I have in an Object an QVector of Coordinates (my type) that I want to transfer to an other Vector ( I validate and than want to use ist ).
Header
bool getVector(QVector<Coordinates> &getCoordinates );
C File
static QVector<Coordinates> current;
int getVector( QVector<Coordinates> &getCoordinates)
{
.... stuff ...
getCoordinates = current;
.... stuff ....
return 0;
}
And I use it like
....
QVector<Coordinates> currentCoordinates;
getVector(currentCoordinates);
currentCoordinates.X // CRASH
The debugger goes to this line where an Live Crash happens
inline QVector(const QVector<T> &v) : d(v.d) { d->ref.ref(); if (!d->sharable) detach_helper(); }
So my how can I fix this? As I can use this to get all the other Variables with this methode.
A likely cause of your problem is that current has not been constructed before getVector is called. Initialization of static objects in C++ is a thorny area, and a frequent source of bugs - for more information, see this question, and the static initialization order fiasco FAQ entry.
A simple solution to this problem is to provide access to current via a function, i.e. replace
static QVector<Coordinates> current;
with
static QVector<Coordinates>& getCurrent()
{
static QVector<Coordinates> current;
return current;
}
Note, however, that the function as written above is not thread-safe. If multiple threads may call getCurrent, then it should be protected with a QMutex.
For gareth and the Forum :
the header:
typedef QVector<Coordinates> VesselCoordinates;
bool (*getVessel)(Charakter forCharakter, Vessel& getVessel,VesselCoordinates &getCoordinates );
later i bind tis function pointer to an static function ( cause this part of my Program will be one day convertet to c)
cpp file lower layer:
static struct {
Charakter currentPlayerVessel;
VesselCoordinates possibility;
}data;
static bool getVessel(Charakter forCharakter, Vessel& getVessel,VesselCoordinates &getCoordinates );
// funktion to bind the funktion pointer to this static funktion so it can be called outside the File
static bool serverNamespace::getVessel(Charakter forCharakter, Vessel& getVessel,VesselCoordinates &getCoordinates )
{
bool retValue= false;
if ( forCharakter == data.currentPlayerVessel){
// TODO abfragen ob die Adresse regestriert ist!
if ((true == minSize()) and ((true == shipsInRow())or (true == shipsInLine())))
{
retValue = true;
Vessel test = (Vessel)data.possibility.size();
getVessel = test;
getCoordinates = data.possibility;
}
}
return retValue;
}
And then i can use this in the upper layer cpp file to get the information i need:
// in an Funktion :
VesselCoordinates currentCoordinates;
currentCoordinates.clear();
Vessel currentVessel;
if (true == basicFleet->getVessel(currentCharakter,currentVessel, currentCoordinates ))
// doing stuff to it
so its worik fine but your idea worked just as fine. Maybe you can see why my idea is also working.
Thank you
elektor
Related
I am writing code for a school project that will be used for a Chromebook charging station with security. The problem I am having now is when I am detecting if a Chromebook is actually in the slot after the user has been assigned one, I am using a rocker switch to simulate this but when I am declaring the pin to the rocker, the arduino verfier comes up with that
"'slot1' does not name a type".
Code is below:
//class
class Chromebook_slot {
public:
String Name = "";
String RFID_tag = "";
int rocker = 0;
boolean chromebook_in = false;
//class function to check if chromebook is in.
//if not, redirect already to reassigning so chromebook slot is entered as open and free.
void set_if_in()
{
int momen_1_state = digitalRead(momen_1);
int momen_2_state = digitalRead(momen_2);
// the button has been pushed down and the previous process has been completed
// eg. servos would have been reset if there was a previous user
if (momen_1_state == HIGH || momen_2_state == HIGH)
{
chromebook_in = digitalRead(this->rocker);
if (chromebook_in == 0)
{
re_assigning();
}
else
{
return;
}
}
}
};
//this is now outside the class..
//class declarations
Chromebook_slot slot1;
Chromebook_slot slot2;
//variables for rocker switches which will act for detecting chromebooks.
// in my final version, this will replaced by a photoresistor and laser.
slot1.rocker = 3;
slot2.rocker = 2;
Where the function re_assigning() is a separate function declared further in the code and just resets the slot as open for future use.
slot1.rocker = 3;
slot2.rocker = 2;
These are statements that cannot be at the top level of a C++ (or .ino) file. They need to be inside of a function. What's happening is the compiler is looking looking at the slot1 identifier through the lens of potential valid constructions. It sees an identifier, and about the only thing that could legally exist at this point in the code that starts with an identifier like that is some declaration, e.g. int a = 7;, or more abstractly some_type some_more_stuff. So it expects slot1 to be a type, which it isn't, hence the message.
If you want an assignment like those to happen early on in an Arduino program, the simplest thing you could do is put them in setup():
void setup() {
slot1.rocker = 3;
slot2.rocker = 2;
// ...
}
Or, you'd make these part of the Chromebook_slot's constructor, such that they could be given in slot1 and slot2's declaration:
class Chromebook_slot {
public:
Chromebook_slot(int rocker_init_value) {
rocker = rocker_init_value;
}
// ...
Or in a maybe less familiar but more proper form, using the constructor's initialization list:
class Chromebook_slot {
public:
Chromebook_slot(int rocker_init_value)
: rocker(rocker_init_value) {}
// ...
Once you have a constructor for Chromebook_slot, your variables can become:
Chromebook_slot slot1(3);
Chromebook_slot slot2(2);
I have a function which returns QFuture object as a result of a QtConcurrent::run computation. However, there could be some conditions before running the concurrent method where I need to manually return a value-holding future from my function.
QFuture<bool> foo(const QString &bar)
{
if (bar.isEmpty()) {
return QFuture<bool>(false); // This does not work.
// Here I need to return from the function, but I don't know how to do it.
}
return QtConcurrent::run([=]() -> bool {
// Asynchronous computations...
});
}
How to manually create the QFuture object?
Or (more globally) how to properly return from such method?
When there's no data to return, things are easy - this should be the first thing to try anyway in modern C++:
return {};
Or, if you're targeting some obsolete platform (<Qt 5.6):
return QFuture<bool>();
That way you get an invalid future. There's no way to directly create a future that carries preset data, you'd have to use QFutureInterface for that:
// https://github.com/KubaO/stackoverflown/tree/master/questions/qfuture-immediate-50772976
#include <QtConcurrent>
template <typename T> QFuture<T> finishedFuture(const T &val) {
QFutureInterface<T> fi;
fi.reportFinished(&val);
return QFuture<T>(&fi);
}
QFuture<bool> foo(bool val, bool valid) {
if (!valid)
return {};
return finishedFuture(val);
}
int main() {
Q_ASSERT(foo(true, true));
Q_ASSERT(!foo(false, true));
Q_ASSERT(foo(false, false).isCanceled());
Q_ASSERT(foo(true, false).isCanceled());
}
I am not able to call negedge of all the subscribers who register for clock, all subscribers also derive from ClkIf
class ClkAdapter : public ClkIf
{
virtual void negedge()
{
for(std::list<ClkIf*>::iterator it = clk_list.begin(); it != clk_list.end(); it++)
(it->negedge)();
}
virtual void posedge()
{ clk_cnt++; }
void registerForClock(ClkIf* module)
{ clk_list.push_back(module); }
std::list<ClkIf*> clk_list;
unsigned long long clk_cnt;
};
error: request for member 'negedge' in '* it.std::_List_iterator<_Tp>::operator-> with _Tp = ClkIf*', which is of non-class type 'ClkIf*'
Error in negedge function, What is wrong in this code??
You have a list of pointers, so the list iterator would work similarly to a double pointer (that is, ClkIf**). Thus, you would have to call (*it)->negedge() within the loop. The (*it) fetchs the current ClkIf* element first, and then the -> operator calls the function on that value.
I want to save an alredy-existing QSettings object into some INI file for backup.
The QSettings comes from the application's global settings, ie. it can be registry, ini file, etc.
In case it helps, my context is:
class Params
{
// All params as data members
// ...
void loadGlobal ()
{
Qettings s; // Global parameters, paths set by application
// Fill data members: s.value (...);
}
};
class Algo
{
Result run (Params p)
{
Result r = F(p);
return r;
}
};
int main (...)
{
Params p;
p.loadGlobal ();
Algo a;
Result r = a.run (p);
// At this point, save Result and Params into a specific directory
// Is there a way to do:
p.saveToIni ("myparams.ini"); // <-- WRONG
}
A solution would be to add a saveTo (QSetting & s) method into the Params class:
class Params
{
void saveTo (QSettings & s)
{
s.setValue (...);
}
};
int main (...)
{
Params p;
p.loadGlobal ();
QSettings bak ("myparams.ini", ...);
p.saveTo (bak);
}
But I am looking for a solution without modifying the Params class.
Well, no, QT Doesn't really support this directly. I think your best bet is writing a helper class...something like:
void copySettings( QSettings &dst, QSettings &src )
{
QStringList keys = src.allKeys();
for( QStringList::iterator i = keys.begin(); i != keys.end(); i++ )
{
dst.setValue( *i, src.value( *i ) );
}
}
I think there are 2 issues:
QSettings does not have a copy constructor or assignment operator (that I know of), so you'll probably have to write your own copy using allKeys().
You can't save QSettings to an arbitrary file, but what you can do is set the path used for a specific format and scope using the static method QSettings::setPath(). Note that you need to do that before your backup QSettings object is created (and you would use format IniFormat).
If you're OK not having complete control over the resulting path, this should be sufficient. If not, you could still do the above, then get the file name using fileName() and use a system call to copy/move the file to the desired final location.
I wrote a program to test my binary tree and when I run it, the program seems to crash (btree.exe has stopped working, Windows is checking for a solution ...).
When I ran it through my debugger and placed the breakpoint on the function I suspect is causing it, destroy_tree(), it seemed to run as expected and returned back to the main function. Main, in turn, returned from the program but then the cursor jumped back to destroy_tree() and looped recusively within itself.
The minimal code sample is below so it can be ran instantly. My compiler is MinGW and my debugger is gdb (I'm using Code::Blocks).
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct node
{
int key_value;
node *left;
node *right;
};
class Btree
{
public:
Btree();
~Btree();
void insert(int key);
void destroy_tree();
private:
node *root;
void destroy_tree(node *leaf);
void insert(int key, node *leaf);
};
Btree::Btree()
{
root = NULL;
}
Btree::~Btree()
{
destroy_tree();
}
void Btree::destroy_tree()
{
destroy_tree(root);
cout<<"tree destroyed\n"<<endl;
}
void Btree::destroy_tree(node *leaf)
{
if(leaf!=NULL)
{
destroy_tree(leaf->left);
destroy_tree(leaf->right);
delete leaf;
}
}
void Btree::insert(int key, node *leaf)
{
if(key < leaf->key_value)
{
if(leaf->left!=NULL)
insert(key, leaf->left);
else
{
leaf->left = new node;
leaf->left->key_value = key;
leaf->left->left = NULL;
leaf->left->right = NULL;
}
}
else if (key >= leaf->key_value)
{
if(leaf->right!=NULL)
insert(key, leaf->right);
else
{
leaf->right = new node;
leaf->right->key_value = key;
leaf->right->left = NULL;
leaf->right->right = NULL;
}
}
}
void Btree::insert(int key)
{
if(root!=NULL)
{
insert(key, root);
}
else
{
root = new node;
root->key_value = key;
root->left = NULL;
root->right = NULL;
}
}
int main()
{
Btree tree;
int i;
tree.insert(1);
tree.destroy_tree();
return 0;
}
As an aside, I'm planning to switch from Code::Blocks built-in debugger to DDD for debugging these problems. I heard DDD can display visually pointers to objects instead of just displaying the pointer's address. Do you think making the switch will help with solving these types of problems (data structure and algorithm problems)?
Your destroy_tree() is called twice, you call it once and then it gets called after the execution leaves main() from the destructor.
You may think it should work anyway, because you check whether leaf!=NULL, but delete does not set the pointer to NULL. So your root is not NULL when destroy_tree() is called for the second time,
Not directly related (or maybe it is) to your problem, but it's good practice to give structs a constructor. For example:
struct node
{
int key_value;
node *left;
node *right;
node( int val ) : key_val( val ), left(NULL), right(NULL) {}
};
If you do this, your code becomes simpler, because you don't need worry about setting the pointers when you create a node, and it is not possible to forget to initialise them.
Regarding DDD, it;'s a fine debugger, but frankly the secret of debugging is to write correct code in the first place, so you don't have to do it. C++ gives you a lot of help in this direction (like the use of constructors), but you have to understand and use the facilities it provides.
Btree::destroy_tree doesn't set 'root' to 0 after successfully nuking the tree. As a result, the destructor class destroy_tree() again and you're trying to destroy already destroyed objects.
That'll be undefined behaviour then :).
Once you destroy the root.
Make sure it is NULL so it does not try to do it again (from the destructor)
void Btree::destroy_tree(node *leaf)
{
if(leaf!=NULL)
{
destroy_tree(leaf->left);
destroy_tree(leaf->right);
delete leaf;
leaf = NULL; // add this line
}
}