Search Results

Search found 5819 results on 233 pages for 'compiler theory'.

Page 50/233 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Why the compiler is not compiling a line in C++ Builder?

    - by MLB
    Hi boys: I was programming an application in C++ Builder 6, and I had encountered this rare problem: void RotateDice() { Graphics::TBitmap *MYbitmap = new Graphics::TBitmap(); Randomize(); int rn = random(6) + 1; switch (rn) { case 1: { //... break; } //... Some cases... } ShowDice(); //it's a function to show the dice delete MYbitmap; //the compiler don't get it!!!! } In the line "ShowDice()", the compiler jumps to the final of the RotateDice() method, it doesn't "see" the line "delete MYbitmap". When I compile the program, every compiled line shows a little blue point in its left side, but that line don't show the blue point... it's like the compiler don't "see" the line of code. What's happening with that???? Note: Some days ago, I was writing a program in Delphi and I was advice of that problematic issue. Some like that happened to me in Delphi 7... So, waht the problem with that? I am so sorry about my English. I am from Cuba.

    Read the article

  • Flex SDK missing fundamental things

    - by Bart van Heukelom
    All of a sudden Flash Builder 4 is missing all kinds of fundamental things and is generating incorrect errors. I've had the same issue yesterday, where I fixed it by downloading a new Flex SDK and importing that into FB. I did this again, but this time it fixed nothing. I don't think it's something I did, like removing critical references from the build path. The errors also appeared on projects I was not working on at the time. It occurs for ActionScript, Flex and Flex Library projects alike. Update 3: Well, i've singled the problem down to a single piece of code, though a very simple one. I can make a new workspace in FB and things work ok, then screw the workspace up forever by adding this code to a project. All projects will have errors and closing or even removing the faulty project does not change this. Making another new workspace (without the faulty code) makes my projects compile again. Link: http://www.the3rdage.net/files/2745/Main.as (i've uploaded the file in case an odd character or encoding error causes the error) Update 2: I've tried manual compiling with mxmlc, the same errors occur. It appears to be an SDK problem, not Flash Builder. Update: I find this stack trace in the Flash Builder error log: !ENTRY com.adobe.flexbuilder.project 4 43 2010-05-11 11:55:47.495 !MESSAGE Uncaught exception in compiler !STACK 0 java.lang.NullPointerException at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2592) at macromedia.asc.parser.VariableBindingNode.evaluate(VariableBindingNode.java:64) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2233) at macromedia.asc.parser.ListNode.evaluate(ListNode.java:44) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2578) at macromedia.asc.parser.VariableDefinitionNode.evaluate(VariableDefinitionNode.java:48) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2310) at macromedia.asc.parser.StatementListNode.evaluate(StatementListNode.java:60) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2503) at macromedia.asc.parser.WithStatementNode.evaluate(WithStatementNode.java:44) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2310) at macromedia.asc.parser.StatementListNode.evaluate(StatementListNode.java:60) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2891) at macromedia.asc.parser.FunctionCommonNode.evaluate(FunctionCommonNode.java:106) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:2905) at macromedia.asc.parser.FunctionCommonNode.evaluate(FunctionCommonNode.java:106) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:3643) at macromedia.asc.parser.ClassDefinitionNode.evaluate(ClassDefinitionNode.java:106) at macromedia.asc.semantics.ConstantEvaluator.evaluate(ConstantEvaluator.java:3371) at macromedia.asc.parser.ProgramNode.evaluate(ProgramNode.java:80) at flex2.compiler.as3.As3Compiler.analyze4(As3Compiler.java:709) at flex2.compiler.CompilerAPI.analyze(CompilerAPI.java:3089) at flex2.compiler.CompilerAPI.analyze(CompilerAPI.java:2977) at flex2.compiler.CompilerAPI.batch2(CompilerAPI.java:528) at flex2.compiler.CompilerAPI.batch(CompilerAPI.java:1274) at flex2.compiler.CompilerAPI.compile(CompilerAPI.java:1496) at flex2.tools.oem.Application.compile(Application.java:1188) at flex2.tools.oem.Application.recompile(Application.java:1133) at flex2.tools.oem.Application.compile(Application.java:819) at flex2.tools.flexbuilder.BuilderApplication.compile(BuilderApplication.java:344) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.multisdk.compiler.internal.ASApplicationBuilder$MyBuilder.mybuild(ASApplicationBuilder.java:276) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.multisdk.compiler.internal.ASApplicationBuilder.build(ASApplicationBuilder.java:127) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.multisdk.compiler.internal.ASBuilder.build(ASBuilder.java:190) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.multisdk.compiler.internal.ASItemBuilder.build(ASItemBuilder.java:74) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.project.compiler.internal.FlexProjectBuilder.buildItem(FlexProjectBuilder.java:480) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.project.compiler.internal.FlexProjectBuilder.build(FlexProjectBuilder.java:306) at com.adobe.flexbuilder.project.compiler.internal.FlexIncrementalBuilder.build(FlexIncrementalBuilder.java:157) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager$2.run(BuildManager.java:627) at org.eclipse.core.runtime.SafeRunner.run(SafeRunner.java:42) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager.basicBuild(BuildManager.java:170) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager.basicBuild(BuildManager.java:201) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager$1.run(BuildManager.java:253) at org.eclipse.core.runtime.SafeRunner.run(SafeRunner.java:42) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager.basicBuild(BuildManager.java:256) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager.basicBuildLoop(BuildManager.java:309) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.BuildManager.build(BuildManager.java:341) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.AutoBuildJob.doBuild(AutoBuildJob.java:140) at org.eclipse.core.internal.events.AutoBuildJob.run(AutoBuildJob.java:238) at org.eclipse.core.internal.jobs.Worker.run(Worker.java:55)

    Read the article

  • Hiding Command Prompt with CodeDomProvider

    - by j-t-s
    Hi All I've just got my own little custom c# compiler made, using the article from MSDN. But, when I create a new Windows Forms application using my sample compiler, the MSDOS window also appears, and if I close the DOS window, my WinForms app closes too. How can I tell the Compiler? not to show the MSDOS window at all? Thank you :) Here's my code: using System; namespace JTS { public class CSCompiler { protected string ot, rt, ss, es; protected bool rg, cg; public string Compile(String se, String fe, String[] rdas, String[] fs, Boolean rn) { System.CodeDom.Compiler.CodeDomProvider CODEPROV = System.CodeDom.Compiler.CodeDomProvider.CreateProvider("CSharp"); ot = fe; System.CodeDom.Compiler.CompilerParameters PARAMS = new System.CodeDom.Compiler.CompilerParameters(); // Ensure the compiler generates an EXE file, not a DLL. PARAMS.GenerateExecutable = true; PARAMS.OutputAssembly = ot; PARAMS.CompilerOptions = "/target:winexe"; PARAMS.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(typeof(System.Xml.Linq.Extensions).Assembly.Location); PARAMS.LinkedResources.Add("this.ico"); foreach (String ay in rdas) { if (ay.Contains(".dll")) PARAMS.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(ay); else { string refd = ay; refd = refd + ".dll"; PARAMS.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(refd); } } System.CodeDom.Compiler.CompilerResults rs = CODEPROV.CompileAssemblyFromFile(PARAMS, fs); if (rs.Errors.Count > 0) { foreach (System.CodeDom.Compiler.CompilerError COMERR in rs.Errors) { es = es + "Line number: " + COMERR.Line + ", Error number: " + COMERR.ErrorNumber + ", '" + COMERR.ErrorText + ";" + Environment.NewLine + Environment.NewLine; } } else { // Compilation succeeded. es = "Compilation Succeeded."; if (rn) System.Diagnostics.Process.Start(ot); } return es; } } }

    Read the article

  • Current SPARC Architectures

    - by Darryl Gove
    Different generations of SPARC processors implement different architectures. The architecture that the compiler targets is controlled implicitly by the -xtarget flag and explicitly by the -arch flag. If an application targets a recent architecture, then the compiler gets to play with all the instructions that the new architecture provides. The downside is that the application won't work on older processors that don't have the new instructions. So for developer's there is a trade-off between performance and portability. The way we have solved this in the compiler is to assume a "generic" architecture, and we've made this the default behaviour of the compiler. The only flag that doesn't make this assumption is -fast which tells the compiler to assume that the build machine is also the deployment machine - so the compiler can use all the instructions that the build machine provides. The -xtarget=generic flag tells the compiler explicitly to use this generic model. We work hard on making generic code work well across all processors. So in most cases this is a very good choice. It is also of interest to know what processors support the various architectures. The following Venn diagram attempts to show this: A textual description is as follows: The T1 and T2 processors, in addition to most other SPARC processors that were shipped in the last 10+ years supported V9b, or sparcvis2. The SPARC64 processors from Fujitsu, used in the M-series machines, added support for the floating point multiply accumulate instruction in the sparcfmaf architecture. Support for this instruction also appeared in the T3 - this is called sparcvis3 Later SPARC64 processors added the integer multiply accumulate instruction, this architecture is sparcima. Finally the T4 includes support for both the integer and floating point multiply accumulate instructions in the sparc4 architecture. So the conclusion should be: Floating point multiply accumulate is supported in both the T-series and M-series machines, so it should be a relatively safe bet to start using it. The T4 is a very good machine to deploy to because it supports all the current instruction sets.

    Read the article

  • How "duplicated" Java code is optimized by the JVM JIT compiler?

    - by Renan Vinícius Mozone
    I'm in charge of maintaining a JSP based application, running on IBM WebSphere 6.1 (IBM J9 JVM). All JSP pages have a static include reference and in this include file there is some static Java methods declared. They are included in all JSP pages to offer an "easy access" to those utility static methods. I know that this is a very bad way to work, and I'm working to change this. But, just for curiosity, and to support my effort in changing this, I'm wondering how these "duplicated" static methods are optimized by the JVM JIT compiler. They are optimized separately even having the exact same signature? Does the JVM JIT compiler "sees" that these methods are all identical an provides an "unified" JIT'ed code?

    Read the article

  • GWT application throws an exception when run on Google Chrome with compiler output style set to 'OBF

    - by Elifarley
    I'd like to know if you guys have faced the same problem I'm facing, and how you are dealing with it. Sometimes, a small and harmless change in a Java class ensues strange errors at runtime. These errors only happen if BOTH conditions below are true: 2) the application is run on Google Chrome, and 1) the GWT JavaScript compiler output style is set to 'OBF'. So, running the application on Firefox or IE always works. Running with the output style set to 'pretty' or 'detailed' always works, even on Google Chrome. Here's an example of error message that I got: "((TypeError): Property 'top' of object [object DOMWindow] is not a function stack" And here's what I have: - GWT 1.5.3 - GXT 1.2.4 - Google Chrome 4 and 5 - Windows XP In order to get rid of this Heisenbug, I have to either deploy my application without obfuscation or endure a time-consuming trial-and-error process in which I re-implement the change in slightly different ways and re-run the application, until the GWT compiler is happy with my code. Would you have a better idea on how to avoid this?

    Read the article

  • How do I inhibit "note C6311" in Microsoft C compiler?

    - by piCookie
    In this maximally clipped source example, the manifest constant FOOBAR is being redefined. This is deliberate, and there is extra code in the live case to make use of each definition. The pragma was added to get rid of a warning message, but then a note appeared, and I don't seem to find a way to get rid of the note. I've been able to modify this particular source to #undef between the #define, but I would like to know if there's a way to inhibit the note without requiring #undef, since there are multiple constants being handled the same way. #pragma warning( disable : 4005 ) // 'identifier' : macro redefinition #define FOOBAR FOO #define FOOBAR BAR The compiler banner and output are as follows Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 12.00.8804 for 80x86 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984-1998. All rights reserved. message.c message.c(3) : note C6311: message.c(2) : see previous definition of 'FOOBAR'

    Read the article

  • "Temporary object" warning - is it me or the compiler?

    - by Roddy
    The following snippet gives the warning: [C++ Warning] foo.cpp(70): W8030 Temporary used for parameter '_Val' in call to 'std::vector<Base *,std::allocator<Base *> >::push_back(Base * const &)' .. on the indicated line. class Base { }; class Derived: public Base { public: Derived() // << warning disappears if constructor is removed! { }; }; std::vector<Base*> list1; list1.push_back(new Base); list1.push_back(new Derived); // << Warning on this line! Compiler is Codegear C++Builder 2007. Oddly, if the constructor for Derived is deleted, the warning goes away... Is it me or the compiler?

    Read the article

  • Determine when using the VC90 compiler in VS2010 instead of VS2008?

    - by Dan
    Is there a (Microsoft-specific) CPP macro to determine when I'm using the VC9 compiler in Visual Studio 2010 as opposed to Visual Studio 2008? _MSC_VER returns the compiler version, so with VS2010 multi-targeting feature, I'll get the same result as with VS2008. The reason for wanting to know the difference is that I created a new VS2010 project which contains code removed from a larger project. I just left the VS2008 stuff "as is" since we're moving away from VS2008 "soon" anyway and I didn't want to go through the hassle of creating a vcproj file along with the new vcxproj. For now, I've just defined my own macro to indicate whether the code is compiled into its own DLL or not; it works just fine, but it would be nice if there were something slightly more elegant.

    Read the article

  • Are macro definitions compatible between MIPS and Intel C compiler?

    - by Derek
    I seem to be having a problem with a macro that I have defined in a C program. I compile this software and run it sucessfully with the MIPS compiler. It builds OK but throws the error "Segmentation fault" at runtime when using icc. I compiled both of these on 64 bit architectures (MIPS on SGI, with -64 flag and icc on an intel platform). Is there some magic switch I need to use to make this work correctly on both system? I turned on warnings for the intel compiler, and EVERY one of the places in my program where a macro is invoked throws a warning. Usually something along the lines of mismatched types on the macro's parameters (int to char *) or some such thing.

    Read the article

  • Compile Flex application without debug? Optimisation options for flex compiler?

    - by maoanz
    I have created a simple test application with the following code var i : int; for (i=0; i<3000000; i++){ trace(i); } When I run the application, it's very slow to load, which means the "trace" is running. I check the flash player by right-clicking, the debugger option is not enable. So I wonder if there is an option to put in compiler to exclude the trace. Otherwise, I have to remove manually all the trace in the program. Are there any other options of compiler to optimize the flex application in a maximum way? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why does the Scala compiler disallow overloaded methods with default arguments?

    - by soc
    While there might be valid cases where such method overloadings could become ambiguous, why does the compiler disallow code which is neither ambiguous at compile time nor at run time? Example: // This fails: def foo(a: String)(b: Int = 42) = a + b def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b // This fails, too. Even if there is no position in the argument list, // where the types are the same. def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b def foo(a: String)(b: String = "Foo") = a + b // This is OK: def foo(a: String)(b: Int) = a + b def foo(a: Int) (b: Int = 42) = a + b // Even this is OK. def foo(a: Int)(b: Int) = a + b def foo(a: Int)(b: String = "Foo") = a + b val bar = foo(42)_ // This complains obviously ... Are there any reasons why these restrictions can't be loosened a bit? Especially when converting heavily overloaded Java code to Scala default arguments are a very important and it isn't nice to find out after replacing plenty of Java methods by one Scala methods that the spec/compiler imposes arbitrary restrictions.

    Read the article

  • Will an optimizing compiler remove calls to a method whose result will be multiplied by zero?

    - by Tim R.
    Suppose you have a computationally expensive method, Compute(p), which returns some float, and another method, Falloff(p), which returns another float from zero to one. If you compute Falloff(p) * Compute(p), will Compute(p) still run when Falloff(p) returns zero? Or would you need to write a special case to prevent Compute(p) from running unnecessarily? Theoretically, an optimizing compiler could determine that omitting Compute when Falloff returns zero would have no effect on the program. However, this is kind of hard to test, since if you have Compute output some debug data to determine whether it is running, the compiler would know not to omit it because of that debug info, resulting in sort of a Schrodinger's cat situation. I know the safe solution to this problem is just to add the special case, but I'm just curious.

    Read the article

  • How do I solve MSSQL 2008 install error, "The MOF compiler could not connect with the WMI server"?

    - by nbolton
    Possibly related to: SQL Server 2008 Install fails error reading etwcls.mof After manually removing MSSQL 2008 from my system (uninstall failed to remove two instances), I receive the following error when trying to re-install: The MOF compiler could not connect with the WMI server. This is either because of a semantic error such as an incompatibility with the existing WMI repository or an actual error such as the failure of the WMI server to start. It seems that mofcomp is failing with one of the .mof files, but I'm not sure which, or why. Digging through the connect article gave some indications, but no solution. I've run winmgmt /salvagerepository, which returns "WMI repository is consistent". Currently, I'm unable to install MSSQL 2008. Please help!

    Read the article

  • How do I solve MSSQL 2008 install error, "The MOF compiler could not connect with the WMI server"?

    - by nbolton
    Possibly related to: SQL Server 2008 Install fails error reading etwcls.mof After manually removing MSSQL 2008 from my system (uninstall failed to remove two instances), I receive the following error when trying to re-install: The MOF compiler could not connect with the WMI server. This is either because of a semantic error such as an incompatibility with the existing WMI repository or an actual error such as the failure of the WMI server to start. It seems that mofcomp is failing with one of the .mof files, but I'm not sure which, or why. Digging through the connect article gave some indications, but no solution. I've run winmgmt /salvagerepository, which returns "WMI repository is consistent". Currently, I'm unable to install MSSQL 2008. Please help!

    Read the article

  • (interactive) graph as in graph theory on a web page ?

    - by LB
    Hi, I have to integrate a graph with nodes and edges on a web page. Ideally, i would like to be able to interact with it (like moving the nodes around). Actually, i'm beginning by representing trees, so i would appreciate to be able to collapse subtrees. How can I do that ? I was considering google-visualization api but i wasn't able to find the kind of visualization i'm looking for (org chart doesn't allow to have multiple fathers, if i understood well) I've got no idea of the kind of technology so my tagging may not be really accurate :-). thanks

    Read the article

  • Linq to SQL Repository ~theory~ - Generic but now uses Linq to Objects?

    - by Matt Tolliday
    The project I am currently working on used Linq to SQL as an ORM data access technology. Its an MVC3 Web app. The problem I faced was primarily due to the inability to mock (for testing) the DataContext which gets autogenerated by the DBML designer. So to solve this issue (after much reading) I refactored the repository system which was in place - single repository with seperate and duplicated access methods for each table which ended up with something like 300 methods only 10 of which were unique - into a single repository with generic methods taking the table and returning more generic types to the upper reaches of the application. My question revolves more around the design I've used to get thus far and the differences I'm noticing in the structure of the app. 1) Having refactored the code from the dark ages which used classic Linq to SQL queries: public Billing GetBilling(int id) { var result = ( from bil in _bicDc.Billings where bil.BillingId == id select bil).SingleOrDefault(); return (result); } it now looks like: public T GetRecordWhere<T>(Expression<Func<T, bool>> predicate) where T : class { T result; try { result = _dataContext.GetTable<T>().Where(predicate).SingleOrDefault(); } catch (Exception ex) { throw ex; } return result; } and is used by the controller with a query along the lines of: _repository.GetRecordWhere<Billing>(x => x.BillingId == 1); which is fine, and precisely what I wanted to achieve. ...however.... I'm also having to do the following to get precisely the result set i require in the controller class (the highest point of the app in essence)... viewModel.RecentRequests = _model.GetAllRecordsWhere<Billing>(x => x.BillingId == 1) .Where(x => x.BillingId == Convert.ToInt32(BillingType.Submitted)) .OrderByDescending(x => x.DateCreated). Take(5).ToList(); This - as far as my understanding is correct - is now using Linq to Objects rather than the Linq to SQL queries I was previously? Is this okay practise? It feels wrong to me but I dont know why. Probably because the logic of the queries is in the very highest tier of the app, rather than the lowest, but... I defer to you good people for advice. One of the issues I considered was bringing the entire table into memory but I understand that using the Iqeryable return type the where clause is taken to the database and evaluated there. Thus returning only the resultset i require... i may be wrong. And if you've made it this far, well done. Thank you, and if you have any advice it is very much appreciated!!

    Read the article

  • Are GUID primary keys bad in theory, or just practice?

    - by Yarin
    Whenever I design a database I automatically start with an auto-generating GUID primary key for each of my tables (excepting look-up tables) I know I'll never lose sleep over duplicate keys, merging tables, etc. To me it just makes sense philosophically that any given record should be unique across all domains, and that that uniqueness should be represented in a consistent way from table to table. I realize it will never be the most performant option, but putting performance aside, I'd like to know if there are philosophical arguments against this practice?

    Read the article

  • A Guided Tour of Complexity

    - by JoshReuben
    I just re-read Complexity – A Guided Tour by Melanie Mitchell , protégé of Douglas Hofstadter ( author of “Gödel, Escher, Bach”) http://www.amazon.com/Complexity-Guided-Tour-Melanie-Mitchell/dp/0199798109/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1339744329&sr=8-1 here are some notes and links:   Evolved from Cybernetics, General Systems Theory, Synergetics some interesting transdisciplinary fields to investigate: Chaos Theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory – small differences in initial conditions (such as those due to rounding errors in numerical computation) yield widely diverging outcomes for chaotic systems, rendering long-term prediction impossible. System Dynamics / Cybernetics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Dynamics – study of how feedback changes system behavior Network Theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_theory – leverage Graph Theory to analyze symmetric  / asymmetric relations between discrete objects Algebraic Topology - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_topology – leverage abstract algebra to analyze topological spaces There are limits to deterministic systems & to computation. Chaos Theory definitely applies to training an ANN (artificial neural network) – different weights will emerge depending upon the random selection of the training set. In recursive Non-Linear systems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_system – output is not directly inferable from input. E.g. a Logistic map: Xt+1 = R Xt(1-Xt) Different types of bifurcations, attractor states and oscillations may occur – e.g. a Lorenz Attractor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenz_system Feigenbaum Constants http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feigenbaum_constants express ratios in a bifurcation diagram for a non-linear map – the convergent limit of R (the rate of period-doubling bifurcations) is 4.6692016 Maxwell’s Demon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%27s_demon - the Second Law of Thermodynamics has only a statistical certainty – the universe (and thus information) tends towards entropy. While any computation can theoretically be done without expending energy, with finite memory, the act of erasing memory is permanent and increases entropy. Life & thought is a counter-example to the universe’s tendency towards entropy. Leo Szilard and later Claude Shannon came up with the Information Theory of Entropy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory) whereby Shannon entropy quantifies the expected value of a message’s information in bits in order to determine channel capacity and leverage Coding Theory (compression analysis). Ludwig Boltzmann came up with Statistical Mechanics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_mechanics – whereby our Newtonian perception of continuous reality is a probabilistic and statistical aggregate of many discrete quantum microstates. This is relevant for Quantum Information Theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_information and the Physics of Information - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_information. Hilbert’s Problems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_problems pondered whether mathematics is complete, consistent, and decidable (the Decision Problem – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entscheidungsproblem – is there always an algorithm that can determine whether a statement is true).  Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems  proved that mathematics cannot be both complete and consistent (e.g. “This statement is not provable”). Turing through the use of Turing Machines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine symbol processors that can prove mathematical statements) and Universal Turing Machines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Turing_machine Turing Machines that can emulate other any Turing Machine via accepting programs as well as data as input symbols) that computation is limited by demonstrating the Halting Problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem (is is not possible to know when a program will complete – you cannot build an infinite loop detector). You may be used to thinking of 1 / 2 / 3 dimensional systems, but Fractal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal systems are defined by self-similarity & have non-integer Hausdorff Dimensions !!!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fractals_by_Hausdorff_dimension – the fractal dimension quantifies the number of copies of a self similar object at each level of detail – eg Koch Snowflake - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_snowflake Definitions of complexity: size, Shannon entropy, Algorithmic Information Content (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithmic_information_theory - size of shortest program that can generate a description of an object) Logical depth (amount of info processed), thermodynamic depth (resources required). Complexity is statistical and fractal. John Von Neumann’s other machine was the Self-Reproducing Automaton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_machine  . Cellular Automata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_automaton are alternative form of Universal Turing machine to traditional Von Neumann machines where grid cells are locally synchronized with their neighbors according to a rule. Conway’s Game of Life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway's_Game_of_Life demonstrates various emergent constructs such as “Glider Guns” and “Spaceships”. Cellular Automatons are not practical because logical ops require a large number of cells – wasteful & inefficient. There are no compilers or general program languages available for Cellular Automatons (as far as I am aware). Random Boolean Networks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_network are extensions of cellular automata where nodes are connected at random (not to spatial neighbors) and each node has its own rule –> they demonstrate the emergence of complex  & self organized behavior. Stephen Wolfram’s (creator of Mathematica, so give him the benefit of the doubt) New Kind of Science http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_New_Kind_of_Science proposes the universe may be a discrete Finite State Automata http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite-state_machine whereby reality emerges from simple rules. I am 2/3 through this book. It is feasible that the universe is quantum discrete at the plank scale and that it computes itself – Digital Physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics – a simulated reality? Anyway, all behavior is supposedly derived from simple algorithmic rules & falls into 4 patterns: uniform , nested / cyclical, random (Rule 30 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_30) & mixed (Rule 110 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_110 localized structures – it is this that is interesting). interaction between colliding propagating signal inputs is then information processing. Wolfram proposes the Principle of Computational Equivalence - http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrincipleofComputationalEquivalence.html - all processes that are not obviously simple can be viewed as computations of equivalent sophistication. Meaning in information may emerge from analogy & conceptual slippages – see the CopyCat program: http://cognitrn.psych.indiana.edu/rgoldsto/courses/concepts/copycat.pdf Scale Free Networks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale-free_network have a distribution governed by a Power Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law - much more common than Normal Distribution). They are characterized by hubs (resilience to random deletion of nodes), heterogeneity of degree values, self similarity, & small world structure. They grow via preferential attachment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_attachment – tipping points triggered by positive feedback loops. 2 theories of cascading system failures in complex systems are Self-Organized Criticality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organized_criticality and Highly Optimized Tolerance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_optimized_tolerance. Computational Mechanics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_mechanics – use of computational methods to study phenomena governed by the principles of mechanics. This book is a great intuition pump, but does not cover the more mathematical subject of Computational Complexity Theory – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_complexity_theory I am currently reading this book on this subject: http://www.amazon.com/Computational-Complexity-Christos-H-Papadimitriou/dp/0201530821/ref=pd_sim_b_1   stay tuned for that review!

    Read the article

  • Examples of different architecture methodologies

    - by Lane
    Is there a resource or site which illustrates building the same application (desktop or web) using several different contrasting architectures? Such as MVP versus MVVM versus MVC, etc. It would be very helpful to see how they look side-by-side using real-world code instead of comparing written theory to written theory. I've often found that something can be described well in a book, but when you go to implement it, the subtleties and weaknesses of the theory become readily apparent.

    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

  • Compiling external C++ library (Octave) for iPhone (Fortran compiler missing?)

    - by Shaggy Frog
    A friend of mine asked me if it would be possible to port the Octave project to the iPhone. I haven't compiled an external package for an iPhone project before, so I downloaded the source code, and then used some scripts found on a couple of different Web sites (one, two) to try and build the libraries. However, when I try either of these scripts (which are nearly identical), they eventually die during the configure phase with the following error output: [...snip checks...] checking whether we are using the GNU Fortran 77 compiler... no checking whether accepts -g... no checking how to get verbose linking output from ... configure: WARNING: compilation failed checking for Fortran 77 libraries of ... rm: conftest.dSYM: is a directory checking for dummy main to link with Fortran 77 libraries... rm: conftest.dSYM: is a directory none checking for Fortran 77 name-mangling scheme... configure: error: cannot compile a simple Fortran program See `config.log' for more details. Is the problem that the iPhone SDK/Xcode doesn't include a Fortran cross-compiler, or am I doing something wrong?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >