Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'jaredc'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • How to select a dynamic datepicker instance in order to extend it with jQuery

    - by JaredC
    I'm trying to control positioning of a jQuery datepicker element. I like the solution offered at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1818670/how-to-control-positioning-of-jqueryui-datepicker for overriding the _checkOffset fn: $.extend(window.DP_jQuery.datepicker,{_checkOffset:function(inst,offset,isFixed){return offset}}); However, this results in a 'window.DP_jQuery is undefined' error. Upon inspection, I can see that the DP_jQuery object in the DOM gets named with a random string, like so: DP_jQuery_123456. If I use this full name in the above code, it works wonderfully. My question is whether there's a way to exend the _checkOffset fn for a datepicker instance without knowing before-hand what the instance name is? For example, can I use some sort of wildcard to select all datepicker instances that begin with 'DP_jQuery_'? Thanks

    Read the article

  • memcpy() safety on adjacent memory regions

    - by JaredC
    I recently asked a question on using volatile and was directed to read some very informative articles from Intel and others discussing memory barriers and their uses. After reading these articles I have become quite paranoid though. I have a 64-bit machine. Is it safe to memcpy into adjacent, non-overlapping regions of memory from multiple threads? For example, say I have a buffer: char buff[10]; Is it always safe for one thread to memcpy into the first 5 bytes while a second thread copies into the last 5 bytes? My gut reaction (and some simple tests) indicate that this is completely safe, but I have been unable to find documentation anywhere that can completely convince me.

    Read the article

  • C++ volatile required when spinning on boost::shared_ptr operator bool()?

    - by JaredC
    I have two threads referencing the same boost::shared_ptr: boost::shared_ptr<Widget> shared; On thread is spinning, waiting for the other thread to reset the boost::shared_ptr: while(shared) boost::thread::yield(); And at some point the other thread will call: shared.reset(); My question is whether or not I need to declare the shared pointer as volatile to prevent the compiler from optimizing the call to shared.operator bool() out of the loop and never detecting the change? I know that if I were simply looping on a variable, waiting for it to reach 0 I would need volatile, but I'm not sure if boost::shared_ptr is implemented in such a way that it is not necessary here.

    Read the article

  • Storing C++ templated objects as same type

    - by JaredC
    I have a class that is a core component of a performance sensitive code path, so I am trying to optimize it as much as possible. The class used to be: class Widget { Widget(int n) : N(n) {} .... member functions that use the constant value N .... const int N; // just initialized, will never change } The arguments to the constructor are known at compile time, so I have changed this class to a template, so that N can be compiled into the functions: template<int N> class Widget { .... member functions that use N .... } I have another class with a method: Widget & GetWidget(int index); However, after templating Widget, each widget has a different type so I cannot define the function like this anymore. I considered different inheritance options, but I'm not sure that the performance gain from the template would outweigh the cost of inherited function invocations. SO, my question is this: I am pretty sure I want the best of both worlds (compile-time / run-time), and it may not be possible. But, is there a way to gain the performance of knowing N at compile time, but still being able to return Widgets as the same type? Thanks!

    Read the article

1