I don't know if this has been asked or answered yet. I am very new on the scene. Purchased my device today while Verizon had an awesome promotion:cool: I was wondering if anyone could answer this question for me, it'd be greatly appreciated:good: thanks in advance to all.:cyclops:
Affichage des articles dont le libellé est Void. Afficher tous les articles
Affichage des articles dont le libellé est Void. Afficher tous les articles
dimanche 16 mars 2014
mardi 11 mars 2014
[Q] upgrade, root, warranty void fix? topic
Is there a fix, in the works, similar to triangle away, clear cache partition for 4.4.2 like for 4.3? A Knox fix I guess? I've already jumped the gun, and updated OTA. And I'm a little hesitant about rerooting, as I read an article that said there is no warranty fix once you root from 4.4.2. Anything?
mercredi 29 janvier 2014
illegal void argument topic
On 29.01.2014 16:04, Öö Tiib wrote:
> In C++ we can have void return type and we can "return" it:
>
> void foo();
>
> void bar()
> {
> return (void)42; // ok #1
> return foo(); // ok #2
> }
>
> Fun way to confuse novices indeed. However, it appears that we can not (for
> whatever unknown reason) pass void arguments:
>
> void bad()
> {
> foo((void)42); // illegal
> }
>
> Even if I think I will be extra clever and add overload of 'foo' that supposedly
> accepts anything ...
>
> void foo(...);
>
> ... then I get different failures or successes on different mac/ubuntu clang/gcc
> versions. Seems that compilers are confused.
>
> Is there reason why we have such inconsistency?
>
`(void)` as a formal argument list doesn't indicate a formal argument of
type `void`. It's just a special syntax from C, where it specifies that
the function really doesn't take *any* arguments, at all.
In C++ the special syntax is unnecessary, since in C++ `()` also says
that, but the special syntax is supported for C compatibility.
Also baffling: why you can create a "void value" via `void()`. I guess
for uniform treatment in template code. But still it's kind of
inconsistent with the basic idea of `void` as an incomplete type.
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
> In C++ we can have void return type and we can "return" it:
>
> void foo();
>
> void bar()
> {
> return (void)42; // ok #1
> return foo(); // ok #2
> }
>
> Fun way to confuse novices indeed. However, it appears that we can not (for
> whatever unknown reason) pass void arguments:
>
> void bad()
> {
> foo((void)42); // illegal
> }
>
> Even if I think I will be extra clever and add overload of 'foo' that supposedly
> accepts anything ...
>
> void foo(...);
>
> ... then I get different failures or successes on different mac/ubuntu clang/gcc
> versions. Seems that compilers are confused.
>
> Is there reason why we have such inconsistency?
>
`(void)` as a formal argument list doesn't indicate a formal argument of
type `void`. It's just a special syntax from C, where it specifies that
the function really doesn't take *any* arguments, at all.
In C++ the special syntax is unnecessary, since in C++ `()` also says
that, but the special syntax is supported for C compatibility.
Also baffling: why you can create a "void value" via `void()`. I guess
for uniform treatment in template code. But still it's kind of
inconsistent with the basic idea of `void` as an incomplete type.
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
dimanche 26 janvier 2014
Warranty void ? topic
Hello dear friends when i install a custom Rom on my android phone than warranty get lost ?
samedi 25 janvier 2014
Install rom without KNOX warranty void from 0x0 to 0x1? topic
I would like to install custom rom on my i9505. It has stock system now and 0x0 knox. Is is possible to install this rom: http://forum.xda-developers.com/show....php?t=2544474 without voiding KNOX warranty (0x1). If the answer is yes, how to do that and how to reset everything (rom, kerrnel, flash counter, ...) back to stock after?
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)