Compile errors:
error C3861: 'Divide': identifier not found, even with argument-dependent lookup
error C2365: 'Divide' : redefinition; previous definition was a 'formerly unknown identifier'
error C2365: 'Mutiplication' : redefinition; previous definition was a 'formerly unknown identifier'
error C2365: 'Subtract' : redefinition; previous definition was a 'formerly unknown identifier'
error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
error C3861: 'Mutiplication': identifier not found, even with argument-dependent lookup
error C3861: 'Subtract': identifier not found, even with argument-dependent lookup
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 1:04
I just fixed the idenitfyer problem. Now I only have the C2440 problem.
(79): error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
(73): error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
(76): error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'int' to 'testLevel'
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 1:20
Time to learn about casting in C++!
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 1:29
What am I casting? Testlevel, or test?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 1:40
>>2
You're needlessly forcing a conversion from integers and your enum. You should just define enum testLevel { EASY = 10, MEDIUM = 20, HARD = 30 };
in your header file. Then change lines 71-81 in the .c file to: switch (l){
case 1:
level = EASY;
return EASY;
case 2:
level = MEDIUM;
return MEDIUM;
case 3:
level = HARD;
return HARD;
}
But you'd still have to figure out why you're setting level in two places (inside the getTestLevel() function and then immediately after when you call setTestInfo(testType, testLevel). In short, read SICP.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 1:42
Here are some code snippets me and my friend wrote that you might find very useful:
>>5
Thanks. I didn't know you could multidefine ints like that, like in vB.
I'm trying to learn complicated languages from my limited knowledge.
I already know x86 ASM like the back of my hand, and then I had to learn vB, and now I'm learning C++. I'm taking dives into all sorts of different pools, and trying to wing it by using knowledge from previous said language.
Here's what I got so far, and now that the professor told me we didn't have to abide by the rules of the assignment, as long as it works like it should.
I'm going to convert the maxNum to your method, seeing as how it's way more efficent.
>>12 I'm trying to learn complicated languages
Why would you possibly be interested in learning complicated languages? The simpler the better, I say.
This isn't your troll forum. OK. Thank you.
Do you have the faintest idea where you are?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 13:10
>>13 Why would you possibly be interested in learning complicated languages? The simpler the better, I say.
This couldn't be more true. The only people who seem to mistake language complexity for expressive power are sepples programmers.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 13:13
>>14 This couldn't be more true.
Why thank you; that's why I posted it. :)
HAVE YOU READ YOUR FORTH APPLICATION TECHNIQUES TODAY‽
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 13:13
It's part of the curriculum.
I'm perfectly content with coding in Assembly, but they deem it unnecessary, Even though you can make a program run almost 3xs faster than in any other language, thanks to its direct binary conversion.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 13:15
>>16 I'm perfectly content with coding in Assembly, but they deem it unnecessary, Even though you can make a program run almost 3xs faster than in any other language, thanks to its direct binary conversion.
You just don't get it.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 13:15
>>13
Yeah. This is programming, this isn't your faggot /b/ or /v/.
>>14 The only people who seem to mistake language complexity for expressive power are sepples programmers.
Speaking as a rehabilitated ex-seppler, I couldn't agree more. I used to think that deep knowledge of arcane obscutities of a convoluted, over-featureful language would make me an EXPERT PROGRAMMER.
>>26
Well know I can't tell what clouded your judgement when you wrote >>22.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:38
>>27
Stackrobacy is known to cloud judgement. And readability.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:40
>>25
Girls and homosexuals. People with a package prefer their stackage.
But assuming that there aren't two guys out there who would use the word 'stackrobacy' or any derivation thereof doesn't that also make you >>22-28 ? Which sides are you arguing?
>>29 People with a package prefer their stackage.
Who are you? Johnny Cochran? Enjoy your write-only code.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:47
>>28
So, let me get this straight: you're a Haskellite who left orbit for a little while to play at stackrobatics, during which time your judgement and readability became clouded, causing you to post nonsense like >>22 on my Prawg?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:51
>>32
Of the 100 nobles watching, 25 were impressed.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:55
>>32
After some stackrobacy, my judgement became clouded for a while, then after some time it became clear again and I realized it was stacrobacy that had clouded it. Then I posted that irrefutable truth that is >>22.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 14:58
>>34
Ah, I see the problem. You really don't know what ``simple'' means. Enjoy your nomads.