Search Results

Search found 4423 results on 177 pages for 'compiler'.

Page 152/177 | < Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >

  • Function Returning Negative Value

    - by Geowil
    I still have not run it through enough tests however for some reason, using certain non-negative values, this function will sometimes pass back a negative value. I have done a lot of manual testing in calculator with different values but I have yet to have it display this same behavior. I was wondering if someone would take a look at see if I am missing something. float calcPop(int popRand1, int popRand2, int popRand3, float pERand, float pSRand) { return ((((((23000 * popRand1) * popRand2) * pERand) * pSRand) * popRand3) / 8); } The variables are all contain randomly generated values: popRand1: between 1 and 30 popRand2: between 10 and 30 popRand3: between 50 and 100 pSRand: between 1 and 1000 pERand: between 1.0f and 5500.0f which is then multiplied by 0.001f before being passed to the function above Edit: Alright so after following the execution a bit more closely it is not the fault of this function directly. It produces an infinitely positive float which then flips negative when I use this code later on: pPMax = (int)pPStore; pPStore is a float that holds popCalc's return. So the question now is, how do I stop the formula from doing this? Testing even with very high values in Calculator has never displayed this behavior. Is there something in how the compiler processes the order of operations that is causing this or are my values simply just going too high? If the later I could just increase the division to 16 I think.

    Read the article

  • display multiple errors via bool flag c++

    - by igor
    Been a long night, but stuck on this and now am getting "segmentation fault" in my compiler.. Basically I'm trying to display all the errors (the cout) needed. If there is more than one error, I am to display all of them. bool validMove(const Square board[BOARD_SIZE][BOARD_SIZE], int x, int y, int value) { int index; bool moveError = true; const int row_conflict(0), column_conflict(1), grid_conflict(2); int v_subgrid=x/3; int h_subgrid=y/3; getCoords(x,y); for(index=0;index<9;index++) if(board[x][index].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this row\n"; moveError=false; } for(index=0;index<9;index++) if(board[index][y].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this column\n"; moveError=false; } for(int i=v_subgrid*3;i<(v_subgrid*3 +3);i++){ for(int j=h_subgrid*3;j<(h_subgrid*3+3);j++){ if(board[i][j].number==value){ cout<<"That value is in conflict in this subgrid\n"; moveError=false; } } } return true; }

    Read the article

  • GWT - problems with constants in css

    - by hba
    Hi, I'm new to GWT; I'm building a small sample app. I have several CSS files. I'm able to successfully use the ClientBundle and CssResource to assign styles to the elements defined in my UiBinder script. Now I'd like to take it one step further and introduce CSS constants using @def css-rule. The @def works great when I define a constant and use it in the same CSS file. However I cannot use it in another CSS file. When I try to use the @eval rule to evaluate an existing constant the compiler throws an execption: "cannot make a static reference to the non-static method ". Here is an example of what I'm trying to do: ConstantStyle.css @def BACKGROUND red; ConstantStyle.java package abc; import ...; interface ConstantStyle extends cssResource { String BACKGROUND(); } MyStyle.css @eval BACKGROUND abc.ConstantStyle.BACKGROUND(); .myClass {background-color: BACKGROUND;} MyStyle.java package abc; import ...; interface ConstantStyle extends cssResource { String myClass; } MyResources.java package abc; import ...; interface MyResources extends ClientBundle { @Source("ConstantStyle.css") ConstantStyle constantStyle(); @Source("MyStyle.css") MyStyle myStyle(); } Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Can C++ do something like an ML case expression?

    - by Nathan Andrew Mullenax
    So, I've run into this sort of thing a few times in C++ where I'd really like to write something like case (a,b,c,d) of (true, true, _, _ ) => expr | (false, true, _, false) => expr | ... But in C++, I invariably end up with something like this: bool c11 = color1.count(e.first)>0; bool c21 = color2.count(e.first)>0; bool c12 = color1.count(e.second)>0; bool c22 = color2.count(e.second)>0; // no vertex in this edge is colored // requeue if( !(c11||c21||c12||c22) ) { edges.push(e); } // endpoints already same color // failure condition else if( (c11&&c12)||(c21&&c22) ) { results.push_back("NOT BICOLORABLE."); return true; } // nothing to do: nodes are already // colored and different from one another else if( (c11&&c22)||(c21&&c12) ) { } // first is c1, second is not set else if( c11 && !(c12||c22) ) { color2.insert( e.second ); } // first is c2, second is not set else if( c21 && !(c12||c22) ) { color1.insert( e.second ); } // first is not set, second is c1 else if( !(c11||c21) && c12 ) { color2.insert( e.first ); } // first is not set, second is c2 else if( !(c11||c21) && c22 ) { color1.insert( e.first ); } else { std::cout << "Something went wrong.\n"; } I'm wondering if there's any way to clean all of those if's and else's up, as it seems especially error prone. It would be even better if it were possible to get the compiler complain like SML does when a case expression (or statement in C++) isn't exhaustive. I realize this question is a bit vague. Maybe, in sum, how would one represent an exhaustive truth table with an arbitrary number of variables in C++ succinctly? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • What's a good way to make a Flex component with placeholders in it?

    - by Daniel Brockman
    I want to create a component that has a couple of "holes" that are to be filled in differently on each use. Currently, I'm doing it like this (using the Flex 4 framework in this example --- it would look almost the same for Flex 3): public var fooComponent : IVisualElement; public var barComponent : IVisualElement; override protected function createChildren() : void { super.createChildren(); fooContainer.addElement(fooComponent); barContainer.addElement(barComponent); } <Group id="fooContainer"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Group id="barContainer"/> This works well, but it's kind of a lot of code to write for something so simple. What I'd like is something like this: [Bindable] public var fooComponent : IVisualElement; [Bindable] public var barComponent : IVisualElement; <Placeholder content="{fooComponent}"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Placeholder content="{barComponent}"/> Now, I could implement the Placeholder component myself, but I can't help wondering if there isn't a better way to do this using the existing tools in the Flex framework. Theoretically, with the proper compiler support, it could even be boiled down to something like this: <Placeholder id="fooComponent"/> <!-- ... other components ... --> <Placeholder id="barComponent"/>

    Read the article

  • Foreign key relationships in Entity Framework

    - by Anders Svensson
    I'm trying to add an object created from Entity Data Model classes. I have a table called Users, which has turned into a User EDM class. And I also have a table Pages, which has become a Page EDM class. These tables have a foreign key relationship, so that each page is associated with many users. Now I want to be able to add a page, but I can't get how to do it. I get a nullreference exception on Users below. I'm still rather confused by all this, so I'm sure it's a simple error, but I just can't see how to do it. Also, by the way, the compiler requires that I set PageID in the object initializer, even though this field is set to be an automatic id in the table. Am I doing it right just setting it to 0, expecting it to be updated automatically in the table when saved, or how should I do that? Any help appreciated! The method in question: private Page GetPage(User currentUser) { string url = _request.ServerVariables["url"].ToLower(); var userPages = from p in _context.PageSet where p.Users.UserID == currentUser.UserID select p; var existingPage = userPages.FirstOrDefault(e => e.Url == url); //Could be combined with above, but hard to read? if (existingPage != null) return existingPage; Page page = new Page() { Count = 0, Url = _request.ServerVariables["url"].ToLower(), PageID = 0, //Only initial value, changed later? }; _context.AddToPageSet(page); page.Users.UserID = currentUser.UserID; //Here's the problem... return page; }

