Search Results

Search found 4826 results on 194 pages for 'compiler directives'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 8/194 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Switching from Debug into Release Mode with VS2010 as IDE and Intel C++ Compiler 13

    - by Drazick
    I have a code of a Plug In from an SDK. The code is in Debug Mode. I use Intel Compiler which only applies optimizations in Release Mode. Under configuration manager of the project only "Debug" mode is defined. How could I switch to "Release" mode and enable all Intel Compiler's optimizations? If I enable them on debug mode nothing is applied (Empty Report). I couldn't find the trick to do so. Thank You.

    Read the article

  • Theory: Can JIT Compiler be used to parse the whole program first, then execute later?

    - by unknownthreat
    Normally, JIT Compiler works by reads the byte code, translate it into machine code, and execute it. This is what I understand, but in theory, is it possible to make the JIT Compiler parses the whole program first, then execute the program later as machine code? I do not know how JIT Compiler works technically and exactly, so I don't know any feasibility in this case. But theoretically, is it possible? Or am I doing it wrong?

    Read the article

  • Parantheses around method invokation: why is the compiler complaining about assignment?

    - by polygenelubricants
    I know why the following code doesn't compile: public class Main { public static void main(String args[]) { main((null)); // this is fine! (main(null)); // this is NOT! } } What I'm wondering is why my compiler (javac 1.6.0_17, Windows version) is complaining "The left hand side of an assignment must be a variable". I'd expect something like "Don't put parantheses around a method invokation, dummy!", instead. So why is the compiler making a totally unhelpful complaint about something that is blatantly irrelevant? Is this the result of an ambiguity in the grammar? A bug in the compiler? If it's the former, could you design a language such that a compiler would never be so off-base about a syntax error like this?

    Read the article

  • Is a C++ compiler allowed to emit different machine code compiling the same program?

    - by sharptooth
    Consider a situation. We have some specific C++ compiler, a specific set of compiler settings and a specific C++ program. We compile that specific programs with that compiler and those settings two times, doing a "clean compile" each time. Should the machine code emitted be the same (I don't mean timestamps and other bells and whistles, I mean only real code that will be executed) or is it allowed to vary from one compilation to another?

    Read the article

  • why it is up to the compiler to decide what value to assign when assigning an out-of-range value to

    - by Allopen
    in C++ Primer 4th edition 2.1.1, it says "when assigning an out-of-range value to a signed type, it is up to the compiler to decide what value to assign". I can't understand it. I mean, if you have code like "char 5 = 299", certainly the compiler will generate asm code like "mov BYTE PTR _sc$[ebp], 43"(VC) or "movb $43, -2(%ebp)"(gcc+mingw), it IS decided by the compiler. but what if we assign a value that is given by the user input? like, via command line? and the asm code generated will be "movb %al, -1(%ebp)"(gcc+mingw) and " mov cl, BYTE PTR _i$[ebp] mov BYTE PTR _sc$[ebp], cl "(VC), so now how can compiler decide what will happen? I think now it is decided by the CPU. Can you give me a clear explanation?

    Read the article

  • Order of the [BITS 16] and [ORG 0x0000] directives

    - by dboarman-FissureStudios
    I am beginning some experimentation in writing a kernel and having fun doing it. I have the basic boot-loader done and the following directives: [BITS 16] [ORG 0x0000] In the kernel tutorial, however, it starts with: [ORG 0x0000] [BITS 16] I was wondering if the order in which these directives are given makes a difference? I am using NASM version 2.06rc2, OpenSUSE 11.2

    Read the article

  • How does one set multiple cache-control directives in ASP.NET

    - by strongopinions
    I have to have several certain cache-control directives set on an ASP.NET page in order to pass a Hailstorm security scan. For example, it wants me to have Cache-control: no-cache="set-cookie" in addition to Cache-control: no-cache I have been setting the latter with the following line in my C# codebehind: Response.CacheControl = "no-cache"; Is there a special way to indicate both directives at once? Do I just separate them with a semicolon?

    Read the article

  • AngularJS directives with async content

    - by SirDavik
    I'm generating a dynamic number of Google Charts tables after receiving the content through an ajax request and I wanted to apply an accordion effect on them. I wanted to know if I could do that with directives (since if I just code render the angular tags they won't get interpreted). I don't need a code example, just a short answer to see if I should learn directives or if I should do it in a different way (I was thinking routeParams). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Need help regarding one LALR(1) parsing.

