Search Results

Search found 870 results on 35 pages for 'allocation'.

Page 2/35 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • C dynamic memory allocation for table of structs

    - by JosiP
    Hi here is my code. I want to dynamincly change no of elemnts in table with structs __state: typedef struct __state{ long int timestamp; int val; int prev_value; }*state_p, state_t; int main(int argc, char **argv){ int zm; int previous_state = 0; int state = 0; int i = 0; int j; state_p st; //here i want to have 20 structs st. st = (state_p) malloc(sizeof(state_t) * 20); while(1){ previous_state = state; scanf("%d", &state); printf("%d, %d\n", state, previous_state); if (previous_state != state){ printf("state changed %d %d\n", previous_state, state); // here i got compile error: main.c: In function ‘main’: main.c:30: error: incompatible type for argument 1 of ‘save_state’ main.c:34: error: invalid type argument of ‘->’ main.c:34: error: invalid type argument of ‘->’ save_state(st[i],previous_state, state); } i++; } return 0; } I suppose i have to change that st[i] to smth like st+ptr ? where pointer is incermeting in each loop iteration ? Or am I wrong ? When i change code: initialization into state_p st[20] and in each loop iteration i put st[i] = (state_p)malloc(sizeof(state_t)) everything works fine, but i want to dynammicly change number of elemets in that table. Thx in advance for any help

    Read the article

  • Class members allocation on heap/stack? C++

    - by simplebutperfect
    If a class is declared as follows: class MyClass { char * MyMember; MyClass() { MyMember = new char[250]; } ~MyClass() { delete[] MyMember; } }; And it could be done like this: class MyClass { char MyMember[250]; }; How does a class gets allocated on heap, like if i do MyClass * Mine = new MyClass(); Does the allocated memory also allocates the 250 bytes in the second example along with the class instantiation? And will the member be valid for the whole lifetime of MyClass object? As for the first example, is it practical to allocate class members on heap?

    Read the article

  • Dynamic stack allocation in C++

    - by Poni
    I want to allocate memory on the stack. Heard of _alloca / alloca and I understand that these are compiler-specific stuff, which I don't like. So, I came-up with my own solution (which might have it's own flaws) and I want you to review/improve it so for once and for all we'll have this code working: /*#define allocate_on_stack(pointer, size) \ __asm \ { \ mov [pointer], esp; \ sub esp, [size]; \ }*/ /*#define deallocate_from_stack(size) \ __asm \ { \ add esp, [size]; \ }*/ void test() { int buff_size = 4 * 2; char *buff = 0; __asm { // allocate mov [buff], esp; sub esp, [buff_size]; } // playing with the stack-allocated memory for(int i = 0; i < buff_size; i++) buff[i] = 0x11; __asm { // deallocate add esp, [buff_size]; } } void main() { __asm int 3h; test(); } Compiled with VC9. What flaws do you see in it? Me for example, not sure that subtracting from ESP is the solution for "any kind of CPU". Also, I'd like to make the commented-out macros work but for some reason I can't.

    Read the article

  • Private member vector of vector dynamic memory allocation

    - by Geoffroy
    Hello, I'm new to C++ (I learned programming with Fortran), and I would like to allocate dynamically the memory for a multidimensional table. This table is a private member variable : class theclass{ public: void setdim(void); private: std::vector < std::vector <int> > thetable; } I would like to set the dimension of thetable with the function setdim(). void theclass::setdim(void){ this->thetable.assign(1000,std::vector <int> (2000)); } I have no problem compiling this program, but as I execute it, I've got a segmentation fault. The strange thing for me is that this piece (see under) of code does exactly what I want, except that it doesn't uses the private member variable of my class : std::vector < std::vector < int > > thetable; thetable.assign(1000,std::vector <int> (2000)); By the way, I have no trouble if thetable is a 1D vector. In theclass : std::vector < int > thetable; and if in setdim : this->thetable.assign(1000,2); So my question is : why is there such a difference with "assign" between thetable and this-thetable for a 2D vector? And how should I do to do what I want? Thank-you for your help, Best regards, -- Geoffroy

    Read the article

  • C vs. C++ for performance in memory allocation

    - by Andrei
    Hi, I am planning to participate in development of a code written in C language for Monte Carlo analysis of complex problems. This codes allocates huge data arrays in memory to speed up its performance, therefore the author of the code has chosen C instead of C++ claiming that one can make faster and more reliable (concerning memory leaks) code with C. Do you agree with that? What would be your choice, if you need to store 4-16 Gb of data arrays in memory during calculation?

