Friday, February 17, 2017

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 18 updates in 6 topics

"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>: Feb 17 02:35PM -0500


>For me, and only me, my shit is the best:
 
> http://Jeff-Relf.Me/X.HTM
 
>Nothing could be more custom, programmable, than my own code.
 
If your own code was so great you'd market it.
But, the sad fact is your code is so idiosyncratic
and absurd that nobody but you could abide it.
 
--
 
"In my erudition, I say a man not mince words in order
to spare the sensibilities of the thin-skinned and the
ignorant." --Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>: Feb 17 01:16PM -0800

"Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake>: Feb 17 05:28PM -0500


>I write code, all the time, and I constantly modify it;
>99.999% of the world can't do that, not like me.
>Hence, I have UltraCustom solutions.
 
More like ultra eccentric. LOL!
 
--
 
"In my erudition, I say a man not mince words in order
to spare the sensibilities of the thin-skinned and the
ignorant." --Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: Feb 17 03:12PM -0500

Is there a set of "canonical" constructors and assignments that can be
used as a unit test to ensure a resource-managing class, which has all
of the "Rule of Five" constructors and assignment operators explicitly
defined is working properly?
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Feb 18 11:09AM +1300

On 02/18/17 09:12 AM, bitrex wrote:
> used as a unit test to ensure a resource-managing class, which has all
> of the "Rule of Five" constructors and assignment operators explicitly
> defined is working properly?
 
That wouldn't be straightforward considering the resource management
choices on offer. The testing of a unique_ptr like object would be
different form a shared_ptr like object.
 
--
Ian
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Feb 17 08:33AM -0800

On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 11:24:04 AM UTC-5, Ramine wrote:
 
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0096300303002790
 
> And read about Conjugate gradient method:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugate_gradient_method
 
It's interesting. I would suggest posting it in scientific, math, or
engineering forums where they could use your tool as a tool, rather
than looking at the underlying code (as we might do in a C++ forum).
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
luisc <l.pereztato@gmail.com>: Feb 17 09:50AM -0800

On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 5:24:04 PM UTC+1, Ramine wrote:
 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugate_gradient_method
 
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
 
Congrats for your work. I look forward to have some time to implement your solver in our FEA package (https://github.com/lcpt/xc). Maybe the people of OpenSees, Calculix, Kratos, Code-Aster,... will be happy to hear about your work.
Ramine <toto@toto.net>: Feb 17 01:07PM -0500

On 2/17/2017 12:50 PM, luisc wrote:
 
>> Thank you,
>> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
 
> Congrats for your work. I look forward to have some time to implement your solver in our FEA package (https://github.com/lcpt/xc). Maybe the people of OpenSees, Calculix, Kratos, Code-Aster,... will be happy to hear about your work.
 
Thank you.
 
You can add it as an option, because my Dense and the Sparse solvers are
scalable on NUMA architecture.
 
 
 
Thank you again,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <toto@toto.net>: Feb 17 01:09PM -0500

On 2/17/2017 12:50 PM, luisc wrote:
 
>> Thank you,
>> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
 
> Congrats for your work. I look forward to have some time to implement your solver in our FEA package (https://github.com/lcpt/xc). Maybe the people of OpenSees, Calculix, Kratos, Code-Aster,... will be happy to hear about your work.
 
Hello,
 
And don't forget to read the readme files inside the zip file, i have
explained how to use all the objects and all the methods.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane
Ramine <toto@toto.net>: Feb 17 01:12PM -0500

On 2/17/2017 12:50 PM, luisc wrote:
 
>> Thank you,
>> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
 
> Congrats for your work. I look forward to have some time to implement your solver in our FEA package (https://github.com/lcpt/xc). Maybe the people of OpenSees, Calculix, Kratos, Code-Aster,... will be happy to hear about your work.
 
If you want to send me an email please send it to:
 
aminer68 at gmail.com
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid>: Feb 17 01:58PM -0800

On 2/16/2017 3:38 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> fine for an example.
 
> Since it's really powerful, It would be wrong to pass it up due to my
> own ignorance.
 
Actually, Ramine is "sometimes" not all that bad wrt some of the
algorithms, and even analysis on such. He, afaict, has tried out and
critiqued some of my algorithms logic basins. Afaict, the hyper followup
postings wrt correcting errors can be collated. This person is excited,
and should try to go ahead and just "calm down", from time to time...
 
:^)
Manfred <noname@invalid.add>: Feb 17 06:31PM +0100

On 2/17/2017 2:34 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> I have already did one exercise today to prepare the mind
> for the comma expression, but I will not really introduce it
> in this course due to lack of time.
FWIW, /if/ the topic of order of evaluation is understood, then the
comma operator is pretty simple to understand too.
OTOH, the comma operator is pretty unique in its function.
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Feb 17 07:29PM

> I kind of wish std
> would have a shortcut to rand() so we do not need to write those 6 lines
> of code to get a simple random number....
 
Where are you getting that figure from? You can get a C++11 rng for
example like:
 
auto rng = std::bind(std::uniform_int_distribution<int>(1, 6), std::mt19937());
std::cout << rng() << "\n";
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Feb 17 09:55PM

On 17/02/2017 11:49, Chris Vine wrote:
> However, on looking at the latest available print of the standard
> (n4640), large parts of the proposal on the order of evaluation of
> expressions and function arguments have been rejected.
 
Good.
 
I can imagine a future where the two functions might be run in parallel
on different CPUs. Currently the overhead of setting such a thing up is
too much, so any parallelism is explicit (threads, or OpenCL).
 
Andy
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Feb 17 07:20PM

> I believe it would be allowed under the "Fair use" doctrine.
> (Needless to say IANAL.)
 
Maybe if you are making a commentary or review on it.
Just copypasting significant portions of the text does not
fall under fair use.
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Feb 17 07:36PM


>Maybe if you are making a commentary or review on it.
>Just copypasting significant portions of the text does not
>fall under fair use.
 
"Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include
commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting,
research, and scholarship."
 
https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Feb 17 09:59PM +0100

On 17/02/17 20:36, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting,
> research, and scholarship."
 
> https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html
 
Does the USA definition of fair use apply when published to an
international newsgroup? The source of the copyrighted material may be
in the USA, but "fair use" varies between countries.
Prroffessorr Fir Kenobi <profesor.fir@gmail.com>: Feb 17 11:11AM -0800

W dniu czwartek, 16 lutego 2017 19:40:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Jorgen Grahn napisał:
 
> > this seem to me to be radically stupid
 
> You make me wish I hadn't spent the time trying to help you.
> Thanks for clarifying that.
 
no problem - if you spend time on producing radically stupid pices of text in front of people i can help YOU yo make stop that
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)