    - by AppleGrew
    I am trying to parse a context-free language, called Context Free Art. I have created its parser in Javascript using a YACC-like JS LALR(1) parser generator JSCC. Take the example of following CFA (Context Free Art) code. This code is a valid CFA. startshape A rule A { CIRCLE { s 1} } Notice the A and s in above. s is a command to scale the CIRCLE, but A is just a name of this rule. In the language's grammar I have set s as token SCALE and A comes under token STRING (I have a regular expression to match string and it is at the bottom of of all tokens). This works fine, but in the below case it breaks. startshape s rule s { CIRCLE { s 1} } This too is a perfectly valid code, but since my parser marks s after rule as SCALE token so it errors out saying that it was expecting STRING. Now my question is, if there is any way to re-write the production rules of the parser to account for this? The related production rule is:- rule: RULE STRING '{' buncha_replacements '}' [* rule(%2, 1) *] | RULE STRING RATIONAL '{' buncha_replacements '}' [* rule(%2, 1*%3) *] ; One simple solution I can think of is create a copy of above rule with STRING replaced by SCALE, but this is just one of the many similar rules which would need such fixing. Furthermore there are many other terminals which can get matched to STRING. So that means way too many rules!

    Read the article

  • Benefits of 'Optimize code' option in Visual Studio build

    - by gt
    Much of our C# release code is built with the 'Optimize code' option turned off. I believe this is to allow code built in Release mode to be debugged more easily. Given that we are creating fairly simple desktop software which connects to backend Web Services, (ie. not a particularly processor-intensive application) then what if any sort of performance hit might be expected? And is any particular platform likely to be worse affected? Eg. multi-processor / 64 bit.

    Read the article

  • When to use certain optimizations such as -fwhole-program and -fprofile-generate with several shared libraries

    - by James
    Probably a simple answer; I get quite confused with the language used in the GCC documentation for some of these flags! Anyway, I have three libraries and a programme which uses all these three. I compile each of my libraries seperately with individual (potentially) different sets of warning flags. However, I compile all three libraries with the same set of optimisation flags. I then compile my main programme linking in these three libraries with its own set of warning flags and the same optimisation flags used during the libraries' compilation. 1) Do I have to compile the libraries with optimisation flags present or can I just use these flags when compiling the final programme and linking to the libraries? If the latter, will it then optimise all or just some (presumably that which is called) of the code in these libraries? 2) I would like to use -fwhole-program -flto -fuse-linker-plugin and the linker plugin gold. At which stage do I compile with these on ... just the final compilation or do these flags need to be present during the compilation of the libraries? 3) Pretty much the same as 2) however with, -fprofile-generate -fprofile-arcs and -fprofile-use. I understand one first runs a programme with generate, and then with use. However, do I have to compile each of the libraries with generate/use etc. or just the final programme? And if it is just the last programme, when I then compeil with -fprofile-use will it also optimise the libraries functionality? Many thanks, James

    Read the article

  • Delphi: All constants are constant, but some are more constant than others?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Consider: clHotlight: TColor = $00FF9933; clLink = clHotLight; //alias of clHotlight [Error] file.pas: Constant expression expected and the alternate wording that works: clHotlight = TColor($00FF9933); clLink = clHotLight; //alias of clHotlight Explain. Then consider: AdministratorGUID: TGUID = '{DE44EEA0-6712-11D4-ADD4-0006295717DA}'; SuperuserGUID = AdministratorGUID; //alias of AdministratorGUID [Error] file.pas: Constant expression expected And fix.

    Read the article

  • Languages and VMs: Features that are hard to optimize and why

    - by mrjoltcola
    I'm doing a survey of features in preparation for a research project. Name a mainstream language or language feature that is hard to optimize, and why the feature is or isn't worth the price paid, or instead, just debunk my theories below with anecdotal evidence. Before anyone flags this as subjective, I am asking for specific examples of languages or features, and ideas for optimization of these features, or important features that I haven't considered. Also, any references to implementations that prove my theories right or wrong. Top on my list of hard to optimize features and my theories (some of my theories are untested and are based on thought experiments): 1) Runtime method overloading (aka multi-method dispatch or signature based dispatch). Is it hard to optimize when combined with features that allow runtime recompilation or method addition. Or is it just hard, anyway? Call site caching is a common optimization for many runtime systems, but multi-methods add additional complexity as well as making it less practical to inline methods. 2) Type morphing / variants (aka value based typing as opposed to variable based) Traditional optimizations simply cannot be applied when you don't know if the type of someting can change in a basic block. Combined with multi-methods, inlining must be done carefully if at all, and probably only for a given threshold of size of the callee. ie. it is easy to consider inlining simple property fetches (getters / setters) but inlining complex methods may result in code bloat. The other issue is I cannot just assign a variant to a register and JIT it to the native instructions because I have to carry around the type info, or every variable needs 2 registers instead of 1. On IA-32 this is inconvenient, even if improved with x64's extra registers. This is probably my favorite feature of dynamic languages, as it simplifies so many things from the programmer's perspective. 3) First class continuations - There are multiple ways to implement them, and I have done so in both of the most common approaches, one being stack copying and the other as implementing the runtime to use continuation passing style, cactus stacks, copy-on-write stack frames, and garbage collection. First class continuations have resource management issues, ie. we must save everything, in case the continuation is resumed, and I'm not aware if any languages support leaving a continuation with "intent" (ie. "I am not coming back here, so you may discard this copy of the world"). Having programmed in the threading model and the contination model, I know both can accomplish the same thing, but continuations' elegance imposes considerable complexity on the runtime and also may affect cache efficienty (locality of stack changes more with use of continuations and co-routines). The other issue is they just don't map to hardware. Optimizing continuations is optimizing for the less-common case, and as we know, the common case should be fast, and the less-common cases should be correct. 4) Pointer arithmetic and ability to mask pointers (storing in integers, etc.) Had to throw this in, but I could actually live without this quite easily. My feelings are that many of the high-level features, particularly in dynamic languages just don't map to hardware. Microprocessor implementations have billions of dollars of research behind the optimizations on the chip, yet the choice of language feature(s) may marginalize many of these features (features like caching, aliasing top of stack to register, instruction parallelism, return address buffers, loop buffers and branch prediction). Macro-applications of micro-features don't necessarily pan out like some developers like to think, and implementing many languages in a VM ends up mapping native ops into function calls (ie. the more dynamic a language is the more we must lookup/cache at runtime, nothing can be assumed, so our instruction mix is made up of a higher percentage of non-local branching than traditional, statically compiled code) and the only thing we can really JIT well is expression evaluation of non-dynamic types and operations on constant or immediate types. It is my gut feeling that bytecode virtual machines and JIT cores are perhaps not always justified for certain languages because of this. I welcome your answers.

    Read the article

  • 'Lexical' scoping of type parameters in C#

    - by leppie
    I have 2 scenarios. This fails: class F<X> { public X X { get; set; } } error CS0102: The type 'F' already contains a definition for 'X' This works: class F<X> { class G { public X X { get; set; } } } The only logical explanation is that in the second snippet the type parameter X is out of scope, which is not true... Why should a type parameter affect my definitions in a type? IMO, for consistency, either both should work or neither should work. Any other ideas? PS: I call it 'lexical', but it probably is not not the correct term.

    Read the article

  • Printing the address of a struct object

    - by bdhar
    I have a struct like this typedef struct _somestruct { int a; int b; }SOMESTRUCT,*LPSOMESTRUCT; I am creating an object for the struct and trying to print it's address like this int main() { LPSOMESTRUCT val = (LPSOMESTRUCT)malloc(sizeof(SOMESTRUCT)); printf("0%x\n", val); return 0; } ..and I get this warning warning C4313: 'printf' : '%x' in format string conflicts with argument 1 of type 'LPSOMESTRUCT' So, I tried to cast the address to int like this printf("0%x\n", static_cast<int>(val)); But I get this error: error C2440: 'static_cast' : cannot convert from 'LPSOMESTRUCT' to 'int' What am I missing here? How to avoid this warning? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • the problem only happens when i try create a release...

    - by ace
    I'm sorry if im not presenting this right, but i trully cannot understand what the problem is. i have a project to hand in, a code of 600 lines defined within a main, .cpp, and header file. if i compile the project with just a debugger and no release, it's fine. when i create it with the release, the following error occurs, for every function!!! 1st error: |36|multiple definition of `countLines(int&, std::vector const&)'| 2nd error: |36|first defined here| if someone will allow me and i can send them the entire code, that would be awesome - i have to have this done within 3 hours.

    Read the article

  • Break in Class Module vs. Break on Unhandled Errors (VB6 Error Trapping, Options Setting in IDE)

    - by Erx_VB.NExT.Coder
    Basically, I'm trying to understand the difference between the "Break in Class Module" and "Break on Unhandled Errors" that appear in the Visual Basic 6.0 IDE under the following path: Tools --> Options --> General --> Error Trapping The three options appear to be: Break on All Errors Break in Class Module Break on Unhandled Errors Now, apparently, according to MSDN, the second option (Break in Class Module) really just means "Break on Unhandled Errors in Class Modules". Also, this option appears to be set by default (ie: I think its set to this out of the box). What I am trying to figure out is, if I have the second option selected, do I get the third option (Break on Unhandled Errors) for free? In that, does it come included by default for all scenarios outside of the Class Module spectrum? To advise, I don't have any Class Modules in my currently active project. I have .bas modules though. Also, is it possible that by Class Mdules they may be referring to normal .bas Modules as well? (this is my second sub-question). Basically, I just want the setting to ensure there won't be any surprises once the exe is released. I want as many errors to display as possible while I am developing, and non to be displayed when in release mode. Normally, I have two types of On Error Resume Next on my forms where there isn't explicit error handling, they are as follows: On Error Resume Next ' REQUIRED On Error Resume Next ' NOT REQUIRED The required ones are things like, checking to see if an array has any length, if a call to its UBound errors out, that means it has no length, if it returns a value 0 or more, then it does have length (and therefore, exists). These types of Error Statements need to remain active even while I am developing. However, the NOT REQUIRED ones shouldn't remain active while I am developing, so I have them all commented out to ensure that I catch all the errors that exist. Once I am ready to release the exe, I do a CTRL+H to find all occurrences of: 'On Error Resume Next ' NOT REQUIRED (You may have noticed they are commented out)... And replace them with: On Error Resume Next ' NOT REQUIRED ... The uncommented version, so that in release mode, if there are any leftover errors, they do not show to users. For more on the description by MSDN on the three options (which I've read twice and still don't find adequate) you can visit the following link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yUQZZK2n2IYJ:support.microsoft.com/kb/129876&hl=en&lr=lang_en%7Clang_tr&gl=au&tbs=lr:lang_1en%7Clang_1tr&prmd=imvns&strip=1 I’m also interested in hearing your thoughts if you feel like volunteering them (and this would be my tentative/totally optional third sub-question, that being, your thoughts on fall-back error handling techniques). Just to summarize, the first two questions were, do we get option 3 included in all non-class scenarios if we choose option 2? And, is it possible that when they use the term "Class Module" they may be referring to .bas Modules as well? (Since a .bad Module is really just a class module that is pre-instantiated in the background during start-up). Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Multiple ServerRoot directives in single apache

    - by fip
    i came across a apache httpd 2.2 configuration recently in which multiple ServerRoot-directives were defined, each followed by individual prefork Settings. Sort of like this: ServerRoot root1 <IfModule prefork.c> StartServers 5 MinSpareServers 5 MaxSpareServers 10 MaxClients 150 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> [vhost-configs] ServerRoot root2 <IfModule prefork.c> StartServers 10 MinSpareServers 10 MaxSpareServers 20 MaxClients 250 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> [vhost-configs] In my understanding these are global settings one overriding the other. But is that true and is it still true with the second ServerRoot directive between the prefork blocks? Thank you in advance EDIT They are not in different conditional blocks and both server roots are used in that way that files with relative paths to both are correctly included. I just wondered if a <ServerRoot> would initiate a new scope in which all global statements would not override the configuration of previous ones.

    Read the article

  • Which compiler option I should choose?

    - by Surjya Narayana Padhi
    Hi Geeks, I have to use the third party static library for my qt application to run on windows. The third party provides me a .lib and .h file for use. These libraries are compiled with MSVC compiler. My qt Creator is using MinGW compiler to compile my application. I copied the .h and .lib file to my qt project directory and then added those in .pro file as follows QT += core gui TARGET = MyTest TEMPLATE = app LIBS += C:\Qt\2010.05\qt\MyTest\newApi.lib SOURCES += main.cpp\ mainwindow.cpp HEADERS += mainwindow.h \ newApi.h FORMS += mainwindow.ui Now I am getting some runtime error like this - Starting C:\Qt\2010.05\qt\MyTest-build-desktop\debug\MyTest.exe... C:\Qt\2010.05\qt\MyTest-build-desktop\debug\MyTest.exe exited with code -1073741515 Can any body suggest is this runtime error is due to mismatch of compiler? (because of my .lib file I added is comipled in MSVC compiler and my qt app is compiled using MinGW compiler) If not what may be the reason? Am I missing anything in adding the .h and .lib file to my qt project? If my MinGW compiler will not support the .lib file generated in MSVC compiler what may be the work-arround? Can I create the .lib files in MinGW compiler? or this format is supported only by MSVC compiler only? Please suggest...

    Read the article

  • nginx error page and internal directives not working as expected

    - by Romain
    I'd like to setup my nginx server to return a specific error page on HTTP 50x status codes, and I'd like this page to be unavailable by a direct request from users (e.g., http//mysite/internalerror). For that, I'm using nginx's internal directive, but I must be missing something, as when I put that directive on my /internalerror location, nginx returns a custom 404 error (which isn't even my own 404 error page) when a page crashes. So, to summarize, here's what seems to happen: GET /Home nginx passes the query to Python I'm simulating an application bug to get the 502 error code nginx tries to return /InternalError from its error_page rule because of the internal rule, it finally fails back to a custom 404 error code <-- why? the documentation says error_page directives are not concerned by internal: http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpCoreModule#internal Here's an extract from nginx.conf with a few comments to point things out: error_page 404 /NotFound; error_page 500 502 503 504 =500 /InternalError; # HTTP 500 Error page declaration location / { try_files /Maintenance.html $uri @pythonbackend; } location @pythonbackend { include uwsgi_params; uwsgi_pass unix:///tmp/uwsgi.sock; } location ~* \.(py|pyc)$ { # This internal location works OK and returns my own 404 error page internal; } location /__Maintenance.html { # This one also works fine internal; } location ~* /internalerror { # This one doesn't work and returns nginx's 404 error page when I trigger an error somewhere on my site internal; } Thanks very much for your help!!

    Read the article

  • why won't Eclipse use the compiler I specify for my project?

    - by codeman73
    I'm using Eclipse 3.3. In my project, I've set the compiler compliance level to 5.0 In the build path for the project. I've added the Java 1.5 JDK in the Installed JREs section and am referencing that System Library in my project build path. However, I'm getting compile errors for a class that implements PreparedStatement for not implementing abstract methods that only exist in Java 1.6 PreparedStatement. Specifically, the methods setAsciiStream(int, InputStream, long) and setAsciiStream(int, InputStream) Strangely enough, it worked when we were compiling it against Java 1.4, which it was originally written for. We added the JREs for Java 1.4 and referenced that system library in the project, and set the project's compiler level to 1.4, and it works fine. But when I do the same changes to try to point to Java 5.0, it instead uses Java 6. Any ideas why? I wrote a similar question earlier, here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2540548/how-do-i-get-eclipse-to-use-a-different-compiler-version-for-java I know how you're supposed to choose a different compiler but it seems Eclipse isn't taking it. It seems to be defaulting to Java 6, even though I have deleted all Java 6 JDKs and JREs that I could find. I've also updated the -vm option in my eclipse.ini to point to the Java5 JDK.

    Read the article

  • I want tell the VC++ Compiler to compile all code. Can it be done?

    - by KGB
    I am using VS2005 VC++ for unmanaged C++. I have VSTS and am trying to use the code coverage tool to accomplish two things with regards to unit tests: See how much of my referenced code under test is getting executed See how many methods of my code under test (if any) are not unit tested at all Setting up the VSTS code coverage tool (see the link text) and accomplishing task #1 was straightforward. However #2 has been a surprising challenge for me. Here is my test code. class CodeCoverageTarget { public: std::string ThisMethodRuns() { return "Running"; } std::string ThisMethodDoesNotRun() { return "Not Running"; } }; #include <iostream> #include "CodeCoverageTarget.h" using namespace std; int main() { CodeCoverageTarget cct; cout<<cct.ThisMethodRuns()<<endl; } When both methods are defined within the class as above the compiler automatically eliminates the ThisMethodDoesNotRun() from the obj file. If I move it's definition outside the class then it is included in the obj file and the code coverage tool shows it has not been exercised at all. Under most circumstances I want the compiler to do this elimination for me but for the code coverage tool it defeats a significant portion of the value (e.g. finding untested methods). I have tried a number of things to tell the compiler to stop being smart for me and compile everything but I am stumped. It would be nice if the code coverage tool compensated for this (I suppose by scanning the source and matching it up with the linker output) but I didn't find anything to suggest it has a special mode to be turned on. Am I totally missing something simple here or is this not possible with the VC++ compiler + VSTS code coverage tool? Thanks in advance, KGB

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >