Search Results

Search found 2746 results on 110 pages for 'vector algebra'.

Page 52/110 | < Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >

  • How to count term frequency for set of documents?

    - by ManBugra
    i have a Lucene-Index with following documents: doc1 := { caldari, jita, shield, planet } doc2 := { gallente, dodixie, armor, planet } doc3 := { amarr, laser, armor, planet } doc4 := { minmatar, rens, space } doc5 := { jove, space, secret, planet } so these 5 documents use 14 different terms: [ caldari, jita, shield, planet, gallente, dodixie, armor, amarr, laser, minmatar, rens, jove, space, secret ] the frequency of each term: [ 1, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1 ] for easy reading: [ caldari:1, jita:1, shield:1, planet:4, gallente:1, dodixie:1, armor:2, amarr:1, laser:1, minmatar:1, rens:1, jove:1, space:2, secret:1 ] What i do want to know now is, how to obtain the term frequency vector for a set of documents? for example: Set<Documents> docs := [ doc2, doc3 ] termFrequencies = magicFunction(docs); System.out.pring( termFrequencies ); would result in the ouput: [ caldari:0, jita:0, shield:0, planet:2, gallente:1, dodixie:1, armor:2, amarr:1, laser:1, minmatar:0, rens:0, jove:0, space:0, secret:0 ] remove all zeros: [ planet:2, gallente:1, dodixie:1, armor:2, amarr:1, laser:1 ] Notice, that the result vetor contains only the term frequencies of the set of documents. NOT the overall frequencies of the whole index! The term 'planet' is present 4 times in the whole index but the source set of documents only contains it 2 times. A naive implementation would be to just iterate over all documents in the docs set, create a map and count each term. But i need a solution that would also work with a document set size of 100.000 or 500.000. Is there a feature in Lucene i can use to obtain this term vector? If there is no such feature, how would a data structure look like someone can create at index time to obtain such a term vector easily and fast? I'm not that Lucene expert so i'am sorry if the solution is obvious or trivial.

    Read the article

  • Computing complex math equations in python

    - by dassouki
    Are there any libraries or techniques that simplify computing equations ? Take the following two examples: F = B * { [ a * b * sumOf (A / B ''' for all i ''' ) ] / [ sumOf(c * d * j) ] } where: F = cost from i to j B, a, b, c, d, j are all vectors in the format [ [zone_i, zone_j, cost_of_i_to_j], [..]] This should produce a vector F [ [1,2, F_1_2], ..., [i,j, F_i_j] ] T_ij = [ P_i * A_i * F_i_j] / [ SumOf [ Aj * F_i_j ] // j = 1 to j = n ] where: n is the number of zones T = vector [ [1, 2, A_1_2, P_1_2], ..., [i, j, A_i_j, P_i_j] ] F = vector [1, 2, F_1_2], ..., [i, j, F_i_j] so P_i would be the sum of all P_i_j for all j and Aj would be sum of all P_j for all i I'm not sure what I'm looking for, but perhaps a parser for these equations or methods to deal with multiple multiplications and products between vectors? To calculate some of the factors, for example A_j, this is what i use from collections import defaultdict A_j_dict = defaultdict(float) for A_item in TG: A_j_dict[A_item[1]] += A_item[3] Although this works fine, I really feel that it is a brute force / hacking method and unmaintainable in the case we want to add more variables or parameters. Are there any math equation parsers you'd recommend? Side Note: These equations are used to model travel. Currently I use excel to solve a lot of these equations; and I find that process to be daunting. I'd rather move to python where it pulls the data directly from our database (postgres) and outputs the results into the database. All that is figured out. I'm just struggling with evaluating the equations themselves. Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • Matlab - Propagate points orthogonally on to the edge of shape boundaries

    - by Graham
    Hi I have a set of points which I want to propagate on to the edge of shape boundary defined by a binary image. The shape boundary is defined by a 1px wide white edge. I also have the coordinates of these points stored in a 2 row by n column matrix. The shape forms a concave boundary with no holes within itself made of around 2500 points. I want to cast a ray from each point from the set of points in an orthogonal direction and detect at which point it intersects the shape boundary at. What would be the best method to do this? Are there some sort of ray tracing algorithms that could be used? Or would it be a case of taking orthogonal unit vector and multiplying it by a scalar and testing after multiplication if the end point of the vector is outside the shape boundary. When the end point of the unit vector is outside the shape, just find the point of intersection? Thank you very much in advance for any help!

    Read the article

  • How much of STL is too much?

    - by Darius Kucinskas
    I am using a lot of STL code with std::for_each, bind, and so on, but I noticed that sometimes STL usage is not good idea. For example if you have a std::vector and want to do one action on each item of the vector, your first idea is to use this: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), Foo()) and it is elegant and ok, for a while. But then comes the first set of bug reports and you have to modify code. Now you should add parameter to call Foo(), so now it becomes: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), std::bind2nd(Foo(), X)) but that is only temporary solution. Now the project is maturing and you understand business logic much better and you want to add new modifications to code. It is at this point that you realize that you should use old good: for(std::vector::iterator it = vec.begin(); it != vec.end(); ++it) Is this happening only to me? Do you recognise this kind of pattern in your code? Have you experience similar anti-patterns using STL?

    Read the article

  • Transfer data between C++ classes efficiently

    - by David
    Hi, Need help... I have 3 classes, Manager which holds 2 pointers. One to class A another to class B . A does not know about B and vise versa. A does some calculations and at the end it puts 3 floats into the clipboard. Next, B pulls from clipboard the 3 floats, and does it's own calculations. This loop is managed by the Manager and repeats many times (iteration after iteration). My problem: Now class A produces a vector of floats which class B needs. This vector can have more than 1000 values and I don't want to use the clipboard to transfer it to B as it will become time consumer, even bottleneck, since this behavior repeats step by step. Simple solution is that B will know A (set a pointer to A). Other one is to transfer a pointer to the vector via Manager But I'm looking for something different, more object oriented that won't break the existent separation between A and B Any ideas ? Many thanks David

    Read the article

  • Android - Correspondence between ImageView coordinates and Bitmap Pixels

    - by Matteo
    In my application I want the user to be able to select some content of an Image contained inside an ImageView. To select the content I subclassed the ImageView class making it implement the OnTouchListener so to draw over it a rectangle with borders decided by the user. Here is an example of the result of the drawing (to have an idea you can think of it as when you click with the mouse on your desktop and drag the mouse): Now I need to determine which pixels of the Bitmap image correspond to the selected part. It's kind of easy to determine which are the points of the ImageView belonging to the rectangle, but I don't know how to get the correspondent pixels, since the ImageView has a different aspect ratio than the original image. I followed the approach described especially here, but also here, but am not fully satisfied because in my opinion the correspondence made is 1 on 1 between pixels and points on the ImageView and does not give me all the correspondent pixels on the original image to the selected area. Calling hoveredRect the rectangle on the ImageView the points inside of it are: class Point { float x, y; @Override public String toString() { return x + ", " + y; } } Vector<Point> pointsInRect = new Vector<Point>(); for( int x = hoveredRect.left; x <= hoveredRect.right; x++ ){ for( int y = hoveredRect.top; y <= hoveredRect.bottom; y++ ){ Point pointInRect = new Point(); pointInRect.x = x; pointInRect.y = y; pointsInRect.add(pointInRect); } } How can I obtain a Vector<Pixels> pixelsInImage containing the correspondent pixels?

    Read the article

  • Accessing Members of Containing Objects from Contained Objects.

    - by Bunkai.Satori
    If I have several levels of object containment (one object defines and instantiates another object which define and instantiate another object..), is it possible to get access to upper, containing - object variables and functions, please? Example: class CObjectOne { public: CObjectOne::CObjectOne() { Create(); }; void Create(); std::vector<ObjectTwo>vObejctsTwo; int nVariableOne; } bool CObjectOne::Create() { CObjectTwo ObjectTwo(this); vObjectsTwo.push_back(ObjectTwo); } class CObjectTwo { public: CObjectTwo::CObjectTwo(CObjectOne* pObject) { pObjectOne = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectOne* GetObjectOne(){return pObjectOne;}; std::vector<CObjectTrhee>vObjectsTrhee; CObjectOne* pObjectOne; int nVariableTwo; } bool CObjectTwo::Create() { CObjectThree ObjectThree(this); vObjectsThree.push_back(ObjectThree); } class CObjectThree { public: CObjectThree::CObjectThree(CObjectTwo* pObject) { pObjectTwo = pObject; Create(); }; void Create(); CObjectTwo* GetObjectTwo(){return pObjectTwo;}; std::vector<CObjectsFour>vObjectsFour; CObjectTwo* pObjectTwo; int nVariableThree; } bool CObjectThree::Create() { CObjectFour ObjectFour(this); vObjectsFour.push_back(ObjectFour); } main() { CObjectOne myObject1; } Say, that from within CObjectThree I need to access nVariableOne in CObjectOne. I would like to do it as follows: int nValue = vObjectThree[index].GetObjectTwo()->GetObjectOne()->nVariable1; However, after compiling and running my application, I get Memory Access Violation error. What is wrong with the code above(it is example, and might contain spelling mistakes)? Do I have to create the objects dynamically instead of statically? Is there any other way how to achieve variables stored in containing objects from withing contained objects?

    Read the article

  • Mixing c++ standard strings and windows API

    - by JB
    Many windows APIs take a pointer to a buffer and a size element but the result needs to go into a c++ string. (I'm using windows unicode here so they are wstrings) Here is an example :- #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <vector> #include <windows.h> using namespace std; // This is the method I'm interested in improving ... wstring getComputerName() { vector<wchar_t> buffer; buffer.resize(MAX_COMPUTERNAME_LENGTH+1); DWORD size = MAX_COMPUTERNAME_LENGTH; GetComputerNameW(&buffer[0], &size); return wstring(&buffer[0], size); } int main() { wcout << getComputerName() << "\n"; } My question really is, is this the best way to write the getComputerName function so that it fits into C++ better, or is there a better way? I don't see any way to use a string directly without going via a vector unless I missed something? It works fine, but somehow seems a little ugly. The question isn't about that particular API, it's just a convenient example.

    Read the article

  • C++ interpreter conceptual problem

    - by Jan Wilkins
    I've built an interpreter in C++ for a language created by me. One main problem in the design was that I had two different types in the language: number and string. So I have to pass around a struct like: class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int intValue; string strValue; } Objects of this class are passed around million times a second during e.g.: a countdown loop in my language. Profiling pointed out: 85% of the performance is eaten by the allocation function of the string template. This is pretty clear to me: My interpreter has bad design and doesn't use pointers enough. Yet, I don't have an option: I can't use pointers in most cases as I just have to make copies. How to do something against this? Is a class like this a better idea? vector<string> strTable; vector<int> intTable; class myInterpreterValue { myInterpreterType type; int locationInTable; } So the class only knows what type it represents and the position in the table This however again has disadvantages: I'd have to add temporary values to the string/int vector table and then remove them again, this would eat a lot of performance again. Help, how do interpreters of languages like Python or Ruby do that? They somehow need a struct that represents a value in the language like something that can either be int or string.

    Read the article

  • How might I wrap the FindXFile-style APIs to the STL-style Iterator Pattern in C++?

    - by BillyONeal
    Hello everyone :) I'm working on wrapping up the ugly innards of the FindFirstFile/FindNextFile loop (though my question applies to other similar APIs, such as RegEnumKeyEx or RegEnumValue, etc.) inside iterators that work in a manner similar to the Standard Template Library's istream_iterators. I have two problems here. The first is with the termination condition of most "foreach" style loops. STL style iterators typically use operator!= inside the exit condition of the for, i.e. std::vector<int> test; for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = test.begin(); it != test.end(); it++) { //Do stuff } My problem is I'm unsure how to implement operator!= with such a directory enumeration, because I do not know when the enumeration is complete until I've actually finished with it. I have sort of a hack together solution in place now that enumerates the entire directory at once, where each iterator simply tracks a reference counted vector, but this seems like a kludge which can be done a better way. The second problem I have is that there are multiple pieces of data returned by the FindXFile APIs. For that reason, there's no obvious way to overload operator* as required for iterator semantics. When I overload that item, do I return the file name? The size? The modified date? How might I convey the multiple pieces of data to which such an iterator must refer to later in an ideomatic way? I've tried ripping off the C# style MoveNext design but I'm concerned about not following the standard idioms here. class SomeIterator { public: bool next(); //Advances the iterator and returns true if successful, false if the iterator is at the end. std::wstring fileName() const; //other kinds of data.... }; EDIT: And the caller would look like: SomeIterator x = ??; //Construct somehow while(x.next()) { //Do stuff } Thanks! Billy3

    Read the article

  • C++ class is not being included properly.

    - by ravloony
    Hello all, I have a problem which is either something I have completely failed to understand, or very strange. It's probably the first one, but I have spent the whole afternoon googling with no success, so here goes... I have a class called Schedule, which has as a member a vector of Room. However, when I compile using cmake, or even by hand, I get the following: In file included from schedule.cpp:1: schedule.h:13: error: ‘Room’ was not declared in this scope schedule.h:13: error: template argument 1 is invalid schedule.h:13: error: template argument 2 is invalid schedule.cpp: In constructor ‘Schedule::Schedule(int, int, int)’: schedule.cpp:12: error: ‘Room’ was not declared in this scope schedule.cpp:12: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘r’ schedule.cpp:13: error: request for member ‘push_back’ in ‘((Schedule*)this)->Schedule::_sched’, which is of non-class type ‘int’ schedule.cpp:13: error: ‘r’ was not declared in this scope Here are the relevant bits of code: #include <vector> #include "room.h" class Schedule { private: std::vector<Room> _sched; //line 13 int _ndays; int _nrooms; int _ntslots; public: Schedule(); ~Schedule(); Schedule(int nrooms, int ndays, int ntslots); }; Schedule::Schedule(int nrooms, int ndays, int ntslots):_ndays(ndays), _nrooms(nrooms),_ntslots(ntslots) { for (int i=0; i<nrooms;i++) { Room r(ndays,ntslots); _sched.push_back(r); } } In theory, g++ should compile a class before the one that includes it. There are no circular dependencies here, it's all straightforward stuff. I am completely stumped on this one, which is what leads me to believe that I must be missing something. :-D

    Read the article

  • C++ iterators, default initialization and what to use as an uninitialized sentinel.

    - by Hassan Syed
    The Context I have a custom template container class put together from a map and vector. The map resolves a string to an ordinal, and the vector resolves an ordinal (only an initial string to ordinal lookup is done, future references are to the vector) to the entry. The entries are modified intrusively to contain a a bool "assigned" and an iterator_type which is a const_iterator to the container class's map. My container class will use RCF's serialization code (which models boost::serialization) to serialize my container classes to nodes in a network. Serializing iterator's is not possible, or a can of worms, and I can easily regenerate them onces the vectors and maps are serialized on the remote site. The Question I need to default initialize, and be able to test that the iterator has not been assigned to (if it is assigned it is valid, if not it is invalid). Since map iterators are not invalidated upon operations performed on it (unless of course items are removed :D) am I to assume that map<x,y>::end() is a valid sentinel (regardless of the state of the map -- i.e., it could be empty) to initialize to ? I will always have access to the parent map, I'm just unsure wheather end() is the same as the map contents change. I don't want to use another level of indirection (--i.e., boost::optional) to achieve my goal, I'd rather forego compiler checks to correct logic, but it would be nice if I didn't need to. Misc This question exists, but most of its content seems non-sense. Assigning a NULL to an iterator is invalid according to g++ and clang++. This is another similar question, but it focuses on the common use-cases of iterators, which generally tends to be using the iterator to iterate, ofcourse in this use-case the state of the container isn't meant to change whilst iteration is going on.

    Read the article

  • How do virtual destructors work?

    - by Prabhu
    Few hours back I was fiddling with a Memory Leak issue and it turned out that I really got some basic stuff about virtual destructors wrong! Let me put explain my class design. class Base { virtual push_elements() {} }; class Derived:public Base { vector<int> x; public: void push_elements(){ for(int i=0;i <5;i++) x.push_back(i); } }; void main() { Base* b = new Derived(); b->push_elements(); delete b; } The bounds checker tool reported a memory leak in the derived class vector. And I figured out that the destructor is not virtual and the derived class destructor is not called. And it surprisingly got fixed when I made the destructor virtual. Isn't the vector deallocated automatically even if the derived class destructor is not called? Is that a quirk in BoundsChecker tool or is my understanding of virtual destructor wrong?

    Read the article

  • How to calculate the normal of points on a 3D cubic Bézier curve given normals for its start and end points?

    - by Robert
    I'm trying to render a "3D ribbon" using a single 3D cubic Bézier curve to describe it (the width of the ribbon is some constant). The first and last control points have a normal vector associated with them (which are always perpendicular to the tangents at those points, and describe the surface normal of the ribbon at those points), and I'm trying to smoothly interpolate the normal vector over the course of the curve. For example, given a curve which forms the letter 'C', with the first and last control points both having surface normals pointing upwards, the ribbon should start flat, parallel to the ground, slowly turn, and then end flat again, facing the same way as the first control point. To do this "smoothly", it would have to face outwards half-way through the curve. At the moment (for this case), I've only been able to get all the surfaces facing upwards (and not outwards in the middle), which creates an ugly transition in the middle. It's quite hard to explain, I've attached some images below of this example with what it currently looks like (all surfaces facing upwards, sharp flip in the middle) and what it should look like (smooth transition, surfaces slowly rotate round). Silver faces represent the front, black faces the back. Incorrect, what it currently looks like: Correct, what it should look like: All I really need is to be able to calculate this "hybrid normal vector" for any point on the 3D cubic bézier curve, and I can generate the polygons no problem, but I can't work out how to get them to smoothly rotate round as depicted. Completely stuck as to how to proceed!

    Read the article

  • Virtual destructor - How does it work?

    - by Prabhu
    Hello All, Few hours back I was fiddling with a Memory Leak issue and it turned out that I really got some basic stuff about virtual destructor wrong!! Let me put explain my class design. class Base { virtual push_elements()<br>{}<br> }; class Derived:public Base { vector<int> x; public: void push_elements(){ for(int i=0;i <5;i++) x.push_back(i); } }; void main() { Base* b = new Derived(); b->push_elements(); delete b; } The bounds checker tool reported a memory leak in the derived class vector. And I figured out that the destructor is not virtual and the derived class destructor is not called.And it surprisingly got fixed when I made the destructor virtual. But my question is "isn't the vector deallocated automatically even if the derived class destructor is not called"? Is that a quirk in BoundsChecker tool or is my understanding of virtual destructor is wrong:)

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of manually written loops vs operator overloads (C++)

    - by Sagekilla
    Hi all, in the program I'm working on I have 3-element arrays, which I use as mathematical vectors for all intents and purposes. Through the course of writing my code, I was tempted to just roll my own Vector class with simple +, -, *, /, etc overloads so I can simplify statements like: for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) r[i] = r1[i] - r2[i]; // becomes: r = r1 - r2; Which should be more or less identical in generated code. But when it comes to more complicated things, could this really impact my performance heavily? One example that I have in my code is this: Manually written version: for (int j = 0; j < 3; j++) { p.vel[j] = p.oldVel[j] + (p.oldAcc[j] + p.acc[j]) * dt2 + (p.oldJerk[j] - p.jerk[j]) * dt12; p.pos[j] = p.oldPos[j] + (p.oldVel[j] + p.vel[j]) * dt2 + (p.oldAcc[j] - p.acc[j]) * dt12; } Using a Vector class with operator overloads: p.vel = p.oldVel + (p.oldAcc + p.acc) * dt2 + (p.oldJerk - p.jerk) * dt12; p.pos = p.oldPos + (p.oldVel + p.vel) * dt2 + (p.oldAcc - p.acc) * dt12; I am compiling my code for maximum possible speed, as it's extremely important that this code runs quickly and calculates accurately. So will me relying on my Vector's for these sorts of things really affect me? For those curious, this is part of some numerical integration code which is not trivial to run in my program. Any insight would be appreciated, as would any idioms or tricks I'm unaware of.

    Read the article

  • Execute a function to affect different template class instances

    - by Samer Afach
    I have a complicated problem, and I need help. I have a base case, class ParamBase { string paramValue; //... } and a bunch of class templates with different template parameters. template <typename T> class Param : public ParamBase { T value; //... } Now, each instance of Param has different template parameter, double, int, string... etc. To make it easier, I have a vector to their base class pointers that contains all the instances that have been created: vector<ParamBase*> allParamsObjects; The question is: How can I run a single function (global or member or anything, your choice), that converts all of those different instances' strings paramValue with different templates arguments and save the conversion result to the appropriate type in Param::value. This has to be run over all objects that are saved in the vector allParamsObjects. So if the template argument of the first Param is double, paramValue has to be converted to double and saved in value; and if the second Param's argument is int, then the paramValue of the second has to be converted to int and saved in value... etc. I feel it's almost impossible... Any help would be highly appreciated :-)

    Read the article

  • Building static (but complicated) lookup table using templates.

    - by MarkD
    I am currently in the process of optimizing a numerical analysis code. Within the code, there is a 200x150 element lookup table (currently a static std::vector < std::vector < double ) that is constructed at the beginning of every run. The construction of the lookup table is actually quite complex- the values in the lookup table are constructed using an iterative secant method on a complicated set of equations. Currently, for a simulation, the construction of the lookup table is 20% of the run time (run times are on the order of 25 second, lookup table construction takes 5 seconds). While 5-seconds might not seem to be a lot, when running our MC simulations, where we are running 50k+ simulations, it suddenly becomes a big chunk of time. Along with some other ideas, one thing that has been floated- can we construct this lookup table using templates at compile time? The table itself never changes. Hard-coding a large array isn't a maintainable solution (the equations that go into generating the table are constantly being tweaked), but it seems that if the table can be generated at compile time, it would give us the best of both worlds (easily maintainable, no overhead during runtime). So, I propose the following (much simplified) scenario. Lets say you wanted to generate a static array (use whatever container suits you best- 2D c array, vector of vectors, etc..) at compile time. You have a function defined- double f(int row, int col); where the return value is the entry in the table, row is the lookup table row, and col is the lookup table column. Is it possible to generate this static array at compile time using templates, and how?

    Read the article

  • Creating an object in the loop

    - by Jacob
    std::vector<double> C(4); for(int i = 0; i < 1000;++i) for(int j = 0; j < 2000; ++j) { C[0] = 1.0; C[1] = 1.0; C[2] = 1.0; C[3] = 1.0; } is much faster than for(int i = 0; i < 1000;++i) for(int j = 0; j < 2000; ++j) { std::vector<double> C(4); C[0] = 1.0; C[1] = 1.0; C[2] = 1.0; C[3] = 1.0; } I realize this happens because std::vector is repeatedly being created and instantiated in the loop, but I was under the impression this would be optimized away. Is it completely wrong to keep variables local in a loop whenever possible? I was under the (perhaps false) impression that this would provide optimization opportunities for the compiler. EDIT: I use VC++2005 (release mode) with full optimization (/Ox)

    Read the article

  • Link compatibility between C++ and D

    - by Caspin
    D easily interfaces with C. D just as easily interfaces with C++, but (and it's a big but) the C++ needs to be extremely trivial. The code cannot use: namespaces templates multiple inheritance mix virtual with non-virtual methods more? I completely understand the inheritance restriction. The rest however, feel like artificial limitations. Now I don't want to be able to use std::vector<T> directly, but I would really like to be able to link with std::vector<int> as an externed template. The C++ interfacing page has this particularly depressing comment. D templates have little in common with C++ templates, and it is very unlikely that any sort of reasonable method could be found to express C++ templates in a link-compatible way with D. This means that the C++ STL, and C++ Boost, likely will never be accessible from D. Admittedly I'll probably never need std::vector while coding in D, but I'd love to use QT or boost. So what's the deal. Why is it so hard to express non-trivial C++ classes in D? Would it not be worth it to add some special annotations or something to express at least namespaces?

    Read the article

  • Creating a new object destroys an older object with different name in C++

    - by Mikael
    First question here! So, I am having some problems with pointers in Visual C++ 2008. I'm writing a program which will control six cameras and do some processing on them so to clean things up I have created a Camera Manager class. This class handles all operations which will be carried out on all the cameras. Below this is a Camera class which interacts with each individual camera driver and does some basic image processing. Now, the idea is that when the manager is initialised it creates two cameras and adds them to a vector so that I can access them later. The catch here is that when I create the second camera (camera2) the first camera's destructor is called for some reason, which then disconnects the camera. Normally I'd assume that the problem is somewhere in the Camera class, but in this case everything works perfectly as long as I don't create the camera2 object. What's gone wrong? CameraManager.h: #include "stdafx.h" #include <vector> #include "Camera.h" class CameraManager{ std::vector<Camera> cameras; public: CameraManager(); ~CameraManager(); void CaptureAll(); void ShowAll(); }; CameraManager.cpp: #include "stdafx.h" #include "CameraManager.h" CameraManager::CameraManager() { printf("Camera Manager: Initializing\n"); [...] Camera *camera1 = new Camera(NodeInfo,1, -44,0,0); cameras.push_back(*camera1); // Adding the following two lines causes camera1's destructor to be called. Why? Camera *camera2 = new Camera(NodeInfo,0, 44,0,0); cameras.push_back(*camera2); printf("Camera Manager: Ready\n"); }

    Read the article

  • Getting functions of inherited functions to be called

    - by wrongusername
    Let's say I have a base class Animal from which a class Cow inherits, and a Barn class containing an Animal vector, and let's say the Animal class has a virtual function scream(), which Cow overrides. With the following code: Animal.h #ifndef _ANIMAL_H #define _ANIMAL_H #include <iostream> using namespace std; class Animal { public: Animal() {}; virtual void scream() {cout << "aaaAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHHHH!!! ahhh..." << endl;} }; #endif /* _ANIMAL_H */ Cow.h #ifndef _COW_H #define _COW_H #include "Animal.h" class Cow: public Animal { public: Cow() {} void scream() {cout << "MOOooooOOOOOOOO!!!" << endl;} }; #endif /* _COW_H */ Barn.h #ifndef _BARN_H #define _BARN_H #include "Animal.h" #include <vector> class Barn { std::vector<Animal> animals; public: Barn() {} void insertAnimal(Animal animal) {animals.push_back(animal);} void tortureAnimals() { for(int a = 0; a < animals.size(); a++) animals[a].scream(); } }; #endif /* _BARN_H */ and finally main.cpp #include <stdlib.h> #include "Barn.h" #include "Cow.h" #include "Chicken.h" /* * */ int main(int argc, char** argv) { Barn barn; barn.insertAnimal(Cow()); barn.tortureAnimals(); return (EXIT_SUCCESS); } I get this output: aaaAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHHHHHH!!! ahhh... How should I code this to get MOOooooOOOOOOOO!!! (and whatever other classes inheriting Animal wants scream() to be) instead?

    Read the article

  • C++ trouble with pointers to objects

    - by Zibd
    I have a class with a vector of pointers to objects. I've introduced some elements on this vector, and on my main file I've managed to print them and add others with no problems. Now I'm trying to remove an element from that vector and check to see if it's not NULL but it is not working. I'm filling it with on class Test: Other *a = new Other(1,1); Other *b = new Other(2,2); Other *c = new Other(3,3); v->push_back(a); v->push_back(b); v->push_back(c); And on my main file I have: Test t; (...) Other *pointer = t.vect->at(0); delete t.vect->at(0); t.vect->erase(t.vect->begin()); if (pointer == NULL) { cout << "Nothing here.."; } // Never enters here..

    Read the article

  • SSE (SIMD extensions) support in gcc

    - by goldenmean
    Hi, I see a code as below: include "stdio.h" #define VECTOR_SIZE 4 typedef float v4sf __attribute__ ((vector_size(sizeof(float)*VECTOR_SIZE))); // vector of four single floats typedef union f4vector { v4sf v; float f[VECTOR_SIZE]; } f4vector; void print_vector (f4vector *v) { printf("%f,%f,%f,%f\n", v->f[0], v->f[1], v->f[2], v->f[3]); } int main() { union f4vector a, b, c; a.v = (v4sf){1.2, 2.3, 3.4, 4.5}; b.v = (v4sf){5., 6., 7., 8.}; c.v = a.v + b.v; print_vector(&a); print_vector(&b); print_vector(&c); } This code builds fine and works expectedly using gcc (it's inbuild SSE / MMX extensions and vector data types. this code is doing a SIMD vector addition using 4 single floats. I want to understand in detail what does each keyword/function call on this typedef line means and does: typedef float v4sf __attribute__ ((vector_size(sizeof(float)*VECTOR_SIZE))); What is the vector_size() function return; What is the __attribute__ keyword for Here is the float data type being type defined to vfsf type? I understand the rest part. thanks, -AD

    Read the article

  • "end()" iterator for back inserters?

    - by Thanatos
    For iterators such as those returned from std::back_inserter(), is there something that can be used as an "end" iterator? This seems a little nonsensical at first, but I have an API which is: template<typename InputIterator, typename OutputIterator> void foo( InputIterator input_begin, InputIterator input_end, OutputIterator output_begin, OutputIterator output_end ); foo performs some operation on the input sequence, generating an output sequence. (Who's length is known to foo but may or may not be equal to the input sequence's length.) The taking of the output_end parameter is the odd part: std::copy doesn't do this, for example, and assumes you're not going to pass it garbage. foo does it to provide range checking: if you pass a range too small, it throws an exception, in the name of defensive programming. (Instead of potentially overwriting random bits in memory.) Now, say I want to pass foo a back inserter, specifically one from a std::vector which has no limit outside of memory constraints. I still need a "end" iterator - in this case, something that will never compare equal. (Or, if I had a std::vector but with a restriction on length, perhaps it might sometimes compare equal?) How do I go about doing this? I do have the ability to change foo's API - is it better to not check the range, and instead provide an alternate means to get the required output range? (Which would be needed anyways for raw arrays, but not required for back inserters into a vector.) This would seem less robust, but I'm struggling to make the "robust" (above) work.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >