| comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com | Google Groups |  |
| Unsure why you received this message? You previously subscribed to digests from this group, but we haven't been sending them for a while. We fixed that, but if you don't want to get these messages, send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
- Onwards and upwards - 4 Updates
- Announcement of new C++11 library to handle measures - 1 Update
- Is it OK to OCCASIONALLY submit C++ code for comments in this group, like RFC? - 13 Updates
- any find and replace, one-pass algorithm processing multiple search strings at once? - 4 Updates
- "JetBrains CLion C++ IDE First Impressions" - 2 Updates
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Sep 29 10:08PM -0700 On Monday, September 29, 2014 2:50:50 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote: > Only got one comment: use boost.asio and get rid of all that crap. The C++ Middleware Writer is an alternative to the serialization library in Boost more so than asio. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Sep 30 06:33PM +0100 >> Only got one comment: use boost.asio and get rid of all that crap. > The C++ Middleware Writer is an alternative to the > serialization library in Boost more so than asio. That is no reason to not use boost.asio; boost.asio is for networking not serialization. Rule of thumb for modern software development: as much as your code as possible should be portable so get rid of that Winsock shite and use boost.asio. /Flibble |
| Christopher Pisz <nospam@notanaddress.com>: Sep 30 02:32PM -0500 On 9/30/2014 12:33 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: > possible should be portable so get rid of that Winsock shite and use > boost.asio. > /Flibble I don't particularly enjoy debugging boost.asio, but haven't really heard of anyone getting around that with iocp. Who started the thread, is hard to find out. |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Sep 30 02:29PM -0700 On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 22:33:16 UTC+3, Christopher Pisz wrote: > I don't particularly enjoy debugging boost.asio, but haven't really > heard of anyone getting around that with iocp. Who started the thread, > is hard to find out. Sometimes it is indeed difficult to debug modern C++ if all types around of where something breaks are whole page of "<", "::" and ">" nausea far worse than worst of XML. There is alternatively a C library named "libuv" (part of "node.js" but may be used separately) that is somewhat similar to boost.asio and that people use for networking quite finely. |
| c.milanesi.bg@gmail.com: Sep 30 02:13PM -0700 > I hope you are aware that something like this exists in boost? Sure, but I was not satisfied by that, and so I designed and implemented my own library. > In what sense is your work different > or even better than the boost solution? I don't really know Boost.Units, but here are some apparent differences. Boost.Units supports 12-year-old compilers, while Cpp-Measures requires, and takes advantage of, the parts of C++11 available in GCC and VC++ 2012. Boost.Units includes many definitions of magnitudes and units in the library, while Cpp-Measures requires that the application programmer defines the needed magnitudes and the units, although many examples will be available in documentation. Boost, when expanded, is 500 megabytes large, while Cpp-Measures is 200 KB of library code for the application programmer, and less than 1 MB with all tests and documentation. It is not clear to me how to install only the Boost.Units library and its dependencies instead of all Boost. Application code using Cpp-Measures is less verbose. For example, the following Boost.Units expression quantity<absolute<fahrenheit::temperature> > T1p(32.0*absolute<fahrenheit::temperature>()); corresponds to the following Cpp-Measures expression point1<fahrenheit> T1p(32); Application code using Cpp-Measures is compiled faster and produces less machine code. For example, the example provided by Boost.Units Quick Start page, when compiled using GCC for Windows, with stripping and optimization, takes 3 times the time to compile the equivalent code using Cpp-Measures, and generates an executable 7 times as large. Cpp-Measures supports 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional measures, with algebraic operations, dot product and cross product, while I couldn't find such features in Boost.Units. Cpp-Measures supports signed and unsigned angles modulo one turn, while I couldn't find such features in Boost.Units. > - do you differentiate between absolute and relative values (for > instance for time, but also for location/distance) Yes, for example, a variable representing an absolute length measured in inches, is defined as: point1<inches> variable_name; While a variable representing a relative length measured in inches, is defined as: vect1<inches> variable_name; > - can you work with non-floating-point base types (especially > fixed-point types implemented on top of integers)? I tested it with the following types: float, double, long double, int, long, long long, complex<double>. Not tested yet, and probably not working properly yet fixed-point, rational, multiple-precision, and arbitrary-precision types. > - can you work with mixed base types (for instance fixed-point types > based on integers of various size and scaling)? Automatic conversion between fixed-point types is not supported yet, but you can do something like the following: auto a = vect1<inches,float>(1.2f) + vect1<inches,double>(2.3); And you get that "a" is of type "vect1<inches,double>", and it has value 3.5. -- Carlo Milanesi |
| Robert Hutchings <rm.hutchings@gmail.com>: Sep 29 06:43PM -0500 On 9/29/2014 6:18 PM, JiiPee wrote: > understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the > company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code > outside work is theirs. Yes, I agree with you. If I write C++ code that has nothing to do with my employer, how can they claim it as "their" IP? THAT makes no sense to me... |
| Christopher Pisz <nospam@notanaddress.com>: Sep 29 06:51PM -0500 On 9/29/2014 6:18 PM, JiiPee wrote: > understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the > company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code > outside work is theirs. Usuaully the intelectual property blurb in the paperwork states that it own works _related to the company's business_, which is reasonable. If you have a blurb in your paperwork sweeping everything without that condition, than I'd mention it. If you have a project worth anything, i.e a game engine you've been working on for 5 years, I A) Wouldn't recommend working for a game company B) Would get written papers stating that you will retain ownership and that they have been notified that this work was underway before your employment. |
| Stuart <DerTopper@web.de>: Sep 30 09:36AM +0200 On 09/30/14, JiiPee wrote: > understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the > company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code > outside work is theirs. Well, they can say anything they want, that's the beauty of freedom of speech. Whether it is legally sound or not is quite another story. Here in Germany your landlord can put a clause into your contract that you have to paper the walls regularly. However, such a clause is illegal in Germany and has therefore no effect. Worse, it can nullify the whole contract - which is why they put an severability clause into the contract as well. If your contract does not contain such a clause, things may turn out to be very interesting, indeed. Just out of curiousity: If you write a virus in your spare time which destroys all atomic weapons in the world (good job IMHO), and the Russians and the US Army are looking for someone to shoot, would it be your head in the block or your bosses? After all, it was _his_ code... ;-) Regards, Stuart PS: I wouldn't work for such a company in the first place. That doesn't mean that I have a problem with security, I just don't like ridiculous interference with my personal life (another thing would be if I worked for the MoD and went to anti-war demonstrations). It turns out that my contract contains a clause that I must not make statements about my work or my company to existing and _future_ clients of our company. That's a bummer. When I confronted my boss - whom I went to school with for two years - he admitted that he did not even read through this particular clause, he just copied the whole thing from the internet. |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Sep 30 09:44AM +0200 On 30/09/14 01:18, JiiPee wrote: > understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the > company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code > outside work is theirs. It is not uncommon for software companies to have this attitude - in fact, I believe it is the default legal position. The reasoning is basically that if you work for them as a professional programmer, then when you program you do so as a professional. Thus when you are programming, you are working - you are therefore either working for them (and they own the code), or you are moonlighting (which is illegal) and competing against your own employer. Of course it is usually possible to form agreements about what this covers, such as distinguishing between different types of programming, or for specific cases - just as you can take a second job with agreement from your main employer. A good employer will be happy to reach an accord of some sort - as long as you are not tiring yourself out with hobby programming to late at night (and thus unable to do your real job as well as you could), and as long as you are not competing with them in some way, then it is usually fine. The same thing applies in many professions, and there have been countless cases of disagreement when someone has made an invention at home that their employer then claims. So it is best to get details of such agreements in writing - especially if you are doing something that might turn out to be valuable. |
| seeplus <gizmomaker@bigpond.com>: Sep 30 12:59AM -0700 On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 5:37:16 PM UTC+10, Stuart wrote: > bummer. When I confronted my boss - whom I went to school with for two > years - he admitted that he did not even read through this particular > clause, he just copied the whole thing from the internet. Haa! Who can take in all those Ts and Cs that companies stick in there. Did you see that experiment setting up a free Wi-Fi hotspot in London recently. { When people connected to the hotspot, the terms and conditions they were asked to sign up to included a "Herod clause" promising free Wi-Fi but only if "the recipient agreed to assign their first born child to us for the duration of eternity". Six people signed up.} |
| "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>: Sep 30 06:57AM -0500 "Stuart" wrote: > bummer. When I confronted my boss - whom I went to school with for two > years - he admitted that he did not even read through this particular > clause, he just copied the whole thing from the internet. I think your chance of getting a job as a programmer or an engineer with those constraints in the USA are real close to zero. Unless you are Very Special the company is not going to be willing to even enter negotiations with you regarding the basics. It also displays an "attitude". A friend of mine wrote Science Fiction as a hobby. Our company refused to give him permission to have it published since it might reflect badly on the company. |
| drew@furrfu.invalid (Drew Lawson): Sep 30 12:27PM In article <mNlWv.358129$J62.156216@fx03.am4> >When I entered my first software company, they said they also own all >the code I do on my spare time, even if its some game I am programming >at home. Is this really true as well? When you took that job, you most likely signed an employment agreement. If this was in that agreement, then it is true. Depending on jurisdiction, some parts of that agreement may not be enforcable. The agreements I've been under have included: 1) The company owns anything done on company time and company equipment, if it relates to the main business interests of the company. 2) The company owns anything done on company equipment. 3) The company owns any IP created during my employment, unless explicitly dislaimed. Any patents I receive must be assigned to the company. I think I'm currently under #3, but I haven't had reason to look recently. In some circles, #3 is called things like "the IBM rule," as they were well known for having and enforcing that. If you were working on the Great American Novel, it was recommended to pass it by HR and get acknowledgement that it was a personal work. >understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the >company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code >outside work is theirs. Somewhat, this is for legal convenience. How do you prove that your project was done on your home computer, rather than on the company's dime? -- Drew Lawson | "But the senator, while insisting he was not | intoxicated, could not explain his nudity." |
| Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk>: Sep 30 06:30PM +0200 On 2014-09-30 01:43, Robert Hutchings wrote: > If I write C++ code that has nothing to do with > my employer, how can they claim it as "their" IP? THAT makes no sense > to me... And what if their huge team of lawyers claim that is DOES have something to do with your employer? Like their secret plans for a new product... Bo Persson |
| Robert Hutchings <rm.hutchings@gmail.com>: Sep 30 12:00PM -0500 On 9/30/2014 11:30 AM, Bo Persson wrote: > And what if their huge team of lawyers claim that is DOES have something > to do with your employer? Like their secret plans for a new product... > Bo Persson Indeed! Unless one signs a contract that explicitly states that "C++ code developed for personal use is NOT the IP of <employer>", you would have to fight a team of lawyers, and that is a daunting prospect... |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Sep 30 11:03AM -0700 On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 12:00:53 PM UTC-5, Robert Hutchings wrote: > Indeed! Unless one signs a contract that explicitly states that "C++ > code developed for personal use is NOT the IP of <employer>", you would > have to fight a team of lawyers, and that is a daunting prospect... When it comes to dealing with companies with lots of lawyers, you have to be careful. I haven't had a debit or credit card in over 10 years because I don't trust those companies. There are advantages to working for a small company. One of them is you don't have to fend off those lawyers. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net |
| Stuart <DerTopper@web.de>: Sep 30 10:14PM +0200 Stuart wrote: >> bummer. When I confronted my boss - whom I went to school with for two >> years - he admitted that he did not even read through this particular >> clause, he just copied the whole thing from the internet. On 09/30/14, Osmium wrote: > those constraints in the USA are real close to zero. Unless you are Very > Special the company is not going to be willing to even enter negotiations > with you regarding the basics. It also displays an "attitude". Gosh, I hadn't suspected this. I wonder whether this is an "American" thing or just another indicator that software engineers are getting closer and closer to the status of a McDonald employee. If I look at the rates that are offered in most freelancer websites, I'd say that McDonalds employees are only slighly less paid. > A friend of mine wrote Science Fiction as a hobby. Our company refused to > give him permission to have it published since it might reflect badly on the > company. I can partly understand this. However, it would be better if your company allowed your friend to publish under a pseudonym. Regards, Stuart |
| Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Sep 30 09:30PM +0100 On 30/09/2014 00:18, JiiPee wrote: > understand and accept that all the code done in workplace belongs to the > company, that is natural.... but I do not think its right that also code > outside work is theirs. This depends on your contract and the country where you work. If you really want to know seek a legal newsgroup, or even pay a lawyer. uk.legal.moderated is quite good, but I suspect not relevant to you. Andy |
| Christopher Pisz <nospam@notanaddress.com>: Sep 30 03:31PM -0500 On 9/30/2014 3:14 PM, Stuart wrote: > Stuart wrote: SNIP > closer and closer to the status of a McDonald employee. If I look at the > rates that are offered in most freelancer websites, I'd say that > McDonalds employees are only slighly less paid. SNIP Eh? I'm in America. Like I said before in this thread, it is pretty much expected at any job that there will be some intellectual property clause in your hiring paperwork. Usually, it only makes claims on things _related to the companies business_, rather than a sweeping claim on everything you do. i.e No, you cannot create a video game on your own while working for a game studio. You can however invent the best flap jack recipe. As far as salaries go, I have never met a McDonald's employee making $120,000/year. Of course, I don't get to McDonald's very often. I suppose it depends what kind of software and where on the totem pole you are. I am sure some companies I've worked for have done the "Let's hire 50 Afghanistan grunts to sludge out this code for $15/hr" and I don't know the details of how that works, only that it results in a maintenance nightmare. Perhaps that's what you are referring to when you compare salaries. However, the average Software Engineer in America is expected to make $60,000 out of college and the average McDonald's Fry Cook is expected to make $10/hr. I think the average junior salary is around $80,000 and seniors typically make $100,000+ last I checked. It varies with your niche and city though. Are Europeans making less? Their money is worth more, so perhaps. I dunno. |
| JKdr <jkdr@siberianoutpost.com>: Sep 30 05:06AM -0400 Input would be: 1) the strings that need to be searched for (or regex patterns) and their substitutions 2) a stream (from a file) and its encoding I spent some time trying to find an implementation of such an algorithm, which I think shouldn't be a big deal at least in the case that you don't use regex, just strings to find, but all implementations I have found touch the input stream more than once I think the data strategies of such algorithms is based on graphs/decision trees, which are used in state machines and similar algorithms Unless I am missing something Any ideas you could shared? lbrtchx (comp.lang.c++) |
| Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Sep 30 09:44AM On Tue, 2014-09-30, JKdr wrote: > algorithm, which I think shouldn't be a big deal at least in the case > that you don't use regex, just strings to find, but all implementations > I have found touch the input stream more than once Which ones /have/ you found? > algorithms > Unless I am missing something > Any ideas you could shared? Not really ... but I /have/ looked into the simpler case "search for multiple strings at once" and there are several algorithms. Follow the links from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth.Morris.Pratt_algorithm I've been meaning to implement this in C++: the case where the same set of search strings are used over and over again can be precalculated well, and encapsulated as an object. On the other hand, I suspect std::regex might perform well. Is it one-pass enough for your purposes? /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . |
| JKdr <jkdr@siberianoutpost.com>: Sep 30 08:23AM -0400 On 09/30/2014 07:00 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote: > Then it's a bit of a fiddle to hold the characters in a buffer, until they match > or don't match your end of string character, which is the terminal of your > suffix tree. I had something very similar in mind. String search algorithms tend to be messy (repeatedly looping though both data). What seems to be great theoretically sometimes is not practical, could you point me to algorithms like the ones you describe, preferably with tests? ;-) Thank you lbrtchx |
| JKdr <jkdr@siberianoutpost.com>: Sep 30 11:31AM -0400 On 09/30/2014 08:54 AM, Siri Crews wrote: > That's called a finite state transducer Yeap! Those kinds of problems have been studied to exhaustion http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&q="finite+state+transducer"+text and there are implementations of such logic ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_state_transducer http://jsalatas.ictpro.gr/java-fst-framework-api-review/ I was (very expectedly indeed ;-)) trying to tackle text processing/corpora research problems with such FST-like strategies Thank you very much, lbrtchx |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Sep 30 08:01AM > acknowledge His help as being help and say to themselves instead, "I know > how the help should be doled out," rather than having faith in God, again > the result of sin. As I thought, you have no response. Of course you don't, because there is no response. The only thing you can do is to try more proselytizing. I find it somewhat amusing how so many Christians think that proselytizing is like magic: As long as people hear the words, magic will sometimes happen. It's like a magical incantation. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Sep 30 09:49AM +0100 On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:01:59 +0000 (UTC) > I find it somewhat amusing how so many Christians think that > proselytizing is like magic: As long as people hear the words, magic > will sometimes happen. It's like a magical incantation. Fuck off. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
