class MyClass{};namespace BI{ class BusinessInterop {
public: static MyClass* func( {
printf("BusinessInterop");return new MyClass();}
[Code] .....
I would like to know how to prevent the program print out "Business", I'd like it to call the base class's static function. I have tried to changed MyClass* into void* but it still prints Business :grumpy:.
My challenge is to output "BusinessInterop" without any changes made to the polymorphic structure as designed.
I want to write a function and be able to call it during execution (say during a while(1) loop). Is this possible without having to parse an input string to extract the function and parameters I need or is that the only way?
I am getting an anomalous output. Before all the iterations of for loop could finish, the program enters into the invoke_thread_S() and I can see the remaining iterations of for loop happening after thread S is finished.
What could be the problem here. Can I put a 'sleep' before I enter into invoke_thread_S() function, I tried it with a very small amount (in nano seconds), but that did not solve the problem.
I've got some functions and macros that I want to execute based on a string input that matches the function's name. I came across as this being a possible solution that I'd like to pursue IF it is possible to do. To clarify, I want to be able to look at a string and if the string matches the name of a defined function or macro then it will execute. Is there an effective way to do this (or is it even possible)?
It has to be pretty robust and dynamic given the project's purpose. Basically there's an input file that is being parsed and functions should execute if called upon in the file. I can't simply match strings to their corresponding functions in decision statements, as this isn't robust and isn't scalable.
I'm just starting c++, doing tutorials. So many tutorials. I've noticed that the tutorials all assume the same thing: That the user will always do exactly as he/she is told when asked for input.
Example: "Please enter your age:"
Now, the example code might be expecting the user to type some numbers, but what if the user feels like typing out the letters of their age?
"I am ninety five thank you very much, sonny"
I could specify to the user that I only want the information in number form, but what if the user is just being a dick?
What if the user types, "none o' yer business."?
So... how to approach "fool-proofing" player input?
preventing a buffer overflow when dealing with strings being passed as arguments.
If I have a function prototype such as:
Code:
void foobar(char *bar);
That argument bar - is intended to take a pointer to a buffer of x characters in length. Inside that function, I can't get the size of that buffer, as bar is now just a pointer to a char. I COULD just make the user of this function pass a length parameter, but there is no guarantee that would be correct. Is there a bullet proof way of detecting that the user has provided a buffer that is too small?
This question is currently only for windows; but I would like to know about a cross-platform way to perform what I want to do (explained below) -
I have created a little program:
#include <iostream> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { for (int i = 0; i < argc; ++i) { std::cout << argv[i] << ' '; } }
I have added this program to the windows PATH. I put this program in C:Program FilesProgram
I now navigate to C:DataVariousTexts using CMD.
Then I type in: "program x"
The program will print out "program x" as by default. What I would like to get hold of is the folder in which the program is actually being called. ( I want to somehow get "C:DataVariousTexts" to be read into my program ).
I have a method that changes a canvas color after set intervals, e.g. start timer, 5 seconds green, 3 seconds red, then stop. This functionality is provided in the interval method. The problem I'm trying to achieve is getting this sequence to repeat for a set number of iterations.
I tried to solve this by setting up a counter after the timer is stopped but the code keeps repeating indefinitely by starting and stopping over and over instead of the max of 6 iterations I had set. In debugging the problem, I watched the value of 'i' and when the 'if' statement is set to false. The 'if' statement gets set to false after 7 iteration as expected but the start(); keeps getting called.
void myTimer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e) { //Assign text box string value to a time span variable. TimeSpan workTm = TimeSpan.ParseExact(wrkString, @"hh : mm : ss : fff", CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); TimeSpan restTm = TimeSpan.ParseExact(rstString, @"hh : mm : ss : fff", CultureInfo.InvariantCulture);
// update the textblock on the display // with hh, mm, ss, ms ms = myStopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
Write a C++ program that compares the execution time of the above summation using two different solutions: one that uses loops, and another that uses the closed form approach. Use large values of n for the comparisons, such as, 10^7, 10^8, 10^9, 10^10, 10^11,10^12, 10^13, and 10^14. Provide a comparison table for the execution time in both solutions.Do not worry about the value of the actual sum. Overflow will occur in the sum value rendering it invalid; however, this is not the primary concern of the program. Execution time is the primary concern.
I have a program including several code blocks in the following simplified structure:
int main() { // block A if(a > 0) { }
// block B if(a > 1) { } }
Block A and B should be executed separately, according to entry from keyboard. For example, if entry "1", block A will be executed and block B will be ignored; if entry "2" the inverse will happen.
I can control the execution of these two blocks through macro but the code will be separated during compilation. But is there a way to control them without using macro?
how we will increase the size of an arry during program execution. eg if the size of an array is 40 and during prog exexution we want to increase the size of an arry ,what is the procedure.
Task1 started in : 2 in milliseconds Task1 finished in : 4015 in milliseconds.
The problem is, that if i count the time with an external device, just like the timer of my watch or my cellphone s,the total time is 4,8 or 4,9 seconds, which i wouldn t expect that to happen.
The first thing i ve thought, is that it takes the ThreadPool about 800msec or 1 sec to create the thread so as to execute this task, but even if it is so, shouldn t the stopwatch count the time precisely?So , why is there a deviation between an external timer and the stopwatch ?
I know there has to be a system call to pause (not system("pause") execution of a program for a few seconds. I would like to give the illusion that my program is 'thinking' rather than just spit out the result as soon as the user has hit the enter key.
I created a C program that extracts some information from computer and displays it on screen. It is completed today and is going to be applied to startup programs of domain machines. It runs at logon and takes somewhat 5-10 seconds to finish execution. The output is shown on console screen & user can either close the window by clicking on 'x' or pressing 'Ctrl+c' during execution. How do i prevent both of these events?
Basically the most time consuming processes are
Code: popen("systeminfo","r"); popen("wmic qfe get installedon","r");
1st command is getting OS name,version and hotfixes installed. 2nd command gives me the date of updates installed.
I then filter out data & print required information only.
#include<iostream> #include<ctime> #include<boost/progress.hpp> using namespace std; class parent { public: virtual void dynamic_display(){
[Code] ....
I am getting the following as output
Calculating....Static Function is called1times The number of processor clicks is0time is0 Calculating....Dynamic function is called1times The number of processor clicks is0time is0 Static Function is called2times Dynamic function is called2times Static Function is called3times Dynamic function is called3times
I am actually trying to calculate the time to execute a statically binding method and a dynamically binded one.consider only the first four lines in my output. Why am i not getting the actual result.
I wrote program for Sequential matrix multiplication .But after execution for any input value( ex. 100,150,400) it shows the execution time is 0.000 msec.
#include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> #include <sys/time.h> void print_results(char *prompt, int N, float *a); int main(int argc, char *argv[])
when i uncomment statements in the following ,it works perfectly fine for infix to postfix conversion.although comments are simple cout statements,, execution with cout statements as comments breaks in b/w.I have found this particularly with a^b-c.DevCPP is also showing similar behavior. I can't understand what's going on.I am working on code blocks.
#include<iostream> #include<cstdio> #include<conio.h> using namespace std; char stk[15];
