Search results for query: *

Replace strcmp with strstr.

I'm afraid it's too generalized. You should try to cut your code down to the smallest, compilable example that demonstrates the problem. This process, while probably painful, might reveal the problem. It seems likely that the function you're calling is doing something that you don't realize...

You need to allocate memory for a inside polyfit: double* polyfit(double* x,double* y,long order,long n) { double *a = malloc(sizeof *a); ... ... return a; }

Assuming you're on a Windows platform, see: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/gdi/prntspol_62ia.asp

...the body into a buffer. Hope it helps. #include <assert.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <curl/curl.h> static unsigned char *body; static size_t body_size; static size_t body_capacity; #define INIT_BODY_SIZE 1024 size_t do_body(void *ptr, size_t size, size_t nmemb, void...

...(how often the function is called) and the project requirements are some of the things that will determine whether or not that memset will be worthwhile or not. Don't get me wrong, intialization is a *good* thing, generally. I just wanted to point out that it is not *always* best practice.

It's certainly debatable if an initialization constitutes &quot;good programming practice&quot; in all instances, particularly if that initialization constitutes a hit on runtime performance.

Why would he need memset there?

The closest you can come is to use multiple case statements and take advantage of &quot;fall-through&quot;: case 'T': case 'V': case 'K': /* do something */ break; If you don't plan on modifying the contents of proddir, you can do what rwb suggested and change proddir to a pointer and...

Incidentally, if %n weren't specified by the C standard (it is, as manvid points out), we don't know how printf will behave when encountering it. The implementation might provide a meaning for it or it might not. Your program might conceivably crash if you pass printf an unrecognized conversion...

...struct person { char name[MAXNAME + 1]; char state[3]; } persons[MAXPERSONS]; int person_count; to insert: int person_insert(const char *name, const char *state) { struct person p; strcpy(p.name, name); strcpy(p.state, state); if (person_count == MAXPERSON) return -1...

If you want to be careful not to offend anyone, you might try &quot;Hey you all&quot; or &quot;Hey y'all&quot;. :)

You're right in that you can use vectorname.size() inside the conditional, rather than assign it to a variable and then test the variable in the condition. I believe in most of the examples the author creates a typedef and uses that typedef in two or more cases throughout the program, so that...

I use int *pint; Only because this has become the de facto convention. Neither one is inherently better.

I'll admit that my earlier comments did constitute a &quot;casual review&quot; and I retract my statements comparing rot13 to butthead's algorithm. I glanced over the code, without taking note that a key was being used and thought that it amounted to simple letter substitution. My apologies to...

You asked me to decipher the message using rot13, so I did, but it still doesn't make any sense to me.

Okay... qsI^[$k:o\[r15U|C_!Q]SlUvT*T,j%*&F2ho)L@70u+d ?K]mJk*c!@%iq#i(J2@e93!7?]s'( <4IRLb|C%aSfWwGVP2u I'm afraid I don't see your point.

atoll isn't part of C89, but is part of C99 (the new C standard). However, most C compilers are C89 compilers and therefore may not provide atoll. See the compiler documentation and see the linker options mentioned in the diagnostic. If your compiler doesn't provide it, there may be atoll...

Thanks guys :)

No offense, but you'll want to use something else unless you're satisfied with the cryptographic strength of rot13.