SIGSEGV hell

<THIS HAS BEEN SORTED BY RESTARTING CODE::BLOCKS, TRY IT IF IT'S RELEVENT, IF NOT WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?>


Hi there all, I am new to posting problems on a forum so apologies if my way of talking doesn't fit properly...

Am a newb c++ programmer (and to be fair I just program like I'm still talking Java with a few extra bits n bobs). I wrote this little program to calculate the surface area available for a
gas to bind to inside a crystal structure. It reads in a couple of files, does a bit of maths based on the crystal structure then outputs a number. I got this working on my old computer in
VS2008 (urg i know... ms, but it was just a stop gap.) I got a new beautiful computer, installed win7 n code::blocks and a whole bunch of compilers, of which I have tried all. I am getting
SIGSEGV faults at line 13, which is the opening parenthesis to the main program, when i run it through the debugger and, unsurprisingly, it won't step any further through the program than
that.....

I am assuming it is a rookie mistake, thought I had made them all but there's always a better idiot, eh?

Here's the code, which I am sure will be as helpful to you as is is for me but I see its the done thing to post ugly code and get it fixed here, enjoy:

Code:

---

UNNECESSARY CODE BLOCK

---

Cheers if you help, cheers if you don't, at least you looked ;)

morb

Left the bug checking in there, sorry guys...

what is the backtrace? you can often still step with the debugger as long as you are remembering to use the 'step into' SHIFT+F7 at function calls, what is going on in these header files?

Quote:

---

#include "dataHub.h"
#include "atomicData.h"
#include "transformMatrix.h"
#include <Eigen/Core>
#include "RandomGenerator.h"

---

You mean you wrote all this code and never compiled once along the way? i mean you would usually have an idea where things are going wrong based on the latest changes you made...

Ok, cheers for that, yes I tested my code, if you read my post you would have been able to tell that.

Quote:

---

yes I tested my code, if you read my post you would have been able to tell that.

---

Well maybe i would have, but nobody else will as you deleted it helpfully

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rogster001

Well maybe i would have, but nobody else will as you deleted it helpfully

---

I find your comment strange. He took the hassle to report for people who'd search google and got to this thread that it was fixed by restarting C::B. The code was valid and it had nothing to do with the problem, so it's even better he removed it to make it easier for people to read...
He did perfect here, in my opinion... Shows a lot of good will, explaining your own answer to people who might have the problem in the future.

Sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way rogster...