I am new to QT. I am facing some strange problem in floating point values. The following code displays a message box WITH decimal points. i.e., 10.53
QMessageBox Msgbox;
float num = 10.53;
QString str = QString::number(num, 'g', 4);
Msgbox.setText(str);
Msgbox.exec();
Where as the following code displays a message box WITHOUT decimal points. i.e., 1
QMessageBox Msgbox;
float num = 120/77;
QString str = QString::number(num, 'g', 4);
Msgbox.setText(str);
Msgbox.exec();
Why the digits after the decimal point are ignored in the second code snippet? I changed the data type to double and qreal. Nothing worked.
because 120/77 is dividing 2 integers (resulting in a integer) and then converting to float
you need to convert the numbers to float before dividing
float a = 120, b = 77;
float num = a/b;
adding (float) before the numbers solved the issue. i.e., float num = (float)120/77;
float num = 120.0/77.0;
Would also work, standard for C.
Related
So I need some help understanding the behaviour at which pointer have, so I have code like this below:
double d1 = 3.5;
double *d1ptr = &d1;
when I increase the pointer position by 1 I get zero i.e d1ptr = d1ptr+1 but when increased by 2 i.e d1ptr = d1ptr + 2 I get the first initialised value that is 3.5
However what is weird that I see is that when I increase by any number greater than 2 the pointer value when I print out gives me 0 i.e when I say printf("%d", *d1ptr)
Can you please explain the behaviour
You are trying to print double using %d, which will result in undefined behavior. Please use %f or %lf so that you can get the expected output.
double d1 = 3.5;
double *d1ptr = &d1;
printf("%lf %u\n", *d1ptr, d1ptr); //prints value and address
d1ptr = d1ptr+2;
printf("%lf %u", *d1ptr, d1ptr); //prints value and address
Output:
3.500000 2255690064
0.000000 2255690080
The address has been increased by 2*(size of double)
I have a simple kernel in OpenCL that has the following structure:
kernel void simple_select(global double *input, global double *output) {
size_t i = get_global_id(0);
printf("input %d\n", (int)(input[i] != 0.0));
output[i] = select((float)0.0, (float)1.0, (int)(input[i] != 0.0));
//output[i] = select((float)0.0, (float)1.0, 1);
}
Equivalently this can be:
kernel void simple_select(global double *input, global double *output) {
size_t i = get_global_id(0);
printf("input %d\n", (int)(input[i] != 0.0));
output[i] = input[i] != 0.0 ? 1.0 : 0.0;
//output[i] = 1 ? 1.0 : 0.0;
}
When I print to the command line, I see:
input 1
input 1
input 1
But the output array has all 0.0. However, if I uncomment the last line of the kernel and comment out the second-to-last-line (meaning if I use the scalar 1 in the select statement) then it works as expected and the output array has all 1.0. So what is the difference between these two lines that leads to two different results?
Here is the answer.
It's a quirk in OpenCL. The problem is that true/false values for scalars are 1/0 (like printf has shown you), but true/false values for vectors are -1/0 - and this is also what select() expects in last argument (more precisely, it expects MSB set which means any negative integer).
Though i think the ternary operator on scalars should still work as expected, if it doesn't i would consider it a bug.
I am new to Arduino and all I want to do is parse a String of binary numbers to an exact integer representation.
char* byte1 = "11111111"
int binary1 = atoi(byte1);
Serial.print(binary1);
However this prints out: -19961
Can anyone explain why? I am coming from a Java and JavaScript perspective.
atoi converts a decimal (base 10) string to int. If you want to convert a binary string to int, you can use strtol:
char *byte1 = "11111111";
int val1 = strtol(byte1, 0, 2);
std::cout << val1 << std::endl;
strtol can convert any base -- the 3rd argument is the base to use.
You get -19961 because on Arduino int is 16 bit wide and cannot hold any number bigger than 32767. To hold an integer representation of 11111111 you have to use long (which on Arduino is 32 bit) and strtol.
long val = strtol(byte1, NULL, 10);
Y axis tick label should only show non decimal values / whole numbers as as series . if i set set TickUnit to 1 it should be 1,2,3,4,5,.. if i set Unit Ticks to 2 ..2,4,6,8,.. if i set to 5 5,10,15,20,25.
i set the Unit Ticks to 1 still it sometimes adding the decimal values also and showing 2.5 ,5.0,7.5,10.0,12.5......how to prevent this and show only whole numbers(Non decimal Numbers).?
option 1. store the number as an int, int num = (int)Math.floor(myDouble);
option 2. in your method make the parameter a double and inside the method cast it to an int
this will allow you to use the method with both a double and a int. Please keep in mind that this is C# code but java should be very similar.
private List<int> numberSeries(double aDouble)
{
List<int> number = new List<int>();
int base = (int)Math.floor(aDouble);
for(int x = 1;x++ < 10) //change 10 to whatever you want
{
number.Add(aDouble * x);
}
return number;
}
let
int*p ,b = 5;
p = &b;
denotes a ONE DIMENSIONAL array, then what is the output given by following statement
printf("%d",p);
is it an address? if it is an address then tell me which element it belongs,please explain clearly
p = &b
This doesn't denote an array! As I explained here, they're not the same thing. b is just an integer value. If you declare b as int b[] = {1, 2, 3}; then p will point to b's first element.
printf("%d",p);
This will print p's value, and since p is a pointer and points to b, this will print b's address. printf("%d", &b); will give the same result.
By the way, if b was an array, b[5] would be translated into *(p + 5), so you can read (and write) values by adding the number of elements to the beginning of the array. And b[5] == p[5] == *(b + 5) == *(p + 5)!!! But not because arrays and pointers are the same thing, just because an array's name translates to its first element's address.
As a side note, compilers always use pointers notation (*(base + offset)) when compiling to assembly.
The p pointer does not denote a one-dimensional array. It is simply a pointer to an integer. It may point to the first element of an array, like when you do int* p = new int[6], but that's something entirely different; in that case you allocate space for a new array of six integers and you store the address of the first one (or, the beginning of the array) in p.
If you print p it will print the memory address it stores. If p "denotes an array" (emphasis on quotes) then you will print the address of the first element of the array.
int*p ,b = 5;
p = &b;
is exactly equivalent to:
int b = 5;
int *p = &b;
p ends up being a pointer to int. Now its true that this code will have much the same effect on what ends up in p (although b has a completely different type and value) as this:
int b[1] = {5};
int *p = b; // or int *p = &b[0];
certainly in either case p points to an int which you may treat as a simple int, or as the first (and only) element in a one-dimensional array of size one. So, what follows is legal and gives meaningful results in both cases:
printf("%d is stored at %p\n", *p, p);
printf("%d\n",p[0]);
but that's pretty much where the similarity ends.
address of the first element of the array. (if b was an array)
use p++ to scroll through the array