| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Comments:
<0> rdragon i order that accelerated c book , but it needs one month to come , what should i do until then ? read tutorials ?
<1> no
<1> twiddle your thumbs
<1> or look at that least-**** tutorial, i guess
<1> of which I don't have the link
<0> oke
<2> functions defined inside work.
<2> when i try to put them outside, the compiler says about functions other than the constructor that they are non-template functions:
<2> LLTrackerFilterBackend.h:561: error: no `void
<2> HID::LLTrackerFilterBackend::Filter<T, DIM>::dump()' member function
<2> declared in cl*** `HID::LLTrackerFilterBackend::Filter<T, DIM>'
<2> LLTrackerFilterBackend.h:561: error: template definition of non-template `void
<2> HID::LLTrackerFilterBackend::Filter<T, DIM>::dump()'
<2> template <cl*** T, int DIM> void LLTrackerFilterBackend::Filter<T, DIM>::dump() { .. }
<3> Many versions of VC++ don't handle member function definitions for cl*** templates well if those definitions are outside the cl*** definition.
<2> ahh, i have these <...> once more than you did. i'll try that.
<2> mh no...now it complains about missing template parameters.
<2> i use g++ (gcc) under suse 9.1
<4> there's only one version of vc++ that people should be using today vc2005
<2> gcc 3.3.3
<2> i'm almost sure that the only thing i'm doing wrong is something like specifying things in the wrong order.
<2> i now put all the definitions at least into the same file.
<2> i can put them into the cl*** definition, too (that works), but i'd strongly prefer to keep them outside.
<2> do i somehow have to qualify function declarations as templates if they are inside a template cl***?
<2> ok, what i will do next is backing up files and then stripping everything not important for figuring out this problem. then maybe i can post complete source files.
<5> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185202,00.html
<4> a single .223 round would solve that problem
<4> take out the ****ing cleri c
<4> just kill him
<4> forget the damned house detention
<6> vawjrwrk: daaaaym
<2> somehow i like vawjrwrk, though i'm happy to be far away ;-)
<6> I would bash vawjr with my bear hands!
<6> *bare
<7> Has anyone done any parallel port programming in windows xp ?
<4> no, not since NT
<2> Cloud: shouldn't microsoft give you a hell of info abbout that?
<7> i am googling, and getting nothing
<7> any hints would be appriciated
<4> Cloud99 use the DDK and look at the sample driver
<4> there are times I really really hate the ****ing "properties" crap in VS
<8> what is the properties crap in VS?
<4> all the project properties ****
<4> it's the WORST ****ING UI ever invented
<8> heh
<8> how so?
<4> have you ever tried to compare two of them
<4> for some goddamned reason all of a sudden one of my projects won't link
<4> I get a zillion multiple defines
<8> oh, yeah, that is a pain
<8> flipping back and forth between them
<4> you can't look at two of them at the same time
<8> as far as I know there's no, make this identical to whatever project option either
<8> which would be useful.
<4> they're identical (so the stupid litle wizard tabs tell you)
<2> wow, i used <int DIM> instead of <unsigned int DIM>. that was what the compiler didn't like.
<4> well there IS a difference
<4> they're different types
<1> there is a bug in the 'configuration manager' - sometimes when you switch from Debug <-> Release in that view, it actually takes all of the current properties and applies it to the other configuration (in essence, switching to Release sets all of the projects to build with their Debug config in release mode)
<4> rdragon yes, the configuration manager is a piece of **** also
<1> not sure if you were aware, but maybe that bit you
<4> I haven't been in the config manager
<4> today
<4> I found that other out last week
<1> heh
<4> who wrote this crap? who designed it? who the **** tested it?
<4> all should be summarily executed
<1> and where's our 'quality release' already
<1> the biggest problem I have is that the find / find in files dialog takes about 10 seconds to open, for some reason
<2> vawjrwrk: tell you boss to use open source software ;-)
<2> your
<1> oh I just realized. I wonder if it's taking forever because there are some network paths cached there.
<8> I think it was peterhu
<4> ignu_dan for what? a c ompiler??? don't make me laugh
<4> actuall I don't care about a c compiler... I need a c++ compiler
<1> gee, that fixed it a bit
<1> you would think for popping up a find dialog it would just insert the paths into the drop-down list, instead of trying to actually access them (i'm guessing thats why it was piss slow)
<8> http://www.thanhniennews.com/features/?catid=10&newsid=12673
<1> hmm
<9> hmm, is there a point to black other than complete carnage?
<1> black as in... ?
<9> the forthcoming game from EA
<1> oh
<9> the destructable environment looks sweet
<9> not sure if it'll be good though
<1> i doubt it's too fancy
<9> from the videos on the website, it may be fun, but vapid
<9> i can enjoy a completely mindless shooter for a little while, but ultimately, it's games like halflife that make the best games
<4> what's the "preferred method" to get rid of warnings like this? e:\Dev\projects\programming\personal\Metalib\FindFiles.hpp(42) : warning C4100: 'ret' : unreferenced formal parameter
<10> Modify function signature i.e. exclude the unreferenced parameter from the parameter list.
<4> the parameter name?
<10> Or if you are expecting to use that parameter in the future, then ***ign the parameter a null or 0 value.
<10> Once within the function.
<4> I've got a cl*** that the user must derive from .... it has 3 virtual functions (one of them pure) the other two "do nothing) unless overridden
<9> that would do it, there's also a silly macro that will rid the warning
<9> UNUSED_PARAMETER or some such
<10> You have to ***ign it a zero value then.
<10> Or just do anything with it.
<2> so guys, i'll stop working for today. bye
<9> UNREFERENCED_PARAMETER that is
<4> peterhu thanks
<10> peterhu and will it remain an UNREFERENCED_PARAMETER when the cl*** is inherited from?
<10> You can't modify function signature while overriding you know
<9> ?
<11> ...
<10> void myfunc (UNREFERENCED_PARAMETER x, int y);
<9> where do you get a signature modification?
<9> no
<10> Override it.
<9> void foo(int x) { UNREFERENCED_PARAMETER(x); }
<9> which preprocesses to void foo(int x) { x; }
<10> oh ok
<8> what the hell is that macro?
<8> I mean, why bother with it?
<9> it's a macro defined in winnt.h, included from windows.h
<8> change the definition to just
<8> void foo(int)
<9> not sure, does C89 support unnamed parameters?
<8> ahhh
<8> of course, if you were using C
<8> why would you have unnamed params?
<8> I guess to fit the signature of a function pointer?
<10> He is using C++
<4> Noidea but if you do void foo(int) when the person gets intellisense they don't get the name to tell then WHAT the int it
<8> I always name it in the declaration
<1> what if you include the parameter name in the declaration but not the definition
<8> but not in the definition if it's unused.
<4> and the reason is I have an cl*** w/ 3 virtual functions
<8> I think the params should ALWAYS be named in the declaration
<4> 1 is pure and 2 are defined to do nothing, but they WILL get called
<8> the .h file is my first source of documentation.
<4> absolutely
<4> that's why it's unfortunate here...I want it for the documentation
<8> put it in a comment
<8> or, is this like an implicitly inlined function?
<8> you're cramming it into the header file?
<1> virtual void f( int x ){ x; } //wouldnt that get rid of the warning, but get optimized away?
<9> yes, that's what the macro does
<8> that's what peterhu just said.
<4> rdragon I believe so
<12> Noidea inline functions depends on the compiler anyway
<9> the macro makes it more clear, strangely enough though
<1> oh alright... so it's solved?
<4> appears to be
<12> even it's declared as inline compiler would compile as non-inline
<9> vic, just stick with the macro and move on =)
<4> it's implicitly inline, it's defined IN the cl*** (well struct) definition
<4> I'm on
<12> what's the pharameter how compiler decides for bein inline or non-inline compilin, a techincal document would be fine.
<9> there are more important things to worry about, like why is jb sending me nude self-photos?
<12> peterhu sugar dad :)
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
#mysql
#linuxhelp
self.frames+javascript
#c++
#php
dll separate heap
#skype
#london
#java
#linux
|
|