not to sound like a smart a$$ but thats what your code should do with the way you have it coded. One way to get it to do what you want it to do would be to have a variable in the second for loop...
btw, as to the original purpose of this post, Im giving up on the error handling for the time being. There is something I am just not getting about the stack frame. I have spent quite some time on...
I saw this post the other day, and I have to agree with both responses you got. First off this piece of code doesnt look like it would acomplish anything meaningfull. If it is homework, show what...
Now Im getting frustrated, there is something seriously wrong with how I am understanding the stack frame setup. Id like to share 2 examples so that, hopefully, someone can point out what I am doing...
in reference to the first link you posted http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2012/0...-stack-frames/. Looking at the diagram of the stack frame at the beggining of the article, you notice 2 orange blocks...
by the way, any suggestions on books on modern assembly programming? everything Ive been finding is at least 4 or 5 years old. I am looking for something on general programming. I wouldnt say a...
SEH was the direction I was thinking of going in. I was wondering how much trouble it would be to implement at the assembly level. In all honesty, the main...
I have a few questions about exception handling in assembly language, Ive been reading up on the subject but have not been able to successfully implement my own handler yet.
Thats the conclusion Ive been slowly coming to. I am trying to find some way around it, the beauty of modular exponentiation is that it keeps the variables (relatively) small, thereby speeding it...
yes, only in my algorithm I start the return value = to the base, decrement the bit counter by one, and I do the squaring first. But yes, it does give correct results for integers. Ive got a...
I am working on a big number library, and noticed that when the modulus isnt a whole number and I run it through the modular expnentiation routine it doesnt give the same result as...
there is no delete this;, but the destroy method takes an instance of the class as a parameter and there is a delete _val; which is working as expected.
I just so happen to be working on this very approach right now, fell asleep at the computer last night in the middle of it. I started thinking I could make a Create and a Destroy functions to be...
in this particular instance I found out the only way this piece of code ever gets hit is if the object being deleted was created in the assembly routine. The reason why you never saw the allocation...
I have checked to make sure the actual value of the pointer didnt change, and I know that the pointer hasnt been deleted yet, but I am not sure how to narrow the search for where the heap would...