C / C++ / MFC

m_serial(new QSerialPort(this),
  // sequence 1` st add HERE
   m_TAB_Ext(new A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT)

m_TAB_Ext(new A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT())

A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT *m_TAB_Ext;

//! [1]
      //! add rfcomm ??
      m_serial(new QSerialPort(this),
     // sequence 1` st add HERE
      m_TAB_Ext(new A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT)

Quote:

m_serial(new QSerialPort(this),
// sequence 1` st add HERE
m_TAB_Ext(new A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT)

QSerialPort *m_serial = nullptr;

<pre>  private:
        // sequence 4th*
    public:
        A_BT_TAB_DIALOG_EXT *m_TAB_Ext = nullptr;

    private:

        void showStatusMessage(const QString &message);
        Ui::MainWindow_Bluetooth *m_ui = nullptr;
        // add MDIarea ??
        QMdiArea  *m_mdiarea = nullptr;

        QLabel *m_status = nullptr;
        Console *m_console = nullptr;
        SettingsDialog *m_settings = nullptr;
        QSerialPort *m_serial = nullptr;


        // STEP 2 define class ??
        // spelling error  !!!
        SettingsDialog_RFcomm *m_settings_RFcomm = nullptr;

class cfoo
{
int // syntax error
public:
void foo();
}

class cfoo
{
xyz // syntax error
public:
void foo();
}

Salvatore Terress wrote:

I just do not want to
derail / influence your ideas of fixing it.

mainwindow.cpp:(.text+0x270): undefined reference to `ORIGINAL_TERMINAL_MainWindow::ORIGINAL_TERMINAL_MainWindow(QWidget*)

for(int x=0;x<count  && !breakouter;x++)
{
  for(int y=0;y<count;y++)
  {
    breakouter = true;
    break;
  } 
}

Maximilien wrote:

Probably one of the last valid usecase for goto. Especially if more than 2 inner loops.

outermost:     <loop control outermost>
                 <outermost statements>

intermediate:    <loop control intermediate>
                   <intermediate statements>

inner:             <loop control inner>
                     <statements>
                     exit intermediate;
                   <end inner>

                   <more intermediate statements>
                 <end intermediate>

                 <more outermost statements>
                <end outermost>

Salvatore Terress wrote:

is "TEST" defined?