Search Results

Search found 6796 results on 272 pages for 'django templates'.

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 142/272 | < Previous Page | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | Next Page >

  • C++: Constructor/destructor unresolved when not inline?

    - by Anamon
    In a plugin-based C++ project, I have a TmpClass that is used to exchange data between the main application and the plugins. Therefore the respective TmpClass.h is included in the abstract plugin interface class that is included by the main application project, and implemented by each plugin. As the plugins work on STL vectors of TmpClass instances, there needs to be a default constructor and destructor for the TmpClass. I had declared these in TmpClass.h: class TmpClass { TmpClass(); ~TmpClass(); } and implemented them in TmpClass.cpp. TmpClass::~TmpClass() {} TmpClass::TmpClass() {} However, when compiling plugins this leads to the linker complaining about two unresolved externals - the default constructor and destructor of TmpClass as required by the std::vector<TmpClass> template instantiation - even though all other functions I declare in TmpClass.h and implement in TmpClass.cpp work. As soon as I remove the (empty) default constructor and destructor from the .cpp file and inline them into the class declaration in the .h file, the plugins compile and work. Why is it that the default constructor and destructor have to be inline for this code to compile? Why does it even maatter? (I'm using MSVC++8).

    Read the article

  • avoiding enums as interface identifiers c++ OOP

    - by AlasdairC
    Hi I'm working on a plugin framework using dynamic loaded shared libraries which is based on Eclipse's (and probally other's) extension-point model. All plugins share similar properties (name, id, version etc) and each plugin could in theory satisfy any extension-point. The actual plugin (ie Dll) handling is managed by another library, all I am doing really is managing collections of interfaces for the application. I started by using an enum PluginType to distinguish the different interfaces, but I have quickly realised that using template functions made the code far cleaner and would leave the grunt work up to the compiler, rather than forcing me to use lots of switch {...} statements. The only issue is where I need to specify like functionality for class members - most obvious example is the default plugin which provides a particular interface. A Settings class handles all settings, including the default plugin for an interface. ie Skin newSkin = settings.GetDefault<ISkin>(); How do I store the default ISkin in a container without resorting to some other means of identifying the interface? As I mentioned above, I currently use a std::map<PluginType, IPlugin> Settings::defaults member to achieve this (where IPlugin is an abstract base class which all plugins derive from. I can then dynamic_cast to the desired interface when required, but this really smells of bad design to me and introduces more harm than good I think. would welcome any tips edit: here's an example of the current use of default plugins typedef boost::shared_ptr<ISkin> Skin; typedef boost::shared_ptr<IPlugin> Plugin; enum PluginType { skin, ..., ... } class Settings { public: void SetDefault(const PluginType type, boost::shared_ptr<IPlugin> plugin) { m_default[type] = plugin; } boost::shared_ptr<IPlugin> GetDefault(const PluginType type) { return m_default[type]; } private: std::map<PluginType, boost::shared_ptr<IPlugin> m_default; }; SkinManager::Initialize() { Plugin thedefault = g_settings.GetDefault(skinplugin); Skin defaultskin = boost::dynamic_pointer_cast<ISkin>(theskin); defaultskin->Initialize(); } I would much rather call the getdefault as the following, with automatic casting to the derived class. However I need to specialize for every class type. template<> Skin Settings::GetDefault<ISkin>() { return boost::dynamic_pointer_cast<ISkin>(m_default(skin)); }

    Read the article

  • C++ template member specialization - is this a compiler limitation?

    - by LoudNPossiblyRight
    Is it possible to do this kind of specialization? If so, how? The specialization in question is marked //THIS SPECIALIZATION WILL NOT COMPILE I have used VS2008, VS2010, gcc 4.4.3 and neither can compile this. #include<iostream> #include<string> using namespace std; template <typename ALPHA> class klass{ public: template <typename BETA> void func(BETA B); }; template <typename ALPHA> template <typename BETA> void klass<ALPHA>::func(BETA B){ cout << "I AM A BETA FUNC: " << B <<endl; } //THIS SPECIALIZATION WILL NOT COMPILE template <typename ALPHA> template <> void klass<ALPHA>::func(string B){ cout << "I AM A SPECIAL BETA FUNC: " << B <<endl; } int main(){ klass<string> k; k.func(1); k.func("hello"); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Silverlight: Button template with texttrimming cut off

    - by dex3703
    I'm replacing the default Button template's ContentPresenter with a TextBlock, so the text can be trimmed when it's too long. Works fine in WPF. In Silverlight the text gets pushed to one edge and cut off on the left, even when there's space on the right: Template is nothing special, just replaced the ContentPresenter with the TextBlock: <Border x:Name="bdrBackground" BorderBrush="{TemplateBinding BorderBrush}" BorderThickness="{TemplateBinding BorderThickness}" Background="{TemplateBinding Background}" /> <Rectangle x:Name="rectMouseOverVisualElement" Opacity="0"> <Rectangle.Fill> <SolidColorBrush x:Name="rectMouseOverColor" Color="{StaticResource MouseOverItemBgColor}"/> </Rectangle.Fill> </Rectangle> <Rectangle x:Name="rectPressedVisualElement" Opacity="0" Style="{TemplateBinding Tag}"/> <TextBlock x:Name="textblock" Text="{TemplateBinding Content}" TextTrimming="WordEllipsis" TextWrapping="NoWrap" HorizontalAlignment="{TemplateBinding HorizontalContentAlignment}" Margin="{TemplateBinding Padding}" VerticalAlignment="{TemplateBinding VerticalContentAlignment}"/> <Rectangle x:Name="rectDisabledVisualElement" Opacity="0" Style="{StaticResource RectangleDisabledStyle}"/> <Rectangle x:Name="rectFocusVisualElement" Opacity="0" Style="{StaticResource RectangleFocusStyle}"/> </Grid> </ControlTemplate> How do I fix this? More info: With the latest comment about HorizontalAlignment, it's clear that SL's implementation of TextTrimming differs from WPF's. In SL, TextTrimming only really works if the text is aligned left. SL isn't smart enough to align the text the way WPF does. For instance: WPF button: SL button with the textblock horizontalalignment = left: SL button with textblock horizontalalignment = center:

    Read the article

  • I have a bunch of template parameters that I want to hide from my users. How can I do this?

    - by Alex
    I have a superclass which is defined in terms of a few internal types it uses. Subclassing is performed as so: template <class InternalType1, class InternalType2> class Super { ... } class Sub : Super <interalTypeClass1, interalTypeClass2> { ... } But when I want to write a function that takes a pointer to the superclass, this happens : template <class InternalType1, class InternalType2> void function(Super<InternalType1, InternalType2>* in) { ... } The user really shouldn't know anything about the inside classes, and should really just concern himself with the use of the function. Some of these template lists become very very large, and expecting the user to pass them every time is wasteful, in my opinion. Any suggestions? EDIT: The function needs to know the internal types in use, so unless there is a way to access template types at compile time, I think there is no solution? Potential solution: Have each class do the following: #define SubTemplateArgs <SubTypeName, SubInternalType1, SubInternalType2> ?

    Read the article

  • Why are there two implementations of std::sort (with and without a comparator) rather than one implementation with a default template parameter?

    - by PolyVox
    In my code I'm adopting a design strategy which is similar to some standard library algorithms in that the exact behavior can be customized by a function object. The simplest example is std::sort, where a function object can control how the comparison is made between objects. I notice that the Visual C++ provides two implementations of std::sort, which naturally involves code duplication. I would have imagined that it was instead possible to have only one implementation, and provide a default comparator (using operator< ) as a default template parameter. What is the rational behind two separate versions? Would my suggestion make the interface more complex in some way? Or result in confusing error messages when the object does not provide operator Thanks, David

    Read the article

  • In the generic programming/TMP world what exactly is a model / a policy and a "concept" ?

    - by Hassan Syed
    I'd like to know the precise yet succinct definitions of these three concepts in one place. The quality of the answer should depend on the following two points. Show a simple code snippet to show how and what the concept/technique is used for. Be simple enough to understand so that a programmer without any exposure to this area can grasp it. Note: There are probably many correct answers since each concept has many different facets. If there are a lot of good answers I will eventually turn the question into CW and aggregate the answers. -- Post Accept Edit -- Boost has a nice article on generic programming concepts

    Read the article

  • Installing a custom project template with Visual Studio Installer project

    - by ulu
    Hi! I've created a custom project template, and now I need to deploy it together with my product (i.e., it should be installed by the same msi I use for the main installation). I'm using a Visual Studio Installer project. One option is to use a custom action and manually copy a template file included in the installation. Another is to create a vsi file and use a custom action to install it after the main installation (how do I have it installed silently?) . Which one is better? Thanks a lot ulu

    Read the article

  • Passing markup into a Rails Partial

    - by 1ndivisible
    Is there any way of doing something equivilant to this: <%= render partial: 'shared/outer' do %> <%= render partial: 'shared/inner' %> <% end %> Resulting in <div class="outer"> <div class="inner"> </div> </div> Obviously there would need to be a way of marking up 'shared/outer.html.erb' to indicate where the passed in partial should be rendered: <div class="outer"> <% render Here %> </div>

    Read the article

  • Better way to write an object generator for an RAII template class?

    - by Dan
    I would like to write an object generator for a templated RAII class -- basically a function template to construct an object using type deduction of parameters so the types don't have to be specified explicitly. The problem I foresee is that the helper function that takes care of type deduction for me is going to return the object by value, which will result in a premature call to the RAII destructor when the copy is made. Perhaps C++0x move semantics could help but that's not an option for me. Anyone seen this problem before and have a good solution? This is what I have: template<typename T, typename U, typename V> class FooAdder { private: typedef OtherThing<T, U, V> Thing; Thing &thing_; int a_; // many other members public: FooAdder(Thing &thing, int a); ~FooAdder(); void foo(T t, U u); void bar(V v); }; The gist is that OtherThing has a horrible interface, and FooAdder is supposed to make it easier to use. The intended use is roughly like this: FooAdder(myThing, 2) .foo(3, 4) .foo(5, 6) .bar(7) .foo(8, 9); The FooAdder constructor initializes some internal data structures. The foo and bar methods populate those data structures. The ~FooAdder dtor wraps things up and calls a method on thing_, taking care of all the nastiness. That would work fine if FooAdder wasn't a template. But since it is, I would need to put the types in, more like this: FooAdder<Abc, Def, Ghi>(myThing, 2) ... That's annoying, because the types can be inferred based on myThing. So I would prefer to create a templated object generator, similar to std::make_pair, that will do the type deduction for me. Something like this: template<typename T, typename U, typename V> FooAdder<T, U, V> AddFoo(Thing &thing, int a) { return FooAdder<T, U, V>(thing, a); } That seems problematic: because it returns by value, the stack temporary object will be destructed, which will cause the RAII dtor to run prematurely. One thought I had was to give FooAdder a copy ctor with move semantics, kinda like std::auto_ptr. But I would like to do this without dynamic memory allocation, so I thought the copy ctor could set a flag within FooAdder indicating the dtor shouldn't do the wrap-up. Like this: FooAdder(FooAdder &rhs) // Note: rhs is not const : thing_(rhs.thing_) , a_(rhs.a_) , // etc... lots of other members, annoying. , moved(false) { rhs.moved = true; } ~FooAdder() { if (!moved) { // do whatever it would have done } } Seems clunky. Anyone got a better way?

    Read the article

  • C++ - checking if a class has a certain method at compile time

    - by jetwolf
    Here's a question for the C++ gurus out there. Is there a way to check at compile time where a type has a certain method, and do one thing if it does, and another thing if it doesn't? Basically, I have a template function template <typename T> void function(T t); and I it to behave a certain way if T has a method g(), and another way if it doesn't. Perhaps there is something that can be used together with boost's enable_if? Something like this: template <typename T> enable_if<has_method<T, g, void ()>, void>::type function(T t) { // Superior implementation calling t.g() } template <typename T> disable_if<has_method<T, g, void ()>, void>::type function(T t) { // Inferior implementation in the case where T doesn't have a method g() } "has_method" would be something that preferably checks both that T has a method named 'g', and that the method has the correct signature (in this case, void ()). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • I have to generate PL/SQL using Java. Most of the procedures are common. Only a few keeps changing.

    - by blog
    I have to generate PL-SQL code, with some common code(invariable) and a variable code. I don't want to use any external tools. Some ways that I can think: Can I go and maintain the common code in a template and with markers, where my java code will generate code in the markers and generate a new file. Maintain the common code in static constant String and then generate the whole code in StringBuffer and at last write to file. But, I am not at all satisfied with both the ideas. Can you please suggest any better ways of doing this or the use of any design patterns or anything? Thanks in Advance.

    Read the article

  • Getting a type for a template instantiation?

    - by ebo
    I have the following situation: I have a object of type MyClass, which has a method to cast itself to it's base class. The class includes a typedef for it's base class and a method to do the downcast. template <class T, class B> class BaseClass; template <class T> class NoAccess; template <class T> class MyClass : public BaseClass<T, NoAccess<T> > { private: typedef BaseClass<T, NoAccess<T> > base; public: base &to_base(); }; I need to pass the result of a base call to a functor Operator: template <class Y> class Operator { Operator(Y &x); }; Operator<???> op(myobject.to_base()); Is there a easy way to fill the ??? provided that I do not want to use NoAccess?

    Read the article

  • Printing factorial at compile time in C++

    - by user519882
    template<unsigned int n> struct Factorial { enum { value = n * Factorial<n-1>::value}; }; template<> struct Factorial<0> { enum {value = 1}; }; int main() { std::cout << Factorial<5>::value; std::cout << Factorial<10>::value; } above program computes factorial value during compile time. I want to print factorial value at compile time rather than at runtime using cout. How can we achive printing the factorial value at compile time? I am using VS2009. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Member function overloading/template specialization issue

    - by Ferruccio
    I've been trying to call the overloaded table::scan_index(std::string, ...) member function without success. For the sake of clarity, I have stripped out all non-relevant code. I have a class called table which has an overloaded/templated member function named scan_index() in order to handle strings as a special case. class table : boost::noncopyable { public: template <typename T> void scan_index(T val, std::function<bool (uint recno, T val)> callback) { // code } void scan_index(std::string val, std::function<bool (uint recno, std::string val)> callback) { // code } }; Then there is a hitlist class which has a number of templated member functions which call table::scan_index(T, ...) class hitlist { public: template <typename T> void eq(uint fieldno, T value) { table* index_table = db.get_index_table(fieldno); // code index_table->scan_index<T>(value, [&](uint recno, T n)->bool { // code }); } }; And, finally, the code which kicks it all off: hitlist hl; // code hl.eq<std::string>(*fieldno, p1.to_string()); The problem is that instead of calling table::scan_index(std::string, ...), it calls the templated version. I have tried using both overloading (as shown above) and a specialized function template (below), but nothing seems to work. After staring at this code for a few hours, I feel like I'm missing something obvious. Any ideas? template <> void scan_index<std::string>(std::string val, std::function<bool (uint recno, std::string val)> callback) { // code }

    Read the article

  • Constant template parameter class manages to link externally

    - by the_drow
    I have a class foo with an enum template parameter and for some reason it links to two versions of the ctor in the cpp file. enum Enum { bar, baz }; template <Enum version = bar> class foo { public: foo(); }; // CPP File #include "foo.hpp" foo<bar>::foo() { cout << "bar"; } foo<baz>::foo() { cout << "baz"; } I'm using msvc 2008, is this the standard behavior? Are only type template parameters cannot be linked to cpp files?

    Read the article

  • Should this work?

    - by Noah Roberts
    I am trying to specialize a metafunction upon a type that has a function pointer as one of its parameters. The code compiles just fine but it will simply not match the type. #include <iostream> #include <boost/mpl/bool.hpp> #include <boost/mpl/identity.hpp> template < typename CONT, typename NAME, typename TYPE, TYPE (CONT::*getter)() const, void (CONT::*setter)(TYPE const&) > struct metafield_fun {}; struct test_field {}; struct test { int testing() const { return 5; } void testing(int const&) {} }; template < typename T > struct field_writable : boost::mpl::identity<T> {}; template < typename CONT, typename NAME, typename TYPE, TYPE (CONT::*getter)() const > struct field_writable< metafield_fun<CONT,NAME,TYPE,getter,0> > : boost::mpl::false_ {}; typedef metafield_fun<test, test_field, int, &test::testing, 0> unwritable; int main() { std::cout << typeid(field_writable<unwritable>::type).name() << std::endl; std::cin.get(); } Output is always the type passed in, never bool_.

    Read the article

  • std::basic_string full specialization (g++ conflict)

    - by SoapBox
    I am trying to define a full specialization of std::basic_string< char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > which is typedef'd (in g++) by the <string> header. The problem is, if I include <string> first, g++ sees the typedef as an instantiation of basic_string and gives me errors. If I do my specialization first then I have no issues. I should be able to define my specialization after <string> is included. What do I have to do to be able to do that? My Code: #include <bits/localefwd.h> //#include <string> // <- uncommenting this line causes compilation to fail namespace std { template<> class basic_string< char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > { public: int blah() { return 42; } size_t size() { return 0; } const char *c_str() { return ""; } void reserve(int) {} void clear() {} }; } #include <string> #include <iostream> int main() { std::cout << std::string().blah() << std::endl; } The above code works fine. But, if I uncomment the first #include <string> line, I get the following compiler errors: blah.cpp:7: error: specialization of ‘std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ after instantiation blah.cpp:7: error: redefinition of ‘class std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h:52: error: previous definition of ‘class std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ blah.cpp: In function ‘int main()’: blah.cpp:22: error: ‘class std::string’ has no member named ‘blah’ Line 52 of /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h: template<typename _CharT, typename _Traits = char_traits<_CharT>, typename _Alloc = allocator<_CharT> > class basic_string; As far as I know this is just a forward delcaration of the template, NOT an instantiation as g++ claims. Line 56 of /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h: typedef basic_string<char> string; As far as I know this is just a typedef, NOT an instantiation either. So why are these lines conflicting with my code? What can I do to fix this other than ensuring that my code is always included before <string>?

    Read the article

  • C++ template type deduction problem

    - by hamishmcn
    motivation: I would like to create a utility class so that instead of having to write: if( someVal == val1 || someVal == val2 || someVal == val3 ) I could instead write: if( is(someVal).in(val1, val2, val3) ) which is much closer to the mathematical 'a is an element of (b,c,d)' and also would save on a lot of typing when the variable name 'someVal' is long. Here is the code I have so far (for 2 and 3 values): template<class T> class is { private: T t_; public: is(T t) : t_(t) { } bool in(const T& v1, const T& v2) { return t_ == v1 || t_ == v2; } bool in(const T& v1, const T& v2, const T& v3) { return t_ == v1 || t_ == v2 || t_ == v3; } }; However it fails to compile if I write: is(1).in(3,4,5); instead I have to write is<int>(1).in(3,4,5); Which isn't too bad, but it would be better if somehow the compiler could figure out that the type is int with out me having to explicitly specify it. Is there anyway to do this or I am stuck with specifying it explicitly?

    Read the article

  • C++ : Swapping template class elements of different types?

    - by metamemetics
    template< class T1, class T2 > class Pair { T1 first; T2 second; }; I'm being asked to write a swap() method so that the first element becomes the second and the second the first. I have: Pair<T2,T1> swap() { return Pair<T2,T1>(second, first); } But this returns a new object rather than swapping, where I think it needs to be a void method that changes its own data members. Is this possible to do since T1 and T2 are potentially different class types? In other words I can't simply set temp=first, first=second, second=temp because it would try to convert them to different types. I'm not sure why you would potentially want to have a template object that changes order of its types as it seems that would cause confusion but that appears to be what I'm being asked to do.

    Read the article

  • In Jeditable, how do I make it so that when I click the div to edit, the text box content has initial value that is processed?

    - by TIMEX
    When the user clicks on the div, jeditable will make a text box. However, I want the initial text to be done with function stripTags(), instead of what's on the page. The reason is that I'm using some URL techniques to turn plain text links into URLs. When the user clicks on the div, jeditable is turning them into <a href=>..</a> Is there a "beforeSubmit" option in jeditable? http://www.appelsiini.net/projects/jeditable

    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

  • Passing functor and function pointers interchangeably using a templated method in C++

    - by metroxylon
    I currently have a templated class, with a templated method. Works great with functors, but having trouble compiling for functions. Foo.h template <typename T> class Foo { public: // Constructor, destructor, etc... template <typename Func> void bar(T x, Func f); }; template <typename T> template <typename Func> Foo::bar(T x, Func f) { /* some code here */ } Main.cpp #include "Foo.h" template <typename T> class Functor { public: Functor() {} void operator()(T x) { /* ... */ } private: /* some attributes here */ }; void Function(T x) { /* ... */ } int main() { Foo<int> foo; foo.bar(2, Functor); // No problem foo.bar(2, Function); // <unresolved overloaded function type> return 0; }

    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 | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | Next Page >