Search Results

Search found 5153 results on 207 pages for 'unique ptr'.

Page 25/207 | < Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >

  • Why isn't the boost::shared_ptr -> operator inlined?

    - by Alan
    Since boost::shared_ptr could be called very frequently and simply returns a pointer, isn't the -> operator a good candidate for being inlined? T * operator-> () const // never throws { BOOST_ASSERT(px != 0); return px; } Would a good compiler automatically inline this anyway? Should I lose any sleep over this? :-)

    Read the article

  • shared_ptr as class member

    - by idimba
    It's common to declared contained objects as a pointers to that class, while "forward declarating" them in header file. This in order to reduce physical dependencies in code. For example class B; // forward declaration class A { private: B* pB; }; Would it be good idea to declare such a member as shared_ptr, instead of naked pointer? I would prefer scoped_ptr, but AFAIKit it won't be in standard.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Iterating through boost ptr_vector

    - by Ockonal
    Hello, I have a ptr_vector list of my own objects. Something like this: boost::ptr_vector<SomeClass> *list; list.push_back(new SomeClass()>; ... BOOST_FOREACH(SomeClass *tempObj, list) // [x] { tempObj->... } >‘boost::ptr_vector<SomeClass>*’ is not a class, struct, or union type

    Read the article

  • Force an object to be allocated on the heap

    - by Warren Seine
    A C++ class I'm writing uses shared_from_this() to return a valid boost::shared_ptr<>. Besides, I don't want to manage memory for this kind of object. At the moment, I'm not restricting the way the user allocates the object, which causes an error if shared_from_this() is called on a stack-allocated object. I'd like to force the object to be allocated with new and managed by a smart pointer, no matter how the user declares it. I thought it could be done through a proxy or an overloaded new operator, but I can't find a proper way of doing that. Is there a common design pattern for such usage? If it's not possible, how can I test it at compile time?

    Read the article

  • Why is std::tr1::shared_ptr<>.reset() so expensive?

    - by Paul Oyster
    Profiling some code that heavily uses shared_ptrs, I discovered that reset() was surprisingly expensive. For example: struct Test { int i; Test() { this->i = 0; } Test(int i) { this->i = i; } } ; ... auto t = make_shared<Test>(1); ... t.reset(somePointerToATestObject); Tracing the reset() in the last line (under VC++ 2010), I discovered that it creates a new reference-counting object. Is there a cheaper way, that reuses the existing ref-count and does not bother the heap?

    Read the article

  • Why it's can be compiled in GNU/C++, can't compiled in VC++2010 RTM?

    - by volnet
    #include #include #include #include "copy_of_auto_ptr.h" #ifdef _MSC_VER #pragma message("#include ") #include // http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Diagnostic-Pragmas.html#Diagnostic-Pragmas #endif /* case 1-4 is the requirement of the auto_ptr. which form http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/020163371X/autoptrupdate/auto_ptr_update.html */ /* case 1. (1) Direct-initialization, same type, e.g. */ std::auto_ptr source_int() { // return std::auto_ptr(new int(3)); std::auto_ptr tmp(new int(3)); return tmp; } /* case 2. (2) Copy-initialization, same type, e.g. */ void sink_int(std::auto_ptr p) { std::cout source_derived() { // return std::auto_ptr(new Derived()); std::auto_ptr tmp(new Derived()); return tmp; } /* case 4. (4) Copy-initialization, base-from-derived, e.g. */ void sink_base( std::auto_ptr p) { p-go(); } int main(void) { /* // auto_ptr */ // case 1. // auto_ptr std::auto_ptr p_int(source_int()); std::cout p_derived(source_derived()); p_derived-go(); // case 4. // auto_ptr sink_base(source_derived()); return 0; } In Eclipse(GNU C++.exe -v gcc version 3.4.5 (mingw-vista special r3)) it's two compile error: Description Resource Path Location Type initializing argument 1 of void sink_base(std::auto_ptr<Base>)' from result ofstd::auto_ptr<_Tp::operator std::auto_ptr<_Tp1() [with _Tp1 = Base, _Tp = Derived]' auto_ptr_ref_research.cpp auto_ptr_ref_research/auto_ptr_ref_research 190 C/C++ Problem Description Resource Path Location Type no matching function for call to `std::auto_ptr::auto_ptr(std::auto_ptr)' auto_ptr_ref_research.cpp auto_ptr_ref_research/auto_ptr_ref_research 190 C/C++ Problem But it's right in VS2010 RTM. Questions: Which compiler stand for the ISO C++ standard? The content of case 4 is the problem "auto_ptr & auto_ptr_ref want to resolve?"

    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

  • Adding and sorting a linked list in C

    - by user1202963
    In my assignment, I have to write a function that takes as arguments a pointer to a "LNode" structure and an integer argument. Then, I have to not only add that integer into the linked list, but also put place it so that the list is in proper ascending order. I've tried several various attempts at this, and this is my code as of posting. LNode* AddItem(LNode *headPtr, int newItem) { auto LNode *ptr = headPtr; ptr = malloc(sizeof(LNode)); if (headPtr == NULL) { ptr->value = newItem; ptr->next = headPtr; return ptr; } else { while (headPtr->value > newItem || ptr->next != NULL) { printf("While\n"); // This is simply to let me know how many times the loop runs headPtr = headPtr->next; } ptr->value = newItem; ptr->next = headPtr; return ptr; } } // end of "AddItem" When I run it, and try to insert say a 5 and then a 3, the 5 gets inserted, but then the while loop runs once and I get a segmentation fault. Also I cannot change the arguments as it's part of a skeletal code for this project. Thanks to anyone who can help. If it helps this is what the structure looks like typedef struct LNode { int value; struct LNode *next; } LNode;

    Read the article

  • C++ volatile required when spinning on boost::shared_ptr operator bool()?

    - by JaredC
    I have two threads referencing the same boost::shared_ptr: boost::shared_ptr<Widget> shared; On thread is spinning, waiting for the other thread to reset the boost::shared_ptr: while(shared) boost::thread::yield(); And at some point the other thread will call: shared.reset(); My question is whether or not I need to declare the shared pointer as volatile to prevent the compiler from optimizing the call to shared.operator bool() out of the loop and never detecting the change? I know that if I were simply looping on a variable, waiting for it to reach 0 I would need volatile, but I'm not sure if boost::shared_ptr is implemented in such a way that it is not necessary here.

    Read the article

  • Boost shared_ptr use_count function

    - by photo_tom
    My application problem is the following - I have a large structure foo. Because these are large and for memory management reasons, we do not wish to delete them when processing on the data is complete. We are storing them in std::vector<boost::shared_ptr<foo>>. My question is related to knowing when all processing is complete. First decision is that we do not want any of the other application code to mark a complete flag in the structure because there are multiple execution paths in the program and we cannot predict which one is the last. So in our implementation, once processing is complete, we delete all copies of boost::shared_ptr<foo>> except for the one in the vector. This will drop the reference counter in the shared_ptr to 1. Is it practical to use shared_ptr.use_count() to see if it is equal to 1 to know when all other parts of my app are done with the data. One additional reason I'm asking the question is that the boost documentation on the shared pointer shared_ptr recommends not using "use_count" for production code.

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to return something like a collection of `std::auto_ptr`s in C++03?

    - by Billy ONeal
    std::auto_ptr is not allowed to be stored in an STL container, such as std::vector. However, occasionally there are cases where I need to return a collection of polymorphic objects, and therefore I can't return a vector of objects (due to the slicing problem). I can use std::tr1::shared_ptr and stick those in the vector, but then I have to pay a high price of maintaining separate reference counts, and object that owns the actual memory (the container) no longer logically "owns" the objects because they can be copied out of it without regard to ownership. C++0x offers a perfect solution to this problem in the form of std::vector<std::unique_ptr<t>>, but I don't have access to C++0x. Some other notes: I don't have access to C++0x, but I do have TR1 available. I would like to avoid use of Boost (though it is available if there is no other option) I am aware of boost::ptr_container containers (i.e. boost::ptr_vector), but I would like to avoid this because it breaks the debugger (innards are stored in void *s which means it's difficult to view the object actually stored inside the container in the debugger)

    Read the article

  • Boost Shared Pointers and Memory Management

    - by Izza
    I began using boost rather recently and am impressed by the functionality and APIs provided. In using boost::shared_ptr, when I check the program with Valgrind, I found a considerable number of "Still reachable" memory leaks. As per the documentation of Valgrind, these are not a problem. However, since I used to use the standard C++ library only, I always made sure that any program written is completely free from memory leaks. My question is, are these memory leaks something to worry about? I tried using reset(), however it only decrements the reference count, doesn't deallocate memory. Can I safely ignore these, or any way to forcibly deallocate the memory allocated by boost::shared_ptr? Thank you.

    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

  • How to interpret Events from Unique Events in Google Analytics?

    - by Mike Buckbee
    I'm trying to add some javascript triggered Google Analytics events to a website that is already working with GA. I've included the following beneath the standard GA script (new ga.js script). _gaq.push(['_trackEvent', 'Downloads', 'Extension']); Which seems to be working ok, but the results listed in the Events Overview report (after waiting 24 hours), don't make sense. It states that there have been 1 Total Events and 5 Unique Events (screenshot below). https://img.skitch.com/20110729-8hufapcq2366rq3cbpuihjgqjd.jpg

    Read the article

  • Microsoft unifie l'accès aux Store Windows et Windows Phone pour les développeurs, un compte unique permet de publier sur les deux galeries

    Microsoft unifie l'accès aux Store Windows et Windows Phone pour les développeurs Un compte unique permet de publier des applications sur les deux galeriesMicrosoft vient d'annoncer que les développeurs peuvent désormais s'inscrire pour Windows et Windows Phone simultanément via le même compte.Cette déclaration est la première étape d'une opération qui devrait aboutir à la fusion des galeries d'applications pour mobiles, tablettes et ordinateurs de bureau.La nouvelle expérience unifiée permettra...

    Read the article

  • Python continue from the point where exception was thrown

    - by James Lin
    Hi is there a way to continue from the point where exception was thrown? eg I have the following psudo code unique code 1 unique code 2 unique code 3 if I want to ignore the exceptions of any of the unique code statements I will have to do it like this: try: #unique code 1 except: pass try: #unique code 2 except: pass try: #unique code 3 except: pass but this isn't elegant to me, and for the life of me I can't remember how I resolved this kind of problem last time... what I want to have is something like try: unique code 1 unique code 2 unique code 3 except: continue from last exception raised

    Read the article

  • Will I need a dedicated static IP or a unique IP is enough to SSL enable my website?

    - by Devner
    Hi, This is the first time I am dealing with SSL and Dedicated Static IP /Unique IP. Now this webhost says that they will provide Unique IP (not shared with other customers) but do NOT guarantee that it will be static. Now I plan to make my website SSL enabled and install a SSL certificate. So in order to SSL enable my website, will I really need a Dedicated Static IP or will this Unique IP (without the guarantee that it will be static) be enough? What problems will I need to face if the IP is not static? I have already bought hosting from them. And they showed me that option while adding optional services to the account (after I placed my order), so I did not even have a clue about this. Thank you all in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to search unique dynamic data in a sheet and then copy relevent row in diffrent sheet?

    - by Hemant
    I am getting data from internet (DataFrom Web) In sheet1. Then I disperse that data in to three sheets based on three unique text. Like a,b and c. Rows are copied to sheet a,b and c sheets depending on text (a,b,c) they have. All the rows have one unique text (like url) by which they can be searched. I have added static data corresponding to the row. The problem is when ever internet data is changed (row addition/substitution or randomized). My static data loses its connection with the original row for which it was written. I want to search the data based on one unique key and put it to its original place where it used to be with static data.

    Read the article

  • Why am I not getting an sRGB default framebuffer?

    - by Aaron Rotenberg
    I'm trying to make my OpenGL Haskell program gamma correct by making appropriate use of sRGB framebuffers and textures, but I'm running into issues making the default framebuffer sRGB. Consider the following Haskell program, compiled for 32-bit Windows using GHC and linked against 32-bit freeglut: import Foreign.Marshal.Alloc(alloca) import Foreign.Ptr(Ptr) import Foreign.Storable(Storable, peek) import Graphics.Rendering.OpenGL.Raw import qualified Graphics.UI.GLUT as GLUT import Graphics.UI.GLUT(($=)) main :: IO () main = do (_progName, _args) <- GLUT.getArgsAndInitialize GLUT.initialDisplayMode $= [GLUT.SRGBMode] _window <- GLUT.createWindow "sRGB Test" -- To prove that I actually have freeglut working correctly. -- This will fail at runtime under classic GLUT. GLUT.closeCallback $= Just (return ()) glEnable gl_FRAMEBUFFER_SRGB colorEncoding <- allocaOut $ glGetFramebufferAttachmentParameteriv gl_FRAMEBUFFER gl_FRONT_LEFT gl_FRAMEBUFFER_ATTACHMENT_COLOR_ENCODING print colorEncoding allocaOut :: Storable a => (Ptr a -> IO b) -> IO a allocaOut f = alloca $ \ptr -> do f ptr peek ptr On my desktop (Windows 8 64-bit with a GeForce GTX 760 graphics card) this program outputs 9729, a.k.a. gl_LINEAR, indicating that the default framebuffer is using linear color space, even though I explicitly requested an sRGB window. This is reflected in the rendering results of the actual program I'm trying to write - everything looks washed out because my linear color values aren't being converted to sRGB before being written to the framebuffer. On the other hand, on my laptop (Windows 7 64-bit with an Intel graphics chip), the program prints 0 (huh?) and I get an sRGB default framebuffer by default whether I request one or not! And on both machines, if I manually create a non-default framebuffer bound to an sRGB texture, the program correctly prints 35904, a.k.a. gl_SRGB. Why am I getting different results on different hardware? Am I doing something wrong? How can I get an sRGB framebuffer consistently on all hardware and target OSes?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >