want to see the output like that "muhasebe"?

  Read the article

• Library for Dataflow in C

  - by msutherl

  How can I do dataflow (pipes and filters, stream processing, flow based) in C? And not with UNIX pipes. I recently came across stream.py. Streams are iterables with a pipelining mechanism to enable data-flow programming and easy parallelization. The idea is to take the output of a function that turns an iterable into another iterable and plug that as the input of another such function. While you can already do this using function composition, this package provides an elegant notation for it by overloading the operator. I would like to duplicate a simple version of this kind of functionality in C. I particularly like the overloading of the operator to avoid function composition mess. Wikipedia points to this hint from a Usenet post in 1990. Why C? Because I would like to be able to do this on microcontrollers and in C extensions for other high level languages (Max, Pd*, Python). * (ironic given that Max and Pd were written, in C, specifically for this purpose – I'm looking for something barebones)

  Read the article

• I have a following gcc compilation warning

  - by thetna

  symbol.h:179: note: expected ‘uintptr_t *’ but argument is of type ‘PRECEDENCE’ The corresponding code is : 176 void symbol_SetCount(SYMBOL, unsigned long); 177 unsigned long symbol_GetCount(SYMBOL); 178 179 size_t symbol_Ordering(uintptr_t*, SYMBOL); 180 181 void symbol_CheckIndexInRange(int); 182 void symbol_CheckNoVariable(SYMBOL); SYMBOL is defined as: typedef size_t SYMBOL Any effort will be highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Not a statement?

  - by abelenky

  I have a simple little code fragment that is frustrating me: HashSet<long> groupUIDs = new HashSet<long>(); groupUIDs.Add(uid)? unique++ : dupes++; At compile time, it generates the error: Only assignment, call, increment, decrement, and new object expressions can be used as a statement HashSet.Add is documented to return a bool, so the ternary (?) operator should work, and this looks like a completely legitimate way to track the number of unique and duplicate items I add to a hash-set. When I reformat it as a if-then-else, it works fine. Can anyone explain the error, and if there is a way to do this as a simple ternary operator?

  Read the article

• C++ function object terminology functor, deltor, comparitor, etc..

  - by Robert S. Barnes

  Is there a commonly accepted terminology for various types for common functors? For instance I found myself naturally using comparitor for comparison functors like this: struct ciLessLibC : public std::binary_function<std::string, std::string, bool> { bool operator()(const std::string &lhs, const std::string &rhs) const { return strcasecmp(lhs.c_str(), rhs.c_str()) < 0 ? 1 : 0; } }; Or using the term deltor for something like this: struct DeleteAddrInfo { void operator()(const addr_map_t::value_type &pr) const { freeaddrinfo(pr.second); } }; If using these kinds of shorthand terms is common, it there some dictionary of them all someplace?

  Read the article

• C++ struct sorting error

  - by Betamoo

  I am trying to sort a vector of custom struct in C++ struct Book{ public:int H,W,V,i; }; with a simple functor class CompareHeight { public: int operator() (Book lhs,Book rhs) { return lhs.H-rhs.H; } }; when trying : vector<Book> books(X); ..... sort(books.begin(),books.end(), CompareHeight()); it gives me exception "invalid operator <" What is the meaning of this error? Thanks

  Read the article

• Minimize the sequence by putting appropriate operations ' DP'

  - by Vikas

  Given a sequence,say, 222 We have to put a '+' or '* ' between each adjacent pair. '* ' has higher precedence over '+' We have to o/p the string whose evaluation leads to minimum value. O/p must be lexicographically smallest if there are more than one. inp:222 o/p: 2*2+2 Explaination: 2+2+2=6 2+2*2=6 2*2+2=6 of this 3rd is lexicographically smallest. I was wondering how to construct a DP solution for this.

  Read the article

• boost variant static_visitor problem picking correct function

  - by Steve

  I'm sure I'm having a problem with template resolution here, but I'm not sure why I'm having the problem. I have a static visitor I'm passing to boost variant where i've had to do template specialization for certain cases. The case for everything except for MyClass should throw in the static_visitor below. Unfortunately, when the visitor is applied to pull a MyClass out, it selects the most generic case rather than the exact match. I would type each case explicitly, but that will be rather long. So, why is the compiler resolving the most generic case over the exact match, and is there anyway to fix it template<> class CastVisitor<MyClass>:public boost::static_visitor<MyClass> { public: template<typename U> MyClass operator()(const U & i) const { throw std::exception("Unable to cast"); } MyClass operator()(const MyClass& i) { return i; } };

  Read the article

• Fast comparison of char arrays?

  - by StackedCrooked

  I'm currently working in a codebase where IPv4 addresses are represented as pointers to u_int8. The equality operator is implemented like this: bool Ipv4Address::operator==(const u_int8 * inAddress) const { return (*(u_int32*) this->myBytes == *(u_int32*) inAddress); } This is probably the fasted solution, but it causes the GCC compiler warning: ipv4address.cpp:65: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules How can I rewrite the comparison correctly without breaking strict-aliasing rules and without losing performance points? I have considered using either memcmp or this macro: #define IS_EQUAL(a, b) \ (a[0] == b[0] && a[1] == b[1] && a[2] == b[2] && a[3] == b[3]) I'm thinking that the macro is the fastest solution. What do you recommend?

  Read the article

• Encrypt/ Decrypt text file in Delphi?

  - by Hemant Kothiyal

  Hi i would like to know best encryption technique for text file encryption and ecryption. My Scenario: I have software having two type of users Administartor and Operators. Our requirement is to encrypt text file when Administrator enter data using GUI and save it. That encrypted file would be input for Operator and they just need to select it and use that file. Here file should be automatically decrypt data for further calculation when Operator select those files. Please help me which encryption/ decryption technique should i use?

  Read the article

• C++ return type overload hack

  - by aaa

  I was bored and came up with such hack (pseudocode): 1 struct proxy { 2 operator int(); // int function 3 operator double(); // double function 4 proxy(arguments); 5 arguments &arguments_; 6 }; 7 8 proxy function(arguments &args) { 9 return proxy(args); 10 } 11 int v = function(...); 12 double u = function(...); is it evil to use in real code?

  Read the article

• What is the difference between the * and the & operators in c programming?

  - by Wesley

  I am just making sure I understand this concept correctly. With the * operator, I make a new variable, which is allocated a place in memory. So as to not unnecessarily duplicate variables and their values, the & operator is used in passing values to methods and such and it actually points to the original instance of the variable, as opposed to making new copies...Is that right? It is obviously a shallow understanding, but I just want to make sure I am not getting them mixed up. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Why does this simple bash code give a syntax error?

  - by Tim

  I have the following bash code, which is copied and pasted from "bash cookbook" (1st edition): #!/bin/bash VERBOSE=0; if [[ $1 =-v ]] then VERBOSE=1; shift; fi When I run this (bash 4.0.33), I get the following syntax error: ./test.sh: line 4: conditional binary operator expected ./test.sh: line 4: syntax error near `=-v' ./test.sh: line 4: `if [[ $1 =-v ]]' Is this as simple as a misprint in the bash cookbook, or is there a version incompatibility or something else here? What would the most obvious fix be? I've tried various combinations of changing the operator, but I'm not really familiar with bash scripting.

  Read the article

• using makefile targets to set build options

  - by leo grrr

  This is either trivial or runs counter to the philosophy of how make should be used, but I'd like to have a command line that reads as "make debug" rather than "make DEBUG=1". I tried creating a phony target called debug that did nothing except set the DEBUG variable, but then there was a difference between "make debug build" and "make build debug"--namely that in one case, the variable got set after the build happened. Is there a way to give certain targets precedence? Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• Copy Constructor in C++

  - by user265260

  i have this code #include <iostream> using namespace std; class Test{ public: int a; Test(int i=0):a(i){} ~Test(){ cout << a << endl; } Test(const Test &){ cout << "copy" << endl; } void operator=(const Test &){ cout << "=" << endl; } Test operator+(Test& p){ Test res(a+p.a); return res; } }; int main (int argc, char const *argv[]){ Test t1(10), t2(20); Test t3=t1+t2; return 0; } Output: 30 20 10 Why isnt the copy constructor called here?

  Read the article

• Doubt with PATH environment in Administrator variable and System variable?

  - by Runner

  I'm running a command line programme as administrator, but I found that PATH in System variable has higher precedence than in Administrator variable . Is that true,can someone give some documents on this?

  Read the article

• C++ enforce conditions on inherited classes

  - by user231536

  I would like to define an abstract base class X and enforce the following: a) every concrete class Y that inherits from X define a constructor Y(int x) b) it should be possible to test whether two Y objects are equal. For a, one not very good solution is to put a pure virtual fromInt method in X which concrete class will have to define. But I cannot enforce construction. For b), I cannot seem to use a pure virtual method in X bool operator == (const X& other) const =0; because in overridden classes this remains undefined. It is not enough to define bool operator == (const Y& other) const { //stuff} because the types don't match. How do I solve these problems?

  Read the article

• Can I reproduce Scala's behavior for == ?

  - by JPP

  In Programming in Scala, I can read that the == operator behaves as if it was defined like this: final def == (that: Any): Boolean = if (null eq this) {null eq that} else {this equals that} But there must actually be compiler magic to avoid null pointer exceptions, right? Is there any way for me to replicate this behavior with pure Scala; i.e., have an operator/method return one thing if the receiver is null and another one if it isn't? What I mean is an actual implementation of null eq this. I suppose I can write a "pimp" and then define the method on the wrapper class, but is there a more direct way to do this?

  Read the article

• Subtracting months/years from boost::posix_time::ptime

  - by Zack

  I have a boost::posix_time::ptime that points to March 31st 2010 like this: ptime p(date(2010, Mar, 31)); I would like to subtract a month (and possibly years) from this date. From the docs I see these two operators: ptime operator-(time_duration) and ptime operator-(days) but none of them can work with months/years. If I try and do: time_duration duration = hours(24 * 30); ptime pp = p - duration; I'm getting March 1st and if I'm trying: ptime pp = p - days(30); I'm still getting March 1st, while I'd like to get February 28th. How can I achieve my desired result? (I would like to get the desired result also when subtracting a month from March 28, 29, 30)

  Read the article

• doubt in - Function Objects - c++

  - by Eternal Learner

  I have a class class fobj{ public: fobj(int i):id(i) {} void operator()() { std::cout<<"Prints"<<std::endl; } private: int id; }; template<typename T> void func(T type) { type(); } My Doubt is if I invoke func like Method 1: func(fobj(1); the message I wanted to print is printed. I was always thinking I needed to do something like Method 2: fobj Iobj(1); // create an instance of the fobj class func(Iobj); //call func by passing Iobj(which is a function object) How does Method 1 work? I mean what exactly happens? and how is a call made to the operator() in class fobj ?

  Read the article

• logical or expression c++

  - by user1870181

  I have a problem using the Logical OR operator in C++. The problem is coming that the right-side expression is not evaluated if the left-side is true. I have two deque-s and I need to popLeft from them with a while, but if I can pop from the first deque, I don't pop from the second because is not evaluated, by the OR operator. How can I overcome this problem. Here is the piece of code: while( D.popLeft( k ) || E.popLeft( m ) ) { if( k < m ) { C.pushRight( k ); E.pushLeft( m ); } else { C.pushRight( m ); D.pushLeft( k ); } }

  Read the article

• Using ANTLR with Left-Recursive Rules

  - by CNevin561

  Basically Ive written a Parse for a language with just basic arithmetic operators ( +, -, * / ) etc, but for the minus and plus cases, the Abstract Syntax Tree which is generated has parsed them as right associative when they need to be left associative. Having a googled for a solution, i found a tutorial that suggests rewriting the rule from: Expression ::= Expression <operator> Term | Term as Expression ::= Term <operator> Expression*. However in my head this seems to generate the tree the wrong way round. Any pointers on a way to resolve this issue?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >