| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Comments:
<0> they won't live to see it happen if we start shooting them
<1> The Supreme court ****ed this one up so bad.
<0> no, the decision was the right one, but for the wrong reasons
<2> or you can open the file with exclusive access so it cannot be modfied by another process
<0> the SC has no jurisdiction over the matter
<1> I don't know, the whole 4th amendment thing.
<0> that applies ONLY to the feds
<1> hmmm, really? I should read that again then.
<3> most platforms don't have forced locking by default -- usually it's only advisory (on *nix at least you have to mount a filesystem with special parameters to enforce locking)
<4> so you want to limit your software to filesystems on CDROMS or filesystems that allow for exclusive access?
<0> the entire U.S. constitution restricts only the feds
<0> unless is explicitly says the states
<2> i was just giving examples of times when the filesize is garanteed to remain the same, and some other examples of when you might need the filesize other than displaying it to the user.
<2> or you can open the file with exclusive access so it cannot be modfied by another process#
<1> hmmm, I've never seen it applied that way.
<1> first amendment issues in states come up all the time.
<4> I was just pointing out that your program is either very limited or has to be prepared for a change in the filesize.
<5> what the dos command for copying a directory AND all is folder?
<0> DOS is dead
<4> Yup, people even have forgotten what DOS was.
<2> those are good points indeed
<2> sometimes you're already targeting a system with exclusive access features, or you're writing software to read specifically from cdrom. in this case the limitations are already there, so why not take advantage?
<1> and, actually, the Supreme Court is hearing the Anna Nicole Smith case right now
<1> And, when someone made the statement that the supreme court didn't have jurisdiction over this issue
<1> the justices said anyone who thinks that doesn't understand how our system works.
<0> the people who said the SC didn't have jurisdiction because it was probate. The SC said it was separate from the probate, it was a gift
<0> they never said they'd make any ruling on the probate
<1> ahh
<0> or at least that's the report I heard on NPR
<6> When indenting code in Emacs using C-M-\, how do I prevent the '{' from been indented two spaces in from the line above it :) ?
<7> ok i got a question
<7> i just started to program in windows
<7> and theres something i dont understand
<7> in all the examples in tutorials that just open a window, theres a window cl*** that you register
<7> and theres that HWND handle that you use in the createwindow function
<7> so whats the connection between the two?
<1> nothing
<7> so whats the idea?
<1> Window identification, I think
<1> so you can do that FindWindow stuff
<7> dont know what you mean
<7> you say that register window function is not needed anyways?
<7> plz.. it realy stuck me, gotto figure out whats going on there
<0> afternoon, Solamente
<8> hi guys
<8> I have a problem
<8> float& operator=(float& v1, const std::complex<float>& v2)
<8> { v1 = 123; return v1;
<8> }
<8> the compiler give me this error:
<8> tool.h|58| error: `float& operator=(float&, const std::complex<float>&)' must be a nonstatic member function
<8> does someone know why?
<8> i waht to be able to do floatVar = complexVar;
<2> is it part ofg a cl***?
<8> no
<8> I want it to be a global operator=
<8> it's weird
<8> if I keep the same code, but with operator+ instead, it workd
<8> words
<8> works
<9> must be a nonstatic member function (I think the word must doesn't leave you a chance to do it another way)
<0> operator = must be a member function, sorry
<8> really?
<8> hum
<0> hum
<0> so what happens if you simply do float somefloat = somecomplex ?
<8> there is a way to convert a usertype (in that case std::complex) to an intrinsic type?
<8> it says i can't
<0> what's the ****ing error
<8> "can't convert from std::complex to float"
<8> or something like that
<0> thank you
<0> what would you LIKE it to do?
<8> std::complex<float> a;
<8> float b;
<8> b = a;
<8> i want that b contain the real part of the complex number
<0> a.real()
<8> yeah, sure :) _But_ I want it to be transparent for the fonction I made that is responsible to convert an array from one type to another
<0> I'm glad you don't work for me, I don't like firing people
<8> template <cl*** T>
<8> template <cl*** U>
<8> Array2d<T>& Array2d<T>::operator=(const Array2d<U>& src)
<0> write your own complex cl*** then
<8> i'm learning, it's why i ask questions
<9> if you made it to create your own array type, maybe you could go further and make a custom float
<0> why the hell do you think that b = a above should copy the real part? not the imagnary part
<0> or perhaps the vector length
<8> I don't think it should, but I need it to do that
<8> then I'll write a wrapper around std::complex to add operator=
<0> bull****
<8> thx for your help
<9> Array2d<T>& Array2d<T>::operator=(const Array2d<U>& src) -- write a specialization for std::complex maybe?
<0> go ahead, confuse the **** out of everyone who tries to read your code
<8> vawjr: what would you recommend then?
<8> melfar: not a bad idea
<0> not trying to re-define the meanings of commonly accepted things
<8> but it's not clean imho
<0> what problem are you trying to solve?
<8> Array2d is a "generic" type, it should'nt know about complex
<0> voider pay real close attention.... you cannont convert a complex to a float
<0> ***erting that you can, and that it means the real portion is just gonna confuse everyone else
<8> ok, here is my problem
<8> I have a cl***, Array2d<T>, and I made an operator= that accept an Array2d<U>
<8> to be able to do something like that?
<8> Array2d<float> af;
<8> Array2d<int> ai;
<8> af = ai;
<8> Array2d contains images pixels/informations
<0> ok
<8> When I apply FFT on them, I get Array<std::complex<float> >
<0> is there some reason you wrote your own? boost::multi_array wasn't good enough for you?
<0> and yes, FFT creates complex
<8> first, I never really messed with boost, second, it's for an homework, and the teacher probably not have boost installed on the correction machine
<0> what cl***?
<8> Array2d
<0> no
<0> homework for what?
<8> 16:39 @ vawjr| is there some reason you wrote your own? boost::multi_array wasn't good enough for you?
<8> ah ok, "image analysis"
<8> not sure if it's the official traduction
<0> so the C++ is not a requirement
<0> it's what you're doing
<8> Yes it is
<8> we must make this homework in c++
<8> As i can see, there is no "clean" way to solve my problem
<0> ok, well, look at it this way.... if float af; complex<float> ac; af = ac; is NOT legal, then it's unreasonable for containeroffloats = containerofcomplex to work
<8> yeah
<0> so trying to MAKE it work is unreasonable
<8> maybe I mis-understood something
<8> so prepare an Array2D for the "numerical recipies" version of the FFT, I must convert my Array2d<float> to Array2d<std::complex<float> >
<0> or you can specialize your containeroffloats if you insist, but that's kinda scary
<8> to convert back the fft result (doing the fft^-1), I am wrong to think I can only take the real part of each complex number?
<0> somecomplex = somefloat; works
<8> Sure i'm wrong
<0> I actually don't know whether you want the real, imagnary, or abs
<0> though real would be the most likely
<8> you're right, I cannot take only the real part of each complex number to get back the real image
<0> your'e doing the FFT? setting some stuff to 0 (getting rid of periodic noise), then FFT-1 ?
<8> just FFT, then FFT-1
<8> trying to get the original image
<0> I thought FFT-1took complex and turned it back to reals
<0> <shrug> it's been ages since I played w/ that stuff
<10> set the angle to -xxx
<8> hum, yes
<10> anyways... BBL.
<8> it's supposed to do that
<8> hum, not sure
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
mutilated dicks
#skype
#linux
ladynigt
#linux
16/f/syd
#linux
www.thebalaabodu.com
lightscribe
#javascript
|
|