Search Results

Search found 786 results on 32 pages for 'macros'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/32 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Programming languages with a Lisp-like syntax extension mechanism

    - by Giorgio
    I have only a limited knowledge of Lisp (trying to learn a bit in my free time) but as far as I understand Lisp macros allow to introduce new language constructs and syntax by describing them in Lisp itself. This means that a new construct can be added as a library, without changing the Lisp compiler / interpreter. This approach is very different from that of other programming languages. E.g., if I wanted to extend Pascal with a new kind of loop or some particular idiom I would have to extend the syntax and semantics of the language and then implement that new feature in the compiler. Are there other programming languages outside the Lisp family (i.e. apart from Common Lisp, Scheme, Clojure (?), Racket (?), etc) that offer a similar possibility to extend the language within the language itself? EDIT Please, avoid extended discussion and be specific in your answers. Instead of a long list of programming languages that can be extended in some way or another, I would like to understand from a conceptual point of view what is specific to Lisp macros as an extension mechanism, and which non-Lisp programming languages offer some concept that is close to them.

    Read the article

  • Conflicting PACKAGE_NAME and other macros when using autotools.

    - by baol
    When using autotools (with a config.h file) for both a library and a software built on that library the compiler complains about a redefinition of some macros (PACKAGE_NAME, PACKAGE_TARNAME and so on). How can I prevent this? The config.h file is needed in the library to propagate it's setting to the software that use it. Right now I have a wrapper script library_config.h that includes the original config.h and provides defaults when the user is not using autotools, but even undefining the macros in that package I get the redefinition warning from gcc. #ifndef LIB_CONFIG_H #define LIB_CONFIG_H #ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H # include "config.h" # undef PACKAGE # undef PACKAGE_BUGREPORT # undef PACKAGE_NAME # undef PACKAGE_STRING # undef PACKAGE_TARNAME # undef PACKAGE_VERSION # undef VERSION #else # if defined (WIN32) # define HAVE_UNORDERED_MAP 1 # define TR1_MIXED_NAMESPACE 1 # elif defined (__GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__) # define HAVE_UNORDERED_MAP 1 # else # define HAVE_TR1_UNORDERED_MAP 1 # endif #endif #endif I believe the best option would be to have a library without that macros: How can I avoid the definition of PACKAGE, PACKAGE_NAME and so on in the library when using autotools?

    Read the article

  • How do I define functions using PLT Scheme macros?

    - by nickname
    I am trying to write a macro that defines a special class of data structure with associated functions. I know this is possible; it is done multiple times in the core language itself. As a specific example, how would I define the define-struct macro in Scheme itself. It needs to create make-struct, struct-<<field>>, etc functions. I tried doing this using define, however, this only defines the function in the macro's lexical scope. How can I actually define a function in a macro?

    Read the article

  • How do we simplify this kind of code in Java? Something like macros in C?

    - by Terry Li
    public static boolean diagonals(char[][] b, int row, int col, int l) { int counter = 1; // because we start from the current position char charAtPosition = b[row][col]; int numRows = b.length; int numCols = b[0].length; int topleft = 0; int topright = 0; int bottomleft = 0; int bottomright = 0; for (int i=row-1,j=col-1;i>=0 && j>=0;i--,j--) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { topleft++; } else { break; } } for (int i=row-1,j=col+1;i>=0 && j<=numCols;i--,j++) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { topright++; } else { break; } } for (int i=row+1,j=col-1;i<=numRows && j>=0;i++,j--) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { bottomleft++; } else { break; } } for (int i=row+1,j=col+1;i<=numRows && j<=numCols;i++,j++) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { bottomright++; } else { break; } } return topleft + bottomright + 1 >= l || topright + bottomleft + 1 >= l; //in this case l is 5 } After I was done posting the code above here, I couldn't help but wanted to simplify the code by merging the four pretty much the same loops into one method. Here's the kind of method I want to have: public int countSteps(char horizontal, char vertical) { } Two parameters horizontal and vertical can be either + or - to indicate the four directions to walk in. What I want to see if possible at all is i++; is generalized to i horizontal horizontal; when horizontal taking the value of +. What I don't want to see is if or switch statements, for example: public int countSteps(char horizontal, char vertical) { if (horizontal == '+' && vertical == '-') { for (int i=row-1,j=col+1;i>=0 && j<=numCols;i--,j++) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { topright++; } else { break; } } } else if (horizontal == '+' && vertical == '+') { for (int i=row+1,j=col+1;i>=0 && j<=numCols;i++,j++) { if (b[i][j]==charAtPosition) { topright++; } else { break; } } } else if () { } else { } } Since it is as tedious as the original one. Note also that the comparing signs for the loop condition i>=0 && j<=numCols; for example, >= && <= have correspondence with the value combination of horizontal and vertical. Sorry for my bad wording, please let me know if anything is not clear.

    Read the article

  • How can one make a 'passthru' function in C++ using macros or metaprogramming?

    - by Ryan
    So I have a series of global functions, say: foo_f1(int a, int b, char *c); foo_f2(int a); foo_f3(char *a); I want to make a C++ wrapper around these, something like: MyFoo::f1(int a, int b, char* c); MyFoo::f2(int a); MyFoo::f3(char* a); There's about 40 functions like this, 35 of them I just want to pass through to the global function, the other 5 I want to do something different with. Ideally the implementation of MyFoo.cpp would be something like: PASSTHRU( f1, (int a, int b, char *c) ); PASSTHRU( f2, (int a) ); MyFoo::f3(char *a) { //do my own thing here } But I'm having trouble figuring out an elegant way to make the above PASSTHRU macro. What I really need is something like the mythical X getArgs() below: MyFoo::f1(int a, int b, char *c) { X args = getArgs(); args++; //skip past implicit this.. ::f1(args); //pass args to global function } But short of dropping into assembly I can't find a good implementation of getArgs().

    Read the article

  • Macro to create macros?

    - by JMarsch
    Over the years, I've built up a number of macros that I like to have available in visual studio. It's always a pain to reload them and rebind them to the keyboard when I go to a different machine/rebuild/use a VM/etc. Someone mentioned to me once that there is a way that you can write a macro that will recreate your macros and bind them to keys automatically. Anyone know how to do that? Is there another way to easily export/import macros (nonsensically, VS has an "export macro" function, but no import).

    Read the article

  • Macros giving problems with dladdr()

    - by Veger
    I have implemented tracing behavior using the -finstrument-functions option of gcc and this (simplified) code: void __cyg_profile_func_enter(void *this_fn, void *call_site) { Dl_info di; if(dladdr(this_fn, &di)) printf("entered %s\n", (di.dli_sname?di_dli_sname:"<unknown>")); } This works great, except for one thing: macros are processed as well, but the function prints the information of the function which contains the macro. So functions containing macros have their information printed multiple times (which is of course undesired). Is there anything to detect that a macro is being processed? Or is is possible to turn off instrumenting macros at all? PS Same problems occur with sizeof()

    Read the article

  • C/C++: Who uses the logical operator macros from iso646.h and why?

    - by Jaime Soto
    There has been some debate at work about using the merits of using the alternative spellings for C/C++ logical operators in iso646.h: and && and_eq &= bitand & bitor | compl ~ not ! not_eq != or || or_eq |= xor ^ xor_eq ^= According to Wikipedia, these macros facilitate typing logical operators in international (non-US English?) and non-QWERTY keyboards. All of our development team is in the same office in Orlando, FL, USA and from what I have seen we all use the US English QWERTY keyboard layout; even Dvorak provides all the necessary characters. Supporters of using the iso646.h macros claim we should them because they are part of the C and C++ standards. I think this argument is moot since digraphs and trigraphs are also part of these standards and they are not even supported by default in many compilers. My rationale for opposing these macros in our team is that we do not need them since: Everybody on our team uses the US English QWERTY keyboard layout; C and C++ programming books from the US barely mention iso646.h, if at all; and new developers may not be familiar with iso646.h (this is expected if they are from the US). /rant Finally, to my set of questions: Does anyone in this site use the iso646.h logical operator macros? Why? What is your opinion about using the iso646.h logical operator macros in code written and maintained on US English QWERTY keyboards? Is my digraph and trigraph analogy a valid argument against using iso646.h with US English QWERTY keyboard layouts? EDIT: I missed two similar questions in StackOverflow: Is anybody using the named boolean operators? Which C++ logical operators do you use: and, or, not and the ilk or C style operators? why?

