Sorry, typo: ... > then your arguments must have types but need to be identifiers and can be > expressions that give you a value ... is wrong, needs to read > can *not* be expressions that give you a value Full text, corrected:
>> In another topic, you wrote me that was syntactically incorrect and you >> advice me to set it like this: >> set_output_multiple(tamano_entrada+nsimbolo); >> >> But this way I get the errors <‘tamano_entrada’ is not a type> and <expected >> ‘,’ or ‘...’ before ‘+’ token> > Different things are correct to do different things: When you call a > function, you must not say which types the parameters have. > If you do something that your compiler thinks is a function declaration, > you must. > >> Again, when I set this parameters the first time I asked (void >> set_output_multiple (int tamano_entrada + nsimbolo); >> void set_relative_rate (double relative_rate);) I did not get any >> errors, > I'd like to address these two lines, and then remove myself from this > discussion. You make C++ beginner's mistakes, which is totally ok, and > can be overcome with a little training, but this is really not the place > to discuss this, I'm afraid. I must apologize if I came across harsh at > times, but you must understand that there's a gap between the level of > questions you're asking and your ability to autonomously write correct > C++ code, and I can't help you bridge that. > > void set_output_multiple (int tamano_entrada + nsimbolo); > > This doesn't really make sense. Either you're in a situation where you need > to supply the type (you *declare* or *define* the function/method > set_output_multiple), then your arguments must have types but need to be > identifiers and can not be expressions that give you a value (such as > tamano_entrada + nsimbolo). > > OR you're in a place to *use* that already existing function or method > (that's the case here), and the typename is wrong. > I can't find any way that GCC won't give an error for this line, sorry; I > think you might be missing some compiler errors. > > void set_relative_rate (double relative_rate); > > > That is **not** a call to gr::block::set_relative_rate. That is a function > declaration, possibly hiding the original method. C++ in some > compilers/versions supports local-scope function declarations like these. A > call would simply look like > set_relative_rate(12.12); > or > set_relative_rate(relative_rate); > but can *never* declare the type of either the arguments or the return value > of that function. That's logical, because the function must already be > declared if you want to use it. The fact that this seems to work better than > what I told you to do means that you have more mistakes that get hidden by > this mistake. > > Best regards, > Marcus _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
