Saturday, May 27, 2017

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 19 updates in 7 topics

Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com>: May 26 08:00PM -0400

On 26/05/2017 23:51, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On 26/05/2017 21:25, Vassilis Spiliopoulos wrote:
>> Islam is a retarded religion.
 
> All religion is retarded.
 
Islam is more retarded than any other religion. It allows paedophilia
and their prophet was a serial paedophile. Their Koran hasn't changed
ever and so Muslims are still living in caves. To get refuge, they ask
Christians for help. Ask Ramine about it. He is a Moroccon Muslim.
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 26 09:03PM -0400

On 5/26/2017 7:16 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> Jesus forgives your sin and gives you new life, eternal life.
 
> Thank you,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
Christianity is a religion - no matter what you claim.
 
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christianity
 
And thousands of other references, vs. Rick. I'll bet even your
priest/pastor/minister would agree.
 
And if Christianity is not a religion, then your church has no grounds
for a religious exemption from taxes.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 26 06:38PM -0700

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 9:03:10 PM UTC-4, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> priest/pastor/minister would agree.
 
> And if Christianity is not a religion, then your church has no grounds
> for a religious exemption from taxes.
 
As I have stated, for many that is all it will ever be. But for the
born again we recognize that religion has almost nothing to do with
Christianity.
 
Here are some examples from various people:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rFvNIiPKiI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZHKsAgg4Kk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azWJ-MtxR2Q
 
And here's Biblical guidance on what religion is:
 
http://biblehub.com/kjv/james/1-27.htm
27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this,
To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to
keep himself unspotted from the world.
 
-----
Modern man has made religion into church buildings and businesses. It
was never intended to be that way, and it is literally Satan infiltrating
the church and converting men and women following after God's Holy Spirit,
purposed on saving men's eternal souls from damnation, into a battle over
whether or not new business is out of order with regards to Robert's Rules
for Order in business meetings which supplant Bible Study one day a month,
as required by the legal statutes for corporations.
 
The real church is something different. And it's not religion.
 
http://biblehub.com/acts/4-32.htm
32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and
of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things
which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection
of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
 
That early church changed the world. They didn't have PowerPoint
charts with teaching plans for modern Christianity. They brought
forth the blood, and they brought forward men's sin. They brought
forward our nature, and our need for a Savior, and they brought forth
the love of God in that while we were yet sinners Christ came to save
us.
 
-----
The modern "church" is so impotent in changing men's hearts because it
is focused on matters of the flesh. Five point programs which tell you
about nothing of God. You go home having seen a good performance and a
good show, but you're not moving toward holiness, you're not repenting,
you're not moving toward outreach and teaching, but are just looking for
your best life now, and trying to figure out which restaurant you should
go to after the service is over.
 
It is only when you focus upon God's Holy Spirit and pursue it with
vigor that you begin to realize what Christianity really is. It is a
relationship with God, an ongoing partnership where He is with you
guiding you to constant appointments where you encounter this soul,
and that soul, and impact them for His Kingdom. You don't use profanity
ever. You don't berate people ever. You are always teaching, always
listening to His inner guidance through the Holy Spirit, and you are
always behaving as an ambassador of God, a royal priest, a servant
unto all.
 
You are that carnal Christian, Jerry. You do not follow or pursue God's
Holy Spirit. I have tried to tell you this many times, but you are so
convinced that you are walking on the right path that you are blind to
the fact you are not only not walking on the right path, but are marching
straight into Hell.
 
If you do want to know what it means to be a real Christian, then press
in and ask God to show you, otherwise you are only someone who has some
form of religion, appeasing your conscience from time to time as you
march yourself steadily on the way to Hell.
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 27 12:15PM -0400

On 5/26/2017 9:38 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> march yourself steadily on the way to Hell.
 
> Thank you,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
Then if your church is not a religion, it should not be tax exempt. How
much has your church paid in taxes on the amount they take in for the
last 10 years?
 
If it's nothing, then according to your statement your minister, church
council and all other leaders should be jailed for tax evasion.
 
As for me being carnal - I strongly suggest you read Matthew 7:1-5
before making any statements about someone else's beliefs.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 27 09:22AM -0700

On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 12:15:14 PM UTC-4, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> council and all other leaders should be jailed for tax evasion.
 
> As for me being carnal - I strongly suggest you read Matthew 7:1-5
> before making any statements about someone else's beliefs.
 
 
I have read those verses, and the rest of the New Testament.
It's why I've written what I have to you these several times.
You are not born again, Jerry. You are not saved. You provide
e
Matthew 7:16,20 evidence which is on display.
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 27 09:31AM -0700

On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 12:15:14 PM UTC-4, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> last 10 years?
 
> If it's nothing, then according to your statement your minister, church
> council and all other leaders should be jailed for tax evasion.
 
Here is my position on obeying man's laws:
 
https://groups.google.com/forum/?nomobile=true#!topic/comp.arch.fpga/t20eW_i-pJs
 
Specifically the post with this text:
 
But, until other people engage in that same philosophy,
we must honor the requests of other people when they make
decisions for themselves, such as releasing something
under copyright. We honor their requests up until those
requests directly contradict the teachings of God:
 
The same holds true for obeying governmental bodies, up until
it contradicts God's teaching, meaning at some point it will
be required that people take the mark. God says whoever takes
the mark is damned. So, obey God in that case, not man's law.
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com>: May 27 12:15PM -0700

On 05/26/2017 01:25 PM, Vassilis Spiliopoulos wrote:
> Islam is a retarded religion.
 
What reason do you have for re-posting the complete OP, adding a
comment unrelated specifically to the OP?
 
--
James Moe
jmm-list at sohnen-moe dot com
Think.
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 27 04:38PM -0400

On 5/27/2017 12:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Matthew 7:16,20 evidence which is on display.
 
> Thank you,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
Christians do not judge others. They leave that up to God. Heretics do
judge others, however.
 
Which are you? Be careful before you answer, Rick.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 27 04:42PM -0400

On 5/27/2017 12:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Matthew 7:16,20 evidence which is on display.
 
> Thank you,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
And is your belief a religion, or do your church leaders belong in jail
for tax evasion? Even Jesus spoke on it - Matthew 22:21.
 
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 27 02:57PM -0700

On Saturday, May 27, 2017, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> [snip]
 
You do not understand, Jerry. I pray sometime you do.
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: May 27 06:45PM -0400

On 5/27/2017 5:57 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> You do not understand, Jerry. I pray sometime you do.
 
> Thank you,
> Rick C. Hodgin
 
Rick, I understand more than you think.
 
Why don't you answer my questions? They are very valid ones. Maybe
because you don't have an answer?
 
Real Christians can answer my questions.
 
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
aminer68@gmail.com: May 27 01:29PM -0700

Hello..
 
 
Here is my final corrected text on (i have corrected some typos because
i write fast and think fast):
 
Can we travel back in time?
 
Here is my thoughts that i have just wrote:
 
It is a very interesting question that demands rationality
and logical thinking to answer it ...
 
To answer it, i start from a mathematical subject which is the mathematical arithmetic series.
 
An arithmetic series has as its main characteristic that
the difference between its terms is constant ... and that its sum
gives (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), a_n being the last term ... now you have to be smart and notice with me that just before the final step of the final calculation that resulted as a general equation of the arithmetic series, the calculation of the arithmetic series required of us a much bigger time to solve the series .. But as soon as the result (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2 has been reached, the time for the resolution of the arithmetic series has greatly diminished, therefore the time preceding the resolution has compressed a lot and allowed us to travel in the the future quickly, the resolution of the arithmetic series which gave: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it's like a wormhole in the universe permit us to time travel in the future more quickly, but understand with me that the time travel in the future that allows you to make the equation of (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is relative to the time taken previously by the arithmetic series just before the discovery of the equation (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), and thus that the universe is computable and that ultimately it allowed a time travel and thanks to mathematics that is something extra-ordinary in itself.
 
Now I will be more logical and ask myself the following question:
 
Is there any contradiction in my evidence since a car
is not a machine to allow time travel in the future to
the simple reason that the regions where we will travel and arrive
faster with a car will not have aged in time that corresponds to the future time in which one arrives by the feet?
 
I answer this in a more logical way:
 
Notice that when I said that the mathematical equation
of the arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future, because it is an equation that also predicts the result more quickly to which one arrives by paper without this equation, so the time has no hold on the theoretical result that is predicted faster so that there is no contradiction when it comes to theoretical prediction. Also when you use this invention That is this mathematical equation of the arithmetic series: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it is that you are living the future of the one who has not yet invented or used this equation and who will arrive there in its future, therefore it is for this reason that this equation is also a time travel machine that permit to travel in the future and it has a predictive characteristic.
 
So there is no contradiction and therefore we can
consider a car as a time traveling machine to travel in the future, like
the microprocessor, and like several other mathematical inventions
as the mathematical equation of the arithmetic series.
 
Here is one of my conclusion:
 
If you are traveling from Montreal to Paris
by airplane, and that another person swims and walk
by foot to Paris, and assume that the person who moves by swiming
and walking wants to see Paris and answer some questions,
And if you travel to Paris by plane and you
answer these questions more quickly since you are going to see Paris
more quickly than the person swimming and and walking , so that
has a predictive character as the mathematical equation of the
arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), since you will be able
to send an email quickly to the person who wants to
to swim and walk to Paris and give him
the answers he's looking for, so you'll be able to see
the answers of his future, and this predictive characteristic
can be considered as a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future,
so the aircraft and the car are like time travelmachines that permit to travel in the future ... as well as the processors and other mathematical inventions and others...
 
 
Rationality and logic also have a predictive characteristic,
so you must also reason better in a more scientific manner and take into account the scientific and empirical evidence to
be ahead of others, like a time machine that permit to travel in the future..
 
If a first person receives a valuable advice and this advice
of value allows him to better control his future and to succeed in his life in the future by executing this valuable advice and also it allows him to predict his future, and besides, imagine that a second person will receive in its future this valuable advice, then the first person will be able to guess with CERTITUDE the future of the second person which will be the consequence of the execution of this valuable advice , and not only the first person will have lived the future of the second person before the second person, since the two will have lived the same event by the execution of this valuable advice, then in my opinion we must reason as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic and
notice that since the first person will guess with CERTITUDE
The future of the second person and will also live the future event of the second person, then those two theoretical and
empirical evidences confirms that the first person has lived the future
event of the second person, so this valuable advice could be called by mathematical approximation a time machine that permits to travel in the future, I say "approximation", because we by analogy are as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic, in addition to that, that the fact that the first person guesses with CERTITUDE the future of the second person, this informs in a logical manner that this certainty change our way of perceiving, for this certainty, even if
it is not travel in the future, it is by approximation
as a journey into the future, for a journey into the future
will lead to the same certainty, and as a result
the same certainties permit us to affirm by approximation
that the valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel
in the future.
 
Then you understand that I am also a Platonist,
Because you noticed that I can define this time travel in the future as a platonic event, so when i said that a valuable advice is a time machine that permits to travel in the future, you understand that it makes us live platonically the future of others, and since I am a also Platonist, I affirm that a valuable advice is a time travel machine
that permit us to travel in the future of others since time has no hold on the ideas, and that the same idea through time inside two
persons, is the same idea, therefore my proof is made that the valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel in the future.
 
When you imagine a circle, I asserts that not only can you imagine the circle in material or matter but also in immaterial, as was my proof that I have just given you , this immaterial essence of the idea is reified by our reason, and that is the reason that gives it existence. So this in my opinion is sufficient proof that the idea exists because we feel it by our reason and it pays homage to our beloved philosopher Plato.
 
It is this reification of the immaterial essence of the idea
by reason which gives the necessary and even sufficient approximation to call even a valuable advice a time machine that permit to travel in the future.
 
Then since the idea exists and since a sensation also exists,
then one can not also distinguish an idea from the generated sensation
by the execution as an automaton of a valuable advice at a time t1 and a time t1 + t2, and since an idea does not age then we can affirm that valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel in the future, and the valuable advice has a predictive characteristic, because the approximation is sufficient since we are not in boolean logic but in fuzzy logic.
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
aminer68@gmail.com: May 27 01:11PM -0700

Hello..
 
 
Can we travel back in time?
 
Here is my thoughts that i have just wrote:
 
It is a very interesting question that demands rationality
and logical thinking to answer it ...
 
To answer it, i start from a mathematical subject which is the mathematical arithmetic series.
 
An arithmetic series has as its main characteristic that
the difference between its terms is constant ... and that its sum
gives (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), a_n being the last term ... now you have to be smart and notice with me that just before the final step of the final calculation that resulted as a general equation of the arithmetic series, the calculation of the arithmetic series required of us a much bigger time to solve the series .. But as soon as the result (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2 has been reached, the time for the resolution of the arithmetic series has greatly diminished, therefore the time preceding the resolution has compressed a lot and allowed us to travel in the the future quickly, the resolution of the arithmetic series which gave: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it's like a wormhole in the universe permit us to time travel in the future more quickly, but understand with me that the time travel in the future that allows you to make the equation of (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is relative to the time taken previously by the arithmetic series just before the discovery of the equation (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), and thus that the universe is computable and that ultimately it allowed a time travel and thanks to mathematics that is something extra-ordinary in itself.
 
Now I will be more logical and ask myself the following question:
 
Is there any contradiction in my evidence since a car
is not a machine to allow time travel in the future to
the simple reason that the regions where we will travel and arrive
faster with a car will not have aged in time that corresponds to the future time in which one arrives by the feet?
 
I answer this in a more logical way:
 
Notice that when I said that the mathematical equation
of the arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future, because it is an equation that also predicts the result more quickly to which one arrives by paper without this equation, so the time has no hold on the theoretical result that is predicted faster so that there is no contradiction when it comes to theoretical prediction. Also when you use this invention That is this mathematical equation of the arithmetic series: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it is that you are living the future of the one who has not yet invented or used this equation and who will arrive there in its future, therefore it is for this reason that this equation is also a time travel machine that permit to travel in the future and it has a predictive characteristic.
 
So there is no contradiction and therefore we can
consider a car as a time traveling machine to travel in the future, like
the microprocessor, and like several other mathematical inventions
as the mathematical equation of the arithmetic series.
 
Here is one of my conclusion:
 
If you are traveling from Montreal to Paris
by airplane, and that another person swims and walk
by foot to Paris, and assume that the person who moves by swiming
and walking wants to see Paris and answer some questions,
And if you travel to Paris by plane and you
answer these questions more quickly since you are going to see Paris
more quickly than the person swimming and and walking , so that
has a predictive character as the mathematical equation of the
arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), since you will be able
to send an email quickly to the person who wants to
to swim and walk to Paris and give him
the answers he's looking for, so you'll be able to see
the answers of his future, and this predictive characteristic
can be considered as a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future,
so the aircraft and the car are like time travelmachines that permit to travel in the future ... as well as the processors and other mathematical inventions and others...
 
 
Rationality and logic also have a predictive characteristic,
so you must also reason better in a more scientific manner and take into account the scientific and empirical evidence to
be ahead of others, like a time machine that permiet to travel in the future..
 
If a first person receives a valuable advice and this advice
of value allows him to better control his future and to succeed in his life in the future by executing this valuable advice and also it allows him to predict his future, and besides, imagine that a second person will receive in its future this valuable advice, then the first person will be able to guess with CERTITUDE the future of the second person which will be the consequence of the execution of this valuable advice , and not only the first person will have lived the future of the second person before the second person, since the two will have lived the same event by the execution of this valuable advice, then in my opinion we must reason as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic and
notice that since the first person will guess with CERTITUDE
The future of the second person and will also live the future event of the second person, then those two theoretical and
empirical evidences confirms that the first person has lived the future
event of the second person, so this valuable advice could be called by mathematical approximation a time machine that permits to travel in the future, I say "approximation", because we by analogy are as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic, in addition to that, that the fact that the first person guesses with CERTITUDE the future of the second person, this informs in a logical manner that this certainty change our way of perceiving, for this certainty, even if
it is not travel in the future, it is by approximation
as a journey into the future, for a journey into the future
will lead to the same certainty, and as a result
the same certainties permit us to affirm by approximation
that the valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel
in the future.
 
Then you understand that I am also a Platonist,
Because you noticed that I can define this time travel in the future as a platonic event, so when i said that a valuable advice is a time machine that permiets to travel in the future, you understand that it makes us live platonically the future of others, and since I am a also Platonist, I affirm that a valuable advice is a time travel machine
that permiet us to travel in the future of others since time has no hold on the ideas, and that the same idea through time inside two
persons, is the same idea, therefore my proof is made that the valuable advice is a time machine that permiet us to travel in the future.
 
When you imagine a circle, I asserts that not only can you imagine the circle in material or matter but also in immaterial, as was my proof that I have just given you , this immaterial essence of the idea is reified by our reason, and that is the reason that gives it existence. So this in my opinion is sufficient proof that the idea exists because we feel it by our reason and it pays homage to our beloved philosopher Plato.
 
It is this reification of the immaterial essence of the idea
by reason which gives the necessary and even sufficient approximation to call even a valuable advice a time machine that permit to travel in the future.
 
Then since the idea exists and since a sensation also exists,
then one can not also distinguish an idea from the generated sensation
by the execution as an automaton of a valuable advice at a time t1 and a time t1 + t2, and since an idea does not age then we can affirm that valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel in the future, and the valuable advice has a predictive characteristic, because the approximation is sufficient since we are not in boolean logic but in fuzzy logic.
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: May 27 10:50AM -0400

Is there any way to use C++11 templates/recursion to adapt the following
algorithm for generating the index/face mesh of an "icosphere"
(icosahedron-derived sphere geometry) such that the structures are
populated for a given recursion depth at compile-time, rather than runtime?
 
<https://schneide.wordpress.com/2016/07/15/generating-an-icosphere-in-c/>
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: May 27 08:04AM -0700

You could write a preprocessor, which takes prog1.cpp, runs it through
the preprocessor and sees a keyword like this: "ico<4>" and does the
compute part creating source code for the tesselation data at that
point, generating prog1_out.cpp, which is the version compiled.
 
It's how I would do it.
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram): May 27 02:55PM

I was not able to find the relevant part in the standard,
so I wanted to try out, whether I correctly understood the
meaning of copy-list-initialization. I used this program:
 
main.cpp
 
#include <initializer_list>
#include <iostream>
#include <ostream>
 
class c
{ c( c & o ){ ::std::cout << "co\n"; }
public:
c( int const a, int const b ){ ::std::cout << "cab\n"; }};
 
int main(){ c x = { 1, 2 }; }
 
transcript
 
cab
 
I used to believe that the right-hand side »{ 1, 2 }« was
converted into a temporary object of type c and then this
object was copied into c. But this should invoke the copy
constructor. So, I tried to declare a private copy constructor
to test my prediction that this will lead to an error message.
I also tried »c( c & o)=delete;«.
 
But there is no error message. So, the above copy-list-
initialization does not use the copy constructor?
(Notwithstanding optimizing away such a use during the
actual execution.)
Jeff-Relf.Me @.: May 27 05:08AM -0700

Christiano <christiano@engineer.com>: May 27 02:58AM -0300

The book PPP2 at page 456, 2nd edition, Fourth Print, shows the following code:
 
struct Open_polyline : Shape {
using Shape::Shape;
void add(Point p) { Shape::add(p); }
};
 
and says:
 
"
" The declaration *using Shape::Shape* is a *using* declaration. It says that an
" *Open_polyline* can use the constructors defined for *Shape*. *Shape* has a default
" constructor and an initializer-list constructor, so the *using* declaration
" is simply a shorthand for defining those two constructors for *Open_polyline*.
" As for *Lines*, the initializer-list constructor is there as a shorthand for an initial
" sequence of *add()*s
"
 
Here is the class Shape (presented at page 494). What matters are the constructors only (look for CONSTRUCTOR 1 and CONSTRUCTOR 2 comments):
// -----------BEGIN Class Shape-----------------------------
class Shape { // deals with color and style, and holds sequence of lines
public:
void draw() const; // deal with color and draw lines
virtual void move(int dx, int dy); // move the shape +=dx and +=dy
 
void set_color(Color col);
Color color() const;
 
void set_style(Line_style sty);
Line_style style() const;
 
void set_fill_color(Color col);
Color fill_color() const;
 
Point point(int i) const; // read only access to points
int number_of_points() const;
 
Shape(const Shape&) = delete; // prevent copying
Shape& operator=(const Shape&) = delete;
 
virtual ~Shape() { }
protected:
Shape() {}; // <<----------- CONSTRUCTOR 1
Shape(initializer_list<Point> lst); // <<----------- CONSTRUCTOR 2
 
virtual void draw_lines() const; // draw the appropriate lines
void add(Point p); // add p to points
void set_point(int i,Point p); // points[i]=p;
private:
vector<Point> points; // not used by all shapes
Color lcolor {static_cast<int>(fl_color())};// color for lines and characters (with default)
Line_style ls {0};
Color fcolor {Color::invisible}; // fill color
};
//-------------- END Class Shape ---------------------------------
 
What I understood:
 
struct Open_polyline : Shape {
using Shape::Shape;
 
void add(Point p) { Shape::add(p); }
};
 
IS EQUIVALENT TO
 
struct Open_polyline : Shape {
Open_polyline() {};
Open_polyline(initializer_list<Point> lst);
 
void add(Point p) { Shape::add(p); }
};
 
So I decided to do a little test with a much smaller code (without graphic libraries):
 
//----------------- BEGIN TEST ----------------------
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
 
class animal
{
protected:
animal()
{
cout << "Animal constructed" << endl;
}
};
 
struct bird: animal
{
 
#ifdef TEST
using animal::animal;
#else
bird()
{
cout << "Bird constructed" << endl;
}
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)