Search Results

Search found 5015 results on 201 pages for 'compiler construction'.

Page 180/201 | < Previous Page | 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187  | Next Page >

  • [c++] accessing the hidden 'this' pointer

    - by Kyle
    I have a GUI architecture wherein elements fire events like so: guiManager->fireEvent(BUTTON_CLICKED, this); Every single event fired passes 'this' as the caller of the event. There is never a time I dont want to pass 'this', and further, no pointer except for 'this' should ever be passed. This brings me to a problem: How can I assert that fireEvent is never given a pointer other than 'this', and how can I simplify (and homogenize) calls to fireEvent to just: guiManager->fireEvent(BUTTON_CLICKED); At this point, I'm reminded of a fairly common compiler error when you write something like this: class A { public: void foo() {} }; class B { void oops() { const A* a = new A; a->foo(); } }; int main() { return 0; } Compiling this will give you ../src/sandbox.cpp: In member function ‘void B::oops()’: ../src/sandbox.cpp:7: error: passing ‘const A’ as ‘this’ argument of ‘void A::foo()’ discards qualifiers because member functions pass 'this' as a hidden parameter. "Aha!" I say. This (no pun intended) is exactly what I want. If I could somehow access the hidden 'this' pointer, it would solve both issues I mentioned earlier. The problem is, as far as I know you can't (can you?) and if you could, there would be outcries of "but it would break encapsulation!" Except I'm already passing 'this' every time, so what more could it break. So, is there a way to access the hidden 'this', and if not are there any idioms or alternative approaches that are more elegant than passing 'this' every time?

    Read the article

  • Not reaction to pressing button

    - by Orange91
    I have a ring in primefaces: <h:form> <p:ring id="ring" value="#{ringBean.images}" var="image" styleClass="image-ring" easing="easeInOutBack"> <p:graphicImage value="./../../images/#{image.image}" width="150" height="150"/> <p:commandButton value="#{image.name}" action="#{image.action}" /> </p:ring> </h:form> My RingBean: @ManagedBean @RequestScoped public class RingBean implements Serializable{ private List<PersonImage> images; private PersonImage selectedPerson; public RingBean() { images = new ArrayList<PersonImage>(); images.add(new PersonImage("person3.png", "Pacjent", "patientList")); images.add(new PersonImage("person4.png", "Admin", "adminList")); images.add(new PersonImage("person5.png", "Lekarz", "doctorList")); images.add(new PersonImage("person6.png", "Sekretarka", "secretaryList")); images.add(new PersonImage("person7.png", "Nieaktywni", "inactiveList")); } public List<PersonImage> getImages() { return images; } public PersonImage getSelectedPerson() { return selectedPerson; } public void setSelectedPerson(PersonImage selectedPerson) { this.selectedPerson = selectedPerson; } } PersonImage class: public class PersonImage { String image; String name; String action; public PersonImage() { } public PersonImage(String image, String name, String action) { this.image = image; this.name = name; this.action = action; } public String getImage() { return image; } public void setImage(String image) { this.image = image; } public String getName() { return name; } public void setName(String name) { this.name = name; } public String getAction() { return action; } public void setAction(String action) { this.action = action; } } faces-config: <navigation-case> <from-outcome>adminList</from-outcome> <to-view-id>/protected/admin/adminList.xhtml</to-view-id> <redirect/> </navigation-case> <navigation-case> <from-outcome>doctorList</from-outcome> <to-view-id>/protected/admin/doctorList.xhtml</to-view-id> <redirect/> </navigation-case> <navigation-case> <from-outcome>patientList</from-outcome> <to-view-id>/protected/admin/patientList.xhtml</to-view-id> <redirect/> </navigation-case> <navigation-case> <from-outcome>secretaryList</from-outcome> <to-view-id>/protected/admin/secretaryList.xhtml</to-view-id> <redirect/> </navigation-case> When i pressed my button, not reaction. Why? I added the action in button: And in Ring I add: images.add(new PersonImage("person4.png", "Admin", "adminList")); action is adminList. Why this not work? When i changed in button: <p:commandButton value="#{image.name}" action="adminList" /> all work. Why? Both construction returned identical string.

    Read the article

  • variables in abstract classes C++

    - by wyatt
    I have an abstract class CommandPath, and a number of derived classes as below: class CommandPath { public: virtual CommandResponse handleCommand(std::string) = 0; virtual CommandResponse execute() = 0; virtual ~CommandPath() {} }; class GetTimeCommandPath : public CommandPath { int stage; public: GetTimeCommandPath() : stage(0) {} CommandResponse handleCommand(std::string); CommandResponse execute(); }; All of the derived classes have the member variable 'stage'. I want to build a function into all of them which manipulates 'stage' in the same way, so rather than defining it many times I thought I'd build it into the parent class. I moved 'stage' from the private sections of all of the derived classes into the protected section of CommandPath, and added the function as follows: class CommandPath { protected: int stage; public: virtual CommandResponse handleCommand(std::string) = 0; virtual CommandResponse execute() = 0; std::string confirmCommand(std::string, int, int, std::string, std::string); virtual ~CommandPath() {} }; class GetTimeCommandPath : public CommandPath { public: GetTimeCommandPath() : stage(0) {} CommandResponse handleCommand(std::string); CommandResponse execute(); }; Now my compiler tells me for the constructor lines that none of the derived classes have a member 'stage'. I was under the impression that protected members are visible to derived classes? The constructor is the same in all classes, so I suppose I could move it to the parent class, but I'm more concerned about finding out why the derived classes aren't able to access the variable. Also, since previously I've only used the parent class for pure virtual functions, I wanted to confirm that this is the way to go about adding a function to be inherited by all derived classes.

    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

  • Looking for out-of-place directories in an SVN working copy?

    - by jthg
    An annoyance that I sometimes come across with SVN is the working copy getting corrupted by one of the .svn folders getting moved from its original location. It doesn't happen often if you're careful and use the proper tools for all moves and renames, but it still somehow happens from time to time. First, does anyone know if there's a good way to catch the problem before a commit is even done? Cruise control usually catches the problem, but there are plenty of cases it wouldn't catch. Second, is there a quick and easy way to check for out-of-place .svn folder if I suspect that there is one? I can definitely do it manually by deducing what directory is out of place based on the compiler errors or by diffing the working copy with another clean checkout. But, this seems like a problem that SVN can diagnose in a second by giving me a list of all directories whose parent directory in the working copy doesn't match its parent directory in the repository. There there some way to have SVN give me a list like that? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Detecting what the target object is when NullReferenceException is thrown.

    - by StingyJack
    I'm sure we all have received the wonderfully vague "Object reference not set to instance of an Object" exception at some time or another. Identifying the object that is the problem is often a tedious task of setting breakpoints and inspecting all members in each statement. Does anyone have any tricks to easily and efficiently identify the object that causes the exception, either via programmatical means or otherwise? --edit It seems I was vague like the exception =). The point is to _not have to debug the app to find the errant object. The compiler/runtime does know that the object has been allocated, and that the object has not yet been instantiated. Is there a way to extract / identify those details in a caught exception @ W. Craig Trader Your explanation that it is a result of a design problem is probably the best answer I could get. I am fairly compulsive with defensive coding and have managed to get rid of most of these errors after fixing my habits over time. The remaining ones just tweak me to no end, and lead me to posting this question to the community. Thanks for everyone's suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Holding variables in memory, C++

    - by b-gen-jack-o-neill
    Today something strange came to my mind. When I want to hold some string in C (C++) the old way, without using string header, I just create array and store that string into it. But, I read that any variable definition in C in local scope of function ends up in pushing these values onto the stack. So, the string is actually 2* bigger than needed. Because first, the push instructions are located in memory, but then when they are executed (pushed onto the stack) another "copy" of the string is created. First the push instructions, than the stack space is used for one string. So, why is it this way? Why doesn't compiler just add the string (or other variables) to the program instead of creating them once again when executed? Yes, I know you cannot just have some data inside program block, but it could just be attached to the end of the program, with some jump instruction before. And than, we would just point to these data? Because they are stored in RAM when the program is executed. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Overhead of calling tiny functions from a tight inner loop? [C++]

    - by John
    Say you see a loop like this one: for(int i=0; i<thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE).count(); ++i) { thing.getData().insert( thing.GetData().Count(), thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE)[i].getName() ); } if this was Java I'd probably not think twice. But in performance-critical sections of C++, it makes me want to tinker with it... however I don't know if the compiler is smart enough to make it futile. This is a made up example but all it's doing is inserting strings into a container. Please don't assume any of these are STL types, think in general terms about the following: Is having a messy condition in the for loop going to get evaluated each time, or only once? If those get methods are simply returning references to member variables on the objects, will they be inlined away? Would you expect custom [] operators to get optimized at all? In other words is it worth the time (in performance only, not readability) to convert it to something like: ElementContainer &source = thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE); int num = source.count(); Store &destination = thing.getData(); for(int i=0;i<num;++i) { destination.insert(thing.GetData().Count(), source[i].getName(); } Remember, this is a tight loop, called millions of times a second. What I wonder is if all this will shave a couple of cycles per loop or something more substantial? Yes I know the quote about "premature optimisation". And I know that profiling is important. But this is a more general question about modern compilers, Visual Studio in particular.

    Read the article

  • How to optimize this simple function which translates input bits into words?

    - by psihodelia
    I have written a function which reads an input buffer of bytes and produces an output buffer of words where every word can be either 0x0081 for each ON bit of the input buffer or 0x007F for each OFF bit. The length of the input buffer is given. Both arrays have enough physical place. I also have about 2Kbyte free RAM which I can use for lookup tables or so. Now, I found that this function is my bottleneck in a real time application. It will be called very frequently. Can you please suggest a way how to optimize this function? I see one possibility could be to use only one buffer and do in-place substitution. void inline BitsToWords(int8 *pc_BufIn, int16 *pw_BufOut, int32 BufInLen) { int32 i,j,z=0; for(i=0; i<BufInLen; i++) { for(j=0; j<8; j++, z++) { pw_BufOut[z] = ( ((pc_BufIn[i] >> (7-j))&0x01) == 1? 0x0081: 0x007f ); } } } Please do not offer any compiler specific or CPU/Hardware specific optimization, because it is a multi-platform project.

    Read the article

  • I want a function to return a type of the subclass its invoked from

    - by Jay
    I want to have a function defined in a superclass that returns a value of the type of the subclass that is used to invoke the function. That is, say I have class A with a function plugh. Then I create subclasses B and C that extend A. I want B.plugh to return a B and C.plugh to return a C. Yes, they could return an A, but then the caller would have to either cast it to the right subtype, which is a pain when used a lot, or declare the receiving variable to be of the supertype, which loses type safety. So I was trying to do this with generics, writing something like this: class A<T extends A> { private T foo; public T getFoo() { return foo; } } class B extends A<B> { public void calcFoo() { foo=... whatever ... } } class C extends A<C> { public void calcFoo() { foo=... whatever ... } } This appears to work but it looks pretty ugly. For one thing, I get warnings on "class A". The compiler says that A is generic and I should specify the type. I guess it wants me to say "class A". But what would I put in for x? I think I could get stuck in an infinite loop here. It seems weird to write "class B extends A", but this causes no complaints, so maybe that's just fine. Is this the right way to do it? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • C++: Weird Segmentation fault.

    - by Kleas
    I am trying to print something using C++. However, I am running into a strange bug that has left me clueless, I use the following code: PRINTDLG pd; ZeroMemory(&pd, sizeof(pd)); pd.lStructSize = sizeof(pd); pd.Flags = PD_RETURNDEFAULT; PrintDlg(&pd); // Set landscape DEVMODE* pDevMode = (DEVMODE*)GlobalLock(pd.hDevMode); pDevMode->dmOrientation = DMORIENT_LANDSCAPE; pd.hwndOwner = mainWindow; pd.Flags = PD_RETURNDC | PD_NOSELECTION; GlobalUnlock(pd.hDevMode); if (PrintDlg(&pd)) { DOCINFO di; di.cbSize = sizeof(DOCINFO); di.lpszDocName = "Test Print"; di.lpszOutput = (LPTSTR)NULL; di.fwType = 0; //start printing StartDoc(pd.hDC, &di); int a; int b; int c; int d; int e; int f; // int g; // Uncomment this -> CRASH EndDoc(pd.hDC); DeleteDC(pd.hDC); } else { cout << "Did not print: " << CommDlgExtendedError() << endl; } The moment I uncomment 'int g;' I get a: "Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault." I use codeblocks and the mingw compiler, both up to date. What could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • Can a member struct be zero-init from the constructor initializer list without calling memset?

    - by selbie
    Let's say I have the following structure declaration (simple struct with no constructor). struct Foo { int x; int y; int z; char szData[DATA_SIZE]; }; Now let's say this struct is a member of a C++ class as follows: class CFoobar { Foo _foo; public: CFoobar(); }; If I declare CFoobar's constructor as follows: CFoobar::CFoobar() { printf("_foo = {%d, %d, %d}\n", _foo.x, _foo.y,_foo.z); for (int x = 0; x < 100; x++) printf("%d\n", _foo.szData[x]); } As you would expect, when CFoobar's constructor runs, garbage data gets printed out Obviously, the easy fix is to memset or ZeroMemory &_foo. It's what I've always done... However, I did notice that if add _foo to the constructor's initialization list with no parameters as follows: CFoobar::CFoobar() : _foo() { That this appears to zero-out the member variables of _foo. At least that was the case with g++ on linux. Now here's my question: Is this standard C++, or is this compiler specific behavior? If it's standard behavior, can someone quote me a reference from an official source? Any "gotchas" in regards to implicit zero-init behavior with more complicated structs and classes?

    Read the article

  • How can I compare the performance of log() and fp division in C++?

    - by Ventzi Zhechev
    Hi, I’m using a log-based class in C++ to store very small floating-point values (as the values otherwise go beyond the scope of double). As I’m performing a large number of multiplications, this has the added benefit of converting the multiplications to sums. However, at a certain point in my algorithm, I need to divide a standard double value by an integer value and than do a *= to a log-based value. I have overloaded the *= operator for my log-based class and the right-hand side value is first converted to a log-based value by running log() and than added to the left-hand side value. Thus the operations actually performed are floating-point division, log() and floating-point summation. My question whether it would be faster to first convert the denominator to a log-based value, which would replace the floating-point division with floating-point subtraction, yielding the following chain of operations: twice log(), floating-point subtraction, floating-point summation. In the end, this boils down to whether floating-point division is faster or slower than log(). I suspect that a common answer would be that this is compiler and architecture dependent, so I’ll say that I use gcc 4.2 from Apple on darwin 10.3.0. Still, I hope to get an answer with a general remark on the speed of these two operators and/or an idea on how to measure the difference myself, as there might be more going on here, e.g. executing the constructors that do the type conversion etc. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Code casing question for private class fields

    - by user200295
    Take the following example public class Class1{ public string Prop1{ get {return m_Prop1;} set {m_Prop1 = value; } } private string m_Prop1; // this is standard private property variable name // how do we cap this variable name? While the compiler can figure out same casing // it makes it hard to read private Class2 Class2; // we camel case the parameter public Class1(Class2 class2){ this.Class2 = class2; } } Here are my stock rules The class name is capitalized (Class1) The public properties are capitalized (Prop1) The private field tied to a public property has m_ to indicate this. My coworker prefers _ There is some debate if using m_ or _ should be used at all, as it is like Hungarian notation. Private class fields are capitalized. The part I am trying to figure out is what do I do if when the Class name of a private field matches the private field name. For example, private Class2 Class2; This is confusing. If the private field name is not the same class, for example private string Name; , there isn't much issue. Or am I thinking about the issue wrong. Should my classes and private fields be named in such a way that they don't collide?

    Read the article

  • Java getMethod with subclass parameter

    - by SelectricSimian
    I'm writing a library that uses reflection to find and call methods dynamically. Given just an object, a method name, and a parameter list, I need to call the given method as though the method call were explicitly written in the code. I've been using the following approach, which works in most cases: static void callMethod(Object receiver, String methodName, Object[] params) { Class<?>[] paramTypes = new Class<?>[params.length]; for (int i = 0; i < param.length; i++) { paramTypes[i] = params[i].getClass(); } receiver.getClass().getMethod(methodName, paramTypes).invoke(receiver, params); } However, when one of the parameters is a subclass of one of the supported types for the method, the reflection API throws a NoSuchMethodException. For example, if the receiver's class has testMethod(Foo) defined, the following fails: receiver.getClass().getMethod("testMethod", FooSubclass.class).invoke(receiver, new FooSubclass()); even though this works: receiver.testMethod(new FooSubclass()); How do I resolve this? If the method call is hard-coded there's no issue - the compiler just uses the overloading algorithm to pick the best applicable method to use. It doesn't work with reflection, though, which is what I need. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • C++ Type error with Object versus Object reference

    - by muddybruin
    I have the following function (which worked in Visual Studio): bool Plane::contains(Vector& point){ return normalVector.dotProduct(point - position) < -doubleResolution; } When I compile it using g++ version 4.1.2 , I get the following error: Plane.cpp: In member function âvirtual bool Plane::contains(Vector&)â: Plane.cpp:36: error: no matching function for call to âVector::dotProduct(Vector)â Vector.h:19: note: candidates are: double Vector::dotProduct(Vector&) So as you can see, the compiler thinks (point-position) is a Vector but it's expecting Vector&. What's the best way to fix this? I verified that this works: Vector temp = point-position; return normalVector.dotProduct(temp) < -doubleResolution; But I was hoping for something a little bit cleaner. I heard a suggestion that adding a copy constructor might help. So I added a copy constructor to Vector (see below), but it didn't help. Vector.h: Vector(const Vector& other); Vector.cpp: Vector::Vector(const Vector& other) :x(other.x), y(other.y), z(other.z), homogenous(other.homogenous) { }

    Read the article

  • C++ privately contructed class

    - by Nona Urbiz
    How can I call a function and keep my constructor private? If I make the class static, I need to declare an object name which the compiler uses to call the constructor, which it cannot if the constructor is private (also the object would be extraneous). Here is the code I am attempting to use (it is not compilable): I want to keep the constructor private because I will later be doing a lot of checks before adding an object, modifying previous objects when all submitted variables are not unique rather than creating new objects. #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <regex> #include <string> #include <list> #include <map> using namespace std; using namespace tr1; class Referral { public: string url; map<string, int> keywords; static bool submit(string url, string keyword, int occurrences) { //if(Referrals.all.size == 0){ // Referral(url, keyword, occurrences); //} } private: list<string> urls; Referral(string url, string keyword, int occurrences) { url = url; keywords[keyword] = occurrences; Referrals.all.push_back(this); } }; struct All { list<Referral> all; }Referrals; int main() { Referral.submit("url", "keyword", 1); }

    Read the article

  • when is a v-table created in C++?

    - by saminny
    When exactly does the compiler create a virtual function table? 1) when the class contains at least one virtual function. OR 2) when the immediate base class contains at least one virtual function. OR 3) when any parent class at any level of the hierarchy contains at least one virtual function. A related question to this: Is it possible to give up dynamic dispatch in a C++ hierarchy? e.g. consider the following example. #include <iostream> using namespace std; class A { public: virtual void f(); }; class B: public A { public: void f(); }; class C: public B { public: void f(); }; Which classes will contain a V-Table? Since B does not declare f() as virtual, does class C get dynamic polymorphism?

    Read the article

  • How can I put back a character that I've read when I detect it's the start of a new row?

    - by gcc
    char nm; int i=0; double thelow, theupp; double numbers[200]; for(i=0;i<4;++i) { { char nm; double thelow,theupp; /*after erased ,created again*/ scanf("%c %lf %lf", &nm, &thelow, &theupp); for (k = 0; ; ++k) ; { scanf("%lf",numbers[k]); if(numbers[k]=='\n') break; } /*calling function and sending data(nm,..) to it*/ } /*after } is seen (nm ..) is erased*/ ; } I want say compiler : hey my dear code read only i-th row,dont touch characters at placed in next line. because characters at placed in next line is token after i increased by 1 and nm ,thelow,theupp is being zero or erased after then again created. how can I do ? input; D -1.5 0.5 .012 .025 .05 .1 .1 .1 .025 .012 0 0 0 .012 .025 .1 .2 .1 .05 .039 .025 .025 B 1 3 .117 .058 .029 .015 .007 .007 .007 .015 .022 .029 .036 .044 .051 .058 .066 .073 .080 .088 .095 .103

    Read the article

  • How do I conditionally compile C code snippets to my Perl module?

    - by mobrule
    I have a module that will target several different operating systems and configurations. Sometimes, some C code can make this module's task a little easier, so I have some C functions that I would like to bind the code. I don't have to bind the C functions -- I can't guarantee that the end-user even has a C compiler, for instance, and it's generally not a problem to failover gracefully to a pure Perl way of accomplishing the same thing -- but it would be nice if I could call the C functions from the Perl script. Still with me? Here's another tricky part. Just about all of the C code is system specific -- a function written for Windows won't compile on Linux and vice-versa, and the function that does a similar thing on Solaris will look totally different. #include <some/Windows/headerfile.h> int foo_for_Windows_c(int a,double b) { do_windows_stuff(); return 42; } #include <path/to/linux/headerfile.h> int foo_for_linux_c(int a,double b) { do_linux_stuff(7); return 42; } Furthermore, even for native code that targets the same system, it's possible that only some of them can be compiled on any particular configuration. #include <some/headerfile/that/might/not/even/exist.h> int bar_for_solaris_c(int a,double b) { call_solaris_library_that_might_be_installed_here(11); return 19; } But ideally we could still use the C functions that would compile with that configuration. So my questions are: how can I compile C functions conditionally (compile only the code that is appropriate for the current value of $^O)? how can I compile C functions individually (some functions might not compile, but we still want to use the ones that can)? can I do this at build-time (while the end-user is installing the module) or at run-time (with Inline::C, for example)? Which way is better? how would I tell which functions were successfully compiled and are available for use from Perl? All thoughts appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Compiling 32-bit Program on VS 2008

    - by gordonwd
    I've been developing on VC++ 2003 on an XP PC but am now on Windows 7 and bought a cheap legal copy of VS 2008 to continue work on the same project. My product has to continue to run on customers' XP systems, so I'm strictly interested in a 32-bit executable. The first issue I ran into was the PRJ0003 error "spawning cl.exe". I had to add the path to this file to the VC++ Directories settings (it appears in both a bin\amd64 and bin\x86_amd64 directory, but I don't think it matters output-wise which I use?). The issue I now have (not counting a tedious cleanup to convert strcpy to strcpy_s, etc.) is that I'm not clear on whether I'm generating a 32-bit or 64-bit exe out of this. My project properties are set to a target of "Win32", so I assume that all is well. Is this correct? I have read some discussions about this, but it's never quite clear if they are talking about whether the compiler itself is running x64 vs. x86, or whether the compiled code is x64 vs. x86, and how this is differentiated. So am I doing the right thing to generate a 32-bit, Win32, x-86 program?

