Search Results

Search found 40165 results on 1607 pages for 'function pointers'.

Page 40/1607 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • shared transaction ID function among multiple threads

    - by poly
    I'm writing an application in C that requires multiple threads to request a unique transaction ID from a function as shown below; struct list{ int id; struct list *next }; function generate_id() { linked-list is built here to hold 10 millions } my concern is how to sync between two or more threads so that transaction id can be unique among them without using mutex, is this possible? Please share anything even if I need to change linked list to something else.

    Read the article

  • Stairway to MDX - Level 2: The Ordinal Function

    Business Intelligence Architect Bill Pearson introduces the MDX Ordinal Function, as a means for generating lists and for conditionally presenting calculations. He also demonstrates the use of the function in creating datasets to support report parameter picklists. Develop seamlessly between Management Studio and Visual StudioSQL Connect is a Visual Studio add-in that makes it easy to keep your database and Visual Studio project in sync.

    Read the article

  • Why is the compiler not selecting my function-template overload in the following example?

    - by Steve Guidi
    Given the following function templates: #include <vector> #include <utility> struct Base { }; struct Derived : Base { }; // #1 template <typename T1, typename T2> void f(const T1& a, const T2& b) { }; // #2 template <typename T1, typename T2> void f(const std::vector<std::pair<T1, T2> >& v, Base* p) { }; Why is it that the following code always invokes overload #1 instead of overload #2? void main() { std::vector<std::pair<int, int> > v; Derived derived; f(100, 200); // clearly calls overload #1 f(v, &derived); // always calls overload #1 } Given that the second parameter of f is a derived type of Base, I was hoping that the compiler would choose overload #2 as it is a better match than the generic type in overload #1. Are there any techniques that I could use to rewrite these functions so that the user can write code as displayed in the main function (i.e., leveraging compiler-deduction of argument types)?

    Read the article

  • Access Expression problem: it's too complex, so how do I turn it in to a function?

    - by Mike
    Access 2007 is telling me that my new expression is to complex. It used to work when we had 10 service levels, but now we have 19! Great! I've asked this question in SuperUser and someone suggested I try it over here. Suggestions are I turn it in to a function - but I'm not sure where to begin and what the function would look like. My expression is checking the COST of our services in the [PriceCharged] field and then assigning the appropriate HOURS [Servicelevel] when I perform a calculation to work out how much REVENUE each colleague has made when working for a client. The [EstimatedTime] field stores the actual hours each colleague has worked. [EstimatedTime]/[ServiceLevel]*[PriceCharged] Below is the breakdown of my COST to HOURS expression. I've put them on different lines to make it easier to read - please do not be put off by the length of this post, it's all the same info in the end. Many thanks,Mike ServiceLevel: IIf([pricecharged]=100(COST),6(HOURS), IIf([pricecharged]=200 Or [pricecharged]=210,12.5, IIf([pricecharged]=300,19, IIf([pricecharged]=400 Or [pricecharged]=410,25, IIf([pricecharged]=500,31, IIf([pricecharged]=600,37.5, IIf([pricecharged]=700,43, IIf([pricecharged]=800 Or [pricecharged]=810,50, IIf([pricecharged]=900,56, IIf([pricecharged]=1000,62.5, IIf([pricecharged]=1100,69, IIf([pricecharged]=1200 Or [pricecharged]=1210,75, IIf([pricecharged]=1300 Or [pricecharged]=1310,100, IIf([pricecharged]=1400,125, IIf([pricecharged]=1500,150, IIf([pricecharged]=1600,175, IIf([pricecharged]=1700,200, IIf([pricecharged]=1800,225, IIf([pricecharged]=1900,250,0)))))))))))))))))))

    Read the article

  • Objective-C Implementation Pointers

    - by Dwaine Bailey
    Hi, I am currently writing an XML parser that parses a lot of data, with a lot of different nodes (the XML isn't designed by me, and I have no control over the content...) Anyway, it currently takes an unacceptably long time to download and read in (about 13 seconds) and so I'm looking for ways to increase the efficiency of the read. I've written a function to create hash values, so that the program no longer has to do a lot of string comparison (just NSUInteger comparison), but this still isn't reducing the complexity of the read in... So I thought maybe I could create an array of IMPs so that, I could then go something like: for(int i = 0; i < [hashValues count]; i ++) { if(currHash == [[hashValues objectAtIndex:i] unsignedIntValue]) { [impArray objectAtIndex:i]; } } Or something like that. The only problem is that I don't know how to actually make the call to the IMP function? I've read that I perform the selector that an IMP defines by going IMP tImp = [impArray objectAtIndex:i]; tImp(self, @selector(methodName)); But, if I need to know the name of the selector anyway, what's the point? Can anybody help me out with what I want to do? Or even just some more ways to increase the efficiency of the parser...

    Read the article

  • How to copy an array of char pointers with a larger list of char pointers?

    - by Casey Link
    My function is being passed a struct containing, among other things, a NULL terminated array of pointers to words making up a command with arguments. I'm performing a glob match on the list of arguments, to expand them into a full list of files, then I want to replace the passed argument array with the new expanded one. The globbing is working fine, that is, g.gl_pathv is populated with the list of expected files. However, I am having trouble copying this array into the struct I was given. #include <glob.h> struct command { char **argv; // other fields... } void myFunction( struct command * cmd ) { char **p = cmd->argv; char* program = *p++; // save the program name (e.g 'ls', and increment to the first argument glob_t g; memset(&g, 0, sizeof(g)); int res = glob(*p, 0, NULL, &g); *p++ // increment while (*p) { glob(*p++, GLOB_APPEND, NULL, &g); // append the matches } // here i want to replace cmd->argv with the expanded g.gl_pathv memcpy(cmd->argv, g.gl_pathv, g.gl_pathc ); // this doesn't work globfree(&g); }

    Read the article

  • javascript - How to pass an argument in a function call?

    - by Fernando SBS
    function rp_marcadesmarcaFarm(valor) { FM_log(3, "marcadesmarcaFarm called = "+valor); for (i = 0; i < farmList.length; i++) { var arr = farmList[i].split("|"); var xy = arr[0].split(","); var fvillageId = xy2id(parseInt(xy[0]), parseInt(xy[1])); GM_setValue("farmAtivada_"+suffixLocal+fvillageId, valor); GM_setValue("farmAtivada_"+suffixLocal+i, valor); }; reloadFarmTable(); }; function createLinkButton(text, title, jsFunction, value) { var button = dom.cn("a"); button.href = "javascript:void(0)"; button.innerHTML = text; button.title = title; if (jsFunction != null) { button.addEventListener('click', jsFunction, false); } return button; } createLinkButton("X", T('CHECKFARM_M'), rp_marcadesmarcaFarm(true)); apparently the last argument (rp_marcadesmarcaFarm(true)) when invoking the createLinkButton is not working. If I change to: createLinkButton("X", T('CHECKFARM_M'), rp_marcadesmarcaFarm); it works. So how can I pass the (true) variable to the third argument of createLinkButton?

    Read the article

  • C: Proper syntax for allocating memory using pointers to pointers.

    - by ~kero-05h
    This is my first time posting here, hopefully I will not make a fool of myself. I am trying to use a function to allocate memory to a pointer, copy text to the buffer, and then change a character. I keep getting a segfault and have tried looking up the answer, my syntax is probably wrong, I could use some enlightenment. /* My objective is to pass a buffer to my Copy function, allocate room, and copy text to it. Then I want to modify the text and print it.*/ #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> int Copy(char **Buffer, char *Text); int main() { char *Text = malloc(sizeof(char) * 100); char *Buffer; strncpy(Text, "1234567890\n", 100); Copy(&Buffer, Text); } int Copy(char **Buffer, char *Text) { int count; count = strlen(Text)+1; *Buffer = malloc(sizeof(char) * count); strncpy(*Buffer, Text, 5); *Buffer[2] = 'A'; /* This results in a segfault. "*Buffer[1] = 'A';" results in no differece in the output. */ printf("%s\n", *Buffer); }

    Read the article

  • Problem with passing vector of pointers to objects to member function of another object

    - by Jamesz
    Hi, I have a vector of pointers to Mouse objects called 'mice'. I'm passing the mice to the cat by reference. vector <Mouse*> mice; Cat * c; c->lookForMouse(&mice); And here's my lookForMouse() member function void Cat::lookForMouse(vector <Mouse*> *mice) { ... } And now to the problem! Within the function above, I can't seem to access my mice. This below will not work mice[i]->isActive(); The error message I receive suggests to use mice[i].isActive(), but this throws an error saying isActive() is not a member of std::vector<_Ty ... This works though... vector <Mouse*> miceCopy = *mice; miceCopy[i]->isActive(); I understand that I shouldn't be creating another vector of mice here, it defeats the whole point of passing it by reference (let me know if I'm wrong)... Why can't I do mice[i]-isActive() What should I be doing? Thanks for your time and help :D James.

    Read the article

  • is it better to test if a function is needed inside or outside of it?

    - by b0x0rz
    what is the best practice? call a function then return if you test for something, or test for something then call? i prefer the test inside of function because it makes an easier viewing of what functions are called. for example: protected void Application_BeginRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { this.FixURLCosmetics(); } and private void FixURLCosmetics() { HttpContext context = HttpContext.Current; if (!context.Request.HttpMethod.ToString().Equals("GET", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { // if not a GET method cancel url cosmetics return; }; string url = context.Request.RawUrl.ToString(); bool doRedirect = false; // remove > default.aspx if (url.EndsWith("/default.aspx", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { url = url.Substring(0, url.Length - 12); doRedirect = true; } // remove > www if (url.Contains("//www")) { url = url.Replace("//www", "//"); doRedirect = true; } // redirect if necessary if (doRedirect) { context.Response.Redirect(url); } } is this good: if (!context.Request.HttpMethod.ToString().Equals("GET", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { // if not a GET method cancel url cosmetics return; }; or should that test be done in Application_BeginRequest? what is better? thnx

    Read the article

  • Attaching methods to prototype from within constructor function

    - by Matthew Taylor
    Here is the textbook standard way of describing a 'class' or constructor function in JavaScript, straight from the Definitive Guide to JavaScript: function Rectangle(w,h) { this.width = w; this.height = h; } Rectangle.prototype.area = function() { return this.width * this.height; }; I don't like the dangling prototype manipulation here, so I was trying to think of a way to encapsulate the function definition for area inside the constructor. I came up with this, which I did not expect to work: function Rectangle(w,h) { this.width = w; this.height = h; this.constructor.prototype.area = function() { return this.width * this.height; }; } I didn't expect this to work because the this reference inside the area function should be pointing to the area function itself, so I wouldn't have access to width and height from this. But it turns out I do! var rect = new Rectangle(2,3); var area = rect.area(); // great scott! it is 6 Some further testing confirmed that the this reference inside the area function actually was a reference to the object under construction, not the area function itself. function Rectangle(w,h) { this.width = w; this.height = h; var me = this; this.constructor.prototype.whatever = function() { if (this === me) { alert ('this is not what you think');} }; } Turns out the alert pops up, and this is exactly the object under construction. So what is going on here? Why is this not the this I expect it to be?

    Read the article

  • Prob comparing pointers and integer in C

    - by Dimitri
    Hi I have a problem with this code. When i am using this function I have no warnings. : void handler(int sig){ switch(sig) { case SIGINT : { click++; fprintf(stdout,"SIGINT recu\n"); if( click == N){ exit(0); } } case SIGALRM : fprintf(stdout,"SIGALRM received\n"); exit(0); case SIGTERM: fprintf(stdout,"SIGTERM received\n"); exit(0); } } But when i rewrite the function with this new version, I have a " comparison between pointer and integer" warning on the if statement: void handler( int sig){ printf("Signal recu\n"); if( signal == SIGINT){ click++; fprintf(stdout,"SIGINT received; Click = %d\n",click); if(click == N){ fprintf(stdout,"Exiting with SIGINT\n"); exit(0); } } else if(signal == SIGALRM){ fprintf(stdout,"SIGALRM received\n"); exit(0); } else if(signal == SIGTERM){ fprintf(stdout,"SIGTERM received\n"); exit(0); } Can someone tell me where is the prob?

    Read the article

  • C++ design question, container of instances and pointers

    - by Tom
    Hi all, Im wondering something. I have class Polygon, which composes a vector of Line (another class here) class Polygon { std::vector<Line> lines; public: const_iterator begin() const; const_iterator end() const; } On the other hand, I have a function, that calculates a vector of pointers to lines, and based on those lines, should return a pointer to a Polygon. Polygon* foo(Polygon& p){ std::vector<Line> lines = bar (p.begin(),p.end()); return new Polygon(lines); } Here's the question: I can always add a Polygon (vector Is there a better way that dereferencing each element of the vector and assigning it to the existing vector container? //for line in vector<Line*> v //vcopy is an instance of vector<Line> vcopy.push_back(*(v.at(i)) I think not, but I dont really like that approach. Hopefully, I will be able to convince the author of the class to change it, but I cant base my coding right now to that fact (and i'm scared of a performance hit). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to return a list of numbers from a Sybase function?

    - by ps_rs4
    I'm trying to overcome a very serious performance issue in which Sybase refuses to use the primary key index on a large table because one of the required fields is specified indirectly through another table - or, in other words; SELECT ... FROM BIGTABLE WHERE KFIELD = 123 runs in ms but SELECT ... FROM BIGTABLE, LTLTBL WHERE KFIELD = LTLTBL.LOOKUP AND LTLTBL.UNIQUEID = 'STRINGREPOF123' takes 30 - 40 seconds. I've managed to work around this first problem by using a function that basically lets me do this; SELECT ... FROM BIGTABLE WHERE KFIELD = MYFUNC('STRINGREPOF123') which also runs in ms. The problem, however, is that this approach only works when there is a single value returned by MYFUNCT but I have some cases where it may return 2 or 3 values. I know that the SQL SELECT ... FROM BIGTABLE WHERE KFIELD IN (123,456,789) also returns in millis so I'd like to have a function that returns a list of possible values rather than just a single one - is this possible? Sadly the application is running on Sybase ASA 9. Yes I know it is old and is scheduled to be refreshed but there's nothing I can do about it now so I need logic that will work with this version of the DB. Thanks in advance for any assistance on this matter.

    Read the article

  • push(ing)_back objects pointers within a loop

    - by Jose Manuel Albornoz
    Consider the following: I have a class CDevices containing, amongst others, a string member class CDevice { public: CDevice(void); ~CDevice(void); // device name std::string Device_Name; etc... } and somewhere else in my code I define another class that contains a vector of pointers to CDevices class CDevice; class CServers { public: CServers(void); ~CServers(void); // Devices vector vector<CDevice*> Devices; etc... } The problem appears in the following lines in my main.c pDevice = new CDevice; pDevice->Device_Name = "de"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " revolotiunibus"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " orbium"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " coelestium"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); for(int i = 0; i < (int)Devices.size(); ++i) cout << "\nLoad name = " << Devices.at(i)->Device_Name << endl; The output I get is " coelestium" repeated four times: each time I push_back a new element into the vector all of the already existing elements take the value of the one which has just been added. I have also tried using iterators to recover each element in the vector with the same results. Could someone please tell me what's wrong here? Thankx

    Read the article

  • Objective C: Function returning correct data for the first time of call and null for other times

    - by Kooshal Bhungy
    Hi all, Am a beginner in objective C, i am implementing a function that would query a web server and display the returning string in console. I am calling the function (getDatafromServer) repeatedly in a loop. The problem is that the first time am getting the value whereas the other times, it returns me a (null) in console... I've searched about memory management and check out on the forums but none have worked. Can you please guys tell me where am wrong in the codes below? Thanks in advance.... @implementation RequestThread +(void)startthread:(id)param{ while (true) { //NSLog(@"Test threads"); sleep(5); NSLog(@"%@",[self getDatafromServer]); } } +(NSString *) getDatafromServer{ NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init]; NSString *myRequestString = @"name=Hello%20&[email protected]"; NSData *myRequestData = [NSData dataWithBytes:[myRequestString UTF8String] length:[myRequestString length]]; NSMutableURLRequest *request = [[NSMutableURLRequest alloc] initWithURL: [NSURL URLWithString:@"http://192.168.1.32/gs/includes/widget/getcalls.php?user=asdasd&passw=asdasdasd"]]; [request setHTTPMethod:@"POST"]; [request setHTTPBody: myRequestData]; [request setValue:@"application/x-www-form-urlencoded" forHTTPHeaderField:@"content-type"]; NSData *returnData = [NSURLConnection sendSynchronousRequest:request returningResponse:nil error:nil]; NSString *myString = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:[returnData bytes]]; [myRequestString release]; [request release]; [returnData release]; return myString; [pool release]; } @end

    Read the article

  • How to override part of an overload function in JavaScript

    - by Guan Yuxin
    I create a class with a function like this var Obj=function(){this.children=[];this.parent=null;}//a base class Obj.prototype.index=function(child){ // the index of current obj if(arguments.length==0){ return this.parent?this.parent.index(this):0; } // the index of a child matchs specific obj [to be override] return -1; } basically it is just an overload function composed of index() and index(child). Then I create a sub class,SubObj or whatever, inherits from Obj SubObj.prototype.prototype=Obj; Now, it's time to override the index(child) function,however, index() is also in the function an I don't want to overwrite it too. One solution is to write like this var Obj=function(){this.children=[];this.parent=null;}//a base class Obj.prototype.index=function(child){ // the index of current obj if(arguments.length==0){ return this.parent?this.parent.index(this):0; } // the index of a child matchs specific obj [to be override] return this._index(this); } Obj.prototype._index=function(this){ return -1; } SubObj.prototype._index=function(this){/* overwriteing */} But this will easily mislead other coders as _index(child) should be both private(should not be used except index() function) and public(is an overload function of index(),which is public) you guys have better idea?

    Read the article

  • C++ Function pointers vs Switch

    - by Perfix
    What is faster: Function pointers or switch? The switch statement would have around 30 cases, consisting of enumarated unsigned ints from 0 to 30. I could do the following: class myType { FunctionEnum func; string argv[123]; int someOtherValue; }; // In another file: myType current; // Iterate through a vector containing lots of myTypes // ... for ( i=0; i < myVecSize; i ++ ) switch ( current.func ) { case 1: //... break; // ........ case 30: // blah break; } And go trough the switch with func every time. The good thing about switch would also be that my code is more organized than with 30 functions. Or I could do that (not so sure with that): class myType { myReturnType (*func); string argv[123]; int someOtherValue; }; I'd have 30 different functions then, at the beginning a pointer to one of them is assigned to myType. What is probably faster: Switch statement or function pointer? Calls per second: Around 10 million. I can't just test it out - that would require me to rewrite the whole thing. Currently using switch. I'm building an interpreter which I want to be faster than Python & Ruby - every clock cycle matters!

    Read the article

  • Problem with passing array of pointers to struct among functions in C

    - by karatemonkey
    The Code that follows segfaults on the call to strncpy and I can't see what I am doing wrong. I need another set of eyes to look it this. Essentially I am trying to alloc memory for a struct that is pointed to by an element in a array of pointers to struct. #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #define MAX_POLICY_NAME_SIZE 64 #define POLICY_FILES_TO_BE_PROCESSED "SPFPolicyFilesReceivedOffline\0" typedef struct TarPolicyPair { int AppearanceTime; char *IndividualFile; char *FullPolicyFile; } PolicyPair; enum { bwlist = 0, fzacts, atksig, rules, MaxNumberFileTypes }; void SPFCreateIndividualPolicyListing(PolicyPair *IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate ) { IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate = (PolicyPair *) malloc(sizeof(PolicyPair)); IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate->IndividualFile = (char *)malloc((MAX_POLICY_NAME_SIZE * sizeof(char))); IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate->FullPolicyFile = (char *)malloc((MAX_POLICY_NAME_SIZE * sizeof(char))); IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate->AppearanceTime = 0; memset(IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate->IndividualFile, '\0', (MAX_POLICY_NAME_SIZE * sizeof(char))); memset(IndividualPolicyPairtoCreate->FullPolicyFile, '\0', (MAX_POLICY_NAME_SIZE * sizeof(char))); } void SPFCreateFullPolicyListing(SPFPolicyPair **CurrentPolicyPair, char *PolicyName, char *PolicyRename) { int i; for(i = 0; i < MaxNumberFileTypes; i++) { CreateIndividualPolicyListing((CurrentPolicyPair[i])); // segfaults on this call strncpy((*CurrentPolicyPair)[i].IndividualFile, POLICY_FILES_TO_BE_PROCESSED, (SPF_POLICY_NAME_SIZE * sizeof(char))); } } int main() { SPFPolicyPair *CurrentPolicyPair[MaxNumberFileTypes] = {NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL}; int i; CreateFullPolicyListing(&CurrentPolicyPair, POLICY_FILES_TO_BE_PROCESSED, POLICY_FILES_TO_BE_PROCESSED); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • deleting an array that stores pointers to some objects

    - by memC
    hi, I am storing pointers to elements of a vec_A in an array A* a_ptrs[3] . Assume that vec_A will not be resized. So, a_ptrs[i] will point to the correct element. My question is: Suppose A* a_ptrs[3] is declared in a class B. Since it is not created using 'new' I am guessing I don't need to delete it in the destructor. Am I right?? class A { public: int getNumber(); A(int val); ~A(){}; private: int num; }; A::A(int val){ num = val; }; int A::getNumber(){ return num; }; int main(){ int i =0; int num; std::vector<A> vec_A; for ( i = 0; i < 10; i++){ vec_A.push_back(A(i)); } A* a_ptrs[3]; a_ptrs[0] = &vec_A[0]; a_ptrs[1] = &vec_A[3]; a_ptrs[2] = &vec_A[5]; for (i = 0; i<3; i++){ std::cout<<"\n: a_ptrs[i].getNumber() = "<<a_ptrs[i]->getNumber(); } std::cout << "\nPress RETURN to continue..."; std::cin.get(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • c++ Multiple Inheritance - Compiler modifying my pointers

    - by Bob
    If I run the following code, I get different addresses printed. Why? class Base1 { int x; }; class Base2 { int y; }; class Derived : public Base1, public Base2 { }; union U { Base2* b; Derived* d; U(Base2* b2) : b(b) {} }; int main() { Derived* d = new Derived; cout << d << "\n"; cout << U(d).d << "\n"; return 0; } Even more fun is if you repeatedly go in and out of the union the address keeps incrementing by 4, like this int main() { Derived* d = new Derived; cout << d << "\n"; d = U(d).d; cout << d << "\n"; d = U(d).d; cout << d << "\n"; return 0; } If the union is modified like this, then the problem goes away union U { void* v; Base2* b; Derived* d; U(void* v) : v(v) {} }; Also, if either base class is made empty, the problem goes away. Is this a compiler bug? I want it to leave my pointers the hell alone.

    Read the article

  • Pointer arithmetic and arrays: what's really legal?

    - by bitcruncher
    Consider the following statements: int *pFarr, *pVarr; int farr[3] = {11,22,33}; int varr[3] = {7,8,9}; pFarr = &(farr[0]); pVarr = varr; At this stage, both pointers are pointing at the start of each respective array address. For *pFarr, we are presently looking at 11 and for *pVarr, 7. Equally, if I request the contents of each array through *farr and *varr, i also get 11 and 7. So far so good. Now, let's try pFarr++ and pVarr++. Great. We're now looking at 22 and 8, as expected. But now... Trying to move up farr++ and varr++ ... and we get "wrong type of argument to increment". Now, I recognize the difference between an array pointer and a regular pointer, but since their behaviour is similar, why this limitation? This is further confusing to me when I also consider that in the same program I can call the following function in an ostensibly correct way and in another incorrect way, and I get the same behaviour, though in contrast to what happened in the code posted above!? working_on_pointers ( pFarr, farr ); // calling with expected parameters working_on_pointers ( farr, pFarr ); // calling with inverted parameters . void working_on_pointers ( int *pExpect, int aExpect[] ) { printf("%i", *pExpect); // displays the contents of pExpect ok printf("%i", *aExpect); // displays the contents of aExpect ok pExpect++; // no warnings or errors aExpect++; // no warnings or errors printf("%i", *pExpect); // displays the next element or an overflow element (with no errors) printf("%i", *aExpect); // displays the next element or an overflow element (with no errors) } Could someone help me to understand why array pointers and pointers behave in similar ways in some contexts, but different in others? So many thanks. EDIT: Noobs like myself could further benefit from this resource: http://www.panix.com/~elflord/cpp/gotchas/index.shtml

    Read the article

  • How to access pixels of an NSBitmapImageRep?

    - by Paperflyer
    I have an NSBitmapImageRep that is created like this: NSBitmapImageRep *imageRep = [[NSBitmapImageRep alloc] initWithBitmapDataPlanes:NULL pixelsWide:waveformSize.width pixelsHigh:waveformSize.height bitsPerSample:8 samplesPerPixel:4 hasAlpha:YES isPlanar:YES colorSpaceName:NSCalibratedRGBColorSpace bytesPerRow:0 bitsPerPixel:0]; Now I want to access the pixel data so I get a pointer to the pixel planes using unsigned char *bitmapData; [imageRep getBitmapDataPlanes:&bitmapData]; According to the Documentation this returns a C array of five character pointers. But how can it do that? since the type of the argument is unsigned char **, it can only return an array of chars, but not an array of char pointers. So, this leaves me wondering how to access the individual pixels. Do you have an idea how to do that? (I know there is the method – setColor:atX:y:, but it seems to be pretty slow if invoked for every single pixel of a big bitmap.)

    Read the article

  • convert pointer to pointer to void pointer

    - by FihopZz
    When I'm learning to use qsort to sort an array of string, there is a question puzzled me. For example, to sort the following s char *s[] = { "Amit", "Garima", "Gaurav", "Vaibhav" }; To use the qsort, you must provide a comparison function like the following function cstring_cmp I guess in the qsort function, the type of parameter to be passed to the function cstring_cmp is char**. How to convert a char** to a void*? Why can we convert a char** to a void*? int cstring_cmp(const void *a, const void *b) { const char **ia = (const char **)a; const char **ib = (const char **)b; return -strcasecmp(*ia, *ib); /* return the negative of the normal comparison */ }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >