Search Results

Search found 3044 results on 122 pages for 'apc smart ups'.

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 22/122 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • should std::auto_ptr<>::operator = reset / deallocate its existing pointee ?

    - by afriza
    I read here about std::auto_ptr<::operator= Notice however that the left-hand side object is not automatically deallocated when it already points to some object. You can explicitly do this by calling member function reset before assigning it a new value. However, when I read the source code for header file C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\ce\include\memory template<class _Other> auto_ptr<_Ty>& operator=(auto_ptr<_Other>& _Right) _THROW0() { // assign compatible _Right (assume pointer) reset(_Right.release()); return (*this); } auto_ptr<_Ty>& operator=(auto_ptr<_Ty>& _Right) _THROW0() { // assign compatible _Right (assume pointer) reset(_Right.release()); return (*this); } auto_ptr<_Ty>& operator=(auto_ptr_ref<_Ty> _Right) _THROW0() { // assign compatible _Right._Ref (assume pointer) _Ty **_Pptr = (_Ty **)_Right._Ref; _Ty *_Ptr = *_Pptr; *_Pptr = 0; // release old reset(_Ptr); // set new return (*this); } What is the correct/standard behavior? How do other STL implementations behave?

    Read the article

  • C++ -- Is there an implicit cast here from Fred* to auto_ptr<Fred>?

    - by q0987
    Hello all, I saw the following code, #include <new> #include <memory> using namespace std; class Fred; // Forward declaration typedef auto_ptr<Fred> FredPtr; class Fred { public: static FredPtr create(int i) { return new Fred(i); // Is there an implicit casting here? If not, how can we return // a Fred* with return value as FredPtr? } private: Fred(int i=10) : i_(i) { } Fred(const Fred& x) : i_(x.i_) { } int i_; }; Please see the question listed in function create. Thank you // Updated based on comments Yes, the code cannot pass the VC8.0 error C2664: 'std::auto_ptr<_Ty::auto_ptr(std::auto_ptr<_Ty &) throw()' : cannot convert parameter 1 from 'Fred *' to 'std::auto_ptr<_Ty &' The code was copied from the C++ FAQ 12.15. However, after making the following changes, replace return new Fred(i); with return auto_ptr<Fred>(new Fred(i)); This code can pass the VC8.0 compiler. But I am not sure whether or not this is a correct fix.

    Read the article

  • Smarty html_options

    - by SeanJA
    For smarty's html_options function, is there a way to avoid having to do this (other than not using smarty that is)? {if $smarty.post} {html_options name=option_1 optins=$options selected=$smarty.post.option_1} {else} {html_options name=option_1 optins=$options} {/if} I realize that it won't show up in the template, but it seems like a bad practice to leave something that is not defined in the template (it also fills up my error logs with noise about undefined indexes).

    Read the article

  • What's correct way to remove a boost::shared_ptr from a list?

    - by Catskul
    I have a std::list of boost::shared_ptr<T> and I want to remove an item from it but I only have a pointer of type T* which matches one of the items in the list. However I cant use myList.remove( tPtr ) I'm guessing because shared_ptr does not implement == for its template argument type. My immediate thought was to try myList.remove( shared_ptr<T>(tPtr) ) which is syntactically correct but it will crash from a double delete since the temporary shared_ptr has a separate use_count. std::list< boost::shared_ptr<T> > myList; T* tThisPtr = new T(); // This is wrong; only done for example code. // stand-in for actual code in T using // T's actual "this" pointer from within T { boost::shared_ptr<T> toAdd( tThisPtr ); // typically would be new T() myList.push_back( toAdd ); } { //T has pointer to myList so that upon a certain action, // it will remove itself romt the list //myList.remove( tThisPtr); //doesn't compile myList.remove( boost::shared_ptr<T>(tThisPtr) ); // compiles, but causes // double delete } The only options I see remaining are to use std::find with a custom compare, or to loop through the list brute force and find it myself, but it seems there should be a better way. Am I missing something obvious, or is this just too non-standard a use to be doing a remove the clean/normal way?

    Read the article

  • C++ std::vector problems

    - by Faur Ioan-Aurel
    For 2 days i tried to explain myself some of the things that are happening in my c++ code,and i can't get a good explanation.I must say that i'm more a java programmer.Long time i used quite a bit the C language but i guess Java erased those skills and now i'm hitting a wall trying to port a few classes from java to c++. So let's say that we have this 2 classes: class ForwardNetwork { protected: ForwardLayer* inputLayer; ForwardLayer* outputLayer; vector<ForwardLayer* > layers; public: void ForwardNetwork::getLayers(std::vector< ForwardLayer* >& result ) { for(int i= 0 ;i< layers.size(); i++){ ForwardLayer* lay = dynamic_cast<ForwardLayer*>(this->layers.at(i)); if(lay != NULL) result.push_back(lay); else cout << "Layer at#" << i << " is null" << endl; } } void ForwardNetwork::addLayer ( ForwardLayer* layer ) { if(layer != NULL) cout << "Before push layer is not null" << endl; //setup the forward and back pointer if ( this->outputLayer != NULL ) { layer->setPrevious ( this->outputLayer ); this->outputLayer->setNext ( layer ); } //update the input layer and outputLayer variables if ( this->layers.size() == 0 ) this->inputLayer = this->outputLayer = layer; else this->outputLayer = layer; //push layer in vector this->layers.push_back ( layer ); for(int i = 0; i< layers.size();i++) if(layers[i] != NULL) cout << "Check::Layer[" << i << "] is not null!" << endl; } }; Second class: class Backpropagation : public Train { public: Backpropagation::Backpropagation ( FeedForwardNetwork* network ){ this->network = network; vector<FeedforwardLayer*> vec; network->getLayers(vec); } }; Now if i add from main() some layers into network via addLayer(..) method it's all good.My vector is just as it should.But after i call Backpropagation() constructor with a network object ,when i enter getLayers(), some of my objects from vector have their address set to NULL(they are randomly chosen:for example if i run my app once with 3 layer's into vector ,the first object from vector is null.If i run it second time first 2 objects are null,third time just first object null and so on). Now i can't explain why this is happening.I must say that all the objects that should be in vector they also live inside the network and they are not NULL; This happens everywhere after i done with addLayer() so not just in the getLayers(). I cant get a good grasp to this problem.I thought first that i might modify my vector.But i can't find such thing. Also why if the reference from vector is NULL ,the reference that lives inside ForwardNetwork as a linked list (inputLayer and outputLayer) is not NULL? I must ask for your help.Please ,if you have some advices don't hesitate! PS: as compiler i use g++ part of gcc 4.6.1 under ubuntu 11.10

    Read the article

  • Is auto_ptr deprecated?

    - by idimba
    Is auto_ptr deprecated in incomming C++ standard? Is unique_ptr should be used for ownershipt transfer instead of share ptr? If unique_ptr is not in standard, than do I need use shared_ptr instead?

    Read the article

  • Cannot run unit tests for an application developed with Compact Framework for Windows CE 6.0 platfor

    - by Thomasek
    I'm developing a solution for Windows CE 6.0 using GuD_AtomKit X86 Device emulator. I'm not able to run any unit tests, because I get following error message: The test adapter ('Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.TestTypes.Unit.UnitTestAdapter, Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.Tips.UnitTest.Adapter, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a') required to execute this test could not be loaded. Check that the test adapter is installed properly. Exception of type 'Microsoft.VisualStudio.SmartDevice.TestHostAdapter.DeviceAgent.TestAlreadyRunningException' was thrown. But there's no unit test running on the device. I would really appreciate your help.

    Read the article

  • Why implement DB connection pointer object as a reference counting pointer? (C++)

    - by DVK
    At our company one of the core C++ classes (Database connection pointer) is implemented as a reference counting pointer. To be clear, the objects are NOT DB connections themselves, but pointers to a DB connection object. The library is very old, and nobody who designed is around anymore. So far, nether I, nor any C++ experts in the company that I asked have come up with a good reason for why this particular design was chosen. Any ideas? It is introducing some problems (partially due to awful reference pointer implementation used), and I'm trying to understand if this design actually has some deep underlying reasons? The usage pattern these days seems to be that the DB connection pointer object is returned by a DB connection manager class, and it's somewhat unclear whether DB connection pointers were designed to be able to be used independently of DB connection manager.

    Read the article

  • Exposing boost::scoped_ptr in boost::python

    - by Rupert Jones
    Hello, I am getting a compile error, saying that the copy constructor of the scoped_ptr is private with the following code snippet: class a {}; struct s { boost::scoped_ptr<a> p; }; BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE( module ) { class_<s>( "s" ); } This example works with a shared_ptr though. It would be nice, if anyone knows the answer. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Remove from a std::set<shared_ptr<T>> by T*

    - by Autopulated
    I have a set of shared pointers: std::set<boost::shared_ptr<T>> set; And a pointer: T* p; I would like to efficiently remove the element of set equal to p, but I can't do this with any of the members of set, or any of the standard algorithms, since T* is a completely different type to boost::shared_ptr<T>. A few approaches I can think of are: somehow constructing a new shared_ptr from the pointer that won't take ownership of the pointed to memory (ideal solution, but I can't see how to do this) wrapping / re-implementing shared_ptr so that I can do the above just doing my own binary search over the set Help!

    Read the article

  • Why can operator-> be overloaded manually?

    - by FredOverflow
    Wouldn't it make sense if p->m was just syntactic sugar for (*p).m? Essentially, every operator-> that I have ever written could have been implemented as follows: Foo::Foo* operator->() { return &**this; } Is there any case where I would want p->m to mean something else than (*p).m?

    Read the article

  • Samsung TV Emulator font size

    - by jperovic
    Can someone please help me with this issue. I've been banging my head to find the solution but no help... The problem is that Samsung TV Emulator displays everything enlarged (line font-size 30ish pixels) and there does seem to have a way to override it. This only happens within Samsung UI components. To make sure it wasn't something with my project I've downloaded sample project from Brightcove: Sample project but noticed the same behavior with that as well. Here is the screenshot of my "project". It only one scene with two UI components: http://tinypic.com/r/124evqc/6 Opposed to that, here's what I see in my IDE view: http://tinypic.com/r/ezmn4l/6. As a side-note, I had to put height: 20px in both of my UI components' CSS in order for IDE to show them that way. Can anyone suggest what am I supposed to do?

    Read the article

  • Custom deleters for std::shared_ptrs

    - by Kristian D'Amato
    Is it possible to use a custom deleter after creating a std::shared_ptr without using new? My problem is that object creation is handled by a factory class and its constructors & destructors are protected, which gives a compile error, and I don't want to use new because of its drawbacks. To elaborate: I prefer to create shared pointers like this, which doesn't let you set a custom deleter (I think): auto sp1 = make_shared<Song>(L"The Beatles", L"Im Happy Just to Dance With You"); Or I can create them like this, which does let met set a deleter through an argument: auto sp2(new Song, MyDeleterFunc); But the second one uses new, which AFAIK isn't as efficient as the top sort of allocation. Maybe this is clearer: is it possible to get the benefits of make_shared<> as well as a custom deleter? Would that mean having to write an allocator?

    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

  • What do I need to use Smart card for windows login (no domain, just regular single local machine)

    - by Muhammad Nour
    I have a reader from ACS "ACR83" and a brand new card from the same place ACO3-32 as a development kit and I need to use both of them to login into my laptop locally I am not a part of domain, I am using Windows xp SP3 what should I do to enable smart card login do I need third party software to do this without domain or should it be a domain environment to be able to do such a thing this is the first time dealing with smart card, so I hope some one will help me Doing this

    Read the article

  • invasive vs non-invasive ref-counted pointers in C++

    - by anon
    For the past few years, I've generally accepted that if I am going to use ref-counted smart pointers invasive smart pointers is the way to go -- However, I'm starting to like non-invasive smart pointers due to the following: I only use smart pointers (so no Foo* lying around, only Ptr) I'm starting to build custom allocators for each class. (So Foo would overload operator new). Now, if Foo has a list of all Ptr (as it easily can with non-invasive smart pointers). Then, I can avoid memory fragmentation issues since class Foo move the objects around (and just update the corresponding Ptr). The only reason why this Foo moving objects around in non-invasive smart pointers being easier than invasive smart pointers is: In non-invasive smart pointers, there is only one pointer that points to each Foo. In invasive smart pointers, I have no idea how many objects point to each Foo. Now, the only cost of non-invasive smart pointers ... is the double indirection. [Perhaps this screws up the caches]. Does anyone have a good study of expensive this extra layer of indirection is?

    Read the article

  • How to use shared_ptr for COM interface pointers

    - by Seefer
    I've been reading about various usage advice relating to the new c++ standard smart pointers unique_ptr, shared_ptr and weak_ptr and generally 'grok' what they are about when I'm writing my own code that declares and consumes them. However, all the discussions I've read seem restricted to this simple usage situation where the programmer is using smart in his/her own code, with no real discussion on techniques when having to work with libraries that expect raw pointers or other types of 'smart pointers' such as COM interface pointers. Specifically I'm learning my way through C++ by attempting to get a standard Win32 real-time game loop up and running that uses Direct2D & DirectWrite to render text to the display showing frames per second. My first task with Direct2D is in creating a Direct2D Factory object with the following code from the Direct2D examples on MSDN: ID2D1Factory* pD2DFactory = nullptr; HRESULT hr = D2D1CreateFactory(D2D1_FACTORY_TYPE_SINGLE_THREADED, &pD2DFactory); pD2DFactory is obviously an 'out' parameter and it's here where I become uncertain how to make use of smart pointers in this context, if indeed it's possible. My inexperienced C++ mind tells me I have two problems: With pD2DFactory being a COM interface pointer type, how would smart_ptr work with the Add() / Release() member functions for a COM object instance? Are smart pointers able to be passed to functions in situations where the function is using an 'out' pointer parameter technique? I did experiment with the alternative of using _com_ptr_t in the comip.h header file to help with pointer lifetime management and declared the pD2DFactory pointer with the following code: _com_ptr_t<_com_IIID<pD2DFactory, &__uuidof(pD2DFactory)>> pD2DFactory = nullptr; and it appears to work so far but, as you can see, the syntax is cumbersome :) So, I was wondering if any C++ gurus here could confirm whether smart pointers are able to help in cases like this and provide examples of usage, or point me to more in-depth discussions of smart pointer usage when needing to work with other code libraries that know nothing of them. Or is it simply a case of my trying to use the wrong tool for the job? :)

    Read the article

  • Ask How-To Geek: Fix Annoying Arrows, Play Old-School DOS games, and Schedule Smart Computer Shutdowns

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    You’ve got questions and we’ve got answers. Today we highlight how to fix the oversized shortcut arrows in Windows 7, play your favorite DOS games in emulation, and schedule intelligent shutdown routines for your PC. We get tons of emails with every kind of technology and computer question under the sun. Today we’re answering some reader emails and sharing the solutions with you. Latest Features How-To Geek ETC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials The 50 Best Registry Hacks that Make Windows Better The How-To Geek Holiday Gift Guide (Geeky Stuff We Like) LCD? LED? Plasma? The How-To Geek Guide to HDTV Technology The How-To Geek Guide to Learning Photoshop, Part 8: Filters Improve Digital Photography by Calibrating Your Monitor The Brothers Mario – Epic Gangland Style Mario Brothers Movie Trailer [Video] Score Awesome Games on the Cheap with the Humble Indie Bundle Add a Colorful Christmas Theme to Your Windows 7 Desktop This Windows Hack Changes the Blue Screen of Death to Red Edit Images Quickly in Firefox with Pixlr Grabber Zoho Writer, Sheet, and Show Now Available in Chrome Web Store

    Read the article

  • Can a programmer get too smart for their own good?

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    The more I learn about programming, the more things I see that could be improved by a great deal. Often, a companies process management is total SWAG or they have Frames based websites written recently, .NET 1.1 based code, no separation of concerns, poor quality control...I could go on and on and on... Projects can succeed, but there tends to be so much waste I am amazed at how much time and money a company can throw away. I've seen it happen at several companies. So is it that ignorance truly is bliss? UPDATE Question "How is it that top developers (I don't mean like Jon Skeet level, I mean guys who are dedicated enough to hit a forum and try for self-improvement) even want to code anymore after they see the often insurmountable sociological and technical problems they are told to fix, but then scolded for doing so? "

    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 | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >