variable-assignment

The Fortran syntax is driving me mad! Can anyone explain how I can call the assignment (I'm pretty sure that is not the right terminology either...). I'm trying to assign a type according to the value type . I have the following: module test_module implicit none type :: mytype integer :: i real :: r logical :: l contains generic :: assignment(=) => mytype_to_type procedure, pass(me) :: mytype_to_type end type mytype contains subroutine mytype_to_type(t, me) implicit none class(*), intent(inout) :: t class(mytype), intent(in) :: me !.. process based on input type select type (t) type is

I develop my c++ app alternately on debian and ubuntu and the library root dir of informix database is different on both distributions. What's a nice way of handling it in Makefile so i don't have to change it manually each time? I thought of just testing on existance of the directory so it's more general then checking uname or lsb-release or hostname. And how is the syntax for assigning in a condition? I get the "missing seperator" error on try#2 // prepare INFORMIXDIR_DEB=/usr/informix INFORMIXDIR_UBU=/opt/IBM/informix // tried #1 $(INFORMIXDIR_DEB): if [ -d $(INFORMIXDIR_DEB) ]; then

I'm trying to create a simple script in batch to run in Windows, the script has 3 variables: the URL to open the number of windows to open the time to wait until the new window is open The script works fine except when the URL contains characters like %20 or %2F in which I guess cmd.exe is trying to use them as variables, I'm putting the value of the URL between quotes but that didn't help. If I use the address: set url="http://domain.com/app.html?path=%2F%2Flocalhost%2Fcode&do_pause=false&go=true" the browser opens this: https://domain.com/app.html?path=FFlocalhostFcode&do_pause=false&go=true

I've created a loop where a variable is used to test if the current run-through of the loop is the first one. Its fairly simple: $firstrun = true; while(condition){ if($firstrun) // Do this else // Do that // Change $firstrun to false } I was just wondering (mostly out of curiosity because I'm it makes no real noticeable difference), when I need to change $firstrun to false, would be more efficient to test if the variable is true before assigning it to false or simply reassign it to false during each run-through? Ex: $firstrun = true; while(condition){ if($firstrun) // Do this else // Do that

Having considerable trouble with some pointer arithmatic. I think I get the concepts (pointer variables point to a memory address, normal variables point to data) but I believe my problem is with the syntax ( *, &, (*), *(), etc.) What I want to do is build dynamic arrays of a custom struct (i.e. arrays of pointers to heap structs), and my interface provides two methods, "ad_to_obj_array" (which takes the object to add and the array which can be null for empty) and "obj_array_dustbin" (which just takes the array to dispose, also disposing of the contents, the heap objs). The former is rendered

This question already has answers here : Closed 9 years ago . Possible Duplicate: Idiomatic object creation in ruby Sometimes it's useful to assign numerous of a constructed arguments to instance variables on construction. Other than the obvious method: def initialize(arg1, arg2, arg3) @arg1, @arg2, @arg3 = arg1, arg2, arg3 end Is there a more concise idiom for achieving the same result? Something like that found in scala for instance: class FancyGreeter(greeting: String) { def greet() = println(greeting) } Where in this case the object FancyGreeter has a default constructor that provides

This question already has answers here : How do I do a deep copy of a 2d array in Java? (6 answers) Closed 6 years ago . I want to make an exact copy of given array to some other array but such that even though I change the value of any in the new array it does not change the value in the original array. I tried the following code but after the third line both the array changes and attains the same value. int [][]a = new int[][]{{1,2},{3,4},{5,6}}; int[][] b = a; b[1][0] = 7; instead of the second line I also tried int[][] b = (int[][])a.clone(); int [][] b = new int [3][2]; System.arraycopy(a

A lot of classes has assignment operator (operator=) the same code as in destructor and than very similar code of copy constructor. So is it good idea to implement the assignment in such way? Point& operator=(const Point& point) { if(&point != this) { //Call the destructor this->~Point(); //Make the placement new //Assignment is made because some compilers optimise such code as just // new Point; Point* p_n = new (this) Point(point); //We where placing in this place so pointers should be equal assert(p_n == this); } return *this; } Fred Larson Herb Sutter has addressed this in one of his GotW