Search Results

Search found 1466 results on 59 pages for 'sizeof'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 2/59 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • SFINAE + sizeof = detect if expression compiles

    - by FredOverflow
    I just found out how to check if operator<< is provided for a type. template<class T> T& lvalue_of_type(); template<class T> T rvalue_of_type(); template<class T> struct is_printable { template<class U> static char test(char(*)[sizeof( lvalue_of_type<std::ostream>() << rvalue_of_type<U>() )]); template<class U> static long test(...); enum { value = 1 == sizeof test<T>(0) }; typedef boost::integral_constant<bool, value> type; }; Is this trick well-known, or have I just won the metaprogramming Nobel prize? ;) EDIT: I made the code simpler to understand and easier to adapt with two global function template declarations lvalue_of_type and rvalue_of_type.

    Read the article

  • c++ struct size

    - by kiokko89
    struct CExample { int a; } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { CExample ce; CExample ce2; cout << "Size:" << sizeof(ce)<< " Address: "<< &ce<< endl; cout << "Size:" << sizeof(ce2)<< " Address: "<< &ce2 << endl; CExample ceArr[2]; cout << "Size:" << sizeof(ceArr[0])<< " Address: "<<&ceArr[0]<<endl; cout << "Size:" << sizeof(ceArr[1])<< " Address: "<<&ceArr[1]<<endl; return 0; } Excuse me I'm just a beginner but i'd like to know why with this code, there is a difference of 12 bytes between the addresses of the first two objects(ce and ce2) (i thought about data allignment), but there is only a difference of 4 bytes between the two objects in the array. Sorry for my bad English...

    Read the article

  • Using sizeof operator on a typedef-ed struct

    - by sskanitk
    This might be something too obvious. However, I couldn't find the specific answer though many stackoverflow threads talk about different aspects of this. typedef struct _tmp { unsigned int a; unsigned int b; } tmp; int main() { int c=10; if (c <= sizeof tmp) { printf("less\n"); } else { printf("more\n"); } return 0; } I compile this prog as - g++ -lstdc++ a.cpp I get an error - expected primary-expression before ‘)’ token I think I am missing something very obvious and straightforward. But can't seem to pinpoint it :-/ Thanks!

    Read the article

  • doubt in sizeof implementation

    - by aks
    Below is the program to find the size of a structure without using sizeof operator: struct MyStruct { int i; int j; }; int main() { struct MyStruct *p=0; int size = ((char*)(p+1))-((char*)p); printf("\nSIZE : [%d]\nSIZE : [%d]\n", size); return 0; } My doubt is: Why is typecasting to char * required? If I don't use the char* pointer, the output is 1 - WHY?

    Read the article

  • Interop c# using a "long" from c++

    - by Daniel
    On my System: sizeof(long) in c++ is 4 aka 32bits sizeof(long) in c# is 8 aka 64 bits So in my Interop method declarations I've been substituting c++ longs with c# int's however I get the feeling this isn't safe? Why is a long the same size as an int in c++? And long long is 64bits? What's next a long long long long??

    Read the article

  • String manipulation in Linux kernel module

    - by user577066
    I am having a hard time in manipulating strings while writing module for linux. My problem is that I have a int Array[10] with different values in it. I need to produce a string to be able send to the buffer in my_read procedure. If my array is {0,1,112,20,4,0,0,0,0,0} then my output should be: 0:(0) 1:-(1) 2:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(112) 3:--------------------(20) 4:----(4) 5:(0) 6:(0) 7:(0) 8:(0) 9:(0) when I try to place the above strings in char[] arrays some how weird characters end up there here is the code int my_read (char *page, char **start, off_t off, int count, int *eof, void *data) { int len; if (off > 0){ *eof =1; return 0; } /* get process tree */ int task_dep=0; /* depth of a task from INIT*/ get_task_tree(&init_task,task_dep); char tmp[1024]; char A[ProcPerDepth[0]],B[ProcPerDepth[1]],C[ProcPerDepth[2]],D[ProcPerDepth[3]],E[ProcPerDepth[4]],F[ProcPerDepth[5]],G[ProcPerDepth[6]],H[ProcPerDepth[7]],I[ProcPerDepth[8]],J[ProcPerDepth[9]]; int i=0; for (i=0;i<1024;i++){ tmp[i]='\0';} memset(A, '\0', sizeof(A));memset(B, '\0', sizeof(B));memset(C, '\0', sizeof(C)); memset(D, '\0', sizeof(D));memset(E, '\0', sizeof(E));memset(F, '\0', sizeof(F)); memset(G, '\0', sizeof(G));memset(H, '\0', sizeof(H));memset(I, '\0', sizeof(I));memset(J, '\0', sizeof(J)); printk("A:%s\nB:%s\nC:%s\nD:%s\nE:%s\nF:%s\nG:%s\nH:%s\nI:%s\nJ:%s\n",A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J); memset(A,'-',sizeof(A)); memset(B,'-',sizeof(B)); memset(C,'-',sizeof(C)); memset(D,'-',sizeof(D)); memset(E,'-',sizeof(E)); memset(F,'-',sizeof(F)); memset(G,'-',sizeof(G)); memset(H,'-',sizeof(H)); memset(I,'-',sizeof(I)); memset(J,'-',sizeof(J)); printk("A:%s\nB:%s\nC:%s\nD:%s\nE:%s\nF:%s\nG:%s\nH:%s\nI:%s\nJ:%\n",A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J); len = sprintf(page,"0:%s(%d)\n1:%s(%d)\n2:%s(%d)\n3:%s(%d)\n4:%s(%d)\n5:%s(%d)\n6:%s(%d)\n7:%s(%d)\n8:%s(%d)\n9:%s(%d)\n",A,ProcPerDepth[0],B,ProcPerDepth[1],C,ProcPerDepth[2],D,ProcPerDepth[3],E,ProcPerDepth[4],F,ProcPerDepth[5],G,ProcPerDepth[6],H,ProcPerDepth[7],I,ProcPerDepth[8],J,ProcPerDepth[9]); return len; }

    Read the article

  • Potential problem with C standard malloc'ing chars.

    - by paxdiablo
    When answering a comment to another answer of mine here, I found what I think may be a hole in the C standard (c1x, I haven't checked the earlier ones and yes, I know it's incredibly unlikely that I alone among all the planet's inhabitants have found a bug in the standard). Information follows: Section 6.5.3.4 ("The sizeof operator") para 2 states "The sizeof operator yields the size (in bytes) of its operand". Para 3 of that section states: "When applied to an operand that has type char, unsigned char, or signed char, (or a qualified version thereof) the result is 1". Section 7.20.3.3 describes void *malloc(size_t sz) but all it says is "The malloc function allocates space for an object whose size is specified by size and whose value is indeterminate". It makes no mention at all what units are used for the argument. Annex E startes the 8 is the minimum value for CHAR_BIT so chars can be more than one byte in length. My question is simply this: In an environment where a char is 16 bits wide, will malloc(10 * sizeof(char)) allocate 10 chars (20 bytes) or 10 bytes? Point 1 above seems to indicate the former, point 2 indicates the latter. Anyone with more C-standard-fu than me have an answer for this?

    Read the article

  • How to create static method that evaluates local static variable once?

    - by Viet
    I have a class with static method which has a local static variable. I want that variable to be computed/evaluated once (the 1st time I call the function) and for any subsequent invocation, it is not evaluated anymore. How to do that? Here's my class: template< typename T1 = int, unsigned N1 = 1, typename T2 = int, unsigned N2 = 0, typename T3 = int, unsigned N3 = 0, typename T4 = int, unsigned N4 = 0, typename T5 = int, unsigned N5 = 0, typename T6 = int, unsigned N6 = 0, typename T7 = int, unsigned N7 = 0, typename T8 = int, unsigned N8 = 0, typename T9 = int, unsigned N9 = 0, typename T10 = int, unsigned N10 = 0, typename T11 = int, unsigned N11 = 0, typename T12 = int, unsigned N12 = 0, typename T13 = int, unsigned N13 = 0, typename T14 = int, unsigned N14 = 0, typename T15 = int, unsigned N15 = 0, typename T16 = int, unsigned N16 = 0> struct GroupAlloc { static const uint32_t sizeClass; static uint32_t getSize() { static uint32_t totalSize = 0; totalSize += sizeof(T1)*N1; totalSize += sizeof(T2)*N2; totalSize += sizeof(T3)*N3; totalSize += sizeof(T4)*N4; totalSize += sizeof(T5)*N5; totalSize += sizeof(T6)*N6; totalSize += sizeof(T7)*N7; totalSize += sizeof(T8)*N8; totalSize += sizeof(T9)*N9; totalSize += sizeof(T10)*N10; totalSize += sizeof(T11)*N11; totalSize += sizeof(T12)*N12; totalSize += sizeof(T13)*N13; totalSize += sizeof(T14)*N14; totalSize += sizeof(T15)*N15; totalSize += sizeof(T16)*N16; totalSize = 8*((totalSize + 7)/8); return totalSize; } };

    Read the article

  • memcpy(), what should the value of the size parameter be?

    - by Tomas
    Hi, I want to copy an int array to another int array. They use the same define for length so they'll always be of the same length. What are the pros/cons of the following two alternatives of the size parameter to memcpy()? memcpy(dst, src, ARRAY_LENGTH*sizeof(int)); or memcpy(dst, src, sizeof(dst); Will the second option always work? Regardless of the content? One thing that favors the last one is that if the array were to change, it'll be some house-keeping to update the memcpy()'s. Thanks

    Read the article

  • how to get the size of a C global array into an assembly program written for the avr architecture co

    - by johannes
    I have a .c file with the following uint8_t buffer[32] I have a .S file where I want to do the following cpi r29, buffer+sizeof(buffer) The second argument for cpi muste be an imidiate value not a location. But unfortunetly sizeof() is a c operator. Both files, are getting compiled to seperate object files and linked afterwards. If I do avr-objdump -x file.c. Amongst other things, I get the size of the buffer. So it is already available in the object file. How do I access the size of the buffer in my assembly file at compile time?

    Read the article

  • Is the size of a struct required to be an exact multiple of the alignment of that struct?

    - by Steve314
    Once again, I'm questioning a longstanding belief. Until today, I believed that the alignment of the following struct would normally be 4 and the size would normally be 5... struct example { int m_Assume_32_Bits; char m_Assume_8_Bit_Bytes; }; Because of this assumption, I have data structure code that uses offsetof to determine the distance in bytes between two adjacent items in an array. Today, I spotted some old code that was using sizeof where it shouldn't, couldn't understand why I hadn't had bugs from it, coded up a unit test - and the test surprised me by passing. A bit of investigation showed that the sizeof the type I used for the test (similar to the struct above) was an exact multiple of the alignment - ie 8 bytes. It had padding after the final member. Here is an example of why I never expected this... struct example2 { example m_Example; char m_Why_Cant_This_Be_At_Offset_6_Bytes; }; A bit of Googling showed examples that make it clear that this padding after the final member is allowed - for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_structure_alignment#Data_structure_padding (the "or at the end of the structure" bit). This is a bit embarrassing, as I recently posted this comment - Use of struct padding (my first comment to that answer). What I can't seem to determine is whether this padding to an exact multiple of the alignment is guaranteed by the C++ standard, or whether it is just something that is permitted and that some (but maybe not all) compilers do. So - is the size of a struct required to be an exact multiple of the alignment of that struct according to the C++ standard? If the C standard makes different guarantees, I'm interested in that too, but the focus is on C++.

    Read the article

  • Write raw struct contents (bytes) to a file in C. Confused about actual size written

    - by d11wtq
    Basic question, but I expected this struct to occupy 13 bytes of space (1 for the char, 12 for the 3 unsigned ints). Instead, sizeof(ESPR_REL_HEADER) gives me 16 bytes. typedef struct { unsigned char version; unsigned int root_node_num; unsigned int node_size; unsigned int node_count; } ESPR_REL_HEADER; What I'm trying to do is initialize this struct with some values and write the data it contains (the raw bytes) to the start of a file, so that when I open this file I later I can reconstruct this struct and gain some meta data about what the rest of the file contains. I'm initializing the struct and writing it to the file like this: int esprime_write_btree_header(FILE * fp, unsigned int node_size) { ESPR_REL_HEADER header = { .version = 1, .root_node_num = 0, .node_size = node_size, .node_count = 1 }; return fwrite(&header, sizeof(ESPR_REL_HEADER), 1, fp); } Where node_size is currently 4 while I experiment. The file contains the following data after I write the struct to it: -bash$ hexdump test.dat 0000000 01 bf f9 8b 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 0000010 I expect it to actually contain: -bash$ hexdump test.dat 0000000 01 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 0000010 Excuse the newbiness. I am trying to learn :) How do I efficiently write just the data components of my struct to a file?

    Read the article

  • Can the size of a structure change after compiled?

    - by Sarah Altiva
    Hi, suppose you have the following structure: #include <windows.h> // BOOL is here. #include <stdio.h> typedef struct { BOOL someBool; char someCharArray[100]; int someIntValue; BOOL moreBools, anotherOne, yetAgain; char someOthercharArray[23]; int otherInt; } Test; int main(void) { printf("Structure size: %d, BOOL size: %d.\n", sizeof(Test), sizeof(BOOL)); } When I compile this piece of code in my machine (32-bit OS) the output is the following: Structure size: 148, BOOL size: 4. I would like to know if, once compiled, these values may change depending on the machine which runs the program. E.g.: if I ran this program in a 64-bit machine, would the output be the same? Or once it's compiled it'll always be the same? Thank you very much, and forgive me if the answer to this question is obvious...

    Read the article

  • Size of abstract class

    - by webgenius
    How can I find the size of an abstract class? class A { virtual void PureVirtualFunction() = 0; }; Since this is an abstract class, I can't create objects of this class. How will I be able to find the size of the abstract class A using the 'sizeof' operator?

    Read the article

  • Is return an operator or a function?

    - by eSKay
    This is too basic I think, but how do both of these work? return true; // 1 and return (true); // 2 Similar: sizeof, exit My guess: If return was a function, 1 would be erroneous. So, return should be a unary operator that can also take in brackets... pretty much like unary minus: -5 and -(5), both are okay. Is that what it is - a unary operator?

    Read the article

  • Convert a byte array to a class containing a byte array in C#

    - by Mathijs
    I've got a C# function that converts a byte array to a class, given it's type: IntPtr buffer = Marshal.AllocHGlobal(rawsize); Marshal.Copy(data, 0, buffer, rawsize); object result = Marshal.PtrToStructure(buffer, type); Marshal.FreeHGlobal(buffer); I use sequential structs: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public new class PacketFormat : Packet.PacketFormat { } This worked fine, until I tried to convert to a struct/class containing a byte array. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public new class PacketFormat : Packet.PacketFormat { public byte header; public byte[] data = new byte[256]; } Marshal.SizeOf(type) returns 16, which is too low (should be 257) and causes Marshal.PtrToStructure to fail with the following error: Attempted to read or write protected memory. This is often an indication that other memory is corrupt. I'm guessing that using a fixed array would be a solution, but can it also be done without having to resort to unsafe code?

    Read the article

  • Struct size containing vector<T> different sizes between DLL and EXE..

    - by Michael Peddicord
    I have this situation where an EXE program imports a DLL for a single function call. It works by passing in a custom structure and returning a different custom structure. Up till now it's worked fine until I wanted one of the structs data members to be a vector < MyStruct When I do a sizeof(vector< MyStruct ) in my program I get a size of 20 but when I do it from inside the DLL I get a size of 24. This size inconsistency is causing a ESP pointer error. Can anyone tell me why a Vector < MyStruct would be a different size in the DLL than in the program? I have reverified that my structs in both the DLL and the Program are identical. I would appreciate any help on the subject. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Simple 'database' in c++

    - by DevAno1
    Hello. My task was to create pseudodatabase in c++. There are 3 tables given, that store name(char*), age(int), and sex (bool). Write a program allowing to : - add new data to the tables - show all records - sort tables with criteria : - name increasing/decreasing - age increasing/decreasing - sex Using function templates is a must. Also size of arrays must be variable, depending on the amount of records. I have some code but there are still problems there. Here's what I have: Function tabSize() for returning size of array. But currently it returns size of pointer I guess : #include <iostream> using namespace std; template<typename TYPE> int tabSize(TYPE *T) { int size = 0; size = sizeof(T) / sizeof(T[0]); return size; } How to make it return size of array, not its pointer ? Next the most important : add() for adding new elements. Inside first I get the size of array (but hence it returns value of pointer, and not size it's of no use now :/). Then I think I must check if TYPE of data is char. Or am I wrong ? // add(newElement, table) template<typename TYPE> TYPE add(TYPE L, TYPE *T) { int s = tabSize(T); //here check if TYPE = char. If yes, get the length of the new name int len = 0; while (L[len] != '\0') { len++; } //current length of table int tabLen = 0; while (T[tabLen] != '\0') { tabLen++; } //if TYPE is char //if current length of table + length of new element exceeds table size create new table if(len + tabLen > s) { int newLen = len + tabLen; TYPE newTab = new [newLen]; for(int j=0; j < newLen; j++ ){ if(j == tabLen -1){ for(int k = 0; k < len; k++){ newTab[k] = } } else { newTab[j] = T[j]; } } } //else check if tabLen + 1 is greater than s. If yes enlarge table by 1. } Am I thinking correct here ? Last functions show() is correct I guess : template<typename TYPE> TYPE show(TYPE *L) { int len = 0; while (L[len] == '\0') { len++; } for(int i=0; i<len; i++) { cout << L[i] << endl; } } and problem with sort() is as follows : Ho can I influence if sorting is decreasing or increasing ? I'm using bubble sort here. template<typename TYPE> TYPE sort(TYPE *L, int sort) { int s = tabSize(L); int len = 0; while (L[len] == '\0') { len++; } //add control increasing/decreasing sort int i,j; for(i=0;i<len;i++) { for(j=0;j<i;j++) { if(L[i]>L[j]) { int temp=L[i]; L[i]=L[j]; L[j]=temp; } } } } And main function to run it : int main() { int sort=0; //0 increasing, 1 decreasing char * name[100]; int age[10]; bool sex[10]; char c[] = "Tom"; name[0] = "John"; name[1] = "Mike"; cout << add(c, name) << endl; system("pause"); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Writing complex records to file

    - by DrSobhani
    Hi I have defined some records in my project which may be consisted of other records and also dynamic arrays of normal data types and other records , it is n example of a record type Type1=record x:integer; end; Type2=record Y:array of X; str:string; end; When I tried to save one of variables of these records type to file with blockwrite function like this : var Temp1:Type2; begin setlength(temp1.y,100); blockwrite(MyFile,Temp1,sizeOf(Temp1); it just wrote as much as the size of pure record is ,but temp1 has a dynmic arrays which is resized , Could someone please tell me how I can write a complex record to a file , I mean something like what is used in VB6 . Thanks

    Read the article

  • Memory allocation problem C/Cpp Windows critical error

    - by Andrew
    Hi! I have a code that need to be "translated" from C to Cpp, and i cant understand, where's a problem. There is the part, where it crashes (windows critical error send/dontSend): nDim = sizeMax*(sizeMax+1)/2; printf("nDim = %d sizeMax = %d\n",nDim,sizeMax); hamilt = (double*)malloc(nDim*sizeof(double)); printf("End hamilt alloc. %d allocated\n",(nDim*sizeof(double))); transProb = (double*)malloc(sizeMax*sizeMax*sizeof(double)); printf("End transProb alloc. %d allocated\n",(sizeMax*sizeMax*sizeof(double))); eValues = (double*)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double)); printf("eValues allocated. %d allocated\n",(sizeMax*sizeof(double))); eVectors = (double**)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double*)); printf("eVectors allocated. %d allocated\n",(sizeMax*sizeof(double*))); if(eVectors) for(i=0;i<sizeMax;i++) { eVectors[i] = (double*)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double)); printf("eVectors %d-th element allocated. %d allocated\n",i,(sizeMax*sizeof(double))); } eValuesPrev = (double*)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double)); printf("eValuesPrev allocated. %d allocated\n",(sizeMax*sizeof(double))); eVectorsPrev = (double**)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double*)); printf("eVectorsPrev allocated. %d allocated\n",(sizeMax*sizeof(double*))); if(eVectorsPrev) for(i=0;i<sizeMax;i++) { eVectorsPrev[i] = (double*)malloc(sizeMax*sizeof(double)); printf("eVectorsPrev %d-th element allocated. %d allocated\n",i,(sizeMax*sizeof(double))); } Log: nDim = 2485 sizeMax = 70 End hamilt alloc. 19880 allocated End transProb alloc. 39200 allocated eValues allocated. 560 allocated eVectors allocated. 280 allocated So it crashes at the start of the loop of allocation. If i delete this loop it crashes at the next line of allocation. Does it mean that with the numbers like this i have not enough memory?? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Custom byte size?

    - by thyrgle
    So, you know how the primitive of type char has the size of 1 byte? How would I make a primitive with a custom size? So like instead of an in int with the size of 4 bytes I make one with size of lets say 16. Is there a way to do this? Is there a way around it?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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