The 19 september 2010 build (6608) CODECOMPLETION BRANCH version is out.

[ollydbg]

ibpp(http://www.ibpp.org/)  and CC problem still not solved
http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,11844.msg80492.html#msg80492

Operator overload for "->" is added at least for some std containers.

[Loaden]

As far as I know nullptr is defined somewhere in CB's sources, so it could be used.

p.s. nullptr will be in gcc 4.6

Rewritten nullptr.
docs: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/More_C%2B%2B_Idioms/nullptr

[Loaden]

Rewritten nullptr again.

Code

#if (  __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 6) ) \
    && !defined __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__
const class nullptr_t
{
public:
    template<typename T> operator T* () const { return (T*)0; }
    template<typename C, typename T> operator T C::* () const { return (T C::*)0; }
    template<typename T> bool equals(T const& rhs) const { return rhs == 0; }
private:
    void operator&() const;
} nullptr = {};

template<typename T> inline bool operator==(const nullptr_t& lhs, T const& rhs) { return lhs.equals(rhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator==(T const& lhs, const nullptr_t& rhs) { return rhs.equals(lhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator!=(const nullptr_t& lhs, T const& rhs) { return !lhs.equals(rhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator!=(T const& lhs, const nullptr_t& rhs) { return !rhs.equals(lhs); }
#endif

class A {};

int main()
{
    int* p = nullptr;
    if (p == nullptr || p != nullptr)
        ;
    if (nullptr == p || nullptr != p)
        ;

    A* a = nullptr;
    if (a == nullptr || a != nullptr)
        ;
    if (nullptr == a || nullptr != a)
        ;
    return 0;
}

:lol:

[attachment deleted by admin]

[oBFusCATed]

Loaden you can't implement nullptr using c++98 or c++03, if should be added to the language!

[Loaden]

Loaden you can't implement nullptr using c++98 or c++03, if should be added to the language!

I know, However, Before added to the language, we can first use it to replace, in order to C++0x.
 

[Loaden]

Loaden you can't implement nullptr using c++98 or c++03, if should be added to the language!

I know, However, Before added to the language, we can first use it to replace, in order to C++0x.
 

#if (  __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 6) ) \
    && !defined __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__
const class nullptr_t
{

I put nullptr_t in guard, that meaning: we can use nullptr if the nullptr is not added to the language. (GCC >= 4.6 && -std=c++0x)
If the nullptr has added to the language, we can not use this nullptr class any more.

[Loaden]

V3
test demo:

Code

#if (  __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 6) ) \
    && !defined __GXX_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX0X__
// it is a const object...
const class nullptr_t
{
public:
    // constructor
    nullptr_t() {}
    // convertible to any type of null non-member pointer...
    template<typename T> operator T* () const{ return (T*)0; }
    // or any type of null member pointer...
    template<typename C, typename T> operator T C::* () const { return (T C::*)0; }
    // support operator overloading (== and !=)
    template<typename T> bool equals(T const& rhs) const { return rhs == 0; }
private:
    // can't take address of nullptr
    void operator&() const;
    // can't copyable
    nullptr_t(const nullptr_t&);
    const nullptr_t& operator=(const nullptr_t&);
} nullptr;

template<typename T> inline bool operator==(const nullptr_t& lhs, T const& rhs) { return lhs.equals(rhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator==(T const& lhs, const nullptr_t& rhs) { return rhs.equals(lhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator!=(const nullptr_t& lhs, T const& rhs) { return !lhs.equals(rhs); }
template<typename T> inline bool operator!=(T const& lhs, const nullptr_t& rhs) { return !rhs.equals(lhs); }
#endif

class A {};

int main()
{
    nullptr_t* n2;
    n2 = nullptr;

    int* p = nullptr;
    if (p == nullptr || p != nullptr)
        ;
    if (nullptr == p || nullptr != p)
        ;

    A* a = nullptr;
    if (a == nullptr || a != nullptr)
        ;
    if (nullptr == a || nullptr != a)
        ;
    return 0;
}

[blueshake]

support member variable initialation codecompletion now

nice to visit the forum again.
here is the patch.

[killerbot]

new nightlies (well the one from Saturday, coming this evening), you can find them already at berlios, but now that the forum is back they can be posted ....

[thomas]

Not sure if we really need this. We've had a nullptr implementation since 2007 (I wrote that one before being aware of Meyer's more elegant solution), and nobody ever cared to use nullptr anywhere in the code

[Loaden]

Not sure if we really need this. We've had a nullptr implementation since 2007 (I wrote that one before being aware of Meyer's more elegant solution), and nobody ever cared to use nullptr anywhere in the code

This seems more like we do not know there is a nullptr implement in CB's sdk.
Use nullptr instead of 0 (or NULL) is sooner or later.
I like the C++0x. 

[Loaden]

support member variable initialation codecompletion now

nice to visit the forum again.
here is the patch.

Nice! The patch improved code completion in member variable init position.
Now it will works better.

[huliming2004]

a.h

namespace A{
    class myclass{
        public:
            void myfunc();
    }
}

a.cpp

using namespace A;

void myclass::myfunc(){
   //codes here
}

where i right clicked "void myfunc()"  in file "a.h" and choose "find implemetion of myfunc()", but failed with "not found myfunc()"
i know it's because of namespace, if i add namespace like this: A::myclass::myfunc(), it's fine

[Loaden]

a.h

namespace A{
    class myclass{
        public:
            void myfunc();
    }
}

a.cpp

using namespace A;

void myclass::myfunc(){
   //codes here
}

where i right clicked "void myfunc()"  in file "a.h" and choose "find implemetion of myfunc()", but failed with "not found myfunc()"
i know it's because of namespace, if i add namespace like this: A::myclass::myfunc(), it's fine

confirmed!
And this code could be parse well.

a.cpp

namespace A
{
void myclass::myfunc(){
   //codes here
}
}

[ollydbg]

a.cpp
namespace A
{
   void myclass::myfunc(){
   //codes here
   }
}

Yes, I prefer using this way, and CC works fine.
and Currently CC does not handling "using namespace XXX " directive correctly.