- Cross-platform C++ GUI Library -- coming soon! - 2 Updates
- DataItem cache - 1 Update
- Making all getters- return values const? - 1 Update
- Commenting code considered harmful - 1 Update
| Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com>: Feb 04 04:22PM -0600 On 2/4/2016 2:15 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: > http://neogfx.org > https://github.com/FlibbleMr/neogfx > /Flibble Will it have X% of the functionality of wxWidgets? https://www.wxwidgets.org/ And a Mac / HTML version? Lynn |
| Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com>: Feb 04 04:54PM -0600 On 2/4/2016 2:15 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: > http://neogfx.org > https://github.com/FlibbleMr/neogfx > /Flibble Neat! SDL is an open source cross platform hardware library: http://www.libsdl.org/ Lynn |
| Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid>: Feb 04 05:52PM -0500 On 2/4/2016 5:03 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: > [..] > My other programmer wants to move to x64. At least 1/4 of our customers > are still running x86 Windows, not gonna happen yet. Perhaps a wrong newsgroup (there is comp.software-eng, if you didn't know), but *why can't you maintain two targets*? Those who have already moved to x64 should use your x64 application and not be constrained. Otherwise it seems rather unfair. V -- I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask |
| Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid>: Feb 04 05:45PM -0500 On 2/4/2016 11:57 AM, JiiPee wrote: > }; > it should be: > const string getName() const { return m_name; } Are you sure you didn't miss the reference indicator, like const string& getName() const { return m_name; } ? > people also think that all getters should be done like this (if they > return an temporary object)? > I do not see class makers doing this consistently. There is very little sense in qualifying the return value type. Code like a.getName() = "Peter"; needs to be caught in a code review and either clarified with a comment or removed. V -- I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask |
| Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Feb 05 12:25AM +0200 On 4.02.2016 23:41, Vir Campestris wrote: > The code is correct. The first operation is guaranteed to remove at > least one char from the input, and put the rest in workbuffer. But it > looks wrong! But you are missing a comment about using malloc()! This should be only used in most low-level classes equivalent to std::vector, which should not be aware any of such high-level business logic as "is guaranteed to remove at least one char". |
| 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. |
No comments:
Post a Comment