Search Results

Search found 14548 results on 582 pages for 'const reference'.

Page 104/582 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • Providing less than operator for one element of a pair

    - by Koszalek Opalek
    What would be the most elegant way too fix the following code: #include <vector> #include <map> #include <set> using namespace std; typedef map< int, int > row_t; typedef vector< row_t > board_t; typedef row_t::iterator area_t; bool operator< ( area_t const& a, area_t const& b ) { return( a->first < b->first ); }; int main( int argc, char* argv[] ) { int row_num; area_t it; set< pair< int, area_t > > queue; queue.insert( make_pair( row_num, it ) ); // does not compile }; One way to fix it is moving the definition of less< to namespace std (I know, you are not supposed to do it.) namespace std { bool operator< ( area_t const& a, area_t const& b ) { return( a->first < b->first ); }; }; Another obvious solution is defining less than< for pair< int, area_t but I'd like to avoid that and be able to define the operator only for the one element of the pair where it is not defined.

    Read the article

  • Why is calling close() after fopen() not closing?

    - by Richard Morgan
    I ran across the following code in one of our in-house dlls and I am trying to understand the behavior it was showing: long GetFD(long* fd, const char* fileName, const char* mode) { string fileMode; if (strlen(mode) == 0 || tolower(mode[0]) == 'w' || tolower(mode[0]) == 'o') fileMode = string("w"); else if (tolower(mode[0]) == 'a') fileMode = string("a"); else if (tolower(mode[0]) == 'r') fileMode = string("r"); else return -1; FILE* ofp; ofp = fopen(fileName, fileMode.c_str()); if (! ofp) return -1; *fd = (long)_fileno(ofp); if (*fd < 0) return -1; return 0; } long CloseFD(long fd) { close((int)fd); return 0; } After repeated calling of GetFD with the appropriate CloseFD, the whole dll would no longer be able to do any file IO. I wrote a tester program and found that I could GetFD 509 times, but the 510th time would error. Using Process Explorer, the number of Handles did not increase. So it seems that the dll is reaching the limit for the number of open files; setting _setmaxstdio(2048) does increase the amount of times we can call GetFD. Obviously, the close() is working quite right. After a bit of searching, I replaced the fopen() call with: long GetFD(long* fd, const char* fileName, const char* mode) { *fd = (long)open(fileName, 2); if (*fd < 0) return -1; return 0; } Now, repeatedly calling GetFD/CloseFD works. What is going on here?

    Read the article

  • multiple definition in header file

    - by Jérôme
    Here is a small code-example from which I'd like to ask a question : complex.h : #ifndef COMPLEX_H #define COMPLEX_H #include <iostream> class Complex { public: Complex(float Real, float Imaginary); float real() const { return m_Real; }; private: friend std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& o, const Complex& Cplx); float m_Real; float m_Imaginary; }; std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& o, const Complex& Cplx) { return o << Cplx.m_Real << " i" << Cplx.m_Imaginary; } #endif // COMPLEX_H complex.cpp : #include "complex.h" Complex::Complex(float Real, float Imaginary) { m_Real = Real; m_Imaginary = Imaginary; } main.cpp : #include "complex.h" #include <iostream> int main() { Complex Foo(3.4, 4.5); std::cout << Foo << "\n"; return 0; } When compiling this code, I get the following error : multiple definition of operator<<(std::ostream&, Complex const&) I've found that making this fonction inline solves the problem, but I don't understand why. Why does the compiler complain about multiple definition ? My header file is guarded (with #define COMPLEX_H). And, if complaining about the operator<< fonction, why not complain about the public real() fonction, which is defined in the header as well ? And is there another solution as using the inline keyword ?

    Read the article

  • virtual methods and template classes

    - by soxs060389
    Hi I got over a problem, I think a very specific one. I've got 2 classes, a B aseclass and a D erived class (from B aseclass). B is a template class ( or class template) and has a pure virtual method virutal void work(const T &dummy) = 0; The D erived class is supposed to reimplement this, but as D is Derived from B rather than D being another template class, the compiler spits at me that virtual functions and templates don't work at once. Any ideas how to acomplish what I want? I am thankfull for any thoughts and Ideas, especially if you allready worked out that problem this class is fixed aka AS IS, I can not edit this without breaking existing code base template <typename T> class B { public: ... virtual void work(const T &dummy) = 0; .. }; take int* as an example class D : public B<int*>{ ... virtual void work(const int* &dummy){ /* put work code here */ } .. }; Edit: The compiler tells me, that void B<T>::work(const T&) [with T = int*] is pure virtual within D

    Read the article

  • C++ ambiguous template instantiation

    - by aaa
    the following gives me ambiguous template instantiation with nvcc (combination of EDG front-end and g++). Is it really ambiguous, or is compiler wrong? I also post workaround à la boost::enable_if template<typename T> struct disable_if_serial { typedef void type; }; template<> struct disable_if_serial<serial_tag> { }; template<int M, int N, typename T> __device__ //static typename disable_if_serial<T>::type void add_evaluate_polynomial1(double *R, const double (&C)[M][N], double x, const T &thread) { // ... } template<size_t M, size_t N> __device__ static void add_evaluate_polynomial1(double *R, const double (&C)[M][N], double x, const serial_tag&) { for (size_t i = 0; i < M; ++i) add_evaluate_polynomial1(R, C, x, i); } // ambiguous template instantiation here. add_evaluate_polynomial1(R, C, x, serial_tag());

    Read the article

  • Circumvent c++ null-terminated string frustration

    - by ypnos
    I'm using boost::program_options and it suffers from the same as many other c++ libs, even std itself: It still uses C-style null-terminated strings, because nobody really likes the weak std::string. The method in question is: options_description_easy_init& operator()(const char* name, const value_semantic* s, const char* description); The typical use case is just fine: options.add_options() ("graphical", bool_switch(&isGraphical)->default_value(false), "Show any graphical output during runtime") However, I need the name of the option to be set dynamically. The reason is that in some cases I nead a custom prefix, which is added to the string by my function std::string key(const std::string& k): options.add_options() (key("graphical"), bool_switch(&isGraphical)->default_value(false), "Show any graphical output during runtime") This fails. I could now use c_str() on the std::string but that's evil -- I don't know how long program_options keeps the variable around and if my string is still alive when needed. I could also reserve memory in a buffer etc. and hand in that. The buffer is never freed and it sucks/is evil. Is there anything else I can do to circumvent the C-style string mess in this situation?

    Read the article

  • null terminating a string

    - by robUK
    Hello, gcc 4.4.4 c89 just wondering what is the standard way to null terminate a string. i.e. However, when I use the NULL I get the warning message. *dest++ = 0; *dest++ = '\0'; *dest++ = NULL; /* Warning: Assignment takes integer from pointer without a cast */ source code I am using: size_t s_strscpy(char *dest, const char *src, const size_t len) { /* Copy the contents from src to dest */ size_t i = 0; for(i = 0; i < len; i++) *dest++ = *src++; /* Null terminate dest */ *dest++ = 0; return i; } Just another quick question. I deliberately commented out the line that null terminates. However, it still correctly printed out the contents of the dest. The caller of this function would send the length of the string by either included the NULL or not. i.e. strlen(src) + 1 or stlen(src). size_t s_strscpy(char *dest, const char *src, const size_t len) { /* Copy the contents from src to dest */ size_t i = 0; /* Don't copy the null terminator */ for(i = 0; i < len - 1; i++) *dest++ = *src++; /* Don't add the Null terminator */ /* *dest++ = 0; */ return i; } Many thanks for any advice,

    Read the article

  • Friends, templates, overloading <<

    - by Crystal
    I'm trying to use friend functions to overload << and templates to get familiar with templates. I do not know what these compile errors are: Point.cpp:11: error: shadows template parm 'class T' Point.cpp:12: error: declaration of 'const Point<T>& T' for this file #include "Point.h" template <class T> Point<T>::Point() : xCoordinate(0), yCoordinate(0) {} template <class T> Point<T>::Point(T xCoordinate, T yCoordinate) : xCoordinate(xCoordinate), yCoordinate(yCoordinate) {} template <class T> std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &out, const Point<T> &T) { std::cout << "(" << T.xCoordinate << ", " << T.yCoordinate << ")"; return out; } My header looks like: #ifndef POINT_H #define POINT_H #include <iostream> template <class T> class Point { public: Point(); Point(T xCoordinate, T yCoordinate); friend std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &out, const Point<T> &T); private: T xCoordinate; T yCoordinate; }; #endif My header also gives the warning: Point.h:12: warning: friend declaration 'std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream&, const Point<T>&)' declares a non-template function Which I was also unsure why. Any thoughts? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • C -- Basic Struct questions

    - by Ryan Yu
    So I'm trying to learn C right now, and I have some basic struct questions I'd like to clear up: Basically, everything centers around this snippet of code: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #define MAX_NAME_LEN 127 typedef struct { char name[MAX_NAME_LEN + 1]; unsigned long sid; } Student; /* return the name of student s */ const char* getName (const Student* s) { // the parameter 's' is a pointer to a Student struct return s->name; // returns the 'name' member of a Student struct } /* set the name of student s If name is too long, cut off characters after the maximum number of characters allowed. */ void setName(Student* s, const char* name) { // 's' is a pointer to a Student struct | 'name' is a pointer to the first element of a char array (repres. a string) s->name = name; } /* return the SID of student s */ unsigned long getStudentID(const Student* s) { // 's' is a pointer to a Student struct return s->sid; } /* set the SID of student s */ void setStudentID(Student* s, unsigned long sid) { // 's' is a pointer to a Student struct | 'sid' is a 'long' representing the desired SID s->sid = sid; } I've commented up the code in an attempt to solidify my understanding of pointers; I hope they're all accurate. So anyway, I have a feeling that setName and setStudentID aren't correct, but I'm not exactly sure why. Can someone explain? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • VS2008 Link Error Using SafeInt3.hpp in 64bit mode.

    - by photo_tom
    I have the below code that links and runs fine in 32bit mode - #include "safeint3.hpp" typedef SafeInt<SIZE_T> SAFE_SIZE_T; SAFE_SIZE_T sizeOfCache; SAFE_SIZE_T _allocateAmt; Where safeint3.hpp is current version that can be found on Codeplex SafeInt. For those who are unaware of it, safeint is a template class that makes working with different integer types and sizes "safe". To quote channel 9 video on software - "it writes the code that you should". Which is my case. I have a class that is managing a large in-memory cache of objects (6gb) and I am very concerned about making sure that I don't have overflow/underflow issues on my pointers/sizes/other integer variables. In this use, it solves many problems. My problem is coming when moving from 32bit dev mode to 64bit production mode. When I build the app in this mode, I'm getting the following linker warnings - 1>cachecontrol.obj : warning LNK4006: "bool __cdecl IntrinsicMultiplyUint64(unsigned __int64 const &,unsigned __int64 const &,unsigned __int64 *)" (?IntrinsicMultiplyUint64@@YA_NAEB_K0PEA_K@Z) already defined in ImageInRamCache.obj; second definition ignored 1>cachecontrol.obj : warning LNK4006: "bool __cdecl IntrinsicMultiplyInt64(__int64 const &,__int64 const &,__int64 *)" (?IntrinsicMultiplyInt64@@YA_NAEB_J0PEA_J@Z) already defined in ImageInRamCache.obj; second definition ignored While I understand I can ignore the error, I would like either (a) prevent the warning from occurring or (b) make it disappear so that my QA department doesn't flag it as a problem. And after spending some time researching it, I cannot find a way to do either.

    Read the article

  • Writing my own implementation of stl-like Iterator in C++.

    - by Negai
    Good evening everybody, I'm currently trying to understand the intrinsics of iterators in various languages i.e. the way they are implemented. For example, there is the following class exposing the list interface. template<class T> class List { public: virtual void Insert( int beforeIndex, const T item ) throw( ListException ) =0 ; virtual void Append( const T item ) =0; virtual T Get( int position ) const throw( ListException ) =0; virtual int GetLength() const =0; virtual void Remove( int position ) throw( ListException ) =0; virtual ~List() =0 {}; }; According to GoF, the best way to implement an iterator that can support different kinds of traversal is to create the base Iterator class (friend of List) with protected methods that can access List's members. The concrete implementations of Iterator will handle the job in different ways and access List's private and protected data through the base interface. From here forth things are getting confusing. Say, I have class LinkedList and ArrayList, both derived from List, and there are also corresponding iterators, each of the classes returns. How can I implement LinkedListIterator? I'm absolutely out of ideas. And what kind of data can the base iterator class retrieve from the List (which is a mere interface, while the implementations of all the derived classes differ significantly) ? Sorry for so much clutter. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Typedef equivalence in function arguments

    - by Warren Seine
    Hi guys, The question is kind of hard to ask without an example so here it is: #include <vector> struct O { }; struct C { template <typename T> void function1(void (C::*callback)(const O*)); template <typename T> void function2(void (C::*callback)(const typename T::value_type)); void print(const O*); }; int main() { C c; c.function1< std::vector<O*> >(&C::print); // Success. c.function2< std::vector<O*> >(&C::print); // Fail. } The error that I am given is: error: no matching function for call to ‘C::function2(void (C::*)(const O*))’. Basically, the only difference between calls is that in function2, I'm more generic since I use the typedef std::vector<O*>::value_type which should resolve to O*, hence similar to function1. I'm using G++ 4.2.1 (I know it's old), but Comeau confirms I'm wrong. Why does the compilation fail?

    Read the article

  • Operator+ for a subtype of a template class.

    - by baol
    I have a template class that defines a subtype. I'm trying to define the binary operator+ as a template function, but the compiler cannot resolve the template version of the operator+. #include <iostream> template<typename other_type> struct c { c(other_type v) : cs(v) {} struct subtype { subtype(other_type v) : val(v) {} other_type val; } cs; }; template<typename other_type> typename c<other_type>::subtype operator+(const typename c<other_type>::subtype& left, const typename c<other_type>::subtype& right) { return typename c<other_type>::subtype(left.val + right.val); } // This one works // c<int>::subtype operator+(const c<int>::subtype& left, // const c<int>::subtype& right) // { return c<int>::subtype(left.val + right.val); } int main() { c<int> c1 = 1; c<int> c2 = 2; c<int>::subtype cs3 = c1.cs + c2.cs; std::cerr << cs3.val << std::endl; } I think the reason is because the compiler (g++4.3) cannot guess the template type so it's searching for operator+<int> instead of operator+. What's the reason for that? What elegant solution can you suggest?

    Read the article

  • Instantiating a class within a class

    - by Ink-Jet
    Hello. I'm trying to instantiate a class within a class, so that the outer class contains the inner class. This is my code: #include <iostream> #include <string> class Inner { private: std::string message; public: Inner(std::string m); void print() const; }; Inner::Inner(std::string m) { message = m; } void Inner::print() const { std::cout << message << std::endl; std::cout << message << std::endl; } class Outer { private: std::string message; Inner in; public: Outer(std::string m); void print() const; }; Outer::Outer(std::string m) { message = m; } void Outer::print() const { std::cout << message << std::endl; } int main() { Outer out("Hello world."); out.print(); return 0; } "Inner in", is my attempt at containing the inner within the outer, however, when I compile, i get an error that there is no matching function for call to Inner::Inner(). What have I done wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • c++ code cons/pros

    - by VirusEcks
    below i have a code that runs in most of my simple programs .. . i want to know if it's good/bad ... and cons/pros . . win32 header file: win32.h #include <windows.h> #include <process.h> #include <stdarg.h> main header file: inc.h #include "win32.h" #ifndef INCS #define INCS #define DD #else #define DD extern #endif #ifndef VARS #define titlen L"my program" #endif DD wchar_t gtitle[512]; DD wchar_t gclass[512]; DD wchar_t gdir[32767]; #include "resources.h" #include "commonfunctions.h" then all files have something like this commonfunctions.h DD inline bool icmp( const char *String1, const char *String2 ) { if ( _stricmp( String1, String2 ) == 0 ) { return true; } return false; } DD inline bool scmp( const char *String1, const char *String2 ) { if ( strcmp( String1, String2 ) == 0 ) { return true; } return false; } all global variables have DD infront of them and all functions have DD too . is there a bad side of this ? . i came up with this idea and it wasn't problematic at all in small programs . but before i apply it in a large project will it be problematic ?. thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Qtimer not timing out QT, C++

    - by realz
    Hi, I am learning C++ and using QT. I have a small program in which I am trying to update the text of the PushButton every second. The label being current time. I have a timer that should time out every second, but seems like it never does. here's the code. Header File #ifndef _HELLOFORM_H #define _HELLOFORM_H #include "ui_HelloForm.h" class HelloForm : public QDialog { public: HelloForm(); virtual ~HelloForm(); public slots: void textChanged(const QString& text); void updateCaption(); private: Ui::HelloForm widget; }; #endif /* _HELLOFORM_H */ CPP file #include "HelloForm.h" #include <QTimer> #include <QtGui/QPushButton> #include <QTime> HelloForm::HelloForm(){ widget.setupUi(this); widget.pushButton->setText(QTime::currentTime().toString()); widget.pushButton->setFont(QFont( "Times", 9, QFont::Bold ) ); QTimer *timer = new QTimer(this); connect(timer, SIGNAL(timeout()), SLOT(updateCaption())); timer->start(1000); connect(widget.pushButton, SIGNAL(clicked()), qApp, SLOT(quit()) ); connect(widget.nameEdit, SIGNAL(textChanged(const QString&)), this, SLOT(textChanged(const QString&))); } HelloForm::~HelloForm() { } void HelloForm::textChanged(const QString& text) { if (0 < text.trimmed().length()) { widget.helloEdit->setText("Hello " + text.trimmed() + "!"); } else { widget.helloEdit->clear(); } } void HelloForm::updateCaption() { QString myVar; myVar = QTime::currentTime().toString(); widget.pushButton->setText(myVar); } Any help will be greatly appreciated... The PushButton's text never changes...

    Read the article

  • I just wanted to DES 4096 bytes of data with a 128 bits key...

    - by badp
    ...and what the nice folks at OpenSSL gratiously provide me with is this. :) Now, since you shouldn't be guessing when using cryptography, I come here for confirmation: what is the function call I want to use? What I understood A 128 bits key is 16 byte large, so I'll need double DES (2 × 8 byte). This leaves me with only a few function calls: void DES_ede2_cfb64_encrypt(const unsigned char *in, unsigned char *out, long length, DES_key_schedule *ks1, DES_key_schedule *ks2, DES_cblock *ivec, int *num, int enc); void DES_ede2_cbc_encrypt(const unsigned char *input, unsigned char *output, long length, DES_key_schedule *ks1, DES_key_schedule *ks2, DES_cblock *ivec, int enc); void DES_ede2_cfb64_encrypt(const unsigned char *in, unsigned char *out, long length, DES_key_schedule *ks1, DES_key_schedule *ks2, DES_cblock *ivec, int *num, int enc); void DES_ede2_ofb64_encrypt(const unsigned char *in, unsigned char *out, long length, DES_key_schedule *ks1, DES_key_schedule *ks2, DES_cblock *ivec, int *num); In this case, I guess the function I want to call DES_ede2_cfb64_encrypt, although I'm not so sure -- I definitely don't need padding here and I'd have to care about what ivec and num are, and how I want to generate them... What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Ways to make (relatively) safe assumptions about the type of concrete subclasses?

    - by Kylotan
    I have an interface (defined as a abstract base class) that looks like this: class AbstractInterface { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const = 0; } And I have an implementation of this (constructors etc omitted): class ConcreteThing { public: bool IsRelatedTo(const AbstractInterface& other) const { return m_ImplObject.has_relationship_to(other.m_ImplObject); } private: ImplementationObject m_ImplObject; } The AbstractInterface forms an interface in Project A, and the ConcreteThing lives in Project B as an implementation of that interface. This is so that code in Project A can access data from Project B without having a direct dependency on it - Project B just has to implement the correct interface. Obviously the line in the body of the IsRelatedTo function cannot compile - that instance of ConcreteThing has an m_ImplObject member, but it can't assume that all AbstractInterfaces do, including the other argument. In my system, I can actually assume that all implementations of AbstractInterface are instances of ConcreteThing (or subclasses thereof), but I'd prefer not to be casting the object to the concrete type in order to get at the private member, or encoding that assumption in a way that will crash without a diagnostic later if this assumption ceases to hold true. I cannot modify ImplementationObject, but I can modify AbstractInterface and ConcreteThing. I also cannot use the standard RTTI mechanism for checking a type prior to casting, or use dynamic_cast for a similar purpose. I have a feeling that I might be able to overload IsRelatedTo with a ConcreteThing argument, but I'm not sure how to call it via the base IsRelatedTo(AbstractInterface) method. It wouldn't get called automatically as it's not a strict reimplementation of that method. Is there a pattern for doing what I want here, allowing me to implement the IsRelatedTo function via ImplementationObject::has_relationship_to(ImplementationObject), without risky casts? (Also, I couldn't think of a good question title - please change it if you have a better one.)

    Read the article

  • Operator+ for a subtype of a template classe.

    - by baol
    I have a template class that defines a subtype. I'm trying to define the binary operator+ as a template function, but the compiler cannot resolve the template version of the operator+. #include <iostream> template<typename other_type> struct c { c(other_type v) : cs(v) {} struct subtype { subtype(other_type v) : val(v) {} other_type val; } cs; }; template<typename other_type> typename c<other_type>::subtype operator+(const typename c<other_type>::subtype& left, const typename c<other_type>::subtype& right) { return typename c<other_type>::subtype(left.val + right.val); } // This one works // c<a>::subtype operator+(const c<a>::subtype& left, // const c<a>::subtype& right) // { return c<a>::subtype(left.val + right.val); } int main() { c<int> c1 = 1; c<int> c2 = 2; c<int>::subtype cs3 = c1.cs + c2.cs; std::cerr << cs3.val << std::endl; } I think the reason is because the compiler (g++4.3) cannot guess the template type so it's searching for operator+<int> instead of operator+. What's the reason for that? What elegant solution can you suggest?

    Read the article

  • Imbricated C++ template

    - by gregseth
    I have the following pattern: template <int a, int b> class MyClass { template <int c> MyClass<a, c> &operator*(MyClass<c, b> const &other) const; }; // ../.. template <int a, int b> template <int c> MyClass<a, c> &MyClass<a, b>::operator*(MyClass<c, b> const &other) const { MyClass<a, c> result; // ..do stuff.. return result; } It doesn't compile, the error message is Error C2975. invalid template argument 'number', constant expression expected. If I replace template <int c> by template <int c, int d> and use it accordignly, it works fine. But I want d to be the same value as b. My questions: Why the example doesn't work? How can I enforce d to be the same than b? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Efficiently get the size of a parameter pack up to a certain index

    - by NmdMystery
    I want to be able to determine the number of bytes that are in a subset of a parameter pack from 0 to a given index. Right now I'm using a non-constexpr way of doing this. Below is my code: template <size_t index, typename... args> struct pack_size_index; template <size_t index, typename type_t, typename... args> struct pack_size_index <index, type_t, args...> { static const size_t index_v = index; static const size_t value(void) { if (index_v > 0) { return sizeof(type_t) + pack_size_index<index - 1, args...>::value(); } return 0; } }; template <size_t index> struct pack_size_index <index> { static const size_t index_v = index; static const size_t value(void) { return 0; } }; Usage: //output: 5 (equal to 1 + 4) std::cout << pack_size_index<2, bool, float, int, double>::value() << std::endl; //output: 20 (equal to 8 + 8 + 4) std::cout << pack_size_index<3, double, double, float, int>::value() << std::endl; This gets the job done, but this uses runtime comparison and the resulting executable increases in size rapidly whenever this is used. What's a less expensive way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • how to change the image on click from database

    - by iosdev
    In my application i having multiple image in sq lite database,Since i want to change to the next image on button click,Here my code, -(void)Readthesqlitefile:(NSInteger *)sno { sqlite3 *database;//database object NSString *docpath=[self doccumentspath];//get sqlite path const char *ch=[docpath UTF8String];//string to constant char UTF8string main part to connect DB if (sqlite3_open(ch, &database)==SQLITE_OK) { const char *chstmt="SELECT * FROM animal where rowid= = %d",sno; sqlite3_stmt *sqlstmt;//to execute the above statement if (sqlite3_prepare_v2(database, chstmt, -1, &sqlstmt, NULL)==SQLITE_OK) { while (sqlite3_step(sqlstmt)==SQLITE_ROW) { const char *Bname=(char *)sqlite3_column_text(sqlstmt, 0); //converting const char to nsstring NSString *Bndname=[NSString stringWithFormat:@"%s",Bname]; NSLog(@"Brand Names=%@",Bndname); lb1.text=[NSString stringWithFormat:Bndname]; NSUInteger legnt=sqlite3_column_bytes(sqlstmt, 1); if (legnt>0) { NSData *dt=[NSData dataWithBytes:sqlite3_column_blob(sqlstmt, 1) length:legnt]; clsimg=[UIImage imageWithData:dt];//converting data to image imager.image=clsimg; } else { clsimg=nil; } } } sqlite3_finalize(sqlstmt); } sqlite3_close(database); } Button click function -(IBAction)changenext { int j; for (j=1; j<10; j++) { [self Readthesqlitefile:j]; } } its is not working pls help me to solve it out?

    Read the article

  • How can I speed-up this loop (in C)?

    - by splicer
    Hi! I'm trying to parallelize a convolution function in C. Here's the original function which convolves two arrays of 64-bit floats: void convolve(const Float64 *in1, UInt32 in1Len, const Float64 *in2, UInt32 in2Len, Float64 *results) { UInt32 i, j; for (i = 0; i < in1Len; i++) { for (j = 0; j < in2Len; j++) { results[i+j] += in1[i] * in2[j]; } } } In order to allow for concurrency (without semaphores), I created a function that computes the result for a particular position in the results array: void convolveHelper(const Float64 *in1, UInt32 in1Len, const Float64 *in2, UInt32 in2Len, Float64 *result, UInt32 outPosition) { UInt32 i, j; for (i = 0; i < in1Len; i++) { if (i > outPosition) break; j = outPosition - i; if (j >= in2Len) continue; *result += in1[i] * in2[j]; } } The problem is, using convolveHelper slows down the code about 3.5 times (when running on a single thread). Any ideas on how I can speed-up convolveHelper, while maintaining thread safety?

    Read the article

  • insertvalue function in stack class is not calling when pointing by smartpointer class? please expai

    - by user323422
    template< class Type > class cStack { Type *m_array; int m_Top; int m_Size; public:cStack(); cStack(const Type&); cStack(const cStack<Type> &); bool Is_Full(); bool Is_Empty(); void InsertValue(const Type&); void RemeoveValue(); ~cStack(); }; template< class Type > class Smartpointer { cStack<Type> *sPtr; public: Smartpointer(); Smartpointer(const Type&); Type* operator->(); Type& operator*(); }; int main() { Smartpointer<int> sptr(1); sptr->InsertValue(2);//its not calling insertvalue } }

    Read the article

  • C++0x Smart Pointer Comparisons: Inconsistent, what's the rationale?

    - by GManNickG
    In C++0x (n3126), smart pointers can be compared, both relationally and for equality. However, the way this is done seems inconsistent to me. For example, shared_ptr defines operator< be equivalent to: template <typename T, typename U> bool operator<(const shared_ptr<T>& a, const shared_ptr<T>& b) { return std::less<void*>()(a.get(), b.get()); } Using std::less provides total ordering with respect to pointer values, unlike a vanilla relational pointer comparison, which is unspecified. However, unique_ptr defines the same operator as: template <typename T1, typename D1, typename T2, typename D2> bool operator<(const unique_ptr<T1, D1>& a, const unique_ptr<T2, D2>& b) { return a.get() < b.get(); } It also defined the other relational operators in similar fashion. Why the change in method and "completeness"? That is, why does shared_ptr use std::less while unique_ptr uses the built-in operator<? And why doesn't shared_ptr also provide the other relational operators, like unique_ptr? I can understand the rationale behind either choice: with respect to method: it represents a pointer so just use the built-in pointer operators, versus it needs to be usable within an associative container so provide total ordering (like a vanilla pointer would get with the default std::less predicate template argument) with respect to completeness: it represents a pointer so provide all the same comparisons as a pointer, versus it is a class type and only needs to be less-than comparable to be used in an associative container, so only provide that requirement But I don't see why the choice changes depending on the smart pointer type. What am I missing? Bonus/related: std::shared_ptr seems to have followed from boost::shared_ptr, and the latter omits the other relational operators "by design" (and so std::shared_ptr does too). Why is this?

    Read the article

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