- The Problem with Christianity - 4 Updates
- Initialize a static const matrix - 1 Update
- "The 2016 Top Programming Languages" - 2 Updates
- Why does this work (stack vs heap allocation)? - 5 Updates
| Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Aug 01 08:40PM +0100 On 30/07/2016 03:26, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > The Problem with Christianity: Leave it Rick. If they want to be happy with their beliefs when they aren't harming anyone, then let them. Andy |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Aug 01 12:56PM -0700 On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Vir Campestris wrote: > Leave it Rick. If they want to be happy with their beliefs when they > aren't harming anyone, then let them. > Andy We are to teach people, Andy. The efforts Jesus asks us to give by going out into the world and teaching and making disciples is not given for those who will never come to believe, but it is for those who will come to believe. We do not labor for the non-believers, but for the future believers, just as not one drop of Christ's blood was shed for non-believers, but only for believers. Many souls will be cast into the lake of fire for all eternity because they would not believe. But unless we teach them, they have no chance to believe. I care enough about teaching people the truth, and in giving them that opportunity to come to know Him that I am willing to risk all the scorn and ridicule because of it. Some people also did this for me and finally, after years of hearing about it from various people, I finally sought the truth in 2004 and I found it. I was seeking to know if what they were saying was honestly true or not. I discovered, much to my surprise, that it was, and in the process I was born again. My life has been forever changed from that point forward. And I wish to give other people the same opportunity God gave me through them to come to Him, even when I was in my mid-30s after having left the church at age 15 because of the extremely overt hypocrisy. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| red floyd <no.spam@its.invalid>: Aug 01 01:38PM -0700 On 8/1/2016 12:56 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > [redacted] > My life has been forever changed from that > point forward. That's nice. Now SHUT UP ABOUT IT. |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Aug 02 12:17AM +0100 On 01/08/2016 21:38, red floyd wrote: >> My life has been forever changed from that >> point forward. > That's nice. Now SHUT UP ABOUT IT. Here is a room full of Hodgins and Woods trying to drown out a poor Satanist attempting to express his religious freedom by saying a prayer: https://twitter.com/tehcoder42/status/760245156478058504 Hypocrites. /Flibble |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Aug 01 02:07PM -0700 On Sunday, 31 July 2016 20:26:46 UTC+3, Mark wrote: > Consider: OK, I will. > # include <iostream> > # include <cstring > I trust that you must type here: # include <cstring> Otherwise it looks like syntax error. > const unsigned int Foo::val[][2] = { { 0, 1 } , { 2, 3 } }; > const TestMatrix < 2, 2 > Foo::test = > { { 0.1, 1.1 } , { 2.2, 3.2 } }; I trust that you must type here: const TestMatrix < 2, 2 > Foo::test = { { { 0.1, 1.1 } , { 2.2, 3.2 } } }; Otherwise it looks like syntax error. > int main() > { > } So? > the initialization of test fails when the TestMatrix effectively > mimics the c-style approach to a multi-dimensional array > Thanks in advance You did not tell what your problem was besides two obvious syntax errors. Oh well. |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Aug 01 09:52AM +0200 On 30/07/16 02:01, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> programmers does nothing to dispel the common view of COBOL's dullness. > You seem to be an expert in /very/ dull jobs - despite your lack of > experience in COBOL. I merely think that your description of COBOL programmers makes it sound like the job is dull. COBOL programming is presumably still be a great job on balance - most people do their jobs for reasons other than fun. > Yes, the common view of those who don't know COBOL is that it's dull. > Those who have programmed in it know better. It's no more or less dull > than C or any other programming language. Plenty of people have dull jobs programming in other languages - there's no denying that. But some people have /fun/ programming in C or a number of other languages. Does anyone have fun programming in COBOL? I don't know - you are the expert there. |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Aug 01 09:59AM -0400 On 8/1/2016 3:52 AM, David Brown wrote: > I merely think that your description of COBOL programmers makes it sound > like the job is dull. COBOL programming is presumably still be a great > job on balance - most people do their jobs for reasons other than fun. What's dull about it? Just because people enjoy doing it for years for the same company? Now narrow-minded. > But some people have /fun/ programming in C or a number of other > languages. Does anyone have fun programming in COBOL? I don't know - > you are the expert there. You should learn what you're talking about before opening your mouth. You first say you don't know anything about COBOL, then say it's a dull job. But that seems to be good at criticizing things you know nothing about. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| "Erdoeban Zsukloff zu Brecher Zhuang" <no@contact.com>: Jul 31 09:40PM -0400 using namespace std; vector<int> build_vector(void) { vector<int> result; result.push_back(1); return result; } int main(void) { auto V = build_vector(); // V should be broken but isn't ! for (auto vv : V) cout << vv ; } Isn't result allocated on stack and thus should be destroyed right upon scope's "}" ? I distinctly recall getting compiler warnings and nasty memory errors, so I got into habit of always using heap when returning anything non-trivial, yet I lately see stuff like the snippet above in legitimate authors ... Thank you in advance ! --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net --- |
| Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>: Jul 31 10:37PM -0400 On 7/31/16 9:40 PM, Erdoeban Zsukloff zu Brecher Zhuang wrote: > anything non-trivial, yet I lately see stuff like the snippet above in > legitimate authors ... > Thank you in advance ! Because you are returning the vector by value, so it is copied. The problem is when you return a pointer to an auto value. |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Jul 31 09:07PM -0700 On Sunday, July 31, 2016 at 9:37:38 PM UTC-5, Richard Damon wrote: > > Thank you in advance ! > Because you are returning the vector by value, so it is copied. The > problem is when you return a pointer to an auto value. I think it would be better to say a pointer to a local variable. If you go by the standard, the meaning of the word auto changed a few years ago. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust. http://webEbenezer.net |
| Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org>: Aug 01 05:29AM > I think it would be better to say a pointer to a > local variable. If you go by the standard, the > meaning of the word auto changed a few years ago. Returning a pointer to a local variable with static storage duration would be okay, though. Most likely Richard meant 'object with automatic storage duration' when he used 'auto value'. |
| leigh.v.johnston@googlemail.com: Aug 01 04:59AM -0700 Most optimisers will elide the copy using NRVO or move semantics. /Leigh |
| 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