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.

Gowerly

United Kingdom916 Posts

November 05 2014 14:40 GMT

#10841

I posted that link and then realised I didn't mean it.
If I'm in Ruby, I will put braces in differently. If I'm doing something like


myArr.each { |item|
    item.DoThing()
}

then my braces are like that. I don't know if Ruby even works without it as I'm still rather new.

Manit0u

Poland17743 Posts

November 05 2014 14:59 GMT

#10842

Ok guys, now I have a different problem... Had to switch branches with the code, all looks fine, except there's 2x more code like stuff I posted on the previous page. I ignore it for the moment but there are other funny things happening.

1. Compiling this code to .war produces file that's 5x smaller than previously, probably missing some dependencies...
2. Errors be thrown: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError, definitely dependencies are missing...
3. 'mvn depdendency:resolve' downloads all the required stuff, 1 and 2 remain unchanged.

Help? I've recompiled the code like 15 times now, updated everything, all looks cool and dandy, maven is able to install, clean package and all that jazz, but it doesn't work

And yes, all deps are properly included in pom.xml and class that's throwing the error does import the right thing.

bangsholt

Denmark138 Posts

November 05 2014 16:14 GMT

#10843

As long as the code is formatted in a consistent way, I don't mind how it's written.

My personal preferences are to follow the style guide of the language you're working in - with the exception of C, where I strongly prefer the Linux Kernel Style.

If it's not consistent, abuse CTRL + K, CTRL + D in VS, CTRL + SHIFT + F in Eclipse or ALT + CTRL + L in IntelliJ.

Now it is.

spinesheath

Germany8679 Posts

November 05 2014 17:05 GMT

#10844

On November 06 2014 01:14 bangsholt wrote:
As long as the code is formatted in a consistent way, I don't mind how it's written.

My personal preferences are to follow the style guide of the language you're working in - with the exception of C, where I strongly prefer the Linux Kernel Style.

If it's not consistent, abuse CTRL + K, CTRL + D in VS, CTRL + SHIFT + F in Eclipse or ALT + CTRL + L in IntelliJ.

Now it is.

And then you pray that you're not the guy who has to merge that with another branch that has code changes in the files you just touched.

nunez

Norway4003 Posts

November 05 2014 18:25 GMT

#10845

On November 06 2014 01:14 bangsholt wrote:
As long as the code is formatted in a consistent way, I don't mind how it's written.

i am with you brother.
i associate a narrow mind with syntax tears.

Saumure

France404 Posts

November 05 2014 20:56 GMT

#10846

Hi guys,
I am pretty desperate

I wrote some c++ code in Qt and when I try to run the executable from the terminal, the program stops right after launching saying:
Illegal instruction

In Qt, when I try to debug, i get:
Debugging starts
&"warning: GDB: Failed to set controlling terminal: Inappropriate ioctl for device\n"

Can someone help me please?

EDIT: solved it

Manit0u

Poland17743 Posts

November 06 2014 08:48 GMT

#10847

On November 06 2014 03:25 nunez wrote:

Show nested quote +

i am with you brother.
i associate a narrow mind with syntax tears.

I only want to cry if people don't put return statements on their own line and don't separate control statements from the rest of the code. I couldn't care less about where you put your bracers since I'm simultaneously working on several projects that have totally different brace-placement policy.

Manit0u

Poland17743 Posts

November 06 2014 13:19 GMT

#10848

On November 05 2014 23:12 spinesheath wrote:
I retract the question. You're defining a method inside a class inside a method inside a class. This just can't be a good idea. Ever.

Is that 3rd method catching the exceptions it throws?

There are plenty of methods that:

a) throw 3 different exceptions in 7 different places
b) catch some of the exceptions they throw themselves and exceptions thrown by other events
c) call other methods that do the same, inside a loop, inside a loop (and those other methods also do such things)
d) there are methods inside classes inside methods inside classes inside methods inside classes and some of those methods are anonymous overrides to methods in classes higher in the order of hierarchy
e) in some classes there are methods that override basic stuff, like count() - my favorite part of it: if (total == 0) { total = 1; }, equals(), etc.

With every passing hour spent trying to understand this code I feel like I'm just diving into madness and going way too far down the rabbit hole...

djookz

1 Post

November 06 2014 13:55 GMT

#10849

Hey guys,
I've been an avid reader since this page came out but never felt the urge to make an account, but upon seeing this thread for the first time now (Usually not looking at General), I wanted to ask if some people here use R?

Chocolate

United States2350 Posts

November 06 2014 18:04 GMT

#10850

Taking a database class centered around SQL (our professor is lazy and is making the course parallel to a course offered at Stanford, so if you have taken their course, it's like that). Should I expect this to be very hard? I hear it's very useful in the working world, but I'm currently at 13 hours (my next semester I'll be busy with non-school things) and I want to know if I should drop this class if I get into a more important CS class that I'm trying to get.

MichaelEU

Netherlands816 Posts

November 06 2014 18:15 GMT

#10851

On November 07 2014 03:04 Chocolate wrote:
Taking a database class centered around SQL (our professor is lazy and is making the course parallel to a course offered at Stanford, so if you have taken their course, it's like that). Should I expect this to be very hard? I hear it's very useful in the working world, but I'm currently at 13 hours (my next semester I'll be busy with non-school things) and I want to know if I should drop this class if I get into a more important CS class that I'm trying to get.

SQL (or rather: database design, which likely involves SQL) is one of the most useful things to learn. It's not that difficult.

Chocolate

United States2350 Posts

November 06 2014 18:22 GMT

#10852

Ok, thanks. Yeah I definitely plan on taking the class eventually but if this one class (intermediate software programming) my school claims to be very helpful to have already done before you start internships opens up, I was planning on swapping them. We'll see I guess.

Also, can any of you tell me why in the world Visual Studio won't let me compile the code on this line? I stared at this shit for half an hour last night and couldn't figure out why VS was being a bitch about it. It's a default constructor for a generic queue class that I have to write for a project

template <typename type>
Queue<type> ::Queue() : head(nullptr), tail(nullptr)
{
//hooray for base initialization
}

The error says "expected semicolon" and that the "<" and ">" don't make sense. I checked a billion times for missing curly brackets and semicolons above this code but couldn't find any.

Khalum

Austria831 Posts

November 06 2014 19:07 GMT

#10853

Are you by any chance writing this code in a .cpp file? You can't do that.

Chocolate

United States2350 Posts

November 06 2014 19:42 GMT

#10854

Yes this is a .cpp file. I have it so that my .h file includes my .cpp so whenever I need to use a queue I include my .h. I did the same thing (I believe) when I made a generic stack class, and that class is working. I feel like I'm probably making some very obvious mistake but I can't identify it for the life of me.

Khalum

Austria831 Posts

November 06 2014 19:53 GMT

#10855

You can't put template code in a .cpp file mate.

[edit] That was not well formulated. You can't declare/define template classes/functions in .cpp files.

Chocolate

United States2350 Posts

November 06 2014 20:23 GMT

#10856

I'm 99% sure you can though, I have a working Stack class where the default constructor is

template <typename type>
Stack<type>::Stack() : head(nullptr)
{
	//no code
}

Khalum

Austria831 Posts

November 06 2014 20:40 GMT

#10857

Please consider reading this: http://www.parashift.com/c -faq-lite/templates-defn-vs-decl.html

Nesserev

Belgium2760 Posts

November 06 2014 20:44 GMT

#10858

--- Nuked ---

Shield

Bulgaria4824 Posts

November 06 2014 22:50 GMT

#10859

I think this is a serious weakness. In general, you're supposed to separate implementation and interface (header files). Except that you can't with templates? Isn't there a better option than one file? I've read about 'export' but there is a warning that it'll be deprecated.

On November 07 2014 05:44 Nesserev wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 07 2014 05:23 Chocolate wrote:
I'm 99% sure you can though, I have a working Stack class where the default constructor is

template <typename type>
Stack<type>::Stack() : head(nullptr)
{
	//no code
}

You can put a rusty spoon in your ass... doesn't mean that you should do it.

The baseline is... you're not supposed to do stuff like including source files in your header files. Wtf, where do you even get this idea? Conventions, please. You're supposed to put all template definitions in the same file (.tpp or .hpp).

It makes sense that a compiler cannot compile a generic template directly like a normal class; templates are just a 'blueprint'. When you use the template, you basically create a new class, and for the compiler to generate that class, it needs all the information that is given by the class definition and class method definitions, so you put it in one file altogether.

The reason why it works if you include your source file from your header, is that #includes basically 'copy' the contents of that file to your translation unit... .h and .cpp are just extensions for the sake of conventions and clarity, so they're treated the same way. But just don't do this stuff... you probably forgot your guards and sh!t in your .cpp file. Dangerous slippery slope to hell and stuff..

Actually, some articles suggest including a source file from header so this is no surprise. Here is an example I'm reading at the moment:

http://stackoverflow.com/a/495056/1091781

Nesserev

Belgium2760 Posts

November 06 2014 23:08 GMT

#10860

--- Nuked ---