    Read the article

  • clang does not compile but g++ does

    - by user1095108
    Can someone help me with this code: #include <type_traits> #include <vector> struct nonsense { }; template <struct nonsense const* ptr, typename R> typename std::enable_if<!std::is_void<R>::value, int>::type fo(void* const) { return 0; } template <struct nonsense const* ptr, typename R> typename std::enable_if<std::is_void<R>::value, int>::type fo(void* const) { return 1; } typedef int (*func_type)(void*); template <std::size_t O> void run_me() { static struct nonsense data; typedef std::pair<char const* const, func_type> pair_type; std::vector<pair_type> v; v.push_back(pair_type{ "a", fo<&data, int> }); v.push_back(pair_type{ "b", fo<&data, void> }); } int main(int, char*[]) { run_me<2>(); return 0; } clang-3.3 does not compile this code, but g++-4.8.1 does, which of the two compiler is right? Is something wrong with the code, as I suspect? The error reads: a.cpp:32:15: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'pair_type' (aka 'pair<const char *const, func_type>') v.push_back(pair_type{ "a", fo<&data, int> }); ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a.cpp:33:15: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'pair_type' (aka 'pair<const char *const, func_type>') v.push_back(pair_type{ "b", fo<&data, void> }); ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Read the article

  • How do actually castings work at the CLR level?

    - by devoured elysium
    When doing an upcast or downcast, what does really happen behind the scenes? I had the idea that when doing something as: string myString = "abc"; object myObject = myString; string myStringBack = (string)myObject; the cast in the last line would have as only purpose tell the compiler we are safe we are not doing anything wrong. So, I had the idea that actually no casting code would be embedded in the code itself. It seems I was wrong: .maxstack 1 .locals init ( [0] string myString, [1] object myObject, [2] string myStringBack) L_0000: nop L_0001: ldstr "abc" L_0006: stloc.0 L_0007: ldloc.0 L_0008: stloc.1 L_0009: ldloc.1 L_000a: castclass string L_000f: stloc.2 L_0010: ret Why does the CLR need something like castclass string? There are two possible implementations for a downcast: You require a castclass something. When you get to the line of code that does an castclass, the CLR tries to make the cast. But then, what would happen had I ommited the castclass string line and tried to run the code? You don't require a castclass. As all reference types have a similar internal structure, if you try to use a string on an Form instance, it will throw an exception of wrong usage (because it detects a Form is not a string or any of its subtypes). Also, is the following statamente from C# 4.0 in a Nutshell correct? Upcasting and downcasting between compatible reference types performs reference conversions: a new reference is created that points to the same object. Does it really create a new reference? I thought it'd be the same reference, only stored in a different type of variable. Thanks

    Read the article

  • passing multidimensional arrays to function

    - by Pegah
    hi! I have a method in my class which uses a 3dimensional tfpairexp as input parameter. and I need to use the values in tfpairexp later. void calctfpairexp (int tf1, int tf2, double tfpairexp[][2][3]) { int ctr,c; for (int j = 0; j < cchips && (c = chips[j].crepls); j += c) { int ctrl_no=0; for (int *p = chips[j].ctrl ; p && (ctr=*p)>=0; ++p,ctrl_no++) { for (int k = 0; k < c; ++k) { tfpairexp[j][ctrl_no][k]=interactionFunc(2,3,1); } } } } I call the method inside the class like this: calctfpairexp(tf1,tf2,tfpairexp); and I need to use values inside tfpairexp in next lines. but the compiler gives error in this line: tfpairexp[j][ctrl_no][k]=interactionFunc(2,3,1); and says that the tfpairexp variable is not defined in the calctfpairexp function. any idea?

    Read the article

  • Some questions about special operators i've never seen in C++ code.

    - by toto
    I have downloaded the Phoenix SDK June 2008 (Tools for compilers) and when I'm reading the code of the Hello sample, I really feel lost. public ref class Hello { //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- // // Description: // // Class Variables. // // Remarks: // // A normal compiler would have more flexible means for holding // on to all this information, but in our case it's simplest (if // somewhat inelegant) if we just keep references to all the // structures we'll need to access as classstatic variables. // //-------------------------------------------------------------------------- static Phx::ModuleUnit ^ module; static Phx::Targets::Runtimes::Runtime ^ runtime; static Phx::Targets::Architectures::Architecture ^ architecture; static Phx::Lifetime ^ lifetime; static Phx::Types::Table ^ typeTable; static Phx::Symbols::Table ^ symbolTable; static Phx::Phases::PhaseConfiguration ^ phaseConfiguration; 2 Questions : What's that ref keyword? What is that sign ^ ? What is it doing protected: virtual void Execute ( Phx::Unit ^ unit ) override; }; override is a C++ keyword too? It's colored as such in my Visual Studio. I really want to play with this framework, but this advanced C++ is really an obstacle right now. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • final transient fields and serialization

    - by doublep
    Is it possible to have final transient fields that are set to any non-default value after serialization in Java? My usecase is a cache variable — that's why it is transient. I also have a habit of making Map fields that won't be changed (i.e. contents of the map is changed, but object itself remains the same) final. However, these attributes seem to be contradictory — while compiler allows such a combination, I cannot have the field set to anything but null after unserialization. I tried the following, without success: simple field initialization (shown in the example): this is what I normally do, but the initialization doesn't seem to happen after unserialization; initialization in constructor (I believe this is semantically the same as above though); assigning the field in readObject() — cannot be done since the field is final. In the example cache is public only for testing. import java.io.*; import java.util.*; public class test { public static void main (String[] args) throws Exception { X x = new X (); System.out.println (x + " " + x.cache); ByteArrayOutputStream buffer = new ByteArrayOutputStream (); new ObjectOutputStream (buffer).writeObject (x); x = (X) new ObjectInputStream (new ByteArrayInputStream (buffer.toByteArray ())).readObject (); System.out.println (x + " " + x.cache); } public static class X implements Serializable { public final transient Map <Object, Object> cache = new HashMap <Object, Object> (); } } Output: test$X@1a46e30 {} test$X@190d11 null

    Read the article

  • ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code sscanf

    - by Need4Sleep
    I'm getting a strange error attempting to compile my unit test code,. For some reason the compiler treats my sscanf call as a mixed declaration? I don't quite understand, here is the entire error: cc1: warnings being treated as errors /home/brlcad/brlcad/src/libbn/tests/bn_complex.c: In function 'main': /home/brlcad/brlcad/src/libbn/tests/bn_complex.c:53: error: ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code make[2]: *** [src/libbn/tests/CMakeFiles/tester_bn_complex.dir/bn_complex.c.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [src/libbn/tests/CMakeFiles/tester_bn_complex.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { double expRe1, expIm2, expSqRe1, expSqIm2; double actRe1, actIm2, actSqRe1, actSqIm2; actRe1 = actIm2 = actSqRe1 = actSqIm2 = expRe1 = expIm2 = expSqRe1 = expSqIm2 = 0.0; bn_complex_t com1,com2; //a struct that holds two doubles if(argc < 5) bu_exit(1, "ERROR: Invalid parameters[%s]\n", argv[0]); sscanf(argv[1], "%lf,%lf", &com1.re, &com1.im); /* Error is HERE */ sscanf(argv[2], "%lf,%lf", &com2.re, &com2.im); sscanf(argv[3], "%lf,%lf", &expRe1, &expIm2); sscanf(argv[4], "%lf,%lf", &expSqRe1, &expSqIm2); test_div(com1, com2, &actRe1, &actIm2); test_sqrt(com1,com2, &actSqRe1, &actSqIm2); if((fabs(actRe1 - expRe1) < 0.00001) || (fabs(actIm2 - expIm2) < 0.00001)){ printf("Division failed...\n"); return 1; } if((fabs(actSqRe1 - expSqRe1) < 0.00001) || (fabs(actSqIm2 - expSqIm2) < 0.00001)){ printf("Square roots failed...\n"); return 1; } return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Would an immutable keyword in Java be a good idea?

    - by berry120
    Generally speaking, the more I use immutable objects in Java the more I'm thinking they're a great idea. They've got lots of advantages from automatically being thread-safe to not needing to worry about cloning or copy constructors. This has got me thinking, would an "immutable" keyword go amiss? Obviously there's the disadvantages with adding another reserved word to the language, and I doubt it will actually happen primarily for the above reason - but ignoring that I can't really see many disadvantages. At present great care has to be taken to make sure objects are immutable, and even then a dodgy javadoc comment claiming a component object is immutable when it's in fact not can wreck the whole thing. There's also the argument that even basic objects like string aren't truly immutable because they're easily vunerable to reflection attacks. If we had an immutable keyword the compiler could surely recursively check and give an iron clad guarantee that all instances of a class were immutable, something that can't presently be done. Especially with concurrency becoming more and more used, I personally think it'd be good to add a keyword to this effect. But are there any disadvantages or implementation details I'm missing that makes this a bad idea?

    Read the article

  • Please help with C++ syntax for const accessor by reference.

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    Right not my implementation returns the thing by value. The member m_MyObj itself is not const - it's value changes depending on what the user selects with a Combo Box. I am no C++ guru, but I want to do this right. If I simply stick a & in front of GetChosenSourceSystem in both decl. and impl., I get one sort of compiler error. If I do one but not another - another error. If I do return &m_MyObj;. I will not list the errors here for now, unless there is a strong demand for it. I assume that an experienced C++ coder can tell what is going on here. I could omit constness or reference, but I want to make it tight and learn in the process as well. Thanks! // In header file MyObj GetChosenThingy() const; // In Implementation file. MyObj MyDlg::GetChosenThingy() const { return m_MyObj; }

    Read the article

  • C++ Constructor initialization list strangeness

    - by Andy
    I have always been a good boy when writing my classes, prefixing all member variables with m_: class Test { int m_int1; int m_int2; public: Test(int int1, int int2) : m_int1(int int1), m_int2(int int2) {} }; void main() { Test t(10, 20); // Just an example } However, recently I forgot to do that and ended up writing: class Test { int int1; int int2; public: // Very questionable, but of course I meant to assign ::int1 to this->int1! Test(int int1, int int2) : int1(int1), int2(int2) {} }; Believe it or not, the code compiled with no errors/warnings and the assignments took place correctly! It was only when doing the final check before checking in my code when I realised what I had done. My question is: why did my code compile? Is something like that allowed in the C++ standard, or is it simply a case of the compiler being clever? In case you were wondering, I was using Visual Studio 2008 Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Questions regarding detouring by modifying the virtual table

    - by Elliott Darfink
    I've been practicing detours using the same approach as Microsoft Detours (replace the first five bytes with a jmp and an address). More recently I've been reading about detouring by modifying the virtual table. I would appreciate if someone could shed some light on the subject by mentioning a few pros and cons with this method compared to the one previously mentioned! I'd also like to ask about patched vtables and objects on the stack. Consider the following situation: // Class definition struct Foo { virtual void Call(void) { std::cout << "FooCall\n"; } }; // If it's GCC, 'this' is passed as the first parameter void MyCall(Foo * object) { std::cout << "MyCall\n"; } // In some function Foo * foo = new Foo; // Allocated on the heap Foo foo2; // Created on the stack // Arguments: void ** vtable, uint offset, void * replacement PatchVTable(*reinterpret_cast<void***>(foo), 0, MyCall); // Call the methods foo->Call(); // Outputs: 'MyCall' foo2.Call(); // Outputs: 'FooCall' In this case foo->Call() would end up calling MyCall(Foo * object) whilst foo2.Call() call the original function (i.e Foo::Call(void) method). This is because the compiler will try to decide any virtual calls during compile time if possible (correct me if I'm wrong). Does that mean it does not matter if you patch the virtual table or not, as long as you use objects on the stack (not heap allocated)?

    Read the article

  • Trying to make a plugin system in C++

    - by Pirate for Profit
    I'm making a task-based program that needs to have plugins. Tasks need to have properties which can be easily edited, I think this can be done with Qt's Meta-Object Compiler reflection capabilities (I could be wrong, but I should be able to stick this in a QtPropertyBrowser?) So here's the base: class Task : public QObject { Q_OBJECT public: explicit Task(QObject *parent = 0) : QObject(parent){} virtual void run() = 0; signals: void taskFinished(bool success = true); } Then a plugin might have this task: class PrinterTask : public Task { Q_OBJECT public: explicit PrinterTask(QObject *parent = 0) : Task(parent) {} void run() { Printer::getInstance()->Print(this->getData()); // fictional emit taskFinished(true); } inline const QString &getData() const; inline void setData(QString data); Q_PROPERTY(QString data READ getData WRITE setData) // for reflection } In a nutshell, here's what I want to do: // load plugin // find all the Tasks interface implementations in it // have user able to choose a Task and edit its specific Q_PROPERTY's // run the TASK It's important that one .dll has multiple tasks, because I want them to be associated by their module. For instance, "FileTasks.dll" could have tasks for deleting files, making files, etc. The only problem with Qt's plugin setup is I want to store X amount of Tasks in one .dll module. As far as I can tell, you can only load one interface per plugin (I could be wrong?). If so, the only possible way to do accomplish what I want is to create a FactoryInterface with string based keys which return the objects (as in Qt's Plug-And-Paint example), which is a terrible boilerplate that I would like to avoid. Anyone know a cleaner C++ plugin architecture than Qt's to do what I want? Also, am I safely assuming Qt's reflection capabilities will do what I want (i.e. able to edit an unknown dynamically loaded tasks' properties with the QtPropertyBrowser before dispatching)?

    Read the article

  • Does it ever make sense to make a fundamental (non-pointer) parameter const?

    - by Scott Smith
    I recently had an exchange with another C++ developer about the following use of const: void Foo(const int bar); He felt that using const in this way was good practice. I argued that it does nothing for the caller of the function (since a copy of the argument was going to be passed, there is no additional guarantee of safety with regard to overwrite). In addition, doing this prevents the implementer of Foo from modifying their private copy of the argument. So, it both mandates and advertises an implementation detail. Not the end of the world, but certainly not something to be recommended as good practice. I'm curious as to what others think on this issue. Edit: OK, I didn't realize that const-ness of the arguments didn't factor into the signature of the function. So, it is possible to mark the arguments as const in the implementation (.cpp), and not in the header (.h) - and the compiler is fine with that. That being the case, I guess the policy should be the same for making local variables const. One could make the argument that having different looking signatures in the header and source file would confuse others (as it would have confused me). While I try to follow the Principle of Least Astonishment with whatever I write, I guess it's reasonable to expect developers to recognize this as legal and useful.

    Read the article

  • Scala path dependent return type from parameter

    - by Rich Oliver
    In the following code using 2.10.0M3 in Eclipse plugin 2.1.0 for 2.10M3. I'm using the default setting which is targeting JVM 1.5 class GeomBase[T <: DTypes] { abstract class NewObjs { def newHex(gridR: GridBase, coodI: Cood): gridR.HexRT } class GridBase { selfGrid => type HexRT = HexG with T#HexTr def uniformRect (init: NewObjs) { val hexCood = Cood(2 ,2) val hex: HexRT = init.newHex(selfGrid, hexCood)// won't compile } } } Error message: Description Resource Path Location Type type mismatch; found: GeomBase.this.GridBase#HexG with T#HexTr required: GridBase.this.HexRT (which expands to) GridBase.this.HexG with T#HexTr GeomBase.scala Why does the compiler think the method returns the type projection GridBase#HexG when it should be this specific instance of GridBase? Edit transferred to a simpler code class in responce to comments now getting a different error message. package rStrat class TestClass { abstract class NewObjs { def newHex(gridR: GridBase): gridR.HexG } class GridBase { selfGrid => def uniformRect (init: NewObjs) { val hex: HexG = init.newHex(this) //error here } class HexG { val test12 = 5 } } } . Error line 11:Description Resource Path Location Type type mismatch; found : gridR.HexG required: GridBase.this.HexG possible cause: missing arguments for method or constructor TestClass.scala /SStrat/src/rStrat line 11 Scala Problem Update I've switched to 2.10.0M4 and updated the plug-in to the M4 version on a fresh version of Eclipse and switched to JVM 1.6 (and 1.7) but the problems are unchanged.

    Read the article

  • Freestanding ARM C++ Code - empty .ctors section

    - by Matthew Iselin
    I'm writing C++ code to run in a freestanding environment (basically an ARM board). It's been going well except I've run into a stumbling block - global static constructors. To my understanding the .ctors section contains a list of addresses to each static constructor, and my code simply needs to iterate this list and make calls to each function as it goes. However, I've found that this section in my binary is in fact completely empty! Google pointed towards using ".init_array" instead of ".ctors" (an EABI thing), but that has not changed anything. Any ideas as to why my static constructors don't exist? Relevant linker script and objdump output follows: .ctors : { . = ALIGN(4096); start_ctors = .; *(.init_array); *(.ctors); end_ctors = .; } .dtors : { . = ALIGN(4096); start_dtors = .; *(.fini_array); *(.dtors); end_dtors = .; } -- 2 .ctors 00001000 8014c000 8014c000 00054000 2**2 CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA <snip> 8014d000 g O .ctors 00000004 start_ctors <snip> 8014d000 g O .ctors 00000004 end_ctors I'm using an arm-elf targeted GCC compiler (4.4.1).

    Read the article

  • Creating an object in the loop

    - by Jacob
    std::vector<double> C(4); for(int i = 0; i < 1000;++i) for(int j = 0; j < 2000; ++j) { C[0] = 1.0; C[1] = 1.0; C[2] = 1.0; C[3] = 1.0; } is much faster than for(int i = 0; i < 1000;++i) for(int j = 0; j < 2000; ++j) { std::vector<double> C(4); C[0] = 1.0; C[1] = 1.0; C[2] = 1.0; C[3] = 1.0; } I realize this happens because std::vector is repeatedly being created and instantiated in the loop, but I was under the impression this would be optimized away. Is it completely wrong to keep variables local in a loop whenever possible? I was under the (perhaps false) impression that this would provide optimization opportunities for the compiler. EDIT: I use VC++2005 (release mode) with full optimization (/Ox)

    Read the article

  • Delphi: How to avoid EIntOverflow underflow when subtracting?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Microsoft already says, in the documentation for GetTickCount, that you could never compare tick counts to check if an interval has passed. e.g.: Incorrect (pseudo-code): DWORD endTime = GetTickCount + 10000; //10 s from now ... if (GetTickCount > endTime) break; The above code is bad because it is suceptable to rollover of the tick counter. For example, assume that the clock is near the end of it's range: endTime = 0xfffffe00 + 10000 = 0x00002510; //9,488 decimal Then you perform your check: if (GetTickCount > endTime) Which is satisfied immediatly, since GetTickCount is larger than endTime: if (0xfffffe01 > 0x00002510) The solution Instead you should always subtract the two time intervals: DWORD startTime = GetTickCount; ... if (GetTickCount - startTime) > 10000 //if it's been 10 seconds break; Looking at the same math: if (GetTickCount - startTime) > 10000 if (0xfffffe01 - 0xfffffe00) > 10000 if (1 > 10000) Which is all well and good in C/C++, where the compiler behaves a certain way. But what about Delphi? But when i perform the same math in Delphi, with overflow checking on ({Q+}, {$OVERFLOWCHECKS ON}), the subtraction of the two tick counts generates an EIntOverflow exception when the TickCount rolls over: if (0x00000100 - 0xffffff00) > 10000 0x00000100 - 0xffffff00 = 0x00000200 What is the intended solution for this problem? Edit: i've tried to temporarily turn off OVERFLOWCHECKS: {$OVERFLOWCHECKS OFF}] delta = GetTickCount - startTime; {$OVERFLOWCHECKS ON} But the subtraction still throws an EIntOverflow exception. Is there a better solution, involving casts and larger intermediate variable types?

    Read the article

  • Problems with variadic function

    - by morpheous
    I have the following function from some legacy code that I am maintaining. long getMaxStart(long start, long count, const myStruct *s1, ...) { long i1, maxstart; myStruct *s2; va_list marker; maxstart = start; /*BUGFIX: 003 */ /*(va_start(marker, count);*/ va_start(marker, s1); for (i1 = 1; i1 <= count; i1++) { s2 = va_arg(marker, myStruct *); /* <- s2 is assigned null here */ maxstart = MAX(maxstart, s2->firstvalid); /* <- SEGV here */ } va_end(marker); return (maxstart); } When the function is called with only one myStruct argument, it causes a SEGV. The code compiled and run without crashing on Windows XP when I compiled it using VS2005. I have now moved the code to Ubuntu Karmic and I am having problems with the stricter compiler on Linux. Is anyone able to spot what is causing the parameter not to be read correctly in the var_arg() statement? I am compiling using gcc version 4.4.1 Edit The statement that causes the SEGV is this one: start = getMaxStart(start, 1, ms1); The variables 'start' and 'ms1' have valid values when the code execution first reaches this line.

    Read the article

  • ojspc always returns 0 on errors

    - by Matt McCormick
    In my Ant build.xml file, I am trying to compile JSPs using ojspc. The files are being compiled, however, the build process is still running to completion when the JSP compilation has errors. This is part of my build.xml: <java fork="true" jar="${env.ORACLE_HOME}\j2ee\home\ojspc.jar" resultproperty="result"> <jvmarg value="-Djava.compiler=NONE"/> <arg value="-extend"/> <arg value="com.orionserver.http.OrionHttpJspPage"/> <arg value="-batchMask"/> <arg value="*.jsp"/> <arg value="${target-directory}/build/target/ear/${module-dir-name}-jsp.war"/> </java> <echo level="info">Result Property: ${result}</echo> I have tried setting the property failonerror="true" but that does not change anything. I receive the following output: [java] Detected archive, now processing contents of ../build/target/ear/web-module-jsp.war... [java] Setting up temp area... [java] Expanding archive in temp area... [java] C:\DOCUME~1\MMCCOR~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\tmp12940\_web_2d_inf\_jsp\_password.java:60: cannot resolve symbol [java] symbol : variable reqvst [java] location: class _web_2d_inf._jsp._password [java] out.print(reqvst.getAttribute("test")); [java] ^ [java] 1 error [java] Creating D:\eclipse-workspace\jdw\build\..\build\target\ear\web-module-jsp.war ... [java] Removing temp area... [echo] Result Property: 0 ...(more commands) BUILD SUCCESSFUL In the password.jsp file, I intentionally introduced an error to test. How can I get the build to fail on an error? At the Ant Java page, I am confused by: By default the return code of a is ignored. Alternatively, you can set resultproperty to the name of a property and have it assigned to the result code (barring immutability, of course). When you set failonerror="true", the only possible value for resultproperty is 0. Any non-zero response is treated as an error and would mean the build exits.

    Read the article

  • c# Why can't open generic types be passed as parameters?

    - by Rich Oliver
    Why can't open generic types be passed as parameters. I frequently have classes like: public class Example<T> where T: BaseClass { public int a {get; set;} public List<T> mylist {get; set;} } Lets say BaseClass is as follows; public BaseClass { public int num; } I then want a method of say: public int MyArbitarySumMethod(Example example)//This won't compile Example not closed { int sum = 0; foreach(BaseClass i in example.myList)//myList being infered as an IEnumerable sum += i.num; sum = sum * example.a; return sum; } I then have to write an interface just to pass this one class as a parameter as follows: public interface IExample { public int a {get; set;} public IEnumerable<BaseClass> myIEnum {get;} } The generic class then has to be modified to: public class Example<T>: IExample where T: BaseClass { public int a {get; set;} public List<T> mylist {get; set;} public IEnumerable<BaseClass> myIEnum {get {return myList;} } } That's a lot of ceremony for what I would have thought the compiler could infer. Even if something can't be changed I find it psychologically very helpful if I know the reasons / justifications for the absence of Syntax short cuts.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >