- High horse - 2 Updates
- [FYI] 1.68.0 deadline for new libraries approaching - 15 Updates
- C++ now is fast - 1 Update
- Improvements in the type system [Supersedes] - 1 Update
- OOP is the new GOTO - 1 Update
| James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu>: Jun 15 11:47AM -0400 On 06/15/2018 02:57 AM, Ian Collins wrote: > On 15/06/18 17:12, James Kuyper wrote: >> On 06/14/2018 05:30 PM, Paavo Helde wrote: ... > There will always be requirements that cannot be converted into a > manageable set of tests, whether you use TDD or not. These requirements > are hard to validate no matter what the development methodology. Again, you're missing my point - it has nothing to do with the difficulty of testing such a function, and everything to do with the concept that "the acceptance tests ... act as the true requirements". Testing whether the function violates its requirements need not be particularly difficult. Taking for example a function of a single floating point argument, a test of a few key values (usually including NaNs, +/-infinity, 0, and values that bracket any value at which the required behavior changes significantly), supplemented by a sufficiently large random sample of other possible values, should be more than adequate for most practical purposes. What I'm saying is that such a test cannot be considered as actually defining the same requirement that would be conveyed by a corresponding English document that specifies what the code being tested is required to do with every possible value of it's inputs. The requirement such a test specifies only applies to the actual values it tests, and implicitly imposes no requirements on the behavior of the function for any other values of the input argument. |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jun 16 09:30AM +1200 On 16/06/18 03:47, James Kuyper wrote: > Again, you're missing my point - it has nothing to do with the > difficulty of testing such a function, and everything to do with the > concept that "the acceptance tests ... act as the true requirements". In many situations they do, especially when the customer in involved in their writing. There large number of tools out there to help with this. > required behavior changes significantly), supplemented by a sufficiently > large random sample of other possible values, should be more than > adequate for most practical purposes. You appear, at least to me, to be conflating unit and acceptance tests. In my environment, the customer has no idea what individual functions make up the code for a feature they have requested. Functions are tested with unit tests, features with acceptance tests. The latter are the customer's true requirements. > test specifies only applies to the actual values it tests, and > implicitly imposes no requirements on the behavior of the function for > any other values of the input argument. I don't think I have ever disagreed with that. What I have said and you snipped in my last response is in the business world (at last my parts of it), most requirements written at a high user experience level. They do not delve into the details of the code. Yes we could turn those into detailed documents but we chose to express the details through tests instead. Sure a written document may be more comprehensive and in some domains they are mandated, but the costs of producing and maintaining them in both time and labour are very high. For a medical device these costs are accepted, everyone in the marked has to bear them. -- Ian. |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 08:58AM -0400 > >the watch, which is in no way a flop. apple sells more watches than the > >entire swiss watch industry combined, and that's in just 3 years or so. > Says an obvious fanboy. ad hominem, and the numbers speak for themselves. <http://fortune.com/2018/02/20/apple-watch-sales-smartwatch/> In the fourth quarter of 2016, Apple零 six million shipments represented nearly half of all smartwatch sales. Apple sold eight million Apple Watches in the final quarter of 2017, the most since the product was introduced and the highest number of shipments in a single quarter for any wearable vendor, according to new estimates from Canalys and IDC. That figure is also more than the companies in the Swiss watch industry零 combined sales, according to shipment statistics from the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry. ... At Apple零 shareholder meeting on Feb. 13, Cook said revenue from the wearables alone is approaching that of a Fortune 400 company. This means Apple零 wearables business is nearly the size of a company like Jetblue, with at least $6.7 billion in annual sales. $6.7b is not what anyone would call 'a flop'. what's worse is you can't see beyond your apple hatred to accept it. > WHere are they then? I almost never see anyone wearing > one, in fact wearing a watch these days is becoming rarer but when I do see > a watch its not apple. then you haven't been looking. |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 08:58AM -0400 > >straw man. > Sorry? Thats how people work. Perhaps you've never had a real job yet and > don't understand that. ad hominem attacks means you have nothing. > >difficult to impossible even just a few years ago. > I could walk 100 miles. But I'd rather use a vehicle. Ditto using a phone > for doing real work on. bad analogy and missing the point entirely. > >the trend is clear. very, very clear. > No, the trend is people buying these things to use for media consumption, not > to work on. absolutely wrong. these were drawn/painted with an apple pencil on an ipad, i.e., *creation*, not consumption: <https://is3-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple118/v4/99/7b/f7/997bf74f- 30a0-a3fa-8aa7-11e74ff31f5d/pr_source.png/628x0w.png> <https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple128/v4/5b/23/03/5b23037e- 86a5-a4b4-4192-21786edfc8ef/pr_source.png/628x0w.png> <https://is3-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple128/v4/54/03/46/540346ba- b7f1-9d98-f7bb-00f82c68e1a5/pr_source.png/628x0w.png> this sure isn't 'media consumption' either: <http://www.unifiedrepublicofstars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/image- 1-768x576.png> |
| "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>: Jun 15 08:59AM -0400 <boltar@cylonHQ.com> wrote | Says an obvious fanboy. WHere are they then? I almost never see anyone wearing | one, in fact wearing a watch these days is becoming rarer but when I do see | a watch its not apple. | The cutting edge people are on the go. They won't be sitting around waiting for you to notice their computer watch. Rather, they're at the gym, using the watch to confirm that their heart is still beating while they pay for the opportunity to officially walk by renting a treadmill. These people are very clever. They're a step ahead of you or I. :) |
| SilverSlimer <.m@nsn.s>: Jun 15 09:00AM -0400 On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:32:23 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: >> > study, which was published on Thursday. >> Sad to hear that it doesn't beat the iPad Pro. >why is it sad? Because it just seems that Apple's got the PC's number in pretty much every category other than gaming and sheer performance. Their offerings are always a lot more user friendly even if they seldom use the most recent processors or even allow people to play the occasional game. No matter what Microsoft tries to do, Apple always seems to do it better. |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 09:21AM -0400 In article <e1e7idd3v1s52c9e8ohvf4ibah1blq0mv6@4ax.com>, SilverSlimer > the most recent processors or even allow people to play the occasional > game. No matter what Microsoft tries to do, Apple always seems to do > it better. again, why is that sad? what matters is using the best product for a given task. sometimes it's apple and sometimes it's not. no device is perfect for everything. today, people have a wide range of options, more so than ever before, including mac, windows, chromebook, ios, android and linux, and they all interoperate with each other (for the most part, anyway). competition means better products for everyone. choice is good. that's *not* sad at all. |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Jun 15 02:36PM On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:58:19 -0400 ><http://fortune.com/2018/02/20/apple-watch-sales-smartwatch/> > In the fourth quarter of 2016, Apple零 six million shipments > represented nearly half of all smartwatch sales. Wow, half of all smartwatch sales! Thats like saying > That figure is also more than the companies in the Swiss watch > industry零 combined sales, according to shipment statistics from the > Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry. Wow! Now lets see how many watches casio shipped... https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/casio-announces-shipment-of-100-million th-g-shock-watch-300514167.html And thats just one model. > means Apple零 wearables business is nearly the size of a company like > Jetblue, with at least $6.7 billion in annual sales. >$6.7b is not what anyone would call 'a flop'. Its hardly the blazing success of their smartphones. That amount is small beer for apple and if they're hoping to build their future revenue on the watch then I'm glad I'm not a shareholder. >what's worse is you can't see beyond your apple hatred to accept it. See, there we go , i'm a "hater". How very adolescent. Actually I use OS/X every day at work and used to own an iPad until I upgraded to android. >> one, in fact wearing a watch these days is becoming rarer but when I do see >> a watch its not apple. >then you haven't been looking. Sure. Believe what you want. |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Jun 15 02:45PM On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:58:20 -0400 >> Sorry? Thats how people work. Perhaps you've never had a real job yet and >> don't understand that. >ad hominem attacks means you have nothing. Not denying it I see. >> I could walk 100 miles. But I'd rather use a vehicle. Ditto using a phone >> for doing real work on. >bad analogy and missing the point entirely. Not at all. You're the one who doesn't know what real work is and have no reference point to make suitable comparisons or understand analogies. >86a5-a4b4-4192-21786edfc8ef/pr_source.png/628x0w.png> ><https://is3-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple128/v4/54/03/46/540346ba- >b7f1-9d98-f7bb-00f82c68e1a5/pr_source.png/628x0w.png> Is that it? Seriously? Now lets see it run a full version of photoshop, never mind blender or lightworks without grinding to a halt. >this sure isn't 'media consumption' either: ><http://www.unifiedrepublicofstars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/image- >1-768x576.png> And? I've got a terminal emulator on my tablet, it doesn't mean its usable unless I want to give myself a headache squinting and spending half the time correcting typos from the virtual keyboard. Like I said, when you get yourself a proper job working for anything up to 12 hours a day instead of pissing about doing some hipster shit in a cafe for half an hour while you sip your soya latte, you might understand the use cases of large screens and a proper keyboard and mouse. Until then... |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Jun 15 02:49PM On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:59:17 -0400 >to officially walk by renting a treadmill. These >people are very clever. They're a step ahead of >you or I. :) :) Damn, I knew I was going to the wrong gym. I need to be where these lifestylers are at! Perhaps I could facetime them while they're on the treadmill and ask for advice... |
| shemp14@outlook.com: Jun 15 03:59PM Slight difference between number shipped and number SOLD. That's the only real number. |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 12:19PM -0400 > > In the fourth quarter of 2016, Apple零 six million shipments > > represented nearly half of all smartwatch sales. > Wow, half of all smartwatch sales! Thats like saying half is incredibly good for a product that's been out for ~3 years. > https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/casio-announces-shipment-of-100-milli > onth-g-shock-watch-300514167.html > And thats just one model. no, that's *not* just one model. that's 100 million *total* since 1981, more than 35 years ago. 100 million over 35 years is an average of about 2.8 million per year. apple sold nearly three times that many in *one* quarter (~8m in q4'17) with an estimated 18 million watches sold for all of 2017. if they maintain current growth rates (and all indications are that they will blow well past it), then 2018 sales should be at least 30 million units. in other words, based on current estimates, apple will likely sell 100 million watches in another year or so, matching what took casio more than 35 years to do. not a very good example to support your claim that it's a flop. > Its hardly the blazing success of their smartphones. That amount is small > beer for apple and if they're hoping to build their future revenue on the > watch then I'm glad I'm not a shareholder. something does not need to sell 200 million units to not be a flop. many companies would be thrilled to have just a fraction of $6.7b in sales. > >what's worse is you can't see beyond your apple hatred to accept it. > See, there we go , i'm a "hater". How very adolescent. Actually I use OS/X > every day at work and used to own an iPad until I upgraded to android. you were first with the fanboy comment, and if you actually used "os/x" you'd know that it is not written that way. > >> a watch its not apple. > >then you haven't been looking. > Sure. Believe what you want. you clearly do. |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 12:19PM -0400 > >bad analogy and missing the point entirely. > Not at all. You're the one who doesn't know what real work is and have no > reference point to make suitable comparisons or understand analogies. nope. that would be you. 'real work' is different for different people and you aren't the one who decides what is real work and what is not. it's also clear that you do not know how to use a mobile device to its fullest potential. |
| Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>: Jun 15 06:11PM > > In the fourth quarter of 2016, Apple?s six million shipments > > represented nearly half of all smartwatch sales. > Wow, half of all smartwatch sales! Thats like saying No, it's not half of all smartwatch sales. It's half of a very small - *selected* - piece of all smartwatch sales, because nospam 'conveniently' left out this bit: <quote> The company sold more watches last quarter than Rolex, Omega, and Swatch combined. </quote> So they're mainly looking at Rolex, Omega, and Swatch! What a complete morons! There are many, many more brands than just these three. Actually these three are not even on the list of main brands. See for example <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartwatch#List_of_models_in_production>. Comparing to Rolex and Omega - and especially Rolex - is like comparing Audi sales to Rolls Royce sales. > > industry?s combined sales, according to shipment statistics from the > > Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry. > Wow! The 'Swiss Watch Industry' is only a fraction of the worldwide watch industry. I.e. another total crock. [...] |
| Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>: Jun 15 06:34PM > In article <pg0itu$b5k$1@gioia.aioe.org>, <boltar@cylonHQ.com> wrote: [...] > > every day at work and used to own an iPad until I upgraded to android. > you were first with the fanboy comment, and if you actually used "os/x" > you'd know that it is not written that way. Ah! A spelling lame! Always an incredibly weak c.q. non argument. FYI, If people who couldn't spell 'HP-UX' properly were non-users, we wouldn't have had any. In any case, 'OS X' sure as hell is not written in lowercase, so physician, heal thyself! |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 02:59PM -0400 In article <pg16gs.9e4.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg > > > represented nearly half of all smartwatch sales. > > Wow, half of all smartwatch sales! Thats like saying > No, it's not half of all smartwatch sales. it is. <https://marketrealist.imgix.net/uploads/2017/04/Smartwatches-Worldwide- Share-of-Units-by-Vendor-as-of-2016-2017-04-27.jpg> > </quote> > So they're mainly looking at Rolex, Omega, and Swatch! What a complete > morons! there's nothing moronic about it. those are the dominant watch makers. prior to the apple watch, rolex was #1. now they're not. they're also looking at other smartwatches. > There are many, many more brands than just these three. Actually these > three are not even on the list of main brands. See for example > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartwatch#List_of_models_in_production>. none of which sell anywhere near as many as apple does. you also 'conveniently' left out this bit: ³Apple has won the wearables game,² said Jason Low, senior analyst at Canalys. since you failed to understand the text, perhaps more graphs will clear it up, despite it being outdated data: <https://marketrealist.imgix.net/uploads/2017/04/Apple-Has-Taken-over-th e-Smartwatch-Segment-2017-04-27.jpg> <https://marketrealist.imgix.net/uploads/2016/06/Apple-watch-market-shar e.png> |
| nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 02:59PM -0400 In article <pg17s2.9e4.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg > > you were first with the fanboy comment, and if you actually used "os/x" > > you'd know that it is not written that way. > Ah! A spelling lame! Always an incredibly weak c.q. non argument. you snipped the rest of it. > wouldn't have had any. > In any case, 'OS X' sure as hell is not written in lowercase, so > physician, heal thyself! it's not called that anymore, nor did i say 'os x' (lower case). |
| Bart <bc@freeuk.com>: Jun 15 02:05PM +0100 On 15/06/2018 13:07, Stefan Ram wrote: > But recently I saw that on this site C++ now nearly is > as fast as C. Maybe C++ enthusiast took some time to > run-time optimize the C++ programs for the "shootout". If you mean this site: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/ then those comparisons are not that meaningful, given that each program is written differently and with a different algorithm and using a different compiler. There are even multiple versions written in the same language, so what is it comparing? But do you see differences where you expect them to be, between for example a program in native code, and one that is interpreted. But you don't need that website for that. And, yes, you would also expect contributions to that site to be highly tuned to those tasks. -- bart |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jun 15 02:52PM +0200 On 15/06/18 14:15, Stefan Ram wrote: > Supersedes: <types-20180615130753@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> > [Spelling] Please do /not/ do this. Ramine is probably the most hated poster in technical newsgroups - one reason is that he starts multiple new threads to "fix" totally irrelevant tiny typos. No one cares about a spelling mistake, but we /do/ care about posting like this. Start a /single/ thread about what you think is new and cool about upcoming C++ standards, and we can discuss that. |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jun 15 08:24AM +0200 On 15/06/18 02:32, Öö Tiib wrote: > of class through a null-pointer. Doing that is explicitly stated to be > undefined behavior. Unless the implementation has defined it (as an > extension) it may as well optimize such checks out. Exactly - only "this" is only one case in a more general optimisation. |
| 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