Thursday, August 23, 2018

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 8 topics

Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Aug 23 05:48AM

On Wed, 2018-08-22, bitrex wrote:
> constexpr class or method is one that is primarily intended to be
> instantiated with/operate on data that is believed pretty likely to be
> available at compile time e.g. template parameters.
 
I think I meant to express this elsewhere in the thread; you did it
better.
 
> didn't think of you lose intent in exchange for...what. Who can say
> exactly. Maybe nothing.
 
> It seems kind of like premature optimization and cargo-culty to me.
 
I'd be interested to learn when I can benefit from constexpr, in the
kind of code I write. Looking at my hobby projects (which are more
about getting things done, than exploring C++ techniques) I find it in
four places, but it seems I used it unnecessarily as a glorified
const.
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Aug 23 05:48AM

> I agree, of course, but I distrust "always" and the idea about doing
> it almost mechanically. I want to write that 'const' only after
> deciding "I don't think I'll want this to change".
 
In the case of function-local variables that's a way to think about it.
 
However, in the case of member functions, it's more than that.
Member functions should always be const by default, and non-const only
if that's the actual intent.
 
The public interface of a class tells the calling code, ie. the code
that's using that class, how it behaves. Moreover, it becomes very
practical due to the prevalence of using const references to objects
in many situations (nothing is more annoying than taking an object by
const reference and then not being able to call a member function that
*should* be const, but isn't.)
 
Even beyond that, in the era of C++11 and newer, the constness of
a member function should indicate that it's thread-safe to call it
without a locking mechanism.
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Aug 23 07:18AM

> about getting things done, than exploring C++ techniques) I find it in
> four places, but it seems I used it unnecessarily as a glorified
> const.
 
I think that the plan for the next C++ standard to have the standard
data containers be constexpr-compatible is an example of where it
could be useful. This allows doing quite complicated calculations
at compile time.
 
There are many situations where you need to precalculate things
(sometimes even large amounts of data) to be hard-coded into the
program, rather than them being calculated at runtime. One common
traditional solution for this is writing a separate program that
does the calculations and outputs C++ source code into a file (which
is then compiled into the actual program at build time).
 
constexpr constructs would, to some extent, allow doing this within
the one and same source code, rather than have to use a secondary
independent program. The compiler would be generating the data, rather
than an external program. (Of course the drawback to this may be that
the calculations would need to be done every single time that source
code is recompiled, even if the calculated data itself remains the same.)
 
Of course that's not the only use for constexpr, but it's one of them.
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Aug 23 07:11AM

On Thu, 2018-08-23, Juha Nieminen wrote:
 
> However, in the case of member functions, it's more than that.
> Member functions should always be const by default, and non-const only
> if that's the actual intent.
 
I agree, except with your wording ("always ... by default").
We mean the same thing: that you should know early if a member
function is const or non-const. And that "const" isn't just an
optional decoration.
 
IME, if you're not sure about such a member, you have an unclear
overall picture of the class, or you're unconciously in the process of
redesigning it.
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
bitrex <user@example.net>: Aug 23 04:44AM -0400

On 08/21/2018 11:58 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> const unless that stops it from compiling.")
 
> The idea with this is, of course, that it will catch unintentional
> modifications of those variables.
 
The frustrating thing about const is that const-qualified class members
and move constructors don't play well together, but it seems that's
where one would see the most benefit re: optimization from
const-qualification. Yeah it's good practice to make all function-local
stack variables that aren't modified again const to express intent but
the modern optimizing compiler seems pretty good about sussing it out
and just inlining/load immediate stuff where appropriate in that
situation anyway.
 
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Aug 23 10:17AM

> the modern optimizing compiler seems pretty good about sussing it out
> and just inlining/load immediate stuff where appropriate in that
> situation anyway.
 
In the 90's there might have been some optimization benefits from
declaring all immutable stack variables as const, with some compilers
(as the constness might have worked a sort of hint to the compiler
to optimize the use of that variable), but that's probably not have
been the case for over a decade now, as you note.
 
However, my point wasn't about optimization of those stack variables
anyway... (In the end, whether you have the custom to declare them
const by default is more a question of style and coding conventions.
Personally I extraordinarily rarely find myself in a situation where
I inadvertently try to modify a variable when I'm not supposed to,
so even that "benefit" doesn't realize itself all that often. I still
use the convention, though. It's just a habit.)
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Aug 23 10:46AM -0700

On Thursday, August 23, 2018 at 5:17:27 AM UTC-5, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> I inadvertently try to modify a variable when I'm not supposed to,
> so even that "benefit" doesn't realize itself all that often. I still
> use the convention, though. It's just a habit.)
 
It's nice to be able to agree with someone. Now I hope more
people will sign the east const petition:
http://slashslash.info/eastconst
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - Enjoying programming again.
https://github.com/Ebenezer-group/onwards
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Aug 23 10:56AM -0700

On Thursday, 23 August 2018 10:18:27 UTC+3, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> data containers be constexpr-compatible is an example of where it
> could be useful. This allows doing quite complicated calculations
> at compile time.
 
Actually std::duple, std::array, std::optional, std::variant and
std::string_view are already constexpr-compatible and these are
more than plenty to build as complex data structures that I can
only imagine compile-time. Also the outcome is quite convenient to
use but may be my imagination is lacking.
 
> traditional solution for this is writing a separate program that
> does the calculations and outputs C++ source code into a file (which
> is then compiled into the actual program at build time).
 
Since the constexpr currently runs rather slowly that traditional way
is still strong alternative in practice. Constexpr is lot more pleasant
to read (and to debug) than complex template or preprocessor
metaprogramming so I believe that as soon as compilers improve the
compile-time speed I switch mostly to it.
 
> than an external program. (Of course the drawback to this may be that
> the calculations would need to be done every single time that source
> code is recompiled, even if the calculated data itself remains the same.)
 
That is indeed benefit of constexpr (same as with template or preprocessor
metaprogramming) that the build process with header-only things is most
simple while build process that involves building tools that generate
code is most complex.
 
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Aug 23 11:27AM -0700


> Now I hope more
> people will sign the east const petition:
> http://slashslash.info/eastconst
 
Is it petition of programmers who sit facing North when programming? :)
 
 
Left or Right const is somewhat matter of habit, mine happens to be
Right too. We could organize a competition who can provide best patch to
one of clang-format, AStyle, Uncrustify or GreatCode (are there others)
to add setting to reformat it as Left const or Right const. Then we would
be basically done with it?
 
Joining with that manifesto would benefit everybody better: https://utf8everywhere.org/
Unfortunately it is also harder. Major doers like Windows, Qt, Java,
C#, Python and ICU use some sort of UCS-2 or UTF-16 internally.
"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: Aug 23 09:12PM +0200

[Sorry, I inadvertently first sent this follow-up as a reply mail.]
 
On 23.08.2018 20:27, Öö Tiib wrote:
>> people will sign the east const petition:
>> http://slashslash.info/eastconst
 
> Is it petition of programmers who sit facing North when programming? :)
 
 
No, because consistent left `const` requires a supporting syntax that
lets you consistently place `const` left.
 
You can get that as a library solution by defining
 
template<class T> using ptr_ = T*;
template<class T> using ref_ = T&;
 
But replacing `*` and `&` with such notation is too much for a formatter.
 
 
 
> Joining with that manifesto would benefit everybody better: https://utf8everywhere.org/
> Unfortunately it is also harder. Major doers like Windows, Qt, Java,
> C#, Python and ICU use some sort of UCS-2 or UTF-16 internally.
 
 
As I recall the manifesto is full of disinformation and unsubstantiated,
sometimes directly incorrect, claims. I.e. it's propaganda. It just
/looks/ technical.
 
In spite of the manifesto I think UTF-8 is the way to go now, after
Visual C++ got support, but the support in Windows, for both g++ and
Visual C++, is very incomplete.
 
In particular,
 
1 with both g++ and Visual C++ the `main` arguments are encoded as
Windows ANSI,
 
2 there's no reasonably direct way to get UTF-8 console i/o (though one
can use libraries like my header only ¹Wrapped stdlib), and
 
3 the standard library, e.g. `isspace`, is based on an assumption of
fixed length encoding.
 
Also, UTF-8 is /easy to get wrong and difficult to get right/ with
std::filesystem, which is designed with an assumption of Windows ANSI
narrow encoding in Windows. So we need a kind of UTF-8 oriented wrapper.
If anyone feels up to the task?
 
Cheers!,
 
- Alf
 
 
Links:
¹ https://github.com/alf-p-steinbach/Wrapped-stdlib
bitrex <user@example.net>: Aug 23 03:29PM -0400

On 08/23/2018 01:48 AM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> four places, but it seems I used it unnecessarily as a glorified
> const.
 
> /Jorgen
 
I've seen it used extensively in say a fixed-point math library as an
example, you have say some base class called say FixedPoint that defines
an interface and though your fundamental type is say a 32 bit integer
you might want an UnsignedFixedPoint<16,16> number with 16 integer bits
and 16 fractional, or SignedFixedPoint<18, 14>, or whatever.
 
"Under the hood" however everything is just represented by a word of
some bits, the processor doesn't care what it is. What it "is" is
defined entirely by its construction and particular way the operator
overloads are carried out, how much you shift when doing a multiply or w/e.
 
So you can just constexpr all that and if all goes well all the
appropriate operations for conversion and manipulation will be inlined
at compile-time, any immediate fixed-point type which is known at
compile-time will be generated appropriately, and there will be little
run-time overhead. The interface can probably even be CRTPed/static
polymorphism to avoid virtual call overhead, too.
bitrex <user@example.net>: Aug 23 03:34PM -0400

On 08/23/2018 03:29 PM, bitrex wrote:
> compile-time will be generated appropriately, and there will be little
> run-time overhead. The interface can probably even be CRTPed/static
> polymorphism to avoid virtual call overhead, too.
 
it's good to remember that you can constexpr lots of stuff, including
operator overloads and constructors. C++11 is a little restrictive in
what you can do there but anything after that you're more free
Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 23 02:06PM -0400

Hello..
 
 
I have implemented Winmenus using wingraph, this one is graphical, i
have also included an Opengl demo and other demos , just execute the
real3d1.exe executable inside the zipfile to see how it is powerful, i
will soon enhance much more my Winmenus.
 
WinMenus using wingraph version 1.0
 
Author: Amine Moulay Ramdane
 
Description:
 
Drop-Down Menu widget using the Object Pascal wingraph unit , it
supports keyboard and mouse. Please look at the real3d1.pas demo inside
the zip file, i have included its 64 bit executable, please run it and
see(please double click with the mouse on the items to execute and
click on the middle mouse to stop the demo, and press escape to exit
from the demo).
 
And use the 'Up' and 'Down' and 'PageUp and 'PageDown' to scroll the menu..
And 'Enter' to select an item from the menu..
And the 'Esc' on the keyboard to exit from the menu..
 
and right arrow and left arrow to scroll on the left or on the right of
the menu
 
Winmenus is event driven, i have to explain it more to you to understand
more...
 
At first you have to create your Widget menu by executing something like
this:
 
Menu1:=TMenu.create(5,5);
 
This will create a Widget menu at the coordinate (x,y) in characters = (5,5)
 
After that you have to set your callback function, cause my Winmenus is
event driven, so you have to add an item with AddItem() and set the
callback function at the same time, like this:
 
AddItem('First 3D opengl demo',test1);
 
test1 will be the callback function.
 
When you execute menu1.execute(false) with a parameter equal to false my
Winmenus widget will draw your menu without waiting for your input and
events, when you set the parameter of the execute() method to true it
will wait for your input and events, if the parameter of the execute
method is true and the returned value of the execute method ctExit that
means you have pressed on the Escape key to exit.
 
 
You can download my Winmenus from:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/winmenus-using-wingraph
 
Language: FPC Pascal v2.2.0+ / Delphi 7+: http://www.freepascal.org/
 
Operating Systems: Windows..
 
Required FPC switches: -O3 -Sd -dFPC -dFreePascal
 
-Sd for delphi mode....
 
Required Delphi switches: -DMSWINDOWS -$H+
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Aug 23 05:31PM +0100

The rapture will happen soon; the last ones didn't happen because reasons.
 
--
 
Thank you,
Rick C. Hodgin
woodbrian77@gmail.com: Aug 22 08:06PM -0700

On Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 1:53:11 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
> standard), and indeed irrelevant to the guy's original problem.
 
> Then you move on to accusing C++ committee members of being alcoholics
> or drug abusers,
 
I said the standardization process hasn't been a total failure or
gone real well.
 
> and of /intentionally/ sabotaging C++.
 
I didn't accuse anyone of intentionally sabotaging C++.
 
 
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net
bitrex <user@example.net>: Aug 23 01:43AM -0400

On 08/22/2018 05:56 PM, Robert Wessel wrote:
 
> I've met Chuck Moore, the developer (singular) of Forth, and he really
> didn't seem the type. Not to mention the fact that widespread
> availability of crack cocaine long post-dates the invention of Forth.
 
It's just a little...well it's...Okay fair enough but something's got to
be the language where they were!
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Aug 23 08:00AM +0200

On 23/08/18 07:43, bitrex wrote:
>> availability of crack cocaine long post-dates the invention of Forth.
 
> It's just a little...well it's...Okay fair enough but something's got to
> be the language where they were!
 
Forth is a bit unusual, but it is quite efficient. VM's for Forth are
tiny in comparison to most VM's, and programs are also small. It was
used for drivers for plug-in cards for workstations for a while - the
card would come with drivers in Forth in a little eprom so that you just
plugged it in and everything worked whether you had a Sparc, a MIPS, a
PPC, or whatever processor.
 
And it is also a good language for more compact processors with
stack-based processing - it is dominant in the 4-bit world.
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Aug 23 08:14AM +0200

>> or drug abusers,
 
> I said the standardization process hasn't been a total failure or
> gone real well.
 
You accused them of being alcoholics or drug abusers:
 
> How many committee members drink too much or use illegal drugs?
 
 
>> and of /intentionally/ sabotaging C++.
 
> I didn't accuse anyone of intentionally sabotaging C++.
 
You wrote:
 
> OK, so I maintain that self sabotage is a problem
> for people on the committee and you disagree.
 
So now you are just saying they are sabotaging C++ by accident -
presumably because they are all drunk on the job?
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu>: Aug 23 07:32AM -0400

On 08/23/2018 01:43 AM, bitrex wrote:
> On 08/22/2018 05:56 PM, Robert Wessel wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 16:03:33 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
...
>> availability of crack cocaine long post-dates the invention of Forth.
 
> It's just a little...well it's...Okay fair enough but something's got to
> be the language where they were!
 
I think that just about any of the languages listed here:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_programming_language>
might qualify. I'm particularly intrigued by Piet.
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu>: Aug 23 07:36AM -0400

On 08/23/2018 02:14 AM, David Brown wrote:
 
> You accused them of being alcoholics or drug abusers:
 
> > Then I reply to SteeleDynamics with:
> > How many committee members drink too much or use illegal drugs?
 
To be fair, that's technically only a question, not an accusation,
though the fact that the question is being asked implies the accusation.
 
> > for people on the committee and you disagree.
 
> So now you are just saying they are sabotaging C++ by accident -
> presumably because they are all drunk on the job?
 
Again, to be fair, he specified "self-sabotage" rather than sabotage of
C++. However, given the context, this is probably due to poor wording.
He probably intended to accuse the committee of self-sabotage, rather
than the individual members of the committee.
Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 16 02:00PM -0400

Hello...
 
One last correction, read again..
 
Read this:
 
What is the essence of human evolution ?
 
(read all my following post to understand better my thoughts)
 
I have to do more philosophy with more "smartness" to understand it..
 
I said that morality is reliability(read my proof of it bellow)..
 
Now i think there is something really important about the essence of
humanity, i think that it is "related" to morality, i said that morality
is reliability, and the essence of reliability and the essence of
perfection is that they solve problems so that to be able to attain the
goal of philosophy or the goal of life that is to attain absolute
perfection or absolute happiness, so morality that is reliability is
pushed towards absolute perfection or absolute happiness, but we have to
do more philosophy to understand better the essence of human evolution,
i think that morality of past history has needed more "diversity" to
be able for humans to survive and to be more quality, and diversity has
given "immensity" or big "quantity", and you can notice it inside the
evolution of life, that life has needed a greater number of monkeys and
many tests and failures by evolution on them to evolve towards quality
and smartness and so that the monkey become human and smartness of
human. So as you are noticing "diversity" has given "immensity" or
"big" "quantity" and that both diversity and immensity or big quantity
have given quality and smartness. This is how "morality" has evolved,
morality has needed diversity and immensity or big quantity so that
to be perfection, this is why morality too of today is needing
diversity and immensity or big quantity so that to be perfection,
and morality of today knows that perfection of today is also
having the right "imperfections" (that are also diversity) to be
able to be the right perfection. Now you are understanding
the essence of human evolution more, but you have also to understand
the near future, because in about 15 years or 20 years from now, and
because of this exponential progress of technology and because of the
law of accelerating returns and because of artificial intelligence,
we will be able to enhance our genetics an become more smart and more
beautiful and more strong etc. and we will be able to do much much more
than that because we will be so powerful in about 15 years or 20 years
from now, this is why i think that we will be able to avoid more
diversity and quantity to create quality and perfection, so morality in
about 15 years to 20 years from now will be different in this regard,
morality will need "less" diversity and less "quantity" to realize
perfection and reliability, this is why i think that humans will be able
to be much more "united" in the near future of about 15 years to 20
years from now.
 
More precision about the definition of reliability
 
Look at the dictionary here:
 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
 
It says that:
 
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
 
This is why when i say above on my writing that:
 
"The essence of reliability and the essence of perfection is that they
solve problems"
 
You have to understand that reliability is the "state" of being reliable.
 
Read the rest of my thoughts of my proof of morality is reliability,
and about my thoughts on the law of accelerating returns etc.:
 
Here is more precision and more proof of what i was
saying about the law of accelerating returns and about
the exponential progress of technology etc. read for example, as i was
saying, what will happen in about 15 years to 20 years from now because
of that:
 
Read this to notice it:
 
==
 
The coming biotechnology revolution will allow us, in the next 15 to 20
years, to reprogram our genes to resist both aging and disease. By
mid-century, we may all be kept healthy and young by billions of
nanorobots inside of our bodies.
 
Of all the technologies riding the wave of exponential progress,
Kurzweil identifies genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics as the three
overlapping revolutions which will define our lives in the decades to
come. In what ways are these technologies revolutionary?
 
-The genetics revolution will allow us to reprogram our own biology.
-The nanotechnology revolution will allow us to manipulate matter
at the molecular and atomic scale.
-The robotics revolution will allow us to create a greater than
human non-biological intelligence.
 
 
Look at this interesting video to notice it:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-SWuAO1RfU
 
==
 
 
And read the rest of my thoughts to understand more my thoughts:
 
What is our today world ?
 
White europeans want to fight arabs, and China wants to fight USA ,
and USA wants to fight China, and European union wants to fight USA,
and neo-nazism is crazy and it is pure fight for fight like craziness !
and India wants to fight China, and China wants to fight India , and
France wants to fight USA and Israel wants to fight arabs, and arabs
want to fight Israel and so on and so on etc. etc. it is "like" brute
force fighting that we are noticing today, it is becoming much more
violent, and that's "not" smartness, you have to be more smart and
understand my way of doing, read again:
 
What is it that i am ?
 
You have seen me here writing, and you know me more that i am a white
arab, and i speak and write english and french and arabic, and
i am a more serious computer programmer, and as you have noticed
i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations,
and you have seen me writing poetry, and you have seen me writing
political philosophy, so you know me more now, now i will ask
you a question, what do you think that i am ? if you say stupidly
that i am an arab and you start to be racist , that's stupidity
because you don't understand my way of doing, you have to be more
serious and precise thinking to know me more.. i will explain also
my way of doing so that you will be more smart, i have
said previously on my political philosophy the following, read it carefully:
 
==
 
My wisdom of today..
 
A better politics..
 
Now you know me more by my writings, and now i will give you an
important wisdom:
 
One of my previous important wisdom in politics was:
 
Today we have to know how to get out from "idealism" without being
pessimistic or without getting into pessimism and violence.
 
My other wisdom of today is:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with a minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
 
This is why i told you before another wisdom by saying the following:
 
Violence is "easy" today, so destruction is easy, but "wisdom"
is to know how to transcend our living conditions by being
discipline of technology and science and by being sophistication
of technology and science and by being wisdom that knows
how to guide our world and humanity in the right and wise way.
 
This wisdom looks like my above one that says:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
===
 
Do you understand my above writing ?
 
Read also again that i wrote above:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
This is my kind of smartness that i am..
 
Because i will ask you a question:
 
How do you think have i invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations so that to sell some of them to Microsoft or to
Google or to Embarcadero ?
 
You will realize that i am applying my following thinking to
"complexity" too:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
I explain, i was aware of the "complexity" of science and of
the complexity of serious computer programming , so what i have
done is like martial art, it is that i have successfully reduced
by much the "complexity" of learning complex programming and
the complexity of inventing scalable algorithms by avoiding at best
complexity by a minimum of "effort" or "brute" force to score and to
succeed "big", tthis is my way of doing, and this is the way of
smartness, and smartness in politics also is:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
And also you have to know me more:
 
I said that i am a white arab, but you have to be more smart to
understand me more, because read the following to know me more,
because i am not like an arab, because i have constructed a "new" man
that is called myself, read my following thoughts to understand better
my way of thinking:
 
What is smartness ?
 
Smartness is also knowing that lots of violence today is easy thinking !
but you have to be more smart at avoiding violence ! smartness
is also avoiding violence without getting into violence or war !
we have to be more smart and keep focussed on smartness !
this is why i am suggesting to construct a new type of man that
is more futuristic ! you have to understand it correctly
and be aware of it ! and you have not to be pessimistic about it !
because we have to be more smart so that this law of accelerating
returns and exponential progress of technology work correctly ! i will
be more confident if the guys that govern us are more smart and are
more futuristic as i have explained and are science and technology,
this Donald Trump is not science and technology, and because he is not a
PhD in science or/and technology, so we have to be more patience and
try in the future to elect a PhD in science and/or technology
that will govern us so that the world be more smart.
 
More philosophy..
 
Human differences causes too much violence...
 
So we have to be smart and know how to attenuate efficiently this kind
of violence such as racism..
 
Look at you, there a not negligeable proportion of men that
want to have sex with beautiful women, so they are like in a hurry
to have sex with beautiful women, but this is racism and this
is violence against less beautiful women, so we have to be wisdom..
but from where can we get this wisdom ? i have talked about racism
and i think that an efficient way to reduce racism is to be more
futuristic, this is the kind of new man that we have to construct,
so being more futuristic is to know about the law of accelerating
returns and to know about the exponential progress of technology and
saying to oneself that since this law of accelerating returns
and since this exponential progress of technology will cause
big events in just about 20 years from now by making us able to enhance
our genetics and become more smart and more beautiful and more
strong etc. so we have "not" to give so much "importance" to
the fact that we are less beautiful or of being of another race
than our race because we have to be more tolerance since
we are going to be "so" much different and a "so" much different world
in just about 20 years from now.. this is the kind of new man that is
futuristic that we have to be.
 
This is why i said the following:
 
How to construct a new man ?
 
I know about communism, communism has tried to construct a new man.
 
But how today can we construct a new man ?
 
I think the new man must be more "futuristic", it must be
aware of the law of accelerating returns and aware about this
exponential progress of technology, and since exponential progress of
technology and this law of accelerating returns will cause a really
"big" event in about 15 years or 20 years, that means that in about 15
years or 20 years we will feel the progress of technology as being
exponentially so so powerful ! thus i think that in about
20 years we will able to enhance our genetics we humans and make us more
smart and more beautiful etc. and in about 20 years we will be capable
of doing much much more than that ! so we have not to waste our time
with the fact that we are of such race or such other race, because we
have to be more "futuristic" and be more aware of this law of
accelerating returns and this exponential progress of technology. this
is the kind of new man that we have to construct.
 
Read the rest of my thoughts:
 
About Israel..
 
As you have noticed i am a white arab that is a more serious computer
programmer and i have invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations..
 
But if you ask me the following question:
 
Why Amine are you not attacking Israel with your words ?
 
You know my friends, i am not like ISIS and i am not like arabs,
i am a new man, i have constructed a new man that is myself,
communism also has tried to construct a new man, i have also done
it for myself, and i am a man that look like more "futuristic",
and as you have noticed i am speaking of the "near" future
of 2030 or 2035, and i am preparing myself to this law of
accelerating returns, and i am sure that in about 7 years or 8 years
you will start to feel this exponential progress of technology that
will become "powerful", this is why i am following this exponential
progress of technology, this is the kind of new man that i am, and i am
also futuristic by "inventing" scalable algorithms and there
implementations, and i am futuristic by speaking about 3D chips and
about this law of accelerating returns, and you have to be careful guys,
because in about 8 years you will start to feel that technology has
become exponentially powerful, and in about 12 years you will start to
feel that technology has become exponentially "really" powerful, and in
about 20 years you will start to feel it exponentially so so powerful !
so i am preparing myself to those events ! this is why i am thinking as
i am thinking, and this is the kind of new man that i have constructed
that is called myself.
 
Read again what follows to notice my kind of thinking:
 
Yet more precision about 3D chips, read the following webpage it says:
 
IBM reckons that 3D chips could allow designers to shrink a
supercomputer that currently fills a building to something the size of a
shoebox.
 
Read here:
 
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/26/vanishing-point-rise-invisible-computer
 
And read now the rest of my writing to understand more:
 
More calculations about artificial intelligence
 
Read this it says:
 
"Already, IBM's "Blue Gene" supercomputer, now being built and scheduled
to be completed by 2005, is projected to provide 1 million billion
calculations per second (i.e., one billion megaflops). This is already
one twentieth of the capacity of the human brain", which I estimate at a
conservatively high 20 million billion calculations per second (100
billion neurons times 1,000 connections per neuron times 200
calculations per second per connection)."
 
Read here:
 
http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns
 
And read for example this:
 
The world's most powerful supercomputer is tailor made for the AI era
 
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611077/the-worlds-most-powerful-supercomputer-is-tailor-made-for-the-ai-era/
 
Notice that this new machine is capable, at peak performance, of 200
petaflops — 200 million billion calculations a second, it is more than
the capacity of a human brain, and 3D CPUs will bring 1000X more
performance than this new machine of 200 petaflops, so by around 2021
we will have 3D CPUs and we will be able to attain singularity and/or a
very "big" advancement in artificial intelligence and science.
 
Read the rest to understand more:
 
More precision about 3D CPUs..
 
I forgot to post about the year of 3D CPUs availability,
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Aug 15 03:02PM -0700

On 8/15/2018 2:57 PM, bitrex wrote:
 
>> /Flibble
 
> Hot take: his poetry is actually better than a good 80% of Emily
> Dickinson's material. Gosh what a bunch of depressing emo rambling.
 
lol.
bitrex <user@example.net>: Aug 15 05:57PM -0400

On 08/15/2018 12:55 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> black Scotsman myself.
 
> That sounds hot.
 
> /Flibble
 
Hot take: his poetry is actually better than a good 80% of Emily
Dickinson's material. Gosh what a bunch of depressing emo rambling.
Nikki Locke <nikki@trumphurst.com>: Aug 14 10:23PM

Available C++ Libraries FAQ
 
URL: http://www.trumphurst.com/cpplibs/
 
This is a searchable list of libraries and utilities (both free
and commercial) available to C++ programmers.
 
If you know of a library which is not in the list, why not fill
in the form at http://www.trumphurst.com/cpplibs/cppsub.php
 
Maintainer: Nikki Locke - if you wish to contact me, please use the form on the website.
Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com>: Aug 16 01:42PM -0400

Hello...
 
 
What is the essence of human evolution ?
 
(read all my following post to understand better my thoughts)
 
I have to do more philosophy with more "smartness" to understand it..
 
I said that morality is reliability(read my proof of it bellow)..
 
Now i think there is something really important about the essence of
humanity, i think that it is "related" to morality, i said that morality
is reliability, and the essence of reliability and the essence of
perfection is that they solve problems so that to be able to attain the
goal of philosophy or the goal of life that is to attain absolute
perfection or absolute happiness, so morality that is reliability is
pushed towards absolute perfection or absolute happiness, but we have to
do more philosophy to understand better the essence of human evolution,
i think that morality of past history has needed more "diversity" to
be able for humans to survive and to be more quality, and diversity has
given "immensity" or big "quantity", and you can notice it inside the
evolution of life, that life has needed a greater number of monkeys and
many tests and failures by evolution on them to evolve towards quality
and smartness and so that the monkey become human and smartness of
human. So as you are noticing "diversity" has given "immensity" or
"big" "quantity" and that both diversity and immensity or big quantity
have given quality and smartness. This is how "morality" has evolved,
morality has needed diversity and immensity or big quantity so that
to be perfection, this is why morality too of today is needing
diversity and immensity or big quantity so that to be perfection,
and morality of today knows that perfection of today is also
having the right "imperfections" (that are also diversity) to be
able to be the right perfection. Now you are understanding
the essence of human evolution more, but you have also to understand
the near future, because in about 15 years or 20 years from now, and
because of this exponential progress of technology and because of the
law of accelerating returns and because of artificial intelligence,
we will be able to enhance our genetics an become more smart and more
beautiful and more strong etc. and we will be able to do much much more
than that because we will be so powerful in about 15 years or 20 years
from now, this is why i think that we will be able to avoid more
diversity and quantity to create quality and perfection, so morality in
about 15 years to 20 years from now will be different in this regard,
morality will need "less" diversity and less "quantity" to realize
perfection and reliability, this is why i think that humans will be able
to be much more "united" in the near future of about 15 years to 20
years from now.
 
More precision about the definition of reliability
 
Look at the dictionary here:
 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability
 
It says that:
 
Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.
 
This is why when i say above on my writing that:
 
"The essence of reliability and the essence of perfection is that they
solve problems"
 
 
Read the rest of my thoughts of my proof of morality is reliability,
and about my thoughts on the law of accelerating returns etc.:
 
Here is more precision and more proof of what i was
saying about the law of accelerating returns and about
the exponential progress of technology etc. read for example, as i was
saying, what will happen in about 15 years to 20 years from now because
of that:
 
Read this to notice it:
 
==
 
The coming biotechnology revolution will allow us, in the next 15 to 20
years, to reprogram our genes to resist both aging and disease. By
mid-century, we may all be kept healthy and young by billions of
nanorobots inside of our bodies.
 
Of all the technologies riding the wave of exponential progress,
Kurzweil identifies genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics as the three
overlapping revolutions which will define our lives in the decades to
come. In what ways are these technologies revolutionary?
 
-The genetics revolution will allow us to reprogram our own biology.
-The nanotechnology revolution will allow us to manipulate matter
at the molecular and atomic scale.
-The robotics revolution will allow us to create a greater than
human non-biological intelligence.
 
 
Look at this interesting video to notice it:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-SWuAO1RfU
 
==
 
 
And read the rest of my thoughts to understand more my thoughts:
 
What is our today world ?
 
White europeans want to fight arabs, and China wants to fight USA ,
and USA wants to fight China, and European union wants to fight USA,
and neo-nazism is crazy and it is pure fight for fight like craziness !
and India wants to fight China, and China wants to fight India , and
France wants to fight USA and Israel wants to fight arabs, and arabs
want to fight Israel and so on and so on etc. etc. it is "like" brute
force fighting that we are noticing today, it is becoming much more
violent, and that's "not" smartness, you have to be more smart and
understand my way of doing, read again:
 
What is it that i am ?
 
You have seen me here writing, and you know me more that i am a white
arab, and i speak and write english and french and arabic, and
i am a more serious computer programmer, and as you have noticed
i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations,
and you have seen me writing poetry, and you have seen me writing
political philosophy, so you know me more now, now i will ask
you a question, what do you think that i am ? if you say stupidly
that i am an arab and you start to be racist , that's stupidity
because you don't understand my way of doing, you have to be more
serious and precise thinking to know me more.. i will explain also
my way of doing so that you will be more smart, i have
said previously on my political philosophy the following, read it carefully:
 
==
 
My wisdom of today..
 
A better politics..
 
Now you know me more by my writings, and now i will give you an
important wisdom:
 
One of my previous important wisdom in politics was:
 
Today we have to know how to get out from "idealism" without being
pessimistic or without getting into pessimism and violence.
 
My other wisdom of today is:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with a minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
 
This is why i told you before another wisdom by saying the following:
 
Violence is "easy" today, so destruction is easy, but "wisdom"
is to know how to transcend our living conditions by being
discipline of technology and science and by being sophistication
of technology and science and by being wisdom that knows
how to guide our world and humanity in the right and wise way.
 
This wisdom looks like my above one that says:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
===
 
Do you understand my above writing ?
 
Read also again that i wrote above:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
This is my kind of smartness that i am..
 
Because i will ask you a question:
 
How do you think have i invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations so that to sell some of them to Microsoft or to
Google or to Embarcadero ?
 
You will realize that i am applying my following thinking to
"complexity" too:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
I explain, i was aware of the "complexity" of science and of
the complexity of serious computer programming , so what i have
done is like martial art, it is that i have successfully reduced
by much the "complexity" of learning complex programming and
the complexity of inventing scalable algorithms by avoiding at best
complexity by a minimum of "effort" or "brute" force to score and to
succeed "big", tthis is my way of doing, and this is the way of
smartness, and smartness in politics also is:
 
A better martial art in politics is to avoid at best "brute" force
and to know how with minimum brute force to score and to succeed.
 
And also you have to know me more:
 
I said that i am a white arab, but you have to be more smart to
understand me more, because read the following to know me more,
because i am not like an arab, because i have constructed a "new" man
that is called myself, read my following thoughts to understand better
my way of thinking:
 
What is smartness ?
 
Smartness is also knowing that lots of violence today is easy thinking !
but you have to be more smart at avoiding violence ! smartness
is also avoiding violence without getting into violence or war !
we have to be more smart and keep focussed on smartness !
this is why i am suggesting to construct a new type of man that
is more futuristic ! you have to understand it correctly
and be aware of it ! and you have not to be pessimistic about it !
because we have to be more smart so that this law of accelerating
returns and exponential progress of technology work correctly ! i will
be more confident if the guys that govern us are more smart and are
more futuristic as i have explained and are science and technology,
this Donald Trump is not science and technology, and because he is not a
PhD in science or/and technology, so we have to be more patience and
try in the future to elect a PhD in science and/or technology
that will govern us so that the world be more smart.
 
More philosophy..
 
Human differences causes too much violence...
 
So we have to be smart and know how to attenuate efficiently this kind
of violence such as racism..
 
Look at you, there a not negligeable proportion of men that
want to have sex with beautiful women, so they are like in a hurry
to have sex with beautiful women, but this is racism and this
is violence against less beautiful women, so we have to be wisdom..
but from where can we get this wisdom ? i have talked about racism
and i think that an efficient way to reduce racism is to be more
futuristic, this is the kind of new man that we have to construct,
so being more futuristic is to know about the law of accelerating
returns and to know about the exponential progress of technology and
saying to oneself that since this law of accelerating returns
and since this exponential progress of technology will cause
big events in just about 20 years from now by making us able to enhance
our genetics and become more smart and more beautiful and more
strong etc. so we have "not" to give so much "importance" to
the fact that we are less beautiful or of being of another race
than our race because we have to be more tolerance since
we are going to be "so" much different and a "so" much different world
in just about 20 years from now.. this is the kind of new man that is
futuristic that we have to be.
 
This is why i said the following:
 
How to construct a new man ?
 
I know about communism, communism has tried to construct a new man.
 
But how today can we construct a new man ?
 
I think the new man must be more "futuristic", it must be
aware of the law of accelerating returns and aware about this
exponential progress of technology, and since exponential progress of
technology and this law of accelerating returns will cause a really
"big" event in about 15 years or 20 years, that means that in about 15
years or 20 years we will feel the progress of technology as being
exponentially so so powerful ! thus i think that in about
20 years we will able to enhance our genetics we humans and make us more
smart and more beautiful etc. and in about 20 years we will be capable
of doing much much more than that ! so we have not to waste our time
with the fact that we are of such race or such other race, because we
have to be more "futuristic" and be more aware of this law of
accelerating returns and this exponential progress of technology. this
is the kind of new man that we have to construct.
 
Read the rest of my thoughts:
 
About Israel..
 
As you have noticed i am a white arab that is a more serious computer
programmer and i have invented many scalable algorithms and there
implementations..
 
But if you ask me the following question:
 
Why Amine are you not attacking Israel with your words ?
 
You know my friends, i am not like ISIS and i am not like arabs,
i am a new man, i have constructed a new man that is myself,
communism also has tried to construct a new man, i have also done
it for myself, and i am a man that look like more "futuristic",
and as you have noticed i am speaking of the "near" future
of 2030 or 2035, and i am preparing myself to this law of
accelerating returns, and i am sure that in about 7 years or 8 years
you will start to feel this exponential progress of technology that
will become "powerful", this is why i am following this exponential
progress of technology, this is the kind of new man that i am, and i am
also futuristic by "inventing" scalable algorithms and there
implementations, and i am futuristic by speaking about 3D chips and
about this law of accelerating returns, and you have to be careful guys,
because in about 8 years you will start to feel that technology has
become exponentially powerful, and in about 12 years you will start to
feel that technology has become exponentially "really" powerful, and in
about 20 years you will start to feel it exponentially so so powerful !
so i am preparing myself to those events ! this is why i am thinking as
i am thinking, and this is the kind of new man that i have constructed
that is called myself.
 
Read again what follows to notice my kind of thinking:
 
Yet more precision about 3D chips, read the following webpage it says:
 
IBM reckons that 3D chips could allow designers to shrink a
supercomputer that currently fills a building to something the size of a
shoebox.
 
Read here:
 
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/26/vanishing-point-rise-invisible-computer
 
And read now the rest of my writing to understand more:
 
More calculations about artificial intelligence
 
Read this it says:
 
"Already, IBM's "Blue Gene" supercomputer, now being built and scheduled
to be completed by 2005, is projected to provide 1 million billion
calculations per second (i.e., one billion megaflops). This is already
one twentieth of the capacity of the human brain", which I estimate at a
conservatively high 20 million billion calculations per second (100
billion neurons times 1,000 connections per neuron times 200
calculations per second per connection)."
 
Read here:
 
http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns
 
And read for example this:
 
The world's most powerful supercomputer is tailor made for the AI era
 
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611077/the-worlds-most-powerful-supercomputer-is-tailor-made-for-the-ai-era/
 
Notice that this new machine is capable, at peak performance, of 200
petaflops — 200 million billion calculations a second, it is more than
the capacity of a human brain, and 3D CPUs will bring 1000X more
performance than this new machine of 200 petaflops, so by around 2021
we will have 3D CPUs and we will be able to attain singularity and/or a
very "big" advancement in artificial intelligence and science.
 
Read the rest to understand more:
 
More precision about 3D CPUs..
 
I forgot to post about the year of 3D CPUs availability,
here it is, it is around year 2021, because read the following it says:
 
"3D CPUs aren't expected until the 2021 – 2024"
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)