Saturday, September 20, 2014

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 17 updates in 6 topics

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.
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Sep 20 05:03PM +0200

On 19/09/14 17:12, Christopher Pisz wrote:
 
> That's the very reason I copied it rather than linked it.
 
> I don't think I got it from that site, but who knows, many sites link to
> the same thing.
 
It would be possible to have an /argument/ - but not a /scientific/
argument or a /scientific/ discussion. The people who write articles
like that simply don't use the same language or understand the concepts
they are discussing. And any time someone says something that counters
their arguments, they simply respond with "God made it that way". There
is no way to continue in a logical, rational or scientific manner. So
there is no point in discussing it further.
 
As I said, I will discuss further with /you/ - since you seem to be
genuinely interested in learning about the science here. Ask, and I
will do my best to explain things to the best of my understanding
(noting that I am not an expert in this field - it is just an interest
of mine). But I will not bang my head against a wall discussing a
non-scientific theology article in scientific terms.
 
And yes, I am taking the position that the scientific viewpoint is
correct. I am not arguing here - I am trying to inform and teach, and
encourage you to find out for yourself.
 
But no, it is not the "Christian" word that puts me off the article. I
am allergic to all sorts of determined ignorance, pseudo-science and
hocus-pocus. That includes people who think the Bible is some sort of
encyclopaedia or science book, people with similar attitudes of
different faiths, conspiracy theorists, "new age" practitioners, etc.
 
I certainly don't mean that science and logic are the only important
things in life - the world would be a boring place indeed if we were
purely rational (medically speaking, being "in love" is closely related
to psychiatric disorders such as manic depression - but it would be a
terrible world without love).
 
However, I do think that scientific issues are best discussed in
scientific terms, based on observable facts, reasoned theories, and
rational logic.
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Sep 20 09:24PM

On Wed, 2014-09-17, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>show that I'm an old fashioned guy ... not just in that I like old
>>John Deere tractors
 
> I'll take a Farmall super M over any JD anyday :-)
 
And I'll take the gray 1950s Massey-Ferguson, thank you ...
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Christopher Pisz <nospam@notanaddress.com>: Sep 19 05:54PM -0500

On 9/19/2014 3:32 PM, Osmium wrote:
> you an idea of how rare I think good C++ books are. It's a real challenge
> to find a book that's a good fit with how your mind works. I would spend
> several *hours* with the Amazon reviews.
 
Maybe so, but a C++ book for a beginner should not be teaching how to
use C pre 1992. It should be showing the beginner how to use the latest
standard and the modern way of doing any common task they choose to
cover. A beginner has no foreknowledge of what they are being taught
incorrectly vs correctly. They should be at ease with accepting
everything in the book as correct. Once they get some experience, they
can go back and read books where it is required to keep in mind the time
they were written.
 
If they didn't use #include <iostream> rather than <iostream.h> I'm sure
they didn't use std::stringstream anywhere either, or std::fstream, or
any number of others that are required so commonly in beginner's tasks
like file parsing, string parsing, obtaining commands from the command
line etc.
 
We don't need them littering code with typesef struct{} MyStruct;
 
We don't need to train any more C programmers to think they are C++
programmers when they aren't.
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Sep 20 11:08AM +1200

Robert Hutchings wrote:
> If you had to pick the best books with which to teach C++ to absolute
> beginners, what would your choices be?
 
It's been out a while, but I would still go for "Accelerated C++:
Practical Programming by Example" by Koenig and Moo backed up by
Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater
depth and C++11.
 
--
Ian Collins
Christopher Pisz <nospam@notanaddress.com>: Sep 19 06:18PM -0500

On 9/19/2014 6:08 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
> Practical Programming by Example" by Koenig and Moo backed up by
> Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater
> depth and C++11.
 
I think Ian, Victor, Alf, and Paavo should get together and write a
book. I learned more from them over the last decade.5 then any text really.
Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com>: Sep 19 07:12PM -0500

On 9/19/2014 6:08 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> beginners, what would your choices be?
 
> It's been out a while, but I would still go for "Accelerated C++: Practical Programming by Example" by Koenig and Moo backed up by
> Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater depth and C++11.
 
+1, an oldie but a goodie:
http://www.amazon.com/Accelerated-C-Practical-Programming-Example/dp/020170353X/
 
Lynn
David Harmon <source@netcom.com>: Sep 19 09:06PM -0700

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 11:08:39 +1200 in comp.lang.c++, Ian Collins
<ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote,
>Practical Programming by Example" by Koenig and Moo backed up by
>Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater
>depth and C++11.
 
Those are the classics.
 
For the absolute raw beginner, someone who doesn't yet know what
programming is, Francis Glassborow _You Can Do It, A Beginners
Introduction to Computer Programming_
Robert Hutchings <rm.hutchings@gmail.com>: Sep 20 06:55AM -0700

> Practical Programming by Example" by Koenig and Moo backed up by
> Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater
> depth and C++11.
 
Excellent choices Ian. The Koening/Moo book is top-notch and of course Stroustrup is THE man for C++
Robert Hutchings <rm.hutchings@gmail.com>: Sep 20 06:57AM -0700

> I think Ian, Victor, Alf, and Paavo should get together and write a
> book. I learned more from them over the last decade.5 then any text really.
 
Yes, and there are some very good online tutorials these days!
Robert Hutchings <rm.hutchings@gmail.com>: Sep 20 06:58AM -0700

> The best C++ books are the ones that include advice about sausages.
> /Flibble
 
LOL, OK, I will check for that :)
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Sep 21 07:31AM +1200

Robert Hutchings wrote:
 
>> Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language, 4th Edition" for greater
>> depth and C++11.
 
> Excellent choices Ian. The Koening/Moo book is top-notch and of course Stroustrup is THE man for C++
 
Please don't snip attributions: doing so is considered as rude on Usenet.
 
--
Ian Collins
MikeCopeland <mrc2323@cox.net>: Sep 20 09:52AM -0700

Is there a way to, in a single assignment, set multiple values in a
std::bitset? For example, I must use 4 "set" calls to establish several
values, but I'd like to do this with a single call if possible. e.g.
 
bitset<100> wantedRecs;
wantedRecs.reset(); // establish basic values
wantedRecs.set(1);
wantedRecs.set(2);
wantedRecs.set(3);
wantedRecs.set(8);
 
Please advise. TIA
 
 
 
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Sep 20 12:41PM -0500

MikeCopeland <mrc2323@cox.net> wrote in
> wantedRecs.set(2);
> wantedRecs.set(3);
> wantedRecs.set(8);
 
It appears you can only set all needed values together, e.g.
 
wantedRecs = std::bitset<100>("100001110");
 
or
 
wantedRecs = (1ul<<1) | (1ul<<2) | (1ul<<3) | (1ul<<8);
 
The latter method can be used only if all the bits you want to set can be
expressed in an unsigned long.
 
hth
Paavo
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Sep 20 07:18PM

On Sat, 2014-09-20, MikeCopeland wrote:
> wantedRecs.set(2);
> wantedRecs.set(3);
> wantedRecs.set(8);
 
wantedRecs |= set_of_1_2_3_and_8;
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Sep 20 12:58PM -0500

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
 
> Algorithmic processing is often offloaded to custom coprocessors
> (generally Field-Programmable Gate Arrays, which are programmed in
> Verilog/VHDL).
[...]
> Given the low-latency requirements, C++ may not be the best choice
> anyway.
 
FYI: it appears that there are some systems which claim to be able to
program FPGA directly from a C or C++ program:
 
http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/sw_manuals/ug998-vivado-intro-
fpga-design-hls.pdf
 
I have not used it (or even read through the pdf) so don't know how much
merit it has.
 
Cheers
Paavo
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Sep 20 09:59AM -0700

http://meetingcpp.com/index.php/br/items/my-trip-to-cppcon.html
 
Jens says the AC was too cold. I'm an American, but I
know what he means.
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net
David Harmon <source@netcom.com>: Sep 19 09:14PM -0700

On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 03:25:13 -0500 in comp.lang.c++, Paavo Helde
<myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> wrote,
>Thus, the C++ standards group should have invented a special std::bitvector
>instead.
 
Some of the purposes you have in mind may be served by std::bitset
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.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)