Search Results

Search found 2508 results on 101 pages for 'ternary operator'.

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 2/101 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • PHP ternary operator

    - by thecoshman
    ($DAO->get_num_rows() == 1) ? echo("is") : echo("are"); This dose not seem to be working for me,I get an error "Unexpected T_ECHO" I have tried it with out the brackets around the conditional. Am I just not able to use a ternary operator in this way? The $DAO-get_num_rows() returns an integer value. Thanks

    Read the article

  • unusual ternary operation

    - by nik
    Hi, I was asked to perform this operation of ternary operator use: $test='one'; echo $test == 'one' ? 'one' : $test == 'two' ? 'two' : 'three'; Which prints two (checked using php). I am still not sure about the logic for this. Please, can anybody tell me the logic for this.

    Read the article

  • Ternary operators in C#

    - by pm_2
    With the ternary operator, it is possible to do something like the following (assuming Func1() and Func2() return an int: int x = (x == y) ? Func1() : Func2(); However, is there any way to do the same thing, without returning a value? For example, something like (assuming Func1() and Func2() return void): (x == y) ? Func1() : Func2(); I realise this could be accomplished using an if statement, I just wondered if there was a way to do it like this.

    Read the article

  • Why does the Ternary\Conditional operator seem significantly faster

    - by Jodrell
    Following on from this question, which I have partially answered. I compile this console app in x64 Release Mode, with optimizations on, and run it from the command line without a debugger attached. using System; using System.Diagnostics; class Program { static void Main() { var stopwatch = new Stopwatch(); var ternary = Looper(10, Ternary); var normal = Looper(10, Normal); if (ternary != normal) { throw new Exception(); } stopwatch.Start(); ternary = Looper(10000000, Ternary); stopWatch.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( "Ternary took {0}ms", stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds); stopwatch.Start(); normal = Looper(10000000, Normal); stopWatch.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( "Normal took {0}ms", stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds); if (ternary != normal) { throw new Exception(); } Console.ReadKey(); } static int Looper(int iterations, Func<bool, int, int> operation) { var result = 0; for (int i = 0; i < iterations; i++) { var condition = result % 11 == 4; var value = ((i * 11) / 3) % 5; result = operation(condition, value); } return result; } static int Ternary(bool condition, in value) { return value + (condition ? 2 : 1); } static int Normal(int iterations) { if (condition) { return = 2 + value; } return = 1 + value; } } I don't get any exceptions and the output to the console is somthing close to, Ternary took 107ms Normal took 230ms When I break down the CIL for the two logical functions I get this, ... Ternary ... { : ldarg.1 // push second arg : ldarg.0 // push first arg : brtrue.s T // if first arg is true jump to T : ldc.i4.1 // push int32(1) : br.s F // jump to F T: ldc.i4.2 // push int32(2) F: add // add either 1 or 2 to second arg : ret // return result } ... Normal ... { : ldarg.0 // push first arg : brfalse.s F // if first arg is false jump to F : ldc.i4.2 // push int32(2) : ldarg.1 // push second arg : add // add second arg to 2 : ret // return result F: ldc.i4.1 // push int32(1) : ldarg.1 // push second arg : add // add second arg to 1 : ret // return result } Whilst the Ternary CIL is a little shorter, it seems to me that the execution path through the CIL for either function takes 3 loads and 1 or 2 jumps and a return. Why does the Ternary function appear to be twice as fast. I underdtand that, in practice, they are both very quick and indeed, quich enough but, I would like to understand the discrepancy.

    Read the article

  • Can I create ternary operators in C# ?

    - by Scott S
    I want to create a ternary operator for a < b < c which is a < b && b < c. or any other option you can think of that a < b c and so on... I am a fan of my own shortform and I have wanted to create that since I learned programming in high school. How?

    Read the article

  • Type result with Ternary operator in C#

    - by Vaccano
    I am trying to use the ternary operator, but I am getting hung up on the type it thinks the result should be. Below is an example that I have contrived to show the issue I am having: class Program { public static void OutputDateTime(DateTime? datetime) { Console.WriteLine(datetime); } public static bool IsDateTimeHappy(DateTime datetime) { if (DateTime.Compare(datetime, DateTime.Parse("1/1")) == 0) return true; return false; } static void Main(string[] args) { DateTime myDateTime = DateTime.Now; OutputDateTime(IsDateTimeHappy(myDateTime) ? null : myDateTime); Console.ReadLine(); ^ } | } | // This line has the compile issue ---------------+ On the line indicated above, I get the following compile error: Type of conditional expression cannot be determined because there is no implicit conversion between '< null ' and 'System.DateTime' I am confused because the parameter is a nullable type (DateTime?). Why does it need to convert at all? If it is null then use that, if it is a date time then use that. I was under the impression that: condition ? first_expression : second_expression; was the same as: if (condition) first_expression; else second_expression; Clearly this is not the case. What is the reasoning behind this? (NOTE: I know that if I make "myDateTime" a nullable DateTime then it will work. But why does it need it? As I stated earlier this is a contrived example. In my real example "myDateTime" is a data mapped value that cannot be made nullable.)

    Read the article

  • Plan Operator Tuesday round-up

    - by Rob Farley
    Eighteen posts for T-SQL Tuesday #43 this month, discussing Plan Operators. I put them together and made the following clickable plan. It’s 1000px wide, so I hope you have a monitor wide enough. Let me explain this plan for you (people’s names are the links to the articles on their blogs – the same links as in the plan above). It was clearly a SELECT statement. Wayne Sheffield (@dbawayne) wrote about that, so we start with a SELECT physical operator, leveraging the logical operator Wayne Sheffield. The SELECT operator calls the Paul White operator, discussed by Jason Brimhall (@sqlrnnr) in his post. The Paul White operator is quite remarkable, and can consume three streams of data. Let’s look at those streams. The first pulls data from a Table Scan – Boris Hristov (@borishristov)’s post – using parallel threads (Bradley Ball – @sqlballs) that pull the data eagerly through a Table Spool (Oliver Asmus – @oliverasmus). A scalar operation is also performed on it, thanks to Jeffrey Verheul (@devjef)’s Compute Scalar operator. The second stream of data applies Evil (I figured that must mean a procedural TVF, but could’ve been anything), courtesy of Jason Strate (@stratesql). It performs this Evil on the merging of parallel streams (Steve Jones – @way0utwest), which suck data out of a Switch (Paul White – @sql_kiwi). This Switch operator is consuming data from up to four lookups, thanks to Kalen Delaney (@sqlqueen), Rick Krueger (@dataogre), Mickey Stuewe (@sqlmickey) and Kathi Kellenberger (@auntkathi). Unfortunately Kathi’s name is a bit long and has been truncated, just like in real plans. The last stream performs a join of two others via a Nested Loop (Matan Yungman – @matanyungman). One pulls data from a Spool (my post – @rob_farley) populated from a Table Scan (Jon Morisi). The other applies a catchall operator (the catchall is because Tamera Clark (@tameraclark) didn’t specify any particular operator, and a catchall is what gets shown when SSMS doesn’t know what to show. Surprisingly, it’s showing the yellow one, which is about cursors. Hopefully that’s not what Tamera planned, but anyway...) to the output from an Index Seek operator (Sebastian Meine – @sqlity). Lastly, I think everyone put in 110% effort, so that’s what all the operators cost. That didn’t leave anything for me, unfortunately, but that’s okay. Also, because he decided to use the Paul White operator, Jason Brimhall gets 0%, and his 110% was given to Paul’s Switch operator post. I hope you’ve enjoyed this T-SQL Tuesday, and have learned something extra about Plan Operators. Keep your eye out for next month’s one by watching the Twitter Hashtag #tsql2sday, and why not contribute a post to the party? Big thanks to Adam Machanic as usual for starting all this. @rob_farley

