Search Results

Search found 9381 results on 376 pages for 'vs macros'.

Page 104/376 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • int vs size_t on 64bit

    - by MK
    Porting code from 32bit to 64bit. Lots of places with int len = strlen(pstr); These all generate warnings now because strlen() returns size_t which is 64bit and int is still 32bit. So I've been replacing them with size_t len = strlen(pstr); But I just realized that this is not safe, as size_t is unsigned and it can be treated as signed by the code (I actually ran into one case where it caused a problem, thank you, unit tests!). Blindly casting strlen return to (int) feels dirty. Or maybe it shouldn't? So the question is: is there an elegant solution for this? I probably have a thousand lines of code like that in the codebase; I can't manually check each one of them and the test coverage is currently somewhere between 0.01 and 0.001%.

    Read the article

  • C++11 VS 2012 functor seems to choke when I have more than 5 parameters

    - by bobobobo
    function <void ( int a, int b, int ia, int ib, bool rev, const Vector4f& color )> benchTris = [&pts]( int a, int b, int ia, int ib, bool rev, const Vector4f& color ) { } The error is: error C2027: use of undefined type 'std::_Get_function_impl<_Tx>' with [ _Tx=void (int,int,int,int,bool,const Vector4f &) ] main.cpp(374) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::function<_Fty>' being compiled with [ _Fty=void (int,int,int,int,bool,const Vector4f &) ] Works ok if I remove ONE parameter, for example a from the front: function <void ( int b, int ia, int ib, bool rev, const Vector4f& color )> benchTris = [&pts]( int b, int ia, int ib, bool rev, const Vector4f& color ) { // ok } Is there some parameter limit I don't know about?

    Read the article

  • SQL: Join vs. subquery

    - by Col. Shrapnel
    I am an old-school MySQL user and always preferred JOIN over sub-query. But nowadays everyone uses sub-query and I hate it, dunno why. Though I've lack of theoretical knowledge to judge myself if there are any difference. Well, I am curious if sub-query as good as join and there is no thing to worry about?

    Read the article

  • PHP vs Phpmyadmin

    - by user330306
    Hi there, I've got this code which i execute on phpmyadmin which works 100% Create Temporary Table Searches ( id int, dt datetime); Create Temporary Table Searches1 ( id int, dt datetime, count int); insert into Searches(id, dt) select a.id, now() from tblSavedSearches a; insert into Searches1(id, dt, count) select b.savedSearchesId, (select c.dt from tblSavedSearchesDetails c where b.savedSearchesId = c.savedSearchesId order by c.dt desc limit 1) as 'dt', count(b.savedSearchesId) as 'cnt' from tblSavedSearchesDetails b group by b.savedSearchesId; insert into tblSavedSearchResults(savedSearchId,DtSearched,isEnabled) select id,now(),0 from Searches where not id in (select savedSearchId from tblSavedSearchResults); update tblSavedSearchResults inner join Searches1 on tblSavedSearchResults.savedSearchId = Searches1.id Set tblSavedSearchResults.DtSearched = Searches1.dt, tblSavedSearchResults.isEnabled = 1; However when i put the same code in php as below it generates an error $dba = DbConnect::CreateDbaInstance(); $query = ""; $query.="Create Temporary Table Searches ( id int, dt datetime); "; $query.="Create Temporary Table Searches1 ( id int, dt datetime, count int); "; $query.="insert into Searches(id, dt) select a.id, now() from tblSavedSearches a; "; $query.="insert into Searches1(id, dt, count) "; $query.="select "; $query.=" b.savedSearchesId, "; $query.=" (select c.dt from tblSavedSearchesDetails c where b.savedSearchesId = c.savedSearchesId order by c.dt desc limit 1) as 'dt', "; $query.=" count(b.savedSearchesId) as 'cnt' "; $query.="from tblSavedSearchesDetails b "; $query.="group by b.savedSearchesId; "; $query.="insert into tblSavedSearchResults(savedSearchId,DtSearched,isEnabled) "; $query.="select id,now(),0 from Searches where not id in (select savedSearchId from tblSavedSearchResults); "; $query.="update tblSavedSearchResults "; $query.="inner join Searches1 on tblSavedSearchResults.savedSearchId = Searches1.id "; $query.="Set tblSavedSearchResults.DtSearched = Searches1.dt, tblSavedSearchResults.isEnabled = 1; "; $dba->DbQuery($query) or die(mysql_error()); I get the following error You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'Create Temporary Table Searches1 ( id int, dt datetime, count int) insert into S' at line 1 Please if someone could assist me with this ... Thanks

    Read the article

  • BackgroundWorker vs background Thread

    - by freddy smith
    I have a stylistic question about the choice of background thread implementation I should use on a windows form app. Currently I have a BackgroundWorker on a form that has an infinite (while(true)) loop. In this loop I use WaitHandle.WaitAny to keep the thread snoozing until something of interest happens. One of the event handles I wait on is a "stopthread" event so that I can break out of the loop. This event is signaled when from my overridden Form.Dispose(). I read somewhere that BackgroundWorker is really intended for operations that you dont want to tie up the UI with and have an finite end - like downloading a file, or processing a sequence of items. In this case the "end" is unknown and only when the window is closed. Therefore would it be more appropriate for me to use a background Thread instead of BackgroundWorker for this purpose?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework vs LINQ to SQL

    - by Chris Roberts
    Now that .NET v3.5 SP1 has been released (along with VS2008 SP1), we now have access to the .NET entity framework. My question is this. When trying to decide between using the Entity Framework and LINQ to SQL as an ORM, what's the difference? The way I understand it, the Entity Framework (when used with LINQ to Entities) is a 'big brother' to LINQ to SQL? If this is the case - what advantages does it have? What can it do that LINQ to SQL can't do on its own?

    Read the article

  • Throwing exception vs returning null value with switch statement

    - by Greg
    So I have function that formats a date to coerce to given enum DateType{CURRENT, START, END} what would be the best way to handling return value with cases that use switch statement public static String format(Date date, DateType datetype) { ..validation checks switch(datetype){ case CURRENT:{ return getFormattedDate(date, "yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm:ss"); } ... default:throw new ("Something strange happend"); } } OR throw excpetion at the end public static String format(Date date, DateType datetype) { ..validation checks switch(datetype){ case CURRENT:{ return getFormattedDate(date, "yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm:ss"); } ... } //It will never reach here, just to make compiler happy throw new IllegalArgumentException("Something strange happend"); } OR return null public static String format(Date date, DateType datetype) { ..validation checks switch(datetype){ case CURRENT:{ return getFormattedDate(date, "yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm:ss"); } ... } return null; } What would be the best practice here ? Also all the enum values will be handled in the case statement

    Read the article

  • resharper "cleanup code" vs. 'var' keyword

    - by bitbonk
    I have an odd behavior with code clean up for c# in visual studio 2008 Team Developer Edition. Whenever I clean up my code using "Full Cleanup" it replaces all var declaration with explicit type declarations. But I have set the appropriate settings under "Inspection Severity" "Use var keyword when initializer explictly declares type" and "use var keyword when possible" to "Show as Error" Is there any other setting I need to set or is this a known bug?

    Read the article

  • WPF Binding XAML vs C#

    - by kubal5003
    Hello, I've got a strange problem - binding created through XAML (both ways by markup extension or normal) isn't working(BindingOperations.IsDataBound returns false and in fact there is no Binding object created). When I do literally the same from code everything is working perfectly. One more thing is that the Binding in XAML is created in a DataTemplate - what's funny about that when I use the DataTemplate for the first time it fails, then I fix it from code (add binding to specific objects) and while adding more objects to the collection the binding set in XAML just works. If I try to remove all the objects from the collection and then add a new one the binding fails once again. In reality this is a shortened version of another of my questions. For details please refer to: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2986511/wpf-debugging-avalonedit-binding-to-document-property Sorry for doing it this way, but there's no answer and it's probably too long for anybody to read. -

    Read the article

  • Which is better? private static vs private

    - by KiD0M4N
    In this code sample: public class SuperMan { private static bool IsProper(decimal x) { return x > 31.0m && x < 45.0m; } public bool CheckStuff(string a, string b, string c) { // lots of code, some of which introduces a variable x return IsProper(x) && /* other conditions */; } } Should IsProper(..) be a 'private static' or a 'private'. Assuming: IsProper(..) doesn't need to access any instance state.

    Read the article

  • ejb timer service vs cron

    - by darko petreski
    Hi Ejb timer service can start some process in desired time intervals. Also we can do the same thing with cron (min 1 minute) interval. But doing it with cron we have more power on controlling, monitoring and changing the intervals. Also we can restart if needed the cron very easily by command line. Also we can add or remove lines in the cron transparently. What are the advantages of using ejb timer services over calling the ejbs from cron ? (several lines of code in the cron classes are not a problem) Regards.

    Read the article

  • Symfony/Doctrine: Unserialize in action vs template

    - by Tom
    Hi, Can anyone tell me why calling "unserialize" works fine in an action but gives an offset error in a template? It's basically possible to unserialize a database text result into a variable in an action and pass it to template, in which case it displays fine: $this->clean = unserialize($this->raw); <?php echo $clean ?> But not if called directly in a template: <?php echo unserialize($raw) ?> Would be interested in knowing why this is so and whether there's some workaround. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • return new string vs .ToString()

    - by Leroy Jenkins
    Take the following code: public static string ReverseIt(string myString) { char[] foo = myString.ToCharArray(); Array.Reverse(foo); return new string(foo); } I understand that strings are immutable, but what I dont understand is why a new string needs to be called return new string(foo); instead of return foo.ToString(); I have to assume it has something to do with reassembling the CharArray (but thats just a guess). Whats the difference between the two and how do you know when to return a new string as opposed to returning a System.String that represents the current object?

    Read the article

  • Does someone have used Network Emulator API exposed in VS 2010

    - by Pritam
    Hi, I have seen VS2010 exposing Network Emulator API. I have installed it and trying to use this API, but not able detect whether it is really running with this code or not. Sometime I have given wrong profile name but it does not throw any error. Please find below my piece of code. If some one have used it please help me. IntPtr m_emulatorHandle = IntPtr.Zero; NetworkEmulationApi.LoadProfile(m_emulatorHandle, "300KB_WithLatency.xml"); NetworkEmulationApi.StartEmulation(m_emulatorHandle); Thanks, Pritam

    Read the article

  • Web Grid, Client side Binding VS. Server side HTML generation

    - by Ron Harlev
    I'm working on replacing an existing web grid in an ASP.NET web application, with a new implementation. The existing grid is powerful, but not flexible enough. It also brings with it all kind of frameworks we don't like to have on our web pages. While looking into existing options I noticed I can break the available solutions into two main approaches. The older approach is represented best by the ASP.NET GridView. This is a classic ASP.NET control that generates the needed HTML on the server, based on a given set of data. The newer approach is depending on client side rendering, mainly with jQuery. A good example would be jqGrid. Only the data is sent to the client (Usually with JSON or XML) In the GridView case, if I want an AJAX behavior, I would have to implement it with something like an update panel. Is there a definitive choice I should make? Is there a good chance of achieving the same snappy behavior I get with jqGrid (even with many records), with server side rendered controls? Is there some hybrid implementation incorporating both approaches?

    Read the article

  • Scala - Enumeration vs. Case-Classes

    - by tzofia
    I've created akka actor called LogActor. The LogActors's receive method handling messages from other actors and logging them to the specified log level. I can distinguish between the different levels in 2 ways. The first one: import LogLevel._ object LogLevel extends Enumeration { type LogLevel = Value val Error, Warning, Info, Debug = Value } case class LogMessage(level : LogLevel, msg : String) The second: (EDIT) abstract class LogMessage(msg : String) case class LogMessageError(msg : String) extends LogMessage(msg) case class LogMessageWarning(msg : String) extends LogMessage(msg) case class LogMessageInfo(msg : String) extends LogMessage(msg) case class LogMessageDebug(msg : String) extends LogMessage(msg) Which way is more efficient? does it take less time to match case class or to match enum value? (I read this question but there isn't any answer referring to the runtime issue)

    Read the article

  • Scala actors: receive vs react

    - by jqno
    Let me first say that I have quite a lot of Java experience, but have only recently become interested in functional languages. Recently I've started looking at Scala, which seems like a very nice language. However, I've been reading about Scala's Actor framework in Programming in Scala, and there's one thing I don't understand. In chapter 30.4 it says that using react instead of receive makes it possible to re-use threads, which is good for performance, since threads are expensive in the JVM. Does this mean that, as long as I remember to call react instead of receive, I can start as many Actors as I like? Before discovering Scala, I've been playing with Erlang, and the author of Programming Erlang boasts about spawning over 200,000 processes without breaking a sweat. I'd hate to do that with Java threads. What kind of limits am I looking at in Scala as compared to Erlang (and Java)? Also, how does this thread re-use work in Scala? Let's assume, for simplicity, that I have only one thread. Will all the actors that I start run sequentially in this thread, or will some sort of task-switching take place? For example, if I start two actors that ping-pong messages to each other, will I risk deadlock if they're started in the same thread? According to Programming in Scala, writing actors to use react is more difficult than with receive. This sounds plausible, since react doesn't return. However, the book goes on to show how you can put a react inside a loop using Actor.loop. As a result, you get loop { react { ... } } which, to me, seems pretty similar to while (true) { receive { ... } } which is used earlier in the book. Still, the book says that "in practice, programs will need at least a few receive's". So what am I missing here? What can receive do that react cannot, besides return? And why do I care? Finally, coming to the core of what I don't understand: the book keeps mentioning how using react makes it possible to discard the call stack to re-use the thread. How does that work? Why is it necessary to discard the call stack? And why can the call stack be discarded when a function terminates by throwing an exception (react), but not when it terminates by returning (receive)? I have the impression that Programming in Scala has been glossing over some of the key issues here, which is a shame, because otherwise it's a truly excellent book.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >