Search Results

Search found 48020 results on 1921 pages for 'void return'.

Page 7/1921 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Is it advisable to have an interface as the return type?

    - by wb
    I have a set of classes with the same functions but with different logic. However, each class function can return a number of objects. It is safe to set the return type as the interface? Each class (all using the same interface) is doing this with different business logic. protected IMessage validateReturnType; <-- This is in an abstract class public bool IsValid() <-- This is in an abstract class { return (validateReturnType.GetType() == typeof(Success)); } public IMessage Validate() { if (name.Length < 5) { validateReturnType = new Error("Name must be 5 characters or greater."); } else { validateReturnType = new Success("Name is valid."); } return validateReturnType; } Are there any pitfalls with unit testing the return type of an function? Also, is it considered bad design to have functions needing to be run in order for them to succeed? In this example, Validate() would have to be run before IsValid() or else IsValid() would always return false. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • When should one use "out" parameters?

    - by qegal
    In Objective-C, there are several methods like initWithContentsOfFile:encoding:error: where one passes in a reference to an NSError object for the error: parameter. In this example, the value of the NSError object passed in can change based on what goes on at runtime when the method is being called and whether the body of the method was executed in a certain way successfully. In a way I think of this NSError object as sort of like a second return value from the method, and only differs from an object anObject in the statement return anObject; in that when this statement is called, execution leaves the method. So my question is, not only in the context of error handling in Objective-C, but in general, when should one use an "out" parameter in place of returning said value in a return statement?

    Read the article

  • Does -localizedDescription of NSError return the actual localized string, or does it return a key fo

    - by mystify
    Must I do something like this? NSString *errorDescription = [error localizedDescription]; NSString *errorInfoStr = NSLocalizedString(errorDescription, nil); Or do I use NSLocalizedString already when populating the userInfo dictionary with the NSLocalizedDescriptionKey key and value? So the value for that is not actually a key for NSLocalizedString, but it is the actual localized string ready to show up on screen?

    Read the article

  • .Net in HTML tp return true if reader object not null, otherwise return false

    - by Phill Healey
    I'm using a DataList to show some data from the database and populating the fields on the html side. I now have a requirement to change the visibility of a panel based on whether or not a db field has data or not. I need to be able to show the panel if the relevant data field has content, and hide it if it doesn't. Eg: <asp:Panel ID="pnlNew" runat="server" Style="margin:0; padding:0; width:42px; height:18px; bottom:5px; right:10px; float:right; position:relative; background:url(../_imgVideoBadge.png) no-repeat;" Visible='<%# Eval("cheese") != null %>' ToolTip="available"></asp:Panel> Obviously this doesn't work in terms of the visible property. But hopefully it gives an idea of what I'm trying to achieve. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I've seen examples previously of doing something along the lines of: a ?? b:c How could this be applied to the above requirement?? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Initialize void pointer to point to an array

    - by idealistikz
    Suppose I have the following: typedef struct { int itemSize; int count; void *list; } Mystruct; Mystruct *InitStruct(int itemSize, int count) { Mystruct *my = malloc(sizeof(Mystruct)); my->itemSize = itemSize; my->count = count; //What is the best way to initialize list? For example: //my->list = malloc(count * sizeof(void *)); OR //my->list = malloc(count * sizeof(itemSize)); } //The following should return a pointer to the element stored at a given index void *Retrieve(const MyStruct *my, int index) { void *item; //What is the best way to return a pointer to the item at the given index from //my->list? } Mystruct is similar to an array and void *list is supposed to store the elements or pointers to the elements. Mystruct *InitStruct is a function that initializes a Mystruct pointer and void *Retrieve is a function that returns a pointer to the element stored at a given index. First, how should I initialize void* list? Should it hold the actual elements or be an array of pointers pointing to the elements? Second, using the void *Retrieve function, how do I return a pointer to the element stored at a given index in my-list?

    Read the article

  • returning a heap block by reference in c++

    - by basicR
    I was trying to brush up my c++ skills. I got 2 functions: concat_HeapVal() returns the output heap variable by value concat_HeapRef() returns the output heap variable by reference When main() runs it will be on stack,s1 and s2 will be on stack, I pass the value by ref only and in each of the below functions, I create a variable on heap and concat them. When concat_HeapVal() is called it returns me the correct output. When concat_HeapRef() is called it returns me some memory address (wrong output). Why? I use new operator in both the functions. Hence it allocates on heap. So when I return by reference, heap will still be VALID even when my main() stack memory goes out of scope. So it's left to OS to cleanup the memory. Right? string& concat_HeapRef(const string& s1, const string& s2) { string *temp = new string(); temp->append(s1); temp->append(s2); return *temp; } string* concat_HeapVal(const string& s1, const string& s2) { string *temp = new string(); temp->append(s1); temp->append(s2); return temp; } int main() { string s1,s2; string heapOPRef; string *heapOPVal; cout<<"String Conact Experimentations\n"; cout<<"Enter s-1 : "; cin>>s1; cout<<"Enter s-2 : "; cin>>s2; heapOPRef = concat_HeapRef(s1,s2); heapOPVal = concat_HeapVal(s1,s2); cout<<heapOPRef<<" "<<heapOPVal<<" "<<endl; return -9; }

    Read the article

  • How we can execute a javascript function and get a return value in our android application?

    - by JAC
    How we can execute a javascript function and get a return value in our android appplication ? We have a javascript file that stored in our sqlite db, We want to execute that script on a button press event, we need to pass parameters to the script and get return values, how we can implement this? sample script file stored in Db is, <html><head><title>ADV</title><script type="text/javascript"> function checkName(pname) if( pname == 'android') { return false; }else { return true; } } </script></head><body></Body></html>

    Read the article

  • How to convert a void pointer to array of classes

    - by user99545
    I am trying to convert a void pointer to an array of classes in a callback function that only supports a void pointer as a means of passing paramaters to the callback. class person { std::string name, age; }; void callback (void *val) { for (int i = 0; i < 9; i++) { std::cout << (person [])val[i].name; } } int main() { person p[10]; callback((void*)p); } My goal is to be able to pass an array of the class person to the callback which then prints out the data such as their name and age. However, the compile does not like what I am doing and complains that error: request for member 'name' in 'val', which is of non-class type 'void*' How can I go about doing this?

    Read the article

  • The Return Of __FILE__ And __LINE__ In .NET 4.5

    - by Alois Kraus
    Good things are hard to kill. One of the most useful predefined compiler macros in C/C++ were __FILE__ and __LINE__ which do expand to the compilation units file name and line number where this value is encountered by the compiler. After 4.5 versions of .NET we are on par with C/C++ again. It is of course not a simple compiler expandable macro it is an attribute but it does serve exactly the same purpose. Now we do get CallerLineNumberAttribute  == __LINE__ CallerFilePathAttribute        == __FILE__ CallerMemberNameAttribute  == __FUNCTION__ (MSVC Extension)   The most important one is CallerMemberNameAttribute which is very useful to implement the INotifyPropertyChanged interface without the need to hard code the name of the property anymore. Now you can simply decorate your change method with the new CallerMemberName attribute and you get the property name as string directly inserted by the C# compiler at compile time.   public string UserName { get { return _userName; } set { _userName=value; RaisePropertyChanged(); // no more RaisePropertyChanged(“UserName”)! } } protected void RaisePropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string member = "") { var copy = PropertyChanged; if(copy != null) { copy(new PropertyChangedEventArgs(this, member)); } } Nice and handy. This was obviously the prime reason to implement this feature in the C# 5.0 compiler. You can repurpose this feature for tracing to get your hands on the method name of your caller along other stuff very fast now. All infos are added during compile time which is much faster than other approaches like walking the stack. The example on MSDN shows the usage of this attribute with an example public static void TraceMessage(string message, [CallerMemberName] string memberName = "", [CallerFilePath] string sourceFilePath = "", [CallerLineNumber] int sourceLineNumber = 0) { Console.WriteLine("Hi {0} {1} {2}({3})", message, memberName, sourceFilePath, sourceLineNumber); }   When I do think of tracing I do usually want to have a API which allows me to Trace method enter and leave Trace messages with a severity like Info, Warning, Error When I do print a trace message it is very useful to print out method and type name as well. So your API must either be able to pass the method and type name as strings or extract it automatically via walking back one Stackframe and fetch the infos from there. The first glaring deficiency is that there is no CallerTypeAttribute yet because the C# compiler team was not satisfied with its performance.   A usable Trace Api might therefore look like   enum TraceTypes { None = 0, EnterLeave = 1 << 0, Info = 1 << 1, Warn = 1 << 2, Error = 1 << 3 } class Tracer : IDisposable { string Type; string Method; public Tracer(string type, string method) { Type = type; Method = method; if (IsEnabled(TraceTypes.EnterLeave,Type, Method)) { } } private bool IsEnabled(TraceTypes traceTypes, string Type, string Method) { // Do checking here if tracing is enabled return false; } public void Info(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Warn(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Error(string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Info(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Warn(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public static void Error(string type, string method, string fmt, params object[] args) { } public void Dispose() { // trace method leave } } This minimal trace API is very fast but hard to maintain since you need to pass in the type and method name as hard coded strings which can change from time to time. But now we have at least CallerMemberName to rid of the explicit method parameter right? Not really. Since any acceptable usable trace Api should have a method signature like Tracexxx(… string fmt, params [] object args) we not able to add additional optional parameters after the args array. If we would put it before the format string we would need to make it optional as well which would mean the compiler would need to figure out what our trace message and arguments are (not likely) or we would need to specify everything explicitly just like before . There are ways around this by providing a myriad of overloads which in the end are routed to the very same method but that is ugly. I am not sure if nobody inside MS agrees that the above API is reasonable to have or (more likely) that the whole talk about you can use this feature for diagnostic purposes was not a core feature at all but a simple byproduct of making the life of INotifyPropertyChanged implementers easier. A way around this would be to allow for variable argument arrays after the params keyword another set of optional arguments which are always filled by the compiler but I do not know if this is an easy one. The thing I am missing much more is the not provided CallerType attribute. But not in the way you would think of. In the API above I did add some filtering based on method and type to stay as fast as possible for types where tracing is not enabled at all. It should be no more expensive than an additional method call and a bool variable check if tracing for this type is enabled at all. The data is tightly bound to the calling type and method and should therefore become part of the static type instance. Since extending the CLR type system for tracing is not something I do expect to happen I have come up with an alternative approach which allows me basically to attach run time data to any existing type object in super fast way. The key to success is the usage of generics.   class Tracer<T> : IDisposable { string Method; public Tracer(string method) { if (TraceData<T>.Instance.Enabled.HasFlag(TraceTypes.EnterLeave)) { } } public void Dispose() { if (TraceData<T>.Instance.Enabled.HasFlag(TraceTypes.EnterLeave)) { } } public static void Info(string fmt, params object[] args) { } /// <summary> /// Every type gets its own instance with a fresh set of variables to describe the /// current filter status. /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam> internal class TraceData<UsingType> { internal static TraceData<UsingType> Instance = new TraceData<UsingType>(); public bool IsInitialized = false; // flag if we need to reinit the trace data in case of reconfigured trace settings at runtime public TraceTypes Enabled = TraceTypes.None; // Enabled trace levels for this type } } We do not need to pass the type as string or Type object to the trace Api. Instead we define a generic Api that accepts the using type as generic parameter. Then we can create a TraceData static instance which is due to the nature of generics a fresh instance for every new type parameter. My tests on my home machine have shown that this approach is as fast as a simple bool flag check. If you have an application with many types using tracing you do not want to bring the app down by simply enabling tracing for one special rarely used type. The trace filter performance for the types which are not enabled must be therefore the fasted code path. This approach has the nice side effect that if you store the TraceData instances in one global list you can reconfigure tracing at runtime safely by simply setting the IsInitialized flag to false. A similar effect can be achieved with a global static Dictionary<Type,TraceData> object but big hash tables have random memory access semantics which is bad for cache locality and you always need to pay for the lookup which involves hash code generation, equality check and an indexed array access. The generic version is wicked fast and allows you to add more features to your tracing Api with minimal perf overhead. But it is cumbersome to write the generic type argument always explicitly and worse if you do refactor code and move parts of it to other classes it might be that you cannot configure tracing correctly. I would like therefore to decorate my type with an attribute [CallerType] class Tracer<T> : IDisposable to tell the compiler to fill in the generic type argument automatically. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { using (var t = new Tracer()) // equivalent to new Tracer<Program>() { That would be really useful and super fast since you do not need to pass any type object around but you do have full type infos at hand. This change would be breaking if another non generic type exists in the same namespace where now the generic counterpart would be preferred. But this is an acceptable risk in my opinion since you can today already get conflicts if two generic types of the same name are defined in different namespaces. This would be only a variation of this issue. When you do think about this further you can add more features like to trace the exception in your Dispose method if the method is left with an exception with that little trick I did write some time ago. You can think of tracing as a super fast and configurable switch to write data to an output destination or to execute alternative actions. With such an infrastructure you can e.g. Reconfigure tracing at run time. Take a memory dump when a specific method is left with a specific exception. Throw an exception when a specific trace statement is hit (useful for testing error conditions). Execute a passed delegate which e.g. dumps additional state when enabled. Write data to an in memory ring buffer and dump it when specific events do occur (e.g. method is left with an exception, triggered from outside). Write data to an output device. …. This stuff is really useful to have when your code is in production on a mission critical server and you need to find the root cause of sporadic crashes of your application. It could be a buggy graphics card driver which throws access violations into your application (ok with .NET 4 not anymore except if you enable a compatibility flag) where you would like to have a minidump or you have reached after two weeks of operation a state where you need a full memory dump at a specific point in time in the middle of an transaction. At my older machine I do get with this super fast approach 50 million traces/s when tracing is disabled. When I do know that tracing is enabled for this type I can walk the stack by using StackFrameHelper.GetStackFramesInternal to check further if a specific action or output device is configured for this method which is about 2-3 times faster than the regular StackTrace class. Even with one String.Format I am down to 3 million traces/s so performance is not so important anymore since I do want to do something now. The CallerMemberName feature of the C# 5 compiler is nice but I would have preferred to get direct access to the MethodHandle and not to the stringified version of it. But I really would like to see a CallerType attribute implemented to fill in the generic type argument of the call site to augment the static CLR type data with run time data.

    Read the article

  • Named output parameters vs return values

    - by Abyx
    Which code is better: // C++ void handle_message(...some input parameters..., bool& wasHandled) void set_some_value(int newValue, int* oldValue = nullptr) // C# void handle_message(...some input parameters..., out bool wasHandled) void set_some_value(int newValue, out int oldValue) or bool handle_message(...some input parameters...) ///< Returns -1 if message was handled //(sorry, this documentation was broken a year ago and we're too busy to fix it) int set_some_value(T newValue) // (well, it's obvious what this function returns, so I didn't write any documentation for it) The first one doesn't have and need any documentation. It's a self-documenting code. Output value clearly says what it means, and it's really hard to make a change like this: - void handle_message(Message msg, bool& wasHandled) { - wasHandled = false; - if (...) { wasHandled = true; ... + void handle_message(Message msg, int& wasHandled) { + wasHandled = -1; + if (...) { wasHandled = ...; With return values such change could be done easily /// Return true if message was handled - bool handle_message(Message msg) { + int handle_message(Message msg) { ... - return true; + return -1; Most of compilers don't (and can't) check documentation written in comments. Programmers also tend to ignore comments while editing code. So, again, the question is: if subroutine has single output value, should it be a procedure with well-named self-documenting output parameter, or should it be a function which returns an unnamed value and have a comment describing it?

    Read the article

  • pass objective c object and primitive type into a void *

    - by user674669
    I want to pass 2 variables: UIImage * img int i into another method that only takes a (void *) I tried making a C struct containing both img and i struct MyStruct { UIImage *img; int i; } but xcode gives me an error saying "ARC forbids Objective-C objects in structs or unions" The next thing I tried is to write an objective-c class MyStruct2 containing img and i, alloc-initing an instance of it and typecasting it as (__bridge void*) before passing it to the method. Seems little involved for my use case. Seems like there should be a better way. What's the simplest way to achieve this? Thank you. Edit based on comments: I have to use void * as it is required by the UIView API. I created a selector as mentioned by UIVIew API + (void)setAnimationDidStopSelector:(SEL)selector Please see documentation for setAnimationDidStopSelector at http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/uikit/reference/UIView_Class/UIView/UIView.html . It says ... The selector should be of the form: - (void)animationDidStop:(NSString *)animationID finished:(NSNumber *)finished context:(void *)context I want to pass both img and i into the (void *)context argument.

    Read the article

  • error: 'void Base::output()' is protected within this context

    - by Bill
    I'm confused about the errors generated by the following code. In Derived::doStuff, I can access Base::output directly by calling it. Why can't I create a pointer to output() in the same context that I can call output()? (I thought protected / private governed whether you could use a name in a specific context, but apparently that is incomplete?) Is my fix of writing callback(this, &Derived::output); instead of callback(this, Base::output) the correct solution? #include <iostream> using std::cout; using std::endl; template <typename T, typename U> void callback(T obj, U func) { ((obj)->*(func))(); } class Base { protected: void output() { cout << "Base::output" << endl; } }; class Derived : public Base { public: void doStuff() { // call it directly: output(); Base::output(); // create a pointer to it: // void (Base::*basePointer)() = &Base::output; // error: 'void Base::output()' is protected within this context void (Derived::*derivedPointer)() = &Derived::output; // call a function passing the pointer: // callback(this, &Base::output); // error: 'void Base::output()' is protected within this context callback(this, &Derived::output); } }; int main() { Derived d; d.doStuff(); }

    Read the article

  • static_cast from Derived* to void* to Base*

    - by Roberto
    I would like to cast a pointer to a member of a derived class to void* and from there to a pointer of the base class, like in the example below: #include <iostream> class Base { public: void function1(){std::cout<<"1"<<std::endl;} virtual void function2()=0; }; class Derived : public Base { public: virtual void function2(){std::cout<<"2"<<std::endl;} }; int main() { Derived d; void ptr* = static_cast<void*>(&d); Base* baseptr=static_cast<Base*>(ptr); baseptr->function1(); baseptr->function2(); } This compiles and gives the desired result (prints 1 and 2 respectively), but is it guaranteed to work? The description of static_cast I found here: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/static_cast only mentions conversion to void* and back to a pointer to the same class (point 10).

    Read the article

  • generic programming in C with void pointer.

    - by Nyan
    Hi everyone, even though it is possible to write generic code in C using void pointer(generic pointer), I find that it is quite difficult to debug the code since void pointer can take any pointer type without warning from compiler. (e.g function foo() take void pointer which is supposed to be pointer to struct, but compiler won't complain if char array is passed.) What kind of approach/strategy do you all use when using void pointer in C?

    Read the article

  • C++11 Tidbits: Decltype (Part 2, trailing return type)

    - by Paolo Carlini
    Following on from last tidbit showing how the decltype operator essentially queries the type of an expression, the second part of this overview discusses how decltype can be syntactically combined with auto (itself the subject of the March 2010 tidbit). This combination can be used to specify trailing return types, also known informally as "late specified return types". Leaving aside the technical jargon, a simple example from section 8.3.5 of the C++11 standard usefully introduces this month's topic. Let's consider a template function like: template <class T, class U> ??? foo(T t, U u) { return t + u; } The question is: what should replace the question marks? The problem is that we are dealing with a template, thus we don't know at the outset the types of T and U. Even if they were restricted to be arithmetic builtin types, non-trivial rules in C++ relate the type of the sum to the types of T and U. In the past - in the GNU C++ runtime library too - programmers used to address these situations by way of rather ugly tricks involving __typeof__ which now, with decltype, could be rewritten as: template <class T, class U> decltype((*(T*)0) + (*(U*)0)) foo(T t, U u) { return t + u; } Of course the latter is guaranteed to work only for builtin arithmetic types, eg, '0' must make sense. In short: it's a hack. On the other hand, in C++11 you can use auto: template <class T, class U> auto foo(T t, U u) -> decltype(t + u) { return t + u; } This is much better. It's generic and a construct fully supported by the language. Finally, let's see a real-life example directly taken from the C++11 runtime library as implemented in GCC: template<typename _IteratorL, typename _IteratorR> inline auto operator-(const reverse_iterator<_IteratorL>& __x, const reverse_iterator<_IteratorR>& __y) -> decltype(__y.base() - __x.base()) { return __y.base() - __x.base(); } By now it should appear be completely straightforward. The availability of trailing return types in C++11 allowed fixing a real bug in the C++98 implementation of this operator (and many similar ones). In GCC, C++98 mode, this operator is: template<typename _IteratorL, typename _IteratorR> inline typename reverse_iterator<_IteratorL>::difference_type operator-(const reverse_iterator<_IteratorL>& __x, const reverse_iterator<_IteratorR>& __y) { return __y.base() - __x.base(); } This was guaranteed to work well with heterogeneous reverse_iterator types only if difference_type was the same for both types.

    Read the article

  • Mock a void method which change the input value

    - by Kar
    Hi, How could I mock a void method with parameters and change the value parameters? My void method looks like this: public interface IFoo { void GetValue(int x, object y) // takes x and do something then access another class to get the value of y } I prepared a delegate class: private delegate void GetValueDelegate(int x, object y); private void GetValue(int x, object y) { // process x // prepare a new object obj if (y == null) y = new Object(); if (//some checks) y = obj; } I wrote something like this: Expect.Call(delegate {x.GetValue(5, null);}).Do (new GetValueDelegate(GetValue)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Any(); But seems like it's not working. Any clue on what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • Recursion with an Array; can't get the right value to return

    - by Matt
    Recursive Solution: Not working! Explanation: An integer, time, is passed into the function. It's then used to provide an end to the FOR statement (counter<time). The IF section (time == 0) provides a base case where the recursion should terminate, returning 0. The ELSE section is where the recursive call occurs: total is a private variable defined in the header file, elsewhere. It's initialized to 0 in a constructor, elsewhere. The function calls itself, recursively, adding productsAndSales[time-1][0] to total, again, and again, until the base call. Then the total is returned, and printed out later. Well, that's what I hoped for anyway. What I imagined would happen is that I would add up all the values in this one column of the array and the value would get returned, and printed out. Instead if returns 0. If I set the IF section to "return 1", I noticed that it returns powers of 2, for whatever value time is. EG: Time = 3, it returns 2*2 + 1. If time = 5, it returns 2*2*2*2 + 1. I don't understand why it's not returning the value I'm expecting. int CompanySales::calcTotals( int time ) { cout << setw( 4 ); if ( time == 0 ) { return 0; } else { return total += calcTotals( productsAndSales[ time-1 ][ 0 ]); } } Iterative Solution: Working! Explanation: An integer, time, is passed into the function. It's then used to provide an end to the FOR statement (counter<time). The FOR statement cycles through an array, adding all of the values in one column together. The value is then returned (and elsewhere in the program, printed out). Works perfectly. int CompanySales::calcTotals( int time ) { int total = 0; cout << setw( 4 ); for ( int counter = 0; counter < time; counter++ ) { total += productsAndSales[counter][0]; } return total0; }

    Read the article

  • What is the carriage return character in an AS/400 db?

    - by donde
    I have a client running an AS/400. I have to ftp a flat file over to them. They tell me their return charaters are RN. I don't recognize this, could not find anything on it, and their tech guy is Nick Burns so he refuses to give me any dirtection. Is there a standard return code for AS/400? I should have mentioned that I have a c# .NET 2.0 console application.

    Read the article

  • how to return 2 values from a java function?

    - by javaLearner.java
    Here is my code: // Function code public static int something(){ int number1 = 1; int number2 = 2; return number1, number2; } // Main class code public static void main(String[] args) { something(); System.out.println(number1 + number2); } Error: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncompilable source code - missing return statement at assignment.Main.something(Main.java:86) at assignment.Main.main(Main.java:53) Java Result: 1

    Read the article

  • How do you return draggable content to their original positions in iPhone dev?

    - by Matt Thomas
    I am wanting to create a button in my iPhone app that when touched will return other draggable elements to their original position. I have looked at the Apple "MoveMe' example, but that returns the button to the center of the screen. I want to be able to position draggable objects around the screen, drag the objects within the app, and then return them to their original starting positions by pressing a designated button. Any help appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Python C API return more than one value / object

    - by Grisu
    I got the following problem. I have written a C-Extension to Python to interface a self written software library. Unfortunately I need to return two values from the C function where the last one is optional. In Python the equivalent is def func(x,y): return x+y, x-y test = func(13,4) #only the first value is used In my C extension I use return Py_BuildValue("ii",x+y,x-y); which results in a tuple. If I now try to access the return value from Python via test2 = cfunc(13,4) print(test2) I got a tuple instead of only the first return value. How is possible to build the same behavior as in Python from C Extension?

    Read the article

  • How to Smooth the drawing Stroke?

    - by user1852420
    I am creating drawing.. i can undo, and put colors on it. but when i draw using my fingers the stroke is not that smooth and has edge lines,, here my codes. on which I can Paint on a view, Undo, change color, and the opacity. stroke.h #import <UIKit/UIKit.h> @interface stroke : UIView{ NSMutableArray *strokeArray; UIColor *strokeColor; int strokeSize; float strokeAlpha; int strokeAlpha2; IBOutlet UISlider *slides; float red; float green; float blue; CGPoint mid1; CGPoint mid2; CGPoint endingPoint,previousPoint1,previousPoint2; CGPoint currentTouch; } @property (nonatomic, retain) UIColor *strokeColor; @property (nonatomic) int strokeSize; @property (nonatomic, retain) NSMutableArray *strokeArray; - (IBAction)changeAlphaValue; -(void)loadSLider; -(void)blueColor; -(void)darkvioletColor; -(void)violetColor; -(void)pinkColor; -(void)darkbrownColor; -(void)redColor; -(void)magentaRedColor; -(void)lightBrownColor; -(void)lightOrangeColor; -(void)OrangeColor; -(void)YellowColor; -(void)greenColor; -(void)lightYellowColor; -(void)darkGreenColor; -(void)TurquioseColor; -(void)PaleTurquioseColor; -(void)skyBlueColor; -(void)whiteColor; -(void)DirtyWhiteColor; -(void)SilverColor; -(void)LightGrayColor; -(void)GrayColor; -(void)LightBlackColor; -(void)BlackColor; @end stroke.m #import "stroke.h" @implementation stroke @synthesize strokeColor; @synthesize strokeSize; @synthesize strokeArray; - (void) awakeFromNib{ self.strokeArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; self.strokeColor = [UIColor colorWithRed:0 green:0 blue:232 alpha:1]; self.strokeSize = 3; } - (void)drawRect:(CGRect)rect{ NSMutableArray *stroke; for (stroke in strokeArray) { CGContextRef contextRef = UIGraphicsGetCurrentContext(); CGContextSetLineWidth(contextRef, [[stroke objectAtIndex:1] intValue]); CGFloat *color = CGColorGetComponents([[stroke objectAtIndex:2] CGColor]); CGContextSetRGBStrokeColor(contextRef, color[0], color[1], color[2], color[3]); CGContextBeginPath(contextRef); CGPoint points[[stroke count]]; for (NSUInteger i = 3; i < [stroke count]; i++) { points[i-3] = [[stroke objectAtIndex:i] CGPointValue]; } CGContextAddLines(contextRef, points, [stroke count]-3); CGContextStrokePath(contextRef); } } -(void)loadSLider{ } - (IBAction)changeAlphaValue{ strokeAlpha2 =((int)slides.value); } -(void)blueColor{ red = 0/255.0; green = 0/255.0; blue = 255/255.0; } -(void)darkvioletColor{ red = 75/255.0; green = 0/255.0; blue = 130/255.0; } -(void)violetColor{ red = 128/255.0; green = 0/255.0; blue = 128/255.0; } -(void)pinkColor{ red = 255/255.0; green = 0/255.0; blue = 255/255.0; } -(void)darkbrownColor{ red = 0.200; green = 0.0; blue = 0.0; } -(void)redColor{ red = 255/255.0; green = 0/255.0; blue = 0/255.0; } -(void)magentaRedColor{ red = 0.350; green = 0.0; blue = 0.0; } -(void)lightBrownColor{ red = 0.480; green = 0.0; blue = 0.0; } -(void)lightOrangeColor{ red = 0.600; green = 0.200; blue = 0.0; } -(void)OrangeColor{ red = 1.0; green = 0.300; blue = 0.0; } -(void)YellowColor{ red = 0.950; green = 0.450; blue = 0.0; } -(void)greenColor{ red = 0.0; green = 1.0; blue = 0.0; } -(void)lightYellowColor{ red = 1.0; green = 1.0; blue = 0.0; } -(void)darkGreenColor{ red = 0.0; green = 0.500; blue = 0.0; } -(void)TurquioseColor{ red = 0.0; green = 0.700; blue = 0.200; } -(void)PaleTurquioseColor{ red = 0.0; green = 0.700; blue = 0.600; } -(void)skyBlueColor{ red = 0.0; green = 0.400; blue = 0.800; } -(void)whiteColor{ red = 1.0; green = 1.0; blue = 1.0; } -(void)DirtyWhiteColor{ red = 0.800; green = 0.800; blue = 0.800; } -(void)SilverColor{ red = 0.600; green = 0.600; blue = 0.600; } -(void)LightGrayColor{ red = 0.500; green = 0.500; blue = 0.500; } -(void)GrayColor{ red = 0.300; green = 0.300; blue = 0.300; } -(void)LightBlackColor{ red = 0.150; green = 0.150; blue = 0.150; } -(void)BlackColor{ red = 0.0; green = 0.0; blue = 0.0; } - (void)touchesBegan:(NSSet *)touches withEvent:(UIEvent *)event { UITouch *touch; NSEnumerator *counter = [touches objectEnumerator]; while ((touch = (UITouch *)[counter nextObject])) { switch (strokeAlpha2) { case 1: strokeAlpha = .1; break; case 2: strokeAlpha = .2; break; case 3: strokeAlpha = .3; break; case 4: strokeAlpha = .4; break; case 5: strokeAlpha = .5; break; case 6: strokeAlpha = .6; break; case 7: strokeAlpha = .7; break; case 8: strokeAlpha = .8; break; case 9: strokeAlpha = .9; break; case 10: strokeAlpha = 1; break; default: strokeAlpha = 1; break; } self.strokeColor = [UIColor colorWithRed:red green:green blue:blue alpha:strokeAlpha]; NSValue *touchPos = [NSValue valueWithCGPoint:[touch locationInView:self]]; UIColor *color = [UIColor colorWithCGColor:strokeColor.CGColor]; NSNumber *size = [NSNumber numberWithInt:strokeSize]; NSMutableArray *stroke = [NSMutableArray arrayWithObjects: touch, size, color, touchPos, nil]; [strokeArray addObject:stroke]; } } - (void)touchesMoved:(NSSet *)touches withEvent:(UIEvent *)event { UITouch *touch; NSEnumerator *counter = [touches objectEnumerator]; while ((touch = (UITouch *)[counter nextObject])) { NSMutableArray *stroke; for (stroke in strokeArray) { if ([stroke objectAtIndex:0] == touch) { [stroke addObject:[NSValue valueWithCGPoint:[touch locationInView:self]]]; } [self setNeedsDisplay]; } } } @end

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >