do { printf(" READY \n"); ClientSocket = accept(ListenSocket, NULL, NULL); if (ClientSocket == INVALID_SOCKET) { printf("accept failed with this fucking Error: %d\n", WSAGetLastError()); closesocket(ListenSocket); WSACleanup(); return 1; } HandShakeThreadClass *_handShakeThread = new HandShakeThreadClass(&ClientSocket); _handShakeThread->StartInternalThread(); continue; } while (is_active);

after i declare class in there HandShakeThreadClass *_handShakeThread = new HandShakeThreadClass(&ClientSocket); _handShakeThread->StartInternalThread(); » ClientSocket memory address not changed in while

all ClientSocket have a same memory address

why ?

why ?

Why not?

Socket should not have different addresses ?

socket accept from clients

In this case not, because you basically using the same variable

In this case not, because you basically using the same variable

problem is do while ?

srry for wrting bad english

problem is do while ?

The problem is that you're using the same variable allocated on stack

im new in c++, you can fix my code to better understand ? ! thank

Please which is good programming c in linux or window

Please which is good programming c in linux or window

What is the "programming c"?

Like programming in c

Like programming in c

Learn some English

Writing c though

Writing c though

What "writing c"?

Learn some English

Thanks

What "writing c"?

Okay i think you understand what i want to say

Okay i think you understand what i want to say

No, I don't

Like 😔 writing codes in c programming language

😂

/saved

/notes

/note

/notes

its engineeredListingHouses you see the Subject of One's and Zeros is a very old legacy, so amazingly engineeredListingHouses(Eng-Lis-H) is so simple, you work for 26 days, and for its cousin Grammer, Its just TooDeep, besides DeepFake is here, AI changes everything that you see(membrane) its just amazing. And everything is a "command". its what I can call a GeneralOutputLanguage. Most people miss use it.. alot

I mean the language.

My mother taught me to defend myself, because no one has the right to judge somebody. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. It's God 👆

My mother taught me to defend myself, because no one has the right to judge somebody. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. It's God 👆

Please stop with off topic. Thanks

Please stop with off topic. Thanks

You're welcome. Titan👽

The problem is that you're using the same variable allocated on stack

thanks,I fully understood the point :)

Please take Jetbrains Developer Ecosystem Survey 2021 Let's make developer tools better https://surveys.jetbrains.com/s3/developer-ecosystem-survey-2021-sh?pcode=966683602426201088

Hold up, is that a referral link?

/warn offtopic, this is not a youtuber group lol

Hold up, is that a referral link?

Shh

Guys why doesn't this condition work when x=0, if (x<1 || x>8) return 0;

It works when x is negative but not for x=0

Guys why doesn't this condition work when x=0, if (x<1 || x>8) return 0;

Any idea

Guys why doesn't this condition work when x=0, if (x<1 || x>8) return 0;

Doesn't work for 0.1, or 0.2 ....

Any negative number or number greater than 8 activates the condition

Guys why doesn't this condition work when x=0, if (x<1 || x>8) return 0;

What is the type of x? Are you sure that the issue in this code and not in some code before?

int x , no; cin >> x; while(x) { if ( x < 1 || x >= 1500) return 1; else no *= 10; }

In this code snippet, when x = 0, the code doesn't work as expected

int x; cin»x;

int x; cin»x;

Sorry, forgot to add that

Assuming that the while condition had any other variable apart from x, then the if condition works for x= 0

works perfectly well for me

int x , no; cin >> x; while(x) { if ( x < 1 || x >= 1500) return 1; else no *= 10; }

Yeah but not for x=0

Yeah but not for x=0

The code does not return 1 when x = 0

tested for 0 and it works. something else in your code. this is not it

Not really, using code blocks as my ide

ah for 0 it does not enter the while

ah for 0 it does not enter the while

Yeah

But for 1, it enters

I mean it works perfectly. for 0 the loop exits.

I mean it works perfectly. for 0 the loop exits.

Does yours return 1?

returns whatever is outside the while loop...0 does not trigger the while condition

int x , no; cin >> x; while(x) { if ( x < 1 || x >= 1500) return 1; else no *= 10; }

when x = 0 —> code won't enter the while

Now, that I am thinking about it, the code is a total aberration. By the condition stated in the while loop, the code should always return 1 because x will at some point be 0. The code therefore is a total mess

:)

I meant x will always end up being 0 for any positive number in the range. So the behavior it's displaying is totally unexpected. Especially for not continuing with the loop when x=0 and simply just executing statements outside the loop for x= 0

Instead, the solution should be the conditional if else statement with the nested while loop

I meant x will always end up being 0 for any positive number in the range. So the behavior it's displaying is totally unexpected. Especially for not continuing with the loop when x=0 and simply just executing statements outside the loop for x= 0

Now, I get the reason for the behavior. It is because a counter controlled while loop is designed to break for counters being equal to 0. Thus with x being my counter, setting x to be 0 prior to loop execution will simply cause the loop to not run as the loop's breaking condition has been met in advance.

The code does not return 1 when x = 0

Because with x==0 you don't enter the loop

Because with x==0 you don't enter the loop

Yeah, I got it

Thanks

/cpp

/cpp

/cpp

/cpp

/cpp

struct Variable { enum Type { id_string, id_integer, id_reference } type; union Data { std::string string; int32_t integer; Variable *reference; } data; }; Any idea why I get "call to implicitly-deleted default constructor" when tring to use this struct?

string in a union is kind of weird isn’t it?

struct Variable { enum Type { id_string, id_integer, id_reference } type; union Data { std::string string; int32_t integer; Variable *reference; } data; }; Any idea why I get "call to implicitly-deleted default constructor" when tring to use this struct?

Do not use union in C++

Use std::variant

It's less error prone and more convenient

using Variable = std::variant<std::string, int64_t, Variable*>;

But I don’t get the reason why it says implicitly deleted default constructor

But I don’t get the reason why it says implicitly deleted default constructor

If a union contains a non-static data member with a non-trivial default constructor, the default constructor of the union is deleted by default unless a variant member of the union has a default member initializer.

Use std::variant

thx