Sunday, October 9, 2016

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 23 updates in 8 topics

woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 08 06:50PM -0700

On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 5:52:04 PM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> and you expect to have 10K people use it, sell it for $1 per copy,
> and once you've recovered your investment, switch to a donation-
> only model.
 
People should be free to set prices however they want.
I know it sometimes leads to high prices, but the alternative
is worse -- e.g. Venezuela.
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 08 06:52PM -0700

On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 5:07:06 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote:
 
Leigh, please don't swear here.
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - Sheep may safely graze.
http://webEbenezer.net
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 08 09:38PM -0700

Brian wrote:
> People should be free to set prices however they want.
 
The Lord commanded Adam that he would labor by the sweat of
his brow until he returned to the ground. This decree by God was
never rescinded, and it is evil to continue to receive gain from prior
efforts of labor without ongoing labor (selling software after it's labor
investment has been returned). It leads to laziness, idle hands, and
all manner of time-filling activities, which are easily pursued into
inappropriateness (sin).
 
We are one people. We are supposed to be working together
for the betterment of others, not ourselves, because in helping
others, we also help ourselves.
 
Not money pursuits. But people pursuits. People are alive, and
money is without life, cold and static.
 
Look at what money pursuits have done. Apple, billions cash on
hand, could single-handidly initiate programs to literally end world
hunger, let alone with a corporate community involvement with
multiple parties. Instead, investors get rich. Apple hoards its
wealth. People die by their riches.
 
It's not supposed to be like this. The love of money is the root
of all evil. And God cursed the ground for Adam's sake, to keep
him busy, occupied with necessity, focused on needs, not resting in
non-labor (the equivalent of selling software ongoing from prior
work, no new labor, same big price).
 
Our purposes, our goals, are people, in making their lives better.
You cannot do that with a focus on money, because you cannot
serve both God and money.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de>: Oct 09 09:17AM +0200

Am 09.10.16 um 00:50 schrieb Rick C. Hodgin:
> software program written in 1960 would still run the
> same today on equal hardware. No rusting, no aging,
> but rather it is how things will be in Heaven.
 
Have you ever heard of "software rot" or "bitrot"? The software in
itself does not degrade, but the environment evolves, and at some point
you can't successfully run the software any longer.
 
Christian
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 09 04:32AM -0700

Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> software in itself does not degrade, but the environment
> evolves, and at some point you can't successfully run the
> software any longer.
 
That's why I wrote, "on equal hardware."
 
And to clarify further, digital media doesn't degrade through use.
A song may be played 10K times, a program may be run a thousand
times a second, it doesn't degrade. Only the hardware they run on
degrades. Copy to another machine, as strong as on day one.
 
Try that with a rug, blender, or pair of shoes.
 
Digital media is on a whole separate realm from material things.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Oct 09 08:27PM +0100

On 09/10/2016 12:32, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Digital media is on a whole separate realm from material things.
 
It's no different to books or music, where copyright has been in place
for hundreds of years.
 
Andy
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 09 12:44PM -0700

Vir Campestris wrote:
> > Digital media is on a whole separate realm from material things.
 
> It's no different to books or music, where copyright has been
> in place for hundreds of years.
 
Books must be printed. They require harnessing of raw materials,
mechanical setup, printing, shipping, distribution, and stores for sales. They wear out. Can be damaged.
 
Digital content can be copied at leisure using the same equipment
for all forms. One copy, a billion copies, one type of digital content,
different types, no difference in conveyance, unlike tangible books
which require libraries to have all of them sometimes.
 
One modern hard drive can hold how many books? And with
the Internet and servers, how many can receive instant copies?
Everyone with a computer.
 
Totally new paradigm in a device.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com>: Oct 09 03:07PM -0500

On 10/8/2016 5:50 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> with them save one: our involvement in creating new things.
 
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
Wow, that is a twisted reality. You are falsely teaching that profit is
bad.
 
I feed my family and my nine employees families with our software sales
of over a million dollars per year. We do not do this for free. And my
investors demand a profit.
 
Lynn
Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com>: Oct 09 04:20PM -0400

On 08/10/2016 21:02, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> "US judge: end software patents, copyright is sufficient"
 
Were you thinking of copyrighting your "Hello World!" program? I
thought it was already done by that idiot called Rick Hodgin and when he
is not posting about Jesus he is running and re-running that program just
to make sure it is working as expected.
Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>: Oct 09 06:42PM -0400

On 10/8/16 5:31 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> must all be completely free to build atop the works of others,
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
If you truly believe this is workable system, please IMMEDIATELY stop
using all software that claims any significant rights via its copyright.
This also includes the GPL, as that put restrictions on the software
based on copyright law.
 
The problem with your idea here is that even software authors need to be
able to earn a living, and one very good way is to charge people for the
software they write, which can only be viable if others aren't allowed
to take that same software and 'pirate' it and give it to others.
 
There are also other individuals/companies who may have other ways to
earn their livelihood, and are willing to develop software 'for free',
but are only willing to do so under what they consider the small
restriction of requiring you to make public any changes you make to it
if you distribute it.
 
If you really feel it is possible to work in a copyright free software
world, prove it be starting there. That means no Commercial or GPLed
operating system to work in, no Commercial or GPLed development tools,
etc, NONE.
Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>: Oct 09 06:22PM -0400

On 10/7/16 7:02 PM, JiiPee wrote:
> and Circle part and they are separate "units". So when I destroy s only
> the Shape part of the object will be destroyed but all the Circle part
> will stay in memory (leaks)? is this how it is?
 
Technically, without the destructor being virtual, doing a delete via a
base pointer for a derived class is undefined behavior, so anything is
allowed to happen.
 
Generally, what does happen is that only the base class destructor gets
called (and not any of the derived classes), which wouldn't make a
difference in your case, but could if any of the derived classes have
non-trivial destructors. The other possible issue is that if the
compiler can be sure that operator new hasn't been overridden, it might
use a small object optimization for the new, and put the object back to
the wrong small object heap.
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 08 06:11PM -0700

On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 2:15:15 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote:
> Jesus's supposed death. So I am correct in what I said: there is
> absolutely no evidence of Jesus's supposed existence, none.
 
> /Flibble
 
J.S. Bach's faith inspired him to write thousands
of great songs:
 
Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwWL8Y-qsJg
 
Another tune he wrote is called "Sheep may safely graze."
This is part of our heritage.
 
My faith in G-d inspired me to start a company that
develops quality software. That was 16 years ago.
To this day G-d keeps helping me to build the company.
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net
Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>: Oct 09 06:51PM +0100


> J.S. Bach's faith inspired him to write thousands
> of great songs:
 
And Keith Richard's massive drug intake inspired him to write hundreds
of great songs. And Jerry Garcia, and Dylan, and Lennon & McCartney.
 
Still doesn't make intravenous drug use a smart lifestyle choice.
Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>: Oct 09 04:31AM -0700

> constexpr uintptr_t register_addr = (uintptr_t) &REGISTER;
> --------------------------------------------------------------
 
> still compiles with GCC, it doesn't compile with Clang: [...]
 
If 'constexpr' is changed to 'const', is that also an error or is
it accepted? I find it hard to follow the rather circuitous
writing in the C++ standard in this area (among others).
 
> would evaluate one of the following expressions:
> ...
> ? (2.13) a reinterpret_cast
 
This item is also present in C++11 (although of course other
things may have changed that also bear on the question).
 
Out of curiosity, what happens if you run your examples
with --std=c++11?
mark <mark@invalid.invalid>: Oct 09 07:49PM +0200

On 2016-10-09 13:31, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> If 'constexpr' is changed to 'const', is that also an error or is
> it accepted? I find it hard to follow the rather circuitous
> writing in the C++ standard in this area (among others).
 
const compiles. However, it does not result in compile time constant
value and is not usable as template parameter or in constexpr.
 
> things may have changed that also bear on the question).
 
> Out of curiosity, what happens if you run your examples
> with --std=c++11?
 
Doesn't make a difference.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 09 05:29AM -0700

A 30-something female describes the deception of the enemy in
thinking Heaven is attainable by works or morals. It isn't. You
must be born again.
 
"I'll be honest, I thought I was good enough for Heaven"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRm7oUjZ4ZQ
 
The video is 19 minutes to teach you about eternal life.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 09 10:12AM -0700

Find the most devout Christian co-worker, classmate, or family member,
and go to church with them. Tell the people there your skepticism,
ask questions, and let them answer them one by one.
 
You'll learn new things about Jesus Christ you didn't know, and they'll
correct misunderstandings so you can have real facts to make informed
decisions.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 09 09:23AM -0700

> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wzc7a3McOs
 
> > > CppCon channel for all CppCon 2016 content, plus prior cons:
 
> > > https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMlGfpWw-RUdWX_JbLCukXg
 
I've watched quite a few of the videos now. This one by Timur Doumler
is one of my favorites:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP6NxVxDQIs
 
. I learned a lot from it.
Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>: Oct 09 05:17AM -0700

>> independent of wchar_t.)
 
> I don't have a copy of the C95 TC, but:
 
> http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/na1.html
 
Yes, I read that same summary.
 
> was actually introduced with Unicode 2.0, and Unicode was purely a
> 16-bit character set in the two earlier standard versions (and in the
> preceding drafts).
 
Right. But the summary also says
 
each character is given a code value that can be stored in
an object of type wchar_t.
 
and Unicode is mentioned only as an example. If the principle
was already established in 1995 (as it appears it was), then
the move to Unicode 2.0 should have prompted expanding wchar_t
to be 32 bits instead of just 16.
 
> version of wchar_t (which they originally typedef'd to the [16-bit]
> Windows type TCHAR), way back in 1993 (and well before that if you
> count the pre-release versions of WinNT).
 
Yes, I expect they were perfectly fine in 1995, when wchar_t
matched where Unicode was at the time. The question is when did
the break occur - did it happen some time between 1996 and 1999,
when Microsoft expanded the set of characters accepted by the OS
generally, or did it happen only after C99 was published? More
succinctly, did it happen before or after the then-current
version of the Standard require distinct wchar_t values for
each code point in the native environment? I suspect it was
after, but I can't be sure without seeing the exact wording
used in the 1995 amendment.
 
> UCS-2 support
> - Circa 1996: Unicode 2.0 adds surrogate pair support, "breaking" the
> "16-bit" nature of Unicode.
 
For me the question hinges on not just wchar_t but also a
provision given for the setlocale() function:
 
A value of "C" for locale specifies the minimal environment
for C translation; a value of "" for locale specifies the
locale-specific native environment.
 
This wording was already present in N869, which is a pre-C99
draft (dated January 18, 1999). If that same wording was present
in the 1995 amendment, then expanding the native environment to
accept and deal with code points outside of the original 16-bit
set should have resulted in expanding wchar_t to a width large
enough to accommodate that.
Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>: Oct 09 05:29AM -0700


> What?!
 
> The documentation states that you can only call the standard library
> function setlocale with locales that the C and C++ standards allow.
 
Yes, and one of those locales (ie, with "" as the value of the
locale parameter to setlocale()) specifies "the locale-specific
native environment". Since the native environment understands
and deals with code points outside the original set of 16-bit
values, it is not spirit-conforming for wchar_t to be just
16 bits, regardless of what encoding(s) the host API chooses
to require.
Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk>: Oct 09 03:26PM +0200

On 2016-10-09 14:17, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> each code point in the native environment? I suspect it was
> after, but I can't be sure without seeing the exact wording
> used in the 1995 amendment.
 
Technically the language doesn't have to work for the entire native
environment, but for "supported locales".
 
As we have seen here earlier, MS points that out in the documentation
for setlocale. You can only (legally) set locales where all characters
fit in a 16-bit wchar_t. Everything else is, at best, an extension.
 
 
Bo Persson
Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk>: Oct 09 03:33PM +0200

On 2016-10-09 14:29, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> values, it is not spirit-conforming for wchar_t to be just
> 16 bits, regardless of what encoding(s) the host API chooses
> to require.
 
And nowhere in the C++ standard does it say that you have to be
"spirit-conforming". :-)
 
I'm not arguing that it is a good choice, only that "supported locales"
can be defined as those locales where it works according to the language
standard. There are no rules that the operating system cannot support
additional locales.
 
Also, one possible fix is to change the language standard to support
existing practice. If it has been like this for 20 years, perhaps it
should be allowed?
 
 
Bo Persson
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 08 06:22PM -0700

On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 3:20:45 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote:
> i.e., too "abstract," to qualify as a patent-eligible invention."
 
> http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/15-1769.Opinion.9-28-2016.1.PDF
 
> This is huge.
 
Perhaps this will motivate some to move to on line services.
 
I have an offer to donate 16 hours/week for six months to a
project that uses the C++ Middleware Writer. More info here:
 
http://webEbenezer.net/about.html
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net
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)