Adding Verbosity to a Program - c++

This is a very n00b question but
I'm writing a nix based tool and would like to have verbosity flags, based on the number of vvv's passed in I would go about printing debug/information statements in my program.
My question is how would I go about using opargs for this, since optargs can only parse one character at a time.
Also suppose I know I'm at verbosity level 3, do all my print statements have to be in an if condition? Or there a clever way of going about it using the pre-processor?
Also if someone could point me to some code online which does this, that would be awesome.
Thanks
I figure it out, thought I'd post here if someone else comes across this in the future:
Basically for all my different verbosity statements I defined a special print using the preprocessor like:
#define dprintf \
if (verbosity == 1) printf
I then put in the statements as needed in the code e.g.
dprintf ("Verbosity is at level 1.");
My opt atgs looks something like this
case 'v':
verbosity++;
break;

The verbosity level is not known at compile time so you need to have code ready to handle any level the user selects.
A simple, and easy to understand, way of doing this is to separate your logging functions in an opaque compilation unit with a static variable keeping track of the verbosity level. You then initialize this with something like "set_logging_level(level)" and write your logging functions guarded by this static variable. Then you only expose the initialization and the logging functions and use them as you need them in your code.
static level = 0;
void set_logging_level(int l) { level = l; }
void log_info(char* msg) {
// Will always print
}
void log_debug(char *msg) {
if(level > 0)
// Write to stdout or stderr, whichever fits
}
void log_details(char *msg) {
if(level > 1)
// As above
}
void log_insanity(char *msg) {
if(level > 2)
// As above
}
Edit: Saner conditions for logging. Especially if you want inclusive logging when the verbosity level goes up...

How about Conditional compilation?
You could also simplify by setting a number for verbose level instead of passing that many v's.
#if VERBOSE_LEVEL == 3
print("A verbose message");
#endif

I'm not too sure if this is what you've meant, but this is how I implemented it in another project:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define TRUE 1
#define FALSE 0
int usage( char *name, int quit );
int main (int argc, char **argv) {
int c;
static int vlevel = 0;
while ( (c = getopt(argc, argv, ":abc:d:hv012")) != -1) {
int this_option_optind = optind ? optind : 1;
switch (c) {
case 'v':
vlevel++;
printf ("verbosity level is %d\n", vlevel);
break;
case ':': /* Option without required operand */
fprintf(stderr, "option -%c requires an operand\n", optopt);
break;
case 'h':
case '?':
usage( argv[0], TRUE );
break;
default:
printf ("?? getopt returned character code 0%o ??\n", c);
}
}
if (optind < argc) {
printf ("non-option ARGV-elements:\n");
while (optind < argc)
printf ("\t%s\n", argv[optind++]);
}
exit (0);
}
int usage( char *progname, int quit )
{
printf ( "Usage:\n\t%s [-vh]\n", progname );
if ( quit ) exit( 1 );
return 0;
}
This would give you something like the following:
eroux#smaug:~$ ./testverbose -h
Usage:
./testverbose [-vh]
eroux#smaug:~$ ./testverbose -vvvv
verbosity level is 1
verbosity level is 2
verbosity level is 3
verbosity level is 4
eroux#smaug:~$
From there you should be able to use the vlevel variable [in main()] to print the correct message during the relevant verbosity level.

Related

MBed program gets stuck

I have written some code with the help of Mbed framework, which is either supposed to take user input and then display sensor values or display the value after 15mins. When I try to execute this code, it is getting stuck at line 21 (display.printf("Inside loop\n");).
I am not able to understand why is it so and what is the fix for this problem so that the switch block gets executed. How to I solve this? FYI, although not important, the microcontroller I am using is STM32 bluepill (STM32F103C8T6).
#include "mbed.h"
#include "Sensor_input.h"
#include "Ticker.h"
#include "Dht11.h"
//#include "USBSerial.h"
Serial display(PA_2, PA_3, 9600);
char* a;
Dht11 DhtSensor(PA_4);
Ticker t;
Sensor_input Soil(PB_7, PB_6, 8);
float *SensorData;
void getSensorData();
int main ( void ){
uint8_t choice = 0;
display.printf("Enter 1 or 2:\n1.Greenhouse stats\n2.Return Control to System");
choice = display.putc(display.getc());
while(1){
display.printf("Inside loop\n");
wait_ms(15000);
switch(choice)
{
case 1:
display.printf("Inside case 1");
a = Soil.readTemp();
display.printf("Temperature: %f\n",DhtSensor.getCelsius());
display.printf("Humidity: %f\n",DhtSensor.getHumidity());
display.printf("Soil water content: %c\n ",*a);
break;
case 2:
/*<GreenHouse object>*/
/*Might have to proceed with timer*/
display.printf("Inside case 2");
t.attach(&getSensorData,4500);
display.printf("Temperature: %f\n",a[0]);
display.printf("Humidity: %f\n",a[1]);
display.printf("Soil water content: %c\n ",a[2]);
break;
default:
break;
}
}
}
void getSensorData(){
static float a[3];
a[0]=DhtSensor.getCelsius();
a[1]=DhtSensor.getHumidity();
a[2]=(int)Soil.readTemp();
}
Your switch statement is probably being executed, but always in the 'default' case. You can test this out by putting a print statement in the default.
When you request a char from the display, it will return the input as an ASCII-character. This means, if you enter '1' on the display, it will give you (as the ASCII table says) 0x31 (decimal 49) and not the value of 1. So you have to change your case to "case '1':" or "case 0x31:" and the equivalent for the second case.

How does execve prevents vulnerabilities compared to system command

I am referring to this link,
Basically, consider the input happy'; useradd 'attacker, the security advice differentiates between a compliant and non-compliant code -
Non Complaint Code
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
enum { BUFFERSIZE = 512 };
void func(const char *input) {
char cmdbuf[BUFFERSIZE];
int len_wanted = snprintf(cmdbuf, BUFFERSIZE,
"any_cmd '%s'", input);
if (len_wanted >= BUFFERSIZE) {
/* Handle error */
} else if (len_wanted < 0) {
/* Handle error */
} else if (system(cmdbuf) == -1) {
/* Handle error */
}
}
Compliant Code
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void func(char *input) {
pid_t pid;
int status;
pid_t ret;
char *const args[3] = {"any_exe", input, NULL};
char **env;
extern char **environ;
/* ... Sanitize arguments ... */
pid = fork();
if (pid == -1) {
/* Handle error */
} else if (pid != 0) {
while ((ret = waitpid(pid, &status, 0)) == -1) {
if (errno != EINTR) {
/* Handle error */
break;
}
}
if ((ret != -1) &&
(!WIFEXITED(status) || !WEXITSTATUS(status)) ) {
/* Report unexpected child status */
}
} else {
/* ... Initialize env as a sanitized copy of environ ... */
if (execve("/usr/bin/any_cmd", args, env) == -1) {
/* Handle error */
_Exit(127);
}
}
}
Assume we pass the same input to both the function with equal privilege, i.e run by root etc etc, How does the second solution ensure that command injection attack is repelled?
My only guess is that, execve will refresh your binary image with any_cmdand use input happy'; useradd 'attacker as args to any_cmd. So we will be have a return value equivalent to "invalid parameters". Is my understanding right? Or is there something deeper than my understanding which I am missing?
The main difference is indeed that with the system function you can launch whatever your shell can execute, so you basically can have shell injections with multiple commands. Whereas with execve first you specify a specific binary to execute, so you're pretty much sure that there is only one command executed (except if you execve a shell..). Also since you give a complete path to execve you avoid hacks based on modifying the HOME or the current working directory.
So yes, your understanding is rather right

Can I throw (and possibly catch) an exception in plain C (GCC)? [duplicate]

