Search Results

Search found 10366 results on 415 pages for 'const char pointer'.

Page 26/415 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

  • Why do C++ streams use char instead of unsigned char?

    - by Johannes Schaub - litb
    I've always wondered why the C++ Standard library has instantiated basic_[io]stream and all its variants using the char type instead of the unsigned char type. char means (depending on whether it is signed or not) you can have overflow and underflow for operations like get(), which will lead to implementation-defined value of the variables involved. Another example is when you want to output a byte, unformatted, to an ostream using its put function. Any ideas? Note: I'm still not really convinced. So if you know the definitive answer, you can still post it indeed.

    Read the article

  • C++'s char * by swig got problem in Python 3.0

    - by gpliu3
    Our C++ lib works fine with Python2.4 using Swig, returning a C++ char* back to a python str. But this solution hit problem in Python3.0, error is: Exception=(, UnicodeDecodeError('utf8', b"\xb6\x9d\xa.....",0, 1, 'unexpected code byte') Our definition is like(working fine in Python 2.4): void cGetPubModulus( void* pSslRsa, char* cMod, int* nLen ); %include "cstring.i" %cstring_output_withsize( char* cMod, int* nLen ); Suspect swig is doing a Bytes-Str conversion automatically. In python2.4 it can be implicit but in Python3.0 it's no long allowed.. Anyone got a good idea? thanks

    Read the article

  • rewrite a function using only pointer increment/decrement

    - by Richard Nguyen
    can anyone help me rewrite the function i wrote below using only points and pointer increment/decrement? I dont have much experience with pointer so I dont know what to do. void reverse(char * s) { int i, l = strlen(s); char c; for(i = 0; i < (l >> 1); i++) { c = s[i]; s[i] = s[l - i - 1]; s[l - i - 1] = c; } } do not use pointer arithmetic or array notation. any help or hint on how to rewrite the function above is appriciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Avoid incompatible pointer warning when dealing with double-indirection

    - by fnawothnig
    Assuming this program: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> static void ring_pool_alloc(void **p, size_t n) { static unsigned char pool[256], i = 0; *p = &pool[i]; i += n; } int main(void) { char *str; ring_pool_alloc(&str, 7); strcpy(str, "foobar"); printf("%s\n", str); return 0; } ... is it possible to somehow avoid the GCC warning test.c:12: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘ring_pool_alloc’ from incompatible pointer type test.c:4: note: expected ‘void **’ but argument is of type ‘char **’ ... without casting to (void**) (or simply disabling the compatibility checks)? Because I would very much like to keep compatibility warnings regarding indirection-level...

    Read the article

  • Returning new base class when the parent class shared pointer is the return type

    - by Ben Dol
    Can you have a parent class shared pointer return type of a function and then return a new child class without it being a shared pointer? I'm not sure how shared pointers work in these situations, do they act like a regular pointer? Here is my example: BaseEventPtr Actions::getEvent(const std::string& nodeName) { if(asLowerCaseString(nodeName) == "action") return new ActionEvent(&m_interface); return nullptr; } ActionEvent is the subclass of BaseEvent in this situation. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • C pointer array scope and function calls

    - by juvenis
    I have this situation: { float foo[10]; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { foo[i] = 1.0f; } object.function1(foo); // stores the float pointer to a const void* member of object } object.function2(); // uses the stored void pointer Are the contents of the float pointer unknown in the second function call? It seems that I get weird results when I run my program. But if I declare the float foo[10] to be const and initialize it in the declaration, I get correct results. Why is this happening?

    Read the article

  • stack dump accessing malloc char array

    - by robUK
    Hello, gcc 4.4.3 c89 I have the following source code. And getting a stack dump on the printf. char **devices; devices = malloc(10 * sizeof(char*)); strcpy(devices[0], "smxxxx1"); printf("[ %s ]\n", devices[0]); /* Stack dump trying to print */ I am thinking that this should create an char array like this. devices[0] devices[1] devices[2] devices[4] etc And each element I can store my strings. Many thanks for any suggestions,

    Read the article

  • Passing a pointer to a function that doesn't match the requirements of the formal parameter

    - by Andreas Grech
    int valid (int x, int y) { return x + y; } int invalid (int x) { return x; } int func (int *f (int, int), int x, int y) { //f is a pointer to a function taking 2 ints and returning an int return f(x, y); } int main () { int val = func(valid, 1, 2), inval = func(invalid, 1, 2); // <- 'invalid' does not match the contract printf("Valid: %d\n", val); printf("Invalid: %d\n", inval); /* Output: * Valid: 3 * Invalid: 1 */ } At the line inval = func(invalid, 1, 2);, why am I not getting a compiler error? If func expects a pointer to a function taking 2 ints and I pass a pointer to a function that takes a single int, why isn't the compiler complaining? Also, since this is happening, what happens to the second parameter y in the invalid function?

    Read the article

  • Alternates to C++ Reference/Pointer Syntax

    - by Jon Purdy
    What languages other than C and C++ have explicit reference and pointer type qualifiers? People seem to be easily confused by the right-to-left reading order of types, where char*& is "a reference to a pointer to a character", or a "character-pointer reference"; do any languages with explicit references make use of a left-to-right reading order, such as &*char/ref ptr char? I'm working on a little language project, and legibility is one of my key concerns. It seems to me that this is one of those questions to which it's easy for a person but hard for a search engine to provide an answer. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to C++ Reference/Pointer Syntax

    - by Jon Purdy
    What languages other than C and C++ have explicit reference and pointer type qualifiers? People seem to be easily confused by the right-to-left reading order of types, where char*& is "a reference to a pointer to a character", or a "character-pointer reference"; do any languages with explicit references make use of a left-to-right reading order, such as &*char/ref ptr char? I'm working on a little language project, and legibility is one of my key concerns. It seems to me that this is one of those questions to which it's easy for a person but hard for a search engine to provide an answer. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • C++ deleting a pointer

    - by eSKay
    On this page, its written that One reason is that the operand of delete need not be an lvalue. Consider: delete p+1; delete f(x); Here, the implementation of delete does not have a pointer to which it can assign zero. Adding a number to a pointer shifts it forward in memory by those many number of sizeof(*p) units. So, what is the difference between delete p and delete p+1, and why would making the pointer 0 only be a problem with delete p+1?

    Read the article

  • Size of a class with 'this' pointer

    - by psvaibhav
    The size of a class with no data members is returned as 1 byte, even though there is an implicit 'this' pointer declared. Shouldn't the size returned be 4 bytes(on a 32 bit machine)? I came across articles which indicated that 'this' pointer is not counted for calculating the size of the object. But I am unable to understand the reason for this. Also, if any member function is declared virtual, the size of the class is now returned as 4 bytes. This means that the vptr is counted for calculating the size of the object. Why is the vptr considered and 'this' pointer ignored for calculating the size of object?

    Read the article

  • Boost Shared Pointer: Simultaneous Read Access Across Multiple Threads

    - by Nikhil
    I have a thread A which allocates memory and assigns it to a shared pointer. Then this thread spawns 3 other threads X, Y and Z and passes a copy of the shared pointer to each. When X, Y and Z go out of scope, the memory is freed. But is there a possibility that 2 threads X, Y go out of scope at the exact same point in time and there is a race condition on reference count so instead of decrementing it by 2, it only gets decremented once. So, now the reference count newer drops to 0, so there is a memory leak. Note that, X, Y and Z are only reading the memory. Not writing or resetting the shared pointer. To cut a long story short, can there be a race condition on the reference count and can that lead to memory leaks?

    Read the article

  • Call function by pointer and set parametrs in memory block

    - by Ellesmess Glain
    Hi, I've little problem : I'm solving problem with calling function by pointer and passing to it parameters in continuous memory block. My goal is to have function named e.g CallFunc(void * func,void *params, unsigned int param_length); that I'll send function pointer, pointer to function's parameters and eventually parameters length and this calling function will call passed function with it's parameters. I will like write this in C/C++, but if somebody has idea, how this resolve in other language, that supports DLL generation and exportet functions, it will be fine too. Thanks for answers, Ellesmess P.S. I'm sorry about my English, but I'm Czech, thanks :o)

    Read the article

  • Add 64 bit offset to a pointer

    - by Novox
    In F#, there's the NativePtr module, but it seems to only support 32 bit offsets for its’ add/get/set functions, just like System.IntPtr does. Is there a way to add a 64 bit offset to a native pointer (nativeptr<'a) in F#? Of course I could convert all addresses to 64 bit integers, do normal integer operations and then convert the result again to nativeptr<'a, but this would cost additional add and imul instructions. I really want the AGUs to perform the address calculations. For instance, using unsafe in C# you could do something like void* ptr = Marshal.AllocHGlobal(...).ToPointer(); int64 offset = ...; T* newAddr = (T*)ptr + offset; // T has to be an unmanaged type Well actually you can't, because there is no "unmanaged" constraint for type parameters, but at least you can do general pointer arithmetic in a non-generic way. In F# we finally got the unmanaged constraint; but how do I do the pointer arithmetic?

    Read the article

  • Feed char array into stdin

    - by Brian Lindsey
    I am writing a parser for a mini scripting language. Some of my grammar rules require jumping to a different location in the file to obtain information. There doesn't seem to be a straightforward way to accomplish this. So, I was thinking about loading my data files into a char array array and parsing line by line. This will allow me to jump all over the array with ease. My question is, is it possible to feed char arrays (i.e. char *) into stdin, so I can easily invoke the yyparse() function as needed.

    Read the article

  • C++ putting a 2d array of floats into a char*

    - by sam
    Hello, I'm trying to take a 2d vector of floats (input) and put them into a char* (output) in c++. void foo(const std::vector<std::vector<float> > &input, char* &output ) { char charBuf[sizeof(output)]; int counter = 0; for(unsigned int i=0; i<input.size(); i++) { for(unsigned int p=0; p<input.at(i).size(); p++) { //what the heck goes here } }

    Read the article

  • Dynamic memory inside a struct

    - by Maximilien
    Hello, I'm editing a piece of code, that is part of a big project, that uses "const's" to initialize a bunch of arrays. Because I want to parametrize these const's I have to adapt the code to use "malloc" in order to allocate the memory. Unfortunately there is a problem with structs: I'm not able to allocate dynamic memory in the struct itself. Doing it outside would cause to much modification of the original code. Here's a small example: int globalx,globaly; struct bigStruct{ struct subStruct{ double info1; double info2; bool valid; }; double data; //subStruct bar[globalx][globaly]; subStruct ** bar=(subStruct**)malloc(globalx*sizeof(subStruct*)); for(int i=0;i<globalx;i++) bar[i]=(*subStruct)malloc(globaly*sizeof(subStruct)); }; int main(){ globalx=2; globaly=3; bigStruct foo; for(int i=0;i<globalx;i++) for(int j=0;j<globaly;j++){ foo.bar[i][j].info1=i+j; foo.bar[i][j].info2=i*j; foo.bar[i][j].valid=(i==j); } return 0; } Note: in the program code I'm editing globalx and globaly were const's in a specified namespace. Now I removed the "const" so they can act as parameters that are set exactly once. Summarized: How can I properly allocate memory for the substruct inside the struct? Thank you very much! Max

    Read the article

  • Objective-C classes, pointers to primitive types, etc.

    - by Toby Wilson
    I'll cut a really long story short and give an example of my problem. Given a class that has a pointer to a primitive type as a property: @interface ClassOne : NSObject { int* aNumber } @property int* aNumber; The class is instantiated, and aNumber is allocated and assigned a value, accordingly: ClassOne* bob = [[ClassOne alloc] init]; bob.aNumber = malloc(sizeof(int)); *bob.aNumber = 5; It is then passed, by reference, to assign the aNumber value of a seperate instance of this type of class, accordingly: ClassOne* fred = [[ClassOne alloc] init]; fred.aNumber = bob.aNumber; Fred's aNumber pointer is then freed, reallocated, and assigned a new value, for example 7. Now, the problem I'm having; Since Fred has been assigned the same pointer that Bob had, I would expect that Bob's aNumber will now have a value of 7. It doesn't, because for some reason it's pointer was freed, but not reassigned (it is still pointing to the same address it was first allocated which is now freed). Fred's pointer, however, has the allocated value 7 in a different memory location. Why is it behaving like this? What am I minsunderstanding? How can I make it work like C++ does?

    Read the article

  • Graphics module: Am I going the right way?

    - by Paul
    I'm trying to write the graphics module of my engine. That is, this part of the code only provides an interface through which to load images, fonts, etc and draw them on the screen. It is also a wrapper for the library I'm using (SDL in this case). Here are the interfaces for my Image, Font and GraphicsRenderer classes. Please tell me if I'm going the right way. Image class Image { public: Image(); Image(const Image& other); Image(const char* file); ~Image(); bool load(const char* file); void free(); bool isLoaded() const; Image& operator=(const Image& other); private: friend class GraphicsRenderer; void* data_; }; Font class Font { public: Font(); Font(const Font& other); Font(const char* file, int ptsize); ~Font(); void load(const char* file, int ptsize); void free(); bool isLoaded() const; Font& operator=(const Font& other); private: friend class GraphicsRenderer; void* data_; }; GrapphicsRenderer class GraphicsRenderer { public: static GraphicsRenderer* Instance(); void blitImage(const Image& img, int x, int y); void blitText(const char* string, const Font& font, int x, int y); void render(); protected: GraphicsRenderer(); GraphicsRenderer(const GraphicsRenderer& other); GraphicsRenderer& operator=(const GraphicsRenderer& other); ~GraphicsRenderer(); private: void* screen_; bool initialize(); void finalize(); };

    Read the article

  • When does invoking a member function on a null instance result in undefined behavior?

    - by GMan
    This question arose in the comments of a now-deleted answer to this other question. Our question was asked in the comments by STingRaySC as: Where exactly do we invoke UB? Is it calling a member function through an invalid pointer? Or is it calling a member function that accesses member data through an invalid pointer? With the answer deleted I figured we might as well make it it's own question. Consider the following code: #include <iostream> struct foo { void bar(void) { std::cout << "gman was here" << std::endl; } void baz(void) { x = 5; } int x; }; int main(void) { foo* f = 0; f->bar(); // (a) f->baz(); // (b) } We expect (b) to crash, because there is no corresponding member x for the null pointer. In practice, (a) doesn't crash because the this pointer is never used. Because (b) dereferences the this pointer (this->x = 5;), and this is null, the program enters undefined behavior. Does (a) result in undefined behavior? What about if both functions are static?

    Read the article

  • C++ this as thread parameter, variables unavailable

    - by brecht
    I have three classes: class Rtss_Generator { int mv_transfersize; } class Rtss_GenSine : Rtss_Generator class Rtss_GenSineRpm : Rtss_GenSine Rtss_GenSine creates a thread in his constructer, it is started immediatly and the threadfunction is off-course declared static, waiting for an event to start calculating. the problem: all the variables that are accessed through the gen-pointer are 0, but it does not fail. Also, this-address in the constructer and the gen-pointer-address in the thread are the same, so the pointer is ok. this code is created and compile in visual studio 6.0 service pack 2003 ORIGINAL CODE no thread Rtss_GenSine::getNextData() { //[CALCULATION] //mv_transferSize is accessible and has ALWAYS value 1600 which is ok } NEW CODE Rtss_GenSine::Rtss_GenSine() { createThread(NULL, threadFunction, (LPVOID) this,0,0); } Rtss_GenSine::getNextData() { SetEvent(startCalculating); WaitForSingleObject(stoppedCalculaing, INFINITE); } DWORD Rtss_GenSine::threadFunction(LPVOID pParam) { Rtss_GenSine* gen = (Rtss_GenSine*) pParam; while(runThread) { WaitForSingleObject(startCalculating, INFINITE); ResetEvent(startCalculating) //[CALCULATION] //gen->mv_transferSize ---> it does not fail, but is always zero //all variables accessed via the gen-pointer are 0 setEvent(stoppedCalculaing) } }

    Read the article

  • Using a Function returning apointer as LValue

    - by Amrish
    Why cant I used a function returning a pointer as a lvalue? For example this one works int* function() { int* x; return x; } int main() { int* x = function(); x = new int(9); } but not this int* function() { int* x; return x; } int main() { int* x; function() = x; } While I can use a pointer variable as a lvalue, why can't I use a function returning a pointer as a lvalue? Also, when the function returns a refernce, instead of a pointer, then it becomes a valid lvalue.

    Read the article

  • Search string in file (C)

    - by chutsu
    So my code isn't working... test.c:27: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘search’ from incompatible pointer type which is the fgets line. My code opens a file, reads the file line by line, and I'm trying to create a "search" function that will return a value that indicates whether that string is found on that line of the file. My ultimate goal is to achieve a search and replace program. But one step at a time eh? this is what I have so far: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> int search(const char *content[], const char *search_term) { int t; for(t=0; content[t]; ++t){ if(!strcmp(content[t], search_term)){ return t; // found } } return 0; // not found } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { FILE *file; char line[BUFSIZ]; int linenumber=0; char term[20] = "hello world"; file = fopen(argv[1], "r"); if(file != NULL){ while(fgets(line, sizeof(line), file)){ if(search(line, term) != -1){ printf("Search Term Found!!\n"); } ++linenumber; } } else{ perror(argv[1]); } fclose(file); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • error in assigning a const character to an unsigned char array in C++

    - by mekasperasky
    #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <cstring> using namespace std; typedef unsigned long int WORD; /* Should be 32-bit = 4 bytes */ #define w 32 /* word size in bits */ #define r 12 /* number of rounds */ #define b 16 /* number of bytes in key */ #define c 4 /* number words in key */ /* c = max(1,ceil(8*b/w)) */ #define t 26 /* size of table S = 2*(r+1) words */ WORD S [t],L[c]; /* expanded key table */ WORD P = 0xb7e15163, Q = 0x9e3779b9; /* magic constants */ /* Rotation operators. x must be unsigned, to get logical right shift*/ #define ROTL(x,y) (((x)<<(y&(w-1))) | ((x)>>(w-(y&(w-1))))) #define ROTR(x,y) (((x)>>(y&(w-1))) | ((x)<<(w-(y&(w-1))))) void RC5_DECRYPT(WORD *ct, WORD *pt) /* 2 WORD input ct/output pt */ { WORD i, B=ct[1], A=ct[0]; for (i=r; i>0; i--) { B = ROTR(B-S [2*i+1],A)^A; A = ROTR(A-S [2*i],B)^B; } pt [1] = B-S [1] ;pt [0] = A-S [0]; } void RC5_SETUP(unsigned char *K) /* secret input key K 0...b-1] */ { WORD i, j, k, u=w/8, A, B, L [c]; /* Initialize L, then S, then mix key into S */ for (i=b-1,L[c-1]=0; i!=-1; i--) L[i/u] = (L[i/u]<<8)+K[ i]; for (S [0]=P,i=1; i<t; i++) S [i] = S [i-1]+Q; for (A=B=i=j=k=0; k<3*t; k++,i=(i+1)%t,j=(j+1)%c) /* 3*t > 3*c */ { A = S[i] = ROTL(S [i]+(A+B),3); B = L[j] = ROTL(L[j]+(A+B),(A+B)); } } void printword(WORD A) { WORD k; for (k=0 ;k<w; k+=8) printf("%02.2lX",(A>>k)&0xFF); } int main() { WORD i, j, k, pt [2], pt2 [2], ct [2] = {0,0}; unsigned char key[b]; ofstream out("cpt.txt"); ifstream in("key.txt"); if(!in) { cout << "Cannot open file.\n"; return 1; } if(!out) { cout << "Cannot open file.\n"; return 1; } key="111111000001111"; RC5_SETUP(key); ct[0]=2185970173; ct[1]=3384368406; for (i=1;i<2;i++) { RC5_DECRYPT(ct,pt2); printf("\n plaintext "); printword(pt [0]); printword(pt[1]); } return 0; } When I compile this code, I get two warnings and also an error saying that I can't assign a char value to my character array. Why is that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >