| |
| |
| |
|
Comments:
<0> lo
<1> good morning...
<1> I live again :)
<2> did you not live at some point?
<1> Auris: it's just a joke
<2> oh. and here I was hoping for resurrection to finally work ;-)
<1> Auris: I can't connect to the network servers last two days or so, I guess this it the last server opened for me :)
<1> s/this it/this is/
<2> ach.
<3> http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pete/upside-down-ternet.html
<3> ;-)
<4> lorinD: http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8030785497.html
<4> this qtopia looks gooood : http://www.trolltech.com/products/qtopia/qtopia-overview
<1> the latest release of Qt is just a monster
<1> and also it was wrote on c++
<4> what do you mean CPU / Mem usage or..?
<1> mem
<1> and syntax
<4> i don't like qt either..
<1> and many other
<4> but, i like the idea of a linux gsm
<1> ah, linux...
<4> you can change the kernel too
<4> and re-code the whole system
<1> I'd like to change it to *BSD*
<5> I liked qt, it was pretty simple
<5> as an api
<4> well honestly, whaterve it is, it must be fun to play with the mobile
<1> eleven: the keyword "was"
<5> denk: qt4 is not anymore? :)
<1> exactly
<1> it's too big now
<5> unfunky
<4> hm.. it looks like this thing has no camera :(
<5> horrible :)
<4> http://www.trolltech.com/products/qtopia/learnmore/screenshots
<6> yo
<6> how can I link a c++ library to a C program without "undefined symbol" messages?
<6> (linux, gcc)
<7> tried -lstdc++?
<8> use g++
<8> (for linking)
<7> it should work just fine with -lstdc++
<8> well ... the standard way is to use the C++ linker when you want to link C++ libs into C programs
<8> actually it might even be required on some platforms since the C linker is more stupid, while the C++ linker need to add calls for static initializers and stuff
<8> int x = somefunc(); on file level was (or is? dunno about C99) illegal in C but always legal in C++ and needs special linker support
<6> gcc -fPIC -shared stream.o -lstdc++ RTVT.o -o stream.so
<6> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lstdc++
<6> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
<7> did you install libstdc++? and perhaps it is a better idea to use g++ instead
<0> lo
<5> http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/
<9> floodpaster!
<5> clownboat!
<9> lovecar!
<0> leprechaun
<5> bonobofit
<0> ...whatsoever
<5> no batman masks allowed
<9> he's a member of inet police I heard
<5> yep
<5> and that black guy too
<9> Jackie Chan?
<5> no
<5> neither al gore
<9> the other black guy then
<9> (tm)
<9>
<0> sorry
<5> http://ludojad.itpp.pl/~wojtek/zestaw/leavetehintarweb.jpg
<5> this
<9> that _is_ Jackie Chan!
<5> oh
<5> sorry
<9> nm
<10> helo
<10> how can i create a method with infinite arguments?
<9> good day to you, Sir
<9> by inventing infinite memory, first
<5> coke, fanta, sprite?
<9> coke please
<9> 1g
<5> .
<5> here you go
<11> rhapsodhy: with '...'
<9> wheeeeeee
<9> *happy*
<10> and how can i access them?
<10> like an array?
<11> man va_start
<11> you have to have at least one fixed argument tho
<11> usually some sort of format string that describes the type of the variable arguments
<10> ok
<10> and if i have nothing like a format string, but just more arguments?
<10> va_start, arg, etc.. will work?
<11> you have to p*** the last fixed parameter to va_start, so you need to have one
<10> but it is not a format string, like in the examples
<10> it is just a simple string, containing the label of a window
<11> of course it needn't be a format string... but somehow you need to know the type and count of the following params... reading params until NULL is reached is an option too
<10> the type's gonna be fixed
<10> but, the count, well
<11> so what's the type? some kind of pointer? then make your function require the last param to be NULL and stop on that... just like e.g. execl()
<11> unfortunately there's nothing like va_count(), so the caller is responsible for p***ing this information
<0> rhapsodhy, can you give an example of what you want?
<9> .o(simply p***ing a pointer to an array with item[0] = size of array won't be easier?)
<10> yep, i think the last one would be the easiest way
<10> michai: i'm planning yet
<0> k
<12> according to C standard, is it OK to have a structure and a typedef with the same name, for example: typedef struct foo foo; <-- is this OK according std ? thx
<13> Yes.
<12> ty
<13> Their use is different.
<13> struct Foo
<13> and
<13> Foo
<12> yeah i know
<12> just wanted to verify
<12> i have seen people using typedef struct foo_s foo_t is it made we wonder
<12> s/is it/so it
<12> bye now
<14> why "typedef struct name{} name;"? why are people using that typedef before?
<15> then you can use "name" without having to have "struct" in front of it everywhere
<14> and thats in c? not c++?
<15> should work in c++ too
<14> well it works :) but it works without 'typedef' like this: struct name{} s1; name s2, s3;
<0> psycho^, I really think that's not C, but it can be
<0> s/can/cound/
<0> s/cound/could nowadays/
Return to
#c
or
Go to some related
logs:
#worldchat
#worldchat
#worldchat
#c
totti merda
#worldchat
#worldchat
#worldchat
#worldchat
scrofone
|
|
