Using THIS pointer with default argument

[romasi]

Thanks, this saves me alot of trouble =).

"Wah wah wah"? Who are you to tell me that MY question was wrong? Its my question, I know exactly what I was asking. You read it wrong! I didn't post any error messages because there was no need, I didn't ask why I was getting an error, I simply asked how to make it work.

No matter how many times you try to attack my reasoning, my question is plainly stated in the first post for everyone to see, and 3 replier have already replied with the answer I was looking for. These further messages are just to explain to YOU what the mix up was on YOUR part and how to avoid them in the future.

Get your head out of your butt and swallow your pride! Your mistake is still your mistake no matter what angle you wish to look at it from.

[helios]

Who are you to tell me that MY question was wrong?

Your question was wrong. You will grow as a person when you accept that.

I didn't post any error messages because there was no need

If your question is related to the error then yes, there is need.

// Following gives a complile error but is there a way
// to make it work?

In the line that followed, a good compiler would have given two errors. Your compiler gave one and my head compiler gave a different one. I think that qualifies as "need".

Get your head out of your butt and swallow your pride! Your mistake is still your mistake no matter what angle you wish to look at it from.

I already said I was wrong, and that my mistake was partly your fault (note, for example, that Bazzy didn't see the default parameter as an error, either [assuming he did read your original question]). If anyone needs to swallow their pride, its you.

These further messages are just to explain to YOU what the mix up was on YOUR part and how to avoid them in the future.

No, these messages are to make you waste time, to anger you, and to show everyone else what an ass you're being to the people who are trying to help you.

[romasi]

Its hardly showing any signs of me being an ass, I've been quite reasonable in explaining my question numerous time despite your condescension.

The only thing I was wrong about was this.something not working inside a class when referencing a members variables.

The following:

// following gives a compile error but is there a way
// to make it work? 

was to inform the readers that I know that method didn't work and thats all.

Ill try to restate the question so you might finally understand it:

How do you pass a members variable as a default argument to a member function?

class String
{
public:
     int rfind( const char *, int position = this.length );
private:
     int length;
}

this example was just to show what method I've tried to use and to further demonstrate my question ONLY.

Are you admitting that this question is too complex for you to understand and therefore need further information to understand what I'm asking?

If so, your first reply should have clearly portrayed that, rather then your actual post being:

"this is a pointer, not an object
this->"

From that post on, I replied to your post accordingly, etc, depending on your reply. My mistake with this.something still doesn't change my question since this->something as the parameters default value still wouldn't work and therefore correcting that mistake would't answer my question and should have been an additional note to accompany your answer if you had one.

[wmheric]

The person stating the question determines the point of the question, not the reader.

It doesn't mean that any reply not sticking to the "point" is inappropriate (and meaningless).
You don't blame others for not understanding your question. If you know what you are asking, figure out why you get such replies and clarify. That's all, saying "you read it wrong" doesn't solve the problem.

From that post on, I replied to your post accordingly, etc, depending on your reply.

Then you are following the track of the replier, if you really want to get back to the question just say it, don't flame.

My mistake with this.something still doesn't change my question since this->something as the parameters default value still wouldn't work and therefore correcting that mistake would't answer my question.

So, people have to ignore anything wrong except what the posting is asking for, even if you are having a serious syntax error.

There is a standard out there, if you use technical terms it is not the person posting to determine the meaning of individual words.

[romasi]

I didn't say it was inappropriate, I said if you have something to state that isn't on the point, add it as an addition ( I've repeated this numerous times ). And your right, saying "you read it wrong" doesn't solve the problem and neither does saying "your question is wrong". If your gonna lecture me for my comment you need to do the same to the poster of the latter.

Following the track of the replier isn't my fault, I didn't post his reply, he did, and trying to get a response thats on the point doesn't make me a flamer. Give a response that makes sense.

In reference to "ignoring anything wrong...", as I stated in the first paragraph of this post, add it as an addition to your answer ( which I've already stated in other posts ). Being determined to flame me doesn't make my argument invalid. Logic is logic regardless of how you look at it.

"Technical terms"? If you don't understand what member variables or member functions means then you either don't know what a member is, a variable or a function is and shouldn't be attempting to answer forum questions.

If you want to reply to this post PLEASE actually answer these points with valid responses because none of helios or yours have addressed any of them after my stating them a number of times. If your intent is just to flame me, waste it somewhere else...

[wmheric]

lol
- Logic is logic, and logic is what is in the third post
- A "technical terms" makes people think the person talking do not understand the terms
- Ok we have to admit that there are people setting standards against others
Yeah, and wasted enough time on this

Member of this forum, not of a class

[edited, don't wanna top this again]
The post is simple. Accept what other says then figure it out later. Just accept.

Remember people first bolded words and sounded like being offended.

[romasi]

If I thought people would confuse member variables and member functions with members of the forum I would have used different word choices, but honestly I didn't expect that to be too hard to differentiate between.

I have had plenty of people respond to prior questions with respect, but some seem to think they are above those asking questions and speak down to them when trying to give advice, which just isn't necessary and will obviously result in the poster taking offense.

I appreciate all the help that everyone has given, it really does help figure stuff out. If I need to I will try to make my questions much more clear so that no one will be confused by what I'm asking.

Thanks again.