Search Results

Search found 175 results on 7 pages for 'metaprogramming'.

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 4/7 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  | Next Page >

  • Are there programs that iteratively write new programs?

    - by chris
    For about a year I have been thinking about writing a program that writes programs. This would primarily be a playful exercise that might teach me some new concepts. My inspiration came from negentropy and the ability for order to emerge from chaos and new chaos to arise out of order in infinite succession. To be more specific, the program would start by writing a short random string. If the string compiles the programs will log it for later comparison. If the string does not compile the program will try to rewrite it until it does compile. As more strings (mini 'useless' programs) are logged they can be parsed for similarities and used to generate a grammar. This grammar can then be drawn on to write more strings that have a higher probability of compilation than purely random strings. This is obviously more than a little silly, but I thought it would be fun to try and grow a program like this. And as a byproduct I get a bunch of unique programs that I can visualize and call art. I'll probably write this in Ruby due to its simple syntax and dynamic compilation and then I will visualize in processing using ruby-processing. What I would like to know is: Is there a name for this type of programming? What currently exists in this field? Who are the primary contributors? BONUS! - In what ways can I procedurally assign value to output programs beyond compiles(y/n)? I may want to extend the functionality of this program to generate a program based on parameters, but I want the program to define those parameters through running the programs that compile and assigning meaning to the programs output. This question is probably more involved than reasonable for a bonus, but if you can think of a simple way to get something like this done in less than 23 lines or one hyperlink, please toss it into your response. I know that this is not quite meta-programming and from the little I know of AI and generative algorithms they are usually more goal oriented than what I am thinking. What would be optimal is a program that continually rewrites and improves itself so I don't have to ^_^

    Read the article

  • Ruby - How to remove a setter on an object

    - by Markus Orrelly
    Given a class like this: class B class << self attr_accessor :var end end Suppose I can't modify the original source code of class B. How might I go about removing the setter on the class variable var? I've tried using something like B.send("unset_method", "var="), but that doesn't work (nor does remove_method, or overwriting that method with a var= method that doesn't do anything). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Re-Include Module

    - by Nino55
    Hello, I need some like this: module One def test; puts 'Test One'; end end module Two def test; puts 'Test Two'; end end class Foo include One include Two include One end In this case I need as a result 'Test One' but obviously it returns 'Test Two'. I need a clean simple way for re-include my module. Any suggestion? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • When/Why ( if ever ) should i think about doing Generic Programming/Meta Programming

    - by hotadvice
    Hi there IMHO to me OOPS, design patterns make sense and i have been able to apply them practically. But when it comes to "generic programming /meta programming" of the Modern C++ kind, i am left confused. -- Is it a new programming/design paradigm ? -- Is it just limited to "library development"? If not, What design/coding situations call for using meta programming/generic programming. -- Does using templates mean i am doing generic programming? I have googled a lot on this topic but do not grasp the BIG PICTURE fully. Also see this post. After reading dicussions here under, up till now, I am sure ( might still not be correct): a) Generic programming and meta programming are two different concepts.

    Read the article

  • Help me choose a web development framework/platform that will make me learn something

    - by Sergio Tapia
    I'm having a bit of an overload of information these past two days. I'm planning to start my own website that will allow local businesses to list their items on sale, and then users can come in and search for "Abercrombie t-shirt" and the stores that sell them will be listed. It's a neat little project I'm really excited for and I'm sure it'll take off, but I'm having problems from the get go. Sure I could use ASP.Net for it, I'm a bit familiar with it and the IDE for ASP.Net pages is bar-none, but I feel this is a great chance for me to learn something new to branch out a bit and not regurgitate .NET like a robot. I've been looking and asking around but it's all just noise and I can't make an educated decision. Can you help me choose a framework/platform that will make me learn something that's a nice thing to know in the job market, but also nice for me to grow as a professional? So far I've looked at: Ruby on Rails Kohana CakePHP CodeIgniter Symfony But they are all very esoteric to me, and I have trouble even finding out which IDE to use to that will let me use auto-complete for the proprietary keywords/methods. Thank you for your time.

    Read the article

  • alias_method and class_methods don't mix?

    - by Daniel
    Greetings, I've been trying to tinker with a global Cache module, but I can't figure out why this isn't working. Does anyone have any suggestions? This is the error produced for the below code: NameError: undefined method get' for moduleCache' from (irb):21:in `alias_method' module Cache def self.get puts "original" end end module Cache def self.get_modified puts "New get" end end def peek_a_boo Cache.module_eval do # make :get_not_modified alias_method :get_not_modified, :get alias_method :get, :get_modified end Cache.get Cache.module_eval do alias_method :get, :get_not_modified end end # test first round peek_a_boo # test second round peek_a_boo TIA! -daniel

    Read the article

  • Why is partial specialziation of a nested class template allowed, while complete isn't?

    - by drhirsch
    template<int x> struct A { template<int y> struct B {};. template<int y, int unused> struct C {}; }; template<int x> template<> struct A<x>::B<x> {}; // error: enclosing class templates are not explicitly specialized template<int x> template<int unused> struct A<x>::C<x, unused> {}; // ok So why is the explicit specialization of a inner, nested class (or function) not allowed, if the outer class isn't specialiced too? Strange enough, I can work around this behaviour if I only partially specialize the inner class with simply adding a dummy template parameter. Makes things uglier and more complex, but it works. Note: I need this feature for recursive templates of the inner class for a set of the outer class. To make things even more complicate, in reality I only need a template function instead of the inner class. But partial specialization of functions is generally disallowed somewhere else in the standard ^^

    Read the article

  • Dynamically defined setter methods using define_method?

    - by nicosuria
    I use a lot of iterations to define convenience methods in my models, stuff like: PET_NAMES.each do |pn| define_method(pn) do ... ... end but I've never been able to dynamically define setter methods, ie: def pet_name=(name) ... end using define_method like so: define_method("pet_name=(name)") do ... end Any ideas? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How do I temporarily monkey with a global module constant?

    - by Daniel
    Greetings, I want to tinker with the global memcache object, and I found the following problems. Cache is a constant Cache is a module I only want to modify the behavior of Cache globally for a small section of code for a possible major performance gain. Since Cache is a module, I can't re-assign it, or encapsulate it. I Would Like To Do This: Deep in a controller method... code code code... old_cache = Cache Cache = MyCache.new code code code... Cache = old_cache code code code... However, since Cache is a constant I'm forbidden to change it. Threading is not an issue at the moment. :) Would it be "good manners" for me to just alias_method the special code I need just for a small section of code and then later unalias it again? That doesn't pass the smell test IMHO. Does anyone have any ideas? TIA, -daniel

    Read the article

  • Ruby - print the variable name and then its value

    - by tyndall
    What is the best way to write a function (or something DSLish) that will allow me to write this code in Ruby. How would I construct the function write_pair? username = "tyndall" write_pair username # where write_pair username outputs username: tyndall Is it possible to do? Looking for the most simple way to do this.

    Read the article

  • Looking for Programming Language that allows you to change true and false.

    - by Maushu
    For my curiosity sake I'm looking for a dynamic object oriented language that allows you to change true to false and vice versa. Something like this: true = false, false = true; This should also affect any conditional statements, therefore 42 == 42 should return False. Basically, with this premise, nothing in the language would be safe from the programmer. Is there any language like this?

    Read the article

  • C++ meta-splat function

    - by aaa
    hello. Is there an existing function (in boost mpl or fusion) to splat meta-vector to variadic template arguments? for example: splat<vector<T1, T2, ...>, function>::type same as function<T1, T2, ...> my search have not found one, and I do not want to reinvent one if it already exists. edit: after some tinkering, apparently it's next to impossible to accomplish this in general way, as it would require declaring full template template parameter list for all possible cases. only reasonable solution is to use macro: #define splat(name, function) \ template<class T, ...> struct name; \ template<class T> \ struct name<T,typename boost::enable_if_c< \ result_of::size<T>::value == 1>::type> { \ typedef function< \ typename result_of::value_at_c<T,0>::type \ > type; \ }; Oh well. thank you

    Read the article

  • C++ Declarative Parsing Serialization

    - by Martin York
    Looking at Java and C# they manage to do some wicked processing based on special languaged based anotation (forgive me if that is the incorrect name). In C++ we have two problems with this: 1) There is no way to annotate a class with type information that is accessable at runtime. 2) Parsing the source to generate stuff is way to complex. But I was thinking that this could be done with some template meta-programming to achieve the same basic affect as anotations (still just thinking about it). Like char_traits that are specialised for the different types an xml_traits template could be used in a declaritive way. This traits class could be used to define how a class is serialised/deserialized by specializing the traits for the class you are trying to serialize. Example Thoughs: template<typename T> struct XML_traits { typedef XML_Empty Children; }; template<> struct XML_traits<Car> { typedef boost::mpl::vector<Body,Wheels,Engine> Children; }; template<typename T> std::ostream& Serialize(T const&) { // my template foo is not that strong. // but somthing like this. boost::mpl::for_each<typename XML_Traits<T>::Children,Serialize>(data); } template<> std::ostream& Serialize<XML_Empty>(T const&) { /* Do Nothing */ } My question is: Has anybody seen any projects/decumentation (not just XML) out there that uses techniques like this (template meta-programming) to emulate the concept of annotation used in languges like Java and C# that can then be used in code generation (to effectively automate the task by using a declaritive style). At this point in my research I am looking for more reading material and examples.

    Read the article

  • Stepping into Ruby Meta-Programming: Generating proxy methods for multiple internal methods

    - by mstksg
    Hi all; I've multiply heard Ruby touted for its super spectacular meta-programming capabilities, and I was wondering if anyone could help me get started with this problem. I have a class that works as an "archive" of sorts, with internal methods that process and output data based on an input. However, the items in the archive in the class itself are represented and processed with integers, for performance purposes. The actual items outside of the archive are known by their string representation, which is simply number_representation.to_s(36). Because of this, I have hooked up each internal method with a "proxy method" that converts the input into the integer form that the archive recognizes, runs the internal method, and converts the output (either a single other item, or a collection of them) back into strings. The naming convention is this: internal methods are represented by _method_name; their corresponding proxy method is represented by method_name, with no leading underscore. For example: class Archive ## PROXY METHODS ## ## input: string representation of id's ## output: string representation of id's def do_something_with id result = _do_something_with id.to_i(36) return nil if result == nil return result.to_s(36) end def do_something_with_pair id_1,id_2 result = _do_something_with_pair id_1.to_i(36), id_2.to_i(36) return nil if result == nil return result.to_s(36) end def do_something_with_these ids result = _do_something_with_these ids.map { |n| n.to_i(36) } return nil if result == nil return result.to_s(36) end def get_many_from id result = _get_many_from id return nil if result == nil # no sparse arrays returned return result.map { |n| n.to_s(36) } end ## INTERNAL METHODS ## ## input: integer representation of id's ## output: integer representation of id's def _do_something_with id # does something with one integer-represented id, # returning an id represented as an integer end def do_something_with_pair id_1,id_2 # does something with two integer-represented id's, # returning an id represented as an integer end def _do_something_with_these ids # does something with multiple integer ids, # returning an id represented as an integer end def _get_many_from id # does something with one integer-represented id, # returns a collection of id's represented as integers end end There are a couple of reasons why I can't just convert them if id.class == String at the beginning of the internal methods: These internal methods are somewhat computationally-intensive recursive functions, and I don't want the overhead of checking multiple times at every step There is no way, without adding an extra parameter, to tell whether or not to re-convert at the end I want to think of this as an exercise in understanding ruby meta-programming Does anyone have any ideas? edit The solution I'd like would preferably be able to take an array of method names @@PROXY_METHODS = [:do_something_with, :do_something_with_pair, :do_something_with_these, :get_many_from] iterate through them, and in each iteration, put out the proxy method. I'm not sure what would be done with the arguments, but is there a way to test for arguments of a method? If not, then simple duck typing/analogous concept would do as well.

    Read the article

  • Odd C++ template behaviour with static member vars

    - by jon hanson
    This piece of code is supposed to calculate an approximation to e (i.e. the mathematical constant ~ 2.71828183) at compile-time, using the following approach; e1 = 2 / 1 e2 = (2 * 2 + 1) / (2 * 1) = 5 / 2 = 2.5 e3 = (3 * 5 + 1) / (3 * 2) = 16 / 6 ~ 2.67 e4 = (4 * 16 + 1) / (4 * 6) = 65 / 24 ~ 2.708 ... e(i) = (e(i-1).numer * i + 1) / (e(i-1).denom * i) The computation is returned via the result static member however, after 2 iterations it yields zero instead of the expected value. I've added a static member function f() to compute the same value and that doesn't exhibit the same problem. #include <iostream> #include <iomanip> // Recursive case. template<int ITERS, int NUMERATOR = 2, int DENOMINATOR = 1, int I = 2> struct CalcE { static const double result; static double f () {return CalcE<ITERS, NUMERATOR * I + 1, DENOMINATOR * I, I + 1>::f ();} }; template<int ITERS, int NUMERATOR, int DENOMINATOR, int I> const double CalcE<ITERS, NUMERATOR, DENOMINATOR, I>::result = CalcE<ITERS, NUMERATOR * I + 1, DENOMINATOR * I, I + 1>::result; // Base case. template<int ITERS, int NUMERATOR, int DENOMINATOR> struct CalcE<ITERS, NUMERATOR, DENOMINATOR, ITERS> { static const double result; static double f () {return result;} }; template<int ITERS, int NUMERATOR, int DENOMINATOR> const double CalcE<ITERS, NUMERATOR, DENOMINATOR, ITERS>::result = static_cast<double>(NUMERATOR) / DENOMINATOR; // Test it. int main (int argc, char* argv[]) { std::cout << std::setprecision (8); std::cout << "e2 ~ " << CalcE<2>::result << std::endl; std::cout << "e3 ~ " << CalcE<3>::result << std::endl; std::cout << "e4 ~ " << CalcE<4>::result << std::endl; std::cout << "e5 ~ " << CalcE<5>::result << std::endl; std::cout << std::endl; std::cout << "e2 ~ " << CalcE<2>::f () << std::endl; std::cout << "e3 ~ " << CalcE<3>::f () << std::endl; std::cout << "e4 ~ " << CalcE<4>::f () << std::endl; std::cout << "e5 ~ " << CalcE<5>::f () << std::endl; return 0; } I've tested this with VS 2008 and VS 2010, and get the same results in each case: e2 ~ 2 e3 ~ 2.5 e4 ~ 0 e5 ~ 0 e2 ~ 2 e3 ~ 2.5 e4 ~ 2.6666667 e5 ~ 2.7083333 Why does result not yield the expected values whereas f() does? According to Rotsor's comment below, this does work with GCC, so I guess the question is, am i relying on some type of undefined behaviour with regards to static initialisation order, or is this a bug with Visual Studio?

    Read the article

  • GCC error with variadic templates: "Sorry, unimplemented: cannot expand 'Identifier...' into a fixe

    - by Dennis
    While doing variadic template programming in C++0x on GCC, once in a while I get an error that says "Sorry, unimplemented: cannot expand 'Identifier...' into a fixed-length arugment list." If I remove the "..." in the code then I get a different error: "error: parameter packs not expanded with '...'". So if I have the "..." in, GCC calls that an error, and if I take the "..." out, GCC calls that an error too. The only way I have been able to deal with this is to completely rewrite the template metaprogram from scratch using a different approach, and (with luck) I eventually come up with code that doesn't cause the error. But I would really like to know what I was doing wrong. Despite Googling for it and despite much experimentation, I can't pin down what it is that I'm doing differently between variadic template code that does produce this error, and code that does not have the error. The wording of the error message seems to imply that the code should work according the C++0x standard, but that GCC doesn't support it yet. Or perhaps it is a compiler bug? Here's some code that produces the error. Note: I don't need you to write a correct implementation for me, but rather just to point out what is about my code that is causing this specific error // Used as a container for a set of types. template <typename... Types> struct TypePack { // Given a TypePack<T1, T2, T3> and T=T4, returns TypePack<T1, T2, T3, T4> template <typename T> struct Add { typedef TypePack<Types..., T> type; }; }; // Takes the set (First, Others...) and, while N > 0, adds (First) to TPack. // TPack is a TypePack containing between 0 and N-1 types. template <int N, typename TPack, typename First, typename... Others> struct TypePackFirstN { // sorry, unimplemented: cannot expand ‘Others ...’ into a fixed-length argument list typedef typename TypePackFirstN<N-1, typename TPack::template Add<First>::type, Others...>::type type; }; // The stop condition for TypePackFirstN: when N is 0, return the TypePack that has been built up. template <typename TPack, typename... Others> struct TypePackFirstN<0, TPack, Others...> //sorry, unimplemented: cannot expand ‘Others ...’ into a fixed-length argument list { typedef TPack type; }; EDIT: I've noticed that while a partial template instantiation that looks like does incur the error: template <typename... T> struct SomeStruct<1, 2, 3, T...> {}; Rewriting it as this does not produce an error: template <typename... T> struct SomeStruct<1, 2, 3, TypePack<T...>> {}; It seems that you can declare parameters to partial specializations to be variadic; i.e. this line is OK: template <typename... T> But you cannot actually use those parameter packs in the specialization, i.e. this part is not OK: SomeStruct<1, 2, 3, T... The fact that you can make it work if you wrap the pack in some other type, i.e. like this: SomeStruct<1, 2, 3, TypePack<T...>> to me implies that the declaration of the variadic parameter to a partial template specialization was successful, and you just can't use it directly. Can anyone confirm this?

    Read the article

  • C# - Silverlight - Dynamically calling a method

    - by cmaduro
    Is there anyway in C# to call a method based on a Enum and/or class? Say if I were to call Controller<Actions.OnEdit, Customer>(customer); Could I do something like this then? public void Controller<TAction, TParam>(TParam object) { Action<TParam> action = FindLocalMethodName(TAction); action(object); } private Action<T> FindLocalMethodName(Enum method) { //Use reflection to find a metode with //the name corresponding to method.ToString() //which accepts a parameters type T. }

    Read the article

  • How are variables bound to the body of a define_method?

    - by Chris
    While trying to brush up my Ruby skills I keep running across this case which I can't figure out an explanation for by just reading the API docs. An explanation would be greatly appreciated. Here's the example code: for name in [ :new, :create, :destroy ] define_method("test_#{name}") do puts name end end What I want/expect to happen is that the name variable will be bound to the block given to define_method and that when #test_new is called it will output "new". Instead each defined method outputs "destroy" -- the last value assigned to the name variable. What am I misunderstanding about define_method and its blocks? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Template meta-programming with member function pointers?

    - by wheaties
    Is it possible to use member function pointers with template meta-programming? Such as: class Connection{ public: string getName() const; string getAlias() const; //more stuff }; typedef string (Connection::*Con_Func)() const; template<Con_Func _Name> class Foo{ Connection m_Connect; public: void Foo(){ cout << m_Connect.(*_Name); } }; typedef Foo<&Connection::getName> NamedFoo; typedef Foo<&Connection::getAlias> AliasFoo; Granted, this is rather contrived but is it possible? (yes, there are probably much better ways but humor me.)

    Read the article

  • Construct a variadic template of unsigned int recursively

    - by Vincent
    I need a tricky thing in a C++ 2011 code. Currently, I have a metafunction of this kind : template<unsigned int N, unsigned int M> static constexpr unsigned int myFunction() This function can generate number based on N and M. I would like to write a metafunction with input N and M, and that will recursively construct a variadic template by decrementing M. For example, by calling this function with M = 3, It will construct a variadic template called List equal to : List... = myFunction<N, 3>, myFunction<N, 2>, myFunction<N, 1>, myFunction<N, 0> How to do that (if it is possible of course) ?

    Read the article

  • Ruby Module Inclusion in Methods

    - by Federico Builes
    In class Foo I'd like to include method Bar under certain conditions: module Bar def some_method "orly" end end class Foo def initialize(some_condition) if !some_condition "bar" else class << self; include Bar; end end end end Is there any cleaner (and clearer) way to achieve the include in the method without having to do it inside the singleton class?

    Read the article

  • Calling different functions depending on the template parameter c++

    - by Noman Javed
    I want to have something like that class A { public: Array& operator()() { . . . } }; class B { public: Element& operator[](int i) { ... } }; template<class T> class execute { public: output_type = operator()(T& t) { if(T == A) Array out = T()(); else { Array res; for(int i=0 ; i < length; ++i) a[i] = t[i]; } } }; There are two issues here 1. Meta-function replacing if-else in the execute operator() 2. Return type of execute operator() Thanks in anticipation Noman

    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  | Next Page >