Search Results

Search found 36186 results on 1448 pages for 'sql 11'.

Page 184/1448 | < Previous Page | 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191  | Next Page >

  • Which libraries use the "We Know Where You Live" optimization for std::make_shared?

    - by KnowItAllWannabe
    Over two years ago, Stephan T. Lavavej described a space-saving optimization he implemented in Microsoft's implementation of std::make_shared, and I know from speaking with him that Microsoft has nothing against other library implementations adopting this optimization. If you know for sure whether other libraries (e.g., for Gnu C++, Clang, Intel C++, plus Boost (for boost::make_shared)) have adopted this implementation, please contribute an answer. I don't have ready access to that many make_shared implementations, nor am I wild about digging into the bowels of the ones I have to see if they've implemented the WKWYL optimization, but I'm hoping that SO readers know the answers for some libraries off-hand. I know from looking at the code that as of Boost 1.52, the WKWYL optimization had not been implemented, but Boost is now up to version 1.55. Note that this optimization is different from std::make_shared's ability to avoid a dedicated heap allocation for the reference count used by std::shared_ptr. For a discussion of the difference between WKWYL and that optimication, consult this question.

    Read the article

  • Can't insert a number into a C++ custom streambuf/ostream

    - by 0xbe5077ed
    I have written a custom std::basic_streambuf and std::basic_ostream because I want an output stream that I can get a JNI string from in a manner similar to how you can call std::ostringstream::str(). These classes are quite simple. namespace myns { class jni_utf16_streambuf : public std::basic_streambuf<char16_t> { JNIEnv * d_env; std::vector<char16_t> d_buf; virtual int_type overflow(int_type); public: jni_utf16_streambuf(JNIEnv *); jstring jstr() const; }; typedef std::basic_ostream<char16_t, std::char_traits<char16_t>> utf16_ostream; class jni_utf16_ostream : public utf16_ostream { jni_utf16_streambuf d_buf; public: jni_utf16_ostream(JNIEnv *); jstring jstr() const; }; // ... } // namespace myns In addition, I have made four overloads of operator<<, all in the same namespace: namespace myns { // ... utf16_ostream& operator<<(utf16_ostream&, jstring) throw(std::bad_cast); utf16_ostream& operator<<(utf16_ostream&, const char *); utf16_ostream& operator<<(utf16_ostream&, const jni_utf16_string_region&); jni_utf16_ostream& operator<<(jni_utf16_ostream&, jstring); // ... } // namespace myns The implementation of jni_utf16_streambuf::overflow(int_type) is trivial. It just doubles the buffer width, puts the requested character, and sets the base, put, and end pointers correctly. It is tested and I am quite sure it works. The jni_utf16_ostream works fine inserting unicode characters. For example, this works fine and results in the stream containing "hello, world": myns::jni_utf16_ostream o(env); o << u"hello, wor" << u'l' << u'd'; My problem is as soon as I try to insert an integer value, the stream's bad bit gets set, for example: myns::jni_utf16_ostream o(env); if (o.badbit()) throw "bad bit before"; // does not throw int32_t x(5); o << x; if (o.badbit()) throw "bad bit after"; // throws :( I don't understand why this is happening! Is there some other method on std::basic_streambuf I need to be implementing????

    Read the article

  • How is the C++ synthesized move constructor affected by volatile and virtual members?

    - by user1827766
    Look at the following code: struct node { node(); //node(const node&); //#1 //node(node&&); //#2 virtual //#3 ~node (); node* volatile //#4 next; }; main() { node m(node()); //#5 node n=node(); //#6 } When compiled with gcc-4.6.1 it produces the following error: g++ -g --std=c++0x -c -o node.o node.cc node.cc: In constructor node::node(node&&): node.cc:3:8: error: expression node::next has side-effects node.cc: In function int main(): node.cc:18:14: note: synthesized method node::node(node&&) first required here As I understand the compiler fails to create default move or copy constructor on line #6, if I uncomment either line #1 or #2 it compiles fine, that is clear. The code compiles fine without c++0x option, so the error is related to default move constructor. However, what in the node class prevents default move constructor to be created? If I comment any of the lines #3 or #4 (i.e. make the destructor non-virtual or make data member non-volatile) it compiles again, so is it the combination of these two makes it not to compile? Another puzzle, line #5 does not cause an compilation error, what is different from line #6? Is it all specific for gcc? or gcc-4.6.1?

    Read the article

  • Implicit constructor available for all types derived from Base excepted the current type?

    - by Vincent
    The following code sum up my problem : template<class Parameter> class Base {}; template<class Parameter1, class Parameter2, class Parameter> class Derived1 : public Base<Parameter> { }; template<class Parameter1, class Parameter2, class Parameter> class Derived2 : public Base<Parameter> { public : // Copy constructor Derived2(const Derived2& x); // An EXPLICIT constructor that does a special conversion for a Derived2 // with other template parameters template<class OtherParameter1, class OtherParameter2, class OtherParameter> explicit Derived2( const Derived2<OtherParameter1, OtherParameter2, OtherParameter>& x ); // Now the problem : I want an IMPLICIT constructor that will work for every // type derived from Base EXCEPT // Derived2<OtherParameter1, OtherParameter2, OtherParameter> template<class Type, class = typename std::enable_if</* SOMETHING */>::type> Derived2(const Type& x); }; How to restrict an implicit constructor to all classes derived from the parent class excepted the current class whatever its template parameters, considering that I already have an explicit constructor as in the example code ? EDIT : For the implicit constructor from Base, I can obviously write : template<class OtherParameter> Derived2(const Base<OtherParameter>& x); But in that case, do I have the guaranty that the compiler will not use this constructor as an implicit constructor for Derived2<OtherParameter1, OtherParameter2, OtherParameter> ? EDIT2: Here I have a test : (LWS here : http://liveworkspace.org/code/cd423fb44fb4c97bc3b843732d837abc) #include <iostream> template<typename Type> class Base {}; template<typename Type> class Other : public Base<Type> {}; template<typename Type> class Derived : public Base<Type> { public: Derived() {std::cout<<"empty"<<std::endl;} Derived(const Derived<Type>& x) {std::cout<<"copy"<<std::endl;} template<typename OtherType> explicit Derived(const Derived<OtherType>& x) {std::cout<<"explicit"<<std::endl;} template<typename OtherType> Derived(const Base<OtherType>& x) {std::cout<<"implicit"<<std::endl;} }; int main() { Other<int> other0; Other<double> other1; std::cout<<"1 = "; Derived<int> dint1; // <- empty std::cout<<"2 = "; Derived<int> dint2; // <- empty std::cout<<"3 = "; Derived<double> ddouble; // <- empty std::cout<<"4 = "; Derived<double> ddouble1(ddouble); // <- copy std::cout<<"5 = "; Derived<double> ddouble2(dint1); // <- explicit std::cout<<"6 = "; ddouble = other0; // <- implicit std::cout<<"7 = "; ddouble = other1; // <- implicit std::cout<<"8 = "; ddouble = ddouble2; // <- nothing (normal : default assignment) std::cout<<"\n9 = "; ddouble = Derived<double>(dint1); // <- explicit std::cout<<"10 = "; ddouble = dint2; // <- implicit : WHY ?!?! return 0; } The last line worry me. Is it ok with the C++ standard ? Is it a bug of g++ ?

    Read the article

  • How to convert a lambda to an std::function using templates

    - by retep998
    Basically, what I want to be able to do is take a lambda with any number of any type of parameters and convert it to an std::function. I've tried the following and neither method works. std::function([](){});//Complains that std::function is missing template parameters template <typename T> void foo(function<T> f){} foo([](){});//Complains that it cannot find a matching candidate The following code does work however, but it is not what I want because it requires explicitly stating the template parameters which does not work for generic code. std::function<void()>([](){}); I've been mucking around with functions and templates all evening and I just can't figure this out, so any help would be much appreciated. As mentioned in a comment, the reason I'm trying to do this is because I'm trying to implement currying in C++ using variadic templates. Unfortunately, this fails horribly when using lambdas. For example, I can pass a standard function using a function pointer. template <typename R, typename...A> void foo(R (*f)(A...)) {} void bar() {} int main() { foo(bar); } However, I can't figure out how to pass a lambda to such a variadic function. Why I'm interested in converting a generic lambda into an std::function is because I can do the following, but it ends up requiring that I explicitly state the template parameters to std::function which is what I am trying to avoid. template <typename R, typename...A> void foo(std::function<R(A...)>) {} int main() { foo(std::function<void()>([](){})); }

    Read the article

  • Perfect Forwarding to async lambda

    - by Alexander Kondratskiy
    I have a function template, where I want to do perfect forwarding into a lambda that I run on another thread. Here is a minimal test case which you can directly compile: #include <thread> #include <future> #include <utility> #include <iostream> #include <vector> /** * Function template that does perfect forwarding to a lambda inside an * async call (or at least tries to). I want both instantiations of the * function to work (one for lvalue references T&, and rvalue reference T&&). * However, I cannot get the code to compile when calling it with an lvalue. * See main() below. */ template <typename T> std::string accessValueAsync(T&& obj) { std::future<std::string> fut = std::async(std::launch::async, [](T&& vec) mutable { return vec[0]; }, std::forward<T>(obj)); return fut.get(); } int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) { std::vector<std::string> lvalue{"Testing"}; // calling with what I assume is an lvalue reference does NOT compile std::cout << accessValueAsync(lvalue) << std::endl; // calling with rvalue reference compiles std::cout << accessValueAsync(std::move(lvalue)) << std::endl; // I want both to compile. return 0; } For the non-compiling case, here is the last line of the error message which is intelligible: main.cpp|13 col 29| note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘std::vector<std::basic_string<char> >’ to ‘std::vector<std::basic_string<char> >&’ I have a feeling it may have something to do with how T&& is deduced, but I can't pinpoint the exact point of failure and fix it. Any suggestions? Thank you! EDIT: I am using gcc 4.7.0 just in case this could be a compiler issue (probably not)

    Read the article

  • Reordering Variadic Parameters

    - by void-pointer
    I have come across the need to reorder a variadic list of parameters that is supplied to the constructor of a struct. After being reordered based on their types, the parameters will be stored as a tuple. My question is how this can be done so that a modern C++ compiler (e.g. g++-4.7) will not generate unnecessary load or store instructions. That is, when the constructor is invoked with a list of parameters of variable size, it efficiently pushes each parameter into place based on an ordering over the parameters' types. Here is a concrete example. Assume that the base type of every parameter (without references, rvalue references, pointers, or qualifiers) is either char, int, or float. How can I make it so that all the parameters of base type char appear first, followed by all of those of base type int (which leaves the parameters of base type float last). The relative order in which the parameters were given should not be violated within sublists of homogeneous base type. Example: foo::foo() is called with arguments float a, char&& b, const float& c, int&& d, char e. The tuple tupe is std::tuple<char, char, int, float, float>, and it is constructed like so: tuple_type{std::move(b), e, std::move(d), a, c}. Consider the struct defined below, and assume that the metafunction deduce_reordered_tuple_type is already implemented. How would you write the constructor so that it works as intended? If you think that the code for deduce_reodered_tuple_type, would be useful to you, I can provide it; it's a little long. template <class... Args> struct foo { // Assume that the metafunction deduce_reordered_tuple_type is defined. typedef typename deduce_reordered_tuple_type<Args...>::type tuple_type; tuple_type t_; foo(Args&&... args) : t_{reorder_and_forward_parameters<Args>(args)...} {} }; Edit 1 The technique I describe above does have applications in mathematical frameworks that make heavy use of expression templates, variadic templates, and metaprogramming in order to perform aggressive inlining. Suppose that you wish to define an operator that takes the product of several expressions, each of which may be passed by reference, reference to const, or rvalue reference. (In my case, the expressions are conditional probability tables and the operation is the factor product, but something like matrix multiplication works suitably as well.) You need access to the data provided by each expression in order to evaluate the product. Consequently, you must move the expressions passed as rvalue references, copy the expressions passed by reference to const, and take the addresses of expressions passed by reference. Using the technique I describe above now poses several benefits. Other expressions can use uniform syntax to access data elements from this expression, since all of the heavy-lifting metaprogramming work is done beforehand, within the class. We can save stack space by grouping the pointers together and storing the larger expressions towards the end of the tuple. Implementing certain types of queries becomes much easier (e.g. check whether any of the pointers stored in the tuple aliases a given pointer). Thank you very much for your help!

    Read the article

  • C++ AMP, for loops to parallel_for_each loop

    - by user1430335
    I'm converting an algorithm to make use of the massive acceleration that C++ AMP provides. The stage I'm at is putting the for loops into the known parallel_for_each loop. Normally this should be a straightforward task to do but it appears more complex then I first thought. It's a nested loop which I increment using steps of 4 per iterations: for(int j = 0; j < height; j += 4, data += width * 4 * 4) { for(int i = 0; i < width; i += 4) { The trouble I'm having is the use of the index. I can't seem to find a way to properly fit this into the parallel_for_each loop. Using an index of rank 2 is the way to go but manipulating it via branching will do harm to the performance gain. I found a similar post: Controlling the index variables in C++ AMP. It also deals about index manipulation but the increment aspect doesn't cover my issue. With kind regards, Forcecast

    Read the article

  • Is std::move really needed on initialization list of constructor for heavy members passed by value?

    - by PiotrNycz
    Recently I read an example from cppreference.../vector/emplace_back: struct President { std::string name; std::string country; int year; President(std::string p_name, std::string p_country, int p_year) : name(std::move(p_name)), country(std::move(p_country)), year(p_year) { std::cout << "I am being constructed.\n"; } My question: is this std::move really needed? My point is that compiler sees that this p_name is not used in the body of constructor, so, maybe, there is some rule to use move semantics for it by default? That would be really annoying to add std::move on initialization list to every heavy member (like std::string, std::vector). Imagine hundreds of KLOC project written in C++03 - shall we add everywhere this std::move? This question: move-constructor-and-initialization-list answer says: As a golden rule, whenever you take something by rvalue reference, you need to use it inside std::move, and whenever you take something by universal reference (i.e. deduced templated type with &&), you need to use it inside std::forward But I am not sure: passing by value is rather not universal reference?

    Read the article

  • Nested for_each with lambda not possible?

    - by Ela782
    The following code does not compile in VS2012, it gives error C2064: term does not evaluate to a function taking 1 arguments on the line of the second for_each (line 4 below). vector<string> v1; for_each(begin(v1), end(v1), [](string s1) { vector<string> v2; for_each(begin(v2), end(v2), [](string s2) { cout << "..."; }); }); I found some related stuff like http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/560907/capturing-variables-in-nested-lambdas which shows a bug (they are doing something different) but on the other hand that shows that what I print above should be possible. What's wrong with the above code?

    Read the article

  • How to copy_if from map to vector?

    - by VJo
    I'd like to copy values that match a predicate (equal ints) from a map<string,int> to a vector<int>. This is what I tried: #include <map> #include <vector> #include <algorithm> int main() { std::vector< int > v; std::map< std::string, int > m; m[ "1" ] = 1; m[ "2" ] = 2; m[ "3" ] = 3; m[ "4" ] = 4; m[ "5" ] = 5; std::copy_if( m.begin(), m.end(), v.begin(), [] ( const std::pair< std::string,int > &it ) { return ( 0 == ( it.second % 2 ) ); } ); } The error message from g++ 4.6.1 is : error: cannot convert 'std::pair<const std::basic_string<char>, int>' to 'int' in assignment Is there a way to adjust the example to do the above copy?

    Read the article

  • SQL - Please Help - How can I select values from different rows depending on the most recent entry

    - by user321185
    Hiya, Basically I have a table which is used to hold employee work wear details. It is formed of the columns: EmployeeID, CostCentre, AssociateLevel, IssueDate, TrouserSize, TrouserLength, TopSize & ShoeSize. An employee can be assigned a pair of trousers, a top and shoes at the same time or only one or two pieces of clothing. As we all know sepeoples sizes and employee levels can change which is why I need help really. I need to be able to select the most recent clothes size and associate level for each item of clothing for each employee. So for example if employee '54664LSS' was given a pair of 'XL' trousers and a 'L' top on 24/03/11 but then received a 'M' top on 26/05/10. Then the values of the 'M' sized top and the 'L' sized trousers would need to be returned. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I'm pretty stuck :(. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Using parameterized function calls in SELECT statements. MS SQL Server

    - by geekzlla
    I have taken over some code from a previous developer and have come across this SQL statement that calls several SQL functions. As you can see, the function calls in the select statement pass a parameter to the function. How does the SQL statement know what value to replace the variable with? For the below sample, how does the query engine know what to replace nDeptID with when it calls, fn_SelDeptName_DeptID(nDeptID)? nDeptID IS a column in table Note. SELECT STATEMENT: SELECT nCustomerID AS [Customer ID], nJobID AS [Job ID], dbo.fn_SelDeptName_DeptID(nDeptID) AS Department, nJobTaskID AS JobTaskID, dbo.fn_SelDeptTaskDesc_OpenTask(nJobID, nJobTaskID) AS Task, nStandardNoteID AS StandardNoteID, dbo.fn_SelNoteTypeDesc(nNoteID) AS [Note Type], dbo.fn_SelGPAStandardNote(nStandardNoteID) AS [Standard Note], nEntryDate AS [Entry Date], nUserName as [Added By], nType AS Type, nNote AS Note FROM Note WHERE nJobID = 844261 xORDER BY nJobID, Task, [Entry Date] ====================== Function fn_SelDeptName_DeptID: ALTER FUNCTION [dbo].[fn_SelDeptName_DeptID] (@iDeptID int) RETURNS varchar(25) -- Used by DataCollection for Job Tracking -- if the Deptartment isnt found return an empty string BEGIN -- Return the Department name for the given DeptID. DECLARE @strDeptName varchar(25) IF @iDeptID = 0 SET @strDeptName = '' ELSE BEGIN SET @strDeptName = (SELECT dName FROM Department WHERE dDeptID = @iDeptID) IF (@strDeptName IS NULL) SET @strDeptName = '' END RETURN @strDeptName END ========================== Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • If I don't odr-use a variable, can I have multiple definitions of it across translation units?

    - by sftrabbit
    The standard seems to imply that there is no restriction on the number of definitions of a variable if it is not odr-used (§3.2/3): Every program shall contain exactly one definition of every non-inline function or variable that is odr-used in that program; no diagnostic required. It does say that any variable can't be defined multiple times within a translation unit (§3.2/1): No translation unit shall contain more than one definition of any variable, function, class type, enumeration type, or template. But I can't find a restriction for non-odr-used variables across the entire program. So why can't I compile something like the following: // other.cpp int x; // main.cpp int x; int main() {} Compiling and linking these files with g++ 4.6.3, I get a linker error for multiple definition of 'x'. To be honest, I expect this, but since x is not odr-used anywhere (as far as I can tell), I can't see how the standard restricts this. Or is it undefined behaviour?

    Read the article

  • Evaluation of (de)reference operators

    - by Micha
    I have an (uncommented...) source file which I'm trying to understand. static const Map *gCurMap; static std::vector<Map> mapVec; then auto e = mapVec.end(); auto i = mapVec.begin(); while(i!=e) { // ... const Map *map = gCurMap = &(*(i++)); // ... } I don't understand what &(*(i++)) does. It does not compile when just using i++, but to me it looks the same, because I'm "incrementing" i, then I'm requesting the value at the given address and then I'm requesting the address of this value?!

    Read the article

  • How to determine number of function arguments dynamically

    - by Kam
    I have the following code: #include <iostream> #include <functional> class test { public: typedef std::function<bool(int)> Handler; void handler(Handler h){h(5);} }; class test2 { public: template< typename Ret2, typename Ret, typename Class, typename Param> inline Ret2 MemFn(Ret (Class::*f)(Param), int arg_num) { if (arg_num == 1) return std::bind(f, this, std::placeholders::_1); } bool f(int x){ std::cout << x << std::endl; return true;} }; int main() { test t; test2 t2; t.handler(t2.MemFn<test::Handler>(&test2::f, 1)); return 0; } It works as expected. I would like to be able to call this: t.handler(t2.MemFn<test::Handler>(&test2::f)); instead of t.handler(t2.MemFn<test::Handler>(&test2::f, 1)); Basically I need MemFn to determine in runtime what Handler expects as the number of arguments. Is that even possible?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • enable_shared_from_this and inheritance

    - by DeadMG
    I've got a type which inherits from enable_shared_from_this<type>, and another type that inherits from this type. Now I can't use the shared_from_this method because it returns the base type and in a specific derived class method I need the derived type. Is it valid to just construct a shared_ptr from this directly? Edit: In a related question, how can I move from an rvalue of type shared_ptr<base> to a type of shared_ptr<derived>? I used dynamic_cast to verify that it really was the correct type, but now I can't seem to accomplish the actual move.

    Read the article

  • std::bind overload resolution

    - by bpw1621
    The following code works fine #include <functional> using namespace std; using namespace std::placeholders; class A { int operator()( int i, int j ) { return i - j; } }; A a; auto aBind = bind( &A::operator(), ref(a), _2, _1 ); This does not #include <functional> using namespace std; using namespace std::placeholders; class A { int operator()( int i, int j ) { return i - j; } int operator()( int i ) { return -i; } }; A a; auto aBind = bind( &A::operator(), ref(a), _2, _1 ); I have tried playing around with the syntax to try and explicitly resolve which function I want in the code that does not work without luck so far. How do I write the bind line in order to choose the call that takes the two integer arguments?

    Read the article

  • what to use in place of std::map::emplace?

    - by kfmfe04
    For containers such as std::map< std::string, std::unique_ptr< Foo >>, it looks like emplace() has yet to be implemented in stdc++ as of gcc 4.7.2. Unfortunately, I can't store Foo directly by value as it is an abstract super-class. As a simple, but inefficient, place-holder, I've just been using std::map< std::string, Foo* > in conjunction with a std::vector< std::unique_ptr< Foo >> for garbage collection. Do you have a interim solution that is more efficient and more easily replaced once emplace() is available?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Why this doesnt't work in C++?

    - by user3377450
    I'm doing something and I have this: //main.cpp file template<typename t1, typename t2> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair<t1, t2>& pair) { return os << "< " << pair.first << " , " << pair.second << " >"; } int main() { std::map<int, int> map = { { 1, 2 }, { 2, 3 } }; std::cout << *map.begin() << std::endl;//This works std::copy(map.begin(), map.end(), std::ostream_iterator<std::pair<int,int> >(std::cout, " "));//this doesn't work } I guess this is not working because in the std::copy algorithm the operator isn't defined, but what can I do?

    Read the article

  • what's the job of std::unique_lock when used with std::conditional_variable::wait()

    - by Mike
    I'm quite confused with the need of a std::unique_lock when wait a std::conditional_variable. So I look into the library code in VS 2013 and get more confused. This is how std::conditional_variable::wait() implemented: void wait(unique_lock<mutex>& _Lck) { // wait for signal _Cnd_waitX(&_Cnd, &_Lck.mutex()->_Mtx); } Is this some kind of joke? Wrap a mutex in a unique_lock and do nothing but get it back latter? Why not just use mutex in the parameter list?

    Read the article

  • What encoding does c32rtomb convert to?

    - by R. Martinho Fernandes
    The functions c32rtomb and mbrtoc32 from <cuchar>/<uchar.h> are described in the C Unicode TR (draft) as performing conversions between UTF-321 and "multibyte characters". (...) If s is not a null pointer, the c32rtomb function determines the number of bytes needed to represent the multibyte character that corresponds to the wide character given by c32 (including any shift sequences), and stores the multibyte character representation in the array whose first element is pointed to by s. (...) What is this "multibyte character representation"? I'm actually interested in the behaviour of the following program: #include <cassert> #include <cuchar> #include <string> int main() { std::u32string u32 = U"this is a wide string"; std::string narrow = "this is a wide string"; std::string converted(1000, '\0'); char* ptr = &converted[0]; std::mbstate_t state {}; for(auto u : u32) { ptr += std::c32rtomb(ptr, u, &state); } converted.resize(ptr - &converted[0]); assert(converted == narrow); } Is the assertion in it guaranteed to hold1? 1 Working under the assumption that __STDC_UTF_32__ is defined.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191  | Next Page >