Phew. Well, that's good. What I actually meant here tho:
So someone has now pointed out to you that it is not obvious what you want. But you did not do anything to resolve that.
Yes, I did. I said I was sorry.
Was that you still haven't "mentioned the specific areas that you would like your reviewers to critique". In case it wasn't clear (I would have thought it obvious, lol) the reason people reacted negatively is that you essentially walked up to a buffet table and started shovelling things into a backpack.
Ask one specific question at a time.
But while we're here (and I am not trying to humiliate you )...
WRT 11-6 in post #3:
- "avail", "limit", "data" and "alloc" are not defined, making it hard to say much beyond: it looks the two arg erase() will work (but it might not), and I dunno what shrink() is going to do.
WRT 12-1 in post #5:
- don't post code you have not compiled and tested, unless you are asking explicitly: I can't get this to compile, I get these errors, how do I approach this?
- "copy" is not defined
- You didn't tackle the fundamental issue of storage. That you are "going to deal" with data[] (which, BTW, is an error for me on g++ 4.5.3 and 4.6.2) is kind of like showing someone an engine you are rebuilding with the pistons, rods, and driveshaft missing and asking, "do you think it will run"? Of course it won't run, there's no pistons, rods, or driveshaft. Why not just do this:
Code:
using namespace std;
int main(void) {
//TODO
}
What do you think of my video processing code so far?
In a way, 12-1 is even more ridiculous, because it all depends on how the storage works, which you still haven't worked out. That is a very bad way to write code. By basing one untested part on another untested part, you risk:
a) wasting twice as much time re-writing both parts.
b) repeating the same basic errors over and over when you only need to do so once, then correct it and do it properly after that.
Rather than create three theoretical constructors, write one, make sure the code compiles and tests successfully, then move on to add other methods. Here's another analogy: you don't build a house of cards starting with the second story, figuring you can build the first one later and place the second one on top. What is the first story? The first story is the one that must work before the other ones do.