| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Comments:
<0> Guns|n|r0s3s you can't define new c++ keywords
<1> rdragon i just mean normal functions
<1> that i define
<1> and i want to color them different
<0> visual ***ist gives a finer-grain color control
<0> oops
<0> http://www.wholetomato.com/
<1> is that for free
<1> and it work with vs2005
<2> no and yes
<0> no, yes
<3> http://www.doesgodexist.org/Charts/EvidenceForDesignInTheUniverse.html
<4> hi, was wondering how i would compile a simple program in visual c++ 2005? its simple object oriented programming, but i cant seem to compile it. the debug button (green play button) is not enabled.
<4> could someone help me out with this? i just created a new file (.cpp) and put my code in there. i just want to be able to compile it and see if it works
<2> sounds like you probably didn't create a project
<4> do i have to create a project for even a simple program? im just creating cl***es
<2> yup
<2> the project contains the compiler settings for your code
<4> but when i create a project what type should i choose? when i tried 'win32' it includes all these headers
<2> win32 (probably), but select "Empty project"
<2> then you get exactly what it says on the tin
<4> just the 'CLR empty project' huh? sure ill give it a try. brb
<2> CLR will be a .net project type
<4> just a general empty project then?
<2> well, it'll still need to be a C++ project
<2> IIRC, 2005 express won't create non-CLR projects by default
<2> you need to install the PSDF
<2> er, PSDK
<4> ****ty
<4> and where would i be able to get psdk from? just search on the net?
<2> from microsoft. though I've no idea how to add new project types to 2005 express
<2> bit of googling should help on that matter
<4> ****ty. should i just install visual c++ 6.0? and try that out? its what my prof seems to be using. but would that need the psdk as well?
<2> 6 wouldn't, no. But it's prehistoric
<4> i jsut tried to compile my code. and it wouldnt recognize my include <iostream.h>
<2> someone else here will probably know how to get 2005 working - I'm still using 2003
<2> probably because that's not a valid C++ include
<2> try #include <iostream>
<2> (no .h)
<4> tried that. didnt work. it gives me syntax errors for my 'ostream' command
<2> std::ostream
<4> that seemed to be alright. now i have syntax errors for my 'strcpy' command... lol.. i think im **** outta luck, might just have to get 6.0
<4> is there a big difference in syntax between 6.0 and 2005?
<2> well, 6.0 is pre C++ standardisation
<2> 2005 is actually a rdecent C compiler
<2> er, C++ compiler
<4> you think after paying thousands of dollars for tuition. they would try and teach you something that is updated.. christ, they might as well be teaching me fortran and smalltalk.. hell lets go back to 'qbasic'
<2> well, 6 can be used to reasaonble effect - but still, if they're teaching you "#include <iostream.h>", they're in need of a big update
<2> also, strcpy
<2> rather than std::string
<4> so what would be the equivalent of "#include <iostream.h>" in 2003/05?
<4> sadly that is what they are teaching us though
<5> #include <iostream?
<5> >
<5> no .h in standard c++ libraries
<5> Ottawaguy : you'll have to learn whatever they teach you to get a good grade, and then forget it all and learn c++
<4> hahaha. guess so.
<4> at least as long as i know the basics it shouldnt be too hard learning c++
<6> haha, false.
<6> the set of "basic" concepts in C++ is rather large
<6> (don't let that discourage you; just don't expect it'll all be easy)
<7> Even if technically, it is quite easy
<6> aye
<4> haha.. why am i even in school.. lol
<2> everythings retrospectively easy
<6> are you a CS major or what
<4> yeah CS and math
<6> well
<2> and schools only really useful to let you A) devote more time to study and B) use big expensive equipment
<6> ideally your other courses won't be about programming, they will be about CS
<7> Actually, it was easy while doing it too
<7> I use big expensive equipment at work, har
<4> thats true. only a few are programming. others are courses like algorithms and analysis and blah blah blah
<2> grand
<6> indeed
<2> algorithms, data structures functional programming, OO programming and procedural programming is the bare minimum
<2> ideally, you need logic/semanitcs, complexity, and lots of other fun topics
<6> OO programming
<6> that one I'm dubious about
<7> generic > OO
<7> OO programming usually is java crap
<7> Or poor C++
<6> yeah
<2> Cowmoo - Well, it's a "needed" skill, that most people don't seem to be able to teach themself
<7> "look, it has cl***es, it's OO!!!"
<4> yeah i've covered a few of those actuallying. they cram OO into you so many ways the first couple of years
<2> well, call it whatever you want
<6> maybe if it was part of a course (i.e. here, take a look at Smalltalk), as opposed to a full course on OO
<2> smalltalk would be a good method
<6> then I'm ok with it
<6> but a full blown course, yucky
<2> i'd probably lump it into the general "introduction to programming" course
<2> which is what happened to me
<2> though if I were teaching total newbies, I'd probably start with functional programming
<4> im actually required to take 3 full blown courses on OO.. all java
<6> SICP ftw
<4> i've taken em all. hate java though
<6> ugh
<6> 3 courses on OO? do these count towards a CS degree?
<4> haha yeah, they're mandatory core courses
<6> for shame.
<2> however, far too much is taught with languages rather than with theory these days
<6> yea
<2> which is why I math majored
<6> and people seem to think programming = CS
<2> indeed
<6> kthx
<4> asriel: i as well am focusing on math more.
<2> grand
<2> I only really took a CS minor for the discreet math style courses anyway
<4> actually have a cryptology course in the fall im looking forward to. should be interesting
<0> don't ***ume that cool sounding cl*** titles actually mean you're going to become some kind of expert
<4> haha, nono, im not that deluded
<6> he just said interesting
<4> just saying it seems like itd be interesting
<6> not "and then I will rule the world"
<4> lol
<0> don't expect it to be interesting, either
<6> haha
<2> pick courses based on lecturers is a good tactic :)
<2> alas, my favorite 2 have left/retired
<0> heh
<6> hunt them down
<6> and sit outside their door waiting for a lecture
<4> always do. most of the time i goto www.ratemyprofessor.ca
<4> and then i sit in on a lecture or two
<4> before signing up
<4> i've had my fair share of run-ins with ****ty profs.
<6> haven't we all
<6> go away
<7> (and I got my degree in 2 weeks, HAR AHR HAR)
<4> and the 'prof evaluations' at the end do nothing
<4> lol
<8> hi
<8> quick question? I have 2 cl***es - mammal::mammal(char *species) and a subcl***: dog : public mammal; --> all I want the subcl*** to do is p*** dog as its species by default (to the constructor) -- how do I do this?
<0> i hope that char* isn't supposed to be a "string"
<6> first please try to use std::string instead of char arrays
<0> Dog::Dog() : Mammal( "dog" ) { ... }
<7> I'd make it char const *, not string
<8> sorry, my bad
<0> why not string, MrAshe ?
<8> thanks, I thought I did it in the constructor -- I don't have my books with me
<7> Because he most likely will hardcode it for each "sub cl***", and never modify the string
<9> I'm having problems p***ing a &vector<int> to a sub and dereferencing it. Could someone help please: http://cpp.sourceforge.net/?show=16428
<9> never mind. question answered
<10> well, that was unpleasant
<10> ubuntu's live cd installer accesses the cd way too often
<10> making it incredibly painful to install under vmware
<10> while xp installs without a problem
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
kurdsh chat
#java
WHAT SUPERMARKETS WERE FOUNDED BY SIR JOHN COHEN WITH THE SLOGAN 'PILE IT HIGH,
#linux
php+GoLive
.. 0 0 0 o N[[ Allah Akbar ]]N o 0 0 0 ..
eb/kbc
masachutes
Peter24 hey
#AllNiteCafe
|
|