Yeah, that must be it, thanks a lot !
Yeah that's my plan, but for now that's not yet possible. How to convince my boss that we should put some effort in organizing our code and make good...
Type: Posts; User: MarkZWEERS
Yeah, that must be it, thanks a lot !
Yeah that's my plan, but for now that's not yet possible. How to convince my boss that we should put some effort in organizing our code and make good...
Hi everyone,
The application I develop consists of several computational models, each of them represented by a specific class ("class alpha", "class beta", "class gamma") derived from "class...
Hi everyone,
Now every error seems weird, but this one _really_ does to me ;-)
I have to classes, A and B. B is an interface for let's say B_a and B_b.
'A' contains a pointer to 'B',...
eureka !
First I need to indicate an explicit specialization for the class, then for the function. This works :
template<>
template<> /// < ---
void A<int> :: f<double> (double&...
Nope, T should match double'. But you're right, i forgot to specialize f's parameter.
I've corrected my post, but it doesn't compile. g++ sais :
new.cpp:67: error: template-id ‘f<double>’ for...
Hi,
How on earth do I explicitely specialize :
template<typename U>
class A {
public:
template<typename T> void f(T& v)
{
Hi guys & girls,
I do have the following question. Let's say I have a skeleton for some functionality, which I want to implement in different ways. One way is the Template pattern, but that uses a...
The problem seems to be solved by a (more than necessary) reorganization of the code files.
But honestly, it cannot be a complex #include spaghetti which makes the debugger fail ?!
At least tnx...
VisualStudio 2008 : version 9.307... (SP) . See the attached file for precise version info.
In the mean time, I also tried to look at the '.i' file, i.e., the intermediate file generated by the...
Yeah already did couple of times. Even changed name of files, .lib (created) etc.
When i take a look at the disassembled code, I notice that (with the function causing my troubles) there is a...
Hi guys,
I'm having this very weird problem : I compile my code and create the executable with all debug options 'on' (.pdb file is written) , then I launch the executable and debug my code.
At a...
If the class std::string is implemented following the COW philosophy it doesn't create a copy unless you modify the string. But I'm not sure if the string class is always implemented that way.
Hi everyone!
During a debug of an existing program, the following occurs :
printf( "blabla ", argv[1]) ; // argv[1] is the argument of 'main'
ret=geo->load(argv[1]);
now, at time of...
Hi everyone,
Does anyone know why the old C function "strrchr" has been implemented in C++ as
const char * strrchr ( const char * str, int character );
char * strrchr ( char *...
A::Update() will only be called in A's member functions.
Hi,
Trying to generalize behaviour of a set of classes and to supply them with decorators, I'm implementing an abstract interface containing the common functions.
Now all my classes have a...
OK thanks, then I'll try to solve that one first :-)
Hi,
That's exactly my problem : the actual class hasn't got a proper interface.
In the file tmp.png I've included the UML diagram :
- "Component", "Composite", "DerivedComposite" are...
This what I've found in the GoF "Design Patterns" :
So basically after having decorated my component, I want my component itself to become the decorated version.
class Component {
...
But the decorator is a wrapper of an object ? If I don't re-define the virtual functions in that wrapper, I can not use the wrap-object instead of the wrapped object. That's what I want : add some...
Hi,
To clean up a class which contains too many fonctions and attributes, I want to implement decorators for that class.
However, the class contains many virtual functions.
If I understood...
OK, thanks !
Hi everybody!
The project I'm working on contains a lot of tables, which are now defined as pointer-type arrays :
typedef struct {
string name;
double value;
int multiplicity;
}...
Then at that higher lever it is decided which Visitor is being accepted by which Element.
It seems more logical to me. The actor decides on which object the action applies, then the actee accepts....
you mean the Visitor initiating the action to visit an element...
void myElement :: foo(bool i)
{
if (i) {
initVisitor initializer;
initializer.Visit(this);
}