    Read the article

  • operator overloading of stream extraction operator in C++ help

    - by Crystal
    I'm having some trouble overloading my stream extraction operator in C++ for a hw assignment. I'm not really sure why I am getting these compile errors since I thought I was doing it right... Here is my code: Complex.h #ifndef COMPLEX_H #define COMPLEX_H class Complex { //friend ostream &operator<<(ostream &output, const Complex &complexObj) const; public: Complex(double = 0.0, double = 0.0); // constructor Complex operator+(const Complex &) const; // addition Complex operator-(const Complex &) const; // subtraction void print() const; // output private: double real; // real part double imaginary; // imaginary part }; #endif Complex.cpp #include <iostream> #include "Complex.h" using namespace std; // Constructor Complex::Complex(double realPart, double imaginaryPart) : real(realPart), imaginary(imaginaryPart) { } // addition operator Complex Complex::operator+(const Complex &operand2) const { return Complex(real + operand2.real, imaginary + operand2.imaginary); } // subtraction operator Complex Complex::operator-(const Complex &operand2) const { return Complex(real - operand2.real, imaginary - operand2.imaginary); } // Overload << operator ostream &Complex::operator<<(ostream &output, const Complex &complexObj) const { cout << '(' << complexObj.real << ", " << complexObj.imaginary << ')'; return output; // returning output allows chaining } // display a Complex object in the form: (a, b) void Complex::print() const { cout << '(' << real << ", " << imaginary << ')'; } main.cpp #include <iostream> #include "Complex.h" using namespace std; int main() { Complex x; Complex y(4.3, 8.2); Complex z(3.3, 1.1); cout << "x: "; x.print(); cout << "\ny: "; y.print(); cout << "\nz: "; z.print(); x = y + z; cout << "\n\nx = y + z: " << endl; x.print(); cout << " = "; y.print(); cout << " + "; z.print(); x = y - z; cout << "\n\nx = y - z: " << endl; x.print(); cout << " = "; y.print(); cout << " - "; z.print(); cout << endl; } Compile erros: complex.cpp(23) : error C2039: '<<' : is not a member of 'Complex' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' complex.cpp(24) : error C2270: '<<' : modifiers not allowed on nonmember functions complex.cpp(25) : error C2248: 'Complex::real' : cannot access private member declared in class 'Complex' complex.h(13) : see declaration of 'Complex::real' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' complex.cpp(25) : error C2248: 'Complex::imaginary' : cannot access private member declared in class 'Complex' complex.h(14) : see declaration of 'Complex::imaginary' complex.h(5) : see declaration of 'Complex' Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Ternary and Artificial Intelligence

    - by user2957844
    Not much of a programmer myself, however I have been thinking about the future of AI. If a fully functional AI is programmed in a binary environment as is used in current computing, would that create a bit of a black and white personality? As in just yes/no, on/off, 1/0? I will use the Skynet computer from the Terminator series as a bad analogy; it is brought online and comes to the conclusion that humanity should just be destroyed so the problem is resolved, basically its only options were; fire the missiles or not. (The films do not really go into what its moves would be after doing such a thing, but that goes into the realms of AI evolution so does not really fit with this question.) It may also have been badly programmed. Now, the human mind has been akin to a ternary system which allows our "out of the box" thinking along with all the other wonderful things our minds can do. So, would it not be more prudent to create a functional ternary system and program an AI using it so the resulting personality would be able to benefit from the third "maybe" (so to speak) option? I understand that in binary there are ways to get around the whole yes/no etc. way of things, however the basic operations are still just 1's and 0's. Again with using the above bad Skynet analogy; if it could have had that third "maybe" option as part of its core system, it may have decided to not launch due to being able to make sense of the intricacies of human nature and the politics of such a move etc. In effect, my question is; Would an AI benefit more from ternary computing as opposed to binary due to the inclusion of -1, or 2, dependent on the system ("maybe," as I call it)?

    Read the article

  • C++ Operator Ambiguity

    - by Scott
    Forgive me, for I am fairly new to C++, but I am having some trouble regarding operator ambiguity. I think it is compiler-specific, for the code compiled on my desktop. However, it fails to compile on my laptop. I think I know what's going wrong, but I don't see an elegant way around it. Please let me know if I am making an obvious mistake. Anyhow, here's what I'm trying to do: I have made my own vector class called Vector4 which looks something like this: class Vector4 { private: GLfloat vector[4]; ... } Then I have these operators, which are causing the problem: operator GLfloat* () { return vector; } operator const GLfloat* () const { return vector; } GLfloat& operator [] (const size_t i) { return vector[i]; } const GLfloat& operator [] (const size_t i) const { return vector[i]; } I have the conversion operator so that I can pass an instance of my Vector4 class to glVertex3fv, and I have subscripting for obvious reasons. However, calls that involve subscripting the Vector4 become ambiguous to the compiler: enum {x, y, z, w} Vector4 v(1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0); glTranslatef(v[x], v[y], v[z]); Here are the candidates: candidate 1: const GLfloat& Vector4:: operator[](size_t) const candidate 2: operator[](const GLfloat*, int) <built-in> Why would it try to convert my Vector4 to a GLfloat* first when the subscript operator is already defined on Vector4? Is there a simple way around this that doesn't involve typecasting? Am I just making a silly mistake? Thanks for any help in advance.

    Read the article

  • Entity Relationship Model: Ternary Relationships

    - by Ethan
    Hi, I am trying to understand why this statement in the book is wrong: "given a C entity, there is at most one related A entity and at most one related B entity". Is it that it doesn't apply to a specific kind of relationship?? So, if I have an example of a student who is in attendance to a course with a type of subject. The entities are student, attendance, course and subject. Student makes attendance in a room. Also, a student can make attendance for a subject. Does this example apply to the statement? Thanks for your time.

    Read the article

  • Ternary operator in if-statement?

    - by Pindatjuh
    I've written the following if-statement in Java: if(methodName.equals("set" + this.name) || isBoolean() ? methodName.equals("is" + this.name) : methodName.equals("get" + this.name)) { ... } Is this a good practice to write such expressions in if, to separate state from condition? And can this expression be simplified?

    Read the article

  • DRY up Ruby ternary

    - by Reed G. Law
    I often have a situation where I want to do some conditional logic and then return a part of the condition. How can I do this without repeating the part of the condition in the true or false expression? For example: ClassName.method.blank? ? false : ClassName.method Is there any way to avoid repeating ClassName.method? Here is a real-world example: PROFESSIONAL_ROLES.key(self.professional_role).nil? ? 948460516 : PROFESSIONAL_ROLES.key(self.professional_role)

    Read the article

  • PHP Simplify a ternary operation

    - by Obay
    In PHP, is there a way to simplify this even more, without using an if()? $foo = $bar!==0 ? $foo : ''; I was wondering if there was a way to not reassign $foo to itself if the condition is satisfied. I understand there is a way to do this in Javascript (using &&, right?), but was wondering if there was a way to do this in PHP.

    Read the article

  • wrong operator() overload called

    - by user313202
    okay, I am writing a matrix class and have overloaded the function call operator twice. The core of the matrix is a 2D double array. I am using the MinGW GCC compiler called from a windows console. the first overload is meant to return a double from the array (for viewing an element). the second overload is meant to return a reference to a location in the array (for changing the data in that location. double operator()(int row, int col) const ; //allows view of element double &operator()(int row, int col); //allows assignment of element I am writing a testing routine and have discovered that the "viewing" overload never gets called. for some reason the compiler "defaults" to calling the overload that returns a reference when the following printf() statement is used. fprintf(outp, "%6.2f\t", testMatD(i,j)); I understand that I'm insulting the gods by writing my own matrix class without using vectors and testing with C I/O functions. I will be punished thoroughly in the afterlife, no need to do it here. Ultimately I'd like to know what is going on here and how to fix it. I'd prefer to use the cleaner looking operator overloads rather than member functions. Any ideas? -Cal the matrix class: irrelevant code omitted class Matrix { public: double getElement(int row, int col)const; //returns the element at row,col //operator overloads double operator()(int row, int col) const ; //allows view of element double &operator()(int row, int col); //allows assignment of element private: //data members double **array; //pointer to data array }; double Matrix::getElement(int row, int col)const{ //transform indices into true coordinates (from sorted coordinates //only row needs to be transformed (user can only sort by row) row = sortedArray[row]; result = array[usrZeroRow+row][usrZeroCol+col]; return result; } //operator overloads double Matrix::operator()(int row, int col) const { //this overload is used when viewing an element return getElement(row,col); } double &Matrix::operator()(int row, int col){ //this overload is used when placing an element return array[row+usrZeroRow][col+usrZeroCol]; } The testing program: irrelevant code omitted int main(void){ FILE *outp; outp = fopen("test_output.txt", "w+"); Matrix testMatD(5,7); //construct 5x7 matrix //some initializations omitted fprintf(outp, "%6.2f\t", testMatD(i,j)); //calls the wrong overload }

    Read the article

  • Operator Overloading in C

    - by Leif Andersen
    In C++, I can change the operator on a specific class by doing something like this: MyClass::operator==/*Or some other operator such as =, >, etc.*/(Const MyClass rhs) { /* Do Stuff*/; } But with there being no classes (built in by default) in C. So, how could I do operator overloading for just general functions? For example, if I remember correctly, importing stdlib.h gives you the - operator, which is just syntactic sugar for (*strcut_name).struct_element. So how can I do this in C? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Explain this C++ operator definition

    - by David Johnstone
    I have the following operator defined in a C++ class called StringProxy: operator std::string&() { return m_string; } a) What is this and how does this work? I understand the idea of operator overloading, but they normally look like X operator+(double i). b) Given an instance of StringProxy, how can I use this operator to get the m_string?

    Read the article

  • C++ Operator overloading - 'recreating the Vector'

    - by Wallter
    I am currently in a collage second level programing course... We are working on operator overloading... to do this we are to rebuild the vector class... I was building the class and found that most of it is based on the [] operator. When I was trying to implement the + operator I run into a weird error that my professor has not seen before (apparently since the class switched IDE's from MinGW to VS express...) (I am using Visual Studio Express 2008 C++ edition...) Vector.h #include <string> #include <iostream> using namespace std; #ifndef _VECTOR_H #define _VECTOR_H const int DEFAULT_VECTOR_SIZE = 5; class Vector { private: int * data; int size; int comp; public: inline Vector (int Comp = 5,int Size = 0) : comp(Comp), size(Size) { if (comp > 0) { data = new int [comp]; } else { data = new int [DEFAULT_VECTOR_SIZE]; comp = DEFAULT_VECTOR_SIZE; } } int size_ () const { return size; } int comp_ () const { return comp; } bool push_back (int); bool push_front (int); void expand (); void expand (int); void clear (); const string at (int); int operator[ ](int); Vector& operator+ (Vector&); Vector& operator- (const Vector&); bool operator== (const Vector&); bool operator!= (const Vector&); ~Vector() { delete [] data; } }; ostream& operator<< (ostream&, const Vector&); #endif Vector.cpp #include <iostream> #include <string> #include "Vector.h" using namespace std; const string Vector::at(int i) { this[i]; } void Vector::expand() { expand(size); } void Vector::expand(int n ) { int * newdata = new int [comp * 2]; if (*data != NULL) { for (int i = 0; i <= (comp); i++) { newdata[i] = data[i]; } newdata -= comp; comp += n; delete [] data; *data = *newdata; } else if ( *data == NULL || comp == 0) { data = new int [DEFAULT_VECTOR_SIZE]; comp = DEFAULT_VECTOR_SIZE; size = 0; } } bool Vector::push_back(int n) { if (comp = 0) { expand(); } for (int k = 0; k != 2; k++) { if ( size != comp ){ data[size] = n; size++; return true; } else { expand(); } } return false; } void Vector::clear() { delete [] data; comp = 0; size = 0; } int Vector::operator[] (int place) { return (data[place]); } Vector& Vector::operator+ (Vector& n) { int temp_int = 0; if (size > n.size_() || size == n.size_()) { temp_int = size; } else if (size < n.size_()) { temp_int = n.size_(); } Vector newone(temp_int); int temp_2_int = 0; for ( int j = 0; j <= temp_int && j <= n.size_() && j <= size; j++) { temp_2_int = n[j] + data[j]; newone[j] = temp_2_int; } //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// return newone; //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// } ostream& operator<< (ostream& out, const Vector& n) { for (int i = 0; i <= n.size_(); i++) { //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// out << n[i] << " "; //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// } return out; } Errors: out << n[i] << " "; error C2678: binary '[' : no operator found which takes a left-hand operand of type 'const Vector' (or there is no acceptable conversion) return newone; error C2106: '=' : left operand must be l-value As stated above, I am a student going into Computer Science as my selected major I would appreciate tips, pointers, and better ways to do stuff :D

    Read the article

  • Are free operator->* overloads evil?

    - by Potatoswatter
    I was perusing section 13.5 after refuting the notion that built-in operators do not participate in overload resolution, and noticed that there is no section on operator->*. It is just a generic binary operator. Its brethren, operator->, operator*, and operator[], are all required to be non-static member functions. This precludes definition of a free function overload to an operator commonly used to obtain a reference from an object. But the uncommon operator->* is left out. In particular, operator[] has many similarities. It is binary (they missed a golden opportunity to make it n-ary), and it accepts some kind of container on the left and some kind of locator on the right. Its special-rules section, 13.5.5, doesn't seem to have any actual effect except to outlaw free functions. (And that restriction even precludes support for commutativity!) So, for example, this is perfectly legal (in C++0x, remove obvious stuff to translate to C++03): #include <utility> #include <iostream> #include <type_traits> using namespace std; template< class F, class S > typename common_type< F,S >::type operator->*( pair<F,S> const &l, bool r ) { return r? l.second : l.first; } template< class T > T & operator->*( pair<T,T> &l, bool r ) { return r? l.second : l.first; } template< class T > T & operator->*( bool l, pair<T,T> &r ) { return l? r.second : r.first; } int main() { auto x = make_pair( 1, 2.3 ); cerr << x->*false << " " << x->*4 << endl; auto y = make_pair( 5, 6 ); y->*(0) = 7; y->*0->*y = 8; // evaluates to 7->*y = y.second cerr << y.first << " " << y.second << endl; } I can certainly imagine myself giving into temp[la]tation. For example, scaled indexes for vector: v->*matrix_width[2][5] = x; Did the standards committee forget to prevent this, was it considered too ugly to bother, or are there real-world use cases?

    Read the article

  • Overloading *(iterator + n) and *(n + iterator) in a C++ iterator class?

    - by exscape
    (Note: I'm writing this project for learning only; comments about it being redundant are... uh, redundant. ;) I'm trying to implement a random access iterator, but I've found very little literature on the subject, so I'm going by trial and error combined with Wikpedias list of operator overload prototypes. It's worked well enough so far, but I've hit a snag. Code such as exscape::string::iterator i = string_instance.begin(); std::cout << *i << std::endl; works, and prints the first character of the string. However, *(i + 1) doesn't work, and neither does *(1 + i). My full implementation would obviously be a bit too much, but here's the gist of it: namespace exscape { class string { friend class iterator; ... public: class iterator : public std::iterator<std::random_access_iterator_tag, char> { ... char &operator*(void) { return *p; // After some bounds checking } char *operator->(void) { return p; } char &operator[](const int offset) { return *(p + offset); // After some bounds checking } iterator &operator+=(const int offset) { p += offset; return *this; } const iterator operator+(const int offset) { iterator out (*this); out += offset; return out; } }; }; } int main() { exscape::string s = "ABCDEF"; exscape::string::iterator i = s.begin(); std::cout << *(i + 2) << std::endl; } The above fails with (line 632 is, of course, the *(i + 2) line): string.cpp: In function ‘int main()’: string.cpp:632: error: no match for ‘operator*’ in ‘*exscape::string::iterator::operator+(int)(2)’ string.cpp:105: note: candidates are: char& exscape::string::iterator::operator*() *(2 + i) fails with: string.cpp: In function ‘int main()’: string.cpp:632: error: no match for ‘operator+’ in ‘2 + i’ string.cpp:434: note: candidates are: exscape::string exscape::operator+(const char*, const exscape::string&) My guess is that I need to do some more overloading, but I'm not sure what operator I'm missing.

    Read the article

  • How do you override operator == when using interfaces instead of actual types?

    - by RickL
    I have some code like this: How should I implement the operator == so that it will be called when the variables are of interface IMyClass? public class MyClass : IMyClass { public static bool operator ==(MyClass a, MyClass b) { if (ReferenceEquals(a, b)) return true; if ((Object)a == null || (Object)b == null) return false; return false; } public static bool operator !=(MyClass a, MyClass b) { return !(a == b); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { IMyClass m1 = new MyClass(); IMyClass m2 = new MyClass(); MyClass m3 = new MyClass(); MyClass m4 = new MyClass(); Console.WriteLine(m1 == m2); // does not go into custom == function. why not? Console.WriteLine(m3 == m4); // DOES go into custom == function } }

    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 >