Monday, May 2, 2016

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 20 updates in 5 topics

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 11:29AM -0400

On 5/2/2016 9:38 AM, Gareth Owen wrote:
>> not twisting in the winds. I'm just standing by the solution to the
>> rules *as given*.
 
> Nobody believes this except you.
 
You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
 
> The requirements where that you didn't have to "adapt as necessary",
> depending on the platform or compiler. That was the whole point of the
> exercise.
 
You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
>> processors and all compilers is "Hello World".
 
> So you walk back your claims that the code works across all compilers
> and platforms?
 
Yes, I do.
 
>> And that may not even work in all cases.
 
> Nobody believes this except you.
 
You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
One thing this thread has shown - who the trolls in this newsgroup are!
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 11:32AM -0400

On 5/2/2016 10:16 AM, David Brown wrote:
> implementation-independent, universal compile-time solution providing an
> ideal answer - and that anyone who says otherwise is "stoopid", "would
> never make it as a consultant", and is a troll.
 
I didn't say anything about it being a "marvellous [sic]
implementation-independent, universal compile-time solution providing an
ideal answer".
 
I said it satisfied the original conditions, which it did. But now
you're trying to change the rules instead of admitting you were wrong
when you said it couldn't be done.
 
> Originally, I had genuinely thought that there was a chance (a small
> one, but a chance nonetheless) that he had a trick that I didn't know
> about here.
 
I did, but you won't admit to know thinking about something so obvious.
But such are the things trolls do.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: May 02 07:28PM +0100

>>> rules *as given*.
 
>> Nobody believes this except you.
 
> You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
Here are the rules as set by David Brown:
 
"If you can post a completely implementation-independent method of
determining the endianness of a target at compile time, using nothing
but the features required in one of the C or C++ standards (pick any one
you like), I will happily admit to being wrong in this case.
 
For emphasis: *COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT* and *AT COMPILE TIME*
 
[ Quoted from Message-ID: <nfttgg$hkc$1@dont-email.me> ]
 
>> depending on the platform or compiler. That was the whole point of the
>> exercise.
 
> You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
Requires adaptign to the implementation
====> NOT COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT <=====
 
(We won't even start on "AT COMPILE TIME")
 
 
>> So you walk back your claims that the code works across all compilers
>> and platforms?
 
> Yes, I do.
 
So you happily admit your solution is
=> NOT COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT <=
 
> You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
Au contraire. And, hey, I can prove it because, you know, the interwebz.
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 02:33PM -0400

On 5/2/2016 2:28 PM, Gareth Owen wrote:
 
> Requires adaptign to the implementation
> ====> NOT COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT <=====
 
> (We won't even start on "AT COMPILE TIME")
 
Ok, then you show me ANY PROGRAM with is COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION
DEPENDENT. One that actually does something productive, that is. There
is no such thing - not even "Hello, World".
 
> => NOT COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT <=
 
>> You obviously didn't read the rules.
 
> Au contraire. And, hey, I can prove it because, you know, the interwebz.
 
Yes, and you show me ANY PROGRAM which is COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION
DEPENDENT. One that actually does something productive, that is.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: May 02 07:30PM +0100


> I didn't say anything about it being a "marvellous [sic]
> implementation-independent, universal compile-time solution providing an
> ideal answer".
 
As cited elsewhere "implementation-independent" and "compile-time" were
both in the original requirements. Marvellous was for extra credit.
 
If yours is not implementation-independent or not compile-time, it does
not fit the requirements. On the plus side, if this is the case, the
reputation of IBM Consultants will not be adversely affected.
 
> i said it satisfied the original conditions, which it did.
 
No, it didn't. The original conditions were
"implementation-independent" and "compile time".
 
See Message-ID: nfttgg$hkc$1@dont-email.me (David Brown)
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 02:47PM -0400

On 5/2/2016 2:30 PM, Gareth Owen wrote:
 
> No, it didn't. The original conditions were
> "implementation-independent" and "compile time".
 
> See Message-ID: nfttgg$hkc$1@dont-email.me (David Brown)
 
And it makes the determination at compile time, and is implementation
independent. It shows a technique that works.
 
But then I know you are just like the other trolls and will never admit
someone showed you how to do something you said was impossible.
 
So show me ANY program which does something useful which is completely
implementation independent.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: May 02 07:50PM +0100


> And it makes the determination at compile time, and is implementation
> independent. It shows a technique that works.
 
You just said the exact opposite in another reply.
 
Seek professional help.
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: May 02 07:45PM +0100


> Ok, then you show me ANY PROGRAM with is COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTATION
> DEPENDENT. One that actually does something productive, that is. There
> is no such thing - not even "Hello, World".
 
If its such an impossibility to write an IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT
program, why did you claim to have solved a problem that required you to
do so, and then throw a tantrum - branding everybody a troll - when
many, many, many people pointed out you hadn't.
 
Have you convinced yourself that you're so infallible that your solution
had to be right, so therefore the question must have been the problem
you solved?
 
And why, when caught out that your program was not
implementation-independent, did you double down on that and repeatedly
state the *outright lie* that the original problem did not ask for an
IMPLEMENTATION-INDEPENDENT solution?
 
Especially when it is so, so trivial for anyone interested to check?
 
Did you think no-one would check?
 
That's an utterly bizarre thing to do in 2016, when half the world knows
how to use google. I think you've got issues far beyond the reach of
your technical knowledge.
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): May 02 07:25PM

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
 
slp53@pacbell.net spake the secret code
>>things down because who cares? LOL.
 
>What I remember distinctly was how much of a breath of fresh
>air Unix was after using TSS/8.24 on the PDP-8.
 
I was exposed to a bunch of machines and environments all at once
through the University of Delaware:
 
- CDC Cyber running PLATO
- Burroughs B6700 running CANDE
- PDP 11/70 running RSTS/E
- PDP 11/70 running Unix (don't remember what version, 4 perhaps?)
- DECsystem 10 running TOPS-10
- HP 2000 running a BASIC shell
 
I taught myself basic on the HP 2000 using a series of programs in
their contributed library[*]. Then went on to using BASIC-PLUS on the
RSTS/E 11/70 for several years before learning C from the unix "learn"
command. (You would type "learn C" and it would launch a series of
lessons on the C programming language.)
 
[*] <http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/hp/2000TSB/5952-4369_Index_To_HP_2000_Series_Contributed_Library_Jul74.pdf>
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): May 02 08:04PM

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
 
Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> spake the secret code
>> I thought it was quite clever.
 
>It is similar to using autoconf for setting up the buid environment,
>howver autoconf is more elaborate (unsurprisingly).
 
CMake is far easier, IMO. In the CMake book[1], they talk about its
advantages over autoconf. I worked with the author of the autotools
book[2] and asked him to read that over from the CMake book and tell
me if he agreed with the CMake guys. He did.
 
[1] <http://amzn.to/26M3wAv>
[2] <http://amzn.to/26M3E2T>
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 04:53PM -0400

On 5/2/2016 2:45 PM, Gareth Owen wrote:
> program, why did you claim to have solved a problem that required you to
> do so, and then throw a tantrum - branding everybody a troll - when
> many, many, many people pointed out you hadn't.
 
What a troll. The technique is implementation independent. That
doesn't mean the code has to be 100% implementation dependent.
 
So now prove that it's possible to create a completely implementation
independent program. Or everyone here will know you're just trolling
(which we already do).
 
 
 
> That's an utterly bizarre thing to do in 2016, when half the world knows
> how to use google. I think you've got issues far beyond the reach of
> your technical knowledge.
 
Yes, you definitely have issues - one of the biggest ones is projection.
But then that's typical of trolls.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 02 04:54PM -0400

On 5/2/2016 2:50 PM, Gareth Owen wrote:
>> independent. It shows a technique that works.
 
> You just said the exact opposite in another reply.
 
> Seek professional help.
 
No, I said nothing different. But you're just too stoopid to understand
plain English.
 
But such is common in trolls.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: May 03 09:07AM +1200

On 05/03/16 01:11, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> compilers are implementations. Therefore the proposed solution doesn't
>> meet the original requirement.
 
> Show where it violates the C standard.
 
Where did I say it did?
 
> And cross-compilation, by definition, is implementation specific. It is
> not part of the C standard, and not supported by all compilers.
 
Where did I say it was?
 
> But that was not in the original rules. You are also just trying to
> change the rules rather than admit I'm right.
 
David said "There is no implementation-independent way to do this in C
or C++". Cross compilers are implementations.
 
--
Ian Collins
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: May 02 10:11PM +0100


> What a troll. The technique is implementation independent. That
> doesn't mean the code has to be 100% implementation dependent.
 
Seek professional help.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.no>: May 02 01:10PM -0700


> FWIW, some, IMHO, fairly interesting C++ code for Field Based DLA:
> https://github.com/ChrisMThomasson/CT_fieldDLA
> that can be heavily multithreaded!
 
[...]
 
FWIW, here is a proxy garbage collector than can be fairly
useful for multi-threaded read-side optimizations.
 
Think RCU here. The code is here:
 
http://pastebin.com/f71480694
(uses Relacy Race Detector:
http://www.1024cores.net/home/relacy-race-detector)
 
How many people have ever used Relacy? FWIW, here is a video
of the man who created it:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9xrxRsIbSU
(very smart!)
 
more context on the simple proxy collector I created:
 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lock-free/X3fuuXknQF0/discussion
(fwiw, there are some very smart people in that thread!)
 
I am thinking about using this for the multi-threaded Field
DLA algorithm.
 
The vector field can be a shared, dynamic, read-mostly
data-structure protected by this, portable C++ proxy garbage
collector.
Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com>: May 02 12:27PM -0300

On 05/02/2016 12:02 PM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>> void foo(char (&a)[N]) { ... }
 
> Yeah, Herb Sutter on 2015-09-22 said/wrote (CppCon day 2):
 
> »Don't use array-to-pointer decay.«.
 
The quoted templated foo is not using array to pointer decay, it's just
using a reference to an array.
 
Array to pointer decay is, of course, used by the solution to avoid code
duplication (foo + internal_foo) in the 2nd part of my post
 
 
 
--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG
Zaphod Beeblebrox <a.laforgia@gmail.com>: May 02 10:14AM -0700

On Thursday, 28 April 2016 12:52:07 UTC+1, JiiPee wrote:
 
 
> void foo(char a[]) {}
 
> and
 
> void foo(char* a) {}
 
It's exactly the same.
 
> Can the foo use the array the same way in both?
 
> char k[] = "hello";
 
Yes, but it needs to know the number of items, so either you use a "sentinel" value at the end of the array (typically '\0' for strings) or you pass in the number of items in the array.

> creates memory for k-array and copies hello there.
 
This is one of the 3 cases when the name of an array *decays* to the pointer to its first element. The other cases are the use of sizeof and the & address-of operator. When you pass the name of an array to a function, instead, it decays to a pointer to its first element.
 
> a[] does not make a new array and copy the calling values there... it
> seems like its a pointer only. Is this correct?
 
'a' is a always a pointer, in your case.
Zaphod Beeblebrox <a.laforgia@gmail.com>: May 02 10:16AM -0700

On Friday, 29 April 2016 00:53:06 UTC+1, JiiPee wrote:
 
[...]
> *does* copy the hello into it. thats what I mean.... that array is not
> "consistant" : sometimes it means copy sometimes it means pointer copy.
> But I understand that now....its ok.
 
Yes, because the initialization via literal, the use of sizeof and the use of & are the only three cases when the name of an array does not decay to the pointer to its first element.
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram): May 02 03:55PM

>>»Don't use array-to-pointer decay.«.
>The quoted templated foo is not using array to pointer decay, it's just
>using a reference to an array.
 
Even though you did not wrote so directly, somehow that
makes me look now as if I would have claimed the opposite.
durganaveen.usit@gmail.com: May 02 08:26AM -0700

Hi,
This is Naveen from SAGE IT INC.
Hope you are doing great. Please send me your updated resume if you're interested for this position.
 
State Agency: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
 
Job Title: Business Intelligence / Data Warehouse Developer
 
Job Description:
 
Business Intelligence / Data Warehouse Developer on SQL Server platform: Creates BI/Data Warehousing cube design and ETL Processes
 
Must have skills:
 
* 7 plus years experience in data warehousing, datamarts, definitions, OLAP, report writers, data mining tools, Dash Board design,SQL, and layouts, Oracle and SQL Server Databases
* 3 plus years in building reports and dashboards off the data warehouse
* Strong experience with T-SQL, DTS, SSIS, Data Mining, OLAP, SSAS, SSRS, Cubes and MDX
Strong data modeling skills
 
* Review business requirements and current data models to develop a framework for BI reporting / Data Warehouse.
* Responsible for incremental data warehouse design, development, testing, support and configuration.
* Design dimensional data models to create star schemas/data warehousing repositories
* Expert in utilizing Data Warehouse modeling tools in SQL Server envirionment (SSIS, SSAS, SSRS, SQL Server, SharePoint, etc.)
* Develop reporting from multiple internal and external data sources to support
* Work independently and with other developers to implement the logical database design in the physical environment
* Create SSIS/DTS ETL Packages
* Soft-skills
 
* Must have experience working in Agile environment - incremental implementation
* Must be able to work with multiple teams - BAs, SMEs, Infrastructure team, DBA, etc.

Technology Requirements:
 
* Intermeidate experience with Linux, Unix, C#, VB, ASP, and Agile
* Advanced experience with Windows, T-SQL, PL/SQL/Dynamic SQL, and SSAS
 
 
 
Thanks& Regards
Durga Naveen
SageIT IT Solutions INC

cnaveen@sageitinc.net
972-996-0650 Extn 349
www.sageitinc.com
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)