Search Results

Search found 26134 results on 1046 pages for 'coming out of void'.

Page 31/1046 | < Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >

  • Cocos2d-x v3 invalid conversion from 'cocos2d::Layer* [on hold]

    - by Hammerh5
    Hello guys I'm learning cocos2d-x v3 right but most of the code that I can find is to the version 2. My specific error is this one, when I try to compile my cocos2s-x 3 project this error shows. invalid conversion from 'cocos2d::Layer to Game* [-fpermisive]* What I want to do is create a new game scene in the following code: //Game.cpp #include "Game.h" Scene* Game::scene() { scene *sc = CCScene::create(); sc->setTag(TAG_GAME_SCENE); const Game *g = Game::create(); //Here is where the conversions fails. sc->addChild(g, 0, TAG_GAME_LAYER); return sc; } Of course this is my header file //Game.h #include "cocos2d.h" #include "Mole.h" #include "AppDelegate.h" using namespace cocos2d; class Game: public cocos2d::Layer { cocos2d::CCArray *moles; float timeBetweenMoles, timeElapsed, increaseMolesAtTime, increaseElapsed, lastMoleHiTime; int molesAtOnce; cocos2d::CCSize s; bool isPaused; public: CCString *missSound, *hitSound; static cocos2d::Scene* scene(); virtual bool init(); void showMole(); void initializeGame(); void onEnterTransitionDidFinish(); void onExit(); void onTouchesBegan(const std::vector<cocos2d::Touch *> &touches, cocos2d::Event *event); void tick(float dt); cocos2d::CCArray* getMoles(bool isUp); //LAYER_CREATE_FUNC(Game); }; #endif /* GAME_H_ */ I don't know what's wrong I suppose this code works fine in Cocos2d-x v2. It's maybe some changes in the C++ version ?

    Read the article

  • Distinguishing repetitive code with the same implementation

    - by KyelJmD
    Given this sample code import java.util.ArrayList; import blackjack.model.items.Card; public class BlackJackPlayer extends Player { private double bet; private Hand hand01 = new Hand(); private Hand hand02 = new Hand(); public void addCardToHand01(Card c) { hand01.addCard(c); } public void addCardToHand02(Card c) { hand02.addCard(c); } public void bustHand01() { hand01.setBust(true); } public void bustHand02() { hand02.setBust(true); } public void standHand01() { hand01.setStand(true); } public void standHand02() { hand02.setStand(true); } public boolean isHand01Bust() { return hand01.isBust(); } public boolean isHand02Bust() { return hand02.isBust(); } public boolean isHand01Standing() { return hand01.isStanding(); } public boolean isHand02Standing() { return hand02.isStanding(); } public int getHand01Score(){ return hand01.getCardScore(); } public int getHand02Score(){ return hand02.getCardScore(); } } Is this considered as a repetitive code? providing that each method is operating a seperate field but doing the same implementation ? Note that hand01 and hand02 should be distinct. if this is considered as repetitive code, how would I address this? providing that each hand is a seperate entity

    Read the article

  • Ogre 3d and bullet physics interaction

    - by Tim
    I have been playing around with Ogre3d and trying to integrate bullet physics. I have previously somewhat successfully got this functionality working with irrlicht and bullet and I am trying to base this on what I had done there, but modifying it to fit with Ogre. It is working but not correctly and I would like some help to understand what it is I am doing wrong. I have a state system and when I enter the "gamestate" I call some functions such as setting up a basic scene, creating the physics simulation. I am doing that as follows. void GameState::enter() { ... // Setup Physics btBroadphaseInterface *BroadPhase = new btAxisSweep3(btVector3(-1000,-1000,-1000), btVector3(1000,1000,1000)); btDefaultCollisionConfiguration *CollisionConfiguration = new btDefaultCollisionConfiguration(); btCollisionDispatcher *Dispatcher = new btCollisionDispatcher(CollisionConfiguration); btSequentialImpulseConstraintSolver *Solver = new btSequentialImpulseConstraintSolver(); World = new btDiscreteDynamicsWorld(Dispatcher, BroadPhase, Solver, CollisionConfiguration); ... createScene(); } In the createScene method I add a light and try to setup a "ground" plane to act as the ground for things to collide with.. as follows. I expect there is issues with this as I get objects colliding with the ground but half way through it and they glitch around like crazy on collision. void GameState::createScene() { m_pSceneMgr->createLight("Light")->setPosition(75,75,75); // Physics // As a test we want a floor plane for things to collide with Ogre::Entity *ent; Ogre::Plane p; p.normal = Ogre::Vector3(0,1,0); p.d = 0; Ogre::MeshManager::getSingleton().createPlane( "FloorPlane", Ogre::ResourceGroupManager::DEFAULT_RESOURCE_GROUP_NAME, p, 200000, 200000, 20, 20, true, 1, 9000,9000,Ogre::Vector3::UNIT_Z); ent = m_pSceneMgr->createEntity("floor", "FloorPlane"); ent->setMaterialName("Test/Floor"); Ogre::SceneNode *node = m_pSceneMgr->getRootSceneNode()->createChildSceneNode(); node->attachObject(ent); btTransform Transform; Transform.setIdentity(); Transform.setOrigin(btVector3(0,1,0)); // Give it to the motion state btDefaultMotionState *MotionState = new btDefaultMotionState(Transform); btCollisionShape *Shape = new btStaticPlaneShape(btVector3(0,1,0),0); // Add Mass btVector3 LocalInertia; Shape->calculateLocalInertia(0, LocalInertia); // CReate the rigid body object btRigidBody *RigidBody = new btRigidBody(0, MotionState, Shape, LocalInertia); // Store a pointer to the Ogre Node so we can update it later RigidBody->setUserPointer((void *) (node)); // Add it to the physics world World->addRigidBody(RigidBody); Objects.push_back(RigidBody); m_pNumEntities++; // End Physics } I then have a method to create a cube and give it rigid body physics properties. I know there will be errors here as I get the items colliding with the ground but not with each other properly. So I would appreciate some input on what I am doing wrong. void GameState::CreateBox(const btVector3 &TPosition, const btVector3 &TScale, btScalar TMass) { Ogre::Vector3 size = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; Ogre::Vector3 pos = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; Ogre::Vector3 scale = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; pos.x = TPosition.getX(); pos.y = TPosition.getY(); pos.z = TPosition.getZ(); scale.x = TScale.getX(); scale.y = TScale.getY(); scale.z = TScale.getZ(); Ogre::Entity *entity = m_pSceneMgr->createEntity( "Box" + Ogre::StringConverter::toString(m_pNumEntities), "cube.mesh"); entity->setCastShadows(true); Ogre::AxisAlignedBox boundingB = entity->getBoundingBox(); size = boundingB.getSize(); //size /= 2.0f; // Only the half needed? //size *= 0.96f; // Bullet margin is a bit bigger so we need a smaller size entity->setMaterialName("Test/Cube"); Ogre::SceneNode *node = m_pSceneMgr->getRootSceneNode()->createChildSceneNode(); node->attachObject(entity); node->setPosition(pos); //node->scale(scale); // Physics btTransform Transform; Transform.setIdentity(); Transform.setOrigin(TPosition); // Give it to the motion state btDefaultMotionState *MotionState = new btDefaultMotionState(Transform); btVector3 HalfExtents(TScale.getX()*0.5f,TScale.getY()*0.5f,TScale.getZ()*0.5f); btCollisionShape *Shape = new btBoxShape(HalfExtents); // Add Mass btVector3 LocalInertia; Shape->calculateLocalInertia(TMass, LocalInertia); // CReate the rigid body object btRigidBody *RigidBody = new btRigidBody(TMass, MotionState, Shape, LocalInertia); // Store a pointer to the Ogre Node so we can update it later RigidBody->setUserPointer((void *) (node)); // Add it to the physics world World->addRigidBody(RigidBody); Objects.push_back(RigidBody); m_pNumEntities++; } Then in the GameState::update() method which which runs every frame to handle input and render etc I call an UpdatePhysics method to update the physics simulation. void GameState::UpdatePhysics(unsigned int TDeltaTime) { World->stepSimulation(TDeltaTime * 0.001f, 60); btRigidBody *TObject; for(std::vector<btRigidBody *>::iterator it = Objects.begin(); it != Objects.end(); ++it) { // Update renderer Ogre::SceneNode *node = static_cast<Ogre::SceneNode *>((*it)->getUserPointer()); TObject = *it; // Set position btVector3 Point = TObject->getCenterOfMassPosition(); node->setPosition(Ogre::Vector3((float)Point[0], (float)Point[1], (float)Point[2])); // set rotation btVector3 EulerRotation; QuaternionToEuler(TObject->getOrientation(), EulerRotation); node->setOrientation(1,(Ogre::Real)EulerRotation[0], (Ogre::Real)EulerRotation[1], (Ogre::Real)EulerRotation[2]); //node->rotate(Ogre::Vector3(EulerRotation[0], EulerRotation[1], EulerRotation[2])); } } void GameState::QuaternionToEuler(const btQuaternion &TQuat, btVector3 &TEuler) { btScalar W = TQuat.getW(); btScalar X = TQuat.getX(); btScalar Y = TQuat.getY(); btScalar Z = TQuat.getZ(); float WSquared = W * W; float XSquared = X * X; float YSquared = Y * Y; float ZSquared = Z * Z; TEuler.setX(atan2f(2.0f * (Y * Z + X * W), -XSquared - YSquared + ZSquared + WSquared)); TEuler.setY(asinf(-2.0f * (X * Z - Y * W))); TEuler.setZ(atan2f(2.0f * (X * Y + Z * W), XSquared - YSquared - ZSquared + WSquared)); TEuler *= RADTODEG; } I seem to have issues with the cubes not colliding with each other and colliding strangely with the ground. I have tried to capture the effect with the attached image. I would appreciate any help in understanding what I have done wrong. Thanks. EDIT : Solution The following code shows the changes I made to get accurate physics. void GameState::createScene() { m_pSceneMgr->createLight("Light")->setPosition(75,75,75); // Physics // As a test we want a floor plane for things to collide with Ogre::Entity *ent; Ogre::Plane p; p.normal = Ogre::Vector3(0,1,0); p.d = 0; Ogre::MeshManager::getSingleton().createPlane( "FloorPlane", Ogre::ResourceGroupManager::DEFAULT_RESOURCE_GROUP_NAME, p, 200000, 200000, 20, 20, true, 1, 9000,9000,Ogre::Vector3::UNIT_Z); ent = m_pSceneMgr->createEntity("floor", "FloorPlane"); ent->setMaterialName("Test/Floor"); Ogre::SceneNode *node = m_pSceneMgr->getRootSceneNode()->createChildSceneNode(); node->attachObject(ent); btTransform Transform; Transform.setIdentity(); // Fixed the transform vector here for y back to 0 to stop the objects sinking into the ground. Transform.setOrigin(btVector3(0,0,0)); // Give it to the motion state btDefaultMotionState *MotionState = new btDefaultMotionState(Transform); btCollisionShape *Shape = new btStaticPlaneShape(btVector3(0,1,0),0); // Add Mass btVector3 LocalInertia; Shape->calculateLocalInertia(0, LocalInertia); // CReate the rigid body object btRigidBody *RigidBody = new btRigidBody(0, MotionState, Shape, LocalInertia); // Store a pointer to the Ogre Node so we can update it later RigidBody->setUserPointer((void *) (node)); // Add it to the physics world World->addRigidBody(RigidBody); Objects.push_back(RigidBody); m_pNumEntities++; // End Physics } void GameState::CreateBox(const btVector3 &TPosition, const btVector3 &TScale, btScalar TMass) { Ogre::Vector3 size = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; Ogre::Vector3 pos = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; Ogre::Vector3 scale = Ogre::Vector3::ZERO; pos.x = TPosition.getX(); pos.y = TPosition.getY(); pos.z = TPosition.getZ(); scale.x = TScale.getX(); scale.y = TScale.getY(); scale.z = TScale.getZ(); Ogre::Entity *entity = m_pSceneMgr->createEntity( "Box" + Ogre::StringConverter::toString(m_pNumEntities), "cube.mesh"); entity->setCastShadows(true); Ogre::AxisAlignedBox boundingB = entity->getBoundingBox(); // The ogre bounding box is slightly bigger so I am reducing it for // use with the rigid body. size = boundingB.getSize()*0.95f; entity->setMaterialName("Test/Cube"); Ogre::SceneNode *node = m_pSceneMgr->getRootSceneNode()->createChildSceneNode(); node->attachObject(entity); node->setPosition(pos); node->showBoundingBox(true); //node->scale(scale); // Physics btTransform Transform; Transform.setIdentity(); Transform.setOrigin(TPosition); // Give it to the motion state btDefaultMotionState *MotionState = new btDefaultMotionState(Transform); // I got the size of the bounding box above but wasn't using it to set // the size for the rigid body. This now does. btVector3 HalfExtents(size.x*0.5f,size.y*0.5f,size.z*0.5f); btCollisionShape *Shape = new btBoxShape(HalfExtents); // Add Mass btVector3 LocalInertia; Shape->calculateLocalInertia(TMass, LocalInertia); // CReate the rigid body object btRigidBody *RigidBody = new btRigidBody(TMass, MotionState, Shape, LocalInertia); // Store a pointer to the Ogre Node so we can update it later RigidBody->setUserPointer((void *) (node)); // Add it to the physics world World->addRigidBody(RigidBody); Objects.push_back(RigidBody); m_pNumEntities++; } void GameState::UpdatePhysics(unsigned int TDeltaTime) { World->stepSimulation(TDeltaTime * 0.001f, 60); btRigidBody *TObject; for(std::vector<btRigidBody *>::iterator it = Objects.begin(); it != Objects.end(); ++it) { // Update renderer Ogre::SceneNode *node = static_cast<Ogre::SceneNode *>((*it)->getUserPointer()); TObject = *it; // Set position btVector3 Point = TObject->getCenterOfMassPosition(); node->setPosition(Ogre::Vector3((float)Point[0], (float)Point[1], (float)Point[2])); // Convert the bullet Quaternion to an Ogre quaternion btQuaternion btq = TObject->getOrientation(); Ogre::Quaternion quart = Ogre::Quaternion(btq.w(),btq.x(),btq.y(),btq.z()); // use the quaternion with setOrientation node->setOrientation(quart); } } The QuaternionToEuler function isn't needed so that was removed from code and header files. The objects now collide with the ground and each other appropriately.

    Read the article

  • VBO and shaders confusion, what's their connection?

    - by Jeffrey
    Considering OpenGL 2.1 VBOs and 1.20 GLSL shaders: When creating an entity like "Zombie", is it good to initialize just the VBO buffer with the data once and do N glDrawArrays() calls per each N zombies? Is there a more efficient way? (With a single call we cannot pass different uniforms to the shader to calculate an offset, see point 3) When dealing with logical object (player, tree, cube etc), should I always use the same shader or should I customize (or be able to customize) the shaders per each object? Considering an entity class, should I create and define the shader at object initialization? When having a movable object such as a human, is there any more powerful way to deal with its coordinates than to initialize its VBO object at 0,0 and define an uniform offset to pass to the shader to calculate its real position? Could you make an example of the Data Oriented Design on creating a generic zombie class? Is the following good? Zombielist class: class ZombieList { GLuint vbo; // generic zombie vertex model std::vector<color>; // object default color std::vector<texture>; // objects textures std::vector<vector3D>; // objects positions public: unsigned int create(); // return object id void move(unsigned int objId, vector3D offset); void rotate(unsigned int objId, float angle); void setColor(unsigned int objId, color c); void setPosition(unsigned int objId, color c); void setTexture(unsigned int, unsigned int); ... void update(Player*); // move towards player, attack if near } Example: Player p; Zombielist zl; unsigned int first = zl.create(); zl.setPosition(first, vector3D(50, 50)); zl.setTexture(first, texture("zombie1.png")); ... while (running) { // main loop ... zl.update(&p); zl.draw(); // draw every zombie }

    Read the article

  • How to implement a stack of game states in C++

    - by Lisandro Vaccaro
    I'm new to C++ and as a college proyect I'm building a 2D platformer with some classmates, I recently read that it's a good idea to have a stack of gamestates instead of a single global variable with the game state (which is what I have now) but I'm not sure how to do it. Currently this is my implementation: class GameState { public: virtual ~GameState(){}; virtual void handle_events() = 0; virtual void logic() = 0; virtual void render() = 0; }; class Menu : public GameState { public: Menu(); ~Menu(); void handle_events(); void logic(); void render(); }; Then I have a global variable of type GameState: GameState *currentState = NULL; And in my Main I define the currentState and call it's methods: int main(){ currentState = new Menu(); currentState.handle_events(); } How can I implement a stack or something similar to go from that to something like this: int main(){ statesStack.push(new Menu()); statesStack.getTop().handle_events(); }

    Read the article

  • First Person Camera strafing at angle

    - by Linkandzelda
    I have a simple camera class working in directx 11 allowing moving forward and rotating left and right. I'm trying to implement strafing into it but having some problems. The strafing works when there's no camera rotation, so when the camera starts at 0, 0, 0. But after rotating the camera in either direction it seems to strafe at an angle or inverted or just some odd stuff. Here is a video uploaded to Dropbox showing this behavior. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2873587/IncorrectStrafing.mp4 And here is my camera class. I have a hunch that it's related to the calculation for camera position. I tried various different calculations in strafe and they all seem to follow the same pattern and same behavior. Also the m_camera_rotation represents the Y rotation, as pitching isn't implemented yet. #include "camera.h" camera::camera(float x, float y, float z, float initial_rotation) { m_x = x; m_y = y; m_z = z; m_camera_rotation = initial_rotation; updateDXZ(); } camera::~camera(void) { } void camera::updateDXZ() { m_dx = sin(m_camera_rotation * (XM_PI/180.0)); m_dz = cos(m_camera_rotation * (XM_PI/180.0)); } void camera::Rotate(float amount) { m_camera_rotation += amount; updateDXZ(); } void camera::Forward(float step) { m_x += step * m_dx; m_z += step * m_dz; } void camera::strafe(float amount) { float yaw = (XM_PI/180.0) * m_camera_rotation; m_x += cosf( yaw ) * amount; m_z += sinf( yaw ) * amount; } XMMATRIX camera::getViewMatrix() { updatePosition(); return XMMatrixLookAtLH(m_position, m_lookat, m_up); } void camera::updatePosition() { m_position = XMVectorSet(m_x, m_y, m_z, 0.0); m_lookat = XMVectorSet(m_x + m_dx, m_y, m_z + m_dz, 0.0); m_up = XMVectorSet(0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0); }

    Read the article

  • Libgdx actor bounds are wrong

    - by Undume
    The Actor's boundaries are not centered at the ButtonText but I used the setBounds() method. The higher the Y position is, the less centered is the boundary. The weird thing is that i only created and added to the Stage one button but the screen shows two. When i click the top button, the bottom one is the one highlighted. How can i fix that? import com.badlogic.gdx.Game; import com.badlogic.gdx.Gdx; import com.badlogic.gdx.files.FileHandle; import com.badlogic.gdx.scenes.scene2d.Stage; import com.badlogic.gdx.scenes.scene2d.ui.Skin; import com.badlogic.gdx.scenes.scene2d.ui.TextButton; public class MyGame extends Game { Stage stage; @Override public void create() { stage=new Stage(); FileHandle skinFile = new FileHandle("data/resources/uiskin/uiskin.json"); Skin skin = new Skin(skinFile); TextButton sas=new TextButton("dd",skin); sas.setBounds(0, 500, 100, 100); stage.addActor(sas); Gdx.input.setInputProcessor(stage); } @Override public void dispose() { super.dispose(); } @Override public void render() { super.render(); stage.act(Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime()); stage.draw(); } @Override public void resize(int width, int height) { super.resize(width, height); } @Override public void pause() { super.pause(); } @Override public void resume() { super.resume(); } }

    Read the article

  • The Return Of __FILE__ And __LINE__ In .NET 4.5

    - by Alois Kraus
    Good things are hard to kill. One of the most useful predefined compiler macros in C/C++ were __FILE__ and __LINE__ which do expand to the compilation units file name and line number where this value is encountered by the compiler. After 4.5 versions of .NET we are on par with C/C++ again. It is of course not a simple compiler expandable macro it is an attribute but it does serve exactly the same purpose. Now we do get CallerLineNumberAttribute  == __LINE__ CallerFilePathAttribute        == __FILE__ CallerMemberNameAttribute  == __FUNCTION__ (MSVC Extension)   The most important one is CallerMemberNameAttribute which is very useful to implement the INotifyPropertyChanged interface without the need to hard code the name of the property anymore. Now you can simply decorate your change method with the new CallerMemberName attribute and you get the property name as string directly inserted by the C# compiler at compile time.   public string UserName { get { return _userName; } set { _userName=value; RaisePropertyChanged(); // no more RaisePropertyChanged(“UserName”)! } } protected void RaisePropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string member = "") { var copy = PropertyChanged; if(copy != null) { copy(new PropertyChangedEventArgs(this, member)); } } Nice and handy. This was obviously the prime reason to implement this feature in the C# 5.0 compiler. You can repurpose this feature for tracing to get your hands on the method name of your caller along other stuff very fast now. All infos are added during compile time which is much faster than other approaches like walking the stack. The example on MSDN shows the usage of this attribute with an example public static void TraceMessage(string message, [CallerMemberName] string memberName = "", [CallerFilePath] string sourceFilePath = "", [CallerLineNumber] int sourceLineNumber = 0) { Console.WriteLine("Hi {0} {1} {2}({3})", message, memberName, sourceFilePath, sourceLineNumber); }   When I do think of tracing I do usually want to have a API which allows me to Trace method enter and leave Trace messages with a severity like Info, Warning, Error When I do print a trace message it is very useful to print out method and type name as well. So your API must either be able to pass the method and type name as strings or extract it automatically via walking back one Stackframe and fetch the infos from there. The first glaring deficiency is that there is no CallerTypeAttribute yet because the C# compiler team was not satisfied with its performance.   A usable Trace Api might therefore look like   enum TraceTypes { None = 0, EnterLeave = 1 << 0, Info = 1 << 1, Warn = 1 << 2, Error = 1 << 3 } class Tracer : IDisposable { string Type; string Method; public Tracer(string type, string method) { Type = type; Method = method; if (IsEnabled(TraceTypes.EnterLeave,Type, Method)) { } } private bool IsEnabled(TraceTypes traceTypes, string Type, string Method) { // Do checking here if tracing is enabled return false; } public void Info(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Warn(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Error(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Info(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Warn(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Error(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Dispose() { // trace method leave } } This minimal trace API is very fast but hard to maintain since you need to pass in the type and method name as hard coded strings which can change from time to time. But now we have at least CallerMemberName to rid of the explicit method parameter right? Not really. Since any acceptable usable trace Api should have a method signature like Tracexxx(… string fmt, params [] object args) we not able to add additional optional parameters after the args array. If we would put it before the format string we would need to make it optional as well which would mean the compiler would need to figure out what our trace message and arguments are (not likely) or we would need to specify everything explicitly just like before . There are ways around this by providing a myriad of overloads which in the end are routed to the very same method but that is ugly. I am not sure if nobody inside MS agrees that the above API is reasonable to have or (more likely) that the whole talk about you can use this feature for diagnostic purposes was not a core feature at all but a simple byproduct of making the life of INotifyPropertyChanged implementers easier. A way around this would be to allow for variable argument arrays after the params keyword another set of optional arguments which are always filled by the compiler but I do not know if this is an easy one. The thing I am missing much more is the not provided CallerType attribute. But not in the way you would think of. In the API above I did add some filtering based on method and type to stay as fast as possible for types where tracing is not enabled at all. It should be no more expensive than an additional method call and a bool variable check if tracing for this type is enabled at all. The data is tightly bound to the calling type and method and should therefore become part of the static type instance. Since extending the CLR type system for tracing is not something I do expect to happen I have come up with an alternative approach which allows me basically to attach run time data to any existing type object in super fast way. The key to success is the usage of generics.   class Tracer<T> : IDisposable { string Method; public Tracer(string method) { if (TraceData<T>.Instance.Enabled.HasFlag(TraceTypes.EnterLeave)) { } } public void Dispose() { if (TraceData<T>.Instance.Enabled.HasFlag(TraceTypes.EnterLeave)) { } } public static void Info(string fmt, params object[] args) { } /// <summary> /// Every type gets its own instance with a fresh set of variables to describe the /// current filter status. /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam> internal class TraceData<UsingType> { internal static TraceData<UsingType> Instance = new TraceData<UsingType>(); public bool IsInitialized = false; // flag if we need to reinit the trace data in case of reconfigured trace settings at runtime public TraceTypes Enabled = TraceTypes.None; // Enabled trace levels for this type } } We do not need to pass the type as string or Type object to the trace Api. Instead we define a generic Api that accepts the using type as generic parameter. Then we can create a TraceData static instance which is due to the nature of generics a fresh instance for every new type parameter. My tests on my home machine have shown that this approach is as fast as a simple bool flag check. If you have an application with many types using tracing you do not want to bring the app down by simply enabling tracing for one special rarely used type. The trace filter performance for the types which are not enabled must be therefore the fasted code path. This approach has the nice side effect that if you store the TraceData instances in one global list you can reconfigure tracing at runtime safely by simply setting the IsInitialized flag to false. A similar effect can be achieved with a global static Dictionary<Type,TraceData> object but big hash tables have random memory access semantics which is bad for cache locality and you always need to pay for the lookup which involves hash code generation, equality check and an indexed array access. The generic version is wicked fast and allows you to add more features to your tracing Api with minimal perf overhead. But it is cumbersome to write the generic type argument always explicitly and worse if you do refactor code and move parts of it to other classes it might be that you cannot configure tracing correctly. I would like therefore to decorate my type with an attribute [CallerType] class Tracer<T> : IDisposable to tell the compiler to fill in the generic type argument automatically. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { using (var t = new Tracer()) // equivalent to new Tracer<Program>() { That would be really useful and super fast since you do not need to pass any type object around but you do have full type infos at hand. This change would be breaking if another non generic type exists in the same namespace where now the generic counterpart would be preferred. But this is an acceptable risk in my opinion since you can today already get conflicts if two generic types of the same name are defined in different namespaces. This would be only a variation of this issue. When you do think about this further you can add more features like to trace the exception in your Dispose method if the method is left with an exception with that little trick I did write some time ago. You can think of tracing as a super fast and configurable switch to write data to an output destination or to execute alternative actions. With such an infrastructure you can e.g. Reconfigure tracing at run time. Take a memory dump when a specific method is left with a specific exception. Throw an exception when a specific trace statement is hit (useful for testing error conditions). Execute a passed delegate which e.g. dumps additional state when enabled. Write data to an in memory ring buffer and dump it when specific events do occur (e.g. method is left with an exception, triggered from outside). Write data to an output device. …. This stuff is really useful to have when your code is in production on a mission critical server and you need to find the root cause of sporadic crashes of your application. It could be a buggy graphics card driver which throws access violations into your application (ok with .NET 4 not anymore except if you enable a compatibility flag) where you would like to have a minidump or you have reached after two weeks of operation a state where you need a full memory dump at a specific point in time in the middle of an transaction. At my older machine I do get with this super fast approach 50 million traces/s when tracing is disabled. When I do know that tracing is enabled for this type I can walk the stack by using StackFrameHelper.GetStackFramesInternal to check further if a specific action or output device is configured for this method which is about 2-3 times faster than the regular StackTrace class. Even with one String.Format I am down to 3 million traces/s so performance is not so important anymore since I do want to do something now. The CallerMemberName feature of the C# 5 compiler is nice but I would have preferred to get direct access to the MethodHandle and not to the stringified version of it. But I really would like to see a CallerType attribute implemented to fill in the generic type argument of the call site to augment the static CLR type data with run time data.

    Read the article

  • Example of DOD design (on a generic Zombie game)

    - by Jeffrey
    I can't seem to find a nice explanation of the Data Oriented Design for a generic zombie game (it's just an example, pretty common example). Could you make an example of the Data Oriented Design on creating a generic zombie class? Is the following good? Zombie list class: class ZombieList { GLuint vbo; // generic zombie vertex model std::vector<color>; // object default color std::vector<texture>; // objects textures std::vector<vector3D>; // objects positions public: unsigned int create(); // return object id void move(unsigned int objId, vector3D offset); void rotate(unsigned int objId, float angle); void setColor(unsigned int objId, color c); void setPosition(unsigned int objId, color c); void setTexture(unsigned int, unsigned int); ... void update(Player*); // move towards player, attack if near } Example: Player p; Zombielist zl; unsigned int first = zl.create(); zl.setPosition(first, vector3D(50, 50)); zl.setTexture(first, texture("zombie1.png")); ... while (running) { // main loop ... zl.update(&p); zl.draw(); // draw every zombie } Or would creating a generic World container that contains every action from bite(zombieId, playerId) to moveTo(playerId, vector) to createPlayer() to shoot(playerId, vector) to face(radians)/face(vector); and contains: std::vector<zombie> std::vector<player> ... std::vector<mapchunk> ... std::vector<vbobufferid> player_run_animation; ... be a good example? Whats the proper way to organize a game with DOD?

    Read the article

  • 1136: Incorrect number of arguments. Expected 0 AS3 Flash CS5.5 [on hold]

    - by Erick
    how do I solve this error? I've been trying to get the answer online but have not been successful. I'm trying to learn As3 for flash so I decided to try making a preloader for a game. Preloader.as package com.game.moran { import flash.display.LoaderInfo; import flash.display.MovieClip; import flash.events.*; public class ThePreloader extends MovieClip { private var fullWidth:Number; public var ldrInfo:LoaderInfo; public function ThePreloader (fullWidth:Number = 0, ldrInfo:LoaderInfo = null) { this.fullWidth = fullWidth; this.ldrInfo = ldrInfo; addEventListener(Event.ENTER_FRAME, checkLoad); } private function checkLoad (e:Event) : void { if (ldrInfo.bytesLoaded == ldrInfo.bytesTotal && ldrInfo.bytesTotal !=0) { dispatchEvent (new Event ("loadComplete")); phaseOut(); } updateLoader (ldfInfo.bytesLoaded / ldrInfo.bytesTotal); } private function updateLoader(num:Number) : void { mcPreloaderBar.Width = num * fullWidth; } private function phaseOut() : void { removeEventListener (Event.ENTER_FRAME, checkLoad); phaseComplete(); } private function phaseComplete() : void { dispatchEvent (new Event ("preloaderFinished")); } } } Engine.as package com.game.moran { import flash.display.MovieClip; import flash.display.Sprite; import flash.events.Event; public class Engine extends MovieClip { private var preloader:ThePreloader; public function Engine() { preloader = new ThePreloader(732, this.loaderInfo); stage.addChild(preloader); preloader.addEventListener("loadComplete", loadAssets); preloader.addEventListener("preloaderFinished", showSponsors); } private function loadAssets (e:Event) : void { this.play(); } private function showSponsors(e:Event) : void { stage.removeChild(preloader); trace("show sponsors") } } } The line being flagged as an error is line 13 in Engine.as.

    Read the article

  • Relationship between Repository and Unit of Work

    - by NullOrEmpty
    I am going to implement a repository, and I would like to use the UOW pattern since the consumer of the repository could do several operations, and I want to commit them at once. After read several articles about the matter, I still don't get how to relate this two elements, depending on the article it is being done in a way u other. Sometimes the UOW is something internal to the repository: public class Repository { UnitOfWork _uow; public Repository() { _uow = IoC.Get<UnitOfWork>(); } public void Save(Entity e) { _uow.Track(e); } public void SubmittChanges() { SaveInStorage(_uow.GetChanges()); } } And sometimes it is external: public class Repository { public void Save(Entity e, UnitOfWork uow) { uow.Track(e); } public void SubmittChanges(UnitOfWork uow) { SaveInStorage(uow.GetChanges()); } } Other times, is the UOW whom references the Repository public class UnitOfWork { Repository _repository; public UnitOfWork(Repository repository) { _repository = repository; } public void Save(Entity e) { this.Track(e); } public void SubmittChanges() { _repository.Save(this.GetChanges()); } } How are these two elements related? UOW tracks the elements that needs be changed, and repository contains the logic to persist those changes, but... who call who? Does the last make more sense? Also, who manages the connection? If several operations have to be done in the repository, I think using the same connection and even transaction is more sound, so maybe put the connection object inside the UOW and this one inside the repository makes sense as well. Cheers

    Read the article

  • IBM PS/2 Keyboard with OS X 10.6 and PS2->USB Converter

    - by public static void
    Just got a new Mac Pro at work and as I can't stand the ZX Spectrum-esque 'dead flies' feel of the new Apple keyboards, I brought my trusty IBM SpaceSaver II to the office (with a USB/PS2 adapter) All seems generally to work ok - even the Trackpoint 'nipple' but periodically the modifier keys, notably the Ctrl and Windows keys seem to go into 'sticky' mode so that typing an 'S' brings up the save dialog, 'O' = open dialog etc. etc. Its generally fixed by switching windows and then returning back to the offending one, but this is really beginning to cheese me off. Can anyone suggest a fix?

    Read the article

  • Domino 8.5.3: Modify Subject of Incoming Email

    - by Void
    I am a newbie in managing and development for Domino. Recently, I have request from other teams at work to set up a filter or agent for incoming mail. This is the requirement for the request: Look for Incoming Mail addressed to #CRITICAL (mutlipurpose, internal group containing a list of engineers) For mail matching Point 1, append "For Immediate Action: " to the front of the Subject Some restrictions I have: Only the Domino server is under my charge, not to touch on network-side or other servers No 3rd party software to be installed I have gone through the configurations in the Domino server and the closest thing I have to filtering Email is the Router/SMTP Restrictions... Rules. But this is not able to fulfill Point 2 in any way. Is this even possible using just Domino server settings, or through agents?

    Read the article

  • Named output parameters vs return values

    - by Abyx
    Which code is better: // C++ void handle_message(...some input parameters..., bool& wasHandled) void set_some_value(int newValue, int* oldValue = nullptr) // C# void handle_message(...some input parameters..., out bool wasHandled) void set_some_value(int newValue, out int oldValue) or bool handle_message(...some input parameters...) ///< Returns -1 if message was handled //(sorry, this documentation was broken a year ago and we're too busy to fix it) int set_some_value(T newValue) // (well, it's obvious what this function returns, so I didn't write any documentation for it) The first one doesn't have and need any documentation. It's a self-documenting code. Output value clearly says what it means, and it's really hard to make a change like this: - void handle_message(Message msg, bool& wasHandled) { - wasHandled = false; - if (...) { wasHandled = true; ... + void handle_message(Message msg, int& wasHandled) { + wasHandled = -1; + if (...) { wasHandled = ...; With return values such change could be done easily /// Return true if message was handled - bool handle_message(Message msg) { + int handle_message(Message msg) { ... - return true; + return -1; Most of compilers don't (and can't) check documentation written in comments. Programmers also tend to ignore comments while editing code. So, again, the question is: if subroutine has single output value, should it be a procedure with well-named self-documenting output parameter, or should it be a function which returns an unnamed value and have a comment describing it?

    Read the article

  • Open ports for Apache Tomcat-7.0.32 on Linux Mandriva

    - by ivanov-void
    I installed Apache Tomcat-7.0.32 on Linux Mandriva and I want to make it accessible. for this I need to open ports in iptables. I added the following rules- iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8081 --syn -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8010 --syn -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8444 --syn -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8006 --syn -j ACCEPT then save and restart iptables - /etc/init.d/iptables save /etc/init.d/iptables restart verify, that ports is open - netstat -tulpn | less I am running command - netstat-ntpl | grep java and see - When I disable the firewall, I see the start page of the server on request - http://server_ip:8081/ When enable - server not accessible from outside. In what may be the cause? I would be most grateful for the information! Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How to remove a box2d body when collision happens?

    - by Ayham
    I’m still new to java and android programming and I am having so much trouble Removing an object when collision happens. I looked around the web and found that I should never handle removing BOX2D bodies during collision detection (a contact listener) and I should add my objects to an arraylist and set a variable in the User Data section of the body to delete or not and handle the removing action in an update handler. So I did this: First I define two ArrayLists one for the faces and one for the bodies: ArrayList<Sprite> myFaces = new ArrayList<Sprite>(); ArrayList<Body> myBodies = new ArrayList<Body>(); Then when I create a face and connect that face to its body I add them to their ArrayLists like this: face = new AnimatedSprite(pX, pY, pWidth, pHeight, this.mBoxFaceTextureRegion); Body BoxBody = PhysicsFactory.createBoxBody(mPhysicsWorld, face, BodyType.DynamicBody, objectFixtureDef); mPhysicsWorld.registerPhysicsConnector(new PhysicsConnector(face, BoxBody, true, true)); myFaces.add(face); myBodies.add(BoxBody); now I add a contact listener and an update handler in the onloadscene like this: this.mPhysicsWorld.setContactListener(new ContactListener() { private AnimatedSprite face2; @Override public void beginContact(final Contact pContact) { } @Override public void endContact(final Contact pContact) { } @Override public void preSolve(Contact contact,Manifold oldManifold) { } @Override public void postSolve(Contact contact,ContactImpulse impulse) { } }); scene.registerUpdateHandler(new IUpdateHandler() { @Override public void reset() { } @Override public void onUpdate(final float pSecondsElapsed) { } }); My plan is to detect which two bodies collided in the contact listener by checking a variable from the user data section of the body, get their numbers in the array list and finally use the update handler to remove these bodies. The questions are: Am I using the arraylist correctly? How to add a variable to the User Data (the code please). I tried removing a body in this update handler but it still throws me NullPointerException , so what is the right way to add an update handler and where should I add it. Any other advices to do this would be great. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Example of DOD design

    - by Jeffrey
    I can't seem to find a nice explanation of the Data Oriented Design for a generic zombie game (it's just an example, pretty common example). Could you make an example of the Data Oriented Design on creating a generic zombie class? Is the following good? Zombie list class: class ZombieList { GLuint vbo; // generic zombie vertex model std::vector<color>; // object default color std::vector<texture>; // objects textures std::vector<vector3D>; // objects positions public: unsigned int create(); // return object id void move(unsigned int objId, vector3D offset); void rotate(unsigned int objId, float angle); void setColor(unsigned int objId, color c); void setPosition(unsigned int objId, color c); void setTexture(unsigned int, unsigned int); ... void update(Player*); // move towards player, attack if near } Example: Player p; Zombielist zl; unsigned int first = zl.create(); zl.setPosition(first, vector3D(50, 50)); zl.setTexture(first, texture("zombie1.png")); ... while (running) { // main loop ... zl.update(&p); zl.draw(); // draw every zombie } Or would creating a generic World container that contains every action from bite(zombieId, playerId) to moveTo(playerId, vector) to createPlayer() to shoot(playerId, vector) to face(radians)/face(vector); and contains: std::vector<zombie> std::vector<player> ... std::vector<mapchunk> ... std::vector<vbobufferid> player_run_animation; ... be a good example? Whats the proper way to organize a game with DOD?

    Read the article

  • How to Implement Project Type "Copy", "Move", "Rename", and "Delete"

    - by Geertjan
    You've followed the NetBeans Project Type Tutorial and now you'd like to let the user copy, move, rename, and delete the projects conforming to your project type. When they right-click a project, they should see the relevant menu items and those menu items should provide dialogs for user interaction, followed by event handling code to deal with the current operation. Right now, at the end of the tutorial, the "Copy" and "Delete" menu items are present but disabled, while the "Move" and "Rename" menu items are absent: The NetBeans Project API provides a built-in mechanism out of the box that you can leverage for project-level "Copy", "Move", "Rename", and "Delete" actions. All the functionality is there for you to use, while all that you need to do is a bit of enablement and configuration, which is described below. To get started, read the following from the NetBeans Project API: http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/javadoc/org-netbeans-modules-projectapi/org/netbeans/spi/project/ActionProvider.html http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/javadoc/org-netbeans-modules-projectapi/org/netbeans/spi/project/CopyOperationImplementation.html http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/javadoc/org-netbeans-modules-projectapi/org/netbeans/spi/project/MoveOrRenameOperationImplementation.html http://bits.netbeans.org/dev/javadoc/org-netbeans-modules-projectapi/org/netbeans/spi/project/DeleteOperationImplementation.html Now, let's do some work. For each of the menu items we're interested in, we need to do the following: Provide enablement and invocation handling in an ActionProvider implementation. Provide appropriate OperationImplementation classes. Add the new classes to the Project Lookup. Make the Actions visible on the Project Node. Run the application and verify the Actions work as you'd like. Here we go: Create an ActionProvider. Here you specify the Actions that should be supported, the conditions under which they should be enabled, and what should happen when they're invoked, using lots of default code that lets you reuse the functionality provided by the NetBeans Project API: class CustomerActionProvider implements ActionProvider { @Override public String[] getSupportedActions() { return new String[]{ ActionProvider.COMMAND_RENAME, ActionProvider.COMMAND_MOVE, ActionProvider.COMMAND_COPY, ActionProvider.COMMAND_DELETE }; } @Override public void invokeAction(String string, Lookup lkp) throws IllegalArgumentException { if (string.equalsIgnoreCase(ActionProvider.COMMAND_RENAME)) { DefaultProjectOperations.performDefaultRenameOperation( CustomerProject.this, ""); } if (string.equalsIgnoreCase(ActionProvider.COMMAND_MOVE)) { DefaultProjectOperations.performDefaultMoveOperation( CustomerProject.this); } if (string.equalsIgnoreCase(ActionProvider.COMMAND_COPY)) { DefaultProjectOperations.performDefaultCopyOperation( CustomerProject.this); } if (string.equalsIgnoreCase(ActionProvider.COMMAND_DELETE)) { DefaultProjectOperations.performDefaultDeleteOperation( CustomerProject.this); } } @Override public boolean isActionEnabled(String command, Lookup lookup) throws IllegalArgumentException { if ((command.equals(ActionProvider.COMMAND_RENAME))) { return true; } else if ((command.equals(ActionProvider.COMMAND_MOVE))) { return true; } else if ((command.equals(ActionProvider.COMMAND_COPY))) { return true; } else if ((command.equals(ActionProvider.COMMAND_DELETE))) { return true; } return false; } } Importantly, to round off this step, add "new CustomerActionProvider()" to the "getLookup" method of the project. If you were to run the application right now, all the Actions we're interested in would be enabled (if they are visible, as described in step 4 below) but when you invoke any of them you'd get an error message because each of the DefaultProjectOperations above looks in the Lookup of the Project for the presence of an implementation of a class for handling the operation. That's what we're going to do in the next step. Provide Implementations of Project Operations. For each of our operations, the NetBeans Project API lets you implement classes to handle the operation. The dialogs for interacting with the project are provided by the NetBeans project system, but what happens with the folders and files during the operation can be influenced via the operations. Below are the simplest possible implementations, i.e., here we assume we want nothing special to happen. Each of the below needs to be in the Lookup of the Project in order for the operation invocation to succeed. private final class CustomerProjectMoveOrRenameOperation implements MoveOrRenameOperationImplementation { @Override public List<FileObject> getMetadataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public List<FileObject> getDataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public void notifyRenaming() throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyRenamed(String nueName) throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyMoving() throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyMoved(Project original, File originalPath, String nueName) throws IOException { } } private final class CustomerProjectCopyOperation implements CopyOperationImplementation { @Override public List<FileObject> getMetadataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public List<FileObject> getDataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public void notifyCopying() throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyCopied(Project prjct, File file, String string) throws IOException { } } private final class CustomerProjectDeleteOperation implements DeleteOperationImplementation { @Override public List<FileObject> getMetadataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public List<FileObject> getDataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public void notifyDeleting() throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyDeleted() throws IOException { } } Also make sure to put the above methods into the Project Lookup. Check the Lookup of the Project. The "getLookup()" method of the project should now include the classes you created above, as shown in bold below: @Override public Lookup getLookup() { if (lkp == null) { lkp = Lookups.fixed(new Object[]{ this, new Info(), new CustomerProjectLogicalView(this), new CustomerCustomizerProvider(this), new CustomerActionProvider(), new CustomerProjectMoveOrRenameOperation(), new CustomerProjectCopyOperation(), new CustomerProjectDeleteOperation(), new ReportsSubprojectProvider(this), }); } return lkp; } Make Actions Visible on the Project Node. The NetBeans Project API gives you a number of CommonProjectActions, including for the actions we're dealing with. Make sure the items in bold below are in the "getActions" method of the project node: @Override public Action[] getActions(boolean arg0) { return new Action[]{ CommonProjectActions.newFileAction(), CommonProjectActions.copyProjectAction(), CommonProjectActions.moveProjectAction(), CommonProjectActions.renameProjectAction(), CommonProjectActions.deleteProjectAction(), CommonProjectActions.customizeProjectAction(), CommonProjectActions.closeProjectAction() }; } Run the Application. When you run the application, you should see this: Let's now try out the various actions: Copy. When you invoke the Copy action, you'll see the dialog below. Provide a new project name and location and then the copy action is performed when the Copy button is clicked below: The message you see above, in red, might not be relevant to your project type. When you right-click the application and choose Branding, you can find the string in the Resource Bundles tab, as shown below: However, note that the message will be shown in red, no matter what the text is, hence you can really only put something like a warning message there. If you have no text at all, it will also look odd.If the project has subprojects, the copy operation will not automatically copy the subprojects. Take a look here and here for similar more complex scenarios. Move. When you invoke the Move action, the dialog below is shown: Rename. The Rename Project dialog below is shown when you invoke the Rename action: I tried it and both the display name and the folder on disk are changed. Delete. When you invoke the Delete action, you'll see this dialog: The checkbox is not checkable, in the default scenario, and when the dialog above is confirmed, the project is simply closed, i.e., the node hierarchy is removed from the application. However, if you truly want to let the user delete the project on disk, pass the Project to the DeleteOperationImplementation and then add the children of the Project you want to delete to the getDataFiles method: private final class CustomerProjectDeleteOperation implements DeleteOperationImplementation { private final CustomerProject project; private CustomerProjectDeleteOperation(CustomerProject project) { this.project = project; } @Override public List<FileObject> getDataFiles() { List<FileObject> files = new ArrayList<FileObject>(); FileObject[] projectChildren = project.getProjectDirectory().getChildren(); for (FileObject fileObject : projectChildren) { addFile(project.getProjectDirectory(), fileObject.getNameExt(), files); } return files; } private void addFile(FileObject projectDirectory, String fileName, List<FileObject> result) { FileObject file = projectDirectory.getFileObject(fileName); if (file != null) { result.add(file); } } @Override public List<FileObject> getMetadataFiles() { return new ArrayList<FileObject>(); } @Override public void notifyDeleting() throws IOException { } @Override public void notifyDeleted() throws IOException { } } Now the user will be able to check the checkbox, causing the method above to be called in the DeleteOperationImplementation: Hope this answers some questions or at least gets the discussion started. Before asking questions about this topic, please take the steps above and only then attempt to apply them to your own scenario. Useful implementations to look at: http://kickjava.com/src/org/netbeans/modules/j2ee/clientproject/AppClientProjectOperations.java.htm https://kenai.com/projects/nbandroid/sources/mercurial/content/project/src/org/netbeans/modules/android/project/AndroidProjectOperations.java

    Read the article

  • Domino 8.5.3: Attaching an Object Residing on Server (Lotusscript preferred)

    - by Void
    Not sure if this question is more appropriate for ServerFault or StackOverflow, sorry if it should belong elsewhere! I am working on an application and one of the function is to automatically send an email with an attachment. I can code the application to attach the object when it resides on local or on a mapped drive. Newbie Question: Is there a way to have the object reside on the Domino server, and still be able to point to it and have the application automatically attach and send? Is there any method that allows me to do this? Users have no direct access to the server/filesystem, so mapped drive of the Domino server is out of the question. Hope someone can shed some light on this question. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • protected abstract override Foo(); &ndash; er... what?

    - by Muljadi Budiman
    A couple of weeks back, a co-worker was pondering a situation he was facing.  He was looking at the following class hierarchy: abstract class OriginalBase { protected virtual void Test() { } } abstract class SecondaryBase : OriginalBase { } class FirstConcrete : SecondaryBase { } class SecondConcrete : SecondaryBase { } Basically, the first 2 classes are abstract classes, but the OriginalBase class has Test implemented as a virtual method.  What he needed was to force concrete class implementations to provide a proper body for the Test method, but he can’t do mark the method as abstract since it is already implemented in the OriginalBase class. One way to solve this is to hide the original implementation and then force further derived classes to properly implemented another method that will replace it.  The code will look like the following: abstract class OriginalBase { protected virtual void Test() { } } abstract class SecondaryBase : OriginalBase { protected sealed override void Test() { Test2(); } protected abstract void Test2(); } class FirstConcrete : SecondaryBase { // Have to override Test2 here } class SecondConcrete : SecondaryBase { // Have to override Test2 here } With the above code, SecondaryBase class will seal the Test method so it can no longer be overridden.  Then it also made an abstract method Test2 available, which will force the concrete classes to override and provide the proper implementation.  Calling Test will properly call the proper Test2 implementation in each respective concrete classes. I was wondering if there’s a way to tell the compiler to treat the Test method in SecondaryBase as abstract, and apparently you can, by combining the abstract and override keywords.  The code looks like the following: abstract class OriginalBase { protected virtual void Test() { } } abstract class SecondaryBase : OriginalBase { protected abstract override void Test(); } class FirstConcrete : SecondaryBase { // Have to override Test here } class SecondConcrete : SecondaryBase { // Have to override Test here } The method signature makes it look a bit funky, because most people will treat the override keyword to mean you then need to provide the implementation as well, but the effect is exactly as we desired.  The concepts are still valid: you’re overriding the Test method from its original implementation in the OriginalBase class, but you don’t want to implement it, rather you want to classes that derive from SecondaryBase to provide the proper implementation, so you also make it as an abstract method. I don’t think I’ve ever seen this before in the wild, so it was pretty neat to find that the compiler does support this case.

    Read the article

  • Interfaces on an abstract class

    - by insta
    My coworker and I have different opinions on the relationship between base classes and interfaces. I'm of the belief that a class should not implement an interface unless that class can be used when an implementation of the interface is required. In other words, I like to see code like this: interface IFooWorker { void Work(); } abstract class BaseWorker { ... base class behaviors ... public abstract void Work() { } protected string CleanData(string data) { ... } } class DbWorker : BaseWorker, IFooWorker { public void Work() { Repository.AddCleanData(base.CleanData(UI.GetDirtyData())); } } The DbWorker is what gets the IFooWorker interface, because it is an instantiatable implementation of the interface. It completely fulfills the contract. My coworker prefers the nearly identical: interface IFooWorker { void Work(); } abstract class BaseWorker : IFooWorker { ... base class behaviors ... public abstract void Work() { } protected string CleanData(string data) { ... } } class DbWorker : BaseWorker { public void Work() { Repository.AddCleanData(base.CleanData(UI.GetDirtyData())); } } Where the base class gets the interface, and by virtue of this all inheritors of the base class are of that interface as well. This bugs me but I can't come up with concrete reasons why, outside of "the base class cannot stand on its own as an implementation of the interface". What are the pros & cons of his method vs. mine, and why should one be used over another?

    Read the article

  • Handling commands or events that wait for an action to be completed afterwards

    - by virulent
    Say you have two events: Action1 and Action2. When you receive Action1, you want to store some arbitrary data to be used the next time Action2 rolls around. Optimally, Action1 is normally a command however it can also be other events. The idea is still the same. The current way I am implementing this is by storing state and then simply checking when Action2 is called if that specific state is there. This is obviously a bit messy and leads to a lot of redundant code. Here is an example of how I am doing that, in pseudocode form (and broken down quite a bit, obviously): void onAction1(event) { Player = event.getPlayer() Player.addState("my_action_to_do") } void onAction2(event) { Player = event.getPlayer() if not Player.hasState("my_action_to_do") { return } // Do something } When doing this for a lot of other actions it gets somewhat ugly and I wanted to know if there is something I can do to improve upon it. I was thinking of something like this, which wouldn't require passing data around, but is this also not the right direction? void onAction1(event) { Player = event.getPlayer() Player.onAction2(new Runnable() { public void run() { // Do something } }) } If one wanted to take it even further, could you not simply do this? void onPlayerEnter(event) { // When they join the server Player = event.getPlayer() Player.onAction1(new Runnable() { public void run() { // Now wait for action 2 Player.onAction2(new Runnable() { // Do something }) } }, true) // TRUE would be to repeat the event, // not remove it after it is called. } Any input would be wonderful.

    Read the article

  • Object array updates one instance repeatedly [on hold]

    - by MGN001
    I'm making a 2D shooter, and the player object holds an array of bullets that represent how many shots the player can have on screen at once. At least, this is what I'm trying for. What's happening is that each time any of the objects in the array is called, it seems to update a single object in memory. So, if I fire and then fire again, the object "starts over" from where I shot from and moves twice as fast. I've spent weeks trying to fix this and I've managed nothing. Hopefully another pair of eyes will see something I've missed. Player.cpp #include "Player.h" const int startLives = 3; const int maxHealth = 2; const float speed = 1; const int maxVelocity = 500; const int topBound = WINDOW_HEIGHT / 5 * 3; const int slowRate = 500; const int accRate = 1000; const int maxBullets = 5; const float spriteWidth = 99; const float spriteHeight = 75; const Vector2f startPosition = { (WINDOW_WIDTH / 2) - (spriteWidth / 2), (WINDOW_HEIGHT / 4 * 3) - (spriteHeight / 2) }; Bullet bullets[maxBullets]; Bullet * bulletPointers[maxBullets]; SDL_Texture * playerHealthy; SDL_Texture * playerDamaged; SDL_Texture * currentSprite; SDL_Rect * rect; Vector2f position; Vector2f velocity; int Health; int Lives; Player::Player() { rect = new SDL_Rect(); } Player::~Player() { SDL_DestroyTexture(playerHealthy); SDL_DestroyTexture(playerDamaged); SDL_DestroyTexture(currentSprite); rect = NULL; } void Player::Initialize(SDL_Renderer * renderer) { SDL_Surface * temp; temp = IMG_Load(".\\Sprites\\player.png"); if (temp == NULL) { printf("Initialization Error: %s\n", IMG_GetError()); exit(PLAYER_INITIALIZATION_ERROR); } playerHealthy = SDL_CreateTextureFromSurface(renderer, temp); temp = IMG_Load(".\\Sprites\\playerDamaged.png"); if (temp == NULL) { printf("Initialization Error: %s\n", IMG_GetError()); exit(PLAYER_INITIALIZATION_ERROR); } playerDamaged = SDL_CreateTextureFromSurface(renderer, temp); temp = IMG_Load(".\\Sprites\\laserGreen.png"); if (temp == NULL) { printf("Initialization Error: %s\n", IMG_GetError()); exit(PLAYER_INITIALIZATION_ERROR); } SDL_Texture * bullet = SDL_CreateTextureFromSurface(renderer, temp); temp = IMG_Load(".\\Sprites\\laserGreenShot.png"); if (temp == NULL) { printf("Initialization Error: %s\n", IMG_GetError()); exit(PLAYER_INITIALIZATION_ERROR); } SDL_Texture * explosion = SDL_CreateTextureFromSurface(renderer, temp); for (int i = 0; i < maxBullets; i++) { bullets[i].Initialize(renderer, bullet, explosion); bulletPointers[i] = NULL; } temp = NULL; rect->h = spriteHeight; rect->w = spriteWidth; Reset(); } void Player::Update(Input input, float deltaTime) { if (abs(velocity.x) < slowRate * deltaTime) { velocity.x = 0; } else if (velocity.x > 0) { velocity.x -= slowRate * deltaTime; } else if (velocity.x < 0) { velocity.x += slowRate * deltaTime; } if (abs(velocity.y) < slowRate * deltaTime) { velocity.y = 0; } if (velocity.y > 0) { velocity.y -= slowRate * deltaTime; } else if (velocity.y < 0) { velocity.y += slowRate * deltaTime; } if (Health <= 0) { --Lives; Spawn(); } velocity.x += UnitVector(input.InputNew.movement).x * accRate * deltaTime; velocity.y += UnitVector(input.InputNew.movement).y * accRate * deltaTime; if (Magnitude(velocity) > maxVelocity) { velocity.x = UnitVector(velocity).x * maxVelocity; velocity.y = UnitVector(velocity).y * maxVelocity; } position.x += velocity.x * deltaTime * speed; position.y += velocity.y * deltaTime * speed; if (input.InputNew.JumpLeft && !input.InputOld.JumpLeft) { position.x -= spriteWidth; } if (input.InputNew.JumpRight && !input.InputOld.JumpRight) { position.x += spriteWidth; } Boundaries(); rect->x = position.x; rect->y = position.y; if (input.InputNew.Fire && !input.InputOld.Fire) { Fire(); } for (int i = 0; i < maxBullets; ++i) { if (bulletPointers[i] != NULL) { bullets[i].Update(deltaTime); if (bullets[i].getPosition().y < -33) { bulletPointers[i] = NULL; } } } } void Player::Draw(SDL_Renderer * renderer) { for (int i = 0; i < maxBullets; ++i) { if (bulletPointers[i] != NULL) { bullets[i].Draw(renderer); } } SDL_RenderCopy(renderer, currentSprite, NULL, rect); } void Player::Spawn() { position = startPosition; Health = maxHealth; currentSprite = playerHealthy; rect->x = position.x; rect->y = position.y; } void Player::Boundaries() { if (position.x < 0) { position.x = 0; velocity.x *= -1; } else if (position.x > WINDOW_WIDTH - spriteWidth) { position.x = WINDOW_WIDTH - spriteWidth; velocity.x *= -1; } if (position.y < topBound) { position.y = topBound; velocity.y *= -1; } else if (position.y > WINDOW_HEIGHT - spriteHeight) { position.y = WINDOW_HEIGHT - spriteHeight; velocity.y *= -1; } } int Player::getLives() { return Lives; } void Player::Reset() { Lives = startLives; Spawn(); } void Player::Fire() { for (int i = 0; i < maxBullets; ++i) { if (bulletPointers[i] == NULL) { bulletPointers[i] = &bullets[i]; bullets[i].Fire(position,velocity.x/2); break; } } } Bullet.cpp #include "Bullet.h" const int speed = 500; Vector2f bulletVelocity; float ExplosionMax = 0.5f; float ExplosionTimer; const Vector2f fireOffset = { 45.5f, 10.0f }; const Vector2f explosionOffset = { 23.5f, -27.0f }; const Vector2i bulletSize = { 9, 33 }; const Vector2i explosionSize = { 56, 54 }; Vector2f bulletPosition; SDL_Texture * bulletSprite; SDL_Texture * explosionSprite; SDL_Texture * bulletCurrentSprite; SDL_Rect * bulletRect; Bullet::Bullet() { } Bullet::~Bullet() { } void Bullet::Initialize(SDL_Renderer * renderer, SDL_Texture * bullet, SDL_Texture * explosion) { bulletSprite = bullet; explosionSprite = explosion; bulletRect = new SDL_Rect(); } void Bullet::Update(float deltaTime) { bulletPosition.y -= bulletVelocity.y * deltaTime; bulletPosition.x += bulletVelocity.x * deltaTime; bulletRect->x = static_cast<int>(bulletPosition.x); bulletRect->y = static_cast<int>(bulletPosition.y); } void Bullet::Draw(SDL_Renderer * renderer) { SDL_RenderCopy(renderer, bulletCurrentSprite, NULL, bulletRect); } void Bullet::Fire(Vector2f pos, float xSpeed) { bulletPosition.x = pos.x + fireOffset.x; bulletPosition.y = pos.y + fireOffset.y; bulletVelocity.x = xSpeed; bulletVelocity.y = speed; bulletCurrentSprite = bulletSprite; bulletRect->h = bulletSize.y; bulletRect->w = bulletSize.x; bulletRect->x = static_cast<int>(bulletPosition.x); bulletRect->y = static_cast<int>(bulletPosition.y); } Vector2f Bullet::getPosition() { return bulletPosition; } void Bullet::Hit() { bulletCurrentSprite = explosionSprite; bulletVelocity = { 0.0f, 0.0f }; ExplosionTimer = ExplosionMax; bulletPosition.x += explosionOffset.x; bulletPosition.y += explosionOffset.y; bulletRect->w = explosionSize.x; bulletRect->h = explosionSize.y; }

    Read the article

  • Which order to define getters and setters in? [closed]

    - by N.N.
    Is there a best practice for the order to define getters and setters in? There seems to be two practices: getter/setter pairs first getters, then setters (or the other way around) To illuminate the difference here is a Java example of getter/setter pairs: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } And here is a Java example of first getters, then setters: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } I think the latter type of ordering is clearer both in code and in class diagrams but I do not know if that is enough to rule out the other type of ordering.

    Read the article

  • C++ virtual functions.Problem with vtable

    - by adivasile
    I'm doing a little project in C++ and I've come into some problems regarding virtual functions. I have a base class with some virtual functions: #ifndef COLLISIONSHAPE_H_ #define COLLISIONSHAPE_H_ namespace domino { class CollisionShape : public DominoItem { public: // CONSTRUCTOR //------------------------------------------------- // SETTERS //------------------------------------------------- // GETTERS //------------------------------------------------- virtual void GetRadius() = 0; virtual void GetPosition() = 0; virtual void GetGrowth(CollisionShape* other) = 0; virtual void GetSceneNode(); // OTHER //------------------------------------------------- virtual bool overlaps(CollisionShape* shape) = 0; }; } #endif /* COLLISIONSHAPE_H_ */ and a SphereShape class which extends CollisionShape and implements the methods above /* SphereShape.h */ #ifndef SPHERESHAPE_H_ #define SPHERESHAPE_H_ #include "CollisionShape.h" namespace domino { class SphereShape : public CollisionShape { public: // CONSTRUCTOR //------------------------------------------------- SphereShape(); SphereShape(CollisionShape* shape1, CollisionShape* shape2); // DESTRUCTOR //------------------------------------------------- ~SphereShape(); // SETTERS //------------------------------------------------- void SetPosition(); void SetRadius(); // GETTERS //------------------------------------------------- cl_float GetRadius(); cl_float3 GetPosition(); SceneNode* GetSceneNode(); cl_float GetGrowth(CollisionShape* other); // OTHER //------------------------------------------------- bool overlaps(CollisionShape* shape); }; } #endif /* SPHERESHAPE_H_ */ and the .cpp file: /*SphereShape.cpp*/ #include "SphereShape.h" #define max(a,b) (a>b?a:b) namespace domino { // CONSTRUCTOR //------------------------------------------------- SphereShape::SphereShape(CollisionShape* shape1, CollisionShape* shape2) { } // DESTRUCTOR //------------------------------------------------- SphereShape::~SphereShape() { } // SETTERS //------------------------------------------------- void SphereShape::SetPosition() { } void SphereShape::SetRadius() { } // GETTERS //------------------------------------------------- void SphereShape::GetRadius() { } void SphereShape::GetPosition() { } void SphereShape::GetSceneNode() { } void SphereShape::GetGrowth(CollisionShape* other) { } // OTHER //------------------------------------------------- bool SphereShape::overlaps(CollisionShape* shape) { return true; } } These classes, along some other get compiled into a shared library. Building libdomino.so g++ -m32 -lpthread -ldl -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lglut -lGLU -lGL -shared -lSDKUtil -lglut -lGLEW -lOpenCL -L/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/lib/x86 -L/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/TempSDKUtil/lib/x86 -L"/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/lib/x86" -lSDKUtil -lglut -lGLEW -lOpenCL -o build/debug/x86/libdomino.so build/debug/x86//Material.o build/debug/x86//Body.o build/debug/x86//SphereShape.o build/debug/x86//World.o build/debug/x86//Engine.o build/debug/x86//BVHNode.o When I compile the code that uses this library I get the following error: ../../../lib/x86//libdomino.so: undefined reference to `vtable for domino::CollisionShape' ../../../lib/x86//libdomino.so: undefined reference to `typeinfo for domino::CollisionShape' Command used to compile the demo that uses the library: g++ -o build/debug/x86/startdemo build/debug/x86//CMesh.o build/debug/x86//CSceneNode.o build/debug/x86//OFF.o build/debug/x86//Light.o build/debug/x86//main.o build/debug/x86//Camera.o -m32 -lpthread -ldl -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lglut -lGLU -lGL -lSDKUtil -lglut -lGLEW -ldomino -lSDKUtil -lOpenCL -L/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/lib/x86 -L/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/TempSDKUtil/lib/x86 -L../../../lib/x86/ -L"/home/adrian/AMD-APP-SDK-v2.4-lnx32/lib/x86" (the -ldomino flag) And when I run the demo, I manually tell it about the library: LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../../lib/x86/:$AMDAPPSDKROOT/lib/x86:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH bin/x86/startdemo After reading a bit about virtual functions and virtual tables I understood that virtual tables are handled by the compiler and I shouldn't worry about it, so I'm a little bit confused on how to handle this issue. I'm using gcc version 4.6.0 20110530 (Red Hat 4.6.0-9) (GCC) Later edit: I'm really sorry, but I wrote the code by hand directly here. I have defined the return types in the code. I apologize to the 2 people that answered below. I have to mention that I am a beginner at using more complex project layouts in C++.By this I mean more complex makefiles, shared libraries, stuff like that.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >