I\'d like to use the following idiom, that I think is non-standard. I have functions which return vectors taking advantage of Return Value Optimization:
This issue has me confused.The first piece of code works fine without crashing, it assigns s1 to s2 perfectly fine.But the second group of code causes the program to crash.
If I have a function that returns a reference to an instance of a class that I don\'t have control over its source, say list<int>:
I would lean towards if (object == nil) but I\'ve noticed in some tutorials the use of if (nil == object)
I was reading some boost co开发者_C百科de, and came across this: inline sparse_vector &assign_temporary(sparse_vector &v) {
I have an \"Event\" class. Due to the way dates are handled, we need to wrap this class in a \"UIEvent\" class, whi开发者_Python百科ch holds the Event, and the date of the Event in another format.
The copy assignment operator has the usual signature: my_class & operator = (my_class const & rhs);
all. I\'m pretty new to C++, and I\'m writing a small library (mostly for my own 开发者_开发百科projects) in C++. In the process of designing a type hierarchy, I\'ve run into the problem of defining t
I have a long set of comparisons to do in Java, and I\'d like to know if one or more of them come out as true. The string of comparisons was long and difficult to read, so I broke it up for readabilit
Here is an extract from item 56 of the book \"C++ Gotchas\": It\'s not uncommon to see a simple initialization of a Y object written
加载中,请稍侯......