| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Comments:
<0> vawjrwrk: Thanks for the tip about en p***anto
<1> who can help me with some cc`s?
<0> Never knew about it before
<2> is that when the pawn can take a piece when it moves two spaces forward?
<0> yeah
<1> cc`s?
<1> :D
<3> ooh I got a Q for you guys, where's a good place to get Computer T-Shirts?
<1> or some roots 4 scan!?
<1> :d
<1> plsz
<1> trade?
<2> a lot of things don't implement it... last time I checked, yahoo chess doesn't have it
<0> hehe
<0> Why is that?
<0> They never knew about it?
<0> It seems few people know about it
<4> cl*** Foo { int myMember; public: Foo(); }; cl*** Bar { int myMember; public: Bar(int); }; Foo::Foo() { Bar myBar(myMember); }; <-- Is the use of "myMember" ambiguous?
<2> I don't know if it's like a world standard and what not... if it was, I'm sure all the pros would complain about it. I see a lot of poeple from around the world in those games (when I use to play)
<5> DrkMatter: How could it be?
<4> Well, when doing it, I get an error saying I'm attempting to access Bar's private members.
<6> DrkMatter, there is no inheritence relationship
<5> DrkMatter, what compiler?
<4> Huh, wait, not "ambiguous"... Rather, are Bar's members in scope when calling it's constructor?
<5> No. It's a lookup issue. But again, what compiler?
<4> VC++ 2005.
<5> The fix is Bar myBar(Foo::myMember)
<5> Hmm.
<5> Anyway, that will disambiguate the member.
<7> another C versus C++ question
<4> Good lord, I'm dumb.
<7> if I have a struct foo
<4> The constructor was private. It wasn't the members it was looking up.
<5> heh
<7> then making a pointer: matsparse *p;
<5> I thought that was a tad too weird
<7> and if there's an array inside that struct double *A;
<7> so that m->A is a pointer to the first element of A
<4> Thanks anyway Solamente. =)
<7> then I make a cl*** with a private array of doubles A
<7> if I do: A = p->A; inside the constructor
<7> (nevermind the m->A up there)
<7> does the double array inside the object point to the same array of doubles in the structure?
<7> so that I don't end storing values twice
<7> ...up...
<7> any comments?
<4> Huh...
<4> IF you ***ign the pointer's value correctly, yes.
<4> Why are you asking corstan? Where could the "issue" be?
<7> DrkMatter, as I profoundly have learned that C++ is OOP while C isn't, I use a struct in C to store variables
<7> I am now linking C code with C++, but I want the variables in the C++ code to point to the same areas in memory as the C code does, so that the same variables are being manipulated as in C and in C++
<7> "linking"
<8> corstan what does OOP or not have to do with what you're doing?
<7> storing values into a data members of a cl***.... ?
<7> while in C I couldn't
<4> corstan: Are you trying to mirror the C code in C++, or are you making wrappers?
<5> corstan: No, C++ is not OO.
<7> jesus
<5> OO is one of the many paradigms which C++ supports
<5> Get used to that.
<7> I am not going to jump into the various paradigms
<5> You can't avoid them.
<4> You should! They're like hoops.
<7> whenever I say C++ and OOP I mean (sorry for not stating this before) use of cl***es and objects (not areas in memories)
<8> corstan do you know the difference betwen a cl*** and a struct?
<7> s/memories/memory
<5> Using cl***es does not imply OOP.
<5> cf. The standard template library.
<7> vawjrwrk, afaik cl***es contains methods and data members
<7> contain
<8> corstan so can struct
<7> not methods
<8> yes
<8> methods
<7> hm, ok
<5> A struct and a cl*** are *identical* in C++ except for default visibility.
<5> struct is default public, cl*** is default private.
<5> Otherwise, there is no difference.
<4> struct Foo { int myMethod();}; <-- struct with a method.
