Search Results

Search found 6796 results on 272 pages for 'django templates'.

Page 139/272 | < Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >

  • Template class implicit copy constructor issues

    - by Nate
    Stepping through my program in gdb, line 108 returns right back to the calling function, and doesn't call the copy constructor in class A, like (I thought) it should: template <class S> class A{ //etc... A( const A & old ){ //do stuff... } //etc... }; template <class T> class B{ //etc... A<T> ReturnsAnA(){ A<T> result; // do some stuff with result return result; //line 108 } //etc... }; Any hints? I've banged my head against the wall about this for 4 hours now, and can't seem to come up with what's happening here.

    Read the article

  • Can I write a test that succeeds if and only if a statement does not compile?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'd like to prevent clients of my class from doing something stupid. To that end, I have used the type system, and made my class only accept specific types as input. Consider the following example (Not real code, I've left off things like virtual destructors for the sake of example): class MyDataChunk { //Look Ma! Implementation! }; class Sink; class Source { virtual void Run() = 0; Sink *next_; void SetNext(Sink *next) { next_ = next; } }; class Sink { virtual void GiveMeAChunk(const MyDataChunk& data) { //Impl }; }; class In { virtual void Run { //Impl } }; class Out { }; //Note how filter and sorter have the same declaration. Concrete classes //will inherit from them. The seperate names are there to ensure only //that some idiot doesn't go in and put in a filter where someone expects //a sorter, etc. class Filter : public Source, public Sink { //Drop objects from the chain-of-command pattern that don't match a particular //criterion. }; class Sorter : public Source, public Sink { //Sorts inputs to outputs. There are different sorters because someone might //want to sort by filename, size, date, etc... }; class MyClass { In i; Out o; Filter f; Sorter s; public: //Functions to set i, o, f, and s void Execute() { i.SetNext(f); f.SetNext(s); s.SetNext(o); i.Run(); } }; What I don't want is for somebody to come back later and go, "Hey, look! Sorter and Filter have the same signature. I can make a common one that does both!", thus breaking the semantic difference MyClass requires. Is this a common kind of requirement, and if so, how might I implement a test for it?

    Read the article

  • Type parameterization in Scala

    - by horatius83
    So I'm learning Scala at the moment, and I'm trying to create an abstract vector class with a vector-space of 3 (x,y,z coordinates). I'm trying to add two of these vectors together with the following code: package math class Vector3[T](ax:T,ay:T,az:T) { def x = ax def y = ay def z = az override def toString = "<"+x+", "+y+", "+z+">" def add(that: Vector3[T]) = new Vector3(x+that.x, y+that.y, z+that.z) } The problem is I keep getting this error: error: type mismatch; found : T required: String def add(that: Vector3[T]) = new Vector3(x+that.x, y+that.y, z+that.z) I've tried commenting out the "toString" method above, but that doesn't seem to have any effect. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • C++ string template library

    - by Gopalakrishnan Subramani
    I want simple C++ string based template library to replace strings at runtime. For example, I will use string template = "My name is {{name}}"; At runtime, I want the name to be changed based on actual one. I found one example, www.stringtemplate.org but I little scared when its talks about antlr etc.

    Read the article

  • "Inherited" types in C++

    - by Ken Moynihan
    The following code does not compile. I get an error message: error C2039: 'Asub' : is not a member of 'C' Can someone help me to understand this? Tried VS2008 & 2010 compiler. template <class T> class B { typedef int Asub; public: void DoSomething(typename T::Asub it) { } }; class C : public B<C> { public: typedef int Asub; }; class A { public: typedef int Asub; }; int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { C theThing; theThing.DoSomething(C::Asub()); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Using member variables inherited from a templated base class (C++)

    - by Aaron Becker
    I'm trying to use member variables of a templated base class in a derived class, as in this example: template <class dtype> struct A { int x; }; template <class dtype> struct B : public A<dtype> { void test() { int id1 = this->x; // always works int id2 = A<dtype>::x; // always works int id3 = B::x; // always works int id4 = x; // fails in gcc & clang, works in icc and xlc } }; gcc and clang are both very picky about using this variable, and require either an explicit scope or the explicit use of "this". With some other compilers (xlc and icc), things work as I would expect. Is this a case of xlc and icc allowing code that's not standard, or a bug in gcc and clang?

    Read the article

  • How do i return a template class from a template function?

    - by LoudNPossiblyRight
    It looks logical but for some reason when i uncomment the last cout line, this code does not compile. How do i return a template class? What do i have to do to this code to make it work? #include<iostream> using namespace std; template <int x> class someclass{ public: int size; int intarr[x]; someclass():size(x){} }; template<int x, int y> int somefunc(someclass<x> A, someclass<y> B){ return ( A.size > B.size ? A.size : B.size); } template<int x, int y, int z> someclass<x> anotherfunc(someclass<y> A, someclass<z> B){ return ( A.size > B.size ? A : B); } int main(){ someclass<5> A; someclass<10> B; cout << "SIZE = " << somefunc(A,B) << endl; //cout << "SIZE = " << (anotherfunc(A,B)).size << endl; //THIS DOES NOT COMPILE return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Passing a template func. as a func. ptr to an overloaded func. - is there a way to compile this code

    - by LoudNPossiblyRight
    Just a general c++ curiosity: This code below shouldn't compile because it's impossible to know which to instantiate: temp(const int&) or temp(const string&) when calling func(temp) - this part i know. What i would like to know is if there is anything i can do to the line marked PASSINGLINE to get the compiler to deduce that i want FPTR1 called and not FPTR2 ? #include<iostream> using std::cout; using std::endl; /*FPTR1*/ void func(void(*fptr)(const int&)){ fptr(1001001);} /*FPTR2*/ void func(void(*fptr)(const string&)){ fptr("1001001"); } template <typename T> void temp(const T &t){ cout << t << endl; } int main(){ /*PASSINGLINE*/ func(temp); return 0; } Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Do I need multiple template specializations if I want to specialize for several kinds of strings?

    - by romkyns
    For example: template<typename T> void write(T value) { mystream << value; } template<> void write<const char*>(const char* value) { write_escaped(mystream, value); } template<> void write<char*>(char* value) { write_escaped(mystream, value); } template<> void write<std::string>(std::string value) { write_escaped(mystream.c_str(), value); } This looks like I'm doing it wrong, especially the two variants for const and non-const char*. However I checked that if I only specialize for const char * then passing a char * variable will invoke the non-specialized version, when called like this in VC++10: char something[25]; strcpy(something, "blah"); write(something); What would be the proper way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • Insert a transformed integer_sequence into a variadic template argument?

    - by coderforlife
    How do you insert a transformed integer_sequence (or similar since I am targeting C++11) into a variadic template argument? For example I have a class that represents a set of bit-wise flags (shown below). It is made using a nested-class because you cannot have two variadic template arguments for the same class. It would be used like typedef Flags<unsigned char, FLAG_A, FLAG_B, FLAG_C>::WithValues<0x01, 0x02, 0x04> MyFlags. Typically, they will be used with the values that are powers of two (although not always, in some cases certain combinations would be made, for example one could imagine a set of flags like Read=0x1, Write=0x2, and ReadWrite=0x3=0x1|0x2). I would like to provide a way to do typedef Flags<unsigned char, FLAG_A, FLAG_B, FLAG_C>::WithDefaultValues MyFlags. template<class _B, template <class,class,_B> class... _Fs> class Flags { public: template<_B... _Vs> class WithValues : public _Fs<_B, Flags<_B,_Fs...>::WithValues<_Vs...>, _Vs>... { // ... }; }; I have tried the following without success (placed inside the Flags class, outside the WithValues class): private: struct _F { // dummy class which can be given to a flag-name template template <_B _V> inline constexpr explicit _F(std::integral_constant<_B, _V>) { } }; // we count the flags, but only in a dummy way static constexpr unsigned _count = sizeof...(_Fs<_B, _F, 1>); static inline constexpr _B pow2(unsigned exp, _B base = 2, _B result = 1) { return exp < 1 ? result : pow2(exp/2, base*base, (exp % 2) ? result*base : result); } template <_B... _Is> struct indices { using next = indices<_Is..., sizeof...(_Is)>; using WithPow2Values = WithValues<pow2(_Is)...>; }; template <unsigned N> struct build_indices { using type = typename build_indices<N-1>::type::next; }; template <> struct build_indices<0> { using type = indices<>; }; //// Another attempt //template < _B... _Is> struct indices { // using WithPow2Values = WithValues<pow2(_Is)...>; //}; //template <unsigned N, _B... _Is> struct build_indices // : build_indices<N-1, N-1, _Is...> { }; //template < _B... _Is> struct build_indices<0, _Is...> // : indices<_Is...> { }; public: using WithDefaultValues = typename build_indices<_count>::type::WithPow2Values; Of course, I would be willing to have any other alternatives to the whole situation (supporting both flag names and values in the same template set, etc). I have included a "working" example at ideone: http://ideone.com/NYtUrg - by "working" I mean compiles fine without using default values but fails with default values (there is a #define to switch between them). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Lua template processor question

    - by PeterMmm
    I'm going to use that template engine LTP . There is not so much doc available. Now i'm stuck how to pass an environment into the render engine. I have basically this: local ltp = require("ltp.template") ltp.render(io.stdout, 1, "index.dhtm", false, {}, "<?lua", "?>", { total="2400" }) What data structure should be the last parameter (env_code), a string, a table with key=val ?

    Read the article

  • Argument type deduction, references and rvalues

    - by uj2
    Consider the situation where a function template needs to forward an argument while keeping it's lvalue-ness in case it's a non-const lvalue, but is itself agnostic to what the argument actually is, as in: template <typename T> void target(T&) { cout << "non-const lvalue"; } template <typename T> void target(const T&) { cout << "const lvalue or rvalue"; } template <typename T> void forward(T& x) { target(x); } When x is an rvalue, instead of T being deduced to a constant type, it gives an error: int x = 0; const int y = 0; forward(x); // T = int forward(y); // T = const int forward(0); // Hopefully, T = const int, but actually an error forward<const int>(0); // Works, T = const int It seems that for forward to handle rvalues (without calling for explicit template arguments) there needs to be an forward(const T&) overload, even though it's body would be an exact duplicate. Is there any way to avoid this duplication?

    Read the article

  • C++ meta-splat function

    - by aaa
    hello. Is there an existing function (in boost mpl or fusion) to splat meta-vector to variadic template arguments? for example: splat<vector<T1, T2, ...>, function>::type same as function<T1, T2, ...> my search have not found one, and I do not want to reinvent one if it already exists. edit: after some tinkering, apparently it's next to impossible to accomplish this in general way, as it would require declaring full template template parameter list for all possible cases. only reasonable solution is to use macro: #define splat(name, function) \ template<class T, ...> struct name; \ template<class T> \ struct name<T,typename boost::enable_if_c< \ result_of::size<T>::value == 1>::type> { \ typedef function< \ typename result_of::value_at_c<T,0>::type \ > type; \ }; Oh well. thank you

    Read the article

  • How to treat Base* pointer as Derived<T>* pointer?

    - by dehmann
    I would like to store pointers to a Base class in a vector, but then use them as function arguments where they act as a specific class, see here: #include <iostream> #include <vector> class Base {}; template<class T> class Derived : public Base {}; void Foo(Derived<int>* d) { std::cerr << "Processing int" << std::endl; } void Foo(Derived<double>* d) { std::cerr << "Processing double" << std::endl; } int main() { std::vector<Base*> vec; vec.push_back(new Derived<int>()); vec.push_back(new Derived<double>()); Foo(vec[0]); Foo(vec[1]); delete vec[0]; delete vec[1]; return 0; } This doesn't compile: error: call of overloaded 'Foo(Base*&)' is ambiguous Is it possible to make it work? I need to process the elements of the vector differently, according to their int, double, etc. types.

    Read the article

  • Passing markup into a Rails Partial

    - by 1ndivisible
    Is there any way of doing something equivilant to this: <%= render partial: 'shared/outer' do %> <%= render partial: 'shared/inner' %> <% end %> Resulting in <div class="outer"> <div class="inner"> </div> </div> Obviously there would need to be a way of marking up 'shared/outer.html.erb' to indicate where the passed in partial should be rendered: <div class="outer"> <% render Here %> </div>

    Read the article

  • Simplest way to mix sequences of types with iostreams?

    - by Kylotan
    I have a function void write<typename T>(const T&) which is implemented in terms of writing the T object to an ostream, and a matching function T read<typename T>() that reads a T from an istream. I am basically using iostreams as a plain text serialisation format, which obviously works fine for most built-in types, although I'm not sure how to effectively handle std::strings just yet. I'd like to be able to write out a sequence of objects too, eg void write<typename T>(const std::vector<T>&) or an iterator based equivalent (although in practice, it would always be used with a vector). However, while writing an overload that iterates over the elements and writes them out is easy enough to do, this doesn't add enough information to allow the matching read operation to know how each element is delimited, which is essentially the same problem that I have with a single std::string. Is there a single approach that can work for all basic types and std::string? Or perhaps I can get away with 2 overloads, one for numerical types, and one for strings? (Either using different delimiters or the string using a delimiter escaping mechanism, perhaps.)

    Read the article

  • Initializing static pointer in templated class.

    - by Anthony
    This is difficult for me to formulate in a Google query (at least one that gives me what I'm looking for) so I've had some trouble finding an answer. I'm sure I'm not the first to ask though. Consider a class like so: template < class T > class MyClass { private: static T staticObject; static T * staticPointerObject; }; ... template < class T > T MyClass<T>::staticObject; // <-- works ... template < class T > T * MyClass<T>::staticPointerObject = NULL; // <-- cannot find symbol staticPointerObject. I am having trouble figuring out why I cannot successfully create that pointer object. Edit: The above code is all specified in the header, and the issue I mentioned is an error in the link step, so it is not finding the specific symbol.

    Read the article

  • Forcing a templated object to construct from a pointer

    - by SalamiArmi
    I have a fictional class: template<typename T> class demonstration { public: demonstration(){} ... T *m_data; } At some point in the program's execution, I want to set m_data to a big block of allocated memory and construct an object T there. At the moment, I've been using this code: void construct() { *m_data = T(); } Which I've now realised is probably not the best idea... wont work under certain cirumstances, if T has a private assignment operator for example. Is there a normal/better way to do what I'm attempting here?

    Read the article

  • vb.net project template how can I leave the root namesapce empty

    - by Wietze Veld
    I have been tinkering with the VS 2010 template. So far I am able to create a vb.net class library project from my template. However, one small thing is bugging me. In my project template the default assembly name is the same as the default file name. I have left the root namespace empty. But when I create a new project from the template, VS 2010 automatically fills the root namespace with the same name as my assembly name. My template project (vbproj) for the assembly name and root namespace looks like this: <AssemblyName>$safeprojectname$</AssemblyName> <!-- RootNameSpace should always be empty. --> <RootNamespace></RootNamespace> But as said, when I leave this empty it is always overwritten with the assembly name. Even if I create a custom parameter with an empty string as value to replace the root namespace, it is still overridden. Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • overloading new/delete problem

    - by hidayat
    This is my scenario, Im trying to overload new and delete globally. I have written my allocator class in a file called allocator.h. And what I am trying to achieve is that if a file is including this header file, my version of new and delete should be used. So in a header file "allocator.h" i have declared the two functions extern void* operator new(std::size_t size); extern void operator delete(void *p, std::size_t size); I the same header file I have a class that does all the allocator stuff, class SmallObjAllocator { ... }; I want to call this class from the new and delete functions and I would like the class to be static, so I have done this: template<unsigned dummy> struct My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl { static SmallObjAllocator myAlloc; }; template<unsigned dummy> SmallObjAllocator My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl<dummy>::myAlloc(DEFAULT_CHUNK_SIZE, MAX_OBJ_SIZE); typedef My_SmallObjectAllocatorImpl<0> My_SmallObjectAllocator; and in the cpp file it looks like this: allocator.cc void* operator new(std::size_t size) { std::cout << "using my new" << std::endl; if(size > MAX_OBJ_SIZE) return malloc(size); else return My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.allocate(size); } void operator delete(void *p, std::size_t size) { if(size > MAX_OBJ_SIZE) free(p); else My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.deallocate(p, size); } The problem is when I try to call the constructor for the class SmallObjAllocator which is a static object. For some reason the compiler are calling my overloaded function new when initializing it. So it then tries to use My_SmallObjectAllocator::myAlloc.deallocate(p, size); which is not defined so the program crashes. So why are the compiler calling new when I define a static object? and how can I solve it?

    Read the article

  • If you use MVC in your web app then you dont need to use Smarty(TemplateEngine) Right?

    - by Imran
    I'm just trying to understand the Templating(system). If you use MVC in your web application then you don't need to use something like Smarty(template engine) as you are already separating application code from presentation code anyway by using MVC right? please correct me? So am i correct in thinking it's MVC OR Templating or do you use both in your apps?If any one could explain this in detail it would be great. Thank you in advance;-)

    Read the article

  • Reducing template bloat with inheritance

    - by benoitj
    Does anyone have experience reducing template code bloat using inheritance? i hesitate rewriting our containers this way: class vectorBase { public: int size(); void clear(); int m_size; void *m_rawData; //.... }; template< typename T > class vector : public vectorBase { void push_back( const T& ); //... }; I should keep maximum performance while reducing compile time I'm also wondering why stl implementations do not uses this approach Thanks for your feedbacks

    Read the article

  • Why is this std::bind not converted to std::function?

    - by dauphic
    Why is the nested std::bind in the below code not implicitly converted to an std::function<void()> by any of the major compilers (VS2010/2012, gcc, clang)? Is this standard behavior, or a bug? #include <functional> void bar(int, std::function<void()>) { } void foo() { } int main() { std::function<void(int, std::function<void()>)> func; func = std::bind(bar, 5, std::bind(foo)); std::cin.get(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • template class: ctor against function -> new C++ standard

    - by Oops
    Hi in this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2779155/template-point2-double-point3-double Dennis and Michael noticed the unreasonable foolishly implemented constructor. They were right, I didn't consider this at that moment. But I found out that a constructor does not help very much for a template class like this one, instead a function is here much more convenient and safe namespace point { template < unsigned int dims, typename T > struct Point { T X[ dims ]; std::string str() { std::stringstream s; s << "{"; for ( int i = 0; i < dims; ++i ) { s << " X" << i << ": " << X[ i ] << (( i < dims -1 )? " |": " "); } s << "}"; return s.str(); } Point<dims, int> toint() { Point<dims, int> ret; std::copy( X, X+dims, ret.X ); return ret; } }; template < typename T > Point< 2, T > Create( T X0, T X1 ) { Point< 2, T > ret; ret.X[ 0 ] = X0; ret.X[ 1 ] = X1; return ret; } template < typename T > Point< 3, T > Create( T X0, T X1, T X2 ) { Point< 3, T > ret; ret.X[ 0 ] = X0; ret.X[ 1 ] = X1; ret.X[ 2 ] = X2; return ret; } template < typename T > Point< 4, T > Create( T X0, T X1, T X2, T X3 ) { Point< 4, T > ret; ret.X[ 0 ] = X0; ret.X[ 1 ] = X1; ret.X[ 2 ] = X2; ret.X[ 3 ] = X3; return ret; } }; int main( void ) { using namespace point; Point< 2, double > p2d = point::Create( 12.3, 34.5 ); Point< 3, double > p3d = point::Create( 12.3, 34.5, 56.7 ); Point< 4, double > p4d = point::Create( 12.3, 34.5, 56.7, 78.9 ); //Point< 3, double > p1d = point::Create( 12.3, 34.5 ); //no suitable user defined conversion exists //Point< 3, int > p1i = p4d.toint(); //no suitable user defined conversion exists Point< 2, int > p2i = p2d.toint(); Point< 3, int > p3i = p3d.toint(); Point< 4, int > p4i = p4d.toint(); std::cout << p2d.str() << std::endl; std::cout << p3d.str() << std::endl; std::cout << p4d.str() << std::endl; std::cout << p2i.str() << std::endl; std::cout << p3i.str() << std::endl; std::cout << p4i.str() << std::endl; char c; std::cin >> c; } has the new C++ standard any new improvements, language features or simplifications regarding this aspect of ctor of a template class? what do you think about the implementation of the combination of namespace, stuct and Create function? many thanks in advance Oops

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >