//Block.h
#pragma once
class Block
{
public:
CRect pos;
int num;
public:
Block(void);
~Block(void);
};
//view class
public:
Block currentState[5]; // stores the current state of the blocks
void CpuzzleView::OnDraw(CDC* pDC)
{
CpuzzleDoc* pDoc = GetDocument();
ASSERT_VALID(pDoc);
if (!pDoc)
return;
//draw the 4 blocks and put text into them
for(int i=0;i<4;i++)
{
pDC->Rectangle(currentState[i].pos);
// i'm getting an error for this line:
pDC->TextOut(currentState[i].pos.CenterPoint(), currentState[i].num);
}
pDC->TextOut(currentState[i].pos.CenterPoint(), currentState[i].num);
The error says that no instance of overloaded function CDC::TextOutW() matches the argument list . But the prototype for the function is:
CDC::TextOutW(int x, int y, const CString &str )
all i've done is that instead of the 2 points i've directly given the point object returned by CenterPoint() ... shouldn't it work?
That's because you didn't supplied arguments list correctly. Please read compiler error message carefully, it's usually helps to solve the problem.
TextOut(currentState[i].pos.CenterPoint(), currentState[i].num);
In this call you passed CPoint object and int. This is not correct, you need to pass int, int and CString (or const char* and int length).
To fix this you shall do something like this:
CString strState;
strState.Format("%d", currentState[i].num); // Or use atoi()/wtoi() functions
TextOut(currentState[i].pos.CenterPoint().x, currentState[i].pos.CenterPoint().x, strState);
Related
C# code:
class Hello{
public void helloWorld(char[] chars){
//do something
}
}
C++ code to call C#:
MyCSDLL::Hello* hello;
//init hello, some calls are ok.
char* myCharPtr;
//init with message
HRESULT result = hello->helloWorld(safeArray, (MyCSDLL::_MyRetVal) _retValPtr);
Adapting from How to create and initialize SAFEARRAY of doubles in C++ to pass to C#
void createSafeArray(SAFEARRAY** saData, char* charPtr)
{
char* iterator = charPtr;
SAFEARRAYBOUND Bound;
Bound.lLbound = 0;
Bound.cElements = 10;
*saData = SafeArrayCreate(VT_R8, 1, &Bound);
char HUGEP *pdFreq;
HRESULT hr = SafeArrayAccessData(*saData, (void HUGEP* FAR*)&pdFreq);
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
do {
*pdFreq++ = *iterator;
} while (*iterator++);
}
}
How to call hello->helloWorld()? it is expecting SAFEARRAY*. The current code gives 80131538 error. How to fix it?
C++ Project is not CLR.
Let's suppose the C# code is this:
namespace ClassLibrary1
{
[ComVisible(true)]
[ClassInterface(ClassInterfaceType.AutoDual)]
public class Hello
{
public void helloWorld(char[] chars)
{
...
}
}
}
Then, you can call it with this C/C++ code, for example:
#import "C:\mycode\ClassLibrary1\bin\Debug\classlibrary1.tlb" raw_interfaces_only
using namespace ClassLibrary1;
HRESULT CallHello(wchar_t* charPtr, int count)
{
CComPtr<_Hello> p;
HRESULT hr = p.CoCreateInstance(__uuidof(Hello));
if (FAILED(hr))
return hr;
SAFEARRAY* psa = SafeArrayCreateVector(VT_UI2, 0, count);
if (!psa)
return E_OUTOFMEMORY;
LPVOID pdata;
hr = SafeArrayAccessData(psa, &pdata);
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
CopyMemory(pdata, charPtr, count * 2); // count is the number of chars
SafeArrayUnaccessData(psa);
hr = p->helloWorld(psa);
}
SafeArrayDestroy(psa);
return hr;
}
.NET's char type is unicode, so the binary size is two bytes, the C equivalent is wchar_t (or unsigned short, etc...). So the safearray element type must match that, that's why I used VT_UI2 (VT_R8 that you used is Real of size 8 bytes, so it's equivalent to .NET's double type).
If you really want to use C's char, then you must do some kind of conversion to a 2-byte character.
Also, you can use the SafeArrayCreateVector function which directly allocates a 1-dimension safe array. Don't forget to call cleanup methods.
i am new in this and i am working on App of media player and recording app. in which i have shown song list of device in the listview and recording start / stop / play. Now i want to convert that .mp3 recorded file into .mp4 and one image will show on behalf of a video in that file. Help me to achive this i have no idea and i refer many links and i didnt find anything.
Please check this link for your first question:
Why can't we initialize class members at their declaration?
Usually constructor is use to initialize value to data variables of class.
For 2nd Question:
If data member is not initialize after creation of object, It will contain garbage value. So initialize or assign suitable value to as per your need.
Check below code:
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class swap_values
{
int a, b, temp;
public:
swap_values(){
a=0;b=0;temp=0;
}
swap_values(int x, int y){
a = x;
b = y;
temp = 0;
}
void swapped()
{
temp = b;
b=a;
a=temp;
}
void print(){
cout<<"a: "<<a<<" b: "<<b<<endl;
}
};
int main()
{
int x =10; int y = 20;
swap_values obj(x, y);
obj.print();
obj.swapped();
obj.print();
return 0;
}
Everything can be done in better ways but just using your code this will work for you -
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class Swap {
private:
int a,b,temp;
public:
Swap()
{
a=10;
b=20;
temp=0;
}
void swapNums()
{
temp=a; a=b; b=temp;
cout<<a<<" " <<b<<endl;
}
};
int main() {
Swap s;
s.swapNums();
return 0;
}
You can avoid using class name as some function name. You can instead use constructor without a return type where you can initialise the member variables. swap method looks fine.
i am not able to initialize my variable in class.
class swap
{
int a=10; \\cannot declare here
int b=20; \\ cannot declare here
}
Since C++11, this is fine, you can have default member initialization.
The error is due to missing semicolon after }.
why it has garbage value with b ??
a=b;
b=temp;
temp=a;
Since temp was never initialized before assigning it to b, temp has an indeterminate value.
Any usage will lead to undefined behavior.
Here's a simple Swap struct:
struct Swap
{
int a = 10; // default member initialization
int b = 20; // default member initialization
Swap(int a = 20, int b = 10): a(b), b(a) {}; // swap on initialization
// using member initializer list
};
Swap s;
std::cout << s.a // 20
<< s.b // 10
<< std::endl;
In this example, default member initialization is "obsolete" / "redundant" due to member initializer list.
In this code snippet, the Init() function acts as a on-demand initializer that fills in all member variables of the structure. This is done to avoid calling default constructors all members of a large array on the stack:
struct Foo {
int m_Member;
void Init(int i);
};
void Foo::Init(int i) {
m_Member = i;
// Many other members initialized here.
}
void SomeFunction(int n) {
Foo buffer[64];
assert(n <= 64);
// Explicitly initialize what is needed.
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
buffer[i].Init(i * 3);
}
// Use buffer[0] - buffer[n-1] somehow.
}
This triggers a static analysis error in VS2012 with /analyze:
warning C6001: Using uninitialized memory 'buffer'.: Lines: 17, 19, 20
I'm looking for a way to annotate Foo::Init() so that this warning doesn't occur. There are plenty of other ways to make the warning go away, including:
Adding an empty constructor
Moving Init() to the constructor and calling placement new in the loop
But I'd like to avoid changing the structure of the code.
I've tried the following annotation without success:
void _At_(this, _Out_) Init();
This syntax is accepted, but only changes the warning to be:
warning C6001: Using uninitialized memory 'buffer'.: Lines: 18, 20, 21
warning C6001: Using uninitialized memory 'buffer[BYTE:0]'.: Lines: 18, 20, 21
Does anyone know how I can declare the intent of this Init() function to the static analysis engine?
Your question is somewhat elusive. You have shown SomeFunction taking int, but want annotation for method Init or constructor.
The warning shown is absolutely correct, assert won't hide the warning. You need to put if to check if n is greateer than 64 and reset n (or do something else, but not to loop when n>=64).
For annotation you need to use __in_bcount or similar alternative. An example:
bool SetBuffer(__in_bcount(8) const char* sBuffer);
Whichs says sBuffer is of 8 bytes (not elements).
You can read this this article for more information.
Too ugly to add an extra helper?
struct Foo {
int m_Member;
void Init(int i);
};
void Foo::Init(int i) {
m_Member = i;
// Many other members initialized here.
}
void Initialize(__in_bcount(sizeof(Foo) * n) Foo* buffer, int n) {
// Explicitly initialize what is needed.
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
buffer[i].Init(i * 3);
}
}
void SomeFunction(int n) {
Foo buffer[64];
assert(n <= 64);
Initialize(buffer, n);
// Use buffer[0] - buffer[n-1] somehow.
}
I found a work around by implementing a function to index the array. I flagged the return value as invalid so that this new function only escapes the uninitialized value check in the specific case where the return value is only used to initialize. I've only tested this in VS2017.
#define _Ret_invalid_ _SAL2_Source_(_Ret_invalid_, (), _Ret1_impl_(__notvalid_impl))
template <typename T>
_Ret_invalid_ T& UninitialzedIndex(T* pt, int index)
{
return pt[index];
}
Then, where the value is indexed, I call UninitialzedIndex instead of operator[]
void SomeFunction(int n) {
Foo buffer[64];
if (n <= 64)
return;
// Explicitly initialize what is needed.
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
UninitialzedIndex(buffer, i).Init(i * 3);
}
// Use buffer[0] - buffer[n-1] somehow.
}
Just add a default constructor (that calls Init()). What is wrong with that?
[Edit] The root problem is not how to lie to the static analyzer or your compiler. It is how to enforce that you don't leave foo in an uninitialized state. There is nothing wrong with adding a default constructor. I'd say the desire to NOT do it imposes risk.
Perhaps some client will use that poorly constructed foo class (Long after you wrote it and long after you are gone) and perhaps they will forget to call .Init() ?? What then? They will be left with data that is uninitialized.
If you are looking to enforce that rule, no amount of static analysis will help you there.
Take care of the foundation before you put on the roof.
I have the following in my WinRT component:
public value struct WinRTStruct
{
int x;
int y;
};
public ref class WinRTComponent sealed
{
public:
WinRTComponent();
int TestPointerParam(WinRTStruct * wintRTStruct);
};
int WinRTComponent::TestPointerParam(WinRTStruct * wintRTStruct)
{
wintRTStruct->y = wintRTStruct->y + 100;
return wintRTStruct->x;
}
But, it seems that the value of winRTStruct->y and x are always 0 inside the method, when called from C#:
WinRTComponent comp = new WinRTComponent();
WinRTStruct winRTStruct;
winRTStruct.x = 100;
winRTStruct.y = 200;
comp.TestPointerParam(out winRTStruct);
textBlock8.Text = winRTStruct.y.ToString();
What is the correct way to pass a struct by reference so it an be updated inside the method of a WinRTComponent written in C++/CX?
You cannot pass a struct by reference. All value types (including structs) in winrt are passed by value. Winrt structs are expected to be relatively small - they're intended to be used for holding things like Point and Rect.
In your case, you've indicated that the struct is an "out" parameter - an "out" parameter is write-only, its contents are ignored on input and are copied out on return. If you want a structure to be in and out, split it into two parameters - one "in" parameter and another "out" parameter (in/out parameters are not allowed in WinRT because they don't project to JS the way you expect them to project).
My co-worker helped me solve this.
In WinRT components, it seems that the best way to do this is to define a ref struct instead of a value struct:
public ref struct WinRTStruct2 sealed
{
private: int _x;
public:
property int X
{
int get(){ return _x; }
void set(int value){ _x = value; }
}
private: int _y;
public:
property int Y
{
int get(){ return _y; }
void set(int value){ _y = value; }
}
};
But this creates other problems. Now the VS11 compiler gives INTERNAL COMPILER ERROR when I try to add a method to the ref struct that returns an instance of the struct.
I am trying to store a pointer to a member function in a structure which will be used to call the function later in my program.
Something like this:
// abc.h
namespace XYZ {
typedef void func(const uint8_t *buf, int len);
struct holder
{
// other members
func * storePtr;
}
} // end of namespace
the other file as:
// pqr.h
#include abc.h
namespace XYZ {
class pqr {
// data members and other functions
void func1(const uint8_t *buffer, int length);
void func2(func *section);
void func3();
}
} // end of namespace
Now my cpp file needs to store instance of this func1 in my structure member storePtr
// app.cpp
#include pqr.h
void pqr::funct3()
{
// Do something
func2(func1);
}
void pqr::func2(func * section)
{
holder h;
h.storePtr = section;
}
But I am getting compilation error at line "func2(func1);" as
"error C3867: 'pqr::func1': function call missing argument list; use '&pqr::func1' to create a pointer to member"
I have used &pqr:: to define the scope but it also doesn't solve my problem and I am not able to understand what to do.
Pointers to member function are not the same thing as pointers to normal functions - have a look at the explanation and example here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/k8336763.aspx