Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>: Jan 16 07:46PM -0700


> I've been programming for "The Bankers" ( ABA.COM )
> for the last 24 years... they haven't fired me yet.
> What about you ?
 
Retired. And all of my cruise missiles work fine.
 
So, you work for the slave masters known as bankers, eh?
 
--
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>: Jan 16 08:39PM -0800

jonkalb <google@kalbweb.com>: Jan 16 10:05PM -0800

On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 10:02:37 AM UTC-8, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> > _Loop(4) however is just undefined behavior,
> > one is not allowed to use such identifiers.
 
> If that "one" is you, then yes; otherwise, no.
 
<atrocious code deleted>
 
Even if you have successfully removed the offending identifiers, all you have succeeded in doing is converting illegal code into immoral code.
 
Jeff, Have you found a single individual in this group that has thanked you (sincerely) for posting either your code or your coding guidelines in this group?
 
I've asked you several times not to post and I'm not alone in this group. It isn't just because seeing this is a waste of our time, it's that some impressionable mind might see your code and think that it is an acceptable style for professional C++. When/if this happens they will either abandon all attempts to write C++ or, and this is far worse, they'll emulate your style.
 
So there are two possibilities. One is that the other participants in this group and I are correct and your code is unworthy of emulation. The other possibility, and let's seriously consider this, is that you are a coding genius with a unique insight into *the one true way to code* and that I and every other participant in this group are such complete morons that they not only don't know how to write good code, they don't even recognize it when you show it to them.
 
But notice that either case has the same implication. Either you are unworthy to post your rantings here or we are unworthy to see your brilliance posted here. In either case:
 
!!!! PLEASE STOP POSTING HERE !!!
 
Thanks.
 
Jon
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>: Jan 16 10:52PM -0800

GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>: Jan 17 11:50AM -0700


>> Retired. And all of my cruise missiles work fine.
 
> I doubt it, sounds like you've been put out to pasture.
> Likely, you have health issues.
 
Nope, I was very expensive and the gov. offered me a retirement package I
couldn't refuse.
 
> We're robots, programmed by Nature to play "The Stay Alive Game";
> including: Breathing, Pissing, Shitting, Breeding, etc.
 
> Pick the LeastWorst option, and hope for the LeastWorst luck.
 
Everyone in the world would be better off if Trump kicked the private bankers
out of this country and go back to the original Bank of Congress... no interest
on loans, the way it used to be.
 
--
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Jan 17 11:17AM -0800

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 12:05:25 AM UTC-6, jonkalb wrote:
 
> So there are two possibilities. One is that the other participants in this group and I are correct and your code is unworthy of emulation. The other possibility, and let's seriously consider this, is that you are a coding genius with a unique insight into *the one true way to code* and that I and every other participant in this group are such complete morons that they not only don't know how to write good code, they don't even recognize it when you show it to them.
 
> But notice that either case has the same implication. Either you are unworthy to post your rantings here or we are unworthy to see your brilliance posted here. In either case:
 
> !!!! PLEASE STOP POSTING HERE !!!
 
I'm with you about 99%, but not with the yelling/caps.
I probably would have written - Please stop posting here
for a month or two. Possibly in a month or two we would
have the same problem, but I also believe people can change.
 
 
Brian
Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com>: Jan 17 06:18PM -0300

On 01/17/2017 03:05 AM, jonkalb wrote:
>>> one is not allowed to use such identifiers.
 
>> If that "one" is you, then yes; otherwise, no.
 
> <atrocious code deleted>
 
LOL x-D x-D
 
 
 
> !!!! PLEASE STOP POSTING HERE !!!
 
Just add him to your kill file (his posts are so hilarious that, just
for now, he is still in my white list!)
 
 
--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jan 17 10:20PM +0100

> I probably would have written - Please stop posting here
> for a month or two. Possibly in a month or two we would
> have the same problem, but I also believe people can change.
 
You have made it perfectly clear that /you/ are unwilling to change, no
matter how much some of your habits annoy other people. Why do you
think this muppet Jeff will change?
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Jan 17 09:51PM

On 17/01/2017 21:18, Cholo Lennon wrote:
> Just add him to your kill file (his posts are so hilarious that, just
> for now, he is still in my white list!)
 
I've killfiled him. It seems ever so quiet now...
 
I put up with sausages and Christianity. Their posters have value.
 
Andy
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>: Jan 16 08:23PM -0800

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>: Jan 16 08:32PM -0800

Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jan 17 09:00PM +1300

On 01/17/17 09:00 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
 
> inline int ER( int X, int Y ) { return X > Y ? X : Y ; }
 
> int j = 3, k = 6, y ;
 
> y = ER( j, k );
 
You won't if you enable optimisation.
 
--
Ian
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jan 17 09:03PM +1300

> On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 1:40:23 PM UTC-6, Mr Flibble wrote:
 
> Please don't swear here.
 
If you have nothing constructive to add, please Foxtrot Oscar and annoy
another group.
 
--
Ian
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Jan 17 10:28AM -0800

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 2:03:23 AM UTC-6, Ian Collins wrote:
 
> > Please don't swear here.
 
> If you have nothing constructive to add, please Foxtrot Oscar and annoy
> another group.
 
Developing and hosting the C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) as a free
service is my main contribution. And I'm willing to make a
contribution to someone who is interested in using the CMW.
There's more info here:
 
http://webEbenezer.net/about.html
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - Enjoy programming again.
http://webEbenezer.net
Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk>: Jan 17 07:37PM +0100

On 2017-01-16 20:48, JiiPee wrote:
 
> //.. and do something with a.
 
> }
 
The question was about
 
int getSum(int a, int b) {
 
return a + b;
 
}
 
which any sensible compiler will inline as a + b, unless you explicitly
ask it NOT to inline any functions.
 
 
You can find a good example of what an optimizing compiler really does,
if you look here:
 
http://stackoverflow.com/a/11639305/597607
 
Note that there are no "inline"s in that code.
 
 
 
Bo Persson
red floyd <dont.bother@its.invalid>: Jan 17 11:51AM -0800


> Developing and hosting the C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) as a free
> service is my main contribution.
 
So basically, your contribution to this group is shilling
your own software, and bitching about everyone else's choice
of words.
 
Fuck off.
JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jan 17 07:53PM

On 17/01/2017 18:37, Bo Persson wrote:
 
> return a + b;
 
> }
 
> which any sensible compiler will inline as a + b
 
 
yes but are you sure? I have this kind of thing in my real code where I
want to have an inline function with index parameters to arrays index.
But a bit worried if it creates temporaries. But I guess I have to
measure time how long it takes to be sure.
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Jan 17 08:25PM

>want to have an inline function with index parameters to arrays index.
>But a bit worried if it creates temporaries. But I guess I have to
>measure time how long it takes to be sure.
 
Or you could simply look at the generated machine code.
JiiPee <no@notvalid.com>: Jan 17 09:29PM

On 17/01/2017 20:25, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> But a bit worried if it creates temporaries. But I guess I have to
>> measure time how long it takes to be sure.
 
> Or you could simply look at the generated machine code.
 
 
yes true. but have not done that really before.
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Jan 17 09:50PM

On 17/01/2017 21:29, JiiPee wrote:
> yes true. but have not done that really before.
 
About time you did.
 
(I'm working on a MIPS CPU at the moment, and I've never used one
before. I couldn't _write_ MIPS assembler the way I could half a dozen
others, but I can read it. Even the branch delay slots...)
 
Andy
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Jan 17 09:51AM -0800

> classes are constructed.
 
> Unfortunately, none of the examples they mention are of
> std::unique_ptr.
 
This is one of many old topics that I'd like to find out
more about.
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net
jonkalb <google@kalbweb.com>: Jan 16 09:46PM -0800

On Monday, January 16, 2017 at 5:40:52 AM UTC-8, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> jonkalb <google@kalbweb.com> writes:
 
> >You are referring to CFront version numbers, not language version numbers.
 
> The two were, of course, one and the same at the time.
 
No.
 
Even if there is only one compiler for a language there is still a difference between the compiler and the language.
 
In the case of C++ and CFront, by the time CFront 2.1 was released, there were C++ compilers available from Glockenspiel (Nov. '86), GNU (Dec. '87), Oregon Software (Jan. '88), and Zortech (Jun. '88). The Glockenspiel compiler was a CFront port, but had its own release numbers.
 
Jon
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jan 17 03:31AM -0800

On Tuesday, 17 January 2017 07:46:10 UTC+2, jonkalb wrote:
> C++ compilers available from Glockenspiel (Nov. '86), GNU (Dec. '87), Oregon
> Software (Jan. '88), and Zortech (Jun. '88). The Glockenspiel compiler was a
> CFront port, but had its own release numbers.
 
You write twice that version numbers of C++ reference implementation were
*incorrect* to use as version numbers of C++ specification. However
you fail second time to type what you consider as *correct*. What version
of C++ specification did CFront 2.1 implement? How you tell it? Why?
Since with just CFront version number as contender on stage it stays the
winner and any argumentation is waste of words. ;-)
Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com>: Jan 17 12:12PM -0300

On 01/13/2017 11:54 PM, Asger Joergensen wrote:
 
>> There is only one IDE that comes even close to VS productivity and
>> that is CLion.
 
> Don't forget C++Bulder
 
C++ Builder is (or was) really nice (I used it a lot until version 6),
but IMO has some problems:

- It's proprietary
- It's very expensive
- Its main libraries (VCL and FireMonkey) are coded in Object Pascal:
this imposes some limitations to C++, ie. some kind of MI are not
allowed or source/header files (related to VCL) must have a strict
naming convention in order to be compilable. Also debugging Pascal code
is not funny :-P
- Until recently its compiler was behind modern standards (AFAIK they
changed their ancient compiler for clang)
- It doesn't support Linux.
- It is difficult to integrate 3rd party libraries (nobody test their
libraries with C++ Builder)
 
 
--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jan 17 01:54AM -0800

On Monday, 16 January 2017 09:06:29 UTC+2, Juha Nieminen wrote:
 
> If you count structs as "returning multiple values from a function",
> then you have been able to do that since C++ was invented. It has
> nothing to do with C++17.
 
Capability to return structs by value is actually because of backwards-
compatibility with C. The implicitly defaulted copy constructors
(that have caused lot of defects) are in C++ language likely because
of that feature of C.
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)