Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sowelu]

Why would they ask that? o_o

To test your approach.  In my experience, when you're asked a question like that, the correct response is to talk your way through your entire thought process from beginning to end, and don't stop when you've reached an answer.  Get, like, two or three.  It's a case where 'showing your work' is valid in the real world.

IE, an interviewer here wouldn't be happy with 'so they don't fall in'.  They would be more satisfied if you went to the whiteboard, scribbled a side view and an overhead view of the situation, and explained out from start to finish how you could make a square manhole cover fail.

Once you've given the obvious, you can continue to...well, it means it's easier to put back in place, since you can do it from any angle.  Maybe it's less prone to wear or warping at the corners, since there are no corners.  Possibly the weight is distributed more evenly (since it's a constant distance from the middle to any edge).  Maybe the material you're putting a hole in is more structurally sound with a hole-shape than a square-shape.

In other more programming-related news, I made a class called Ccircle.
But the codepad compiler says

  Ccircle circleA;

... doesn't work. What am I doing wrong? D:

What language, what error message?  Did you declare your class before using it?  Did you include your header?

[Skyrunner]

C++. No headers involved (I was using Codepad, so .h and .cpp files were not supported.), and I declared it via:

class Ccircle {//class stuff};

It's really baffling. I think I should try it again at home with my own ide...

[kaenneth]

So that when the Incredible Hulk throws them at people they are safer since they don't have pointy corners.

[Araph]

Okay, I think that these two chunks of HTML:

Code: [Select]

<script type="text/javascript">
function box_text()
{
document.getElementById(Selection_Description).innerHTML =
'<p>Test Paragraph</p>';
}
</script>


Code: [Select]

<div id="Selection_Description" style="margin:5px; width:750px; height:300px">
</div>

<map name="CenterMap">
<area shape="circle" coords="219,50,42" alt="Button" href="ButtonTest.html" onMouseOver="box_text() onMouseOut="basic_box()">
</map>
Should make it so that when you mouse over the image map, it makes a bit of text appear in the Selection_Description box. The link from the image map works fine, but the script doesn't run properly. I think I must be making some dumb mistake, because it isn't wrong according to the tutorials I've looked at. Can anyone tell what I'm doing wrong?

[Siquo]

Put quotes around "Selection_Description".

Code: [Select]

<script type="text/javascript">
function box_text()
{
document.getElementById("Selection_Description").innerHTML =
'<p>Test Paragraph</p>';
}
</script>


[Araph]

Derp. Now I feel unobservant. It works! Thanks for the help!

[Skyrunner]

Javascript and HTML really need compiler-like thingies.

[MorleyDev]

Javascript and HTML really need compiler-like thingies.

http://validator.w3.org/ ?

[Sowelu]

There are really good IDEs for them.  <3

Microsoft even has this web developer express thingamabob, though it's more aimed at AJAX.  But it's still good at what it does, and understands JQuery.

Incidentally, once you understand the basics of using Javascript to tweak your html and css elements, you should move up to JQuery.  It's the de-facto standard library for javascript web stuff.  Imagine writing a C++ program without cin/cout, or a C program without like...strlen and strcpy.  That's Javascript without JQuery.

[Skyrunner]

Teehee. I don't think I'm going to ever learn Javascript or HTML >.>

Javascript and HTML really need compiler-like thingies.

http://validator.w3.org/ ?

Does that work as well as a regular compilerIDE in error checking? o_O I remember Shoruke complaining that is Javascript, if things don't work they just fizzle quietly; whereas if something is wrong in C++ the compiler complains loudly and clearly.

[Sowelu]

It'll tell you if your syntax is alright, at least.

[Mego]

Does that work as well as a regular compilerIDE in error checking? o_O I remember Shoruke complaining that is Javascript, if things don't work they just fizzle quietly; whereas if something is wrong in C++ the compiler complains loudly and clearly.

And profusely. For a school project, I was writing a Fraction class in C++. The code, and the error messages. I haven't yet started to try to fix them yet, because one thing struck me as being odd.

I haven't used templates a lot, but I know how they work and how to use them. Or, so I thought. If I'm reading the error messages right, template specialization can't be used with templated functions in a non-templated class. Am I reading the error messages wrong, or are templates really this silly?

[Siquo]

Imagine writing a C++ program without cin/cout, or a C program without like...strlen and strcpy.  That's Javascript without JQuery.

I never use cin, hardly use cout, and could live without strlen and strcopy. And I could live without jQuery. Mootools is actually a lot nicer to work with, even though it's the less popular choice these days.

Javascript without either one of those frameworks is pretty much useless, by the way.

[MorleyDev]

I haven't used templates a lot, but I know how they work and how to use them. Or, so I thought. If I'm reading the error messages right, template specialization can't be used with templated functions in a non-templated class. Am I reading the error messages wrong, or are templates really this silly?

You can't partially specialise them. There's a reason for this: http://www.gotw.ca/publications/mill17.htm

Basically it'd mess with the overload resolution. And since you can overload template functions anyway it's not as useful as you'd think.

[Mego]

Ahh, I had those functions as non-templated functions originally, but apparently my understanding of overload resolution with templated functions was pretty much completely wrong.

There's my lesson for the day. Screw school, I'm going back to bed.