Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I am using gcc as a compiler and gnuplot-iostream.h as a stream to combine C++ code and the gnuplot features.
What I am doing:
I try to make a fit of the data via gnuplot and extract the final fit parameters from the generated fit.log file for further processing.
What's the problem:
When executing the code like this
std::cout << "Starting to fit" << std::endl;
if (bStartFit == true)
{
// gp << doing stuf here;
std::cout << "Test end" << std::endl;
}
std::cout << "Fit is done" << std::endl;
the output will be:
Starting to fit
Fit is done
Test end
//gnuplot stuff
My question is: how to force the code execute gnuplot stuff exactly when needed, and after proceed with the C++ code. For example:
write intro message;
plot the sin(x) function (as fast example);
wait until the gnuplot is closed;
write exiting message or do what ever AFTER the gnuplot is done.
thank you,
P
EDIT:
std::string filename = "fit.log";
if (bStartFit == true)
{
// Using Gnuplot for the data fit (command are parsed as the strings):
// 1. define the fit function.
gp << "f(x) = imfpZP * x**(-b) + c * x**(d) + g * x**(h) \n";
// 2. fit parameters first assumption.
gp << "b = 1.1; c = 0.5; d = 1.0; g = 2.0; h = 0.1 \n";
// 3. fit range.
gp << "fit [50:10000] f(x) 'agn.iimfp' via b,c,d,g,h \n";
// 4. set the logarithmic scale.
gp << "set logscale \n";
// 5. plot the fitted data.
gp << "plot 'agn.iimfp' w l lw 2 tit 'orig', f(x) w l lw 2 tit 'fit' \n";
std::cout << "Fit was successful" << std::endl;
}
// Opening the generated fit.log file to store the fit parameters:
std::ifstream inFIT(filename.c_str());
if (inFIT.is_open())
{
std::cout << "FIT log is opened" << std::endl;
std::string line;
int lineCounter = 0;
while (std::getline(inFIT, line))
{
lineCounter++;
}
std::cout << "Total lines: " << lineCounter << std::endl;
// Getting the five lines with fit parameters from the fit.log:
std::fstream& GoToLine(std::fstream& file, unsigned int lineNumber);
std::fstream file(filename.c_str());
GoToLine(file, lineCounter - 15);
std::string b_Line;
std::getline(file, b_Line);
std::cout << b_Line << std::endl;
std::istringstream sb(b_Line);
std::string tempStr;
char tempChar;
sb >> tempStr >> tempChar >> b
// similar code to get another 4 lines
;
It is operating system specific. I am guessing you are on Linux (or at least on some POSIX OS). Then you really should read Advanced Linux Programming. And using strace(1) could be helpful to understand what is happening.
You could use popen(3), but you probably should explicitly use system calls (they are listed in syscalls(2)) like pipe(2), fork(2), dup2(2), execve(2), waitpid(2), etc. And very probably have some event loop (e.g. around poll(2)).
BTW, you should be aware that input output is buffered, and you probably want to be sure that your gnuplot stream is regularly flushed (so use std::endl or std::flush appropriately on it). Writing a \n is not enough! You probably should code at least
gp << "plot 'agn.iimfp' w l lw 2 tit 'orig', f(x) w l lw 2 tit 'fit' "
<< std::endl;
(I have replaced some \n inside a string with an explicit use of std::endl)
I don't know much about gnuplot stream (I'm guessing it is a bit like some specialized popen but using C++ streams), but I guess that you should the gnuplot print or printerr command to communicate to your calling program the fact that a given curve has been plotted. (But then you need a genuine event loop, and you are defining a bidirectional protocol between gnuplot and your program.).
Perhaps Qt or POCO might be relevant, because they provide some notion of event loop and processes. Perhaps you might have several threads (one managing gnuplot and the other for the rest), but then you have synchronization issues.
(I don't understand enough what your program is supposed to do, and how you have coded it, so it is a blind guess; I feel your question is very unclear)
Read more about Inter-Process Communications.
Related
Closed. This question needs debugging details. It is not currently accepting answers.
Edit the question to include desired behavior, a specific problem or error, and the shortest code necessary to reproduce the problem. This will help others answer the question.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
as I wrote in the topic - I try to put sf::String into map first argument and it does not work. Here's the code:
void Flashcards::add(sf::String sf_string) {
std::string text = sf_string.toAnsiString();
std::pair<std::string,std::string> pairr = std::make_pair(text,"<Polish translation>");
std::cout << "Inserting: " << pairr.first << std::endl;
all_words.insert(pairr); //std::map<std::string, std::string> variable
void Flashcards::show() {
std::cout << "Flashcards:\n";
for (std::map<std::string, std::string>::iterator it = all_words.begin(); it != all_words.end(); it++)
{
std::cout << "English word: " << it->first
<< " " << "Polish word: " << it->second << std::endl;
}
The result in console is:
Inserting: //a word//
Flashcards:
Polish word: <Polish translation>
Instead of needed:
Inserting: hello
Flashcards:
English word: //a word// Polish word: <Polish translation>
Here are the variations I have already tried:
1) I switched the arguments so it looked like this: std::make_pair("<Polish translation>",text); and it works - hardcoded key and the value are both showed in the console (but I don't want hardcoding, what is obvious).
2) Note that this line: std::cout << "Inserting: " << pairr.first << std::endl; shows that the key value is converted into std::string correctly - calling this will show value we have just typed on the keyboard.
3) I tried to send the sf::String value directly to the std::make_pair() method, it works exactly the same as putting std::string there.
Can somebody say how to make this work?
The string you are providing as an argument to the add method obviously ends with a \r (carriage return) character, probably because you are reading it from a Windows text file using a Unix/Linux execution environment. If you capture the output of your program in a file and look at it with a hexdumper (such as hd), you should immediately see what is going on.
It certainly has nothing to do with your use of the C++ standard library. However, you don't need to go to all that work to insert an entry into a std::map. Just do this:
all_words[key] = value;
As long as key has the right type (or there is an automatic conversion), that will do precisely what you want in a single line easily-understood line, and probably more efficiently as well.
I was wondering what is the most efficient performant way to output a new line to console. Please explain why one technique is more efficient. Efficient in terms of performance.
For example:
cout << endl;
cout << "\n";
puts("");
printf("\n");
The motivation for this question is that I find my self writing loops with outputs and I need to output a new line after all iterations of the loop. I'm trying to find out what's the most efficient way to do this assuming nothing else matters. This assumption that nothing else matters is probably wrong.
putchar('\n') is the most simple and probably fastest. cout and printf with string "\n" work with null terminated string and this is slower because you process 2 bytes (0A 00). By the way, carriage return is \r = 13 (0x0D). \n code is Line Feed (LF).
You don't specify whether you are demanding that the update to the screen is immediate or deferred until the next flush. Therefore:
if you're using iostream io:
cout.put('\n');
if you're using stdio io:
std::putchar('\n');
The answer to this question is really "it depends".
In isolation - if all you're measuring is the performance of writing a '\n' character to the standard output device, not tweaking the device, not changing what buffering occurs - then it will be hard to beat options like
putchar('\n');
fputchar('\n', stdout);
std::cout.put('\n');
The problem is that this doesn't achieve much - all it does (assuming the output is to a screen or visible application window) is move the cursor down the screen, and move previous output up. Not exactly a entertaining or otherwise valuable experience for a user of your program. So you won't do this in isolation.
But what comes into play to affect performance (however you measure that) if we don't output newlines in isolation? Let's see;
Output of stdout (or std::cout) is buffered by default. For the output to be visible, options include turning off buffering or for the code to periodically flush the buffer. It is also possible to use stderr (or std::cerr) since that is not buffered by default - assuming stderr is also directed to the console, and output to it has the same performance characteristics as stdout.
stdout and std::cout are formally synchronised by default (e.g. look up std::ios_base::sync_with_stdio) to allow mixing of output to stdout and std::cout (same goes for stderr and std::cerr)
If your code outputs more than a set of newline characters, there is the processing (accessing or reading data that the output is based on, by whatever means) to produce those other outputs, the handling of those by output functions, etc.
There are different measures of performance, and therefore different means of improving efficiency based on each one. For example, there might be CPU cycles, total time for output to appear on the console, memory usage, etc etc
The console might be a physical screen, it might be a window created by the application (e.g. hosted in X, windows). Performance will be affected by choice of hardware, implementation of windowing/GUI subsystems, the operating system, etc etc.
The above is just a selection, but there are numerous factors that determine what might be considered more or less performance.
On Ubuntu 15.10, g++ v5.2.1 (and an older vxWorks, and OSE)
It is easy to demonstrate that
std::cout << std::endl;
puts a new line char into the output buffer, and then flushes the buffer to the device.
But
std::cout << "\n";
puts a new line char into the output buffer, and does not output to the device. Some future action will be needed to trigger the output of the newline char in the buffer to the device.
Two such actions are:
std::cout << std::flush; // will output the buffer'd new line char
std::cout << std::endl; // will output 2 new line chars
There are also several other actions that can trigger the flush of the std::cout buffering.
#include <unistd.h> // for Linux
void msDelay (int ms) { usleep(ms * 1000); }
int main(int, char**)
{
std::cout << "with endl and no delay " << std::endl;
std::cout << "with newline and 3 sec delay " << std::flush << "\n";
msDelay(3000);
std::cout << std::endl << " 2 newlines";
return(0);
}
And, per comment by someone who knows (sorry, I don't know how to copy his name here), there are exceptions for some environments.
It's actually OS/Compiler implementation dependent.
The most efficient, least side effect guaranteed way to output a '\n' newline character is to use std::ostream::write() (and for some systems requires std::ostream was opened in std::ios_base::binary mode):
static const char newline = '\n';
std::cout.write(&newline,sizeof(newline));
I would suggest to use:
std::cout << '\n'; /* Use std::ios_base::sync_with_stdio(false) if applicable */
or
fputc('\n', stdout);
And turn the optimization on and let the compiler decide what is best way to do this trivial job.
Well if you want to change the line I'd like to add the simplest and the most common way which is using (endl), which has the added perk of flushing the stream, unlike cout << '\n'; on its own.
Example:
cout << "So i want a new line" << endl;
cout << "Here is your new line";
Output:
So i want a new line
Here is your new line
This can be done for as much new lines you want. Allow me to show an example using 2 new lines, it'll definitely clear all of your doubts,
Example:
cout << "This is the first line" << endl;
cout << "This is the second line" << endl;
cout << "This is the third line";
Output:
This is the first line
This is the second line
This is the third line
The last line will just have a semicolon to close since no newline is needed. (endl) is also chain-able if needed, as an example, cout << endl << endl; would be a valid sequence.
As part of a bigger application I am working on a class for reading input from a text file for use in the initialization of the program. Now I am myself fairly new to programming, and I only started to learn C++ in December, so I would be very grateful for some hints and ideas on how to get started! I apologise in advance for a rather long wall of text.
The text file format is "keyword-driven" in the following way:
There are a rather small number of main/section keywords (currently 8) that need to be written in a given order. Some of them are optional, but if they are included they should adhere to the given ordering.
Example:
Suppose there are 3 potential keywords ordered like as follows:
"KEY1" (required)
"KEY2" (optional)
"KEY3" (required)
If the input file only includes the required ones, the ordering should be:
"KEY1"
"KEY3"
Otherwise it should be:
"KEY1"
"KEY2"
"KEY3"
If all the required keywords are present, and the total ordering is ok, the program should proceed by reading each section in the sequence given by the ordering.
Each section will include a (possibly large) amount of subkeywords, some of which are optional and some of which are not, but here the order does NOT matter.
Lines starting with characters '*' or '--' signify commented lines, and they should be ignored (as well as empty lines).
A line containing a keyword should (preferably) include nothing else than the keyword. At the very least, the keyword must be the first word appearing there.
I have already implemented parts of the framework, but I feel my approach so far has been rather ad-hoc. Currently I have manually created one method per section/main keyword , and the first task of the program is to scan the file for to locate these keywords and pass the necessary information on to the methods.
I first scan through the file using an std::ifstream object, removing empty and/or commented lines and storing the remaining lines in an object of type std::vector<std::string>.
Do you think this is an ok approach?
Moreover, I store the indices where each of the keywords start and stop (in two integer arrays) in this vector. This is the input to the above-mentioned methods, and it would look something like this:
bool readMAINKEY(int start, int stop);
Now I have already done this, and even though I do not find it very elegant, I guess I can keep it for the time being.
However, I feel that I need a better approach for handling the reading inside of each section, and my main issue is how should I store the keywords here? Should they be stored as arrays within a local namespace in the input class or maybe as static variables in the class? Or should they be defined locally inside relevant functions? Should I use enums? The questions are many!
Now I've started by defining the sub-keywords locally inside each readMAINKEY() method, but I found this to be less than optimal. Ideally I want to reuse as much code as possible inside each of these methods, calling upon a common readSECTION() method, and my current approach seems to lead to much code duplication and potential for error in programming. I guess the smartest thing to do would simply be to remove all the (currently 8) different readMAINKEY() methods, and use the same function for handling all kinds of keywords. There is also the possibility for having sub-sub-keywords etc. as well (i.e. a more general nested approach), so I think maybe this is the way to go, but I am unsure on how it would be best to implement it?
Once I've processed a keyword at the "bottom level", the program will expect a particular format of the following lines depending on the actual keyword. In principle each keyword will be handled differently, but here there is also potential for some code reuse by defining different "types" of keywords depending on what the program expects to do after triggering the reading of it. Common task include e.g. parsing an integer or a double array, but in principle it could be anything!
If a keyword for some reason cannot be correctly processed, the program should attempt as far as possible to use default values instead of terminating the program (if reasonable), but an error message should be written to a logfile. For optional keywords, default values will of course also be used.
In order to summarise, therefore, my main questions are the following:
1. Do you think think my approach of storing the relevant lines in a std::vector<std::string> to be reasonable?
This will of course require me to do a lot of "indexing work" to keep track of where in the vector the different keywords are located. Or should I work more "directly" with the original std::ifstream object? Or something else?
2. Given such a vector storing the lines of the text file, how I can I best go about detecting the keywords and start reading the information following them?
Here I will need to take account of possible ordering and whether a keyword is required or not. Also, I need to check if the lines following each "bottom level" keyword is in the format expected in each case.
One idea I've had is to store the keywords in different containers depending on whether they are optional or not (or maybe use object(s) of type std::map<std::string,bool>), and then remove them from the container(s) if correctly processed, but I am not sure exactly how I should go about it..
I guess there is really a thousand different ways one could answer these questions, but I would be grateful if someone more experienced could share some ideas on how to proceed. Is there e.g. a "standard" way of doing such things? Of course, a lot of details will also depend on the concrete application, but I think the general format indicated here can be used in a lot of different applications without a lot of tinkering if programmed in a good way!
UPDATE
Ok, so let my try to be more concrete. My current application is supposed to be a reservoir simulator, so as part of the input I need information about the grid/mesh, about rock and fluid properties, about wells/boundary conditions throughout the simulation and so on. At the moment I've been thinking about using (almost) the same set-up as the commercial Eclipse simulator when it comes to input, for details see
http://petrofaq.org/wiki/Eclipse_Input_Data.
However, I will probably change things a bit, so nothing is set in stone. Also, I am interested in making a more general "KeywordReader" class that with slight modifications can be adapted for use in other applications as well, at least it can be done in a reasonable amount of time.
As an example, I can post the current code that does the initial scan of the text file and locates the positions of the main keywords. As I said, I don't really like my solution very much, but it seems to work for what it needs to do.
At the top of the .cpp file I have the following namespace:
//Keywords used for reading input:
namespace KEYWORDS{
/*
* Main keywords and corresponding boolean values to signify whether or not they are required as input.
*/
enum MKEY{RUNSPEC = 0, GRID = 1, EDIT = 2, PROPS = 3, REGIONS = 4, SOLUTION = 5, SUMMARY =6, SCHEDULE = 7};
std::string mainKeywords[] = {std::string("RUNSPEC"), std::string("GRID"), std::string("EDIT"), std::string("PROPS"),
std::string("REGIONS"), std::string("SOLUTION"), std::string("SUMMARY"), std::string("SCHEDULE")};
bool required[] = {true,true,false,true,false,true,false,true};
const int n_key = 8;
}//end KEYWORDS namespace
Then further down I have the following function. I am not sure how understandable it is though..
bool InputReader::scanForMainKeywords(){
logfile << "Opening file.." << std::endl;
std::ifstream infile(filename);
//Test if file was opened. If not, write error message:
if(!infile.is_open()){
logfile << "ERROR: Could not open file! Unable to proceed!" << std::endl;
std::cout << "ERROR: Could not open file! Unable to proceed!" << std::endl;
return false;
}
else{
logfile << "Scanning for main keywords..." << std::endl;
int nkey = KEYWORDS::n_key;
//Initially no keywords have been found:
startIndex = std::vector<int>(nkey, -1);
stopIndex = std::vector<int>(nkey, -1);
//Variable used to control that the keywords are written in the correct order:
int foundIndex = -1;
//STATISTICS:
int lineCount = 0;//number of non-comment lines in text file
int commentCount = 0;//number of commented lines in text file
int emptyCount = 0;//number of empty lines in text file
//Create lines vector:
lines = std::vector<std::string>();
//Remove comments and empty lines from text file and store the result in the variable file_lines:
std::string str;
while(std::getline(infile,str)){
if(str.size()>=1 && str.at(0)=='*'){
commentCount++;
}
else if(str.size()>=2 && str.at(0)=='-' && str.at(1)=='-'){
commentCount++;
}
else if(str.size()==0){
emptyCount++;
}
else{
//Found a non-empty, non-comment line.
lines.push_back(str);//store in std::vector
//Start by checking if the first word of the line is one of the main keywords. If so, store the location of the keyword:
std::string fw = IO::getFirstWord(str);
for(int i=0;i<nkey;i++){
if(fw.compare(KEYWORDS::mainKeywords[i])==0){
if(i > foundIndex){
//Found a valid keyword!
foundIndex = i;
startIndex[i] = lineCount;//store where the keyword was found!
//logfile << "Keyword " << fw << " found at line " << lineCount << " in lines array!" << std::endl;
//std::cout << "Keyword " << fw << " found at line " << lineCount << " in lines array!" << std::endl;
break;//fw cannot equal several different keywords at the same time!
}
else{
//we have found a keyword, but in the wrong order... Terminate program:
std::cout << "ERROR: Keywords have been entered in the wrong order or been repeated! Cannot continue initialisation!" << std::endl;
logfile << "ERROR: Keywords have been entered in the wrong order or been repeated! Cannot continue initialisation!" << std::endl;
return false;
}
}
}//end for loop
lineCount++;
}//end else (found non-comment, non-empty line)
}//end while (reading ifstream)
logfile << "\n";
logfile << "FILE STATISTICS:" << std::endl;
logfile << "Number of commented lines: " << commentCount << std::endl;
logfile << "Number of non-commented lines: " << lineCount << std::endl;
logfile << "Number of empty lines: " << emptyCount << std::endl;
logfile << "\n";
/*
Print lines vector to screen:
for(int i=0;i<lines.size();i++){
std:: cout << "Line nr. " << i << " : " << lines[i] << std::endl;
}*/
/*
* So far, no keywords have been entered in the wrong order, but have all the necessary ones been found?
* Otherwise return false.
*/
for(int i=0;i<nkey;i++){
if(KEYWORDS::required[i] && startIndex[i] == -1){
logfile << "ERROR: Incorrect input of required keywords! At least " << KEYWORDS::mainKeywords[i] << " is missing!" << std::endl;;
logfile << "Cannot proceed with initialisation!" << std::endl;
std::cout << "ERROR: Incorrect input of required keywords! At least " << KEYWORDS::mainKeywords[i] << " is missing!" << std::endl;
std::cout << "Cannot proceed with initialisation!" << std::endl;
return false;
}
}
//If everything is in order, we also initialise the stopIndex array correctly:
int counter = 0;
//Find first existing keyword:
while(counter < nkey && startIndex[counter] == -1){
//Keyword doesn't exist. Leave stopindex at -1!
counter++;
}
//Store stop index of each keyword:
while(counter<nkey){
int offset = 1;
//Find next existing keyword:
while(counter+offset < nkey && startIndex[counter+offset] == -1){
offset++;
}
if(counter+offset < nkey){
stopIndex[counter] = startIndex[counter+offset]-1;
}
else{
//reached the end of array!
stopIndex[counter] = lines.size()-1;
}
counter += offset;
}//end while
/*
//Print out start/stop-index arrays to screen:
for(int i=0;i<nkey;i++){
std::cout << "Start index of " << KEYWORDS::mainKeywords[i] << " is : " << startIndex[i] << std::endl;
std::cout << "Stop index of " << KEYWORDS::mainKeywords[i] << " is : " << stopIndex[i] << std::endl;
}
*/
return true;
}//end else (file opened properly)
}//end scanForMainKeywords()
You say your purpose is to read initialization data from a text file.
Seems you need to parse (syntax analyze) this file and store the data under the right keys.
If the syntax is fixed and each construction starts with a keyword, you could write a recursive descent (LL1) parser creating a tree (each node is a stl vector of sub-branches) to store your data.
If the syntax is free, you might pick JSON or XML and use an existing parsing library.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How to update a printed message in terminal without reprinting (Linux)
I have c++ code, performing some simulations.
I want to show the percentage of my simulation, but I don't want to output a new line every step, like
%1
%2
%3
...
Is there a way, in c++ or in shell scripts to show the progress without creating new lines?
Thanks
Edit 1
Anyone know how to update a number on my personal webpage without refreshing the whole page?
Thanks
Edit 2
double N=0;
forAll (internalIDs_, i) {
N++;
double percent = 100*N/internalIDs_.size();
// Info<< "\rProgress: " << percent << "%" << endl;
printf("\r[%6.4f%%]",percent);}
The terminal cursor keeps blinking cyclically through the numbers, very annoything, how to get rid of this?
The trick used for this is to return to the first position in the current line instead of progressing to the next line.
This is done by writing the \r character (carriage return) to the terminal/stdout.
cout << "\r%1";
cout << "\r%2";
cout << "\r%3";
...
\r - move at the begin of line;
but!
if :
cout << "\rsomelongmessage";
cout << "\rshort";
then you get at out:
shortongmessage
because of:
somelongmessage
^^^^^
short
but you can:
cout << "\rsomelongmessage";
cout << "\rshort ";
then you get finally:
short
I am doing some scientific work on a system with a queue. The cout gets output to a log file with name specified with command line options when submitting to the queue. However, I also want a separate output to a file, which I implement like this:
ofstream vout("potential.txt"); ...
vout<<printf("%.3f %.5f\n",Rf*BohrToA,eval(0)*hatocm);
However it gets mixed in with the output going to cout and I only get some cryptic repeating numbers in my potential.txt. Is this a buffer problem? Other instances of outputting to other files work... maybe I should move this one away from an area that is cout heavy?
You are sending the value returned by printf in vout, not the string.
You should simply do:
vout << Rf*BohrToA << " " << eval(0)*hatocm << "\n";
You are getting your C and C++ mixed together.
printf is a function from the c library which prints a formatted string to standard output. ofstream and its << operator are how you print to a file in C++ style.
You have two options here, you can either print it out the C way or the C++ way.
C style:
FILE* vout = fopen("potential.txt", "w");
fprintf(vout, "%.3f %.5f\n",Rf*BohrToA,eval(0)*hatocm);
C++ style:
#include <iomanip>
//...
ofstream vout("potential.txt");
vout << fixed << setprecision(3) << (Rf*BohrToA) << " ";
vout << setprecision(5) << (eval(0)*hatocm) << endl;
If this is on a *nix system, you can simply write your program to send its output to stdout and then use a pipe and the tee command to direct the output to one or more files as well. e.g.
$ command parameters | tee outfile
will cause the output of command to be written to outfile as well as the console.
You can also do this on Windows if you have the appropriate tools installed (such as GnuWin32).