Search Results

Search found 43467 results on 1739 pages for 'member function pointers'.

Page 54/1739 | < Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >

  • AutoMapper: setup member name matching convention

    - by epitka
    I tried setting up a member name mapping convention so that the source members ending with a "Id" are mapped to destination members without Id. For example UserId - User How does one do this? I tried using SourceMemberNameTransformer without success. Also tried using RecognizePostfixes(). this.SourceMemberNameTransformer = s => { return s.Replace("Id", string.Empty); };

    Read the article

  • group member dropdown in visual studio 2008

    - by knittl
    in visual studio is the member dropdown, where you can select all members of the current type alphabetically ordered. is there an option which allows grouping of the members? i.e. all constructors before all methods before all properties before all events before all fields? if there is not, bad for me, i guess—it would really enhance productivity

    Read the article

  • How can I pass a C++ member function to a C API as a parameter

    - by michael
    Hi, In my C++ program, I need to call this c API: GConn* gnet_conn_new (const gchar *hostname, gint port, GConnFunc func); where GConnFunc is defined as: void (*GConnFunc) (GConn *conn); My question is if I have a C++ class and have a member function like Class A { public: A(); void my_func (GConn* conn); } In my A::A() Constructor, how can I pass this-myfunc to gnet_conn_new as the GConnFunc parameter? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to free static member variable in C++?

    - by user299831
    Can anybody explain how to free memory of a static member Variable? In my understanding it can only be freed if all the instances of the class are destroyed. I am a little bit helpless at this point... Some Code to explain it: class ball { private: static SDL_Surface *ball_image; }; //FIXME: how to free static Variable? SDL_Surface* ball::ball_image = SDL_LoadBMP("ball.bmp");

    Read the article

  • C++ Class Construction and Member Initialization

    - by anachoret
    The first print shows the member value to be false, and the other two prints show it as true. Why does the first output differ from the last two? #include #include using namespace std; class MyClass { public: bool value; bool stuff; }; class Container { public: vector my_classes; Container() { MyClass c; cout

    Read the article

  • Hibernate (JPA) Entity with Static collection as a member

    - by Kyle Partridge
    Is it possible to have a static collection as a member of a hibernate entity? Say I have an object Question: public class Question { private String category; ... } Would it be possible to populate a static Set<String> that is a distinct set of all categories in the Database? I know I could just query this, but I was wondering if there was a more elegant solution, as it seems like something that other people may have come across.

    Read the article

  • How can make a variable (not class member) "read only" in C#

    - by devfreak
    Hi, I'm new to the C# world and I can't find a method to declare read only variable in C# (something like declaring "const" variable in c++). Is there one? I'll give you an example: ... int f() { return x; } // x is not const member ... void g() { int readOnlyVar = f(); // is there a method to declare readOnlyVar as read only or const // Some code in which I want to restrict access to readOnlyVar to read only }

    Read the article

  • Problem with incomplete type while trying to detect existence of a member function

    - by abir
    I was trying to detect existence of a member function for a class where the function tries to use an incomplete type. The typedef is struct foo; typedef std::allocator<foo> foo_alloc; The detection code is struct has_alloc { template<typename U,U x> struct dummy; template<typename U> static char check(dummy<void* (U::*)(std::size_t),&U::allocate>*); template<typename U> static char (&check(...))[2]; const static bool value = (sizeof(check<foo_alloc>(0)) == 1); }; So far I was using incomplete type foo with std::allocator without any error on VS2008. However when I replaced it with nearly an identical implementation as template<typename T> struct allocator { T* allocate(std::size_t n) { return (T*)operator new (sizeof(T)*n); } }; it gives an error saying that as T is incomplete type it has problem instantiating allocator<foo> because allocate uses sizeof. GCC 4.5 with std::allocator also gives the error, so it seems during detection process the class need to be completely instantiated, even when I am not using that function at all. What I was looking for is void* allocate(std::size_t) which is different from T* allocate(std::size_t). My questions are (I have three questions, but as they are correlated , so I thought it is better not to create three separate questions). Why MS std::allocator doesn't check for incomplete type foo while instantiating? Are they following any trick which can be implemented ? Why the compiler need to instantiate allocator<T> to check the existence of the function when sizeof is not used as sfinae mechanism to remove/add allocate in the overload resolutions set? It should be noted that, if I remove the generic implementation of allocate leaving the declaration only, and specialized it for foo afterwards such as struct foo{}; template< struct allocator { foo* allocate(std::size_t n) { return (foo*)operator new (sizeof(foo)*n); } }; after struct has_alloc it compiles in GCC 4.5 while gives error in VS2008 as allocator<T> is already instantiated and explicit specialization for allocator<foo> already defined. Is it legal to use nested types for an std::allocator of incomplete type such as typedef foo_alloc::pointer foo_pointer; ? Though it is practically working for me, I suspect the nested types such as pointer may depend on completeness of type it takes. It will be good to know if there is any possible way to typedef such types as foo_pointer where the type pointer depends on completeness of foo. NOTE : As the code is not copy paste from editor, it may have some syntax error. Will correct it if I find any. Also the codes (such as allocator) are not complete implementation, I simplified and typed only the portion which I think useful for this particular problem.

    Read the article

  • ReplaceBetweenTags function with delegate to describe transformation

    - by Michael Freidgeim
    I've created a function that allow to replace content between XML tags with data, that depend on original content within tag, in particular to MAsk credit card number.The function uses MidBetween extension from My StringHelper class /// <summary> /// /// </summary> /// <param name="thisString"></param> /// <param name="openTag"></param> /// <param name="closeTag"></param> /// <param name="transform"></param> /// <returns></returns> /// <example> /// // mask <AccountNumber>XXXXX4488</AccountNumber> ///requestAsString  = requestAsString.ReplaceBetweenTags("<AccountNumber>", "</AccountNumber>", CreditCard.MaskedCardNumber); ///mask cvv ///requestAsString = requestAsString.ReplaceBetweenTags("<FieldName>CC::VerificationCode</FieldName><FieldValue>", "</FieldValue>", cvv=>"XXX"); /// </example> public static string ReplaceBetweenTags(this string thisString, string openTag, string closeTag, Func<string, string> transform) { //See also http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1359412/c-sharp-remove-text-in-between-delimiters-in-a-string-regex string sRet = thisString; string between = thisString.MidBetween(openTag, closeTag, true); if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(between)) sRet=thisString.Replace(openTag + between + closeTag, openTag + transform(between) + closeTag); return sRet; } public static string ReplaceBetweenTags(this string thisString, string openTag, string closeTag, string newValue) { //See also http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1359412/c-sharp-remove-text-in-between-delimiters-in-a-string-regex string sRet = thisString; string between = thisString.MidBetween(openTag, closeTag, true); if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(between)) sRet = thisString.Replace(openTag + between + closeTag, openTag + newValue + closeTag); return sRet; }

    Read the article

  • Implementing a post-notification function to perform custom validation

    - by Alejandro Sosa
    Introduction Oracle Workflow Notification System can be extended to perform extra validation or processing via PLSQL procedures when the notification is being responded to. These PLSQL procedures are called post-notification functions since they are executed after a notification action such as Approve, Reject, Reassign or Request Information is performed. The standard signature for the post-notification function is     procedure <procedure_name> (itemtype  in varchar2,                                itemkey   in varchar2,                                actid     in varchar2,                                funcmode  in varchar2,                                resultout in out nocopy varchar2); Modes The post-notification function provides the parameter 'funcmode' which will have the following values: 'RESPOND', 'VALIDATE, and 'RUN' for a notification is responded to (Approve, Reject, etc) 'FORWARD' for a notification being forwarded to another user 'TRANSFER' for a notification being transferred to another user 'QUESTION' for a request of more information from one user to another 'QUESTION' for a response to a request of more information 'TIMEOUT' for a timed-out notification 'CANCEL' when the notification is being re-executed in a loop. Context Variables Oracle Workflow provides different context information that corresponds to the current notification being acted upon to the post-notification function. WF_ENGINE.context_nid - The notification ID  WF_ENGINE.context_new_role - The new role to which the action on the notification is directed WF_ENGINE.context_user_comment - Comments appended to the notification   WF_ENGINE.context_user - The user who is responsible for taking the action that updated the notification's state WF_ENGINE.context_recipient_role - The role currently designated as the recipient of the notification. This value may be the same as the value of WF_ENGINE.context_user variable, or it may be a group role of which the context user is a member. WF_ENGINE.context_original_recipient - The role that has ownership of and responsibility for the notification. This value may differ from the value of the WF_ENGINE.context_recipient_role variable if the notification has previously been reassigned.  Example Let us assume there is an EBS transaction that can only be approved by a certain people thus any attempt to transfer or delegate such notification should be allowed only to users SPIERSON or CBAKER. The way to implement this functionality would be as follows: Edit the corresponding workflow definition in Workflow Builder and open the notification. In the Function Name enter the name of the procedure where the custom code is handled, for instance, TEST_PACKAGE.Post_Notification In PLSQL create the corresponding package TEST_PACKAGE with a procedure named Post_Notification, as follows:     procedure Post_Notification (itemtype  in varchar2,                                  itemkey   in varchar2,                                  actid     in varchar2,                                  funcmode  in varchar2,                                  resultout in out nocopy varchar2) is     l_count number;     begin       if funcmode in ('TRANSFER','FORWARD') then         select count(1) into l_count         from WF_ROLES         where WF_ENGINE.context_new_role in ('SPIERSON','CBAKER');               --and/or any other conditions         if l_count<1 then           WF_CORE.TOKEN('ROLE', WF_ENGINE.context_new_role);           WF_CORE.RAISE('WFNTF_TRANSFER_FAIL');         end if;       end if;     end Post_Notification; Launch the workflow process with the changed notification and attempt to reassign or transfer it. When trying to reassign the notification to user CBROWN the screen would like like below: Check the Workflow API Reference Guide, section Post-Notification Functions, to see all the standard, seeded WF_ENGINE variables available for extending notifications processing. 

    Read the article

  • Generalized Ajax function [migrated]

    - by TecBrat
    Not sure if this question will be considered "off topic". If it is, I'll remove it, but: I hadn't see this yet so I wrote it and would like to know if this is a good approach to it. Would anyone care to offer improvements to it, or point me to an example of where someone else has already written it better? function clwAjaxCall(path,method,data,asynch) { var xmlhttp; if (window.XMLHttpRequest) {// code for IE7+, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari xmlhttp=new XMLHttpRequest(); } else {// code for IE6, IE5 xmlhttp=new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP"); } if(asynch) { xmlhttp.onreadystatechange=function() { if (xmlhttp.readyState==4 && xmlhttp.status==200) { //alert(xmlhttp.responseText); //var newaction=xmlhttp.responseText; //alert('Action becomes '+newaction); return xmlhttp.responseText; } } } if(method=='GET'){path=path+"/?"+data;} xmlhttp.open(method,path,asynch); if(method=='GET'){xmlhttp.send();}else{xmlhttp.send(data);} if (!asynch){return xmlhttp.responseText;} } I then called it like Just Testing <script type="text/javascript" src="/mypath/js/clwAjaxCall.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> document.write("<br>More Testing"); document.write(clwAjaxCall("http://www.mysite.com",'GET',"var=val",false)); </script>

    Read the article

  • MDX needs a function or macro syntax

    - by Darren Gosbell
    I was having an interesting discussion with a few people about the impact of named sets on performance (the same discussion noted by Chris Webb here: http://cwebbbi.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/referencing-named-sets-in-calculations). And apparently the core of the performance issue comes down to the way named sets are materialized within the SSAS engine. Which lead me to the thought that what we really need is a syntax for declaring a non-materialized set or to take this even further a way of declaring an MDX expression as function or macro so that it can be re-used in multiple places. Because sometimes you do want the set materialised, such as when you use an ordered set for calculating rankings. But a lot of the time we just want to make our MDX modular and want to avoid having to repeat the same code over and over. I did some searches on connect and could not find any similar suggestions so I posted one here: https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/651646/mdx-macro-or-function-syntax Although apparently I did not search quite hard enough as Chris Webb made a similar suggestion some time ago, although he also included a request for true MDX stored procedures (not the .Net style stored procs that we have at the moment): https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/473694/create-parameterised-queries-and-functions-on-the-server Chris also pointed out this post that he did last year http://cwebbbi.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/iccube/ where he pointed out that the icCube product already has this sort of functionality. So if you think either or both of these suggestions is a good idea then I would encourage you to click on the links and vote for them.

    Read the article

  • call function between classes [closed]

    - by aziz joh
    hello I have 3 classes class A, B, and C class A is the main class and content the main function also, i call class B and class C in the main as b1,b2 and c1. in class B there is a vector (V) has list of int. and 3 functions Add, get and delete delete. all the thing in the class is public. in class C i have function that need to (B::get) from b. what I want is that how I can make c1 call get of b1 to return the value of the V in b1 after that use add of b2 to add new item in V of b2. Thanks in advance This is an example class a{ int main(){ b b1,b2; c c1; b1.add(10); b1.add(20); c1.start(); }} class b{ vector<int> v; void add(int i){ v.push_back(i)} int get(){int i=v.at(0); return i;} } class c{// take something from b1 and add it to b2 void play(){ int i=b.get();//should take it from b1 b.add(i*2);//should add it to b2 }} please I need your help I been searching to solve this problem for days.

    Read the article

  • Brother MFC-J470DW scan function "Check Connection"

    - by user292599
    I have a Brother MFC-J470DW printer that I have connected to a Linux desktop (running Ubuntu 14.04) using a wireless router network. The printer works fine for printing and copying, but now I want to add the scan function. To set up the scan function, I went to the Brother web page for this printer: http://support.brother.com/g/b/downloadlist.aspx?c=eu_ot&lang=en&prod=mfcj470dw_us_eu_as&os=128 and under Scanner Drivers selected "Scanner driver 64bit (deb package)", "Scan-key-tool 64bit (deb package)", and "Scanner Setting file (deb package)". For each package, I clicked the EULA, and selected "open with Ubuntu Software Center". Then after the USC window pops up, I click on Install and the red line goes from left to right. In each case, the USC window then had a green checkmark and the Install box changes to Reinstall (that's how you know it worked). So now I try it out. Hitting the Scan button on the printer, selecting "Scan to file", and hitting ok produces the message "Check Connection". I checked the Brother Linux Information FAQ (scanner) page and the 14th question seems the same as mine: When I try to use the scan key on my network connected machine, I receive the error "Check connection" or I can not select anything except "scan to FTP". I explored the solution given for this FAQ, but found from ifconfig that I am already using eth0, the default setting, so presumably that is not the problem. I also found brscan-skey installed in /usr/bin and did drrm@drrmlinux2:~$ brscan-skey -t drrm@drrmlinux2:~$ brscan-skey but that didn't help - I still get the "Check connection" message. What can you suggest to fix this problem?

    Read the article

  • Defining a function that is both a generator and recursive [on hold]

    - by user96454
    I am new to python, so this code might not necessarily be clean, it's just for learning purposes. I had the idea of writing this function that would display the tree down the specified path. Then, i added the global variable number_of_py to count how many python files were in that tree. That worked as well. Finally, i decided to turn the whole thing into a generator, but the recursion breaks. My understanding of generators is that once next() is called python just executes the body of the function and "yields" a value until we hit the end of the body. Can someone explain why this doesn't work? Thanks. import os from sys import argv script, path = argv number_of_py = 0 lines_of_code = 0 def list_files(directory, key=''): global number_of_py files = os.listdir(directory) for f in files: real_path = os.path.join(directory, f) if os.path.isdir(real_path): list_files(real_path, key=key+' ') else: if real_path.split('.')[-1] == 'py': number_of_py += 1 with open(real_path) as g: yield len(g.read()) print key+real_path for i in list_files(argv[1]): lines_of_code += i print 'total number of lines of code: %d' % lines_of_code print 'total number of py files: %d' % number_of_py

    Read the article

  • @staticmethod vs module-level function

    - by darkfeline
    This is not about @staticmethod and @classmethod! I know how staticmethod works. What I want to know is the proper use cases for @staticmethod vs. a module-level function. I've googled this question, and it seems there's some general agreement that module-level functions are preferred over static methods because it's more pythonic. Static methods have the advantage of being bound to its class, which may make sense if only that class uses it. However, in Python functionality is usually organized by module not class, so usually making it a module function makes sense too. Static methods can also be overridden by subclasses, which is an advantage or disadvantage depending on how you look at it. Although, static methods are usually "functionally pure" so overriding it may not be smart, but it may be convenient sometimes (though this may be one of those "convenient, but NEVER DO IT" kind of things only experience can teach you). Are there any general rule-of-thumbs for using either staticmethod or module-level functions? What concrete advantages or disadvantages do they have (e.g. future extension, external extension, readability)? If possible, also provide a case example.

    Read the article

  • Function not returning value at all - not a void [migrated]

    - by user105439
    I have this function that is not returning a function value. I've added some random testers to try and debug but no luck. Thanks! #include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> #include <time.h> #define N 100 float error(int a, int b); int main(){ printf("START\n"); srand(time(NULL)); int a, b, j, m; float plot[N+1]; printf("Lower bound for x: "); scanf("%d", &a); printf("Upper bound for x: "); scanf("%d", &b); printf("okay\n"); for(j = 0; j < N; j++) plot[j] = 0; printf("okay1\n"); m = error(a,b); printf("%f\n",m); return 0; } float error(int a, int b){ float product = a*b; printf("%f\n",product); return product; } so the m = error(a,b) always gives 0 no matter what! Please help. I apologise for not cleaning this up...

    Read the article

  • Form, function and complexity in rule processing

    - by Charles Young
    Tim Bass posted on ‘Orwellian Event Processing’. I was involved in a heated exchange in the comments, and he has more recently published a post entitled ‘Disadvantages of Rule-Based Systems (Part 1)’. Whatever the rights and wrongs of our exchange, it clearly failed to generate any agreement or understanding of our different positions. I don't particularly want to promote further argument of that kind, but I do want to take the opportunity of offering a different perspective on rule-processing and an explanation of my comments. For me, the ‘red rag’ lay in Tim’s claim that “...rules alone are highly inefficient for most classes of (not simple) problems” and a later paragraph that appears to equate the simplicity of form (‘IF-THEN-ELSE’) with simplicity of function.   It is not the first time Tim has expressed these views and not the first time I have responded to his assertions.   Indeed, Tim has a long history of commenting on the subject of complex event processing (CEP) and, less often, rule processing in ‘robust’ terms, often asserting that very many other people’s opinions on this subject are mistaken.   In turn, I am of the opinion that, certainly in terms of rule processing, which is an area in which I have a specific interest and knowledge, he is often mistaken. There is no simple answer to the fundamental question ‘what is a rule?’ We use the word in a very fluid fashion in English. Likewise, the term ‘rule processing’, as used widely in IT, is equally difficult to define simplistically. The best way to envisage the term is as a ‘centre of gravity’ within a wider domain. That domain contains many other ‘centres of gravity’, including CEP, statistical analytics, neural networks, natural language processing and so much more. Whole communities tend to gravitate towards and build themselves around some of these centres. The term 'rule processing' is associated with many different technology types, various software products, different architectural patterns, the functional capability of many applications and services, etc. There is considerable variation amongst these different technologies, techniques and products. Very broadly, a common theme is their ability to manage certain types of processing and problem solving through declarative, or semi-declarative, statements of propositional logic bound to action-based consequences. It is generally important to be able to decouple these statements from other parts of an overall system or architecture so that they can be managed and deployed independently.  As a centre of gravity, ‘rule processing’ is no island. It exists in the context of a domain of discourse that is, itself, highly interconnected and continuous.   Rule processing does not, for example, exist in splendid isolation to natural language processing.   On the contrary, an on-going theme of rule processing is to find better ways to express rules in natural language and map these to executable forms.   Rule processing does not exist in splendid isolation to CEP.   On the contrary, an event processing agent can reasonably be considered as a rule engine (a theme in ‘Power of Events’ by David Luckham).   Rule processing does not live in splendid isolation to statistical approaches such as Bayesian analytics. On the contrary, rule processing and statistical analytics are highly synergistic.   Rule processing does not even live in splendid isolation to neural networks. For example, significant research has centred on finding ways to translate trained nets into explicit rule sets in order to support forms of validation and facilitate insight into the knowledge stored in those nets. What about simplicity of form?   Many rule processing technologies do indeed use a very simple form (‘If...Then’, ‘When...Do’, etc.)   However, it is a fundamental mistake to equate simplicity of form with simplicity of function.   It is absolutely mistaken to suggest that simplicity of form is a barrier to the efficient handling of complexity.   There are countless real-world examples which serve to disprove that notion.   Indeed, simplicity of form is often the key to handling complexity. Does rule processing offer a ‘one size fits all’. No, of course not.   No serious commentator suggests it does.   Does the design and management of large knowledge bases, expressed as rules, become difficult?   Yes, it can do, but that is true of any large knowledge base, regardless of the form in which knowledge is expressed.   The measure of complexity is not a function of rule set size or rule form.  It tends to be correlated more strongly with the size of the ‘problem space’ (‘search space’) which is something quite different.   Analysis of the problem space and the algorithms we use to search through that space are, of course, the very things we use to derive objective measures of the complexity of a given problem. This is basic computer science and common practice. Sailing a Dreadnaught through the sea of information technology and lobbing shells at some of the islands we encounter along the way does no one any good.   Building bridges and causeways between islands so that the inhabitants can collaborate in open discourse offers hope of real progress.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring an immediate drawing function into VBO, access violation error

    - by Alex
    I have a MD2 model loader, I am trying to substitute its immediate drawing function with a Vertex Buffer Object one.... I am getting a really annoying access violation reading error and I can't figure out why, but mostly I'd like an opinion as to whether this looks correct (never used VBOs before). This is the original function (that compiles ok) which calculates the keyframe and draws at the same time: glBegin(GL_TRIANGLES); for(int i = 0; i < numTriangles; i++) { MD2Triangle* triangle = triangles + i; for(int j = 0; j < 3; j++) { MD2Vertex* v1 = frame1->vertices + triangle->vertices[j]; MD2Vertex* v2 = frame2->vertices + triangle->vertices[j]; Vec3f pos = v1->pos * (1 - frac) + v2->pos * frac; Vec3f normal = v1->normal * (1 - frac) + v2->normal * frac; if (normal[0] == 0 && normal[1] == 0 && normal[2] == 0) { normal = Vec3f(0, 0, 1); } glNormal3f(normal[0], normal[1], normal[2]); MD2TexCoord* texCoord = texCoords + triangle->texCoords[j]; glTexCoord2f(texCoord->texCoordX, texCoord->texCoordY); glVertex3f(pos[0], pos[1], pos[2]); } } glEnd(); What I'd like to do is to calculate all positions before hand, store them in a Vertex array and then draw them. This is what I am trying to replace it with (in the exact same part of the program) int vCount = 0; for(int i = 0; i < numTriangles; i++) { MD2Triangle* triangle = triangles + i; for(int j = 0; j < 3; j++) { MD2Vertex* v1 = frame1->vertices + triangle->vertices[j]; MD2Vertex* v2 = frame2->vertices + triangle->vertices[j]; Vec3f pos = v1->pos * (1 - frac) + v2->pos * frac; Vec3f normal = v1->normal * (1 - frac) + v2->normal * frac; if (normal[0] == 0 && normal[1] == 0 && normal[2] == 0) { normal = Vec3f(0, 0, 1); } indices[vCount] = normal[0]; vCount++; indices[vCount] = normal[1]; vCount++; indices[vCount] = normal[2]; vCount++; MD2TexCoord* texCoord = texCoords + triangle->texCoords[j]; indices[vCount] = texCoord->texCoordX; vCount++; indices[vCount] = texCoord->texCoordY; vCount++; indices[vCount] = pos[0]; vCount++; indices[vCount] = pos[1]; vCount++; indices[vCount] = pos[2]; vCount++; } } totalVertices = vCount; glEnableClientState(GL_NORMAL_ARRAY); glEnableClientState(GL_TEXTURE_COORD_ARRAY); glEnableClientState(GL_VERTEX_ARRAY); glNormalPointer(GL_FLOAT, 0, indices); glTexCoordPointer(2, GL_FLOAT, sizeof(float)*3, indices); glVertexPointer(3, GL_FLOAT, sizeof(float)*5, indices); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, totalVertices, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, indices); glDisableClientState(GL_VERTEX_ARRAY); // disable vertex arrays glEnableClientState(GL_TEXTURE_COORD_ARRAY); glDisableClientState(GL_NORMAL_ARRAY); First of all, does it look right? Second, I get access violation error "Unhandled exception at 0x01455626 in Graphics_template_1.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0xed5243c0" pointing at line 7 Vec3f pos = v1->pos * (1 - frac) + v2->pos * frac; where the two Vs seems to have no value in the debugger.... Till this point the function behaves in exactly the same way as the one above, I don't understand why this happens? Thanks for any help you may be able to provide!

    Read the article

  • Python: Create a duplicate of an array

    - by Dan
    I have an double array alist[1][1]=-1 alist2=[] for x in xrange(10): alist2.append(alist[x]) alist2[1][1]=15 print alist[1][1] and I get 15. Clearly I'm passing a pointer rather than an actual variable... Is there an easy way to make a seperate double array (no shared pointers) without having to do a double for loop? Thanks, Dan

    Read the article

  • pointer as second argument instead of returning pointer?

    - by Tyler
    I noticed that it is a common idiom in C to accept an un-malloced pointer as a second argument instead of returning a pointer. Example: /*function prototype*/ void create_node(node_t* new_node, void* _val, int _type); /* implementation */ node_t* n; create_node(n, &someint, INT) Instead of /* function prototype */ node_t* create_node(void* _val, int _type) /* implementation */ node_t* n = create_node(&someint, INT) What are the advantages and/or disadvantages of both approaches? Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >