- "Why I don't spend time with Modern C++ anymore" by Henrique Bucher - 6 Updates
- Where do you want to go for eternity? - 4 Updates
- Compile time contants simplification - 3 Updates
- C++ Middleware Writer - 6 Updates
- My Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library was updated - 1 Update
- [OT]the meter (was: C++ Middleware Writer) - 3 Updates
- overloading function matching - 2 Updates
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: May 24 06:09AM > (unless you count the built-in stuff like integers, arrays and > references as objects), but I do use objects in a more abstract sense. > Indeed, something must be stored. I'm suspecting you are using the term "object" with a different meaning than I undestand it. In normal parlance "object" is simply the instantiation of a class. For example: std::string s = "Hello"; That 's' is an object (and std::string is a class). But maybe you have a difference concept of what "object" means. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl>: May 24 08:18AM +0200 Op 24-May-16 om 8:09 AM schreef Juha Nieminen: > For example: > std::string s = "Hello"; > That 's' is an object (and std::string is a class). That is exactly the kind of object that I don't use for my small-systems compile-type-polymorphism programming style. Wouter "Objects? No thanks!" van Ooijen |
| jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr>: May 24 07:49PM +0200 Le 23/05/2016 à 08:08, Juha Nieminen a écrit : > Whenever someone whines about compilation times, I immediately disregard > the entire thing. It's such a retarded thing to whine about. > --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- sure. If you are paid per hour, it is very nice to wait :-) If you are not it is dammed frustrating waiting 3 minutes at each change or even more |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: May 24 10:40PM > If you are not it is dammed frustrating waiting 3 minutes at each > change or even more I don't think I have had *anything* I have ever done take 3 minutes to compile, even after a clean. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: May 24 10:41PM >> That 's' is an object (and std::string is a class). > That is exactly the kind of object that I don't use for my small-systems > compile-type-polymorphism programming style. Why not? Why make your life more difficult than it needs to be? --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 24 06:50PM -0400 On 5/24/2016 6:40 PM, Juha Nieminen wrote: > I don't think I have had *anything* I have ever done take 3 minutes > to compile, even after a clean. > --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- You haven't worked on very big projects, then. I've seen compiles take overnight on a mainframe. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 24 01:35PM -0700 I saw this video today on the ComputerHistory channel on YouTube. The man cited, David Cutler, has been a pioneer in several low-level aspects of computer development while at Microsoft, and before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN0H4Lb9Lfs I posted a comment immediately after watching the video. However, the more I thought about it the more I realized there's something larger that needs to take place here. I want to begin to educate our technology sector away from that which is their focus today (money), to instead begin thinking of that which should be their focus (God, and all of God's people world-wide). I have expanded my comment here, and I will continue to polish and edit it as I give it more thought: ----- May.24.2016 It's hard for me to appreciate any success for Microsoft, or for any of the people at Microsoft. They have money-driven goals and make choices based on money-ends, rather than right-ends -- which are (to be clear) people-ends. As a result of Windows 3.1 sales, for example, OS/2 (an all ways a superior operating system) was abandoned by Microsoft after years of development so they could pursue Windows NT (because they could make more money selling Windows than pursuing the better product). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DAojx2Hgec&t=38m50s Money drove Microsoft's decision, and later drove them to also move in anti-competitive ways for which they were found guilty in courts of law around the world, ultimately ordered to pay record fines. And even upon receiving the multiple legal findings, they still professed innocence and did not believe they were doing anything wrong, or had done anything wrong. No apologies. No voluntary changes. ----- People will say Microsoft's behavior was "just business," and they're right. It was just business. But business goals are focused predomin- ately around money factors, and these goals ultimately harm real and creative people world-wide. Business goals seek to lock in solutions which isolate and segregate us into the channels required by their goals, so that we do not have free room to move, but are able to move within a confined arena only. While we might receive products which allow us to move, it's akin to being in a type of prison where we can harvest trees, build homes, raise animals and families to our heart's content, but we're still in the prison. If we want to move to another place it's not possible because we're locked in. This inevitably results in us receiving wholly inferior products because there is no equal footing given to competition, such that even in 2016 we still don't have the capabilities OS/2 had back in the 1990s in released products, nor do we have many of the alternative products that we could've had were Microsoft's anti-competitive practices not in play, such that money was not the driving goal (office suites, business software, browsers, and other models, for example). Microsoft has harmed people with their releases. And while the people who have contributed to Microsoft's "success" are no doubt talented people, their goals and loyalties have been to Microsoft and its money ends, rather than "in serving people" ends, and that needs to change. And Microsoft is not alone in this. Business in this world today is geared toward maximizing profit. You rarely hear, for example, of a company willing to sacrifice half of its net increase in sales to hire more people, or give them better health care, or increase their family time, etc. You typically hear it going the other way because money is the goal, not people. And to be clear: having money-based goals makes all of the effort involved just flatly wrong because those goals ultimately harm people. People's needs and "rightness needs" are always sacrificed in cases where an additional dollar can be gained by sacrificing them, and that needs to change. ----- Each of us is part of a purpose here on this planet. We are part of a system that was created by God with right ends (honoring Him, and loving one another in the world He gave us). That purpose has been usurped by sin, and that sin at work in men. It has given us this world we live in where people everywhere are rising up and hating and fighting other people. People who, had they been born in a different place, could've grown up in your community, been raised with your children, gone to school and social functions with your family, so that you would've been neighbors, rather than enemies. Everything that's wrong with this world stems from the same single source: sin, and all that accompanies it. Sin is the problem. Jesus Christ is the cure ... because He literally takes sin away. ----- The truth is we were created to honor God with our lives. We were made in His very image and likeness, and He made us different than all of the rest of creation. Even apart from the angels, for not one of them will be forgiven for their sin against God, but all of us have the opportunity to be forgiven if we will accept Jesus Christ, allowing Him to become the Lord of our life, the One who guides us and leads us. He will take away our sin and restore us to that which mankind had before the fall: eternal life, a spirit that's alive, and real hope and a future. ----- The goals of this world's business models, philosophy models, and economic models at large, all need to change. And that change needs to be center-focused around each of us developing a close, personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and then walking under His guidance. Jesus advocates loving one another. It's actually a new command He gave us (John 13:34). Jesus advocates peace, and says that peacemakers will be called the children of God. Jesus advocates sharing your excess with the one who does not have. Jesus advocates seeking after righteousness as food and water. You can read about all of these yourself: http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/5.htm http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/6.htm http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/7.htm And you can see the love of God manifest in the gospel of John (put yourself in the position of John, recognizing that as He loved John, so He also loves you): http://biblehub.com/kjv/john/1.htm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hexhw3wWmE ----- This world teaches us incorrectly about who Jesus Christ is, what He expects from us, and how we must come to Him. Jesus is looking for those who are broken, flawed, who know they are sinners and yet don't want to be. He knows you can't do it on your own, and He promises those who seek Him that you don't have to do it on your own, but to simply come to Him as you are (broken, flawed, in sin), and ask Him to forgive you, and to help you, and He will. He receives all who come to Him, and will never turn any who come to Him away. No matter your past. No matter you sin. No matter those worst things you've ever done. Jesus knows all about it, and He loves you anyway and will save you despite those things: http://www.libsf.org/misc/love.html ----- Our goals on this planet are to better one another's lives, beginning in all things with a trust and reliance upon God. And whether we are willing to admit it to ourselves or not, He has been with us every day of our lives here upon this Earth. We have ignored Him, but He has remained. We have sinned against Him, but He has been there watching over us. We have turned our back on Him and blasphemed everything about Him and His due Glory, and yet He continues to love us, just as a parent would love their child even if that child had done truly heinous things. The only solution to this world's ills is for each of us to embrace that close and personal relationship with Jesus Christ, to bring Him into our hearts making Him the centerpiece of our lives, so that He is then able to operate through us into this world. We become His hands and feet. We become His voice in this world. We let those around us see the salvation He's given us at work in us, as we look up to Him and teach others those things He first taught us. ----- We must each refocus the goals of our industry to move with a purpose focused upon that larger realization and goal, that which brings both God and improving other people's lives always into the forefront of our consideration, knowing that He will bring us to success in achieving all of the goals we have, or to replace our goals with right goals to which He will then bring us to success within. Right service in this world: God first* People second* * And because we put God first, and God Himself puts us ahead of nearly all other considerations, then by putting God first we automatically also put people first. ----- Our talents and abilities are gifts given to us by God. As are the opportunities we've had, and the positions we're now in. It is time to stand up for what's right in this world, to seek that close personal relationship with Jesus Christ, with the One who can focus your life upon God, and upon people simultaneously, so that we are not alone in this world, we are not seeking our own goals in this world, but we are consistently looking out for the other guy, and even for all the other guys, so that our lives are contributory to each other in grand and focused ways as by the sum total of our plans, our interests, our wants, wishes, needs even. We need to start considering the long-term effects of the things we do, remembering God first, and letting Him be the consistent cue which is the lead role in our lives here in this world, but also in the world to come. ----- Jesus Christ is my King. And His ways are right and true. I challenge each of you to pick up a Bible for yourself, and read it for yourself, and come to see for yourself that which I am talking about. If you have your eyes set on truth and rightness, you will find treasure there beyond your wildest dreams. I love you. But Jesus loves you more. Come to Him and receive His free gift of salvation, and learn of Him. Ask Him to guide you in your life so that you'll never go astray again. He will do this, both because of who He is, and because of who you are to Him. ----- Each of us is part of the community God has place us in. He has given us this planet, everything on it, our lives, our selves, and He's given us the inspiration we've had for ideas, the knowledge we possess has come from the opportunities He's given us, and so much more. He occupies the place of God in our lives, whether we acknowledge Him or not. And I encourage each of you to look deeply at everything around you and see His hand at work. He stands at the door of your soul and He knocks. He invites you to come in and sup with Him, and He with you. He knocks because He desires for you to be part of His life (eternal life), and to be someone who is His here in this grand universe He's created. He has plans for you that would bring you to tears because of their beauty were you to know the full extent of them. Don't let the enemy bind you up with the distractions from this world. Step up and see for yourself who God is. You'll find He's nothing like this world has taught, and everything that true-seeking, right-seeking part of you has ever longed for ... and more. Jesus Christ. His name literally means, "God who saves [from judgment]." Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: May 24 10:22PM +0100 On 24/05/2016 21:35, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Jesus Christ. His name literally means, "God who saves [from judgment]." > Best regards, > Rick C. Hodgin Mate, fuck off you tedious, annoying cunt. Oh and BTW if Jesus really did exist back in the day then he was a bastard because his whore mother obviously got knocked up and blamed it on divine intervention (this repeated lie would probably have had the side effect of making Jesus mentally ill which also explains his outlandish claims). /Flibble |
| jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr>: May 24 11:57PM +0200 Le 24/05/2016 à 23:22, Mr Flibble a écrit : > he was a bastard because his whore mother obviously got knocked up and > blamed it on divine intervention Wasn't that guy gabriel that came to her? It was on march 25th, when gabriel came and said to joseph: "Just one time pal... I promise I won't come again" Nine month later she gave birth. |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: May 24 10:48PM > Jesus Christ. His name literally means, "God who saves [from judgment]." What does your religion say about lying? --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): May 24 12:40PM >How could I dirct the compiler to simplify: > float128_t a = 123.567F128 + 234.5678F128; >to do the addition at compile time? Use gcc's builtin __uint128_t or __int128_t types :-) |
| jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr>: May 23 11:26PM +0200 Le 23/05/2016 à 20:17, Paavo Helde a écrit : > compile-time expressions. This is exactly what constexpr does. > Cheers > Paavo This is completely impossible. To add two float128_t I need at least 50-60% of the library to extract the components, adjust the decimal point, do a 256 bit mantissa addition, build the result and a long etc! I thought the compiler would just call a function in a dll/so or similar. |
| jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr>: May 25 12:47AM +0200 Le 24/05/2016 à 14:40, Scott Lurndal a écrit : >> float128_t a = 123.567F128 + 234.5678F128; >> to do the addition at compile time? > Use gcc's builtin __uint128_t or __int128_t types :-) Excuse but I do not understand your point. I am speaking of a full implementation of IEEE 128 bit floating point format, not integers... ??? |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: May 23 05:33PM -0700 On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 3:39:43 PM UTC-5, David Brown wrote: > Freedom of speech is a great thing (and freedom /after/ speech is even > better!). It is a shame to waste it on something so counter-productive > as your nagging. I don't buy your counter-productive argument. I hope things will get better. I don't know how long it will take. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: May 24 04:43PM +1200 > I don't buy your counter-productive argument. I hope things > will get better. I don't know how long it will take. Maybe you and Flibble could reach a compromise: you stop proselytising and stops swearing (as much...)? I'm sure I'm not the only reader who finds the former more annoying than the latter. -- Ian Collins |
| "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: May 24 07:27AM +0200 On 24.05.2016 05:17, Stefan Ram wrote: > (The second has been defined independently of the meter and > the speed of light by a multiple of the inverse of an > observable natural frequency.) Are you sure that the frequency doesn't depend on the size of the something oscillating? I think I read something about pendulums in my youth. ;-) > Otherwise, »big rip« would be meaningless. >> Logic, which I'm fond of. :) > It might be logic, it's not physics. If you require of physics that it should be consistent with today's cosmology, which is inconsistent with itself, our times' version of astrology, then I'm afraid you'll be in Religion-land in no time. That's not to say that even a large self-contradiction can't be tolerated, as e.g. the physics versus relativity contradiction is tolerated today, or e.g. as the information paradox is tolerated today. But when the contradictions are due to just über-silly religious-like beliefs, with all theory and supposed facts devised and repeatedly revised to fit (a very large number of times), then the contradictions are not signs of the limits of applicability of current theory, but rather of a mess of arbitrary mutually contradictory silly suppositions. Cheers!, - Alf |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): May 24 12:43PM >On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 3:01:11 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote: >Sorry if my freedom of speech bothers you. I'm free to >nag about it and you are free to nag me for nagging about it. :) Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theatre, nor does it preclude you from the common courtesy of following the charter of this usenet newsgroup which is intended to be discussions of the computer programming language C++. I'll echo Leigh here, albeit more kindly: Go away. |
| "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: May 23 11:31PM +0200 On 23.05.2016 13:21, David Brown wrote: >> individuals, or on groups of individuals; in their view that's impossible. > The usual view of evolution is that it acts on species or groups, /not/ > on individuals. I think you failed to understand what I wrote here. You can get on a start on the topic, also called the evolutionary «unit of selection» (what evolution acts on), here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_of_selection However, the Wikipedia article, as usual, neatly avoids getting into the issues or the raging conflicts. It yields the impression, to the casual reader, that there is none. So I suspect that its list of examples is also, as usual, lacking some crucial ones (I write "as usual" because, for example, if you read Wikipedia's article on apartheid in Israel and its section about support for the apartheid view (which the article calls the apartheid "analogy"), you won't find a reference to the UN resolution that equated zionism with apartheid – and it's that way all over Wikipedia, but this is my main example). [snip] > effect at intergalactic distances, so it is best known and studied > there. But it applies down to the space between atomic nuclei and their > electrons. You can convince yourself that a completly /uniform/ expansion is not present, simply by considering how to measure things. When everything expands at the same rate, then your ruler expands exactly as much as everything else. So you then have no non-expanding thing to measure the expansion against. Logic, which I'm fond of. :) [snip] > Well, scientists are human too - we should not forget that. The point > of scientific methods is to reduce the effect of personal ideas or > convictions as we gradually enhance the body of human knowledge. Yes. :) Cheers!, - Alf |
| Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: May 24 08:56PM +0100 On Tue, 24 May 2016 12:43:46 GMT > of following the charter of this usenet newsgroup which is > intended to be discussions of the computer programming language C++. > I'll echo Leigh here, albeit more kindly: Go away. The point you are missing is that people of faith like Brian have God on their side and therefore the ordinary rules of common courtesy to others don't apply to them. There is no contradiction in Brian repeatedly posting off topic messages about his faith (and off topic messages about other things as well) which annoy people on the one hand, and raising pathetic points about bad language which no one else objects to on the other. That is because Brian has been told by God that it is right to do so. Further discussion is unnecessary. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: May 24 09:05AM -0700 Hello... One last touch.. My Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library was updated, i have just hidden a data member in my classes. You can download my new updated Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library from: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-c-conjugate-gradient-linear-system-solver-library Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram): May 24 03:17AM >When everything expands at the same rate, then your ruler expands >exactly as much as everything else. So you then have no non-expanding >thing to measure the expansion against. The meter today is defined by the distance the light travels within "1/299792458" seconds. So, it is possible to meaningfully explain what it would mean for all meter bars to have doubled their length tomorrow. It means that the light tomorrow would need "2/299792458" seconds to travel their length. (The second has been defined independently of the meter and the speed of light by a multiple of the inverse of an observable natural frequency.) Otherwise, »big rip« would be meaningless. >Logic, which I'm fond of. :) It might be logic, it's not physics. |
| ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram): May 24 11:15AM >Are you sure that the frequency doesn't depend on the size of the >something oscillating? No, I am not sure. A second consists of 9'192'631'770 periods of a certain frequency of radiation from the caesium atom, this is a frequency which is defined as a result of a quantum process (a "quantum leap"), which has no »internal mechanism« than be analyzed further, it's an "elementary process". This frequency does not depend on a size in an obvious way, but even if it would depend one a size, the definition can still be used to measure a meter. It is possible that then transformations of some kind might indeed not be observable (which is the same as to say that physically these transformations do not exist). For example, when the meter /and/ the second is doubled at the same time. But for a pendulum T ~ 2 pi sqrt( L / g ), so the time changes with the /square root/ of the length L. Thus when times and lengths are both rescaled /linearly/ an effect should be visible with a pendulum but not with light travelling a meter, but when time and lengths are rescaled so that no effect is visible with a pendulum, it should become visible with light travelling a meter bar. The apostrophes in the first paragraph are the C++ content in this post. Reportedly that topic took the committee for C++14 more time in discussions than any other topic. |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: May 24 03:04PM +0200 |
| sjsung8790@gmail.com: May 23 11:50PM -0700 hello asking one question about simple overloading function matching let me show some code snippet -------------------------------------------------------------- #include <iostream> #include <string> using namespace std; string f(int n) { cout<<"int function called : "<<n<<endl; return "done"; } string f(unsigned int n) { cout<<"unsigned int called : "<<n<<endl; return f(3); } int main(void) { f(12); f(12U); return 0; } this code results as follow --------------------------------------------------- int function called : 12 unsigned int called : 12 int function called : 3 yeah this is simple f(12) called f(int), and f(12U) called f(unsigned int) which again called f(int) inside of it these was plain.. but if i change the function definition code for two f function like this #include <iostream> using namespace std; string f(unsigned int n) //function definition place was changed { cout<<"unsigned int called : "<<n<<endl; return f(3); } string f(int n) //function definition place was changed { cout<<"int function called : "<<n<<endl; return "done"; } int main(void) { f(12); f(12U); return 0; } and if i run those codes.. it result stack overflow : it was infinite recursive calling very strange : in main f(12U) called unsigned int version of f but when that unsigned int version function called f(3) it called unsigned int version of f instead of int version of f I searched overloading function matching rule.. ( 1. exact matching, 2. promotion, 3. standard conversion..) but can't understand that results |
| Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de>: May 24 09:10AM +0200 > #include <iostream> > using namespace std; string f(int n); > { > cout<<"unsigned int called : "<<n<<endl; > return f(3); // here the compiler does not know that there is an f(int) function. // Unless you have the forward declaration shown above. |
| 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