On Thu May 22 2008 10:49:25 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> You keep talking about scope. The access specifier should affect scope
> and name resolution? This does not make sense! The public function is
> available, a using declaration should bring that function from A's
> scope into B's scope, bu
On 22/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu May 22 2008 06:34:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>
> The first thing to note is that neither of these is your original
> example, so it would be better if you had written "the *only*
> difference between the two examples above is the
On Thu May 22 2008 06:34:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed May 21 2008 20:01:10 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> > > So what's the fix here? Why does a using A::f declaration inside class
> > > B not work?
> >
> > There's no f(int)
On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed May 21 2008 20:01:10 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>
> > So what's the fix here? Why does a using A::f declaration inside class
> > B not work?
>
>
> There's no f(int) in scope, only int(foo).
No, no, wait. This makes no sense. Consid
Mike Bird wrote:
On Wed May 21 2008 20:01:10 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed May 21 2008 19:00:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> The problem seems to be that all of my functions being named f are
> somehow colliding with each other.
On Wednesday 21 May 2008, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> The following code will not compile:
>
> class foo{};
>
> class A{
> public:
> void f(int a ){a++;};
> private:
> virtual void f(foo a) = 0;
> };
>
> class B : public A{
> private:
> v
On Wed May 21 2008 20:01:10 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed May 21 2008 19:00:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> > > The problem seems to be that all of my functions being named f are
> > > somehow colliding with each other.
> >
> >
On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed May 21 2008 19:00:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> > The problem seems to be that all of my functions being named f are
> > somehow colliding with each other.
>
>
> Annotated C++ Reference Manual, Ellis & Stroustrup, Section 13.1
>
On Wed May 21 2008 19:00:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> The problem seems to be that all of my functions being named f are
> somehow colliding with each other.
Annotated C++ Reference Manual, Ellis & Stroustrup, Section 13.1
(Declaration Matching). "A function member of a derived class is
no
Feel free to redirect me to a better place to ask if you know of one.
The following code will not compile:
class foo{};
class A{
public:
void f(int a ){a++;};
private:
virtual void f(foo a) = 0;
};
class B : public A{
private:
virtual void
One could easily expand the code snippet to something more like...
int i;
char c;
unsigned long l;
:
:
for (i = sizeof(unsigned long); i > 0; i--)
{
int shift_factor = (i - 1) * 8;
c = (char)((l & ((unsigned long)0xFF << shift_factor)) >>
shift_factor);
putchar(c);
}
... if you want t
On 16-Mar-2000 Shao Zhang wrote:
> Thanks. This is exactly what I want. I have thought about doing it this
> way, it is just that from memory, there is a libc function that does the
> equivalent.
>
What was given is the only safe and sane way I have ever seen. Bigger question
is why do you have
You could just do:
fflush (stdout); /* clear the stream buffer */
write (1, myvar, 4); /* write binary to stdout */
jim
> Thanks. This is exactly what I want. I have thought about doing it this
> way, it is just that from memory, there is a libc function that does the
> equivalent.
Thanks. This is exactly what I want. I have thought about doing it this
way, it is just that from memory, there is a libc function that does the
equivalent.
shao.
Matthew Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sorry... I automatically made a link between binary data and hexadecimal
> data...
>
> You
Sorry... I automatically made a link between binary data and hexadecimal
data...
You could shift 8 bits of the unsigned long into a unsigned char one at
a time, and print that character with a %c in the printf, or use
putchar() or something.
eg:
unsigned long l = 0x38c9616e;
unsig
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 03:04:53PM +1100, Shao Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
> If I have an unsigned long int, instead printing out its values
> in string using printf("%ld\n", my_var),
>
> I would like to print it out as a 4-byte binary data. Is there
> any easy way to do this in C.
But isn't %[Xx] just prints out as Hexdecimal?
I just tried, and it prints out something like: 38c9616e
which consumes 8 bytes in a file. Given that unsigned long is 32 bits,
I want to use exactly 4 byte to represent it in order to save some
space.
Thanks.
Shao.
Matthew Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
If I have an unsigned long int, instead printing out its values
in string using printf("%ld\n", my_var),
I would like to print it out as a 4-byte binary data. Is there
any easy way to do this in C.
Thanks.
Shao.
--
18 matches
Mail list logo
