Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

Anybody want to volunteer to look at the code?

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

Sure, though I'm not that great with C++, I might be able to spot something...

Re: OT: Stupid c++ (Roguelike development)
 

Why would new re-assign what same pointers?

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

And now it isn't even getting past re-sizing the character array.

Why are you using character arrays at all? There is no reason to ever use them over string. Any time you need to pass a char* to a function, just use the .c_str() member on your string (aka: crazy_function(mystring.c_str()).

C++ is stupid.

C++ is neither stupid nor smart. It all depends on how you use it.

Why would the 'new' operator re-assign the same pointers?

I don't understand the question. New doesn't assign any pointers; it creates an object in the dynamic memory space (heap), and returns a pointer to it.

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

By character array, I mean an array of NPC's and PC's. And technically I should have said 'vector'.

C++ needs more comprehensive error checking.

Tomato, tomato.

Anyone who wants to see the source code, PM me, thanks.

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

C++ compilers have more error checking than most other languages (esp. g++ with things like -pedantic flags). And anyways, you can always add more by throwing and catching exceptions.

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

It doesn't tell me why the resize function wasn't working on the character vector! Obviously, it's not fully-featured! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

Why are you using a resize function anyways? push_back() works well.

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

Because, with resize you don't have to push_back something.

Re: OT: Stupid c++
 

Why would you increase the size of a vector without having something to add to it?