Search Results

Search found 5650 results on 226 pages for 'ref counted pointer'.

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 10/226 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • How can I anonymize my browser useragent, yet still be counted as a FF/Ubuntu user?

    - by Rory
    I read about EFF's Panopticlick project to see how unique your webbrowser's headers are. I would like to anonymize that a bit. My current User Agent is Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100106 Ubuntu/9.10 (karmic) Firefox/3.5.7 I would like to make that more anonymous, however I still wanted to be counted as a Firefox and Ubuntu user. How can I change my User Agent in Firefox? What should I change it to so that it's less unique, but will be counted as a Firefox user and a Ubuntu user on web analytics software? I know that there is no guarantee that I will be counted a Firefox/Ubuntu user, just something that 'works most of the time' would be sufficent.

    Read the article

  • C# 4.0: COM Interop Improvements

    - by Paulo Morgado
    Dynamic resolution as well as named and optional arguments greatly improve the experience of interoperating with COM APIs such as Office Automation Primary Interop Assemblies (PIAs). But, in order to alleviate even more COM Interop development, a few COM-specific features were also added to C# 4.0. Ommiting ref Because of a different programming model, many COM APIs contain a lot of reference parameters. These parameters are typically not meant to mutate a passed-in argument, but are simply another way of passing value parameters. Specifically for COM methods, the compiler allows to declare the method call passing the arguments by value and will automatically generate the necessary temporary variables to hold the values in order to pass them by reference and will discard their values after the call returns. From the point of view of the programmer, the arguments are being passed by value. This method call: object fileName = "Test.docx"; object missing = Missing.Value; document.SaveAs(ref fileName, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing, ref missing); can now be written like this: document.SaveAs("Test.docx", Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value); And because all parameters that are receiving the Missing.Value value have that value as its default value, the declaration of the method call can even be reduced to this: document.SaveAs("Test.docx"); Dynamic Import Many COM methods accept and return variant types, which are represented in the PIAs as object. In the vast majority of cases, a programmer calling these methods already knows the static type of a returned object form the context of the call, but has to explicitly perform a cast on the returned values to make use of that knowledge. These casts are so common that they constitute a major nuisance. To make the developer’s life easier, it is now possible to import the COM APIs in such a way that variants are instead represented using the type dynamic which means that COM signatures have now occurrences of dynamic instead of object. This means that members of a returned object can now be easily accessed or assigned into a strongly typed variable without having to cast. Instead of this code: ((Excel.Range)(excel.Cells[1, 1])).Value2 = "Hello World!"; this code can now be used: excel.Cells[1, 1] = "Hello World!"; And instead of this: Excel.Range range = (Excel.Range)(excel.Cells[1, 1]); this can be used: Excel.Range range = excel.Cells[1, 1]; Indexed And Default Properties A few COM interface features are still not available in C#. On the top of the list are indexed properties and default properties. As mentioned above, these will be possible if the COM interface is accessed dynamically, but will not be recognized by statically typed C# code. No PIAs – Type Equivalence And Type Embedding For assemblies indentified with PrimaryInteropAssemblyAttribute, the compiler will create equivalent types (interfaces, structs, enumerations and delegates) and embed them in the generated assembly. To reduce the final size of the generated assembly, only the used types and their used members will be generated and embedded. Although this makes development and deployment of applications using the COM components easier because there’s no need to deploy the PIAs, COM component developers are still required to build the PIAs.

    Read the article

  • OS X mouse pointer speed varies with different mouse

    - by Stan
    OS X Snow Leopard It seems that when using different mice on OS X may have different pointer speed and scrolling speed. For example, when using my Logitech basic laser mouse, the pointer speed is like normal. But when using MX Performance or Anywhere, it's very slow, I will have to adjust the pointer speed in mouse configuration to max. Even with max, it's still a bit slow. Basically, just feel the plug and play on OS X is terrible. I need re-adapt to it every single time. This is not the case on Windows OS. Also, the mouse scrolling speed varies with different mouse too. But usually they are all very slow, usually scroll 1 line at a time. If I adjust it in mouse configuration, it turns to scroll too much lines. I have Logitech official mouse driver (LCC) installed. But either tuning in LCC or mouse configuration doesn't make things better. Has anyone have similar issue? How to resolve it? Please advise, thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to bulk insert data from ref cursor to a temporary table in PL/SQL

    - by Sambath
    Could anyone tell me how to bulk insert data from a ref cursor to a temporary table in PL/SQL? I have a procedure that one of its parameters stores a result set, this result set will be inserted to a temporary table in another stored procedure. This is my sample code. CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE get_account_list ( type_id in account_type.account_type_id%type, acc_list out sys_refcursor ) is begin open acc_list for select account_id, account_name, balance from account where account_type_id = type_id; end get_account_list; CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE proc1 ( ... ) is accounts sys_refcursor; begin get_account_list(1, accounts); --How to bulk insert data in accounts to a temporary table? end proc1; In SQL Server, I can write as code below CREATE PROCEDURE get_account_list type_id int as select account_id, account_name, balance from account where account_type_id = type_id; CREATE PROCEDURE proc1 ( ... ) as ... insert into #tmp_data(account_id, account_name, balance) exec get_account_list 1 How can I write similar to the code in SQL Server? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why did instruments report a leak while its ref count did become zero

    - by bromj
    Hello guys, green hand i am. I'm using instruments, and it did a great help to me so far, but I'm confused now 'cause it report a memory leak to me while its leaked block history shows me that the ref count of that memory had finally become 0. What does it mean? It's really embarrassing that I couldn't post a image here... so I have to describe it in text. Hope it would be clear enough for you: Event Type || RefCt || Responsible Library || Responsible Caller Malloc         || 1        || MyWeather              || +[ForecastData parseSingleForecastWithXMLElement:] Autorelease||           || MyWeather              || +[ForecastData parseSingleForecastWithXMLElement:] Retain         || 2        || MyWeather              || +[ForecastData parseWithData:] Release      || 1        || Foundation              || +[NSAutoreleasePool drain:] Retain         || 2        || Foundation              || +[NSThread initWithTarget:selector:object:] Release      || 1        || Foundation              || +[NSString compare:options:] Release      || 0        || MyWeather              || +[RootViewController dealloc] Any help will be appreciated~

    Read the article

  • Null Ref when adding TabPages at runtimes

    - by BDotA
    This is a sample code I wrote to add some tab pages with the controls in them at run time. but when I run it , I get a Null Ref exception error. what part I am doing wrong? TabPage[] tabPages = new TabPage[2]; CheckBox ck  = new CheckBox();       tabPages[0].BackColor = Color.Firebrick;     tabPages[0].Controls.Add(ck);       tabPages[1].BackColor = Color.Firebrick;     tabPages[1].Controls.Add(ck);   tabGuy.SuspendLayout();     tabGuy.TabPages.Add(tabPages[0]);     tabGuy.TabPages.Add(tabPages[1]); tabGuy.ResumeLayout();

    Read the article

  • How does delete deal with pointer constness?

    - by aJ
    I was reading this question Deleting a const pointer and wanted to know more about delete behavior. Now, as per my understanding: delete expression works in two steps: invoke destructor then releases the memory (often with a call to free()) by calling operator delete. operator delete accepts a void*. As part of a test program I overloaded operator delete and found that operator delete doesn't accept const pointer. Since operator delete does not accept const pointer and delete internally calls operator delete, how does Deleting a const pointer work ? Does delete uses const_cast internally?

    Read the article

  • Official names for pointer operators

    - by FredOverflow
    What are the official names for the operators * and & in the context of pointers? They seem to be frequently called dereference operator and address-of operator respectively, but unfortunately, the section on unary operators in the standard does not name them. I really don't want to name & address-of anymore, because & returns a pointer, not an address. (A pointer is a language mechanism, while an address is an implementation detail. Addresses are untyped, while pointers aren't, except for void*.) The standard is very clear about this: The result of the unary & operator is a pointer to its operand. Symmetry suggests to name & reference operator which is a little unfortunate because of the collision with references in C++. The fact that & returns a pointer suggests pointer operator. Are there any official sources that would confirm these (or other) namings?

    Read the article

  • What's your preferred pointer declaration style, and why?

    - by Owen
    I know this is about as bad as it gets for "religious" issues, as Jeff calls them. But I want to know why the people who disagree with me on this do so, and hear their justification for their horrific style. I googled for a while and couldn't find a style guide talking about this. So here's how I feel pointers (and references) should be declared: int* pointer = NULL; int& ref = *pointer; int*& pointer_ref = pointer; The asterisk or ampersand goes with the type, because it modifies the type of the variable being declared. EDIT: I hate to keep repeating the word, but when I say it modifies the type I'm speaking semantically. "int* something;" would translate into English as something like "I declare something, which is a pointer to an integer." The "pointer" goes along with the "integer" much more so than it does with the "something." In contrast, the other uses of the ampersand and asterisk, as address-of and dereferencing operators, act on a variable. Here are the other two styles (maybe there are more but I really hope not): int *ugly_but_common; int * uglier_but_fortunately_less_common; Why? Really, why? I can never think of a case where the second is appropriate, and the first only suitable perhaps with something like: int *hag, *beast; But come now... multiple variable declarations on one line is kind of ugly form in itself already.

    Read the article

  • Double pointer const-correctness warnings in C

    - by Michael Koval
    You can obviously cast a pointer to non-const data to a a pointer of the same type to const data: int *x = NULL; int const *y = x; Adding additional const qualifiers to match the additional indirection should logically work the same way: int * *x = NULL; int *const *y = x; /* okay */ int const *const *z = y; /* warning */ Compiling this with GCC or Clang with the -Wall flag, however, results in the following warning: test.c:4:23: warning: initializing 'int const *const *' with an expression of type 'int *const *' discards qualifiers in nested pointer types int const *const *z = y; /* warning */ ^ ~ Why does adding an additional const qualifier "discard qualifiers in nested pointer types"?

    Read the article

  • Why implement DB connection pointer object as a reference counting pointer? (C++)

    - by DVK
    At our company one of the core C++ classes (Database connection pointer) is implemented as a reference counting pointer. To be clear, the objects are NOT DB connections themselves, but pointers to a DB connection object. The library is very old, and nobody who designed is around anymore. So far, nether I, nor any C++ experts in the company that I asked have come up with a good reason for why this particular design was chosen. Any ideas? It is introducing some problems (partially due to awful reference pointer implementation used), and I'm trying to understand if this design actually has some deep underlying reasons? The usage pattern these days seems to be that the DB connection pointer object is returned by a DB connection manager class, and it's somewhat unclear whether DB connection pointers were designed to be able to be used independently of DB connection manager.

    Read the article

  • Ref to map vs. map to refs vs. multiple refs

    - by mikera
    I'm working on a GUI application in Swing+Clojure that requires various mutable pieces of data (e.g. scroll position, user data, filename, selected tool options etc.). I can see at least three different ways of handling this set of data: Create a ref to a map of all the data: (def data (ref { :filename "filename.xml" :scroll [0 0] })) Create a map of refs to the individual data elements: (def datamap { :filename (ref "filename.xml") :scroll (ref [0 0]) })) Create a separate ref for each in the namespace: (def scroll (ref [0 0])) (def filename (ref "filename.xml")) Note: This data will be accessed concurrently, e.g. by background processing threads or the Swing event handling thread. However there probably isn't a need for consistent transactional updates of multiple elements. What would be your recommended approach and why?

    Read the article

  • LLVM: Passing a pointer to a struct, which holds a pointer to a function, to a JIT function

    - by Rusky
    I have an LLVM (version 2.7) module with a function that takes a pointer to a struct. That struct contains a function pointer to a C++ function. The module function is going to be JIT-compiled, and I need to build that struct in C++ using the LLVM API. I can't seem get the pointer to the function as an LLVM value, let alone pass a pointer to the ConstantStruct that I can't build. I'm not sure if I'm even on the track, but this is what I have so far: void print(char*); vector<Constant*> functions; functions.push_back(ConstantExpr::getIntToPtr( ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt32Ty(context), (int)print), /* function pointer type here, FunctionType::get(...) doesn't seem to work */ )); ConstantStruct* struct = cast<ConstantStruct>(ConstantStruct::get( cast<StructType>(m->getTypeByName("printer")), functions )); Function* main = m->getFunction("main"); vector<GenericValue> args; args[0].PointerVal = /* not sure what goes here */ ee->runFunction(main, args);

    Read the article

  • How to assign a value to an pointer-pointer passed in call by reference?

    - by mystify
    I want to achieve something similar to what these guys do here: - (NSUInteger)countForFetchRequest:(NSFetchRequest *)request error:(NSError **)error like you can see, you pass an NSError pointer and that nice method will assign a real NSError object to your pointer in case there is an error. So the cool thing about this is, that the method returns an NSUInteger but can ALSO return an NSError, without having to mess around with ugly and fat arrays or dictionaries. So how could I assign an object to the passed-in error pointer?

    Read the article

  • Initializing and accessing a pointer from an array of pointers

    - by idealistikz
    Suppose I have the following: void **Init(int numElems) { //What is the best way to intialize 'ptrElems' to store an array of void *'s? void **ptrElems = malloc(numElems * sizeof(void *)); return ptrElems; } //What is the best way to return a pointer pointing at the index passed as a parameter? void **GetPtr(void **ptrElems, int index) { void **elem = elems + (index * sizeof(void *)); return elem; } First, what is the best way to intialize 'ptrElems' to store an array of pointers? I use malloc because assigning it to an array will not persist after the end of the function. Second, what is the best way to point to the pointer at the specified index? I tried typecasting the first line of the 'GetPtr' function to ensure proper pointer arithmetic, but I receive the warning, 'initialization from incompatible pointer type'. Is it necessary to typecast?

    Read the article

  • How do you delete a pointer without deleting the data the pointer points to?

    - by Faken
    I have a pointer that points to an array and another pointer referencing the same array. How do i delete any one of those pointers without killing the array such that the second undeleted pointer still works? for example: int* pointer1 = new int [1000]; int* pointer2; pointer2 = pointer1; Now i want to get rid of pointer1, how would i do it such that i can continue to access the array normaly through pointer2?

    Read the article

  • boost::function function pointer to parameters?

    - by high6
    How does boost::function take a function pointer and get parameters from it? I want wrap a function pointer so that it can be validated before being called. And it would be nice to be able to call it like boost::function is with the () operator and not having to access the function pointer member. Wrapper func; func(5); //Yes :D func.Ptr(5) //Easy to do, but not as nice looking

    Read the article

  • Detect pointer arithmetics because of LARGEADDRESSAWARE

    - by Suma
    I would like to switch my application to LARGEADDRESSAWARE. One of issues to watch for is pointer arithmetic, as pointer difference can no longer be represented as signed 32b. Is there some way how to find automatically all instances of pointer subtraction in a large C++ project? If not, is there some "least effort" manual or semi-automatic method how to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Determining if Memory Pointer is Valid - C++

    - by Jim Fell
    It has been my observation that if free( ptr ) is called where ptr is not a valid pointer to system-allocated memory, an access violation occurs. Let's say that I call free like this: LPVOID ptr = (LPVOID)0x12345678; free( ptr ); This will most definitely cause an access violation. Is there a way to test that the memory location pointed to by ptr is valid system-allocated memory? It seems to me that the the memory management part of the Windows OS kernel must know what memory has been allocated and what memory remains for allocation. Otherwise, how could it know if enough memory remains to satisfy a given request? (rhetorical) That said, it seems reasonable to conclude that there must be a function (or set of functions) that would allow a user to determine if a pointer is valid system-allocated memory. Perhaps Microsoft has not made these functions public. If Microsoft has not provided such an API, I can only presume that it was for an intentional and specific reason. Would providing such a hook into the system prose a significant threat to system security? Situation Report Although knowing whether a memory pointer is valid could be useful in many scenarios, this is my particular situation: I am writing a driver for a new piece of hardware that is to replace an existing piece of hardware that connects to the PC via USB. My mandate is to write the new driver such that calls to the existing API for the current driver will continue to work in the PC applications in which it is used. Thus the only required changes to existing applications is to load the appropriate driver DLL(s) at startup. The problem here is that the existing driver uses a callback to send received serial messages to the application; a pointer to allocated memory containing the message is passed from the driver to the application via the callback. It is then the responsibility of the application to call another driver API to free the memory by passing back the same pointer from the application to the driver. In this scenario the second API has no way to determine if the application has actually passed back a pointer to valid memory.

    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 | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >