- "IT is urbanizing, McDonald's gets it, but Woonsocket doesn't (yet)" - 1 Update
- ECS - 8 Updates
- In high standard compilers, could inline do the job of the constexpr everytime? - 1 Update
- OOP is the new GOTO - 1 Update
- Reason of "no matching function". - 1 Update
| Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com>: Aug 11 01:13AM +0300 Scott: > 2. the spreadsheet does its magic using the data > 3. the calculation engine grabs the results from the spreadsheet > Text files do not work for this. Excel can import and export CSV files, so you still can work in plain text and then either invoke a couple of interop methods or kindly ask the user in Excel to open and save into CSV. You can also read Excel spreadsheets as very quickly using the OLE DB interface, which is called either Ace or Jet OLE DB. It is a deliverance form the Office interop hell. -- () ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail /\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived] |
| guinness.tony@gmail.com: Aug 09 04:45PM -0700 On Thursday, 9 August 2018 21:36:03 UTC+1, Mr Flibble wrote: > > Not everyone will be saved. > Nobody will be "saved". > #atheism +1. Hear, hear. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Aug 09 10:40PM -0700 On 8/9/2018 1:35 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: >> Not everyone will be saved. > Nobody will be "saved". > #atheism Atheist or not, imvvho, just try really hard to live a good life, and if there is an afterlife, well... All of your great works on Earth should be of wonderful service, and experience. If there is an afterlife, there probably is a jail. Well, just keep on trying to be good, and no worries. :) |
| Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Aug 10 07:18AM On Thu, 2018-08-09, Paavo Helde wrote: >> to objects. > The instances of simple types *are* objects in C++, so how could they be > treated differently from themselves? If we forget for a moment that boltar is (unsurprisingly) being an ass about this, I have to say that when I read "object" in this group, I tend to think the author doesn't mean an int. Even though I know C++ standard inherited the meaning of "object" from the C standard. This ambiguity has never been a problem in reality, as far as I can recall. When it /does/ matter it's usually clear from context. /Jorgen PS. It's a pity that the original "people say class when they mean object" complaint got lost along the way. -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Aug 10 08:28AM On Thu, 09 Aug 2018 17:59:07 +0300 >> to objects. >The instances of simple types *are* objects in C++, so how could they be >treated differently from themselves? Why not ask the authors of the compilers. |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Aug 10 08:38AM On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 11:24:09 -0400 >But, the world was made in seven days. Literal 24-hour days. It is >as is recorded in Genesis 1-3. Was that a long time before Smeagol found the ring? Oh wait, wrong fantasy book. >There really is evidence for the things of the Bible. Archaeological >evidence. Genetics evidence. Fossil record evidence. That fossil evidence is in the same layer as the unicorns presumably. |
| boltar@cylonHQ.com: Aug 10 08:43AM On 10 Aug 2018 07:18:55 GMT >> treated differently from themselves? >If we forget for a moment that boltar is (unsurprisingly) being an ass >about this, I have to say that when I read "object" in this group, I Perhaps I am being an ass, but pedantry for its own sake just gets up my nose. When I say class and object in the same sentence I'm obviously not talking about a uniquely referenced memory object, I'm talking about a class instance. >tend to think the author doesn't mean an int. Even though I know C++ >standard inherited the meaning of "object" from the C standard. That fact that C calls these "objects" should have been a red flag, but no, some people just love to argue. |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Aug 10 09:10AM -0400 >> There really is evidence for the things of the Bible. Archaeological >> evidence. Genetics evidence. Fossil record evidence. > That fossil evidence is in the same layer as the unicorns presumably. Investigate it. You have information in your life now that there is information which refutes the things you've learned your whole life. You have infor- mation that there is an enemy bent on seeing your soul destroyed in Hell. You have information that there is a loving God who came to the Earth to save you. The information is before you, and there are men and women like me who are willing to teach you and answer any questions you have. You will not enter Hell blindfolded. You will only enter Hell by choice because everything you need to know the truth and have salvation has been made available and set before you. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Aug 09 08:22PM +0100 On 09/08/2018 19:26, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> summarily dismissed. >> #atheism > Your flesh won't want to read this. You'll gloss over it with an [snip] tl;dr. #atheism /Flibble -- "Suppose it's all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?" "I'd say, bone cancer in children? What's that about?" Fry replied. "How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault. It's not right, it's utterly, utterly evil." "Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That's what I would say." |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Aug 10 08:59AM > That gives the feeling that inline could do constexpr's job. Theoretically the result of a constexpr function (or other expression) can be used in places where a compiler-time constant is required (such as the size of a static array inside a class or struct, or an integral template parameter). The result of an inline function can never be used in this manner. (Of course there's the caveat that the standard doesn't guarantee that constexpr functions will be evaluated at compile time, which makes this a bit of a problem. However, in code that's not supposed to be universally compilable I have used constexpr functions for truly compile-time constant evaluation.) |
| Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid>: Aug 09 11:23PM +0100 On 08/08/2018 06:05, Tim Rentsch wrote: > Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> writes: >> On 06/08/2018 18:34, Tim Rentsch wrote: <snip>>>> > Did you miss the part where I said "the dynamic type of the > argument is SomeClass"? If the dynamic type is SomeClass, > the reference must refer to a SomeClass, not a DerivedClass. <snip> bas cannot know the actual runtime type of the SomeClass reference. It's possible an optimising compiler might work it out, in which case it can omit the vtable activity, but the general case is it'll look in the vtable (which is not very expensive) before making the call. Andy |
| christiano@engineer.com: Aug 09 05:32PM -0700 I undertood this error by reading the Johannes's answer, here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/411103/function-with-same-name-but-different-signature-in-derived-class |
| 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