cbase | cbase project page for distribution tarballs

Since you didn't mention it, i'll guess the error message is : Subquery returned more than 1 value. or Consolidado_B isn't defined.

The CTE need to be with the select statement, not separate with the SET statement.

Try this :

That's how C++ works.

You don't return a CDerived object, you return a CBase, copied from the CBase sub-object of the temporary CDerived.

You could provide a constructor that converts a cbas to C such as:

At the risk of getting downvoted, I'm going to go on a limb and intentionally not answer your question. In fact I am going to do the opposite and say that the whole endeavor is misguided from the get-go.

The type of scenarios like you describe, where a child class invokes methods or refer to members of its parent class is, with the exception of a few specific cases, considered bad code. It's called inherit-to-extend if you want to read more on that anti-pattern. Good SO answer as an intro on the subject

Ok, well it's not so much bad code, as it is a code smell: a vague indication that something is not quite right in the fundamental design of the code.

Code smells are ok, you don't necessarilly have to go out of your way to avoid every single one of them, and the pattern you described might genuinely be the right thing to do in your case. However, it would be naughty code, that deserves a big comment block to explain why it's ok in this instance.

Jumping through hoops to make it easier to write naughty code is just a bad idea.

Delete your local coinbase.py in your test folder or run python in a different folder

I don't know how to access the second value of nested dictionary.

In your code example, you can access the nested value as val['Name'].

In your for loop for key, val in dictionary.items(), val is actually another dictionary which can not be directly used in string.replace() function.

Try this:

No. Templates are by definition a compile time construct. If you need runtime polymorphism, then you should basically be looking towards virtual functions.

Your first approach is fine. There's nothing wrong with it. However, when the number of parameters exceed 5, it's recommended to use the builder pattern.

The second alternative doesn't make sense. You're indirectly forcing the caller of your derived class to pass in an object of the base class in the constructor. This is a bad practice as you are leaking the details of your base class in the derived class.

You should stick to the first approach.

libhm and libhmd are debug memory management libraries. They detect errors by keeping extra information after malloc and then checking before free that the block was not previously freed and that it was allocated via malloc. These libraries don't handle posix_memalign and don't keep extra information for it. So when you call free after posix_memalign, they think you're trying to free memory that was not properly allocated. That said, I don't recall that causing a segmentation fault, but a false positive error message. (I'm more used to libhmd than libhm.)

These libraries are no longer maintained. See for example the XLF compiler manual page for them. The official recommendation is to use AIX's native debug malloc tool instead.