473,725 Members | 2,271 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Pass by Reference Function Question

I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope. The global
variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from accessing by the
programmers. All global functions share global variables.
Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for the
programmers to use. Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.
My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary? Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables. Please advise.

--

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff
Jun 27 '08 #1
12 3013
Bryan Parkoff wrote:
I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope. The
global variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from
accessing by the programmers. All global functions share global
variables. Only very few global functions are allowed to be
reusability for the programmers to use. Few global functions access
most hidden functions during the time execution.
That sounds like a very bad design. No offence.
My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary? Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse
function with the choice of global / local variables. Please advise.
You need a good book on design and some time to digest it. I am not
really sure what to recommend. "Advanced C++" by Coplien? Dated.
"Multiparad igm Design for C++" by him? Maybe. "Modern C++ Design"
by Alexandrescu? "Large-Scale C++ Software Design" by Lakos? <shrug>

If you want more OOD theory, look for Grady Booch (and ask in the
comp.object newsgroup).

Most of what I've read and been taught says that global data should be
avoided. So, if you start with that premise, passing objects to your
functions (either by pointer or by reference) becomes a necessity.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Jun 27 '08 #2
On Apr 11, 3:24 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope.
OK
The global
variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from accessing by the
programmers.
Then they aren't global are they?
What means did you use to "hide" them?

All global functions share global variables.
OK
Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for the
programmers to use.
What do you mean?
You have global functions that you don't want anyone to call? They
probably shouldn't be global then.

Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.
I thought the global functions were hidden themselves from what you
said earlier...
So, you have global "hidden" functions (I don't know how) calling
other global "hidden" functions?

My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary?
Necessary for what?
What are you trying to do? show some source code.

Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables.
What? I don't know what you are talking about, but no. There is no
requirement to pass by reference based on global functions or
variables or lack thereof.
Jun 27 '08 #3
On Apr 11, 3:24 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
> I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope.

OK
I see you understand now.
>The global
variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from accessing by
the
programmers.

Then they aren't global are they?
What means did you use to "hide" them?
Well, you can make one of two choice -- global object or local object.
The local object is ideal for class. You can always bind local variable and
local function inside class. I have chosen to use global object. I agree
that global variable should be avoided unless you put global object inside
namespace for better readability. Global object has concern of performance
issue than local object like class. Anyway...
> All global functions share global variables.

OK
> Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for the
programmers to use.

What do you mean?
You have global functions that you don't want anyone to call? They
probably shouldn't be global then.
You call public global function. Then public global function is in turn
to call hidden global functions. I do not want the programmers to see
hidden global functions and they are allowed to use global object by running
public global function.
>Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.

I thought the global functions were hidden themselves from what you
said earlier...
So, you have global "hidden" functions (I don't know how) calling
other global "hidden" functions?

>My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary?

Necessary for what?
What are you trying to do? show some source code.

>Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables.

What? I don't know what you are talking about, but no. There is no
requirement to pass by reference based on global functions or
variables or lack thereof.
Let me give you sample code. It helps you to understand better. You
can see that pass by reference is not necessary because all hidden functions
share global variable.

// Global object
namespace Object
{
static int a = 0; // hidden global variable
static int b = 0; // hidden global variable
static int c = 0; // hidden global variable

static void Modify1 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify2 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify3 (void); // hidden global function
void Run_Object (void); // public global function

void Modify1 (void)
{
a += 2;
b += 4;
c = a * b;
}

void Modify2 (void)
{
a *= 5;
b *= 10;
c = a - b;
}

void Modify3 (void)
{
a = b / c;
b = 0;
c = 0;
}

void Run_Object (void)
{
Modify1();
Modify2();
Modify3();
}
}

// end of header

#include "object.h" // above code

int main (void)
{
// do something...
Object::Run_Obj ect(); // Run fine for all hidden functions.

Object::Modify1 (); // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden
global functions.
a = 5; // Time Compile runs fine unless you use global variable -- a
outside main function on this source like main.cpp
Object::a = 10; // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden global
variable
return 0;
}

You can see that namespace is ideal for readability because sometimes
global variable has the same name in both source codes. It guards against
overwritten accidently.
Please advise.

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff
Jun 27 '08 #4
On Apr 11, 5:00 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
On Apr 11, 3:24 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope.
OK

I see you understand now.
The global
variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from accessing by
the
programmers.
Then they aren't global are they?
What means did you use to "hide" them?

Well, you can make one of two choice -- global object or local object.
The local object is ideal for class. You can always bind local variable and
local function inside class. I have chosen to use global object. I agree
that global variable should be avoided unless you put global object inside
namespace for better readability. Global object has concern of performance
issue than local object like class. Anyway...
All global functions share global variables.
OK
Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for the
programmers to use.
What do you mean?
You have global functions that you don't want anyone to call? They
probably shouldn't be global then.

You call public global function. Then public global function is in turn
to call hidden global functions. I do not want the programmers to see
hidden global functions and they are allowed to use global object by running
public global function.
Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.
I thought the global functions were hidden themselves from what you
said earlier...
So, you have global "hidden" functions (I don't know how) calling
other global "hidden" functions?
My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary?
Necessary for what?
What are you trying to do? show some source code.
Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables.
What? I don't know what you are talking about, but no. There is no
requirement to pass by reference based on global functions or
variables or lack thereof.

Let me give you sample code. It helps you to understand better. You
can see that pass by reference is not necessary because all hidden functions
share global variable.

// Global object
namespace Object
{
static int a = 0; // hidden global variable
static int b = 0; // hidden global variable
static int c = 0; // hidden global variable

static void Modify1 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify2 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify3 (void); // hidden global function
void Run_Object (void); // public global function

void Modify1 (void)
{
a += 2;
b += 4;
c = a * b;
}

void Modify2 (void)
{
a *= 5;
b *= 10;
c = a - b;
}

void Modify3 (void)
{
a = b / c;
b = 0;
c = 0;
}

void Run_Object (void)
{
Modify1();
Modify2();
Modify3();
}

}

// end of header

#include "object.h" // above code

int main (void)
{
// do something...
Object::Run_Obj ect(); // Run fine for all hidden functions.

Object::Modify1 (); // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden
global functions.
a = 5; // Time Compile runs fine unless you use global variable -- a
outside main function on this source like main.cpp
Object::a = 10; // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden global
variable
return 0;

}

You can see that namespace is ideal for readability because sometimes
global variable has the same name in both source codes. It guards against
overwritten accidently.
Please advise.

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff

Oh my goodness where to begin...

Do not write implementation in header files. Write it in .cpp files
Your source is obviously not what you ran, because the compiler gives
no such error: "you can't access hidden global variable"

Yes, passing anything at all, by reference or value, is not necessary
in this example code, because the variables in question are global to
the namespace in which the functions that use them, belong to. Passing
them by reference is not necessary because they are also primitive
types. Passing them by reference is also not necessary because
modifications made to them inside the function change the variables
values outside the function, since they are global. Had they been UDTs
passing by reference or const reference may have been preferable. Had
they belonged to another object or been declared within function body,
passing by reference may have been necessary.

I see no reason at all that this entire namespace can't be neatly made
into a class. Why are you making everything global exactly?

Also, are you sure you know what you are doing with the "static"
keyword here?

Jun 27 '08 #5
Bryan Parkoff wrote:
[..]
Let me give you sample code. It helps you to understand better. You
can see that pass by reference is not necessary because all
hidden functions share global variable.

// Global object
namespace Object
{
static int a = 0; // hidden global variable
static int b = 0; // hidden global variable
static int c = 0; // hidden global variable

static void Modify1 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify2 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify3 (void); // hidden global function
You keep using the word "hidden" as if it is a mantra. How are
those variables and functions *hidden*? I can see them here
just fine, and so can a compiler.
void Run_Object (void); // public global function

void Modify1 (void)
{
a += 2;
b += 4;
c = a * b;
}

void Modify2 (void)
{
a *= 5;
b *= 10;
c = a - b;
}

void Modify3 (void)
{
a = b / c;
b = 0;
c = 0;
}

void Run_Object (void)
{
Modify1();
Modify2();
Modify3();
}
}

// end of header

#include "object.h" // above code

int main (void)
Please drop those "void" in parentheses. Looks so C, so last
century. Don't put anything where nothing is expected.
{
// do something...
Object::Run_Obj ect(); // Run fine for all hidden functions.
I have a problem with your comments. I don't get the errors where
you claim to have some, and I do get the error on the 'a = 5' line
where you say "runs fine"...
Object::Modify1 (); // Error Time Compile -- you can't access
hidden global functions.
a = 5; // Time Compile runs fine unless you use global variable --
a outside main function on this source like main.cpp

I don't get the "fine" above, 'a' is undefined.
Object::a = 10; // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden
global variable
I get no error.
return 0;
}

You can see that namespace is ideal for readability because
sometimes global variable has the same name in both source codes. It
guards against overwritten accidently.
Huh?
Please advise.
What is it you'd like us to advise on? Could you please put it in
a form of a question?

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Jun 27 '08 #6
"Christophe r" <cp***@austin.r r.comwrote in message
news:8b******** *************** ***********@8g2 000hsu.googlegr oups.com...
On Apr 11, 5:00 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
On Apr 11, 3:24 pm, "Bryan Parkoff" <nos...@nospam. comwrote:
I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline. I define variables and functions in the global scope.
OK

I see you understand now.
>The global
variables and global functions are hidden to prevent from accessing by
the
programmers.
Then they aren't global are they?
What means did you use to "hide" them?

Well, you can make one of two choice -- global object or local
object.
The local object is ideal for class. You can always bind local variable
and
local function inside class. I have chosen to use global object. I
agree
that global variable should be avoided unless you put global object
inside
namespace for better readability. Global object has concern of
performance
issue than local object like class. Anyway...
> All global functions share global variables.
OK
> Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for
the
programmers to use.
What do you mean?
You have global functions that you don't want anyone to call? They
probably shouldn't be global then.

You call public global function. Then public global function is in
turn
to call hidden global functions. I do not want the programmers to see
hidden global functions and they are allowed to use global object by
running
public global function.
>Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.
I thought the global functions were hidden themselves from what you
said earlier...
So, you have global "hidden" functions (I don't know how) calling
other global "hidden" functions?
>My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary?
Necessary for what?
What are you trying to do? show some source code.
>Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables.
What? I don't know what you are talking about, but no. There is no
requirement to pass by reference based on global functions or
variables or lack thereof.

Let me give you sample code. It helps you to understand better. You
can see that pass by reference is not necessary because all hidden
functions
share global variable.

// Global object
namespace Object
{
static int a = 0; // hidden global variable
static int b = 0; // hidden global variable
static int c = 0; // hidden global variable

static void Modify1 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify2 (void); // hidden global function
static void Modify3 (void); // hidden global function
void Run_Object (void); // public global function

void Modify1 (void)
{
a += 2;
b += 4;
c = a * b;
}

void Modify2 (void)
{
a *= 5;
b *= 10;
c = a - b;
}

void Modify3 (void)
{
a = b / c;
b = 0;
c = 0;
}

void Run_Object (void)
{
Modify1();
Modify2();
Modify3();
}

}

// end of header

#include "object.h" // above code

int main (void)
{
// do something...
Object::Run_Obj ect(); // Run fine for all hidden functions.

Object::Modify1 (); // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden
global functions.
a = 5; // Time Compile runs fine unless you use global variable -- a
outside main function on this source like main.cpp
Object::a = 10; // Error Time Compile -- you can't access hidden
global
variable
return 0;

}

You can see that namespace is ideal for readability because sometimes
global variable has the same name in both source codes. It guards
against
overwritten accidently.
Please advise.

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff
Christopher,
Oh my goodness where to begin...
Thank you for your comment.
Do not write implementation in header files. Write it in .cpp files
Your source is obviously not what you ran, because the compiler gives
no such error: "you can't access hidden global variable"
I agree. I always declare variables and functions in the header code
and I always define variable and functions in the source code. It would
help to debug a lot better. After you complete designing both header code
and source code, you will be able to create static library or DLL library.
Then, source code is not necessary. You can always use header code and it
will access to "LIB" or "DLL" file at compile time.
Yes, passing anything at all, by reference or value, is not necessary
in this example code, because the variables in question are global to
the namespace in which the functions that use them, belong to. Passing
them by reference is not necessary because they are also primitive
types. Passing them by reference is also not necessary because
modifications made to them inside the function change the variables
values outside the function, since they are global. Had they been UDTs
passing by reference or const reference may have been preferable. Had
they belonged to another object or been declared within function body,
passing by reference may have been necessary.
I understand.
I see no reason at all that this entire namespace can't be neatly made
into a class. Why are you making everything global exactly?
According to my performance test, global variables and global functions
are running faster than local variable and local function inside class. You
don't need to use a pointer to access global variable or global function.
You create a class. You define local variable and local function inside
class. The class requires a pointer to access local variable or local
function inside class. It may be slow because extra x86 instruction has to
be added to read memory address and then locate value in the memory.
Also, are you sure you know what you are doing with the "static"
keyword here?
Yes, I understand "static" keyword. It has two different definitions.
If you have same variable name on the global scope and local scope, you put
static inside function. Local variable inside function can modify global
variable outside of function. This way, you exit function, you won't lose
local variable to be placed in global variable. It is fine. I don't use
this feature.
Another definition for static is internal linkage. All global variables
and global functions have static keyword so they are inside internal
linkage. The global variable and global function using internal linkage on
the one header code is never available to all source codes unless you want
to use public function (you put extern keyword for public) in turn to access
hidden function. It is good design.
Please tell me what you think how to design object better -- use global
object for performance reason or local object for readability and reduce
bugs.

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff
Jun 27 '08 #7
Bryan Parkoff asked:
I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline.
Ewww. Don't do that. If these functions are all doing nearly
the same thing (as I very much suspect), replace those 4000
functions with maybe 7 or 13 or 21 functions taking arguments
(passed by value or by reference, maybe returning a value and
maybe not, as the problem demands) to configure their behavior.

The whole idea of functions is STRUCTURE. That means top-level
functions call mid-level functions, and mid-level functions
call bottom-level functions. Having 4000 tiny, nearly-identical
bottom-level functions is a design nightmare.
I define variables and functions in the global scope.
Don't define variables at the global scope. Period.
The global variables and global functions are hidden to prevent
from accessing by the programmers. All global functions share
global variables.
I don't see how you can make global variables "hidden",
unless you make them file-static, so that only one translation
unit sees them.

If you need data hiding (encapsulation) , define your objects
either on the stack (local, "auto") in functions, or dynamically
(using new and delete).

You can still allow one function to have read/write access to
local variables in another function by passing arguments by
non-const reference, like so:

void function2 (double & asdf) // NON-CONST REF!!!!!
{
asdf *= 2.0; // alters "trouble" in function1 below
return;
}

int function1 (void)
{
double trouble = 47;
function2(troub le); // double trouble (pardon pun)
std::cout << trouble << std::endl; // prints 94
return 42;
}
Only very few global functions are allowed to be reusability for the
programmers to use. Few global functions access most hidden functions
during the time execution.
My question is -- do you think that pass by reference is really
necessary? Pass by reference is necessary unless you want to reuse function
with the choice of global / local variables. Please advise.
Passing by non-const reference is the only way I know of that
one function can alter local variables in another function.
I use it a lot in my C++ programming. I try for ZERO global
variables. I often don't quite make it, electing to have
2 or 3 global variables, if they truly are used by a lot of
different functions. But that's really just laziness on my
part; it *could* all be done with non-const refs instead.

--
Cheers,
Robbie Hatley
lonewolf aatt well dott com
www dott well dott com slant user slant lonewolf slant
Jun 27 '08 #8
Robbie Hatley wrote:
Bryan Parkoff asked:
> I write my large project in C++ source code. My C++ source code
contains approximate four thousand small functions. Most of them are
inline.

Ewww. Don't do that. If these functions are all doing nearly
the same thing (as I very much suspect), replace those 4000
functions with maybe 7 or 13 or 21 functions taking arguments
(passed by value or by reference, maybe returning a value and
maybe not, as the problem demands) to configure their behavior.
Where did he say they were doing nearly the same thing?

There's nothing wrong with using lots of small function if they make the
code clearer.

--
Ian Collins.
Jun 27 '08 #9
>> static int a = 0; // hidden global variable
>
Both a named namespace and file scope rarely makes sense.

To declare an identifier with external binding and
file scope, in C++, an anonymous namesspace is used:

namespace { int a = 0; }

»static« was used in C for this purpose, but is
obsolecent in C++.
If you write C source code, you always want most functions to be
invisible inside one header and source code using internal linkage. It is
best to guard these functions. It is ideal when you make to design a chip.
You do not want people to do reverse engineering to see inside chip and draw
schematic.
Then, why do you claim **static** keyword to be obsolete for both global
variables and global functions? I ask you please provide me an example of
your source code in C++. Please do not tell me if I have to use class. I
do not want to use a pointer to access memory address and locate variable
and function inside class. It is slower than global function without
pointer according to my performance test.
It is why I try to find some ways how to design object better on global
slope instead of local slope like class.
It is a bad practice to write a huge function with about 50 - 1,000
lines. It is too complex and difficult time to do debugging. Write very
small hundred or thousand functions with 5 - 20 lines. Be very simple
instead of complex. Add inline to all small functions. You can always put
some small sub-functions into one function. The C++ Compiler can decide to
put piece of sub-functions together into one big function. It can decide to
use peformance or small codes without inline.
Maybe, you should use **static** inside function body. This way, you
always avoid modifying global variable. Use local variable to test inside
function body. You decide to store local variable into global variable by
adding static. I think pass by reference is not good idea because you might
accidently overwrite global variable unless you know sure to be avoided.

Yours Truly,
Bryan Parkoff
Jun 27 '08 #10

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

110
9936
by: Mr A | last post by:
Hi! I've been thinking about passing parameteras using references instead of pointers in order to emphasize that the parameter must be an object. Exemple: void func(Objec& object); //object must be an object instead of
3
1879
by: TeejB | last post by:
Hi all, Quick question: If I have a function which populates a large array (ie. reading rowsets), is it better to pass in a reference to a variable to accept the data, or should I just create, populate and return the array from the function? Thanks in advance!
14
2466
by: xdevel | last post by:
Hi, I need your help because I don't understand very well this: in C arguments are passed by-value. The function parameters get a copy of the argument values. But if I pass a pointer what really is happening? also a copy is passed ? in C++ there is a pass-by-reference too... and in that case the paramter can be considered as an alias of the argument...
14
20405
by: Abhi | last post by:
I wrote a function foo(int arr) and its prototype is declared as foo(int arr); I modify the values of the array in the function and the values are getting modified in the main array which is passed also. I understand that this way of passing the array is by value and if the prototype is declared as foo(int *), it is by reference in which case the value if modified in the function will get reflected in the main function as well. I dont...
10
13660
by: Robert Dailey | last post by:
Hi, I noticed in Python all function parameters seem to be passed by reference. This means that when I modify the value of a variable of a function, the value of the variable externally from the function is also modified. Sometimes I wish to work with "copies", in that when I pass in an integer variable into a function, I want the function to be modifying a COPY, not the reference. Is this possible?
6
2713
by: lisp9000 | last post by:
I've read that C allows two ways to pass information between functions: o Pass by Value o Pass by Reference I was talking to some C programmers and they told me there is no such thing as pass by reference in C since you are just passing an address (or a pointer value address I guess?). So I was wondering is this correct?
11
3358
by: venkatagmail | last post by:
I have problem understanding pass by value and pass by reference and want to how how they are or appear in the memory: I had to get my basics right again. I create an array and try all possible ways of passing an array. In the following code, fun1(int a1) - same as fun1(int* a1) - where both are of the type passed by reference. Inside this function, another pointer a1 is created whose address &a1 is different from that of the passed...
9
2058
by: raylopez99 | last post by:
I'm posting this fragment from another thread to frame the issue clearer. How to pass an object to a function/method call in C# that will guarantee not to change the object?* In C++, as seen below, you can use the 'const' keyword in the function / method declaration. But how to do this in C#? *for example: "void Foo() const;"
12
11098
by: raylopez99 | last post by:
Keywords: scope resolution, passing classes between parent and child forms, parameter constructor method, normal constructor, default constructor, forward reference, sharing classes between forms. Here is a newbie mistake that I found myself doing (as a newbie), and that even a master programmer, the guru of this forum, Jon Skeet, missed! (He knows this I'm sure, but just didn't think this was my problem; LOL, I am needling him) If...
0
8884
marktang
by: marktang | last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look ! Part I. Meaning of...
1
9168
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
0
9103
tracyyun
by: tracyyun | last post by:
Dear forum friends, With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
0
8084
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
1
6700
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules. He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms. Adolph will...
0
6009
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
4508
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
4779
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
3217
by: 6302768590 | last post by:
Hai team i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.