    Read the article

  • Excel 2007 - "The macro may not be available in this workbook" Error

    - by Psycho Bob
    We use an Excel sheet that has been protected to prevent modification of it from end users. All in all they are only able to edit certain tabs to add information that will then be used to generate information on other tabs using equations and such. On the tab with the equations, a button is present called "Prep for Internal Hard Copy Print." This button runs a macro that selects the information on the tab, unprotects it, then sends a print job to the user's default printer that contains the unprotected content. Normally this works like a champ. This time around, however, the macro is throwing the following error: Cannot run the macro "FILENAME.xlsx'!MacroName'. The macro may not be available in this workbook or all macros may be disabled. As far as I can tell, the macros are still present within the workbook. This sheet is normally a .xlsm though the user saved it with a different filename as a .xlsx. Also, the macros appear only as MacroName in the .xlsm file and not "FILENAME.xlsx'!MacroName' as it does in the .xlsx. Finally, when I open the .xlsm it asks if I want to enable the macro content while the .xlsx does not prompt for this. Can anyone tell me what's going on with this sheet or know of a way that I can get the macros working in the .xlsx without having to start over with a different sheet?

    Read the article

  • MS Word Macro in visual Basic

    - by Mac
    I have a Visual Basic system that in places runs word macros. I now need to have a MS Word Macro that I can search for a character and then extend the search to another character and extract the details into a vb variable from the first to the last character. Thereafter I need to search for the next occurrence of the first character and repeat the exercise. When all have been processed the last search must inform me that there are no more. During the searches I need to identify the section numbers where I find the searches and be able to get them in VB variable. Any assistance will be greatly appreciated. Regards Mac

    Read the article

  • Programming languages with extensible syntax

    - by Giorgio
    I have only a limited knowledge of Lisp (trying to learn a bit in my free time) but as far as I understand Lisp macros allow to introduce new language constructs and syntax by describing them in Lisp itself. This means that a new construct can be added as a library, without changing the Lisp compiler / interpreter. This approach is very different from that of other programming languages. E.g., if I wanted to extend Pascal with a new kind of loop or some particular idiom I would have to extend the syntax and semantics of the language and then implement that new feature in the compiler. Are there other programming languages outside the Lisp family (i.e. apart from Common Lisp, Scheme, Clojure (?), Racket (?), etc) that offer a similar possibility to extend the language within the language itself?

    Read the article

  • Listing C Constants/Macros

    - by ZJR
    Is there a way to make the GNU C Preprocessor, cpp (or some other tool) list all available macros and their values at a given point in a C file? I'm looking for system-specific macros while porting a program that's already unix savvy and loading a sparse bunch of unix system files. Just wondering if there's an easier way than going hunting for definitions.

    Read the article

  • Outlook 2007 Archiving through macros

    - by Balaji V
    In Outlook 2007, the Archiving options are very forbidding. I DONT want Outllok to Auto Archive, I prefer to do it manually. Having said that, I want Outlook to ARCHIVE only a selected set of folders. In older version, unchecking the "include in auto arhive" option excludes these folders. Unfortunately 2007 makes life more complicated. A. Can someone help me how to exclude a set of sub-folders from archiving while doing a manual archiving. B. Is there a way I can use Macros to archive folders, this will solve all my problems.

    Read the article

  • opening word document contailning macros using textarea

    - by avani-nature
    Hai frnds i am avani here,actually 1.i amhaving one word document which contains macros i wann to open it in textarea.. 2.i am able to open the word document which is not containing macros 3.i am not able to open the document which contains macros 4.i am using below code 5.please do help me anyone i am thinking its some what impossible { //echo $aud; $filename = 'C:/xampp/htdocs/mts/sites/default/files/a.doc'; //echo $filename; if(isset($_REQUEST['Save'])){ $somecontent = stripslashes($_POST['somecontent']); // Let's make sure the file exists and is writable first. if (is_writable($filename)) { // In our example we're opening $filename in append mode. // The file pointer is at the bottom of the file hence // that's where $somecontent will go when we fwrite() it. if (!$handle = fopen($filename, 'w')) { echo "Cannot open file ($filename)"; exit; } // Write $somecontent to our opened file. if (fwrite($handle, $somecontent) === FALSE) { echo "Cannot write to file ($filename)"; exit; } echo "Success, wrote ($somecontent) to file ($filename) - Continue - "; fclose($handle); } else { echo "The file $filename is not writable"; } } else{ // get contents of a file into a string $handle = fopen($filename, "r"); $somecontent = fread($handle, filesize($filename)); $word = new COM("word.application") or die ("Could not initialise MS Word object."); $word-Documents-Open(realpath("$filename")); // Extract content. $somecontent = (string) $word-ActiveDocument-Content; //echo $somecontent; $word-ActiveDocument-Close(false); $word-Quit(); $word = null; unset($word); fclose($handle); } ? Edit file -------- ?

    Read the article

  • How to set Visio 2003 Trusted Locations

    - by Jon Fournier
    I see the option in Visio 2003 to only trust macros stored in trusted locations, but I can't find any way to set up what these trusted locations are. My problem is I have a template file that's not signed in the VBA project but the VBA project is locked (so I can't just sign it myself). So, there are only two ways I can stop the warning: lower my security settings so anything with macros will run (not a good idea) Tell Visio that the template is in a trusted location (if this is even possible)

    Read the article

  • Macros in Excel 2010 hangs

    - by Ahmad
    I have a spreadsheet with several macros. Generally, when previously using Excel 2007, a user clicks a button and everything works as expected (calculations, some email sending & file I/O). Typically, the expected run-time is about 90 seconds. The spreadsheet is a xlsm file created with Excel 2007. With Excel 2010 however, the same user process results in a non-responsive excel and forces us to kill excel from the task manager. Some note that I have gathered so far in trying to debug this issue: When monitoring CPU usage, it seems that Excel does start the macro. CPU usage increases as expected to about 47% for a few seconds. Excel.exe than drops to 0% usage and I now have a non-responsive Excel (even after 1 hour). If I set debug break points across modules and different functions and step through the code (after clicking the button) , the process works as expected albeit much slower. To add, there were no exceptions. I am at a complete loss as to what the issue may be. I initially thought it may be the add in that is being used but that was debunked by point 2. This seems to be a very odd situation. I can provide more information if required, but I'm at wits end about the root cause could be. I need help in diagnosing and resolving this issue.

    Read the article

  • Conditional macro expansion

    - by Dave DeLong
    Heads up: This is a weird question. I've got some really useful macros that I like to use to simplify some logging. For example I can do Log(@"My message with arguments: %@, %@, %@", @"arg1", @"arg2", @"arg3"), and that will get expanded into a more complex method invocation that includes things like self, _cmd, __FILE__, __LINE__, etc, so that I can easily track where things are getting logged. This works great. Now I'd like to expand my macros to not only work with Objective-C methods, but general C functions. The problem is the self and _cmd portions that are in the macro expansion. These two parameters don't exist in C functions. Ideally, I'd like to be able to use this same set of macros within C functions, but I'm running into problems. When I use (for example) my Log() macro, I get compiler warnings about self and _cmd being undeclared (which makes total sense). My first thought was to do something like the following (in my macro): if (thisFunctionIsACFunction) { DoLogging(nil, nil, format, ##__VA_ARGS__); } else { DoLogging(self, _cmd, format, ##__VA_ARGS__); } This still produces compiler warnings, since the entire if() statement is substituted in place of the macro, resulting in errors with the self and _cmd keywords (even though they will never be executed during function execution). My next thought was to do something like this (in my macro): if (thisFunctionIsACFunction) { #define SELF nil #define CMD nil } else { #define SELF self #define CMD _cmd } DoLogging(SELF, CMD, format, ##__VA_ARGS__); That doesn't work, unfortunately. I get "error: '#' is not followed by a macro parameter" on my first #define. My other thought was to create a second set of macros, specifically for use in C functions. This reeks of a bad code smell, and I really don't want to do this. Is there some way I can use the same set of macros from within both Objective-C methods and C functions, and only reference self and _cmd if the macro is in an Objective-C method?

    Read the article

  • Do I lose the benefits of macro recording if I develop Excel apps in Visual Studio?

    - by DanM
    I've written lots of Excel macros in the past using the following development process: Record a macro. Open the VBA editor. Edit the macro. I'm now experimenting with a Visual Studio 2008 "Excel 2007 Add-In" project (C#), and I'm wondering if I will have to give up this development process. Questions: I know I can still record macros using Excel, but is there any way to access the resulting code in Visual Studio? Or do I just have to copy and paste then C#-ize it? What happens with my "Personal Macro Workbook"? Can I use the macros I have stored in there within C#? Or is there some way to convert them to C#? If there is some support for opening and editing VBA macros in Visual Studio, can you provide a very brief summary of how it works or point me to a good reference? Do you have any other tips for transitioning from writing macros in VBA using Excel's built-in editor to writing them in C# with Visual Studio?

    Read the article

  • Open an Access database and run one of its Macros from Excel

    - by sqlnoob
    From Excel, I need to open an Access database and run one of the database's macros. I'm using Excel and Access 2007. Here is my code in Excel: Sub accessMacro() Dim appAccess As New Access.Application Set appAccess = Access.Application appAccess.OpenCurrentDatabase "C:\blah.mdb" appAccess.Visible = True appAccess.DoCmd.RunMacro "RunQueries.RunQueries" appAccess.CloseCurrentDatabase End Sub In the Access Database, there is a procedure named RunQueries in a module named RunQueries. Each time I run this, I get the following error: Runtime error '2485': Microsoft Access Office can't find the object 'RunQueries.' I have also tried: appAccess.DoCmd.RunMacro "RunQueries" and I get the same errors message. Any idea how to do this? By the way, I could go into a long explanation about why I need to do this, but let me just say that I've already argued against it, and I have to do it this way (meaning, I have to use Excel as a frontend to open several Access dbs and run their macros).

    Read the article

  • How to enable BDS2006's C++ WARN & TRACE macros.

    - by Psychic
    I am trying to find out how to enable (& use) Borland's WARN & TRACE macros. My starting point was this link: http://bcbjournal.org/articles/vol2/9809/Debugging_with_diagnostic_macros.htm?PHPSESSID=37bf58851bfeb5c199d1af31d7b2e7ff However, that appears to be for BCB5, and not the 2006 Borland Developer Studio. I've set the two defines (__WARN & __TRACE) I've included the .h file () I've added some macros, and everything compiles & links fine. But when I run the application (in DEBUG mode), no debug output file is created. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • Reliably converting C preprocessor macros to python code

    - by manual-manuel
    Hi, I have a bunch of C macros the operation of which I need to simulate in python. I saw some pointers to pygccxml or ctypeslib etc. Are these the ways to go ? Or is there something out there that is better ? The C macros if and when they change, I would like the python implementation to be auto generated rather than having to make manual modifications. Hence the question. <my_c_header.h> /* #defines type 1 */ #ifdef OS #define NUM_FLAGS (uint16_t)(3) #define NUM_BITS (uint16_t)(8) #else #define NUM_FLAGS (uint16_t)(6) #define NUM_BITS (uint16_t)(16) #endif #define MAKE_SUB_FLAGS (uint16_t)((1<<NUMFLAGS) -1) #define MAKE_TOTAL_FLAGS(x) (uint16_t)((x & MAKE_SUB_FLAGS) >> NUM_BITS) /* #defines type 2 */ #ifdef OS #DO_SOMETHING(X) os_specifc_process(x) #else #DO_SOMETHING(x) #endif /* #defines type 3 */ enum { CASE0, CASE1, CASE2 } #define MY_CASE_0 ((uint16_t)CASE0) #define MY_CASE_1 ((uint16_t)CASE1) #define MY_CASE_2 ((uint16_t)CASE2) #define /*End of file <my_c_header.h> */ Thanks M

    Read the article

  • Word Macros Problem: MsgBox function appears to lock all open windows of word

    - by amby
    I have some Macros that run in Word. We are migrating to Office 2007. Problem: the MsgBox function appears to lock all open windows of word. Any Ideas on how to get around that? (It is a macro that walks a user through a bunch of prompts for information that they enter into user forms and or MsgBoxes.) The error says: The command cannot be completed because a dialog box is open. Click OK then close all open dialog boxes to continue. Is there any way to have each window of word act independently of each other? The problem is that the information is frequently cut and pasted from other open word documents, and this doesn't work as the MsgBox locks control of ALL windows of Word 2007. The macros are pretty simple, but if you want to see the code, I will certainly post it. Basically, the old version of office let you go between windows, while 2007, that we are migrating to does not. I have run all the updates I could find. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can I turn off calculated columns in an Excel table from a macro using VBA? [migrated]

    - by user41293
    I am working on a macro that inserts formulas into a cell in an Excel table. The Excel table does the automatic filling of columns and fills all the cells in that column with the formula, but all I want is one cell to have the formula. I cannot just turn off automatic formula for tables as I need to have other people use this worksheet on their systems. Is there a way to turn off the automatic filling of formulas in a table using VBA in a macro? It just needs to be temporary: I just want to turn it off, put in my formulas, then turn it back on.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >