You did not mention what error you received, but I assume it is because you are still trying to access an item which does not exist. The values for argc and argv are as follows:
1. argv is an array of strings, which will always contain at least one item: the name of the executable that is used to initiate the program.
2. argc contains the number of items in the argv array. So it will always be at least 1.
Let's look at a couple of examples:
1. A simple command line call to run my program, which is called Test.exe produces the following:
If we add some parameters to the command line we will get something like
C:\Users\user1\Documents\Code\C++>Test.exe one two "three and a half"
argc = 4
argv = Test.exe
argv = one
argv = two
argv = three and a half
So argv now contains 4 items, the program name followed by each item that is separated by a space or tab. Not that argv contains four words, since they were delineated by double quotes in the command line.
The code to list these values is as follows:
std::cout<<"argc = "<< argc <<std::endl;
for (int i = 0; i < argc; ++i)
std::cout<<"argv["<< i <<"] = "<< argv[i] <<std::endl;
Generally you are not interested in the program name so you can start the above loop from 1 rather than 0.
The actual values in each parameter are for you to decide. You can use simple strings in a specific or random order, option letters or names preceded by single or double dashes or forward slashes:
Test check \foo\bar\filename.txt
Test -c C:\user1\Documents\file.jpg
Test --check somefilename
The simplest way to do this is to read the file line by line and check for the data that you are interested in. Remember a text file is just a stream of characters with no structure so you cannot easily use file positioning to get to a particular item.
Oh, this explains why I got an email that contained code but couldn't find the same message on this board.
Sorry, I don't do code inspections. If you don't know how to use a debugger, you need to learn now. The days when I wrote code with very few errors are gone. I wouldn't be able to do anything without a debugger now. They're so much better and easier to use than they were 40 years ago that I just focus on the design and then use the debugger to fix the details that I got wrong.
Okay may be i disturbed everyone here for nothing... I'm really sorry for stupid questions. I do actually know how to debug you sir when you get stuck only then you ask for help... but that debugger get the job done after 7 hours ... and Richard's steps may be helpful but it is very difficult for me to understand it you know... Anyways
Thank you for your help, i appreciate your help