As I said earlier, there is no way you can do that. NOT ANY WAY!
[if anyone thinks that _msize() is the right solution, may I just point out that we don't even know what compiler the OP is using, and it's definitely and absolutely not portable to any other compiler or even another C library].
--
Mats
Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.Originally Posted by bithub
Quzah.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Aren't the ROW_SIZE and COLUMN_SIZE exchanged? i mean in 2D arrays first memory is allocated for rows and then only for columns?
Typically, yes. It doesn't actually matter what you call it, just as long as you know what it is you're doing, and keep doing it that way. But yes, you generally think of it as:But it doesn't actually matter how you think of it, just as long as you are consistent in your usage of X and Y.Code:allocate pointers for rows for each row allocate one row (which is really just the number of columns for that row)
Quzah.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Agreed! but why create unnecessary confusion for others? Let's say COLUMN_SIZE is 4 and ROW_SIZE is 5. So, in general we would say he wants to create a 5 *4 matrix. But that above code would create a 4 *5 matrix. Total elements are definitely same(20). But that does not mean he is right!
Later on if he wants to process it and keeps the outer loop as ROW_SIZE and inner as COLUM_SIZE what would happen at that time?the compiler is bound to give some garbage values And ya now don't argue that what if he keeps the outer loop as COLUMN_SIZE and inner as ROW_SIZE. Wrong is wrong and that is not going to be true if you keep arguing. He or others are probably not going to process array each and every time in "Transpose manner". "Names are confusing and THEY ARE".
-Chotti.
It really doesn't make any difference - it's just a matter of convention. Hell, if you look at a lot of matrix libraries out there you'd find that they use a column-major layout just as often as not. As Quzah said, as long as you are consistent about it you won't have any problems.
Code:#include <cmath> #include <complex> bool euler_flip(bool value) { return std::pow ( std::complex<float>(std::exp(1.0)), std::complex<float>(0, 1) * std::complex<float>(std::atan(1.0) *(1 << (value + 2))) ).real() < 0; }
If you read every other post by this guy, you'll notice that he has never once taken advice or even apparently read a single helpful post. Just stop wating your time.
