Search Results

Search found 23792 results on 952 pages for 'void pointers'.

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 8/952 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Function pointer demo

    - by AKN
    Hi, Check the below code void functionptrdemo() { typedef int *(funcPtr) (int,int); funcPtr ptr; ptr = add; //IS THIS CORRECT? (*ptr)(2,3); } In the place where I try to assign a function to function ptr with same function signature, it shows a compilation error as error C2659: '=' : function as left operand

    Read the article

  • C++ and function pointers assessment: lack of inspiration

    - by OlivierDofus
    I've got an assessment to give to my students. It's about C++ and function pointers. Their skill is middle: it the first year of a programming school after bachelor. To give you something precise, here's a sample of a solution of one of 3 exercices they had to do in 30 minutes (the question was: "here's a version of a code that could be written with function pointers, write down the same thing but with function pointers"): typedef void (*fcPtr) (istream &); fcPtr ArrayFct [] = { Delete , Insert, Swap, Move }; void HandleCmd (const string && Cmd) { string AvalaibleCommands ("DISM"); string::size_type Pos; istringstream Flux (Cmd); char CodeOp; Flux >> CodeOp; Pos = AvalaibleCommands.find (toupper (CodeOp)); if (Pos != string::npos) { ArrayFct [Pos](Flux); } } Any idea where I could find some inspiration? Some of the students have understood the principles, even though it's very hard for them to write C++ code. I know them, I know they're clever, and I'm pretty sure they should be very good project managers. So, writing C++ code is not that important after all. Understanding is the most important part (IMHO). I'm wondering about maybe break the habits, and give half of the questions about the principle, or even better, give some sample in other language and ask them why it's better to use function pointers instead of classical programming (usually a big switch case). Any idea where I could look? Find some inspiration?

    Read the article

  • What is the underlying reason for not being able to put arrays of pointers in unsafe structs in C#?

    - by cons
    If one could put an array of pointers to child structs inside unsafe structs in C# like one could in C, constructing complex data structures without the overhead of having one object per node would be a lot easier and less of a time sink, as well as syntactically cleaner and much more readable. Is there a deep architectural reason why fixed arrays inside unsafe structs are only allowed to be composed of "value types" and not pointers? I assume only having explicitly named pointers inside structs must be a deliberate decision to weaken the language, but I can't find any documentation about why this is so, or the reasoning for not allowing pointer arrays inside structs, since I would assume the garbage collector shouldn't care what is going on in structs marked as unsafe. Digital Mars' D handles structs and pointers elegantly in comparison, and I'm missing not being able to rapidly develop succinct data structures; by making references abstract in C# a lot of power seems to have been removed from the language, even though pointers are still there at least in a marketing sense. Maybe I'm wrong to expect languages to become more powerful at representing complex data structures efficiently over time.

    Read the article

  • C - Complicated pointer declarations - help understanding

    - by Emmel
    In my burgeoning new self-education in the C language, I've come across a set of declarations that I do not understand how to read. I'd love for someone to break these down. I'll explain at the bottom where I got these examples from. 1. char (*(*x())[])() "x: function returning pointer to array[] of pointer to function returning char" - huh? 2. char (*(*x[3])())[5] "x: array[3] of pointer to function returning pointer to array[5] of char" - come again? 3. char **argv This I understand. "Pointer to pointer to char." But what I don't understand is -- what's the use case for a pointer to a pointer? Follow-up question: does anyone every use declarations this complex or is this just academic fun on the part of the authors of the examples I got this from? These examples are from section 5.12 of the K&R book. This is the first time I'm genuinely stumped by an explanation, in an otherwise well-written classic. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Passing a pointer to a function that doesn't match the requirements of the formal parameter

    - by Andreas Grech
    int valid (int x, int y) { return x + y; } int invalid (int x) { return x; } int func (int *f (int, int), int x, int y) { //f is a pointer to a function taking 2 ints and returning an int return f(x, y); } int main () { int val = func(valid, 1, 2), inval = func(invalid, 1, 2); // <- 'invalid' does not match the contract printf("Valid: %d\n", val); printf("Invalid: %d\n", inval); /* Output: * Valid: 3 * Invalid: 1 */ } At the line inval = func(invalid, 1, 2);, why am I not getting a compiler error? If func expects a pointer to a function taking 2 ints and I pass a pointer to a function that takes a single int, why isn't the compiler complaining? Also, since this is happening, what happens to the second parameter y in the invalid function?

    Read the article

  • Why can operator-> be overloaded manually?

    - by FredOverflow
    Wouldn't it make sense if p->m was just syntactic sugar for (*p).m? Essentially, every operator-> that I have ever written could have been implemented as follows: Foo::Foo* operator->() { return &**this; } Is there any case where I would want p->m to mean something else than (*p).m?

    Read the article

  • Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    Read the article

  • [C++] Start a thread using a method pointer

    - by Michael
    Hi ! I'm trying to develop a thread abstraction (POSIX thread and thread from the Windows API), and I would very much like it to be able to start them with a method pointer, and not a function pointer. What I would like to do is an abstraction of thread being a class with a pure virtual method "runThread", which would be implanted in the future threaded class. I don't know yet about the Windows thread, but to start a POSIX thread, you need a function pointer, and not a method pointer. And I can't manage to find a way to associate a method with an instance so it could work as a function. I probably just can't find the keywords (and I've been searching a lot), I think it's pretty much what Boost::Bind() does, so it must exist. Can you help me ?

    Read the article

  • If you favor "T *var", do you ever write "T*"?

    - by Roger Pate
    Thinking about where we place our asterisks; how do those that prefer to keep the "pointerness" away from the type and with the identifier (int *i) write code when the identifier is missing? void f(int*); // 1 void f(int *); // 2 The former seems much more common, no matter what your preference when with the identifier. Is this a special case? What makes it an exception? However, the first still isn't universal, because I have seen the latter style. Besides consistency along the lines of "there's always a space with the identifier, so we have one without", are there any other reasons to prefer it? What about casts or array and function types? How would you re-write these: (void*)var /*or*/ (void *)var int[3] /*or*/ int [3] // more relevant in C++ than C: Example<int[3]> void(int) /*or*/ void (int) // more relevant in C++ than C: std::function<void(int)> The latter two would rarely, if ever, be used in C, but are seen with C++ templates.

    Read the article

  • How to pass a function in a function?

    - by SoulBeaver
    That's an odd title. I would greatly appreciate it if somebody could clarify what exactly I'm asking because I'm not so sure myself. I'm watching the Stanford videos on Programming Paradigms(that teacher is awesome) and I'm up to video five when he started doing this: void *lSearch( void* key, void* base, int elemSize, int n, int (*cmpFn)(void*, void*)) Naturally, I thought to myself, "Oi, I didn't know you could declare a function and define it later!". So I created my own C++ test version. int foo(int (*bar)(void*, void*)); int bar(void* a, void* b); int main(int argc, char** argv) { int *func = 0; foo(bar); cin.get(); return 0; } int foo(int (*bar)(void*, void*)) { int c(10), d(15); int *a = &c; int *b = &d; bar(a, b); return 0; } int bar(void* a, void* b) { cout << "Why hello there." << endl; return 0; } The question about the code is this: it fails if I declare function int *bar as a parameter of foo, but not int (*bar). Why!? Also, the video confuses me in the fact that his lSearch definition void* lSearch( /*params*/ , int (*cmpFn)(void*, void*)) is calling cmpFn in the definition, but when calling the lSearch function lSearch( /*params*/, intCmp ); also calls the defined function int intCmp(void* elem1, void* elem2); and I don't get how that works. Why, in lSearch, is the function called cmpFn, but defined as intCmp, which is of type int, not int* and still works? And why does the function in lSearch not have to have defined parameters?

    Read the article

  • Why Garbage Collection if smart pointers are there

    - by Gulshan
    This days, so many languages are garbage collected. Even it is available for C++ by third parties. But, C++ has RAII and smart pointers. So, what's the point of using garbage collection? Is it doing something extra? And in other languages like C#, if all the references are treated as smart pointers(keeping RAII aside), by specification and by implementation, will there be still any need of garbage collectors? If no, then why this is not so?

    Read the article

  • using GNU GPL v2 software as pointers to solution to problem

    - by Patrick
    I am coding a PHP serial access class and have been taking pointers from the PHP-serial class on Google Code (here). That class is based on PHP 4 and I'm creating a PHP 5 class that allows more functionality and is specific to some business demands I have. There is no code copied and I have done all the coding. Does the class I'm writing fall under the Google Code's GPL or am I free to select a license that I feel is appropriate? I'm not sure of the standard that applies to licensing when you are only looking to another work for pointers.

    Read the article

  • How to access a structure member in a function that get it as void* type?

    - by Ahmad
    I want to have a function that accepts different type of structures as argument. So, since I don't have a specific type, I have to use void*. Now question is: when I pass a structure to this function, how can I access a known member of this structure inside the function? Specifically, I know that all structures have str1 as a member and I want, for example, print it. Here is a sample code: struct { char* str1; float tt1; } var1 = {"This is me", 12}; struct { char* str1; int tt2; } var2 = {"This is you", 18}; void printStruct(void* str) { printf("\n the structure string is %s", ??); //can I put something in ?? to print the string? } main(....) { printStruct(&var1); printStruct(&var2); }

    Read the article

  • How to create a container that holds different types of function pointers in C++?

    - by Alex
    I'm doing a linear genetic programming project, where programs are bred and evolved by means of natural evolution mechanisms. Their "DNA" is basically a container (I've used arrays and vectors successfully) which contain function pointers to a set of functions available. Now, for simple problems, such as mathematical problems, I could use one type-defined function pointer which could point to functions that all return a double and all take as parameters two doubles. Unfortunately this is not very practical. I need to be able to have a container which can have different sorts of function pointers, say a function pointer to a function which takes no arguments, or a function which takes one argument, or a function which returns something, etc (you get the idea)... Is there any way to do this using any kind of container ? Could I do that using a container which contains polymorphic classes, which in their turn have various kinds of function pointers? I hope someone can direct me towards a solution because redesigning everything I've done so far is going to be painful.

    Read the article

  • How can i use a variable created in a objective c Void function?

    - by James
    Im trying to get the lat and long values generated in a void function and use them within another function. Any help grateful. (void)locationManager:(CLLocationManager *)manager didUpdateToLocation:(CLLocation *)newLocation fromLocation:(CLLocation *)oldLocation { float latDeg = newLocation.coordinate.latitude; NSLog(@"Lat: %g", latDeg); float longDeg = newLocation.coordinate.longitude; NSLog(@"Lat: %g", longDeg); } I want to use the latDeg and longDeg variables.

    Read the article

  • Make Your Mouse Pointers Left-hand Friendly

    - by Matthew Guay
    It’s a right-centric world, with everything from pencils to computer mice expecting you to be right-handed.  Here’s how you can train your mouse and cursors in Windows 7 and Vista to respect your left-handedness. Using your Left Hand the Right Way It’s easy to switch your mouse to left-handed mode.  Enter “mouse” in your Start menu search, and select the first entry. Check the “Switch primary and secondary buttons” box to make your mouse more left-hand friendly.  Now your primary select button is your right button, and the secondary button (commonly referred to as right-click) is the left button. But, it can still be awkward to select items on screen with your left hand using the default cursors.  MSDN has a free set of cursors designed for left-handed users, that can fix this problem for you.  These cursors are exactly like the default Aero cursors in Windows 7 and Vista, except they are reversed to make them better for left-handed use. The cursors are available in 3 sizes: normal, large, and extra large.  The normal ones are the same size as the default ones in Windows 7; feel free to choose the other sizes if you prefer them.  Click each link to download all 6 cursors for your size (link below). Click “I Agree” after selecting the cursors to accept the license agreement and download them. Once you have all 6 cursors downloaded, select the Pointers tab in the Mouse Properties dialog.  Click the cursor to change, and then click Browse to select the new cursor. Browse to the folder you downloaded your new cursors to, select the correct cursor, and click Open. Do this for each of the 6 cursors to be changed.  Strangely, the Busy cursor (the spinning blue orb) is a static cursor, so you may not wish to change it.  All the other ones look and act like their standard counterparts. Here’s the cursors to be changed, and their equivalents in the default cursors: Normal Select: aero_arrow_left.cur Help Select: aero_helpsel_left.cur Working in Background: aero_working_left.ani Busy: aero_busy_left.cur Handwriting: aero_pen_left.cur Link Select: aero_link_left.cur After changing all the cursors, click Save As… to save this mouse scheme so you can easily select it in the future.  Finally click Ok to close the Mouse Properties dialog and accept the changes. Now your pointers will be easier to use left-handed! Conclusion Whether you’re right-handed or left-handed, you can enjoy the Aero cursors in Windows 7 or Vista in the way that works best for you.  Unfortunately, many mice are still designed for right-handed people, but this trick will help you make the best out of your mouse. We included all of the 6 cursors for you in a zip file you can download Here. This will make it easier for you to get them all together without having to download them individually. Link Download Left-Handed Mouse Pointers from MSDN Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Prevent Themes From Modifying Icons and Cursors in Windows 7How To Personalize Windows 7 StarterShow Two Time Zones in Your Outlook 2007 CalendarMake Mouse Navigation Faster in WindowsWhy Doesn’t Tab Work for Drop-down Controls in Firefox on OS X? TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips DVDFab 6 Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows PC Tools Internet Security Suite 2010 Microsoft’s “How Do I ?” Videos Home Networks – How do they look like & the problems they cause Check Your IMAP Mail Offline In Thunderbird Follow Finder Finds You Twitter Users To Follow Combine MP3 Files Easily QuicklyCode Provides Cheatsheets & Other Programming Stuff

    Read the article

  • How to explain pointers to a Java/VB programmer

    - by Skeith
    I am writing a game and my friend has offered to help me as it is a RPG and will take a long time to do the "scripting" bit of the game. The problem is IMO he's not that good a programmer :( (add flame war here). He has only programmed in Java and VB and keeps saying really stupid things to me like "Why don't you drag and drop an onClick event" to design my UI when I'm using DirectX. I tried explaining pointers to him but his response was, if it's just a variable that holds a memory address, why don't you just use an int? I create an instance of an attack class and give the creature a pointer to it so if several creatures use the same attack there is only one instance of it. He keeps saying why not put if statements in the creature class for every attack class and set true for the ones that are there. He has programmed mainly in VB and a little in Java just to learn OOP. How can I explain advanced C++ concepts like pointers and memory management to him? He just doesn't understand there are no super functions like form.show in C++.

    Read the article

  • pointers to member functions in an event dispatcher

    - by derivative
    For the past few days I've been trying to come up with a robust event handling system for the game (using a component based entity system, C++, OpenGL) I've been toying with. class EventDispatcher { typedef void (*CallbackFunction)(Event* event); typedef std::unordered_map<TypeInfo, std::list<CallbackFunction>, hash_TypeInfo > TypeCallbacksMap; EventQueue* global_queue_; TypeCallbacksMap callbacks_; ... } global_queue_ is a pointer to a wrapper EventQueue of std::queue<Event*> where Event is a pure virtual class. For every type of event I want to handle, I create a new derived class of Event, e.g. SetPositionEvent. TypeInfo is a wrapper on type_info. When I initialize my data, I bind functions to events in an unordered_map using TypeInfo(typeid(Event)) as the key that corresponds to a std::list of function pointers. When an event is dispatched, I iterate over the list calling the functions on that event. Those functions then static_cast the event pointer to the actual event type, so the event dispatcher needs to know very little. The actual functions that are being bound are functions for my component managers. For instance, SetPositionEvent would be handled by void PositionManager::HandleSetPositionEvent(Event* event) { SetPositionEvent* s_p_event = static_cast<SetPositionEvent*>(event); ... } The problem I'm running into is that to store a pointer to this function, it has to be static (or so everything leads me to believe.) In a perfect world, I want to store pointers member functions of a component manager that is defined in a script or whatever. It looks like I can store the instance of the component manager as well, but the typedef for this function is no longer simple and I can't find an example of how to do it. Is there a way to store a pointer to a member function of a class (along with a class instance, or, I guess a pointer to a class instance)? Is there an easier way to address this problem?

    Read the article

  • What are the barriers to understanding pointers and what can be done to overcome them?

    - by David McGraw
    Why are pointers such a leading factor of confusion for many new, and even old, college level students in the C/C++ language? Are there any tools or thought processes that helped you understand how pointers work at the variable, function, and beyond level? What are some good practice things that can be done to bring somebody to the level of, "Ah-hah, I got it," without getting them bogged down in the overall concept? Basically, drill like scenarios.

    Read the article

  • Fast sketching tools for drawing C/C++ structs, pointers, etc...

    - by tomasorti
    Hi. I would like to know what do you use to sketch relations between different entities in C/C++. This can be a very broad issue, so I'll try to clarify a bit more my question and give an example. I'm looking for something that is simple enough as a user, and let me sketch easily containers, pointers, etc... in an informal way. The aim is to document some structs relations to pass them to junior developers. A look at the drawings is supposed to accelerate the understanding of the code. My solutions at this moment are to use: 1) Paper & pencil. 2) Microsoft PowerPoint/Word Autoshapes. 3) Freeware Dia. Other ones could be: 4) Microsoft Visio, but my company does not own licenses. 5) UML tools. I don't want to go this way. This is what I mean a more formal solution. I know tools like Rational Rose are great, and I tried boUML and violet and they are fine in some parts, but I prefer the flexibility of options 2) or 3). Finally, let me write down a more concrete example: Let's say I what to sketch a map that contains another map as the mapped value, and that one contains a struct as the mapped value, that holds a vector of pointers of a type and a pointer to other type. Also, there exist other structs that hold pointers to the objects pointed by the previous map, so there are objects pointed from different places. This is just one example I have, but you can easily come with one from you experience. What would you use to sketch this example or another similar you have dealt with? Best regards, Tomas.

    Read the article

  • C++: Vector of objects vs. vector of pointers to new objects?

    - by metamemetics
    Hello, I am seeking to improve my C++ skills by writing a sample software renderer. It takes objects consisting of points in a 3d space and maps them to a 2d viewport and draws circles of varying size for each point in view. Which is better: class World{ vector<ObjectBaseClass> object_list; public: void generate(){ object_list.clear(); object_list.push_back(DerivedClass1()); object_list.push_back(DerivedClass2()); or... class World{ vector<ObjectBaseClass*> object_list; public: void generate(){ object_list.clear(); object_list.push_back(new DerivedClass1()); object_list.push_back(new DerivedClass2()); ?? Would be using pointers in the 2nd example to create new objects defeat the point of using vectors, because vectors automatically call the DerivedClass destructors in the first example but not in the 2nd? Are pointers to new objects necessary when using vectors because they handle memory management themselves as long as you use their access methods? Now let's say I have another method in world: void drawfrom(Viewport& view){ for (unsigned int i=0;i<object_list.size();++i){ object_list.at(i).draw(view); } } When called this will run the draw method for every object in the world list. Let's say I want derived classes to be able to have their own versions of draw(). Would the list need to be of pointers then in order to use the method selector (-) ?

    Read the article

  • Why not System.Void?

    - by Stewart
    I have no practical reason for knowing this answer, but I'm curious anyway... In C#, trying to use System.Void will produce a compilation error: error CS0673: System.Void cannot be used from C# -- use typeof(void) to get the void type object As I understood it, void is simply an alias of System.Void. So, I don't understand why 'System.Void' can't be used directly as you might with 'string' for 'System.String' for example. I would love to read an explanation for this! Incidentally, System.Void can be successfully used with the Mono compiler, instead of Microsoft's .Net, and there it appears equivalent to using the void keyword. This must therefore be a compiler-enforced restriction rather than a CLR restriction, right?

    Read the article

  • "Pointers" with $ Syntax in /etc/environment

    - by Tyson Trautmann
    Is it valid to have "pointers" in /etc/environment using $FOO syntax? Right now my /etc/environment looks like this: JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk MAVEN_HOME=/usr/bin/apache-maven/apache-maven-3.0.4 M2_HOME=$MAVEN_HOME M2=$MAVEN_HOME/bin PATH=/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/games:$JAVA_HOME/bin:$MAVEN_HOME/bin I'm not getting the results that I'm expecting though: ~$ echo $JAVA_HOME /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk ~$ echo $MAVEN_HOME /usr/bin/apache-maven/apache-maven-3.0.4 ~$ echo $PATH /usr/lib/lightdm/lightdm:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin/bin:/usr/games:$JAVA_HOME/bin:$MAVEN_HOME/bin

    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 >