Search Results

Search found 3200 results on 128 pages for 'stl collections'.

Page 35/128 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • What's the bug in the following code ?

    - by Johannes
    #include <iostream> #include <algorithm> #include <vector> #include <boost/array.hpp> #include <boost/bind.hpp> int main() { boost::array<int, 4> a = {45, 11, 67, 23}; std::vector<int> v(a.begin(), a.end()); std::vector<int> v2; std::transform(v.begin(), v.end(), v2.begin(), boost::bind(std::multiplies<int>(), _1, 2)); std::copy(v2.begin(), v2.end(), std::ostream_iterator<int>(std::cout, " ")); } When run, this gives a creepy segmentation fault. Please tell me where I'm going wrong.

    Read the article

  • Using pair in c++

    - by user1543957
    Can someone please tell why i am unable to compile the following program #include<iostream> #include<string> #include<cmath> #include<iostream> #include<cfloat> #define MOD 10000009 using namespace std; double distance(pair<int,int> p1,pair<int,int> p2) { double dist; dist = sqrt( (p1.first-p2.first)*(p1.first-p2.first) + (p1.second-p2.second)*(p1.second-p2.second) ); return(dist); } int main() { int N,i,j; cin >> N; pair<int,int> pi[N]; for(i=0;i<N;i++) { cin >> pi[i].first >> pi[i].second; } for(i=0;i<N;i++) { cout << pi[i].first << " "<< pi[i].second << endl; } distance(pi[0],pi[1]); // This line is giving error return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Are upper bounds of indexed ranges always assumed to be exclusive?

    - by polygenelubricants
    So in Java, whenever an indexed range is given, the upper bound is almost always exclusive. From java.lang.String: substring(int beginIndex, int endIndex) Returns a new string that is a substring of this string. The substring begins at the specified beginIndex and extends to the character at index endIndex - 1 From java.util.Arrays: copyOfRange(T[] original, int from, int to) from - the initial index of the range to be copied, inclusive to - the final index of the range to be copied, exclusive. From java.util.BitSet: set(int fromIndex, int toIndex) fromIndex - index of the first bit to be set. toIndex - index after the last bit to be set. As you can see, it does look like Java tries to make it a consistent convention that upper bounds are exclusive. My questions are: Is this the official authoritative recommendation? Are there notable violations that we should be wary of? Is there a name for this system? (ala "0-based" vs "1-based")

    Read the article

  • C# type safe and developer friendly list/collection technique

    - by Agile Noob
    I am populating a "Dictionary" with the results of an sp call. The key is the field name and the value is whatever value the sp returns for the field. This is all well and good but I'd like developers to have a predefined list of keys to access this list, for safety and documentation reasons. What I'd like to do is have something like an enum as a key for the dictionary so developers can safely access the list, but still have the ability to access the dictionary with a string key value. I am hoping to have a list of string values that I can access with an enum key AND a string key. Please make sure any suggestions are simple to implement, this is not the kind of thing I'm willing to build a lot of overhead to implement.

    Read the article

  • Collection type generated by for with yield

    - by Jesper
    When I evaluate a for in Scala, I get an immutable IndexedSeq (a collection with array-like performance characteristics, such as efficient random access): scala> val s = for (i <- 0 to 9) yield math.random + i s: scala.collection.immutable.IndexedSeq[Double] = Vector(0.6127056766832756, 1.7137598183155291, ... Does a for with a yield always return an IndexedSeq, or can it also return some other type of collection class (a LinearSeq, for example)? If it can also return something else, then what determines the return type, and how can I influence it? I'm using Scala 2.8.0.RC3.

    Read the article

  • What is the most popular generic collection data structure library for C?

    - by Tom Dalling
    I'm looking for a C library that provides generic collection data structures such as lists, associative arrays, sets, etc. The library should be stable and well tested. I'm basically looking for something better than the crappy C standard library. What C libraries fit this description? EDIT: I'd prefer that the library was cross-platform, but failing that, anything that works on Mac/Linux.

    Read the article

  • scala implicit or explicit conversion from iterator to iterable

    - by landon9720
    Does Scala provide a built-in class, utility, syntax, or other mechanism for converting (by wrapping) an Iterator with an Iterable? For example, I have an Iterator[Foo] and I need an Iterable[Foo], so currently I am: val foo1: Iterator[Foo] = .... val foo2: Iterable[Foo] = new Iterable[Foo] { def elements = foo1 } This seems ugly and unnecessary. What's a better way?

    Read the article

  • How to create collection object in vbscript?

    - by Onnesh
    what should be the parameter for create object the following code dim a set a=CreateObject("Collection") //getting a runtime error saying ActiveX //component can't create object: 'Collection a.add(CreateObject("Collection")) a.Items(0).Add(1) MsgBox(a.Items(0).count) MsgBox(a.Items(0).Item(0))

    Read the article

  • How to convert c++ std::list element to multimap iterator

    - by user63898
    Hello all, I have std::list<multimap<std::string,std::string>::iterator> > Now i have new element: multimap<std::string,std::string>::value_type aNewMmapValue("foo1","test") I want to avoid the need to set temp multimap and do insert to the new element just to get its iterator back so i could to push it back to the: std::list<multimap<std::string,std::string>::iterator> > can i somehow avoid this creation of the temp multimap. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How can I display a list of three different Models sortable by the same :attribute in rails?

    - by Angela
    I have a Campaign model which has_many Calls, Emails, and Letters. For now, these are each a separate Model with different controllers and actions (although I would like to start to think of ways to collapse them once the models and actions stabilize). They do share two attributes at least: :days and :title I would like a way to represent all the Calls, Emails, and Letters that belong_to a specific Campaign as a sortable collection (sortable by :days), in a way that outputs the model name and the path_to() for each. For example (I know the below is not correct, but it represents the kind of output/format I've been trying to do: @campaign_events.each do |campaign_event| <%= campaign_event.model_name %> <%= link_to campaign_event.title, #{model_name}_path(campaign_event) %> end Thanks so much. BTW, if this matters, I would then want to make the :days attribute editable_in_place.

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to take the address of std::wstring's internal pointer?

    - by LCC
    I have an interface which is used like the following: if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetSize(&size)) { wchar_t tmp = new wchar_t[size]; if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetValue(tmp, size))) { std::wstring str = tmp; // do some work which doesn't throw } delete[] tmp; } Is it safe and portable to do this instead? if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetSize(&size)) { std::wstring str; str.resize(size); if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetValue(&str[0], size))) { // do some work } } Now, obviously this works (doesn't crash/corrupt memory) or I wouldn't have asked, but I'm mostly wanting to know if there's a compelling reason not to do this.

    Read the article

  • C++ map to track when the end of map is reached

    - by eNetik
    Currently I have a map that prints out the following map<string, map<int,int> > mapper; map<int,int>::iterator inner; map<string, map<int,int> >::iterator outer; for(outer = mapper.begin(); outer != mapper.end(); outer++){ cout<<outer->first<<": "; for(inner = outer->second.begin(); inner != outer->second.end(); inner++){ cout<<inner->first<<","<<inner->second<<","; } } As of now this prints out the following stringone: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8, stringtwo: 3,5,6,7, stringthree: 2,3,4,5, What i want it to print out is stringone: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 stringtwo: 3,5,6,7 stringthree: 2,3,4,5 how can i check for the end of the map inside my inner map? Any help would be appreciated Thank you

    Read the article

  • Would vector of vectors be contiguous?

    - by user1150989
    I need to allocate a vector of rows where row contains a vector of rows. I know that a vector would be contiguous. I wanted to know whether a vector of vectors would also be contiguous. Example code is given below vector<long> firstRow; firstRow.push_back(0); firstRow.push_back(1); vector<long> secondRow; secondRow.push_back(0); secondRow.push_back(1); vector< vector < long> > data; data.push_back(firstRow); data.push_back(secondRow); Would the sequence in memory be 0 1 0 1?

    Read the article

  • Periodically iterating over a collection that's constantly changing

    - by rwmnau
    I have a collection of objects that's constantly changing, and I want to display some information about objects (my application is multi-threaded, and differently threads are constantly submitting requests to modify an object in the collection, so it's unpredictable), and I want to display some information about what's currently in the collection. If I lock the collection, I can iterate over it and get my information without any problems - however, this causes problems with the other threads, since they could have submitted multiple requests to modify the collection in the meantime, and will be stalled. I've thought of a couple ways around this, and I'm looking for any advice. Make a copy of the collection and iterate over it, allowing the original to continue updating in the background. The collection can get large, so this isn't ideal, but it's safe. Iterate over it using a For...Next loop, and catch an IndexOutOfBounds exception if an item is removed from the collection while we're iterating. This may occasionally cause duplicates to appear in my snapshot, so it's not ideal either. Any other ideas? I'm only concerned about a moment-in-time snapshot, so I'm not concerned about reflecting changes in my application - my main concern is that the collection be able to be updated with minimal latency, and that updates never be lost.

    Read the article

  • std::basic_string full specialization (g++ conflict)

    - by SoapBox
    I am trying to define a full specialization of std::basic_string< char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > which is typedef'd (in g++) by the <string> header. The problem is, if I include <string> first, g++ sees the typedef as an instantiation of basic_string and gives me errors. If I do my specialization first then I have no issues. I should be able to define my specialization after <string> is included. What do I have to do to be able to do that? My Code: #include <bits/localefwd.h> //#include <string> // <- uncommenting this line causes compilation to fail namespace std { template<> class basic_string< char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char> > { public: int blah() { return 42; } size_t size() { return 0; } const char *c_str() { return ""; } void reserve(int) {} void clear() {} }; } #include <string> #include <iostream> int main() { std::cout << std::string().blah() << std::endl; } The above code works fine. But, if I uncomment the first #include <string> line, I get the following compiler errors: blah.cpp:7: error: specialization of ‘std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ after instantiation blah.cpp:7: error: redefinition of ‘class std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h:52: error: previous definition of ‘class std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >’ blah.cpp: In function ‘int main()’: blah.cpp:22: error: ‘class std::string’ has no member named ‘blah’ Line 52 of /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h: template<typename _CharT, typename _Traits = char_traits<_CharT>, typename _Alloc = allocator<_CharT> > class basic_string; As far as I know this is just a forward delcaration of the template, NOT an instantiation as g++ claims. Line 56 of /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stringfwd.h: typedef basic_string<char> string; As far as I know this is just a typedef, NOT an instantiation either. So why are these lines conflicting with my code? What can I do to fix this other than ensuring that my code is always included before <string>?

    Read the article

  • Bind to a collection's view and just call ToString() in WPF

    - by womp
    I'm binding a GridView to a collection of objects that look like this: public class Transaction { public string PersonName { get; set; } public DateTime TransactionDate { get; set; } public MoneyCollection TransactedMoney { get; set;} } MoneyCollection simply inherits from ObservableCollection<T>, and is a collection of MyMoney type object. In my GridView, I just want to bind a column to the MoneyCollection's ToString() method. However, binding it directly to the TransactedMoney property makes every entry display the text "(Collection)", and the ToString() method is never called. Note that I do not want to bind to the items in MoneyCollection, I want to bind directly to the property itself and just call ToString() on it. I understand that it is binding to the collection's default view. So my question is - how can I make it bind to the collection in such a way that it calls the ToString() method on it? This is my first WPF project, so I know this might be a bit noobish, but pointers would be very welcome.

    Read the article

  • C++ std::vector memory/allocation

    - by aaa
    from a previous question about vector capacity, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2663170/stdvector-capacity-after-copying, Mr. Bailey said: In current C++ you are guaranteed that no reallocation occurs after a call to reserve until an insertion would take the size beyond the value of the previous call to reserve. Before a call to reserve, or after a call to reserve when the size is between the value of the previous call to reserve and the capacity the implementation is allowed to reallocate early if it so chooses. So, if I understand correctly, in order to assure that no relocation happens until capacity is exceeded, I must do reserve twice? can you please clarify it? I am using vector as a memory stack like this: std::vector<double> memory; memory.reserve(size); memory.insert(memory.end(), matrix.data().begin(), matrix.data().end()); // smaller than size size_t offset = memory.size(); memory.resize(memory.capacity(), 0); I need to guarantee that relocation does not happen in the above. thank you. ps: I would also like to know if there is a better way to manage memory stack in similar manner other than vector

    Read the article

  • Java queue and multi-dimension array

    - by javaLearner.java
    First of all, this is my code (just started learning java): Queue<String> qe = new LinkedList<String>(); qe.add("b"); qe.add("a"); qe.add("c"); qe.add("d"); qe.add("e"); My question: Is it possible to add element to the queue with two values, like: qe.add("a","1"); // where 1 is integer So, that I know element "a" have value 1. If I want to add a number let say "2" to element a, I will have like a = 3. If this cant be done, what else in java classes that can handle this? I tried to use multi-dimention array, but its kinda hard to do the queue, like pop, push etc. (Maybe I am wrong) How to call specific element in the queue? Like, call element a, to check its value. [Note] Please don't give me links that ask me to read java docs. I was reading, and I still dont get it. The reason why I ask here is because, I know I can find the answer faster and easier.

    Read the article

  • std::map keys in C++

    - by Soumava
    I have a requirement to create two different maps in C++. The Key is of type CHAR * and the Value is a pointer to a struct. I am filling 2 maps with these pairs, in separate iterations. After creating both maps I need find all such instances in which the value of the string referenced by the CHAR * are same. For this i am using the following code : typedef struct _STRUCTTYPE { .. } STRUCTTYPE, *PSTRUCTTYPE; typedef pair {CHAR *,PSTRUCTTYPE} kvpair; .. CHAR *xyz; PSTRUCTTYPE abc; after filling the information; Map.insert (kvpair(xyz,abc)); the above is repeated x times for the first map, and y times for the second map. after both are filled out; std::map {CHAR *, PSTRUCTTYPE} :: iterator Iter,findIter; for (Iter=iteratedMap-begin();Iter!=iteratedMap-end();mapIterator++) { char *key = Iter-first; printf("%s\n",key); findIter=otherMap-find(key); //printf("%u",findIter-second); if (findIter!=otherMap-end()) { printf("Match!\n"); } } The above code does not show any match, although the list of keys in both maps show obvious matches. My understanding is that the equals operator for CHAR * just equates the memory address of the pointers. My question is, what should i do to alter the equals operator for this type of key or could I use a different datatype for the string? *note : {} has been used instead of angle brackets as the content inside angle brackets was not showing up in the post.

    Read the article

  • IList<T> and IReadOnlyList<T>

    - by Safak Gür
    My problem is that I have a method that can take a collection as parameter that, Has a Count property Has an integer indexer (get-only) And I don't know what type should this parameter be. I would choose IList<T> before .NET 4.5 since there is no other indexable collection interface for this and arrays implement it, which is a big plus. But .NET 4.5 introduces the new IReadOnlyList<T> interface and I want my method to support that, too. How can I write this method to support both IList<T> and IReadOnlyList<T> without violating the basic principles like DRY? Can I convert IList<T> to IReadOnlyList<T> somehow in an overload? What is the way to go here? Edit: Daniel's answer gave me some pretty ideas, I guess I'll go with this: public void Do<T>(IList<T> collection) { DoInternal(collection, collection.Count, i => collection[i]); } public void Do<T>(IReadOnlyList<T> collection) { DoInternal(collection, collection.Count, i => collection[i]); } private void DoInternal<T>(IEnumerable<T> collection, int count, Func<int, T> indexer) { // Stuff } Or I could just accept a ReadOnlyList<T> and provide an helper like this: public static class CollectionEx { public static IReadOnlyList<T> AsReadOnly<T>(this IList<T> collection) { if (collection == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("collection"); return new ReadOnlyWrapper<T>(collection); } private sealed class ReadOnlyWrapper<T> : IReadOnlyList<T> { private readonly IList<T> _Source; public int Count { get { return _Source.Count; } } public T this[int index] { get { return _Source[index]; } } public ReadOnlyWrapper(IList<T> source) { _Source = source; } public IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator() { return _Source.GetEnumerator(); } IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); } } } Then I could call Do(array.AsReadOnly())

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >