- Reversing a Linked List using Recursion - 2 Updates
| cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross): Jun 20 08:02PM In article <20170620200632.630f796e@bother.homenet>, >Jerry's responses. I understand that it is easy to miss the >development of the thread, particularly if, because of your plonking, >you can only see one side of the "conversation".) Ah yes, I know: I was trying to indirectly respond to Stuckle's comment by quoting "through" your post (if you'll excuse the analogy). Hence my comments about having plonk'ed him but having to respond to that bit of his note.... Apologies if that was not sufficiently clear. To be explicit: You are correct, he is wrong, but he is even more wrong than he realizes because he is using terminology incorrectly. > [snip] - Dan C. |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Jun 20 09:48PM +0100 On 20/06/2017 20:32, Chris Vine wrote: > returned where constructing local objects with RVO would be more > efficient. RVO is required by C++17 but you should be coding for it > with any compiler produced in the last 10 years. Bad analogy. RVO not happening doesn't result in a stack fault (incorrect code). Read up on the "as-if" rule and observable behaviour. /Flibble |
| 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