List of Web Hosting Companies
- by Kiran
I am looking for a good web hosting company to host my website. But when I Google I only see few list of companies with lot advertisements everywhere. Where I can find good list of web hosting companies ?
Search Results
Search found 11618 results on 465 pages for 'shared storage'.
Page 88/465 | < Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 | Next Page >
-
-
how to pass an arbitrary signature to Certifcate
- by eskoba
I am trying to sign certificate (X509) using secret sharing. that is shareholders combine their signatures to produce the final signature. which will be in this case the signed certificate. however practically from my understanding only one entity can sign a certificate. therefore I want to know: which entities or data of the x509certificate are actually taken as input to the signing algorithm? ideally I want this data to be signed by the shareholders and then the final combination will be passed to the X509certificate as valid signature. is this possible? how could it done? if not are they other alternatives?Read the article
-
Configuring a library to be included with C++ test
- by vrish88
Hello, I would like to utilize the UnitTest++ library in a testing file. However, I am having some difficulty getting the library to be included at compile time. So here is my current directory structure: tests/ UnitTests++/ libUnitTest++.a src/ UnitTests++.h unit/ test.cpp I have just used the UnitTest++ getting started guide to just get the library setup. Here is test.cpp: // test.cpp #include <UnitTest++.h> TEST(FailSpectacularly) { CHECK(false); } int main() { return UnitTest::RunAllTests(); } And I am currently trying to compile with: gcc -lUnitTest++ -L../UnitTest++/ -I../UnitTest++/src/ test.cpp I am currently getting a bunch output with ld: symbol(s) not found at the end. So how would I be able to get the UnitTest++ library properly included when this program is compiled? I am on a Mac and I'd also like for there to be an easy way for people on a Linux machine to run these same tests. Whew, I hope this provides enough information, if not please let me know.Read the article
-
what is the correct way to make sure user use share_ptr and not regular ptr?
- by eriks
In my class the constructor is private and i added a static method "CreateMyClassPtr" that uses the constructor and returns a share_ptr of it. Is it the correct implementation? Do you think i even have to make sure that shared_ptr will be used? Maybe i should leave it to the user to decide?Read the article
-
Returning references while using shared_ptrs
- by Goose Bumper
Suppose I have a rather large class Matrix, and I've overloaded operator== to check for equality like so: bool operator==(Matrix &a, Matrix &b); Of course I'm passing the Matrix objects by reference because they are so large. Now i have a method Matrix::inverse() that returns a new Matrix object. Now I want to use the inverse directly in a comparison, like so: if (a.inverse()==b) { ... }` The problem is, this means the inverse method needs to return a reference to a Matrix object. Two questions: Since I'm just using that reference in this once comparison, is this a memory leak? What happens if the object-to-be-returned in the inverse() method belongs to a boost::shared_ptr? As soon as the method exits, the shared_ptr is destroyed and the object is no longer valid. Is there a way to return a reference to an object that belongs to a shared_ptr?Read the article
-
How should platform specific lib files be named?
- by Scott Langham
Hello, I'm working on a C++ project that produces a lib that other teams use. It's being produced in a few different flavours: Win32 Debug Win32 Debug Static Win32 Release Win32 Release Static x64 Debug x64 Debug Static x64 Release x64 Release Static I'm wondering what the best wisdom is on how to name the dlls and what arguments are for different naming conventions. Do I output the libs into different directories, or do I append some letters on the end of the lib to differentiate them, or something else? One concern is that if I use directories, but don't give all the libs different names, users of the library will have problems where they accidentally use the wrong lib. Are these concerns valid? Thanks very much.Read the article
-
Share ASP.Net membership info between two applications
- by bill
Hi All, I have an existing webapp and i'm attempting to setup BlogEngine .Net to share the membership tables Everything seems to work.. accept i can see that the Membership.ValidateUser call in blogengine returns false! While the other apps returns true. I'm at a loss.. Membership.GetUser called from both apps returns the correct user.. Any ideas? thanks!Read the article
-
C++ - passing references to boost::shared_ptr
- by abigagli
If I have a function that needs to work with a shared_ptr, wouldn't it be more efficient to pass it a reference to it (so to avoid copying the shared_ptr object)? What are the possible bad side effects? I envision two possible cases: 1) inside the function a copy is made of the argument, like in ClassA::take_copy_of_sp(boost::shared_ptr<foo> &sp) { ... m_sp_member=sp; //This will copy the object, incrementing refcount ... } 2) inside the function the argument is only used, like in Class::only_work_with_sp(boost::shared_ptr<foo> &sp) //Again, no copy here { ... sp->do_something(); ... } I can't see in both cases a good reason to pass the boost::shared_ptr by value instead of by reference. Passing by value would only "temporarily" increment the reference count due to the copying, and then decrement it when exiting the function scope. Am I overlooking something? Andrea. EDIT: Just to clarify, after reading several answers : I perfectly agree on the premature-optimization concerns, and I alwasy try to first-profile-then-work-on-the-hotspots. My question was more from a purely technical code-point-of-view, if you know what I mean.Read the article
-
typedef boost::shared_ptr<MyJob> Ptr; or #define Ptr boost::shared_ptr
- by danio
I've just started wrking on a new codebase where each class contains a shared_ptr typedef (similar to this) like: typedef boost::shared_ptr<MyClass> Ptr; Is the only purpose to save typing boost::shared_ptr? If that is the case why not do #define Ptr boost::shared_ptr in one common header? Then you can do: Ptr<MyClass> myClass(new MyClass); which is no more typing than MyClass::Ptr myClass(new MyClass); and saves the Ptr definition in each class.Read the article
-
I can't use std::vector of auto_ptr - should i use shared_ptr?
- by eriks
I don't really need to share the objects, but i do want to make sure no memory leakage occurs. Is it correct to use shared_ptr in this case?Read the article
-
Using custom dll in Qt Application
- by Donotalo
First, my compiler and OS: Qt Creator 1.3 Qt 4.6 (32 bit) Windows 7 Ultimate I want to learn how to create and import a dll in Qt. I've created a *.dll file using Qt Creator, called Shared1.dll which contains nothing but an empty class named Shared1. Now I'd like to use Shared1 class in another Qt project. How can I do that? Thanks in advance.Read the article
-
Where is shared_ptr?
- by Jake
I am so frustrated right now after several hours trying to find where shared_ptr is located. None of the examples I see show complete code to include the headers for shared_ptr (and working). Simply stating "std" "tr1" and "" is not helping at all! I have downloaded boosts and all but still it doesn't show up! Can someone help me by telling exactly where to find it? Thanks for letting me vent my frustrations!Read the article
-
Is there a way to increase the efficiency of shared_ptr by storing the reference count inside the co
- by BillyONeal
Hello everyone :) This is becoming a common pattern in my code, for when I need to manage an object that needs to be noncopyable because either A. it is "heavy" or B. it is an operating system resource, such as a critical section: class Resource; class Implementation : public boost::noncopyable { friend class Resource; HANDLE someData; Implementation(HANDLE input) : someData(input) {}; void SomeMethodThatActsOnHandle() { //Do stuff }; public: ~Implementation() { FreeHandle(someData) }; }; class Resource { boost::shared_ptr<Implementation> impl; public: Resource(int argA) explicit { HANDLE handle = SomeLegacyCApiThatMakesSomething(argA); if (handle == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) throw SomeTypeOfException(); impl.reset(new Implementation(handle)); }; void SomeMethodThatActsOnTheResource() { impl->SomeMethodThatActsOnTheHandle(); }; }; This way, shared_ptr takes care of the reference counting headaches, allowing Resource to be copyable, even though the underlying handle should only be closed once all references to it are destroyed. However, it seems like we could save the overhead of allocating shared_ptr's reference counts and such separately if we could move that data inside Implementation somehow, like boost's intrusive containers do. If this is making the premature optimization hackles nag some people, I actually agree that I don't need this for my current project. But I'm curious if it is possible.Read the article
-
How to accomplish covariant return types when returning a shared_ptr?
- by Kyle
using namespace boost; class A {}; class B : public A {}; class X { virtual shared_ptr<A> foo(); }; class Y : public X { virtual shared_ptr<B> foo(); }; The return types aren't covariant (nor are they, therefore, legal), but they would be if I was using raw pointers instead. What's the commonly accepted idiom to work around this, if there is one?Read the article
-
boost::shared_ptr<const T> to boost::shared_ptr<T>
- by Flevine
I want to cast the const-ness out of a boost::shared_ptr, but I boost::const_pointer_cast is not the answer. boost::const_pointer_cast wants a const boost::shared_ptr, not a boost::shared_ptr. Let's forego the obligitory 'you shouldn't be doing that'. I know... but I need to do it... so what's the best/easiest way to do it? For clarity sake: boost::shared_ptr<const T> orig_ptr( new T() ); boost::shared_ptr<T> new_ptr = magic_incantation(orig_ptr); I need to know the magic_incantation() Thanks!Read the article
-
Can processor cores thrash each other's caches?
- by Jørgen Fogh
If more than one core on a processor is accessing the same memory address, will they thrash each other's caches or will some snooping protocol allow each to keep the data in L1-cache? I am interested in a general answer as well as answers for specific processors. How many layers of cache are invalidated? Will accessing another address within the same cache-line invalidate the entire line? What can you do to alleviate these problems?Read the article
-
Is this a correct implementation of singleton C++?
- by Kamal
class A{ static boost::shared_ptr<A> getInstance(){ if(pA==NULL){ pA = new A(); } return boost::shared_ptr(pA); } //destructor ~A(){ delete pA; pA=NULL; } private: A(){ //some initialization code } //private assigment and copy constructors A(A const& copy); // Not Implemented A& operator=(A const& copy); // Not Implemented static A* pA; }; A* A::pA = NULL;Read the article
-
How to handle 'this' pointer in constructor?
- by Kyle
I have objects which create other child objects within their constructors, passing 'this' so the child can save a pointer back to its parent. I use boost::shared_ptr extensively in my programming as a safer alternative to std::auto_ptr or raw pointers. So the child would have code such as shared_ptr<Parent>, and boost provides the shared_from_this() method which the parent can give to the child. My problem is that shared_from_this() cannot be used in a constructor, which isn't really a crime because 'this' should not be used in a constructor anyways unless you know what you're doing and don't mind the limitations. Google's C++ Style Guide states that constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method. This solves the 'this-in-constructor' problem as well as a few others as well. What bothers me is that people using your code now must remember to call Init() every time they construct one of your objects. The only way I can think of to enforce this is by having an assertion that Init() has already been called at the top of every member function, but this is tedious to write and cumbersome to execute. Are there any idioms out there that solve this problem at any step along the way?Read the article
-
Using CreateFileMapping between two programs - C
- by Jamie Keeling
Hello, I have two window form applications written in C, one holds a struct consisting of two integers, another will receive it using the CreateFileMapping. Although not directly related I want to have three events in place so each of the processes can "speak" to each other, one saying that the first program has something to pass to the second, one saying the first one has closed and another saying the second one has closed. What would be the best way about doing this exactly? I've looked at the MSDN entry for the CreateFileMapping operation but I'm still not sure as to how it should be done. I didn't want to start implementing it without having some sort of clear idea as to what I need to do. Thanks for your time.Read the article
-
Is boost shared_ptr <XXX> thread safe?
- by sxingfeng
I have a question about boost :: shared_ptr. There are lots of thread. class CResource { xxxxxx } class CResourceBase { public: void SetResource(shared_ptr<CResource> res) { m_Res = res; } shared_ptr<CResource> GetResource() { return m_Res; } private: shared_ptr<CResource> m_Res; } CResourceBase base; //---------------------------------------------- Thread A: while (true) { ...... shared_ptr<CResource> nowResource = base.GetResource(); nowResource.doSomeThing(); ... } Thread B: shared_ptr<CResource> nowResource; base.SetResource(nowResource); ... //----------------------------------------------------------- If thread A do not care the nowResource is the newest . Will this part of code have problem? I mean when ThreadB do not SetResource completely, Thread A get a wrong smart point by GetResource? Another question : what does thread-safe mean? If I do not care about whether the resource is newest, will the shared_ptr nowResource crash the program when the nowResource is released or will the problem destroy the shared_point?Read the article
-
Trouble assigning a tr1::shared_ptr
- by Max
I've got a class that has a tr1::shared_ptr as a member, like so: class Foo { std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp> bsp; void Bar(); } In member function Bar, I try to assign it like this: bsp = newTCODBsp(x,y,w,h); g++ then gives me this error no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘((yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator*)this)->yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator::bsp = (operator new(40u), (<statement>, ((TCODBsp*)<anonymous>)))’ /usr/include/c++/4.4/tr1/shared_ptr.h:834: note: candidates are: std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>& std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>::operator=(const std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>&) in my code, Foo is actually yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator. What am I doing wrong?Read the article
-
Casting a container of shared_ptr
- by Jamie Cook
Hi all, I have a method void foo(list<shared_ptr<Base>>& myList); Which I'm trying to call with a two different types of lists, one of DerivedClass1 and one of DerivedClass2 list<shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>> myList1; foo(myList1); list<shared_ptr<DerivedClass2>> myList2; foo(myList2); However this obviously generates a compiler error error: a reference of type "std::list<boost::shared_ptr<Base>, std::allocator<boost::shared_ptr<Base>>> &" (not const-qualified) cannot be initialized with a value of type "std::list<boost::shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>, std::allocator<boost::shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>>>" Is there any easy way to cast a container of shared_ptr? Of alternate containers that can accomplish this?Read the article
-
Using WPF class in a web application, problem with hosting permission
- by tanathos
I'm developing a DLL that uses WPF classes to make image manipulation. It works fine in my local environment, but when I try to use it in an hosted web site I retrieve this error: Request for the permission of type 'System.Security.Permissions.MediaPermission, WindowsBase, Version=3.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35' failed. exactly when I try to call the EndInit() of a BitmapImage object: BitmapImage originalImage = new BitmapImage(); originalImage.BeginInit(); originalImage.CacheOption = BitmapCacheOption.OnLoad; originalImage.UriSource = new Uri(physical_imagepath); originalImage.EndInit(); Any suggestion?Read the article
-
Using CreateFileMapping between to programs - C
- by Jamie Keeling
Hello, I have two window form applications written in C, one holds a struct consisting of two integers, another will receive it using the CreateFileMapping. Although not directly related I want to have three events in place so each of the processes can "speak" to each other, one saying that the first program has something to pass to the second, one saying the first one has closed and another saying the second one has closed. What would be the best way about doing this exactly? I've looked at the MSDN entry for the CreateFileMapping operation but I'm still not sure as to how it should be done. I didn't want to start implementing it without having some sort of clear idea as to what I need to do. Thanks for your time.Read the article
-
How can I compile an autotools project with statically linked dependancies?
- by flyx
There's an open source library I want to use. As I want to spread my software as binary package, I do not want the library to have dependancies on other libraries, so I need to link the dependancies statically. Now as the library is open source and there are no binaries provided, I compile it myself. The library uses autotools, and I didn't find any useful documentation on how to link dependancies statically. What I did try is to call the configure script with --enable-static, but this apparently only tells configure to compile a static version of the library - but what I need is a dynamic library that includes all the libraries it depends on. So, I need a way to either tell configure to link against dependancies statically, or a way to post-process the built library to include all dependancies. Can anyone tell me how to do this? Oh, and if it matters: I'm on 64bit Snow Leopard.Read the article
