| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Comments:
<0> hello everyone
<0> Is it fpossible to make a program that hides all text that you are currently wrighting and just shows it when you hit enter or send?
<1> of course.
<0> hmm.. Is that a program like that Zenethian?
<0> *is there..
<1> yeah
<1> there are lots
<1> the login program for linux does that
<1> a lot of mud clients have a variant of it
<1> its all over the place
<1> it isn't hard to do
<0> I'm on windows :/
<0> windows XP
<2> you can use ReadConsole* functionality (windows.h) and not echo what is read
<1> yeah
<2> msdn.microsoft.com/library to look up ReadConsole(), ReadConsoleInput(), GetStdHandle()
<2> if your compiler doesn't have a _getch() or conio.h, then you can implement it yourself using the above
<0> oh.. now you are talking advanced stuff... isnt there just a exe?
<0> when it comes to programing i am retarded.. i can barley do a homepage without using FrontPage :D
<3> Syriana is an awesome film.
<0> What is it about?
<3> US corruption over oil.
<3> (It's fiction)
<0> ok
<0> allmost truth
<3> There are a lot of truths in the film :)
<0> Could anyone please explain to me how i can make a program that hides what I'm witghing?
<0> *wrighting
<0> please?
<3> I don't think teq's answer can be improved upon.
<0> oh.. ok.
<0> bummer.. i get nothing of what im reading on those pages....
<3> Where available, _getch() typically reads a single character from stdin, without echoing it. Just loop doing that.
<0> hmm.. ok...
<3> http://cpp.enisoc.com/pastebin/6810
<0> cool.. so where do i use that code?
<3> Oh. I didn't realise you were completely clueless. I can't help you.
<0> lol i am :(
<0> ok well thanx any way. :/
<3> You need a C++ compiler. Then you need to put that in a source file, and to use it in a program that can take the string and do something with it. If you haven't got a program that can use the code, it's not much use to you.
<0> tobad.. I belived that i could just write it in to a file and then run that file and so...
<3> That's not how C++ works. You're thinking of shell scripting languages.
<4> You reth
<3> You tencho. Ug!
<4> oops
<4> was supposed to be "yo"
<4> not you
<4> anyways
<4> Is there an easy way to take over an applications accelerators?
<4> Or
<4> one specific accelerator.
<0> hmm.. ok. what language can i use to get a shell program?
<4> on linux?
<2> Dawda: they're scripts, not programs; you learn one of the shell scripting languages (for whatever interpreters you have installed on your linux system)
<0> I am on Windows XP
<3> tenchiko: Do you mean accelerators, or keyboard shortcuts?
<2> Dawda: all you want is a program that hides what you type in the win32 console? or in GUI applications too? the former is easy, if you write something that just displays a prompt and uses popen() a lot... the latter could be near impossible
<5> hey.
<5> when I have such a for loop: for (i=0; i<32; ++i)
<2> as opposed to what?
<5> this mean that i is incrimented before starting the loop?
<5> so it basically ends at 31?
<6> tyerr99: no, after the loop, 'i' will have the value 32. Try it and see for yourself.
<2> tyerr99: no, (I'm ***uming a primitive integral type for i); it is equivalent to for (i = 0; i<32; i++) - C++ programmers prefer ++i - you'll see why when you implement operator+ and operator+(int) for your own integer cl***
<5> so what the difference between ++i and i++ then?
<4> Um.
<2> tyerr99: in that usage, nothing - if not optimized, ++i will result in smaller code generated (because no temporary is being used)
<5> so ++i = i++ in this case?
<4> I think, with i++ it uses it before it incs.
<2> tyerr99: NO... ++i; is equivalent to i++; (i.e. where the expression is not used in another expression - it is a statement by itself)
<0> popen() i dont know what that is..
<4> Like for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++), it'd use i, then increase.
<2> tenchiko: You're wrong.
<5> ok thanks
<4> I'm not.
<2> but a = ++i; and a = i++; here it is different. (i.e. the expressions are used in an ***ignment expression)
<5> yeah it incriments before setting in that case...
<2> tenchiko: *sigh* try it out; for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) is equivalent to for (int i = 0; i < 5; ++i)
<0> Well.. I'm not gonna bother you no more.. I'm just gonna search the web and hope for the best :D
<4> Hang on.
<4> I'll show you.
<2> [11:21] <@tequilla> tyerr99: NO... ++i; is equivalent to i++; (i.e. where the expression is not used in another expression - it is a statement by itself)
<2> notice the semicolons after the i++ and ++i
<2> emphasis on "it is a statement by itself"
<2> now go read your C/C++ book
<3> I would say tench is right. If you talk about the value of the expression, ++i is different from i++. I think it's silly to separate the case of it being a full expression from that where it's a sub expression.
<2> Rethguals: in the case of the for loop, the effect is the same (on the loop: which is where tyerr99 is confused)
<3> The effect is the same, because the value isn't used.
<2> I think, that tenchiko thinks that for (int i = 0; i < 32; i++) is different (where the value of 'i' in the body of the loop is concerned) to for (int i = 0; i < 32; ++i)
<4> I was using it as an example, actually.
<2> but it's not; in the body of the loop, the value of i is the same in each loop, for each iteration
<4> But you are right, it doesn't alter the for loop.
<4> I just thought he wanted to know the difference between ++i and i++
<4> I guess this would be a better example:
<4> while(i < 5)
<4> {
<4> std::cout << ++i;
<4> }
<4> with "int i 0;" before that.
<2> my gripe was "[11:21] <4> I think, with i++ it uses it before it incs." in that for header, it doesn't "use" the value of the "i++" expression (or the "++i" expression)
<3> Hiya tqz.
<3> x.
<7> hey
<7> This is just great. I recently bought a brand new computer (rather expensive too), and I can't get a soundcard to run smoothly on it (I have tried 2 so far)
<7> they run for an hour or so, then just stops to work.
<7> with a crackle and pop sound as a result
<4> Oo;
<2> but the on-board sound works?
<7> yeah
<4> I'd rather build my own computer.
<7> tenchiko, i selected the components myself
<3> tqx: Does your motherboard have a weird orange PCI slot?
<7> You mean PCI Express?
<3> No.
<7> Hmm, not sure about the color. But one or two are colored
<7> but the soundcard is connected to a regular PCI port (white)
<3> Wait, I'll find a picture.
<2> which board is it?
<7> Gigabyte GN-K8N Pro-SLI
<3> Ah, that one doesn't.
<4> sure did go for the expensive stuff.
<3> I meant one like this: http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductInfo.asp?WebProductID=327679
<2> exprensive would be A8N32-SLI Deluxe :)
<2> *expensive
<4> I like that one, too
<4> but, it's all expensive to me.
<4> I don't have $2
<7> I have a distant idea that it might be the AMD 64 Dual Core
<7> And after a while, the system seems to freeze all together
<3> ...but in that, a souncard would go in the *orange* PCI slot, not the white one (nor the PCI-E slots)
<7> I'm really worried about this
<4> hmm
<7> Since one of the reasons I actually bought the damn thing was to be able to use heavy audio production tools
<4> what brand of computer is it?
<7> No brand, it's a custom
<4> ohh
<4> I read "brand new"
<4> thought something else.
<3> tqx: Have you tried using a different slot?
<7> AMD64 Dual Cure 2x1mb 4400+, 2x1024 RAM, ATI Radeon X800 256 PCI-E... with that motherboard
<7> reth, yeah
<7> and my old soundcard behaves exactly the same way
<7> works for a while, then dies
<4> And they still work like normal in another computer?
<7> yeah
<7> hence why I think it's either the motherboard itself, or the Dual core
<3> Well. I've had that problem when I used the nForce drivers for the onboard Realtec 850 crap on XP x64, or I used the wrong slot, but not otherwise.
<2> or some BIOS setting
<7> tequilla, i've checked everything. I even upgraded the bios
<7> I have done every possible thing I can think of
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
#linux
#india
#india
qarTvelebi american
#chat-world
complaint to Bukit Aman
#chat-world
#kl
#php
negro melayu
|
|