Search Results

Search found 8 results on 1 pages for 'peoro'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • C++: calling non-member functions with the same syntax of member ones

    - by peoro
    One thing I'd like to do in C++ is to call non-member functions with the same syntax you call member functions: class A { }; void f( A & this ) { /* ... */ } // ... A a; a.f(); // this is the same as f(a); Of course this could only work as long as f is not virtual (since it cannot appear in A's virtual table. f doesn't need to access A's non-public members. f doesn't conflict with a function declared in A (A::f). I'd like such a syntax because in my opinion it would be quite comfortable and would push good habits: calling str.strip() on a std::string (where strip is a function defined by the user) would sound a lot better than calling strip( str );. most of the times (always?) classes provide some member functions which don't require to be member (ie: are not virtual and don't use non-public members). This breaks encapsulation, but is the most practical thing to do (due to point 1). My question here is: what do you think of such feature? Do you think it would be something nice, or something that would introduce more issues than the ones it aims to solve? Could it make sense to propose such a feature to the next standard (the one after C++0x)? Of course this is just a brief description of this idea; it is not complete; we'd probably need to explicitly mark a function with a special keyword to let it work like this and many other stuff.

    Read the article

  • Help with off-game tasks

    - by peoro
    I love writing video games for fun, and often do that. I noticed, anyway, that most of the times implementing the gameplay itself doesn't take too much time to me (maybe because I already did that plenty times and know what and how to do for most of the things), but when I try to implement off-game stuff I get lost. By off-game I mean what is not gameplay: menus, cutscenes between levels, world map to choose levels, saving and loading status, managing replays ... Only tried to write a few of these a few times, but always failed; that's why I never really completed and distributed a game. Are these common problems? And where should I start to do this? Where could I find some books/guides about such stuff?

    Read the article

  • Linux: Automatically switch to external monitor (VGA)

    - by peoro
    I've got an eeePC with a really tiny monitor, so whenever I go (home, faculty, parent's home, friend's home, ...) I attach it to any external monitor I can find. If it matters my system is like this: Archlinux Linux 2.6.36 Xorg 7.6 X server 1.9.2 Intel Corporation Mobile 945GME Express Integrated Graphics Controller (fully accelerated by intel modules) When I boot up the system, it uses the integrated monitor (LVDS1) only, and I have to manually manually switch to the external monitor (VGA1) using xrandr. Is it possible to configure my Xorg (or whatever) so that it uses the VGA1 output if present?

    Read the article

  • Portable applications for phones?

    - by peoro
    What's the best way to write an application in order to get it working on the several phones out there (iPhone, symbian-based, xpPhone, and so on)? The idea I have in mind is that of writing a few interfaces to abstract from phone-dependent stuff (ie: some Input/Output interfaces), implementing such interfaces on the several phones and then writing an application that doesn't use any phone-dependent thing. But is this really possible? What would be the language I should choose for my interfaces and applications? (would love to use C++, hopefully even with GCC extensions) Is there any project that aims to offer what I need? (maybe something like SDL?)

    Read the article

  • C++: is it safe to work with std::vectors as if they were arrays?

    - by peoro
    I need to have a fixed-size array of elements and to call on them functions that require to know about how they're placed in memory, in particular: functions like glVertexPointer, that needs to know where the vertices are, how distant they are one from the other and so on. In my case vertices would be members of the elements to store. to get the index of an element within this array, I'd prefer to avoid having an index field within my elements, but would rather play with pointers arithmetic (ie: index of Element *x will be x - & array[0]) -- btw, this sounds dirty to me: is it good practice or should I do something else? Is it safe to use std::vector for this? Something makes me think that an std::array would be more appropriate but: Constructor and destructor for my structure will be rarely called: I don't mind about such overhead. I'm going to set the std::vector capacity to size I need (the size that would use for an std::array, thus won't take any overhead due to sporadic reallocation. I don't mind a little space overhead for std::vector's internal structure. I could use the ability to resize the vector (or better: to have a size chosen during setup), and I think there's no way to do this with std::array, since its size is a template parameter (that's too bad: I could do that even with an old C-like array, just dynamically allocating it on the heap). If std::vector is fine for my purpose I'd like to know into details if it will have some runtime overhead with respect to std::array (or to a plain C array): I know that it'll call the default constructor for any element once I increase its size (but I guess this won't cost anything if my data has got an empty default constructor?), same for destructor. Anything else?

    Read the article

  • C++: calling non-member functions with the same syntax of member ones

    - by peoro
    One thing I'd like to do in C++ is to call non-member functions with the same syntax you call member functions: class A { }; void f( A & this ) { /* ... */ } // ... A a; a.f(); // this is the same as f(a); Of course this could only work as long as f is not virtual (since it cannot appear in A's virtual table. f doesn't need to access A's non-public members. f doesn't conflict with a function declared in A (A::f). I'd like such a syntax because in my opinion it would be quite comfortable and would push good habits: calling str.strip() on a std::string (where strip is a function defined by the user) would sound a lot better than calling strip( str );. most of the times (always?) classes provide some member functions which don't require to be member (ie: are not virtual and don't use non-public members). This breaks encapsulation, but is the most practical thing to do (due to point 1). My question here is: what do you think of such feature? Do you think it would be something nice, or something that would introduce more issues than the ones it aims to solve? Could it make sense to propose such a feature to the next standard (the one after C++0x)? Of course this is just a brief description of this idea; it is not complete; we'd probably need to explicitly mark a function with a special keyword to let it work like this and many other stuff.

    Read the article

  • Javascript one-liners

    - by peoro
    Often I find some really cool javascript one liners that you can copy and paste into your browser address bar in order to get some fancy effects or even useful ones. This, for example, will let you edit anything on the page. javascript:document.body.contentEditable='true'; document.designMode='on'; void 0 What is your favorite? EDIT: I know that technically all these snippets are just javascript scripts that gets evaluated by the browser as if they were defined in the page. I also know that many browsers have got extensions to let you run javascript code (also letting you store scripts somewhere, providing a good editor etc etc). However that's not so practical; I'm not a javascript developer, haven't got firebug installed, and I can't install it anywhere I go. My idea idea is that of collecting the best "mini-scripts" that whoever can just copy and paste in his browser without the need of installing extensions and stuff.

    Read the article

  • Fastest way to find the largest power of 10 smaller than x

    - by peoro
    Is there any fast way to find the largest power of 10 smaller than a given number? I'm using this algorithm, at the moment, but something inside myself dies anytime I see it: 10**( int( math.log10(x) ) ) # python pow( 10, (int) log10(x) ) // C I could implement simple log10 and pow functions for my problems with one loop each, but still I'm wondering if there is some bit magic for decimal numbers.

    Read the article

1