Hi,
Matthieu Fertré a écrit :
> Ok, no problem. I have initially replaced it thinking it was a vector.
> On a vector, if I remember correctly, .at(i) is equivalent to [i] but
> .at(i) checks that the vector is long enough and i is not out of range,
> [i] don't do that.
Meaning that if the code
Kurosu a écrit :
> Author: kurosu
> Date: Fri Oct 10 19:50:21 2008
> New Revision: 5246
>
> URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/wormux?rev=5246&view=rev
> Log:
> [Win32] .at() method not implemented, use normal [] operator instead.
>
Ok, no problem. I have initially replaced it thinking it was a ve
