Search Results

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

Page 68/1607 | < Previous Page | 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75  | Next Page >

  • Setting the first two bytes of a block of memory

    - by idealistikz
    Suppose I have a block of memory as such: void *block = malloc(sizeof(void *) + size); How do I set the first two bytes of the block as NULL or have it point somewhere? I do not want to simply assign 'block' to NULL or to another pointer because I want to access the rest of the memory I malloc'ed.

    Read the article

  • Objective C LValue required as unary '&' operand

    - by Bob
    Hello! In my code, I get this error when I try to get a pointer to my class property. (I wrote a small *.OBJ file translator in Python, discarding the normals) CODE: //line: line of text const char *str = [line UTF8String]; Point3D *p1, *p2, *p3; p1 = [Point3D makeX:0 Y:0 Z:0]; p2 = [Point3D makeX:0 Y:0 Z:0]; p3 = [Point3D makeX:0 Y:0 Z:0]; sscanf(str, "t %f,%f,%f %f,%f,%f %f,%f,%f",(&[p1 x]),&([p1 y]),&([p1 z]),&([p2 x]),&([p2 y]),&([p2 z]),&([p3 x]),&([p3 y]),&([p3 z])); Triangle3D *tri = [Triangle3D make:p1 p2:p2 p3:p3];

    Read the article

  • Why would I get a bus error or segmentation fault when calling free() normally?

    - by chucknelson
    I have a very simple test program, running on Solaris 5.8: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(void) { char *paths; paths = getenv("PATH"); printf("Paths: %s\n", paths); free(paths); // this causes a bus error return 0; } If I don't call free() at the end, it displays the message fine and exits. If I include the free() call, it crashes with a bus error. I've had other calls to free(), in other programs, cause segmentation faults as well. Even if I allocate the memory for *paths myself, free() will cause a bus error. Is there some reason trying to free up the memory is causing a crash?

    Read the article

  • C++: Reference and Pointer question (example regarding OpenGL)

    - by Jay
    I would like to load textures, and then have them be used by multiple objects. Would this work? class Sprite { GLuint* mTextures; // do I need this to also be a reference? Sprite( GLuint* textures ) // do I need this to also be a reference? { mTextures = textures; } void Draw( textureNumber ) { glBindTexture( GL_TEXTURE_2D, mTextures[ textureNumber ] ); // drawing code } }; // normally these variables would be inputed, but I did this for simplicity. const int NUMBER_OF_TEXTURES = 40; const int WHICH_TEXTURE = 10; void main() { std::vector<GLuint> the_textures; the_textures.resize( NUMBER_OF_TEXTURES ); glGenTextures( NUMBER_OF_TEXTURES, &the_textures[0] ); // texture loading code Sprite the_sprite( &the_textures[0] ); the_sprite.Draw( WHICH_TEXTURE ); } And is there a different way I should do this, even if it would work? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Avoid incompatible pointer warning when dealing with double-indirection

    - by fnawothnig
    Assuming this program: #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> static void ring_pool_alloc(void **p, size_t n) { static unsigned char pool[256], i = 0; *p = &pool[i]; i += n; } int main(void) { char *str; ring_pool_alloc(&str, 7); strcpy(str, "foobar"); printf("%s\n", str); return 0; } ... is it possible to somehow avoid the GCC warning test.c:12: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘ring_pool_alloc’ from incompatible pointer type test.c:4: note: expected ‘void **’ but argument is of type ‘char **’ ... without casting to (void**) (or simply disabling the compatibility checks)? Because I would very much like to keep compatibility warnings regarding indirection-level...

    Read the article

  • Why is comparing against "end()" iterator legal?

    - by sharptooth
    According to C++ standard (3.7.3.2/4) using (not only dereferencing, but also copying, casting, whatever else) an invalid pointer is undefined behavior (in case of doubt also see this question). Now the typical code to traverse an STL containter looks like this: std::vector<int> toTraverse; //populate the vector for( std::vector<int>::iterator it = toTraverse.begin(); it != toTraverse.end(); ++it ) { //process( *it ); } std::vector::end() is an iterator onto the hypothetic element beyond the last element of the containter. There's no element there, therefore using a pointer through that iterator is undefined behavior. Now how does the != end() work then? I mean in order to do the comparison an iterator needs to be constructed wrapping an invalid address and then that invalid address will have to be used in a comparison which again is undefined behavior. Is such comparison legal and why?

    Read the article

  • How to tell where I am in an array with pointer arythmetic?

    - by klez
    In C, I have declared a memory area like this: int cells = 512; int* memory = (int*) malloc ((sizeof (int)) * cells); And I place myself more or less in the middle int* current_cell = memory + ((cells / 2) * sizeof (int)); My question is, while I increment *current_cell, how do I know if I reached the end of the allocated memory area?

    Read the article

  • Pointing to array element

    - by regular
    What I'm trying to achieve is say i have an array, i want to be able to modify a specific array element throughout my code, by pointing at it. for example in C++ i can do this int main(){ int arr [5]= {1,2,3,4,5}; int *c = &arr[3]; cout << arr[3] <<endl; *c = 0; cout << arr[3]<<endl; } I did some googling and there seems to be a way to do it through 'unsafe', but i don't really want to go that route. I guess i could create a variable to store the indexes, but I'm actually dealing with slightly more complexity (a list within a list. so having two index variables seems to add complexity to the code.) C# has a databinding class, so what I'm currently doing is binding the array element to a textbox (that i have hidden) and modifying that textbox whenever i want to modify the specific array element, but that's also not a good solution (since i have a textbox that's not being used for its intended purpose - a bit misleading).

    Read the article

  • Objective-c pointer assignment and reassignment dilema

    - by moshe
    Hi, If I do this: 1 NSMutableArray *near = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; 2 NSMutableArray *all = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; 3 NSMutableArray *current = near; 4 current = all; What happens to near? At line 3, am I setting current to point to the same address as near so that I now have two variables pointing to the same place in memory, or am I setting current to point to the location of near in memory such that I now have this structure: current - near - NSMutableArray The obvious difference would be the value of near at line 4. If the former is happening, near is untouched and still points to its initial place in memory. If the latter is happening,

    Read the article

  • C++ destructor problem with boost::scoped_ptr

    - by bb-generation
    I have a question about the following code: #include <iostream> #include <boost/scoped_ptr.hpp> class Interface { }; class A : public Interface { public: A() { std::cout << "A()" << std::endl; } virtual ~A() { std::cout << "~A()" << std::endl; } }; Interface* get_a() { A* a = new A; return a; } int main() { { std::cout << "1" << std::endl; boost::scoped_ptr<Interface> x(get_a()); std::cout << "2" << std::endl; } std::cout << "3" << std::endl; } It creates the following output: 1 A() 2 3 As you can see, it doesn't call the destructor of A. The only way I see to get the destructor of A being called, is to add a destructor for the Interface class like this: virtual ~Interface() { } But I really want to avoid any Implementation in my Interface class and virtual ~Interface() = 0; doesn't work (produces some linker errors complaining about a non existing implementation of ~Interface(). So my question is: What do I have to change in order to make the destructor being called, but (if possible) leave the Interface as an Interface (only abstract methods).

    Read the article

  • Converting c pointer types

    - by bobbyb
    I have a c pointer to a structre type called uchar4 which looks like { uchar x; uchar y; uchar z; uchar w; } I also have data passed in as uint8*. I'd like to create a uchar* pointing to the data at the uint8* so I've tried doing this: uint8 *data_in; uchar4 *temp = (uchar4*)data_in; However, the first 8 bytes always seem to be wrong. Is there another way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • pointer to a structure in a nested structure

    - by dpka6
    I have a 6 levels of nested structures. I am having problem with last three levels. The program compiles fine but when I run it crashes with Segmentation fault. There is some problem in assignment is what I feel. Kindly point out the error. typedef struct { char addr[6]; int32_t rs; uint16_t ch; uint8_t ap; } C; typedef struct { C *ap_info; } B; typedef struct { union { B wi; } u; } A; function1(char addr , int32_t rs, uint16_t ch, uint8_t ap){ A la; la.u.wi.ap_info->addr[6] = addr; la.u.wi.ap_info->rs = rs; la.u.wi.ap_info->ch = ch; la.u.wi.ap_info->ap = ap; }

    Read the article

  • How does compiler understand the pointer type?

    - by Narek
    How c++ compiler understands the pointer type? As I know pointer has a size equal to WORD of the OS (32 or 64). So does it store dome info in that 32(or 64) bits about type? Just because you can not have a pointer on one type and assign to that pointer another pointer with a different type.

    Read the article

  • Property Scope (Iphone)

    - by Hank
    Hello All. I am having trouble accessing a declared property and I think I am missing something fundamental about the nature of properties and perhaps view controllers. Here's what I'm doing so far: declaring a property "myPhone" in a root view controller called RootViewController. grabbing a phone number from a modally presented people picker setting "myPhone" to the value from the people picker (from within shouldContinueAfterSelectingPerson of ABPeoplePickerNavigationController) trying to access "myPhone" from another modally presented view controller "myPhone" continues to NSLog to null despite trying every permutation of self.myPhone, super, RootViewController, etc. to try and access the value I set. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • What is "null pointer assignment error"?

    - by sharptooth
    One of job interview questions on C pointer here is the following: what is null pointer assignment error? I've googled for a while and don't see any reasonable explanation. What is that? Trying to write through a null pointer? Something architecture- or environment-specific? What exactly is that error?

    Read the article

  • Can a pointer ever point to itself?

    - by eSKay
    This question was mentioned here. My doubt is: If a pointer variable has the same address as its value, is it really pointing to itself? For example - in the following piece of code, is a a pointer to itself? #include<stdio.h> int main(){ int* a; int b = (int)&a; a = b; printf("address of a = %d\n", &a); printf(" value of a = %d\n", a); } If a is not a pointer to itself, then the same question poses again: Can a pointer point to itself? Also, how is a self pointing pointer useful?

    Read the article

  • Send copy of class to view class so it can render him? ( iPhone )

    - by Johannes Jensen
    I'm making a game for the iPhone, and I have a class called Robot. Then I have a class called View, which renders everything. I want to send a copy of my Robot, which I defined in my ViewController, and I send it to gameView (which is View *gameView), like this: robot = [Robot new]; [gameView setRobot: [robot copy]]; I tried to make a copy but that didn't work, I could also do it with a pointer to Robot (&robot) but sometimes it just crashes ? I tried this in my View.h @interface definition: @property (copy) Robot* robot; but I get the error /RobotsAdventure/Classes/View.h:24: error: setter '-robot' argument type does not match property type :/ Help? I'm pretty new at this, heh.

    Read the article

  • Can someone explain how pointer to pointer works?

    - by user3549560
    I don't really understand how the pointer to pointer works. Any way to do the same work without using pointer to pointer? struct customer{ char name[20]; char surname[20]; int code; float money; }; typedef struct customer customer; void inserts(customer **tmp) { *tmp = (customer*)malloc(sizeof(customer)); puts("Give me a customer name, surname code and money"); scanf("%s %s %d %f", (*tmp)->name, (*tmp)->surname, &(*tmp)->code,&(*tmp)->money); }

    Read the article

  • C newbie malloc question

    - by roufamatic
    Why doesn't this print 5? void writeValue(int* value) { value = malloc(sizeof(int)); *value = 5; } int main(int argc, char * argv) { int* value = NULL; writeValue(value); printf("value = %d\n", *value); // error trying to access 0x00000000 } and how can I modify this so it would work while still using a pointer as an argument to writeValue?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75  | Next Page >