|
Thread Rules 1. This is not a "do my homework for me" thread. If you have specific questions, ask, but don't post an assignment or homework problem and expect an exact solution. 2. No recruiting for your cockamamie projects (you won't replace facebook with 3 dudes you found on the internet and $20) 3. If you can't articulate why a language is bad, don't start slinging shit about it. Just remember that nothing is worse than making CSS IE6 compatible. 4. Use [code] tags to format code blocks. |
On December 03 2013 23:48 ThatGuy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2013 22:40 Nausea wrote:Ok! So your favorite noob is back with a question for c++. I have 2 classes, both within the same namespace. One of the classes calls upon the other with a function and one of the parameters is of the first class. I try to send it with a "this" pointer and that can't be done because the compiler complains that i try to send namespacename::classname* instead of just the classname*. I tried adding the namespace to the functions parameter but that didn't work. Basically: m_stateMachine.SetState(m_stateFactory->GetState(0), this, 0); bool CStateMachine::SetState(CState* _state, CGame* _game, unsigned int _id) Putting this might work: bool CStateMachine::SetState(CState* _state, CGame* const _game, unsigned int _id) I believe 'this' is a const pointer that cannot have its address modified.
Yeah I tried that but it didn't work.
|
That seems to be what's happening. Even if it shouldn't:
In the body of a non-static (9.3) member function, the keyword this is a prvalue expression whose value is the address of the object for which the function is called. The type of this in a member function of a class X is X*. If the member function is declared const, the type of this is const X*, ....
Looks like a compiler bug to me.
*Edit: Surprised even that doesn't work. What compiler is this? :p What happens if you call then function like this:
m_stateMachine.SetState(m_stateFactory->GetState(0), (CGame*)this, 0);
|
On December 04 2013 00:05 iaretehnoob wrote:That seems to be what's happening. Even if it shouldn't: Show nested quote + In the body of a non-static (9.3) member function, the keyword this is a prvalue expression whose value is the address of the object for which the function is called. The type of this in a member function of a class X is X*. If the member function is declared const, the type of this is const X*, ....
Looks like a compiler bug to me. *Edit: Surprised even that doesn't work. What compiler is this? :p What happens if you call then function like this: m_stateMachine.SetState(m_stateFactory->GetState(0), (CGame*)this, 0);
For some reason I can get all this to work, but not when I want to add namespace to all of it. As soon as I start to add namespace to it, it complains about that thing. I just don't get it.
|
Well at least this was a good learning experience. I learned to never use namespaces again.
|
On December 04 2013 00:24 Nausea wrote: Well at least this was a good learning experience. I learned to never use namespaces again. That's quite certainly the worst thing you could learn from this. Namespaces in C++ should be used sparingly, but they should be used.
|
On December 04 2013 05:12 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 00:24 Nausea wrote: Well at least this was a good learning experience. I learned to never use namespaces again. That's quite certainly the worst thing you could learn from this. Namespaces in C++ should be used sparingly, but they should be used.
Ye of course I wasn't completely serious, just angered by the results.
|
Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine?
|
On December 04 2013 08:08 ThatGuy wrote: Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine?
Yeah sure.
+ Show Spoiler +#ifndef CStateMachine_H #define CStateMachine_H
/** * Class CStateMachine *Description: Manages the game states. **/
#include "CState.h"
//namespace tpe {
class CStateMachine{
public: // == Constructors CStateMachine(); ~CStateMachine();
// == Methods
void OnLoop(CGame* _game);
void OnDraw(CGame* _game);
void OnEvent(CGame* _game);
/** * Set a new state, removes the old one to make space for the new one. * * \param _state The new state to make active. * \param _game The game class. * \param _id The state ID. * \return Returns true if the state was set. **/ bool SetState(CState* _state, CGame* const _game, unsigned int _id); /** * Destroys the current state. * * \param _game The game object to pass to the states before destroying them. * \return Returns true. ATM **/ bool RemoveCurSet(CGame* _game);
// == Members CState* m_currentState; };
//}
#endif + Show Spoiler +#include "CStateMachine.h"
//namespace tpe{
CStateMachine::CStateMachine() { m_currentState = NULL; }
CStateMachine::~CStateMachine() { m_currentState = NULL; }
void CStateMachine::OnLoop(CGame* _game) { }
void CStateMachine::OnDraw(CGame* _game) {
m_currentState->OnDraw(_game); }
bool CStateMachine::SetState(CState* _state, CGame* const _game, unsigned int _id) { if(!RemoveCurSet(_game)) { return false; } m_currentState = _state; if(!_state) { return true; } m_currentState->m_stateId = _id; m_currentState->OnInit(_game);
return true;
}
bool CStateMachine::RemoveCurSet(CGame* _game) { if(!m_currentState) { return true;} m_currentState->OnDestroy(_game); delete m_currentState; m_currentState = NULL; return true; }
void CStateMachine::OnEvent(CGame* _game) { m_currentState->OnEvent(_game); }
//}
|
I've got a question for you: How do you go about password encryption this days?
Would something like this be feasible for a small system?
string GetEncryptedPassword(string input) { string salt = md5(input);
return md5(input + salt); }
I know that md5 isn't secure any more, just using it as an example here. With this method I get to hit 2 birds with 1 stone: a) I get a unique salt for each password b) I don't have to store the salt anywhere in the databases
|
How do you group two joined xml files in xquery by an element?
I know how to join. I know how to group. But I can't do both together...
nvm, figured out a way to do the problem with group by and a join using where clauses.
|
On December 04 2013 09:05 Nausea wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 08:08 ThatGuy wrote: Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine? Yeah sure.
Might be getting closer here...how does CStateMachine know of the existence of CGame? Is it declared in CState.h?
|
On December 04 2013 09:12 Manit0u wrote:I've got a question for you: How do you go about password encryption this days? Would something like this be feasible for a small system? string GetEncryptedPassword(string input) { string salt = md5(input);
return md5(input + salt); }
I know that md5 isn't secure any more, just using it as an example here. With this method I get to hit 2 birds with 1 stone: a) I get a unique salt for each password b) I don't have to store the salt anywhere in the databases 
The first rule of crypto is don't roll your own crypto.
That said, salts (from what I can tell) are usually generated based on some combination of things like timestamp, username, ect to be as random as possible. The issue with what you are suggesting is that multiple people could have the same input, which means they have the same salt and same hashed passwords, just with a slightly more complex, but still trivial algorithm.
The best crypto methods will work even when the attacker knows exactly what you did, but they still can't do anything about it.
|
On December 04 2013 09:12 Manit0u wrote:I've got a question for you: How do you go about password encryption this days? Would something like this be feasible for a small system? string GetEncryptedPassword(string input) { string salt = md5(input);
return md5(input + salt); }
I know that md5 isn't secure any more, just using it as an example here. With this method I get to hit 2 birds with 1 stone: a) I get a unique salt for each password b) I don't have to store the salt anywhere in the databases 
I use BCrypt, https://github.com/codahale/bcrypt-ruby
There's bindings for Java and C# as well I'm pretty sure.
Here's an example in Ruby + Show Spoiler + class User include Mongoid::Document attr_accessor :password, :password_confirmation
field :name, :type => String field :email, :type => String field :crypted_password, :type => String validates_presence_of (etc...) validates_confirmation_of :password, :if => :password_required validates_length_of :password, :within => 3..40, :if => :password_required validates (etc...)
before_save :encrypt_password, :if => :password_required
def self.authenticate(email, password) account = first(:conditions => { :email => /^#{email}$/i }) if email.present? account && account.has_password?(password) ? account : nil end
def has_password?(password) ::BCrypt::Password.new(crypted_password) == password end
private def encrypt_password self.crypted_password = ::BCrypt::Password.create(self.password) end
def password_required crypted_password.blank? || self.password.present? end end
I use a before_save callback to call encrypt_password.
You should only save the password in the DB as encrypted, so GetPassword should never encrypt the password it should always return an already encrypted password.
If it is not a Getter and is a function that encrypts a password then the naming should be EncryptPassword, not GetPassword.
|
On December 04 2013 13:59 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 09:12 Manit0u wrote:I've got a question for you: How do you go about password encryption this days? Would something like this be feasible for a small system? string GetEncryptedPassword(string input) { string salt = md5(input);
return md5(input + salt); }
I know that md5 isn't secure any more, just using it as an example here. With this method I get to hit 2 birds with 1 stone: a) I get a unique salt for each password b) I don't have to store the salt anywhere in the databases  I use BCrypt, https://github.com/codahale/bcrypt-rubyThere's bindings for Java and C# as well I'm pretty sure. Here's an example in Ruby + Show Spoiler + class User include Mongoid::Document attr_accessor :password, :password_confirmation
field :name, :type => String field :email, :type => String field :crypted_password, :type => String validates_presence_of (etc...) validates_confirmation_of :password, :if => :password_required validates_length_of :password, :within => 3..40, :if => :password_required validates (etc...)
before_save :encrypt_password, :if => :password_required
def self.authenticate(email, password) account = first(:conditions => { :email => /^#{email}$/i }) if email.present? account && account.has_password?(password) ? account : nil end
def has_password?(password) ::BCrypt: assword.new(crypted_password) == password end
private def encrypt_password self.crypted_password = ::BCrypt: assword.create(self.password) end
def password_required crypted_password.blank? || self.password.present? end end
I use a before_save callback to call encrypt_password. You should only save the password in the DB as encrypted, so GetPassword should never encrypt the password it should always return an already encrypted password. If it is not a Getter and is a function that encrypts a password then the naming should be EncryptPassword, not GetPassword. 
I know, I just used a single function to do everything as a way to convey the meaning of the encryption method
|
On December 04 2013 10:27 ThatGuy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 09:05 Nausea wrote:On December 04 2013 08:08 ThatGuy wrote: Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine? Yeah sure. Might be getting closer here...how does CStateMachine know of the existence of CGame? Is it declared in CState.h?
It's forward declared in CState.h.
|
On December 04 2013 09:12 Manit0u wrote:I've got a question for you: How do you go about password encryption this days? Would something like this be feasible for a small system? string GetEncryptedPassword(string input) { string salt = md5(input);
return md5(input + salt); }
I know that md5 isn't secure any more, just using it as an example here. With this method I get to hit 2 birds with 1 stone: a) I get a unique salt for each password b) I don't have to store the salt anywhere in the databases 
I recommend using some form of key stretching like PBKDF2. Read this carefully and make sure you understand it.
On another note, it's not password encryption. Encryption implies that you can decrypt it, which is not wanted here.
|
Does anyone here like Objective-C? I'm starting to hate it with a passion by now. I find Java's syntax and way much better and easier.
|
On December 04 2013 20:52 Nausea wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 10:27 ThatGuy wrote:On December 04 2013 09:05 Nausea wrote:On December 04 2013 08:08 ThatGuy wrote: Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine? Yeah sure. Might be getting closer here...how does CStateMachine know of the existence of CGame? Is it declared in CState.h? It's forward declared in CState.h.
I think this may be your problem, the forward declaration might not be within the namespace.
|
On December 05 2013 01:05 ThatGuy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2013 20:52 Nausea wrote:On December 04 2013 10:27 ThatGuy wrote:On December 04 2013 09:05 Nausea wrote:On December 04 2013 08:08 ThatGuy wrote: Can you copy/paste your header file of CStateMachine? Yeah sure. Might be getting closer here...how does CStateMachine know of the existence of CGame? Is it declared in CState.h? It's forward declared in CState.h. I think this may be your problem, the forward declaration might not be within the namespace.
Ye I thought so too. Then I tried it and got the same error. ;(
|
Then let's continue the investigation ^^ can I see the CState.h? :D
|
|
|
|
|
|