- open source SVG library for C++ or C - 21 Updates
- Stripping cast from macro - 4 Updates
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 01:06AM +0100 On 05/10/2016 23:28, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] > Richard, is this really such a common occurrence that you > have to placard every post you make with a stand-out bulletin? You have a fucking nerve mate what with your habit of constantly spamming this newsgroup with your off topic Christian bullshit. Don't worry mate you are still in my killfile: this is a different computer. /Flibble |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 05 05:12PM -0700 On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 7:06:28 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote: Leigh, please don't swear here. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid>: Oct 05 06:07PM -0700 > On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 7:06:28 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote: > Leigh, please don't swear here. WTF does this feeble attempt at language moderation actually mean? Let me guess, a PG-13 movie just might be too harsh for your emasculated brain to decode? Go% DAM% it! Grow up. |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 05 06:07PM -0700 Mr. Flibble wrote: > You have a .. nerve mate what with your habit of constantly spamming > this newsgroup with your off topic Christian .. . Your use of profanity is out of place with your great intellect and honed skill. It demeans you and your character in ways which harm you. There is a better way to be, and I would like to encourage you toward that end. > Don't worry mate you are still in my killfile: this is a different > computer. Are you a coward, Leigh? Are the teachings of Jesus Christ too much for your delicate sensibilities? His call to be holy, to stand up for the truth, to proclaim His name, these are all too much for you to bear? You'd rather go the easy path of being just like everybody else in this world? Safety and security in numbers no matter the vulgarity or perpetual hostility? Just go with the (literally damned) flow straight to your own eternal death? Have you no strength of your own? No ability to stand up against the popular decree? Are you only a follower with no backbone, unable to stand up against the evils of this world? Do those evils own you? Yes. They do. ----- Your replies to people speak of a man afraid to stand up for what's right. Bold obscenities and harsh words to people, these are attempts to cover and hide the frightened boy inside. It doesn't have to be like that. You can have the strength and courage you lack. You can be rightly bold, and not just pretense bold. It comes from Him, Leigh. Him only. And it is whole, and it is complete, because it comes from within, not from without, and it comes from the new life. Eternal life. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>: Oct 06 03:13AM +0200 On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:07:53 -0700 > emasculated brain to decode? > Go% DAM% it! > Grow up. One of freedoms of unmoderated usenet is to swear ;) -- press any key to continue or any other to quit |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 05 11:27PM -0700 On Thursday, 6 October 2016 04:10:29 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Are you a coward, Leigh? He may be is uninterested in contents of your postings because these are boring and off topic. |
| Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de>: Oct 06 08:58AM +0200 Am 06.10.16 um 00:28 schrieb Rick C. Hodgin: > have to placard every post you make with a stand-out bulletin? > I've never had one person ever also email me a reply of their usenet > post. I get CC'ed to a usenet reply from time to time, but it's not overly common. In the last year, I sent ~300 Usenet posts. From this I got CC'ed maybe 3 or 4 times. So yes this header could go into the signature, but it is just one line. Additionally, the mail contains a valid reply which points to the (very good) AGG library. Other people spam this group with pages of Off-Topic rants. Matthew 7:3 comes to mind. Christian |
| Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Oct 06 10:39AM +0300 On 6.10.2016 0:52, Lynn McGuire wrote: > Does anyone have any good experience with one of the various open source > libraries for SVG graphics for C++ or C ? > I am using Visual Studio 2015 on Windows 7. There is the wxsvg library which is cross-platform and written in C++. OTOH, it does not implement some more advanced SVG features and the main drawback is that it builds upon the wx cross-platform toolkit which has zillion dependencies and is a PITA to get building independently. If you only target Windows then probably there are simpler options. But if the project is already using wx then wxsvg would be an easy add-on. HTH Paavo |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 03:18AM -0700 Christian Gollwitzer wrote: > overly common. In the last year, I sent ~300 Usenet posts. > From this I got CC'ed maybe 3 or 4 times. So yes this header > could go into the signature, but it is just one line. I do not see that rate or ratio as anywhere near sufficient to warrant a front page placard on every post. It's one of the oddest things I've seen on usenet. Every time I see it, I involuntarily pause and think, "Really, Richard?" I'm curious to hear from Richard what his rate or ratio of emails is, that he still feels justified in putting the placard up fron, set apart, on every post. Maybe he has a good reason. Until he explains his reasoning, I can't visualize why he'd be justified in doing it. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 04:03PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 02:07, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > honed skill. It demeans you and your character in ways which > harm you. There is a better way to be, and I would like to > encourage you toward that end. Demeans me? Three things: 1) Swearing is not demeaning, read: http://danieware.com/2743/fuck/ 2) Advising that off-topic spam is not welcome on Usenet is not demeaning 3) Asserting my atheism in the form of calling out your Christian bullshit is not demeaning. Given the above I am not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that I am being demeaned. [snip] /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 08:18AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 11:04:08 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > .. is not demeaning. > Given the above I am not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that I > am being demeaned. I could tell you, Leigh, but as there are some things a child must simply go through to personally learn (because until they experience it for themselves they just won't listen or be able to believe), you will have to seek the answer for yourself. I can't teach it to you. That being said, I'll do my best: (1) You are wrong on all accounts above [1), 2), and 3)]. (2) But, you are unaware of this because you only see things through natural eyes. You are only operating in the flesh, and what you possess there is the thinking regarding how the flesh understands such things. (3) The flesh is not the only component of our existence. We are all three-fold beings, soul, body, spirit, but because of sin we are spiritually dead, leaving us with only our physical flesh, our body, giving us input. (4) When you come to Jesus and ask Him to forgive your sin, He takes your sin and transfers it to Himself by a supernatural act of God (a miracle), removing it from you, depositing it on Him. He then is guilty of your sin, not you, which means He pays the price of it in Hell, not you. (5) This leaves you with spotless righteousness before God, which means the "spiritually dead" aspect of your existence is no longer dead. You no longer possess sin, so you are no longer under the sentence of death through sin. (6) Because of (4) and (5), that person is then living with the two inputs now feeding their existence: flesh, and spirit. (7) The two are at odds with each other, and they are polar opposites. The flesh sees things a particular way which, because of sin, and because there are evil spirits all around us feeding us continually spiritual input into our flesh that only our flesh is aware of, we think a certain way, we feel a certain way, we then have resulting behavior which is a certain way. But none of it is real. It's being injected into our flesh by evil spirits who are purposefully trying to harm us. (8) When a person no longer has sin, and is then spiritually alive again, the Christian term for this is "born again," then there is an awareness, an input of spiritual things into our existence. We are no longer fed only by our flesh, but God Himself and His Holy Spirit is able to feed us true and proper input. (9) It is from within this input from God where the truth is known, and the false ways of the enemy are illuminated for what they are: hateful, false, leading only to death through sin, and wholly and completely evil and dark. There is more to our existence than this flesh. It's what Jesus Christ has given us through His atoning death at the cross. He who knew no sin became sin in our place so that we could be set free from sin. I pray you consider this, Leigh. You are a formidable talent and I am greatly impressed with your work. But there is a real enemy taking advantage of your sin state, trying to do you real harm, and unless you receive this message of salvation through Jesus Christ, through the understanding of your sin, what your sin has done to you, what it's cost you, what it will cost you, and how He can take it away, desires to take it away, came to this Earth to take it away, so that you might be set free from that enemy's grip upon you unto death, then you will fall to it, as no flesh can overcome the spirit, and Satan is a spirit, as well as all his demon imps (former angels who walked away from God). It's out there for you to seek for yourself, Leigh. DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANY OF IT. Examine it for yourself. "Taste and see that the Lord is good" the Bible says. It's my best offering to you, Leigh. It's all I possess given to you so that you too might come to receive what He has given me. And I my prayer for you is that when you do, you will outshine me in your service unto Him, such that I will look like a failure beside your accomplishments in Him. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 04:30PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 16:18, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > themselves they just won't listen or be able to believe), you will have > to seek the answer for yourself. I can't teach it to you. > That being said, I'll do my best: tl;dr. [snip] /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 08:33AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 11:30:51 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > On 06/10/2016 16:18, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > That being said, I'll do my best: > tl;dr. If I could make it shorter I would. I can only advise you, Leigh: It's important enough to take the two minutes and read it. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 04:39PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 16:33, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> tl;dr. > If I could make it shorter I would. I can only advise you, Leigh: It's > important enough to take the two minutes and read it. But, you obtuse fuck, I don't want to read 10 seconds of your off-topic Christian bullshit never mind two minutes of it. I suspect nobody else who wants to use this newsgroup as a place to discuss C++ want to read it either. /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 08:50AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 11:40:09 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > > important enough to take the two minutes and read it. > But, you obtuse .. , I don't want to read 10 seconds of your off-topic > Christian .. never mind two minutes of it. I guess my coward assessment of you was spot on, Leigh. The truth about yourself, and about Jesus Christ, it's just too much for you to ever dare learn about. You are rejecting truth, rejecting Him out of fear, a fear of learning the truth because you like living in your current world of dark falseness. Enjoy it. It won't last long. And this dark world of hate and war will be the closest thing to Heaven you ever get to experience because what comes after for those who reject salvation through Jesus Christ is much worse. So bad that He takes these great pangs to warn you, even vulgar and offensive you, through men and women like me, so that you too might be saved as we were in our vulgarity and offensiveness. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 04:55PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 16:50, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > yourself, and about Jesus Christ, it's just too much for you to ever dare > learn about. > You are rejecting truth, rejecting Him out of fear, a fear of learning the You are the coward; you are the one rejecting truth; you are the one pretending that death is anything other than oblivion. /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 08:59AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 11:55:28 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > > You are rejecting truth, rejecting Him out of fear, a fear of learning the > You are the coward; you are the one rejecting truth; you are the one > pretending that death is anything other than oblivion. You'll find out soon enough if you are right or not, if choosing to not even read two minutes worth of information by someone who tells you he cares enough about you to look past your vulgarity and obscenity and reach out a hand of truth, to even examine if it's true or not. Why are you so scared that you won't even examine it? Pssst ... I'll tell you what it is. I'll whisper it in your ear. Step closer: "It's because there really are evil spirits in this world and they are operating against you right now. Yeah. They're trying to drip thoughts into your mind that it's all nonsense. That you are wholly justified in turning a deaf ear to it all." They're laughing at you, Leigh. They're laughing at your pride and arrogance being so puffed up that you won't even consider the message because of their own prompting into your flesh / mind. If you care at all about truth ... read what I've written. If not, then tick tock. Tick tock. Tick tock. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 05:08PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 16:59, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> You are the coward; you are the one rejecting truth; you are the one >> pretending that death is anything other than oblivion. > You'll find out soon enough if you are right or not, if choosing to not As an atheist I reject even Pascal's Wager; as for what else you wrote mate: tl;dr [snip] /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 09:16AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 12:08:48 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > As an atheist ... tl;dr How do atheists feel about ignorance? When I was an atheist I was convinced I was right. And I was. I was so sure of my position in atheism that I challenged the evangelical Christian in the next cubicle over to read through the Bible with me, so that I could prove to him it was total bunk. He agreed, and we began reading it on our lunch hours. The difference between you and me is this: I set my mind on seeking the truth. I wanted honestly to know if I was right or wrong. And because I was seeking to know the answer to that question for real, I found the true answer. My life changed at that point, and to a degree I would never have imagined possible. In fact, there are times to this day 12 years later I still stand mouth agape, wide-eyed, head spinning, at how much I've changed, and how much more there is to an infinite God of love and compassion. Good luck with your choices, Leigh. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.co.uk>: Oct 06 05:37PM +0100 On 06/10/2016 17:16, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 12:08:48 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: >> As an atheist ... tl;dr > How do atheists feel about ignorance? You reject evolution on the grounds that it is the "work of the devil"; using the devil as an excuse to reject anything that conflicts with your world-view is the height of ignorance so consider your own ignorance before you call others ignorant. /Flibble |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 06 09:42AM -0700 On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 12:37:54 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > >> As an atheist ... tl;dr > > How do atheists feel about ignorance? > You reject evolution on the grounds that it is the "work of the devil"; Not quite. Evolution is a teaching of the devil, not a "work of the devil." God created things a particular way. The devil can't change that. But because of sin, and because of our inability to know truth because of our being spiritually dead in sin, Satan takes advantage of our fallen flesh and flesh-only mind. He injects things which seem to make sense, seem to be plausible. But, because they are not true, they fail under scrutiny. I reject evolution because it is a lie of the devil perpetrated against mankind to lead people into falseness. The truth about how we and all animals came about is described in Genesis 1 through 11 (the creation of man, through to the tower of Babel and the confusion of our languages by God, so that people groups would diverge and separate and spread over the whole Earth. > using the devil as an excuse to reject anything that conflicts with your > world-view is the height of ignorance so consider your own ignorance > before you call others ignorant. I agree with you that using the devil as an excuse would be the height of ignorance. However, that's not what I'm doing. ----- If you would take some time out of your busy schedule to pursue the truth with an honest seeking, you'd discover all of this and more for yourself. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin |
| mark <mark@invalid.invalid>: Oct 06 04:25PM +0200 I have C header files with a bunch of memory mapped register definitions like: #define REGISTER (*(volatile uint32_t *)0x42424242) GCC used to allow this kind of thing in constexpr, but is now randomly enforcing it as forbidden reinterpret_cast. I want to turn this into an uintptr_t that can be used in a constexpr. The only possible way seems to be some nasty macro that can somehow do the transformation. Any ideas? (Why is it impossible in this so-called Systems Programming Language to define a pointer to a fixed location? Every compiler does it's own non-standard thing.) |
| mark <mark@invalid.invalid>: Oct 06 04:39PM +0200 On 2016-10-06 16:25, mark wrote: > #define REGISTER (*(volatile uint32_t *)0x42424242) In case that isn't clear, I want to end up with: constexpr uintptr_t register_addr = 0x42424242; |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 06 05:12PM +0200 On 06/10/16 16:39, mark wrote: >> #define REGISTER (*(volatile uint32_t *)0x42424242) > In case that isn't clear, I want to end up with: > constexpr uintptr_t register_addr = 0x42424242; What happens when you write: #define REGISTER (*(volatile uint32_t *)0x42424242) constexpr uintptr_t register_addr = (uintptr_t) ®ISTER; or constexpr uintptr_t register_addr2 = reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(®ISTER); Both seem to be accepted by gcc in my (very brief) tests. |
| mark <mark@invalid.invalid>: Oct 06 05:19PM +0200 On 2016-10-06 17:12, David Brown wrote: > constexpr uintptr_t register_addr2 = > reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(®ISTER); > Both seem to be accepted by gcc in my (very brief) tests. That's what I mean by GCC randomly enforcing constexpr restrictions. Some cases still work, others are broken. This is explicitly forbidden by the standard and GCC is moving towards more enforcement. |
| 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