I was thinking today about the try/catch blocks existent in another languages. Googled for a while this but with no result. From what I know, there is not such a thing as try/catch in C. However, is there a way to "simulate" them?
Sure, there is assert and other tricks but nothing like try/catch, that also catch the raised exception. Thank you
C itself doesn't support exceptions but you can simulate them to a degree with setjmp and longjmp calls.
static jmp_buf s_jumpBuffer;
void Example() {
if (setjmp(s_jumpBuffer)) {
// The longjmp was executed and returned control here
printf("Exception happened here\n");
} else {
// Normal code execution starts here
Test();
}
}
void Test() {
// Rough equivalent of `throw`
longjmp(s_jumpBuffer, 42);
}
This website has a nice tutorial on how to simulate exceptions with setjmp and longjmp
http://www.di.unipi.it/~nids/docs/longjump_try_trow_catch.html
You use goto in C for similar error handling situations.
That is the closest equivalent of exceptions you can get in C.
Ok, I couldn't resist replying to this. Let me first say I don't think it's a good idea to simulate this in C as it really is a foreign concept to C.
We can use abuse the preprocessor and local stack variables to give use a limited version of C++ try/throw/catch.
Version 1 (local scope throws)
#include <stdbool.h>
#define try bool __HadError=false;
#define catch(x) ExitJmp:if(__HadError)
#define throw(x) {__HadError=true;goto ExitJmp;}
Version 1 is a local throw only (can't leave the function's scope). It does rely on C99's ability to declare variables in code (it should work in C89 if the try is first thing in the function).
This function just makes a local var so it knows if there was an error and uses a goto to jump to the catch block.
For example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#define try bool __HadError=false;
#define catch(x) ExitJmp:if(__HadError)
#define throw(x) {__HadError=true;goto ExitJmp;}
int main(void)
{
try
{
printf("One\n");
throw();
printf("Two\n");
}
catch(...)
{
printf("Error\n");
}
return 0;
}
This works out to something like:
int main(void)
{
bool HadError=false;
{
printf("One\n");
{
HadError=true;
goto ExitJmp;
}
printf("Two\n");
}
ExitJmp:
if(HadError)
{
printf("Error\n");
}
return 0;
}
Version 2 (scope jumping)
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <setjmp.h>
jmp_buf *g__ActiveBuf;
#define try jmp_buf __LocalJmpBuff;jmp_buf *__OldActiveBuf=g__ActiveBuf;bool __WasThrown=false;g__ActiveBuf=&__LocalJmpBuff;if(setjmp(__LocalJmpBuff)){__WasThrown=true;}else
#define catch(x) g__ActiveBuf=__OldActiveBuf;if(__WasThrown)
#define throw(x) longjmp(*g__ActiveBuf,1);
Version 2 is a lot more complex but basically works the same way. It uses a
long jump out of the current function to the try block. The try block then
uses an if/else to skip the code block to the catch block which check the local
variable to see if it should catch.
The example expanded again:
jmp_buf *g_ActiveBuf;
int main(void)
{
jmp_buf LocalJmpBuff;
jmp_buf *OldActiveBuf=g_ActiveBuf;
bool WasThrown=false;
g_ActiveBuf=&LocalJmpBuff;
if(setjmp(LocalJmpBuff))
{
WasThrown=true;
}
else
{
printf("One\n");
longjmp(*g_ActiveBuf,1);
printf("Two\n");
}
g_ActiveBuf=OldActiveBuf;
if(WasThrown)
{
printf("Error\n");
}
return 0;
}
This uses a global pointer so the longjmp() knows what try was last run.
We are using abusing the stack so child functions can also have a try/catch block.
Using this code has a number of down sides (but is a fun mental exercise):
It will not free allocated memory as there are no deconstructors being called.
You can't have more than 1 try/catch in a scope (no nesting)
You can't actually throw exceptions or other data like in C++
Not thread safe at all
You are setting up other programmers for failure because they will likely not notice the hack and try using them like C++ try/catch blocks.
In C99, you can use setjmp/longjmp for non-local control flow.
Within a single scope, the generic, structured coding pattern for C in the presence of multiple resource allocations and multiple exits uses goto, like in this example. This is similar to how C++ implements destructor calls of automatic objects under the hood, and if you stick to this diligently, it should allow you for a certain degree of cleanness even in complex functions.
While some of the other answers have covered the simple cases using setjmp and longjmp, in a real application there's two concerns that really matter.
Nesting of try/catch blocks. Using a single global variable for your jmp_buf will make these not work.
Threading. A single global variable for you jmp_buf will cause all kinds of pain in this situation.
The solution to these is to maintain a thread-local stack of jmp_buf that get updated as you go. (I think this is what lua uses internally).
So instead of this (from JaredPar's awesome answer)
static jmp_buf s_jumpBuffer;
void Example() {
if (setjmp(s_jumpBuffer)) {
// The longjmp was executed and returned control here
printf("Exception happened\n");
} else {
// Normal code execution starts here
Test();
}
}
void Test() {
// Rough equivalent of `throw`
longjump(s_jumpBuffer, 42);
}
You'd use something like:
#define MAX_EXCEPTION_DEPTH 10;
struct exception_state {
jmp_buf s_jumpBuffer[MAX_EXCEPTION_DEPTH];
int current_depth;
};
int try_point(struct exception_state * state) {
if(current_depth==MAX_EXCEPTION_DEPTH) {
abort();
}
int ok = setjmp(state->jumpBuffer[state->current_depth]);
if(ok) {
state->current_depth++;
} else {
//We've had an exception update the stack.
state->current_depth--;
}
return ok;
}
void throw_exception(struct exception_state * state) {
longjump(state->current_depth-1,1);
}
void catch_point(struct exception_state * state) {
state->current_depth--;
}
void end_try_point(struct exception_state * state) {
state->current_depth--;
}
__thread struct exception_state g_exception_state;
void Example() {
if (try_point(&g_exception_state)) {
catch_point(&g_exception_state);
printf("Exception happened\n");
} else {
// Normal code execution starts here
Test();
end_try_point(&g_exception_state);
}
}
void Test() {
// Rough equivalent of `throw`
throw_exception(g_exception_state);
}
Again a more realistic version of this would include some way to store error information into the exception_state, better handling of MAX_EXCEPTION_DEPTH (maybe using realloc to grow the buffer, or something like that).
DISCLAIMER: The above code was written without any testing whatsoever. It is purely so you get an idea of how to structure things. Different systems and different compilers will need to implement the thread local storage differently. The code probably contains both compile errors and logic errors - so while you're free to use it as you choose, TEST it before using it ;)
This is another way to do error handling in C which is more performant than using setjmp/longjmp. Unfortunately, it will not work with MSVC but if using only GCC/Clang is an option, then you might consider it. Specifically, it uses the "label as value" extension, which allows you to take the address of a label, store it in a value and and jump to it unconditionally. I'll present it using an example:
GameEngine *CreateGameEngine(GameEngineParams const *params)
{
/* Declare an error handler variable. This will hold the address
to jump to if an error occurs to cleanup pending resources.
Initialize it to the err label which simply returns an
error value (NULL in this example). The && operator resolves to
the address of the label err */
void *eh = &&err;
/* Try the allocation */
GameEngine *engine = malloc(sizeof *engine);
if (!engine)
goto *eh; /* this is essentially your "throw" */
/* Now make sure that if we throw from this point on, the memory
gets deallocated. As a convention you could name the label "undo_"
followed by the operation to rollback. */
eh = &&undo_malloc;
/* Now carry on with the initialization. */
engine->window = OpenWindow(...);
if (!engine->window)
goto *eh; /* The neat trick about using approach is that you don't
need to remember what "undo" label to go to in code.
Simply go to *eh. */
eh = &&undo_window_open;
/* etc */
/* Everything went well, just return the device. */
return device;
/* After the return, insert your cleanup code in reverse order. */
undo_window_open: CloseWindow(engine->window);
undo_malloc: free(engine);
err: return NULL;
}
If you so wish, you could refactor common code in defines, effectively implementing your own error-handling system.
/* Put at the beginning of a function that may fail. */
#define declthrows void *_eh = &&err
/* Cleans up resources and returns error result. */
#define throw goto *_eh
/* Sets a new undo checkpoint. */
#define undo(label) _eh = &&undo_##label
/* Throws if [condition] evaluates to false. */
#define check(condition) if (!(condition)) throw
/* Throws if [condition] evaluates to false. Then sets a new undo checkpoint. */
#define checkpoint(label, condition) { check(condition); undo(label); }
Then the example becomes
GameEngine *CreateGameEngine(GameEngineParams const *params)
{
declthrows;
/* Try the allocation */
GameEngine *engine = malloc(sizeof *engine);
checkpoint(malloc, engine);
/* Now carry on with the initialization. */
engine->window = OpenWindow(...);
checkpoint(window_open, engine->window);
/* etc */
/* Everything went well, just return the device. */
return device;
/* After the return, insert your cleanup code in reverse order. */
undo_window_open: CloseWindow(engine->window);
undo_malloc: free(engine);
err: return NULL;
}
A quick google search yields kludgey solutions such as this that use setjmp/longjmp as others have mentioned. Nothing as straightforward and elegant as C++/Java's try/catch. I'm rather partial to Ada's exception handling myself.
Check everything with if statements :)
This can be done with setjmp/longjmp in C. P99 has a quite comfortable toolset for this that also is consistent with the new thread model of C11.
In C, you can "emulate" exceptions along with automatic "object reclamation" through manual use of if + goto for explicit error handling.
I often write C code like the following (boiled down to highlight error handling):
#include <assert.h>
typedef int errcode;
errcode init_or_fail( foo *f, goo *g, poo *p, loo *l )
{
errcode ret = 0;
if ( ( ret = foo_init( f ) ) )
goto FAIL;
if ( ( ret = goo_init( g ) ) )
goto FAIL_F;
if ( ( ret = poo_init( p ) ) )
goto FAIL_G;
if ( ( ret = loo_init( l ) ) )
goto FAIL_P;
assert( 0 == ret );
goto END;
/* error handling and return */
/* Note that we finalize in opposite order of initialization because we are unwinding a *STACK* of initialized objects */
FAIL_P:
poo_fini( p );
FAIL_G:
goo_fini( g );
FAIL_F:
foo_fini( f );
FAIL:
assert( 0 != ret );
END:
return ret;
}
This is completely standard ANSI C, separates the error handling away from your mainline code, allows for (manual) stack unwinding of initialized objects much like C++ does, and it is completely obvious what is happening here. Because you are explicitly testing for failure at each point it does make it easier to insert specific logging or error handling at each place an error can occur.
If you don't mind a little macro magic, then you can make this more concise while doing other things like logging errors with stack traces. For example:
#include <assert.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define TRY( X, LABEL ) do { if ( ( X ) ) { fprintf( stderr, "%s:%d: Statement '%s' failed! %d, %s\n", __FILE__, __LINE__, #X, ret, strerror( ret ) ); goto LABEL; } while ( 0 )
typedef int errcode;
errcode init_or_fail( foo *f, goo *g, poo *p, loo *l )
{
errcode ret = 0;
TRY( ret = foo_init( f ), FAIL );
TRY( ret = goo_init( g ), FAIL_F );
TRY( ret = poo_init( p ), FAIL_G );
TRY( ret = loo_init( l ), FAIL_P );
assert( 0 == ret );
goto END;
/* error handling and return */
FAIL_P:
poo_fini( p );
FAIL_G:
goo_fini( g );
FAIL_F:
foo_fini( f );
FAIL:
assert( 0 != ret );
END:
return ret;
}
Of course, this isn't as elegant as C++ exceptions + destructors. For example, nesting multiple error handling stacks within one function this way isn't very clean. Instead, you'd probably want to break those out into self contained sub functions that similarly handle errors, initialize + finalize explicitly like this.
This also only works within a single function and won't keep jumping up the stack unless higher level callers implement similar explicit error handling logic, whereas a C++ exception will just keep jumping up the stack until it finds an appropriate handler. Nor does it allow you to throw an arbitrary type, but instead only an error code.
Systematically coding this way (i.e. - with a single entry and single exit point) also makes it very easy to insert pre and post ("finally") logic that will execute no matter what. You just put your "finally" logic after the END label.
Warning: the following is not very nice but it does the job.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
unsigned int id;
char *name;
char *msg;
} error;
#define _printerr(e, s, ...) fprintf(stderr, "\033[1m\033[37m" "%s:%d: " "\033[1m\033[31m" e ":" "\033[1m\033[37m" " ‘%s_error’ " "\033[0m" s "\n", __FILE__, __LINE__, (*__err)->name, ##__VA_ARGS__)
#define printerr(s, ...) _printerr("error", s, ##__VA_ARGS__)
#define printuncaughterr() _printerr("uncaught error", "%s", (*__err)->msg)
#define _errordef(n, _id) \
error* new_##n##_error_msg(char* msg) { \
error* self = malloc(sizeof(error)); \
self->id = _id; \
self->name = #n; \
self->msg = msg; \
return self; \
} \
error* new_##n##_error() { return new_##n##_error_msg(""); }
#define errordef(n) _errordef(n, __COUNTER__ +1)
#define try(try_block, err, err_name, catch_block) { \
error * err_name = NULL; \
error ** __err = & err_name; \
void __try_fn() try_block \
__try_fn(); \
void __catch_fn() { \
if (err_name == NULL) return; \
unsigned int __##err_name##_id = new_##err##_error()->id; \
if (__##err_name##_id != 0 && __##err_name##_id != err_name->id) \
printuncaughterr(); \
else if (__##err_name##_id != 0 || __##err_name##_id != err_name->id) \
catch_block \
} \
__catch_fn(); \
}
#define throw(e) { *__err = e; return; }
_errordef(any, 0)
Usage:
errordef(my_err1)
errordef(my_err2)
try ({
printf("Helloo\n");
throw(new_my_err1_error_msg("hiiiii!"));
printf("This will not be printed!\n");
}, /*catch*/ any, e, {
printf("My lovely error: %s %s\n", e->name, e->msg);
})
printf("\n");
try ({
printf("Helloo\n");
throw(new_my_err2_error_msg("my msg!"));
printf("This will not be printed!\n");
}, /*catch*/ my_err2, e, {
printerr("%s", e->msg);
})
printf("\n");
try ({
printf("Helloo\n");
throw(new_my_err1_error());
printf("This will not be printed!\n");
}, /*catch*/ my_err2, e, {
printf("Catch %s if you can!\n", e->name);
})
Output:
Helloo
My lovely error: my_err1 hiiiii!
Helloo
/home/naheel/Desktop/aa.c:28: error: ‘my_err2_error’ my msg!
Helloo
/home/naheel/Desktop/aa.c:38: uncaught error: ‘my_err1_error’
Keep on mind that this is using nested functions and __COUNTER__. You'll be on the safe side if you're using gcc.
Redis use goto to simulate try/catch, IMHO it is very clean and elegant:
/* Save the DB on disk. Return REDIS_ERR on error, REDIS_OK on success. */
int rdbSave(char *filename) {
char tmpfile[256];
FILE *fp;
rio rdb;
int error = 0;
snprintf(tmpfile,256,"temp-%d.rdb", (int) getpid());
fp = fopen(tmpfile,"w");
if (!fp) {
redisLog(REDIS_WARNING, "Failed opening .rdb for saving: %s",
strerror(errno));
return REDIS_ERR;
}
rioInitWithFile(&rdb,fp);
if (rdbSaveRio(&rdb,&error) == REDIS_ERR) {
errno = error;
goto werr;
}
/* Make sure data will not remain on the OS's output buffers */
if (fflush(fp) == EOF) goto werr;
if (fsync(fileno(fp)) == -1) goto werr;
if (fclose(fp) == EOF) goto werr;
/* Use RENAME to make sure the DB file is changed atomically only
* if the generate DB file is ok. */
if (rename(tmpfile,filename) == -1) {
redisLog(REDIS_WARNING,"Error moving temp DB file on the final destination: %s", strerror(errno));
unlink(tmpfile);
return REDIS_ERR;
}
redisLog(REDIS_NOTICE,"DB saved on disk");
server.dirty = 0;
server.lastsave = time(NULL);
server.lastbgsave_status = REDIS_OK;
return REDIS_OK;
werr:
fclose(fp);
unlink(tmpfile);
redisLog(REDIS_WARNING,"Write error saving DB on disk: %s", strerror(errno));
return REDIS_ERR;
}
If you're using C with Win32, you can leverage its Structured Exception Handling (SEH) to simulate try/catch.
If you're using C in platforms that don't support setjmp() and longjmp(), have a look at this Exception Handling of pjsip library, it does provide its own implementation
After studying the answers given above, I set up a system that automatically handles nested exceptions well. Here is the code I wrote to test my system:
#include "MyOtherTricks.h"
#include "Exceptions.h"
void Testing_InnerMethod();
void Testing_PossibleExceptionThrower();
void TestExceptionHandling()
{
try
{
Testing_InnerMethod();
Say("The inner method exited without an exception.");
}
catch (Exception)
{
Say("I caught an Exception that the inner method did not catch.");
}
end_try
}
void Testing_InnerMethod()
{
try
{
Say("I am in a try block.");
Testing_PossibleExceptionThrower();
Say("The possible exception thrower didn't throw an exception.");
}
catch (ExceptionSubtype1)
Say("I caught an exception, subtype 1.");
catch (ExceptionSubtype2)
{
Say("I caught an exception, subtype 2.");
Say("I will now rethrow it.");
throw(exception);
}
end_try
}
void Testing_PossibleExceptionThrower()
{
Say("Here is the possible exception thrower.");
throw(new(ExceptionSubtype2)); // To further test exception handling, replace ExceptionSubtype2 in this line with Exception or ExceptionSubtype1, or comment out this line entirely.
Say("No, I won't throw an exception!");
}
The example code relies on two files, Exceptions.h and Exceptions.c. Here is Exceptions.h:
#include <setjmp.h>
extern jmp_buf* Exception_Handler;
#define try do \
{ \
jmp_buf* outerExceptionHandler = Exception_Handler; \
jmp_buf exceptionHandler; \
Exception_Handler = &exceptionHandler; \
Exception exception = (Exception)setjmp(exceptionHandler); \
if (exception != 0) Exception_Handler = outerExceptionHandler; \
if (exception == 0) \
{ \
// The try block goes here. It must not include a return statement or anything else that exits the try...end_try block, because then the outer exception handler will not be restored.
#define catch(exceptionType) Exception_Handler = outerExceptionHandler; \
} \
else if (Object_IsSomeTypeOf(exception, exceptionType)) \
{
// The catch block goes here. It may include a return statement or anything else that exits the try...end_try block. A break statement will exit only the try...end_try block.
#define end_try } \
else \
throw(exception); \
} while(0);
void throw(Exception exception);
And here is Exceptions.c:
#include "MyOtherTricks.h"
#include "Exceptions.h"
jmp_buf* Exception_Handler = 0;
void throw(Exception exception)
{
if (Exception_Handler == 0) FailBecause("Uncaught exception.");
longjmp(*Exception_Handler, (int)exception);
}
Note that this code references some additional methods that I'm not including here (because class inheritance in C is off-topic). To make this code work for you, you'll have to understand this code well enough to replace a few things. In particular, if you want to distinguish between different types of exceptions, you'll need to realize that this code assumes that Object_IsSomeTypeOf(new(ExceptionSubtype1), Exception) returns true and Object_IsSomeTypeOf(new(ExceptionSubtype1), ExceptionSubtype2) returns false, and you'll need to either make your own version of my Object_IsSomeTypeOf macro or replace it with something else.
Perhaps not a major language (unfortunately), but in APL, theres the ⎕EA operation (stand for Execute Alternate).
Usage:
'Y' ⎕EA 'X'
where X and Y are either code snippets supplied as strings or function names.
If X runs into an error, Y (usually error-handling) will be executed instead.

'SDL_main' : must return a value

I am trying to retreive content of websice in c++ usind SDL but it is giving me this error:
'SDL_main' : must return a value
my code is:
#include <iostream>
#include "SDL.h"
#include "SDL_net.h"
#include <cstring>
int main(int argc,char** argv)
{
SDL_Init(SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING);
SDLNet_Init();
IPaddress ip;
SDLNet_ResolveHost(&ip,"www.linux.org",80);
const char* http="GET / HTTP/1.1\nHost: www.linux.org\n\n";
TCPsocket client=SDLNet_TCP_Open(&ip);
SDLNet_TCP_Send(client,http,strlen(http)+1);
char text[10000];
while(SDLNet_TCP_Recv(client,text,10000))
std::cout << text;
SDLNet_TCP_Close(client);
SDLNet_Quit();
SDL_Quit();
}
When I put return 0; at the end, it built project but it finished immediately after that
(I am using vs2012)
UPDATE
cout<<"Some message";
doesn't print anything, is it possible that I have configured my imports wrong? are those additional dependencies right?
SDL.lib;SDL_net.lib;SDLmain.lib
I don't know what else could be wrong ...
It's because SDL defines a macro like this:
#define main SDL_main
So the function you've written is actually called SDL_main and like any other function that is not the actual main function, if it doesn't return void, you have to give it a return statement.
because your code doesn't loop forever it just returns 0 after first pass, you need to make a loop like:
while(1){
sdl_events event;
switch(event){
//handle events, drawings and so on
...
...
...
case SDL_QUIT:
exit (0);
break;
}
}
http://sdl.beuc.net/sdl.wiki/OpenGL_Full_Example
UPDATE
you may also have some problem connecting to host so you could check if connection succeed like this:
#define MAXLEN 1024
int result;
char msg[MAXLEN];
result = SDLNet_TCP_Recv(sock,msg,MAXLEN-1);
if(result <= 0) {
// TCP Connection is broken. (because of error or closure)
SDLNet_TCP_Close(sock);
exit(1);
}
else {
msg[result] = 0;
printf("Received: \"%s\"\n",msg);
}
UPDATE 2
change this:
while(SDLNet_TCP_Recv(client,text,10000))
std::cout << text;
to this:
while(SDLNet_TCP_Recv(client,text,9999))
std::cout << text;
UPDATE 3
try this, put your receive part in this if statement
if(SDLNet_SocketReady(client) == 1)
{
while(SDLNet_TCP_Recv(client,text,9999))
std::cout << text;
}
if this still doesn't work I suggest to use QT sockets or Boost asio, both async and more intuitive

How to identify shift/ctrl keys were pressed in the linux world (without using GL and X11/XKBlib.h) in C++?

I used to do in windows:
SHORT key1 = ::GetKeyState(VK_LSHIFT)& 0xF0;
SHORT key2 = ::GetKeyState(VK_RSHIFT)& 0xF0;
SHORT key3 = ::GetKeyState(VK_LCONTROL)& 0xF0;
SHORT key4 = ::GetKeyState(VK_RCONTROL)& 0xF0;
bShift = (key1 != 0) || (key2 != 0);
bCtrl = (key3 != 0) || (key4 != 0);
How to detect if the shift/ctrl keys were pressed in the linux world?
Without using GL(it can be pressed not in the graphic window..) or X11..
Is there something general to retrieve it directly form the OS?
Thanks,
Vladimir.
I would do this using Linux Input API. Take a look at Youarefunny's answer here to see how you can check current key state (pressed or released).
Such check may take noticeable amount of time especially if you need to call it very often. So once you determine the initial state you may monitor for changes by reading input events from device file, like this (I skipped error-checking for brevity):
#include <stdio.h>
#include <linux/input.h>
int main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
struct input_event ev;
FILE *kbd = fopen("/dev/input/by-id/usb-Dell_Dell_QuietKey_Keyboard-event-kbd", "r");
while (fread(&ev, sizeof(ev), 1, kbd) == 1)
{
if (ev.type == EV_KEY && (ev.code == KEY_LEFTSHIFT || ev.code == KEY_RIGHTSHIFT))
{
switch (ev.value)
{
case 0: printf("Shift released\n"); break;
case 1: printf("Shift pressed\n"); break;
case 2: printf("Shift repeated\n"); break;
default: break;
}
}
// similarly for KEY_LEFTCTRL, KEY_RIGHTCTRL, etc.
}
fclose(kbd);
return 0;
}
Note that reading /dev/input/* files will probably require root privileges (unless you run chmod before) since default access mode is 640 and the files belong to root.