Your C++ Homework

[Fred Astair]

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

[Pedro Graca]

Fred Astair wrote:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Don't forget main() returns an int.
--
USENET would be a better place if everybody read: | to mail me: simply |
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html | "reply" to this post, |
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html | *NO* MIME, plain text |
http://www.expita.com/nomime.html | and *NO* attachments. |

[JKop]

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.
-JKop

[Julie]

JKop wrote:

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.

-JKop

Having a teacher isn't an either/or situation.

[Jonathan Turkanis]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:6e*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.

I wouldn't stress that one example too much.

However, there's something to be said for learning C++ independently from
textbooks, since some excellent C++ books are widely available and good C++
teachers seem to be in short supply.

Jonathan

[Cy Edmunds]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:6e*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.
-JKop

Given that you recently threw one on line fit because you couldn't add an
integer to a string and another because you couldn't return a stream by
value, I would say this proof is a little leaky.

--
Cy
http://home.rochester.rr.com/cyhome/

[Catalin Pitis]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:6e*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster and
spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials. I missed
that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the companies that I
worked.

Catalin

[JKop]

Jonathan Turkanis posted:

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:6e*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Fred Astair posted:

> I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left
> me no clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it
> out.
>
> Fred

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.

I wouldn't stress that one example too much.

Any particular reason why?
-JKop

[JKop]

Cy Edmunds posted:

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:6e*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Fred Astair posted:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left
me no clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it
out.

Fred
Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.
-JKop

Given that you recently threw one on line fit because you couldn't add
an integer to a string and another because you couldn't return a

stream by value, I would say this proof is a little leaky.

You learn something new everyday.

-JKop

[JKop]

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster
and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials.
I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.

Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.
-JKop

[Catalin Pitis]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster
and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials.
I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.

Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Catalin

[Gernot Frisch]

"Catalin Pitis" <ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn
faster
and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other
materials.
I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.

Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for
anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for
the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on
why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Don't understand: Is there no book that tells you that it's illegal?
I'm gonna write one. Title:
"Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal".

Content:
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal. Example:
int* p_k; *p_k=4; [1]

References:
[1] JKob in comp.lang.c++, 27.10.2004

Am I gonna be rich?
-Gernot

[Catalin Pitis]

"Gernot Frisch" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"Catalin Pitis" <ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster
and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials.
I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.
Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Don't understand: Is there no book that tells you that it's illegal? I'm
gonna write one. Title:
"Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal".

Content:
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal. Example:
int* p_k; *p_k=4; [1]

References:
[1] JKob in comp.lang.c++, 27.10.2004

Am I gonna be rich?
-Gernot

It should be a missundertanding :). By illegal I meant that the compiler
doesn't allow me to do it. But I'm allowed to do it. I surely wouldn't do it
:).

Catalin

[Patrick Kowalzick]

Hi Fred,

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Nice. Did it help? Did you learn a lot?

Regards,
Patrick

[JKop]

Given that you recently threw one on line fit because you couldn't add
an integer to a string and another because you couldn't return a stream
by value, I would say this proof is a little leaky.

Actually, don't you think that destroys your own argument? You've just
expressed that at one time I didn't know how to append a number in digit
form to a string, and that I didn't know why a stream could not be copied.
Evidently, I posted enquiring about these, and now I know how. Emphasis on
"now I know". Quit living in the past.
-JKop

[Ioannis Vranos]

Catalin Pitis wrote:

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster and
spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials. I missed
that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the companies that I
worked.

I do not think that a teacher for C++ will help learning any programming
language faster. In the end, you will have to do the reading. Actually,
there is the additional time cost (meaning lost time) of the lesson
which makes things worse. It is better to get learning by reading a good
book since the beginning.
In a large scale learning however, for example studies, where you learn
many things simultaneously, a teacher/professor helps to maintain focus.

--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[Lieven]

Patrick Kowalzick wrote:

Hi Fred,

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Nice. Did it help? Did you learn a lot?

Regards,
Patrick

Isn't there a session where you are to defend your project/assignment.
If yes, start understanding the code, if no, bad school.

[Lieven]

Fred Astair wrote:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

Isn't there a session where you are to defend your project/assignment.
If yes, start understanding the code, if no, bad school.

[Catalin Pitis]

"Ioannis Vranos" <iv*@guesswh.at.grad.com> wrote in message
news:1098881672.371203@athnrd02...

Catalin Pitis wrote:

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster and
spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials. I
missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.

I do not think that a teacher for C++ will help learning any programming
language faster. In the end, you will have to do the reading. Actually,
there is the additional time cost (meaning lost time) of the lesson which
makes things worse. It is better to get learning by reading a good book
since the beginning.
In a large scale learning however, for example studies, where you learn
many things simultaneously, a teacher/professor helps to maintain focus.

I ment something else. I missed someone to guide my studies in C++ when I
started to learn it. Starting with good books and ending with some good
explanations to some issues that I couldn't easy understand. Of course the
teacher can't make you learn faster than your capacity. But he/she can
minimize your time to search for good materials. At least until you become
independent and can judge for yourself :).

So maybe teacher is not the right word. It might be mentor.

Catalin

[chris]

Fred Astair wrote:

I used this site for a c++ homework assignment that my teacher left me no
clue on how to do it. http://www.betterteachers.com. Check it out.

Fred

I'm somewhat suprised that no-one has commented on this...

It's clearly a total scam. I tried e-mailing them out of interest and
they are charging stupid amounts of money to write trivial 10 line
programs. I actualy bought one and found that it had a number of really
quite trivial mistakes ¬_¬.

Also, is anyone really so desperate that they would pay someone else to
write their programs for them? You still won't pass you exams...

Chris

[Jonathan Turkanis]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote:

Jonathan Turkanis posted:

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote :

Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!

I'm living proof of the contrary.
I wouldn't stress that one example too much.

Any particular reason why?

I was trying to express what I thought was a pretty obvious point without being
overtly rude. As is so often the case, I probably should have kept my mouth
shut.
-JKop

Jonathan

[Mike Wahler]

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:dz*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Given that you recently threw one on line fit because you couldn't add
an integer to a string and another because you couldn't return a stream
by value, I would say this proof is a little leaky.

Actually, don't you think that destroys your own argument? You've just
expressed that at one time I didn't know how to append a number in digit
form to a string, and that I didn't know why a stream could not be copied.
Evidently, I posted enquiring about these, and now I know how. Emphasis on
"now I know". Quit living in the past.
-JKop

On 10/23/2004
"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:D8*******************@news.indigo.ie...
Hello!

I'm an expert C++ programmer.

-Mike

[Raymond Martineau]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:40:03 +0300, "Catalin Pitis"
<ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> wrote:

"Gernot Frisch" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"Catalin Pitis" <ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...
Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Don't understand: Is there no book that tells you that it's illegal? I'm
gonna write one. Title:
"Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal".

Content:
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal. Example:
int* p_k; *p_k=4; [1]

References:
[1] JKob in comp.lang.c++, 27.10.2004

Am I gonna be rich?
-Gernot

It should be a missundertanding :). By illegal I meant that the compiler
doesn't allow me to do it. But I'm allowed to do it. I surely wouldn't do it
:).

The compiler generally issues a warning in that case. It doesn't block you
from doing it (since the standard merely says it's undefined rather than an
error), but alerts you in case you forgot to do somethine first.

The piece of code is only stated to be undefined under general standards. A
compiler doesn't complain because there is a chance that the variable may
be initialized somehow (but I doubt it). As a result, the only problems
you encounter will be at run-time (or in the case of old dos programs, a
"null pointer assignment" message on shutdown.)

[Ioannis Vranos]

Raymond Martineau wrote:

The compiler generally issues a warning in that case. It doesn't block you
from doing it (since the standard merely says it's undefined rather than an
error), but alerts you in case you forgot to do somethine first.

The piece of code is only stated to be undefined under general standards. A
compiler doesn't complain because there is a chance that the variable may
be initialized somehow (but I doubt it). As a result, the only problems
you encounter will be at run-time (or in the case of old dos programs, a
"null pointer assignment" message on shutdown.)

Assignment of an integer to a pointer type is not allowed, unless some
"dirty" casting is used.

--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[JKop]

Jonathan Turkanis posted:

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote:

Jonathan Turkanis posted:

> "JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote : >> Since when does one need a teacher to learn C++?!
>>
>> I'm living proof of the contrary.
>
> I wouldn't stress that one example too much.

Any particular reason why?

I was trying to express what I thought was a pretty obvious point
without being overtly rude. As is so often the case, I probably should
have kept my mouth shut.

-JKop

Jonathan

Curious, that's all.
-JKop

[JKop]

Mike Wahler posted:

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:dz*******************@news.indigo.ie...

> Given that you recently threw one on line fit because you couldn't
> add an integer to a string and another because you couldn't return a
> stream by value, I would say this proof is a little leaky.

Actually, don't you think that destroys your own argument? You've just
expressed that at one time I didn't know how to append a number in
digit form to a string, and that I didn't know why a stream could not
be copied. Evidently, I posted enquiring about these, and now I know
how. Emphasis on "now I know". Quit living in the past.
-JKop

On 10/23/2004
"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:D8*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Hello!

I'm an expert C++ programmer.

-Mike

I presume that was to a Win32 newsgroup, no?

The term "expert" is relative. Outside of this newsgroup, I would definitely
say that I'm an expert C++ programmer, but if I were to say that right here
then it wouldn't have much weight as there's people here with superior
knowledge of C++ than me (in particular, of the Standard Library... it
really is about time I got a book on it!).
If we throw the Standard Library out of the window for the moment, then I
would be comfortable saying here that I'm an expert C++ programmer - I
pretty much understand and know how to use all of the features of C++.
Anyway Mike, thanks for clarifying whatever the hell you were trying to
clarify.
-JKop

[JKop]

Ioannis Vranos posted:

Raymond Martineau wrote:

The compiler generally issues a warning in that case. It doesn't
block you from doing it (since the standard merely says it's undefined rather than an error), but alerts you in case you forgot to do
somethine first.

The piece of code is only stated to be undefined under general
standards. A compiler doesn't complain because there is a chance that
the variable may be initialized somehow (but I doubt it). As a
result, the only problems you encounter will be at run-time (or in the case of old dos programs, a "null pointer assignment" message on
shutdown.)

Assignment of an integer to a pointer type is not allowed, unless some
"dirty" casting is used.

void* const address = reinterpret_cast<void* const>(666);
Not ttoooo dirty.
-JKop

[JKop]

I actualy bought one and found that it had a number of really
quite trivial mistakes ¬_¬.

Money to burn...
-JKop

[Joe Van Dyk]

On 2004-10-27 02:17:09 -0700, "Gernot Frisch" <[e-mail]> said:

"Catalin Pitis" <ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...

Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn faster
and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other materials.
I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's study in the
companies that I worked.
Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for anything in
life really) will make you learn faster, still there's no need for the
teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Don't understand: Is there no book that tells you that it's illegal?
I'm gonna write one. Title:
"Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal".

Content:
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal. Example:
int* p_k; *p_k=4; [1]

References:
[1] JKob in comp.lang.c++, 27.10.2004

Am I gonna be rich?
-Gernot

So, if I have a pointer to an int that's unitialized, how do I tell it
to point at a given int?

[JKop]

Joe Van Dyk posted:

On 2004-10-27 02:17:09 -0700, "Gernot Frisch" <[e-mail]> said:

"Catalin Pitis" <ca***********@iquestint.com.renameme> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:2u*************@uni-berlin.de...

"JKop" <NU**@NULL.NULL> wrote in message
news:LR*******************@news.indigo.ie...

> Depends on the teacher. With a good teacher(s), you may learn
> faster and spend less time for digging in books, manuals and other
> materials. I missed that a lot. But I took care to guide other's
> study in the companies that I worked.
Definitely agree with you there! While having a teacher (for
anything in life really) will make you learn faster, still there's
no need for the teacher. I've yet to find a book which has a good
explanation on why:
int *p_k;

*p_k = 4;
is illegal.

When you find it, tell me :). I'm curious.

Don't understand: Is there no book that tells you that it's illegal?
I'm gonna write one. Title:
"Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal".

Content:
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is illegal. Example:
int* p_k; *p_k=4; [1]

References:
[1] JKob in comp.lang.c++, 27.10.2004

Am I gonna be rich?
-Gernot

So, if I have a pointer to an int that's unitialized, how do I tell it
to point at a given int?

int* p_k;

int a = 1;
int b = 2;
int c = 3;
int d = 4;

p_k = &a;

*p_k = 4;

p_k = &b;

*p_k = 3;

p_k = &c;

*p_k = 2;

p_k = &d;

*p_k = 1;
-JKop

[Howard]

"Joe Van Dyk" <jo*******@no.spam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2004102716345516807%joevandyk@nospamgmailcom. ..

On 2004-10-27 02:17:09 -0700, "Gernot Frisch" <[e-mail]> said:

So, if I have a pointer to an int that's unitialized, how do I tell it to
point at a given int?

Two ways:

Point it at an existing variable:

int* p; // uninitialized
....
int a = 6; // stores 6 in variable a
....
p = &a; // now, p points to a, so *p == 6
or,

Create its own memory to point at, and assign a value to that

int* p; // uninitialized
....
p = new int; // create new storage for p to point to
....
*p = 9; // stores 9 in memory set aside for *p
....
delete p; // don't forget to delete when you new!

-Howard

(P.S., you could also set the value of *p in the new statement itself, with
p = new int(9);)

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

[snips]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:35:04 +0000, Joe Van Dyk wrote:

So, if I have a pointer to an int that's unitialized, how do I tell it
to point at a given int?

Assign it.

int *p; // uninitialized
int x;

*p = 3; // invalid, p hasn't been pointed at anything
p = &x; // perfectly good, points p at x
if ( *p ) // bad again, as x (aka *p) has no defined value
x = 3; // perfectly good
if (*p) // okay now, as x is initialized