<7> I use a struct in C to store variables
<7> that is C
<5> C isn't C++
<8> the ONLY differences are 1) they're spelled differently 2) the default is public for struct and private for cl*** 2) you can use the word cl*** to declare a template arg, not struct
<7> Solamente, ????
<8> corstan so what if you use a struct in C to store variables.... you can do the same thing in C++
<7> yes, but as stated tons of times before I cannot do that since this is a course I am taking
<4> As a matter of fact, a cl*** without variables isn't much of an OOP thing.
<8> you cannot do what??
<7> and don't say that the teacher should be shot or whatever <-- that's stupid
<8> I have NO idea what cl*** you're taking
<9> corstan as has been stated several times, and as is supported by your inability, you should learn C++ before trying to use it
<4> Well, wouldn't that be the point of taking a cl***? LEarning it? o_O
<9> no
<7> I should know it beforehand?
<9> you shouldn't expect a teacher to be able to properly teach C++
<7> I am not in the lectures anyways
<7> because I won't understand anything
<7> when told
<10> hey
<4> Hey.
<10> :) I have a big big problem :)
<4> Ask, and we may ahve a big answer.
<10> Ok following:
<10> I load a function from a Dll. Than I start a new thread with that function. Either the entire app shutsdown or the thread gets never executed and CreateThread or _beginthread stop the entire app from going on
<10> I already put the question here: http://h4cky0u.org/viewtopic.php?t=7306
<10> the imported function called itself works fine
<8> what does "load a function" mean?
<10> GetProcAddress
<10> after LoadLibrary
<10> it's a normal C function but I try to make a Thread-cl***, so I think I'm at least a bit right here :D
<4> I'm certainly not a knowledgeable person in this particular field, but freeing the module THEN calling on its function doesn't seem very logical.
<10> I tried it the other way arround but no success
<10> same result
<11> nice
<8> what makes you think you can free it at all?
<10> hm ... good point. but I loaded a cl*** from a dll and it even worked after calling FreeLibrary
<5> I'm beginning to think that Raymond Chen lurks in here. He's blogged about a recent channel topic again.
<8> http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/15428?type=kbArticle&trk=MSCP you might want to look at that tooo
<5> The other day we were talking about determining if a file is available to be opened by attempting to open it.
<11> who?
<5> http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2006/02/02/523171.aspx
<5> impatient: You don't know who Raymond Chen is?
<8> neonomicus what do you mean "loaded a cl***" ?
<11> sure don't
<5> Dude, turn in your geek pin
<11> :(
<5> Nah, I didn't discover him until about a year ago.
<5> He's a developer on the Windows shell team.
<10> I GetProcAddress-imported a function that returns an object of a certain cl***
<5> Bright dude.
<5> I learn more about Win32 by reading his blog than almost any other source these days.
<11> nice
<8> neonomicus and you've called this function after you've freed the dll?
<11> hmm there's no code to look at in that article
<5> Of course, he covers other interesting topics: http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2006/02/02/523172.aspx
<5> (I watch the Food Network to see Giada di Laurentis)
<11> code is to impatient what large pictures are to a 5 year old
<5> Something to hang on the refrigerator?
<11> there you go
<11> also I apparently just needed to scroll down more
<11> oh wait, wrong page
<10> without freeing the dll it does not work either
<11> haha nice blog
<11> (just read the 2nd one)
<4> neonomicus: Then there's probably a second problem in there.
<5> Larry Osterman is usually good, too: http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2006/02/02/523259.aspx
<10> I just don't get it :( maybe it's impossible at all to start a new thread with a function imported from a dll
<10> the funniest thing is that it simply shutsdown the app but without any error
<5> Hmm... I've got two computers downloading Firefox 1.5.0.1
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
flood din putty
#mirc
180db alarm -keyring -keyfob -key fob
pinkey and the brain quotes
#linux
servelate
#mirc
serious53
#linux
#c++
|
|