    Read the article

  • Array Assignment

    - by Mahesh
    Let me explain with an example - #include <iostream> void foo( int a[2], int b[2] ) // I understand that, compiler doesn't bother about the // array index and converts them to int *a, int *b { a = b ; // At this point, how ever assignment operation is valid. } int main() { int a[] = { 1,2 }; int b[] = { 3,4 }; foo( a, b ); a = b; // Why is this invalid here. return 0; } Is it because, array decays to a pointer when passed to a function foo(..), assignment operation is possible. And in main, is it because they are of type int[] which invalidates the assignment operation. Doesn't a,b in both the cases mean the same ? Thanks. Edit 1: When I do it in a function foo, it's assigning the b's starting element location to a. So, thinking in terms of it, what made the language developers not do the same in main(). Want to know the reason.

    Read the article

  • Which of the following Java coding fragments is better?

    - by Simon
    This isn't meant to be subjective, I am looking for reasons based on resource utilisation, compiler performance, GC performance etc. rather than elegance. Oh, and the position of brackets doesn't count, so no stylistic comments please. Take the following loop; Integer total = new Integer(0); Integer i; for (String str : string_list) { i = Integer.parse(str); total += i; } versus... Integer total = 0; for (String str : string_list) { Integer i = Integer.parse(str); total += i; } In the first one i is function scoped whereas in the second it is scoped in the loop. I have always thought (believed) that the first one would be more efficient because it just references an existing variable already allocated on the stack, whereas the second one would be pushing and popping i each iteration of the loop. There are quite a lot of other cases where I tend to scope variables more broadly than perhaps necessary so I thought I would ask here to clear up a gap in my knowledge. Also notice that assignment of the variable on initialisation either involving the new operator or not. Do any of these sorts of semi-stylistic semi-optimisations make any difference at all?

    Read the article

  • Operator Overloading << in c++

    - by thlgood
    I'm a fresh man in C++. I write this simple program to practice Overlaoding. This is my code: #include <iostream> #include <string> using namespace std; class sex_t { private: char __sex__; public: sex_t(char sex_v = 'M'):__sex__(sex_v) { if (sex_v != 'M' && sex_v != 'F') { cerr << "Sex type error!" << sex_v << endl; __sex__ = 'M'; } } const ostream& operator << (const ostream& stream) { if (__sex__ == 'M') cout << "Male"; else cout << "Female"; return stream; } }; int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { sex_t me('M'); cout << me << endl; return 0; } When I compiler it, It print a lots of error message: The error message was in a mess. It's too hard for me to found useful message sex.cpp: ???‘int main(int, char**)’?: sex.cpp:32:10: ??: ‘operator<<’?‘std::cout << me’????? sex.cpp:32:10: ??: ???: /usr/include/c++/4.6/ostream:110:7: ??: std::basic_ostream<_CharT, _Traits>::__ostream_type& std::basic_ostream<_CharT, _Traits>::operator<<(std::basic_ostre

    Read the article

  • What's the point of indicating AllowMultiple=false on an abstract Attribute class?

    - by tvanfosson
    On a recent question about MVC attributes, someone asked whether using HttpPost and HttpDelete attributes on an action method would result in either request type being allowed or no requests being allowed (since it can't be both a Post and a Delete at the same time). I noticed that ActionMethodSelectorAttribute, from which HttpPostAttribute and HttpDeleteAttribute both derive is decorated with [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] I had expected it to not allow both HttpPost and HttpDelete on the same method because of this, but the compiler doesn't complain. My limited testing tells me that the attribute usage on the base class is simply ignored. AllowMultiple seemingly only disallows two of the same attribute from being applied to a method/class and doesn't seem to consider whether those attributes derive from the same class which is configured to not allow multiples. Moreover, the attribute usage on the base class doesn't even preclude your from changing the attribute usage on a derived class. That being the case, what's the point of even setting the values on the base attribute class? Is it just advisory or am I missing something fundamental in how they work? FYI - it turns out that using both basically precludes that method from ever being considered. The attributes are evaluated independently and one of them will always indicate that the method is not valid for the request since it can't simultaneously be both a Post and a Delete.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187  | Next Page >