Search Results

Search found 8576 results on 344 pages for 'named constructor'.

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 40/344 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • prevent using functions before initialization, constructors-like in C

    - by Hernán Eche
    This is the way I get to prevent funA,funB,funC, etc.. for being used before init #define INIT_KEY 0xC0DE //any number except 0, is ok static int initialized=0; int Init() { //many init task initialized=INIT_KEY; } int funA() { if (initialized!=INIT_KEY) return 1 //.. } int funB() { if (initialized!=INIT_KEY) return 1 //.. } int funC() { if (initialized!=INIT_KEY) return 1 //.. } The problem with this approach is that if some of those function is called within a loop so "if (initialized!=INIT_KEY)" is called again, and again, although it's not necessary. It's a good example of why constructors are useful haha, If it were an object I would be sure that when was created initialization was called, but in C, I don't know how to do it. Any other ideas are welcome!

    Read the article

  • +(void) initialize in objecive c class static variables construstor

    - by sugar
    I found some sample code from here. static UIImage *backgroundImageDepressed; /** * */ @implementation DecimalPointButton + (void) initialize { backgroundImageDepressed = [[UIImage imageNamed:@"decimalKeyDownBackground.png"] retain]; } is it something like this - +(void) initialize method initialize static variables of a class ( interface ) in objective c ? I have never seen this before. Please need your guidance on it. Thanks in advance for sharing your great knowledge. Sagar

    Read the article

  • Is the old vector get cleared? If yes, how and when?

    - by user180866
    I have the following code: void foo() { vector<double> v(100,1); // line 1 // some code v = vector<double>(200,2); // line 2 // some code } what happened to the vector of size 100 after the second line? Is it gets cleared by itself? If the answer is yes, how and when it is cleared? By the way, is there any other "easy and clean" ways to change the vector as in line 2? I don't want things like v.resize(200); for (int i=0; i<200; i++) v[i] = 2;

    Read the article

  • Forcing a templated object to construct from a pointer

    - by SalamiArmi
    I have a fictional class: template<typename T> class demonstration { public: demonstration(){} ... T *m_data; } At some point in the program's execution, I want to set m_data to a big block of allocated memory and construct an object T there. At the moment, I've been using this code: void construct() { *m_data = T(); } Which I've now realised is probably not the best idea... wont work under certain cirumstances, if T has a private assignment operator for example. Is there a normal/better way to do what I'm attempting here?

    Read the article

  • Pattern for database-wrapper in java

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I am currently writing a java-class that wraps an SQLite database. This class has two ways to be instantiated: Open an existing database. Create a new database. This is what I cam up with: public class SQLiteDatabaseWrapper { public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper openExisting(File PathToDB) { return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } public static SQLiteDatabaseWrapper createNew(File PathToDB) { CreateAndInitializeNewDatabase(PathToDB); return new SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(PathToDB); } private SQLiteDatabaseWrapper(File PathToDB) { // Open connection and setup wrapper } } Is this the way to go in Java, or is there any other best practice for this situation?

    Read the article

  • Translate SQL statement into named_scope?

    - by keruilin
    How can I translate this SQL into a named_scope? Also, I want the total comments param to be passed through a lambda. "select users., count() as total_comments from users, comments where (users.id = comments.user_id) and (comments.public_comment = 1) and (comments.aasm_state = 'posted') and (comments.forum_user_id is null) group by users.id having total_comments 25"

    Read the article

  • C++: Copy contructor: Use Getters or access member vars directly?

    - by cbrulak
    Have a simple container class: public Container { public: Container() {} Container(const Container& cont) //option 1 { SetMyString(cont.GetMyString()); } //OR Container(const Container& cont) //option 2 { m_str1 = cont.m_str1; } public string GetMyString() { return m_str1;} public void SetMyString(string str) { m_str1 = str;} private: string m_str1; } So, would you recommend this method or accessing the member variables directly? In the example, all code is inline, but in our real code there is no inline code. Update (29 Sept 09): Some of these answers are well written however they seem to get missing the point of this question: this is simple contrived example to discuss using getters/setters vs variables initializer lists or private validator functions are not really part of this question. I'm wondering if either design will make the code easier to maintain and expand. Some ppl are focusing on the string in this example however it is just an example, imagine it is a different object instead. I'm not concerned about performance. we're not programming on the PDP-11

    Read the article

  • How to differentiate two constructors with the same parameters?

    - by cibercitizen1
    Suppose we want two constructors for a class representing complex numbers: Complex (double re, double img) // construct from cartesian coordinates Complex (double A, double w) // construct from polar coordinates but the parameters (number and type) are the same: what is the more elegant way to identify what is intended? Adding a third parameter to one of the constructors?

    Read the article

  • Reusing named_scope to define another named_scope

    - by Sergei Kozlov
    The problem essence as I see it One day, if I'm not mistaken, I have seen an example of reusing a named_scope to define another named_scope. Something like this (can't remember the exact syntax, but that's exactly my question): named_scope :billable, :conditions => ... named_scope :billable_by_tom, :conditions => { :billable => true, :user => User.find_by_name('Tom') } The question is: what is the exact syntax, if it's possible at all? I can't find it back, and Google was of no help either. Some explanations Why I actually want it, is that I'm using Searchlogic to define a complex search, which can result in an expression like this: Card.user_group_managers_salary_greater_than(100) But it's too long to be put everywhere. Because, as far as I know, Searchlogic simply defines named_scopes on the fly, I would like to set a named_scope on the Card class like this: named_scope from_big_guys, { user_group_managers_salary_greater_than(100) } - this is where I would use that long Searchlogic method inside my named_scope. But, again, what would be the syntax? Can't figure it out. Resume So, is named_scope nesting (and I do not mean chaining) actually possible?

    Read the article

  • c++/boost: use tuple ctors when subclassing

    - by bbb
    Hi there, is there some way to use a boost tuple's ctors as an addition to the subclass methods (and ctors) like here? // typedef boost::tuple<int, SomeId, SomeStatus> Conn; // Conn(1); // works and initializes using default ctors of Some* struct Conn : boost::tuple<int, AsynchId, AccDevRetStatus> {}; Conn(1); // "no matching function call" (but i want it so much) T.H.X.

    Read the article

  • How to catch-up named mercurial branch from default branch without merging the two into one?

    - by Dynite
    I have two branches in mercurial.. default named |r1 |r2 |r3 -------- named branch created here. | |r4 | |r5 | r6 | | |r7 | | -----------> | r8 How do I achieve this catch-up? | | I want to update the named branch from default, but I'm not ready to merge the branches yet. How do I achieve this? Edit: Additionally, what would the operation be using the GUI? Is it.. right-click r6, merge with..., r8,... then what? commit to named branch?

    Read the article

  • copy C'tor with operator= | C++

    - by user2266935
    I've got this code here: class DerivedClass : public BaseClass { SomeClass* a1; Someclass* a2; public: //constructors go here ~DerivedClass() { delete a1; delete a2;} // other functions go here .... }; My first question is as follows: Can I write an "operator=" to "DerivedClass" ? (if your answer is yes, could you show me how?) My second question is: If the answer to the above is yes, could you show me how to make an "copy c'tor" using the "operator=" that you wrote beforehand (if that is even possible)? Your help would be much appreciated !

    Read the article

  • Should constant contructor aguments be passed by reference or value?

    - by Mike
    When const values are passed to an object construct should they be passed by reference or value? If you pass by value and the arguments are immediately fed to initializes are two copies being made? Is this something that the compiler will automatically take care of. I have noticed that all textbook examples of constructors and intitializers pass by value but this seems inefficient to me. class Point { public: int x; int y; Point(const int _x, const int _y) : x(_x), y(_y) {} }; int main() { const int a = 1, b = 2; Point p(a,b); Point q(3,5); cout << p.x << "," << p.y << endl; cout << q.x << "," << q.y << endl; } vs. class Point { public: int x; int y; Point(const int& _x, const int& _y) : x(_x), y(_y) {} }; Both compile and do the same thing but which is correct?

    Read the article

  • List with non-null elements ends up containing null. A synchronization issue?

    - by Alix
    Hi. First of all, sorry about the title -- I couldn't figure out one that was short and clear enough. Here's the issue: I have a list List<MyClass> list to which I always add newly-created instances of MyClass, like this: list.Add(new MyClass()). I don't add elements any other way. However, then I iterate over the list with foreach and find that there are some null entries. That is, the following code: foreach (MyClass entry in list) if (entry == null) throw new Exception("null entry!"); will sometimes throw an exception. I should point out that the list.Add(new MyClass()) are performed from different threads running concurrently. The only thing I can think of to account for the null entries is the concurrent accesses. List<> isn't thread-safe, after all. Though I still find it strange that it ends up containing null entries, instead of just not offering any guarantees on ordering. Can you think of any other reason? Also, I don't care in which order the items are added, and I don't want the calling threads to block waiting to add their items. If synchronization is truly the issue, can you recommend a simple way to call the Add method asynchronously, i.e., create a delegate that takes care of that while my thread keeps running its code? I know I can create a delegate for Add and call BeginInvoke on it. Does that seem appropriate? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Storing objects in STL vector - minimal set of methods

    - by osgx
    Hello What is "minimal framework" (necessary methods) of object, which I will store in STL <vector>? For my assumptions: #include <vector> #include <cstring> using namespace std; class Doit { private: char *a; public: Doit(){a=(char*)malloc(10);} ~Doit(){free(a);} }; int main(){ vector<Doit> v(10); } gives *** glibc detected *** ./a.out: double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x0804b008 *** Aborted and in valgrind: malloc/free: 2 allocs, 12 frees, 50 bytes allocated.

    Read the article

  • Can I pass a pointer to a superclass, but create a copy of the child?

    - by Alex
    I have a function that takes a pointer to a superclass and performs operations on it. However, at some point, the function must make a deep copy of the inputted object. Is there any way I can perform such a copy? It occurred to me to make the function a template function and simply have the user pass the type, but I hold out hope that C++ offers a more elegant solution.

    Read the article

  • creating new instance fails PHP

    - by as3isolib
    I am relatively new to PHP and having some decent success however I am running into this issue: If I try to create a new instance of the class GenericEntryVO, I get a 500 error with little to no helpful error information. However, if I use a generic object as the result, I get no errors. I'd like to be able to cast this object as a GenericEntryVO as I am using AMFPHP to communicate serialize data with a Flex client. I've read a few different ways to create constructors in PHP but the typical 'public function Foo()' for a class Foo was recommended for PHP 5.4.4 //in my EntryService.php class public function getEntryByID($id) { $link = mysqli_connect("localhost", "root", "root", "BabyTrackingAppDB"); if (mysqli_connect_errno()) { printf("Connect failed: %s\n", mysqli_connect_error()); exit(); } $query = "SELECT * FROM Entries WHERE id = '$id' LIMIT 1"; if ($result = mysqli_query($link, $query)) { // $entry = new GenericEntryVO(); this is where the problem lies! while ($row = mysqli_fetch_row($result)) { $entry->id = $row[0]; $entry->entryType = $row[1]; $entry->title = $row[2]; $entry->description = $row[3]; $entry->value = $row[4]; $entry->created = $row[5]; $entry->updated = $row[6]; } } mysqli_free_result($result); mysqli_close($link); return $entry; } //my GenericEntryVO.php class <?php class GenericEntryVO { public function __construct() { } public $id; public $title; public $entryType; public $description; public $value; public $created; public $updated; // public $properties; } ?>

    Read the article

  • Copy object using pointer (templates)

    - by Azodious
    How the push_back of stl::vector is implemented so it can make copy of any datatype .. may be pointer, double pointer and so on ... I'm implementing a template class having a function push_back almost similar to vector. Within this method a copy of argument should be inserted in internal memory allocated memory. but the argument is a pointer. (an object pointer). Can you pls tell how to create copy from pointer. so that if i delete the pointer in caller still the copy exists in my template class? Code base is as follows: template<typename T> class Vector { public: void push_back(const T& val_in) { T* a = *(new T(val_in)); m_pData[SIZE++] = a; } } Caller: Vector<MyClass*> v(3); MyClass* a = new MyClass(); a->a = 0; a->b = .5; v.push_back(a); delete a; Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do I use a named_scope to filter records in my model

    - by kibyegon
    I have a model "Product" with a "description" field. Now I want to have a link in the index page that when clicked will show all products where the description is blank (empty). In the model I have defined a named_scope like this named_scope :no_description, :conditions => { :description => "" } I have checked that the named_scope works by calling Product.no_description.count on the console. As far as I know, the controller is then supposed to handle the filter request from the link on the "index" action but be able to distinguish it from the default which is view all products. def index @products = Product.all ... My problem is getting the controller handle the different request, what route to setup for the link on the view and the actual link on the view. Hope I explained my problem.

    Read the article

  • Is new int[10]() valid c++?

    - by Naveen
    While trying to answer this question I found that the code int* p = new int[10](); compiles fine with VC9 compiler and initializes the integers to 0. So my questions are: First of all is this valid C++ or is it a microsoft extension? Is it guaranteed to initialize all the elements of the array? Also, is there any difference if I do new int; or new int();? Does the latter guarantee to initialize the variable?

    Read the article

  • C++: Could Polymorphic Copy Constructors work?

    - by 0xC0DEFACE
    Consider: class A { public: A( int val ) : m_ValA( val ) {} A( const A& rhs ) {} int m_ValA; }; class B : public A { public: B( int val4A, int val4B ) : A( val4A ), m_ValB( val4B ) {} B( const B& rhs ) : A( rhs ), m_ValB( rhs.m_ValB ) {} int m_ValB; }; int main() { A* b1 = new B( 1, 2 ); A* b2 = new A( *b1 ); // ERROR...but what if it could work? return 0; } Would C++ be broken if "new A( b1 )" was able to resolve to creating a new B copy and returning an A? Would this even be useful?

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