Search Results

Search found 32459 results on 1299 pages for 'no internet connection'.

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 400/1299 | < Previous Page | 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407  | Next Page >

  • The importance of Document Freedom Day explained by Microsoft

    <b>Stop:</b> "These are only a few of the many resources that you can use to understand how important DFD is for you, even if, personally, you don't care at all about computers. The rest of this page, instead, explains how even a job offer from one of the greatest enemies of Document Freedom, Microsoft, proves the same point."

    Read the article

  • Linker error: wants C++ virtual base class destructor

    - by jdmuys
    Hi, I have a link error where the linker complains that my concrete class's destructor is calling its abstract superclass destructor, the code of which is missing. This is using GCC 4.2 on Mac OS X from XCode. I saw http://stackoverflow.com/questions/307352/g-undefined-reference-to-typeinfo but it's not quite the same thing. Here is the linker error message: Undefined symbols: "ConnectionPool::~ConnectionPool()", referenced from: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool::~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool()in RKConnector.o ld: symbol(s) not found collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Here is the abstract base class declaration: class ConnectionPool { public: static ConnectionPool* newPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b); virtual ~ConnectionPool() =0; virtual int keepAlive() =0; virtual int disconnect() =0; virtual sql::Connection * getConnection(char *compression_scheme = NULL) =0; virtual void releaseConnection(sql::Connection * theConnection) =0; }; Here is the concrete class declaration: class AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool: public ConnectionPool { protected: <snip data members> public: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b); virtual ~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(); virtual int keepAlive(); // will make sure the connection doesn't time out. Call regularly virtual int disconnect(); // disconnects/destroys all connections. virtual sql::Connection * getConnection(char *compression_scheme = NULL); virtual void releaseConnection(sql::Connection * theConnection); }; Needless to say, all those members are implemented. Here is the destructor: AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool::~AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool() { printf("AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool destructor call"); // nothing to destruct in fact } and also maybe the factory routine: ConnectionPool* ConnectionPool::newPool(std::string h, short p, std::string u, std::string pw, std::string b) { return new AlwaysConnectedConnectionZPool(h, p, u, pw, b); } I can fix this by artificially making my abstract base class concrete. But I'd rather do something better. Any idea? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why sockets does not die when server dies? Why socket dies when server is alive?

    - by Roman
    I try to play with sockets a bit. For that I wrote very simple "client" and "server" applications. Client: import java.net.*; public class client { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { InetAddress localhost = InetAddress.getLocalHost(); System.out.println("before"); Socket clientSideSocket = null; try { clientSideSocket = new Socket(localhost,12345,localhost,54321); } catch (ConnectException e) { System.out.println("Connection Refused"); } System.out.println("after"); if (clientSideSocket != null) { clientSideSocket.close(); } } } Server: import java.net.*; public class server { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { ServerSocket listener = new ServerSocket(12345); while (true) { Socket serverSideSocket = listener.accept(); System.out.println("A client-request is accepted."); } } } And I found a behavior that I cannot explain: I start a server, than I start a client. Connection is successfully established (client stops running and server is running). Then I close the server and start it again in a second. After that I start a client and it writes "Connection Refused". It seems to me that the server "remember" the old connection and does not want to open the second connection twice. But I do not understand how it is possible. Because I killed the previous server and started a new one! I do not start the server immediately after the previous one was killed (I wait like 20 seconds). In this case the server "forget" the socket from the previous server and accepts the request from the client. I start the server and then I start the client. Connection is established (server writes: "A client-request is accepted"). Then I wait a minute and start the client again. And server (which was running the whole time) accept the request again! Why? The server should not accept the request from the same client-IP and client-port but it does!

    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 | 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407  | Next Page >