This could be a basic question, however, I couldn't figure out how can I simplify this statement. I have a feeling that something's not right on this code.
Thank you.
var a = string.Empty;
if (File.Exists(a = Path.Combine(modelPath, "attributes", filename))) { }
else
{
if (File.Exists(a = GetSaveAsAttribute(firmPath))) { }
else
{
for (int i = 0; i < systemPaths.Count; i++)
{
if (File.Exists(a = GetSaveAsAttribute(systemPaths[i])))
break;
}
}
}
You can remove your **if** by directly checking for another condition.
var a = string.Empty;
if (!(File.Exists(a = Path.Combine(modelPath, "attributes", filename)))) {
if (!(File.Exists(a = GetSaveAsAttribute(firmPath))) ){
for (int i = 0; i < systemPaths.Count; i++)
{
if (File.Exists(a = GetSaveAsAttribute(systemPaths[i])))
break;
}
}
}
Related
I was creating a custom operating system and I have a problem. I have an array of child components in an array of all opened windows. When I call a function CDraw (Component Draw) on the child array the system crashes with the message "General Protection Fault Detected".
Window array and code:
int openedWindows = 0;
Window* windows[128];
int OpenWindow(Window win) {
windows[0][openedWindows] = win;
openedWindows++;
return openedWindows-1;
};
void CloseWindow(int index) {
for(int i = index+1; i < 127; i++) {
if(i != 127)
windows[0][i] = windows[0][i-1];
else
windows[0][i] = Window();
}
openedWindows--;
};
void CloseAllWindows() {
for(int i = 0; i < 127; i++) {
windows[0][i] = Window();
}
openedWindows = 0;
};
/*Draw Windows*/
for(int i = 0; i < openedWindows; i++)
{
windows[0][i].Update();
}
Where I call the code:
Window wnd = Window("Window");
wnd.Update();
Button btn = Button(wnd, "Hello");
btn.CPosition = Point(10, 10);
btn.BackColor = Color(MediumTurquoise);
btn.parent = &wnd;
btn.parent->AddComponent(btn);
btn.Update();
Button btn2 = Button(wnd, "H2");
btn2.CPosition = Point(100, 100);
btn2.BackColor = Color(Red);
btn2.parent = &wnd;
btn2.parent->AddComponent(btn2);
btn2.Update();
OpenWindow(wnd);
Componet code:
int childIndex = 0;
BaseGuiComponent* children[128];
int BaseGuiComponent::AddComponent(BaseGuiComponent baseGuiComponent) {
children[0][childIndex] = baseGuiComponent;
childIndex++;
return childIndex-1;
};
void BaseGuiComponent::RemoveComponent(int index) {
for(int i = index+1; i < 127; i++) {
if(i != 127)
children[0][i] = children[0][i-1];
else
children[0][i] = BaseGuiComponent();
}
childIndex--;
};
void BaseGuiComponent::ClearComponents() {
for(int i = 0; i < 127; i++) {
children[0][i] = BaseGuiComponent();
}
childIndex = 0;
};
//List components and Update();
void BaseGuiComponent::DrawChildren() {
for(int i = 0; i < childIndex; i++) {
children[0][i].Update();
}
};
Drawing code:
void BaseGuiComponent::CDraw() {
if (strcmp(type,"Window",128)) {
Draw->DrawWindow(BackColor.GetHexColor(), CPosition.X, CPosition.Y, CSize.Width, CSize.Height, 2, CText, WindowStyle, Draw->GetScreenBounds());
DrawChildren();
} else if (strcmp(type,"Button",128)) {
Draw->FillRect(BackColor.GetHexColor(), CGlobalPosition.X*4, CGlobalPosition.Y, CSize.Width*4, CSize.Height, parent->bound/* Conflicting code */);
Draw->PRINTAT(ForeColor.GetHexColor(),CText, CGlobalPosition.X + nabs(CSize.Width - svlen(CText))/2,CGlobalPosition.Y + nabs(CSize.Height-16)/2, bound);
}
};
All help is welcomed. Thanks.
I was making a verification system for my dll. I am just trying different things.
I used this
bool allow = false;
std::string Name = "Name";
std::string Allowed[] = {"ye", "lol"};
for (int i = 0; i < sizeof(Allowed); i++)
{
if (Allowed[i] == Name)
{
allow = true;
}
}
But the for in the for loop is an error.
I don't know why but it says expected a decleration
Change sizeOf to sizeof
Declare allow
bool allow;
std::string Name = "Name";
std::string Allowed[] = {"ye", "lol"};
for (int i = 0; i < sizeof(Allowed); i++)
{
if (Allowed[i] == Name)
{
allow = true;
}
}
try this
bool allow;
string Name = "ye";
string Allowed[] = {"ye", "lol"};
int size = sizeof(Allowed)/sizeof(Allowed[0]);
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
if (Allowed[i] == Name)
{
allow = true;
}
}
cout << allow;
return 0;
I know that similar question has been asked,but I still can not figure out what is wrong.As mentioned above,I am debugging a program with VS2010 which always telling me "This may be due to a corruption of the heap, which indicates a bug in SwiftIndex.exe or any of the DLLs it has loaded...".So,here is part of my code:
Status PrefixQuickSI::my_QucikSI(std::vector<_QISymbol> &cur_sequence, QISequence graphcode, int depth, int feature_size, ECVector<char> cur_UsageTab, ECVector<SequenceIndex> cur_MappingTab, bool &flag)
{
Status st;
int vcnt = m_QueryGraph->V();
_QISymbol T;
if(depth == 0)
{
T.tSymbol = graphcode.sequence[depth]->tSymbol;
T.rSymbols.clear();
for(int i = 0; i < graphcode.sequence[depth]->numOfRSymbol; i++)
{
int v1,v2;
Label elabel;
v1 = graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[i].val;
v2 = graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[i+1].val;
elabel = graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[i].lable;
if(m_QueryGraph->getELabel(cur_MappingTab[v1],cur_MappingTab[v2]) != elabel)
{
flag = false;
return OK;
}
T.rSymbols.push_back(graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[i]);
T.rSymbols.push_back(graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[i+1]);
i++;
}
depth++;
cur_sequence.push_back(T);
if(depth == graphcode.numOfPrefixNode)
{
flag =true;
return OK;
}
else
{
st = my_QucikSI(cur_sequence, graphcode,depth, feature_size, cur_UsageTab, cur_MappingTab, flag);
if(flag == true)
{
return OK;
}
else
{
flag = false;
return OK;
}
}
}
else
{
T.tSymbol = graphcode.sequence[depth]->tSymbol;
for( int j = 0; j < graphcode.sequence[depth]->numOfRSymbol; ++j )
{
RSymbol rSymbol;
rSymbol = graphcode.sequence[depth]->rSymbol[j];
T.rSymbols.push_back(rSymbol);
}
int pV;
VertexIDSet Vcandiates;
for( int i = 0; i < vcnt; i++ )
{
pV = T.tSymbol.p;
if( cur_UsageTab[i] > 0 || m_QueryGraph->getLabel(i) != T.tSymbol.l || m_QueryGraph->getELabel(i, cur_MappingTab[pV]) != T.tSymbol.pl)
continue;
Vcandiates.insert(i);
}
for( VertexIDSet::const_iterator v = Vcandiates.begin(); v != Vcandiates.end(); v++ )
{
bool mis_match = false;
for( std::vector<RSymbol>::const_iterator r = T.rSymbols.begin(); r != T.rSymbols.end(); r++ )
{
if( !MatchREntry(cur_sequence, *v, *r) )
{
mis_match = true;
break;
}
}
if( mis_match )
continue;
cur_MappingTab[feature_size + depth] = *v;
cur_UsageTab[*v] = 1;
depth++;
cur_sequence.push_back(T);
if(depth == graphcode.numOfPrefixNode)
{
flag = true;
return OK;
}
else
{
st = my_QucikSI(cur_sequence, graphcode,depth, feature_size, cur_UsageTab, cur_MappingTab,flag);
if(flag == true)
{
return OK;
}
else
{
cur_UsageTab[*v] = 0;
depth--;
}
}
}
}
return OK;
}
and the calling function statement is:
int depth = 0;
st = my_QucikSI(cur_sequence, datacodes[cur_graphid], depth, cur_size,cur_UsageTab,cur_MappingTab, flag);
I have debugged step by step,and found that the "heap corruption" occurred in the second return of the recursion of function my_QuickSI(flag already equaled true at the third recursion and function returned to the second recursion,when it's about to return to the first recursion,the "heap corruption" happened).
Hope someone find where the problem is.
You can find my previous answer useful for your problem:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/22074401/2724703
In general heap corruption is often detected after the real corruption has already occurred by some DLL/module loaded within your process.
I am a llvm newbie.
I am trying to write a llvm pass to optimize for algebraic identities in a function (like, if my function has an instruction a = b * 0, my pass should replace all following uses of "a" with 0).
So, my pass looks like follows:-
...
for (Function::iterator f_it = F.begin(), f_ite = F.end(); f_it != f_ite; ++f_it) {
for(BasicBlock::iterator b_it = f_it->begin(), b_ite = f_it->end(); b_it != b_ite; ++b_it) {
if(op->getOpcode() == Instruction::Mul) {
if(ConstantInt *CI_F = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(&*b_it->getOperand(0))) {
if(CI_F->isZero()) {
firstop_zero = 1;
}
}
if(ConstantInt *CI_S = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(&*b_it->getOperand(1))) {
if(CI_S->isZero()) {
secop_zero = 1;
}
}
if(first_zero || second_zero) {
errs()<<"found zero operand\n";
ReplaceInstWithValue(b_it->getParent()->getInstList(),b_it,(first_zero?(&*b_it->getOperand(1)):(&*b_it->getOperand(0))));
}
}
}
}
I can see that my comment "found zero operand gets printed out on std-err, but I can't see the replacement in the resulting .bc's disassembly.
What am I missing here? Any help is sincerely appreciated.
Thanks a lot!
Praveena
Try
for (Function::iterator f_it = F.begin(), f_ite = F.end(); f_it != f_ite; ++f_it) {
for(BasicBlock::iterator b_it = f_it->begin(), b_ite = f_it->end(); b_it != b_ite; ++b_it) {
Instruction *I = *b_it;
Value *Zeroval;
if(op->getOpcode() == Instruction::Mul) {
if(ConstantInt *CI_F = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(&*b_it->getOperand(0))) {
if(CI_F->isZero()) {
firstop_zero = 1;
Zeroval = CI_F;
}
}
if(ConstantInt *CI_S = dyn_cast<ConstantInt>(&*b_it->getOperand(1))) {
if(CI_S->isZero()) {
secop_zero = 1;
ZeroVal = CI_S;
}
}
if(first_zero || second_zero) {
errs()<<"found zero operand\n";
I->ReplaceAlluseswith(ZeroVal);
}
}
}
}
I have a struct defined as follows
struct VariableList
{
void Add(simple_instr* instr)
{
//PrintOpcode(instr);
switch(instr->opcode)
{
case STR_OP:
case MCPY_OP:
Add(instr->u.base.src1);
Add(instr->u.base.src2);
break;
case LDC_OP:
Add(instr->u.ldc.dst);
break;
case BTRUE_OP:
case BFALSE_OP:
Add(instr->u.bj.src);
break;
case CALL_OP:
if (instr->u.call.dst != NO_REGISTER)
{
Add(instr->u.call.dst);
}
Add(instr->u.call.proc);
for (int i = 0; i < instr->u.call.nargs; i++)
{
Add(instr->u.call.args[i]);
}
break;
case MBR_OP:
Add(instr->u.mbr.src);
break;
case RET_OP:
if (instr->u.base.src1 != NO_REGISTER)
Add(instr->u.base.src1);
break;
case CVT_OP:
case CPY_OP:
case NEG_OP:
case NOT_OP:
case LOAD_OP:
Add(instr->u.base.dst);
Add(instr->u.base.src1);
break;
case LABEL_OP:
case JMP_OP:
break;
default:
Add(instr->u.base.dst);
Add(instr->u.base.src1);
Add(instr->u.base.src2);
break;
}
}
void Add(Variable var)
{
variableList.push_back(var);
}
void RemoveDuplicates()
{
if (variableList.size() > 0)
{
variableList.erase(unique(variableList.begin(), variableList.end()), variableList.end());
currentID = variableList.size();
}
}
VariableList()
{
currentID = 0;
dynamicallyCreated = false;
}
VariableList(VariableList& varList, bool setLiveness = false, bool LiveVal = false)
{
currentID = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < varList.size(); i++)
{
Variable* var = new Variable(varList[i]);
if (setLiveness)
{
var->isLive = LiveVal;
}
variableList.push_back(*var);
}
dynamicallyCreated = variableList.size() > 0;
}
Variable& operator[] (int i)
{
return variableList[i];
}
int size()
{
return variableList.size();
}
vector<Variable>::iterator begin()
{
return variableList.begin();
}
vector<Variable>::iterator end()
{
return variableList.end();
}
bool CompareLiveness(VariableList &var)
{
if(variableList.size() != var.size())
{
return false;
}
for (int i = 0; i < variableList.size(); i++)
{
if(variableList[i].isLive != var[i].isLive)
return false;
}
return true;
}
~VariableList()
{
if(dynamicallyCreated)
{
for (vector<Variable>::iterator it = variableList.begin(); it < variableList.end(); ++it)
{
//delete (&it);
}
}
}
protected:
int currentID;
vector<Variable> variableList;
bool dynamicallyCreated;
void Add(simple_reg* reg, bool checkForDuplicates = false)
{
if (reg == null)
{
cout << "null detected" << endl;
return;
}
if (reg->kind == PSEUDO_REG)
{
if (!checkForDuplicates || (checkForDuplicates && find(variableList.begin(), variableList.end(), reg->num) != variableList.end()))
{
cout << "Adding... Reg " << reg->num << endl;
Variable* var = new Variable(reg->num, currentID);
variableList.push_back(*var);
currentID++;
}
}
}
};
I'd like to be able to do a statement like this
VariableList varsIn(Variables, true, false);
that will create a deep copy and allow me to change a few properties. As you can see in my struct, I'm currently attempting to do this using
VariableList(VariableList& varList, bool setLiveness = false, bool LiveVal = false)
{
currentID = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < varList.size(); i++)
{
Variable* var = new Variable(varList[i]);
if (setLiveness)
{
var->isLive = LiveVal;
}
variableList.push_back(*var);
}
dynamicallyCreated = variableList.size() > 0;
}
I don't think this is the right way to do it though. What's the proper way to do this sort of copying? Is there a way to do it without using new? For reference, the Variable struct is as follows
struct Variable
{
int id;
int num;
bool isLive;
simple_op opcode;
Variable()
{
id = 0;
num = 0;
opcode = NOP_OP;
vClass = Basic;
isLive = false;
}
Variable(int _num, int _id = 0, simple_op _op = NOP_OP)
{
id = _id;
num = _num;
opcode = _op;
vClass = Basic;
isLive = false;
}
VariableClass GetClass()
{
return vClass;
}
bool operator==(const Variable &var) const
{
return num == var.num;
}
bool operator==(const int &x) const
{
return x == num;
}
protected:
VariableClass vClass;
};
VariableClass and simple_op are enums
Thanks in advance
Your code is not only doing dynamic allocation unnecessarily, it's also leaking Variable instances everywhere. Just use an automatic variable, push_back will make a copy:
VariableList(VariableList& varList, bool setLiveness = false, bool LiveVal = false)
{
currentID = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < varList.size(); i++)
{
Variable var(varList[i]);
if (setLiveness)
{
var.isLive = LiveVal;
}
variableList.push_back(var);
}
}
And take out the destructor, you can't delete the elements owned by the vector. If they pointed somewhere, sure, but you're not storing pointers.
Also, here's an even better way:
VariableList(VariableList& other, bool setLiveness = false, bool LiveVal = false)
: currentID(0)
, variableList(other.variableList)
{
if (setLiveness) {
for( int i = 0; i < size(); i++ )
variableList[i].isLive = LiveVal;
}
}