Stack overflow: Correct way to define a pointer to a function?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

RalphTheExpert - 19 Nov 2005 14:21 GMT

Under MC++, what is the right way to define a (typedef'd) pointer to a
static function?

When I call a function through a pointer I get a stack overflow.

For those having the same problem, I worked around the problem by
replacing the pointer to a function with a functor.

If you need to know what a functor is, just ask.

Ralph Shnlevar

Reply to this Message

JAL - 19 Nov 2005 22:39 GMT

Ralph.... Are you asking about a delegate or type safe pointer to a method
call:

public ref class Program {
    public :
        static void StaticMethod(int i) {
            Console::WriteLine(i);
        }
};
public delegate void SomeDelegate(int i);

int main(array<System::String ^> ^args)
{
    SomeDelegate^ del= gcnew SomeDelegate(&Program::StaticMethod);
    del(5);
    Console::ReadLine();
return 0;
}

> Under MC++, what is the right way to define a (typedef'd) pointer to a
> static function?
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Ralph Shnlevar

Reply to this Message

RalphTheExpert - 19 Nov 2005 23:16 GMT

>Ralph.... Are you asking about a delegate or type safe pointer to a method

Actually, neither. I'm talking about a C++ (isn't this a C++ forum?)
pointer to a vanilla static function.

Unfortunately, I don't know C# and can't tell exactly what you are
doing.

--
Sent via .NET Newsgroups
http://www.dotnetnewsgroups.com

Reply to this Message

Willy Denoyette [MVP] - 19 Nov 2005 00:06 GMT

>>Ralph.... Are you asking about a delegate or type safe pointer to a
> method
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Sent via .NET Newsgroups
> http://www.dotnetnewsgroups.com

What JAL shows you is not C#, it is a (VS2005) C++/CLI code snip, probably
he got confused by this
<Under MC++, what is ...>, means... Under Managed C++ (VS2002/2003).

Willy.

Reply to this Message

JAL - 20 Nov 2005 00:08 GMT

Hi Ralph... Well. I'm afraid the code i posted is a form of C++, MC++, or
managed C++ in this the dotnet newsgroup :)

> >Ralph.... Are you asking about a delegate or type safe pointer to a
> method
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Sent via .NET Newsgroups
> http://www.dotnetnewsgroups.com

Reply to this Message

Peter Oliphant - 22 Nov 2005 18:36 GMT

>(isn't this a C++ forum?)

Not exactly. It's a C forum specializing in VS.NET as a development
platform. This includes both C++ and C#, and even 'vanilla' C. So responses
in C# are valid unless you specify what language you're interested in (and
C# translates to C++ with not too much difficulty)... : )

[==P==]

>>Ralph.... Are you asking about a delegate or type safe pointer to a
> method
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Sent via .NET Newsgroups
> http://www.dotnetnewsgroups.com

Reply to this Message

Olaf Baeyens - 22 Nov 2005 09:04 GMT

> When I call a function through a pointer I get a stack overflow.

A stack overflow is typically caused by calling a function recursively.
or if A calls B calls C calls A calls B calls C calls A Calls B calls C
<crash...>

My guess is that you have some (hidden) loop in your code that keeps calling
in a call in a call in a call...

Reply to this Message

RalphTheExpert - 22 Nov 2005 11:21 GMT

>My guess is that you have some (hidden) loop in your code that keeps calling
>in a call in a call in a call...

Nope. The problem happens immediately when I attempt to step into the
function being called.

The stack overflow is just one of several crash symptoms.

I don't understand MC++ at all well. I can truly understand why Carl
Daniel said in Message-ID: <Os7Fnbi7FHA.2816@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,

"Managed Extensions for C++ are a collection of syntax and semantic
extensions to C++ supported by VC++ 2002 (7.0) and later. This is a
fully ISO conforming extension, using lots of ugly __prefixed names for
new features. Managed extensions doesn't expose everything that the .NET
platform has to offer and has not been very well accepted."

I read somewhere (I think) that MC++ does not support pointers to
functions. This would make a certain amount of sense since it might
confuse the garbage colector.

Like I said, I don't understand MC++ at all. I have to use MC++ 2003
because it was specified in the contract I have but, ugh, it is ugly.

I do like (a lot) the "object orientation" of the .Net environment. But
slapping try/catch/finally and a lack of being able to put managed
objects on the stack and being unable to declare friends in public __gc
classes, etc., is just, well, awful.

Ralph

--
Sent via .NET Newsgroups
http://www.dotnetnewsgroups.com

Reply to this Message

David Wilkinson - 22 Nov 2005 11:41 GMT

> I don't understand MC++ at all well. I can truly understand why Carl
> Daniel said in Message-ID: <Os7Fnbi7FHA.2816@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> objects on the stack and being unable to declare friends in public __gc
> classes, etc., is just, well, awful.

Ralph:

Can you switch to Visual Studio 2005? There MC++ is replaced by a new
language, C++/CLI, with a much more pleasant syntax, and some real
improvments like automatic deterministic destruction. The old MC++
syntax still works, but is deprecated. An automatic translator was
"promised", but has not materialized. Visual C++ Express is free.

David Wilkinson

Reply to this Message

Olaf Baeyens - 22 Nov 2005 12:21 GMT

> Nope. The problem happens immediately when I attempt to step into the
> function being called.
>
> The stack overflow is just one of several crash symptoms.

In my case it is because it is because in the function I call myself
accidentially.

Allocating too big of local memory could also cause a stack overflow.
For example a huge array. Better to allocate using a 'new' in that case.

Reply to this Message

Stack overflow: Correct way to define a pointer to a function?

Free Magazines