    Read the article

  • Understanding C++ dynamic allocation

    - by kiokko89
    Consider the following code: class CString { private: char* buff; size_t len; public: CString(const char* p):len(0), buff(nullptr) { cout << "Constructor called!"<<endl; if (p!=nullptr) { len= strlen(p); if (len>0) { buff= new char[len+1]; strcpy_s(buff, len+1, p); } } } CString (const CString& s) { cout << "Copy constructor called!"<<endl; len= s.len; buff= new char[len+1]; strcpy_s(buff, len+1, s.buff); } CString& operator = (const CString& rhs) { cout << "Assignment operator called!"<<endl; if (this != &rhs) { len= rhs.len; delete[] buff; buff= new char[len+1]; strcpy_s(buff, len+1, rhs.buff); } return *this; } CString operator + (const CString& rhs) const { cout << "Addition operator called!"<<endl; size_t lenght= len+rhs.len+1; char* tmp = new char[lenght]; strcpy_s(tmp, lenght, buff); strcat_s(tmp, lenght, rhs.buff); return CString(tmp); } ~CString() { cout << "Destructor called!"<<endl; delete[] buff; } }; int main() { CString s1("Hello"); CString s2("World"); CString s3 = s1+s2; } My problem is that I don't know how to delete the memory allocated in the addition operator function(char* tmp = new char[length]). I couldn't do this in the constructor(I tried delete[] p) because it is also called from the main function with arrays of chars as parameters which are not allocated on the heap...How can I get around this? (Sorry for my bad English...)

    Read the article

  • C++ Dynamic Allocation Mismatch: Is this problematic?

    - by acanaday
    I have been assigned to work on some legacy C++ code in MFC. One of the things I am finding all over the place are allocations like the following: struct Point { float x,y,z; }; ... void someFunc( void ) { int numPoints = ...; Point* pArray = (Point*)new BYTE[ numPoints * sizeof(Point) ]; ... //do some stuff with points ... delete [] pArray; } I realize that this code is atrociously wrong on so many levels (C-style cast, using new like malloc, confusing, etc). I also realize that if Point had defined a constructor it would not be called and weird things would happen at delete [] if a destructor had been defined. Question: I am in the process of fixing these occurrences wherever they appear as a matter of course. However, I have never seen anything like this before and it has got me wondering. Does this code have the potential to cause memory leaks/corruption as it stands currently (no constructor/destructor, but with pointer type mismatch) or is it safe as long as the array just contains structs/primitive types?

    Read the article

  • c: memory allocation (what's going on)

    - by facha
    Hi, everyone Please take a look at this piece of code. I'm allocating one byte for the first variable and another byte for the second one. However, it seems like the compiler allocates more (or I'm missing something). The program outputs both strings, even though their length is more the one byte. void main() { char* some1 = malloc(1); sprintf(some1,"cool"); char* some2 = malloc(1); sprintf(some2,"face"); printf("%s ",some1); printf("%s\n",some2); } Please, could anyone spot some light on what's going on when memory is being allocated.

    Read the article

  • C++ new memory allocation fragmentation

    - by tamulj
    I was trying to look at the behavior of the new allocator and why it doesn't place data contiguously. My code: struct ci { char c; int i; } template <typename T> void memTest() { T * pLast = new T(); for(int i = 0; i < 20; ++i) { T * pNew = new T(); cout << (pNew - pLast) << " "; pLast = pNew; } } So I ran this with char, int, ci. Most allocations were a fixed length from the last, sometimes there were odd jumps from one available block to another. sizeof(char) : 1 Average Jump: 64 bytes sizeof(int): 4 Average Jump: 16 sizeof(ci): 8 (int has to be placed on a 4 byte align) Average Jump: 9 Can anyone explain why the allocator is fragmenting memory like this? Also why is the jump for char so much larger then ints and a structure that contains both an int and char.

    Read the article

  • C++ Memory allocation question involving vectors

    - by TheFuzz
    vector< int > vect; int *int_ptr = new int(10); vect.push_back( *int_ptr ); I under stand that every "new" needs to be followed by a "delete" at some point but does the clear() method clean this memory? What about this method of doing the same thing: vector< int > vect; int int_var = 10; vect.push_back( int_var ); From what I understand, clear() calls the variables destructors, but both vect.push_back() methods in this example push an object on the vector, not a pointer. so does the first example using an int pointer need something other than clear() to clean up memory?

    Read the article

  • Memory allocation in Linux

    - by Goofy
    Hello! I have a multi threaded application where I allocate buffers with data, which then wait in queues to be send via sockets. All buffers are reproducible because I use only buffers of fixed size in whole program (1024, 2048, 2080 and 5248 bytes). I noticed, that my program usually use up to 10 buffers of each length type at the same moment. So far I always manually allocate new buffer and then free it (using malloc() and free ()) where it's not needed any more. I started wondering if Linux is enough smart to cache this memory for me, so next time I allocate new buffer system only quickly receive a buffer I have already used before and not perform heavy operation of allocating new memory block?

    Read the article

  • [C]Dynamic allocation memory of structure, related to GTK

    - by MakeItWork
    Hello, I have following structure: typedef struct { GtkWidget* PoziomaLinijka; GtkWidget* PionowaLinijka; GtkWidget* Label1; GtkWidget* Label2; gint x,y; } StrukturaDrawing; And i need to allocate it on the heap because later I have functions which uses that structure and I don't want to use global variables. So I allocate it like this: StrukturaDrawing* Wsk; Wsk = (StrukturaDrawing*)malloc(sizeof(StrukturaDrawing)); if (!Wsk) { printf("Error\n"); } And it doesn't returning error and also works great with other functions, it works the way I wanted it to work so finally i wanted to free that memory and here is problem because in Debug Mode compilator bitches: First-chance exception at 0x102d12b4 in GTK.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xfffffffc. Unhandled exception at 0x102d12b4 in GTK.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xfffffffc. I connect callback to my function, like that: g_signal_connect(G_OBJECT(Okno), "destroy", G_CALLBACK(Wyjscie), Wsk); Function which is suppose to free memory and close program: void Wyjscie(GtkWindow* window, GdkEvent* event, StrukturaDrawing* data) { gtk_main_quit(); free(data); data = NULL; } Any help really appreciated.

    Read the article

  • GL Expense Allocation in OPM Actual Costing

    - by Annemarie Provisero
    ADVISOR WEBCAST:  GL Expense Allocation in OPM Actual Costing PRODUCT FAMILY: Oracle Process Manufacturing     March 16, 2011 at 8 am PT, 9 am MT, 11 am ET This session is designed for customers and functional users, and discusses the setups necessary for expense allocation (flow of expenses from general ledger balances to Oracle Process Manufacturing Costing then back to GL, Examples include screen shots of test cases). TOPICS WILL INCLUDE: Concept of GL expense allocation in OPM. Situation where this functionality is more suitable. Setups needed to make this work. Examples with screen shots (Performed test cases). Known gaps in this functionality. A short, live demonstration (only if applicable) and question and answer period will be included. Oracle Advisor Webcasts are dedicated to building your awareness around our products and services. This session does not replace offerings from Oracle Global Support Services. Click here to register for this session ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above webcast is a service of the E-Business Suite Communities in My Oracle Support.For more information on other webcasts, please reference the Oracle Advisor Webcast Schedule.Click here to visit the E-Business Communities in My Oracle Support Note that all links require access to My Oracle Support.

    Read the article

  • error of pdf2djvu: "Bogus memory allocation size"

    - by Tim
    I am using pdf2djvu to convert a pdf file into a djvu file, but got this error while trying to convert to either bundled or indirect multi-page djvu file: $ pdf2djvu 1.pdf -o 1.djvu 1.pdf: - page #1 -> #1 Bogus memory allocation size $ pdf2djvu 1.pdf -i 1.djvu 1.pdf: - page #1 -> #1 Bogus memory allocation size I was wondering what is wrong here and how I shall fix the problem? You can suggest another application other than pdf2djvu. My pdf file can be downloaded from here , in case that you may wonder what is special about it. Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • How to fix error in pdf2djvu: "Bogus memory allocation size"

    - by Tim
    I am using pdf2djvu to convert a pdf file into a djvu file, but got this error while trying to convert either bundled or indirect multi-page djvu file: $ pdf2djvu 1.pdf -o 1.djvu 1.pdf: - page #1 -> #1 Bogus memory allocation size $ pdf2djvu 1.pdf -i 1.djvu 1.pdf: - page #1 -> #1 Bogus memory allocation size I was wondering what is wrong here and how I shall fix the problem? You can suggest another application other than pdf2djvu. To convert it to djvu My pdf file can be downloaded from here , in case that you may wonder what is special about it. Thanks and regards

    Read the article

  • Manual memory allocation and purity

    - by Eonil
    Language like Haskell have concept of purity. In pure function, I can't mutate any state globally. Anyway Haskell fully abstracts memory management, so memory allocation is not a problem here. But if languages can handle memory directly like C++, it's very ambiguous to me. In these languages, memory allocation makes visible mutation. But if I treat making new object as impure action, actually, almost nothing can be pure. So purity concept becomes almost useless. How should I handle purity in languages have memory as visible global object?

    Read the article

  • Implement Budget Allocation in DAX for Power Pivot and Tabular #powerpivot #tabular #ssas #dax

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    Comparing sales and budget, or costs and budget, is a very common operation. However, it is often the case that you have different granularities for different tables containing budget and the data to compare with. There are two ways to do that: you can limit the comparison to the granularity that is common to the two tables, or you can allocate the budget where it’s not defined. For example, if you have a budget defined by quarter and category, you might want to allocate it by month and product. In this way, you will do the comparison as you had a more granular definition of the budget, without actually having to do the manual job of allocating data (usually in an Excel worksheet!). If you want to do budget allocation in DAX, you can use the Budget Patterns we published on DAX Patterns. If you come from and MDX/OLAP background, at first you might find it hard to solve the problem of not having attribute hierarchies that helps you in propagating the budget values to lower hierarchical levels. However, I think that once you get used to DAX, you will find the behavior very predictable and easy to “debug” also for more complex allocation formula. You just have to be careful in writing the DAX formula, but probably the pattern we wrote should help you designing the right data model, without creating physical relationships to the budget table! This pattern is also based on the Handling Different Granularities scenario I discussed a couple of weeks ago.

    Read the article

  • Implement Budget Allocation in DAX for Power Pivot and Tabular #powerpivot #tabular #ssas #dax

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    Comparing sales and budget, or costs and budget, is a very common operation. However, it is often the case that you have different granularities for different tables containing budget and the data to compare with. There are two ways to do that: you can limit the comparison to the granularity that is common to the two tables, or you can allocate the budget where it’s not defined. For example, if you have a budget defined by quarter and category, you might want to allocate it by month and product. In this way, you will do the comparison as you had a more granular definition of the budget, without actually having to do the manual job of allocating data (usually in an Excel worksheet!). If you want to do budget allocation in DAX, you can use the Budget Patterns we published on DAX Patterns. If you come from and MDX/OLAP background, at first you might find it hard to solve the problem of not having attribute hierarchies that helps you in propagating the budget values to lower hierarchical levels. However, I think that once you get used to DAX, you will find the behavior very predictable and easy to “debug” also for more complex allocation formula. You just have to be careful in writing the DAX formula, but probably the pattern we wrote should help you designing the right data model, without creating physical relationships to the budget table! This pattern is also based on the Handling Different Granularities scenario I discussed a couple of weeks ago.

    Read the article

  • Small objects allocator

    - by Felics
    Hello, Has anybody used SmallObjectAllocator from Modern C++ Design by Andrei Alexandrescu in a big project? I want to implement this allocator but I need some opinions about it before using it in my project. I made some tests and it seems very fast, but the tests were made in a small test environment. I want to know how fast it is when are lots of small objects(like events, smart pointers, etc) and how much extra memory it uses.

    Read the article

  • Does allocation speed depend on the garbage collector being used?

    - by jkff
    My app is allocating a ton of objects (1mln per second; most objects are byte arrays of size ~80-100 and strings of the same size) and I think it might be the source of its poor performance. The app's working set is only tens of megabytes. Profiling the app shows that GC time is negligibly small. However, I suspect that perhaps the allocation procedure depends on which GC is being used, and some settings might make allocation faster or perhaps make a positive influence on cache hit rate, etc. Is that so? Or is allocation performance independent on GC settings under the assumption that garbage collection itself takes little time?

    Read the article

  • Best Practices - Core allocation

    - by jsavit
    This post is one of a series of "best practices" notes for Oracle VM Server for SPARC (also called Logical Domains) Introduction SPARC T-series servers currently have up to 4 CPU sockets, each of which has up to 8 or (on SPARC T3) 16 CPU cores, while each CPU core has 8 threads, for a maximum of 512 dispatchable CPUs. The defining feature of Oracle VM Server for SPARC is that each domain is assigned CPU threads or cores for its exclusive use. This avoids the overhead of software-based time-slicing and emulation (or binary rewriting) of system state-changing privileged instructions used in traditional hypervisors. To create a domain, administrators specify either the number of CPU threads or cores that the domain will own, as well as its memory and I/O resources. When CPU resources are assigned at the individual thread level, the logical domains constraint manager attempts to assign threads from the same cores to a domain, and avoid "split core" situations where the same CPU core is used by multiple domains. Sometimes this is unavoidable, especially when domains are allocated and deallocated CPUs in small increments. Why split cores can matter Split core allocations can silenty reduce performance because multiple domains with different address spaces and memory contents are sharing the core's Level 1 cache (L1$). This is called false cache sharing since even identical memory addresses from different domains must point to different locations in RAM. The effect of this is increased contention for the cache, and higher memory latency for each domain using that core. The degree of performance impact can be widely variable. For applications with very small memory working sets, and with I/O bound or low-CPU utilization workloads, it may not matter at all: all machines wait for work at the same speed. If the domains have substantial workloads, or are critical to performance then this can have an important impact: This blog entry was inspired by a customer issue in which one CPU core was split among 3 domains, one of which was the control and service domain. The reported problem was increased I/O latency in guest domains, but the root cause might be higher latency servicing the I/O requests due to the control domain being slowed down. What to do about it Split core situations are easily avoided. In most cases the logical domain constraint manager will avoid it without any administrative action, but it can be entirely prevented by doing one of the several actions: Assign virtual CPUs in multiples of 8 - the number of threads per core. For example: ldm set-vcpu 8 mydomain or ldm add-vcpu 24 mydomain. Each domain will then be allocated on a core boundary. Use the whole core constraint when assigning CPU resources. This allocates CPUs in increments of entire cores instead of virtual CPU threads. The equivalent of the above commands would be ldm set-core 1 mydomain or ldm add-core 3 mydomain. Older syntax does the same thing by adding the -c flag to the add-vcpu, rm-vcpu and set-vcpu commands, but the new syntax is recommended. When whole core allocation is used an attempt to add cores to a domain fails if there aren't enough completely empty cores to satisfy the request. See https://blogs.oracle.com/sharakan/entry/oracle_vm_server_for_sparc4 for an excellent article on this topic by Eric Sharakan. Don't obsess: - if the workloads have minimal CPU requirements and don't need anywhere near a full CPU core, then don't worry about it. If you have low utilization workloads being consolidated from older machines onto a current T-series, then there's no need to worry about this or to assign an entire core to domains that will never use that much capacity. In any case, make sure the most important domains have their own CPU cores, in particular the control domain and any I/O or service domain, and of course any important guests. Summary Split core CPU allocation to domains can potentially have an impact on performance, but the logical domains manager tends to prevent this situation, and it can be completely and simply avoided by allocating virtual CPUs on core boundaries.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Memory Allocation and Memory Management

    - by Bunkai.Satori
    In an average game, there are hundreds or maybe thousands of objects in the scene. Is it completely correct to allocate memory for all objects, including gun shots (bullets), dynamically via default new()? Should I create any memory pool for dynamic allocation, or is there no need to bother with this? What if the target platform are mobile devices? Is there a need for a memory manager in a mobile game, please? Thank you. Language Used: C++; Currently developed under Windows, but planned to be ported later.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >