Search Results

Search found 12267 results on 491 pages for 'out of memory'.

Page 125/491 | < Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >

• in java, which is better - three arrays of booleans or 1 array of bytes?

  - by joe_shmoe

  I know the question sounds silly, but consider this: I have an array of items and a labelling algorithm. at any point the item is in one of three states. The current version holds these states in a byte array, where 0, 1 and 2 represent the three states. alternatively, I could have three arrays of boolean - one for each state. which is better (consumes less memory) depends on how jvm (sun's version) stores the arrays - is a boolean represented by 1 bit? (p.s. don't start with all that "this is not the way OO/Java works" - I know, but here performance comes in front. plus the algorithm is simple and perfectly readable even in such form). Thanks a lot

  Read the article

• If free() knows the length of my array, why can't I ask for it in my own code?

  - by Chris Cooper

  I know that it's a common convention to pass the length of dynamically allocated arrays to functions that manipulate them: void initializeAndFree(int* anArray, int length); int main(){ int arrayLength = 0; scanf("%d", &arrayLength); int* myArray = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int)*arrayLength); initializeAndFree(myArray, arrayLength); } void initializeAndFree(int* anArray, int length){ int i = 0; for (i = 0; i < length; i++) { anArray[i] = 0; } free(anArray); } but if there's no way for me to get the length of the allocated memory from a pointer, how does free() "automagically" know what to deallocate? Why can't I get in on the magic, as a C programmer? Where does free() get its free (har-har) knowledge from?

  Read the article

• release viewcontroller after presenting modally

  - by Jonathan

  I was watching CS193P Stanford course on Itunes, and in one of the lectures a demo was given and There it was said you could present the viewcontroller modally and then release it. Roughly like this (I know this isn't perfect but I'm on my PC atm) [self.view presentcontentmodally:myVC] [myVC release]; However this seems to produce problems. If I put a NSLog(@"%d", [myVC retainCount]) between those two lines then it returns 2 implying it is ok to release. However when I dismiss the myVC the app crashes. Nothing in the NSlog and the debugger won't show where it stopped. But I used malloc-history or something that some blog said would help. And found that it was the myVC. So should I be releasing myVC? (also when the modalVC has been dissmissed should the app's memory usuage go back to before the modalVC was presented?)

  Read the article

• Allocated Private Bytes keeps going up in one computer but not the other

  - by Jacob

  OK, this may sound weird, but here goes. There are 2 computers, A (Pentium D) and B (Quad Core) with almost the same amount of RAM. If I run the same code on both computers, the allocated private bytes in A never goes down resulting in a crash later on. In B it looks like the private bytes is constantly deallocated and everything looks fine. In both computers, the working set is deallocated and allocated similarly. Could this be an issue with manifests or DLLs (system)? I'm clueless. Note: I observed the utilized memory with Process Explorer.

  Read the article

• In what circumstances can large pages produce a speedup ?

  - by timday

  Modern x86 CPUs have the ability to support larger page sizes than the legacy 4K (ie 2MB or 4MB), and there are OS facilities (Linux, Windows) to access this functionality. The Microsoft link above states large pages "increase the efficiency of the translation buffer, which can increase performance for frequently accessed memory". Which isn't very helpful in predicting whether large pages will improve any given situation. I'm interested in concrete, preferably quantified, examples of where moving some program logic (or a whole application) to use huge pages has resulted in some performance improvement. Anyone got any success stories ? There's one particular case I know of myself: using huge pages can dramatically reduce the time needed to fork a large process (presumably as the number of TLB records needing copying is reduced by a factor on the order of 1000). I'm interested in whether huge pages can also benefit more mundane applications though.

  Read the article

• How do I release an object allocated in a different AutoReleasePool ?

  - by ajcaruana

  Hi, I have a problem with the memory management in Objective-C. Say I have a method that allocates an object and stores the reference to this object as a member of the class. If I run through the same function a second time, I need to release this first object before creating a new one to replace it. Supposing that the first line of the function is: NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init]; This means that a different auto-release pool will be in place. The code to allocate the object is as follows: if (m_object != nil) [m_object release]; m_object = [[MyClass alloc] init]; [m_object retain]; The problem is that the program crashes when running the last line of the method: [pool release]; What am I doing wrong ? How can I fix this ? Regards Alan

  Read the article

• Writing to pointer out of bounds after malloc() not causing error

  - by marr

  Hi, when I try the code below it works fine. Am I missing something? main() { int *p; p=malloc(sizeof(int)); printf("size of p=%d\n",sizeof(p)); p[500]=999999; printf("p[0]=%d",p[500]); return 0; } I tried it with malloc(0*sizeof(int)) or anything but it works just fine. The program only crashes when I don't use malloc at all. So even if I allocate 0 memory for the array p, it still stores values properly. So why am I even bothering with malloc then?

  Read the article

• Looking at the C++ new[] cookie. How portable is this code?

  - by carleeto

  I came up with this as a quick solution to a debugging problem - I have the pointer variable and its type, I know it points to an array of objects allocated on the heap, but I don't know how many. So I wrote this function to look at the cookie that stores the number of bytes when memory is allocated on the heap. template< typename T > int num_allocated_items( T *p ) { return *((int*)p-4)/sizeof(T); } //test #include <iostream> int main( int argc, char *argv[] ) { using std::cout; using std::endl; typedef long double testtype; testtype *p = new testtype[ 45 ]; //prints 45 std::cout<<"num allocated = "<<num_allocated_items<testtype>(p)<<std::endl; delete[] p; return 0; } I'd like to know just how portable this code is.

  Read the article

• Code corresponding to leaks with Visual Leak Detector

  - by matt

  I am trying to use Visual Leak Detector in Visual Studio 2008, here is an example of the output I get: Detected memory leaks! Dumping objects -> {204} normal block at 0x036C1568, 1920 bytes long. Data: < > 80 08 AB 03 00 01 AB 03 80 F9 AA 03 00 F2 AA 03 {203} normal block at 0x0372CC68, 40 bytes long. Data: <( > 28 00 00 00 80 02 00 00 E0 01 00 00 01 00 18 00 {202} normal block at 0x0372CC00, 44 bytes long. Data: << E > 3C 16 45 00 80 02 00 00 E0 01 00 00 01 00 00 00 The user's guide says to click on any line to jump to the corresponding file/line of code ; I tried clicking on every line but nothing happens! What am I missing?

  Read the article

• C++ deleting a pointer

  - by eSKay

  On this page, its written that One reason is that the operand of delete need not be an lvalue. Consider: delete p+1; delete f(x); Here, the implementation of delete does not have a pointer to which it can assign zero. Adding a number to a pointer shifts it forward in memory by those many number of sizeof(*p) units. So, what is the difference between delete p and delete p+1, and why would making the pointer 0 only be a problem with delete p+1?

  Read the article

• Force an object to be allocated on the heap

  - by Warren Seine

  A C++ class I'm writing uses shared_from_this() to return a valid boost::shared_ptr<>. Besides, I don't want to manage memory for this kind of object. At the moment, I'm not restricting the way the user allocates the object, which causes an error if shared_from_this() is called on a stack-allocated object. I'd like to force the object to be allocated with new and managed by a smart pointer, no matter how the user declares it. I thought it could be done through a proxy or an overloaded new operator, but I can't find a proper way of doing that. Is there a common design pattern for such usage? If it's not possible, how can I test it at compile time?

  Read the article

• Freeing a character pointer returns error

  - by Kraffs

  I'm trying to free a character pointer after having used it but it returns a strange error. The error says: "_CrtDbgREport: String too long or IO Error" The debugger itself returns no errors while compiling. The code currently looks like this: void RespondToUser(SOCKET client, SOCKET server) { char buffer[80]; char *temp = malloc(_scprintf("HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\n%s\r\nServer: %s\r\nConnection: close\r\n\r\nHi!", buffer, SERVER_NAME)); sprintf(temp, "HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\n%s\r\nServer: %s\r\nConnection: close\r\n\r\nHi!", buffer, SERVER_NAME); send(client, temp, strlen(temp), 0); closesocket(client); free(temp); ListenToUsers(server); } The problem only occurs when I try to free the temp pointer from the memory and not otherwise. What might be causing this?

  Read the article

• Is Private Bytes >> Working Set?

  - by Jacob

  OK, this may sound weird, but here goes. There are 2 computers, A (Pentium D) and B (Quad Core) with almost the same amount of RAM running Windows XP. If I run the same code on both computers, the allocated private bytes in A never goes down resulting in a crash later on. In B it looks like the private bytes is constantly deallocated and everything looks fine. In both computers, the working set is deallocated and allocated similarly. Could this be an issue with manifests or DLLs (system)? I'm clueless. Note: I observed the utilized memory with Process Explorer. Question: During execution (where we have several allocations and deallocations) is it normal for the number of private bytes to be much bigger (1.5 GB vs 70 MB) than the working set?

  Read the article

• C# class code loaded in RAM ?

  - by Spi1988

  hi, I would like to know whether the actual code of a C# class gets loaded in RAM when you instantiate the class? So for example if I have 2 Classes CLASS A , CLASS B, where class A has 10000 lines of code but just 1 field, an int. And class B has 10 lines of code and also 1 field an int as well. If I instantiate Class A will it take more RAM than Class B due to its lines of code ? A supplementary question, If the lines of code are loaded in memory together with the class, will they be loaded for every instance of the class? or just once for all the instances? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Split query result by half in TSQL (obtain 2 resultsets/tables)

  - by rubdottocom

  I have a query that returns a large number of heavy rows. When I transform this rows in a list of CustomObject I have a big memory peak, and this transformation is made by a custom dotnet framework that I can't modify. I need to retrieve a less number of rows to do "the transform" in two passes and then avoid the momery peak. How can I split the result of a query by half? I need to do it in DB layer. I thing to do a "Top count(*)/2" but how to get the other half? Thank you!

  Read the article

• What is the fastest way to write hundreds of files to disk using C#?

  - by Ehsan

  My program should write hundreds of files to disk, received by external resources (network) each file is a simple document that I'm currently store it with the name of GUID in a specific folder but creating hundred files, writing, closing is a lengthy process. Is there any better way to store these amount of files to disk? I've come to a solution, but I don't know if it is the best. First, I create 2 files, one of them is like allocation table and the second one is a huge file storing all the content of my documents. But reading from this file would be a nightmare; maybe a memory-mapped file technique could help. Could working with 30GB or more create a problem?

  Read the article

• question related to Iphone autorelease usage

  - by user524331

  Could someone help me please understand how allocation and memory management is done and handled in following scenario. i am giving a Psuedo code example and question thats troubling me is inline below: interface first { NSDecimalNumber *number1; } implementation ..... -(void) dealloc { [number1 release]; [super dealloc]; } ================================= interface second { NSDecimalNumber *number2; } implementation second ..... - (First*) check { First *firstObject = [[[First alloc] init] autorelease]; number1 = [[NSDecimalNumber alloc] initWithInteger:0]; **// do i need to autorelease number1 as well?** return firstObject; }

  Read the article

• What's the best way to return something like a collection of `std::auto_ptr`s in C++03?

  - by Billy ONeal

  std::auto_ptr is not allowed to be stored in an STL container, such as std::vector. However, occasionally there are cases where I need to return a collection of polymorphic objects, and therefore I can't return a vector of objects (due to the slicing problem). I can use std::tr1::shared_ptr and stick those in the vector, but then I have to pay a high price of maintaining separate reference counts, and object that owns the actual memory (the container) no longer logically "owns" the objects because they can be copied out of it without regard to ownership. C++0x offers a perfect solution to this problem in the form of std::vector<std::unique_ptr<t>>, but I don't have access to C++0x. Some other notes: I don't have access to C++0x, but I do have TR1 available. I would like to avoid use of Boost (though it is available if there is no other option) I am aware of boost::ptr_container containers (i.e. boost::ptr_vector), but I would like to avoid this because it breaks the debugger (innards are stored in void *s which means it's difficult to view the object actually stored inside the container in the debugger)

  Read the article

• C++: Delete a struct?

  - by Rosarch

  I have a struct that contains pointers: struct foo { char* f; int* d; wchar* m; } I have a vector of shared pointers to these structs: vector<shared_ptr<foo>> vec; vec is allocated on the stack. When it passes out of scope at the end of the method, its destructor will be called. (Right?) That will in turn call the destructor of each element in the vector. (Right?) Does calling delete foo delete just the pointers such as foo.f, or does it actually free the memory from the heap?

  Read the article

• C++ destructor issue with std::vector of class objects

  - by Nigel

  I am confused about how to use destructors when I have a std::vector of my class. So if I create a simple class as follows: class Test { private: int *big; public: Test () { big = new int[10000]; } ~Test () { delete [] big; } }; Then in my main function I do the following: Test tObj = Test(); vector<Test> tVec; tVec.push_back(tObj); I get a runtime crash in the destructor of Test when I go out of scope. Why is this and how can I safely free my memory?

  Read the article

• What is the difference between these two ways of creating NSStrings?

  - by adame

  NSString *myString = @"Hello"; NSString *myString = [NSString stringWithString:@"Hello"]; I understand that using method (1) creates a pointer to a string literal that is defined as static memory (and cannot be deallocated) and that using (2) creates an NSString object that will be autoreleased. Is using method (1) bad? What are the major differences? Is there any instances where you would want to use (1)? Is there a performance difference? P.S. I have searched extensively on Stack Overflow and while there are questions on the same topic, none of them have answers to the questions I have posted above.

  Read the article

• How to store double using SharedPrefrences?

  - by user3924167

  I am having trouble storing a double in the phone's memory. What are my other options if this isnt possible. Basically what the code is aiming to do using sharedprefrences is take the stored value of "Alcohol" spending and then add whatever the input is in the editText to it and then store that new value for the next time. Running total of spending on alcohol **Can someone please help with this issue and be detailed where x y & z should go in the project. The user selects from a spinner, which works. public void addInput(){ double dblCostInput = Double.valueOf(inputBox.getText().toString()); String strCategories= spinnerCategories.getSelectedItem().toString(); if(strCategories.equals("Alcohol")) { alcoholSpend = alcoholSpend + dblCostInput; inputBox.setText(""); nextInput(); inputBox.setText("Your Spending on"+strCategories+" is: " +d.format(alcoholSpend)); }

  Read the article

• Allocate from buffer in C

  - by Grimless

  I am building a simple particle system and want to use a single array buffer of structs to manage my particles. That said, I can't find a C function that allows me to malloc() and free() from an arbitrary buffer. Here is some pseudocode to show my intent: Particle* particles = (Particle*) malloc( sizeof(Particle) * numParticles ); Particle* firstParticle = <buffer_alloc>( particles ); initialize_particle( firstParticle ); // ... Some more stuff if (firstParticle->life < 0) <buffer_free>( firstParticle ); // @ program's end free(particles); Where <buffer_alloc> and <buffer_free> are functions that allocate and free memory chunks from arbitrary pointers (possibly with additional metadata such as buffer length, etc.). Do such functions exist and/or is there a better way to do this? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Why does Apple use Objective-C for iPhone development? (App Store)

  - by Luca Matteis

  I'm interested to know your opinion on why Apple uses a language such as Objective-C for app development. Does Apple's app store allow apps written only in this language? Does apple even look at your source-code or does it just care of the binary output? I learned that most of their app rejection (in the app store) is based upon apps crashing (probably memory leaks in which Objective-c is not very efficient unless you use a GC). Why not let developers use a safer language, like a scripting language? I think these are important questions for a developer (I don't even use Apple's products) because it seems like Apple's app store is the MOST successful app sale place on the web.

  Read the article

• .NET Garbage Collection behavior (with DataTable)

  - by gmac

  I am wonder why after creating a very simple DataTable and then setting it to null why Garbage Collection does not clear out all the memory used by that DataTable. Here is an example. The variable Before should be equal to Removed but it is not. { long Before = 0, After = 0, Removed = 0, Collected = 0; Before = GC.GetTotalMemory(true); DataTable dt = GetSomeDataTableFromSql(); After = GC.GetTotalMemory(true); dt = null; Removed = GC.GetTotalMemory(true); GC.Collect(); Collected = GC.GetTotalMemory(true); } Gives the following results. Before = 388116 After = 731248 Removed = 530176 Collected = 530176

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >