primitive

I know that identical objects are not equal, i.e: var obj = { name: "Value" }; var obj2 = { name: "Value" }; console.log("obj equals obj2: " + (obj === obj2)); //evaluates to false Yet primitive types are: var str = "string1"; var str2 = "string1"; console.log("str equals str2: " + (str === str2)); //evaluates to true My question is why. Why are objects and primitives treated differently? If an object is nothing but an empty container, with only the attributes you specify to put in the container, why wouldn't the container's identical attributes evaluate to be the same? I looked around for

I'm using these function calls: glEnable(GL_BLEND) glEnable(GL_POLYGON_SMOOTH) glBlendFunc(GL_SRC_ALPHA_SATURATE, GL_ONE) It doesn't work and won't render. glEnable(GL_BLEND) glEnable(GL_POLYGON_SMOOTH) glBlendFunc(GL_SRC_ALPHA, GL_ONE_MINUS_SRC_ALPHA) It doesn't anti-alias. Try glHint(GL_POLYGON_SMOOTH_HINT, GL_NICEST) This is a mundane answer.. but if you want rounded corners, you'll probably want to use more more vertices at the corners and place them for a more rounded shape. You could also look into doing this procedurally.. but if you're doing a game and you want to get it finish, I'd

This question already has an answer here: Why does type-promotion take precedence over varargs for overloaded methods 2 answers the following method returns output : in primitive int arg method public class TestMethodOverloading { private void show(int a){ System.out.println("in primitive int arg method"); } private void show(float a){ System.out.println("in primitive float arg method"); } public static void main(String[] args) { TestMethodOverloading tmo = new TestMethodOverloading(); tmo.show(4); } } Whereas if i change the arguement type of show method from int to Integer then output

This question already has an answer here: Identifying primitive types in templates 8 answers In specializing a class template, I would like to have one specialization target full-blown classes (complete with constructor, destructor, etc.) and one specialization target primitives ( int , float , etc.). The only partial specialization I've seen is with targeting pointer types (via T* ). Is there a way to do this? You can used C++11 type_traits . Here is something to get you started, you can specialize more as needed: #include <type_traits> #include <iostream> template<typename T, typename E =

I'm writing a large scale application where I'm trying to conserve as much memory as possible as well as boost performance. As such, when I have a field that I know is only going to have values from 0 - 10 or from -100 - 100, I try to use the short data type instead of int . What this means for the rest of the code, though, is that all over the place when I call these functions, I have to downcast simple int s into short s. For example: Method Signature public void coordinates(short x, short y) ... Method Call obj.coordinates((short) 1, (short) 2); It's like that all throughout my code because

I am trying to understand the process of declaration and assignment of a primitive type at the back stage. int i; i = 3; For 1), on the memory stack, it assigns a space for storing an int type value named i For 2), it assigns the value 3 to the space preserved above Is there a memory address there? From my impression, memory address is always associated with the objects on the heap? Update: Regarding the replies: So, for every variable on the stack, they are all assigned a memory address as well just like the objects on the heap. Am I correct? But for Java, this is not the case? There are not