Tuesday, October 2, 2018

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 17 updates in 6 topics

Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com>: Oct 01 02:16PM -0700

Hello,
 
Read this:
 
Good random number generators version 1.0, you can port them to C++
 
Look at them they are powerful.
 
Author: Amine Moulay Ramdane that have enhanced
both random number generators.
 
Description:
 
This is an enhanced versions of both Mersenne Twister that is a
good random number generator and Splitmix64 that is a fast random number
generator, both have passed the BigCrush tests.
 
Look into defines.inc file, there is many options:
 
{$DEFINE CPU32} and {$DEFINE Windows32} for 32 bit systems
 
{$DEFINE CPU64} and {$DEFINE Windows64} for 64 bit systems
 
Look at test.pas demo inside the zip file...
 
You can download it from:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/good-random-number-generators
 
Language: FPC Pascal v2.2.0+ / Delphi 5+: http://www.freepascal.org/
 
Operating Systems: Win , Linux and Mac (x86).
 
Required FPC switches: -O3 -Sd
 
-Sd for delphi mode....
 
Required Delphi switches: -$O+
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 02 03:28PM -0400

On 10/2/2018 2:44 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> [snip]
Chris, I was thinking today ... the "boring" parts of a fractal,
which don't spin into infinities. Have you ever examined the
"smoothness" of their variation there in the flat areas? To see
if there isn't some unusual variations in the smoothness?
 
You look at a beach from a Cessna from 500 feet and you see a
smooth thing. You get down there on the ground and walk on it
you see a lot more interesting detail. It might even look like
it has fingerprints depending on the winds and waves.
 
Perhaps there is perturbation there which, when greatly amplified,
would yield some interesting graphs. Perhaps also there is a
"dance" between the perturbation patterns (when amplified) and
the nearby fractal reduction portions, such that a correlation
between those perturbations and the descent into fractals would
yield some interesting things, kind of like how there are some
constants encoded in fractals. Perhaps there's more in there.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Oct 02 01:11PM -0700

On 10/2/2018 4:01 AM, David Brown wrote:
> bother to optimise them away, and treat them pretty much as "volatile".
 
> However, race conditions are always undefined behaviour. And relying on
> the behaviour of undefined behaviour is never a good idea.
 
I am artificially creating the race condition using 100% legitimate
operations; the compiler should not mess with my atomics and relaxed
memory barriers. Each load and store are there for a reason. The
compiler better not shi% it up. Sorry for the brief response, but I am
working on a fractal right now. Will have some more time later on today
David. Thanks.
 
Paul <pepstein5@gmail.com>: Oct 02 08:00AM -0700

On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 1:42:40 PM UTC+1, David Brown wrote:
> over-engineering again.
 
> > Thanks a lot. Glad you reminded me of the template solution.
 
> > Paul
 
Thanks, David
I don't understand why your idea improves on mine.
Possibly, the reason I don't know this is that I don't
understand precisely enough what you intend.
 
Paul
Paul <pepstein5@gmail.com>: Oct 02 08:03AM -0700

On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 4:01:05 PM UTC+1, Paul wrote:
> Possibly, the reason I don't know this is that I don't
> understand precisely enough what you intend.
 
> Paul
 
Sorry, I think I get it now.
integer templates.
 
You use integers between < and >
just as in my approach you use int or long
etc. between these brackets.
 
I'd forgotten about that.
I'll look up int templates now.
I agree that that is much better than what I did.
 
Great that I'm learning so much.
 
Paul
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 02 08:55PM +0200

On 02/10/18 17:03, Paul wrote:
 
> You use integers between < and >
> just as in my approach you use int or long
> etc. between these brackets.
 
Exactly, yes.
 
> I'll look up int templates now.
> I agree that that is much better than what I did.
 
> Great that I'm learning so much.
 
Marvellous. Keep asking questions, and keep learning. That's what this
newsgroup is for (despite appearances sometimes).
 
Once you have had a try, post your code if you are not sure about it.
"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: Oct 02 10:10PM +0200

On 02.10.2018 09:58, Paul wrote:
> IntegerType(int underlying)
> which throws an exception in the constructor when a user tries to make the instantiation of the underlying integer positive.
 
> Is this what's done in practice?
 
No, one just uses `int`.
 
Except some programmers who does use not just `unsigned`, but all kinds
of unsigned types that they pick up from typedefs in classes. They add a
heck of a lot of up front work in order to satisfy an associative ideal.
Then get a lot of extra work also later when the lunacy results in bugs.
 
 
> If not, what is the standard solution?
 
`int`.
 
Since source code is about communicating to programmers, you can
communicate a non-negative intent by e.g.
 
using Non_negative_int = int;
 
However, I can't recall actually doing that, just that the possibility
has popped up in earlier discussions about this.
 
 
> Many thanks for your advice.
 
You're welcome.
 
 
Cheers!,
 
- Alf
Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Oct 02 07:22PM +0100

Is there any point killfiling Rick C. Hodgin? He won't shut the fuck up
and everyone replies to him so I see lots of half conversations and parts
of his effluence quoted in those replies.
 
/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."
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 02 11:50AM -0700

On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 2:22:27 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote:
> Is there any point killfiling Rick C. Hodgin? He won't shut .. up
> and everyone replies to him so I see lots of half conversations and parts
> of his effluence quoted in those replies.
 
Add my name to a test to the body of the message, and not just
by email address.
 
If any post includes "Rick C. Hodgin" in it, delete it.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Oct 02 07:49PM


>Add my name to a test to the body of the message, and not just
>by email address.
 
>If any post includes "Rick C. Hodgin" in it, delete it.
 
Don't be an idiot. Don't put the onus on others for your trespasses. Don't
trespass on this group and everything will be fine and everyone (except you)
will be happy.
Ralf Goertz <me@myprovider.invalid>: Oct 02 05:47PM +0200

Am Tue, 2 Oct 2018 08:04:50 -0400
> char, and signed char are described in 27.7.2.2.3p11, while character
> inserters get their own numbered section, 27.7.2.3.4. No mention is
> made in either place of any extended integer type or size-named type.
 
Well, what about this program:
 
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdint>
 
int main() {
uint8_t i(42);
std::cout<<i<<std::endl;
}

If uint8_t were not typedefed to unsigned char but a separate type then
it would not even compile?
 
> <stdio.h> are the only ways provided by C++ to directly input or
> output any size-named types that are typedefed to extended integer
> types.
 
Seems to be the case then.
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 02 10:14AM -0700

On Tuesday, 2 October 2018 18:47:22 UTC+3, Ralf Goertz wrote:
> }
 
> If uint8_t were not typedefed to unsigned char but a separate type then
> it would not even compile?
 
Yes, it would be ill-formed because of ambiguity. Extended integer types
can be converted to standard integer types but compiler can't figure
which standard integer type you meant.
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Oct 02 03:40PM


> I've tried to teach this before: But one of the enemy's traps
> is to try to pigeonhole a response from someone on the things
> of God.
 
You don't answer because you have no answers. You simply
regurgitate what other creationists have said, without knowing
anything about it yourself. You mindlessly parrot what others
say, like a robot. You don't answer any questions because you
don't know the answers. You don't *want* to answer any questions.
 
You believe that by regurgitating your beliefs and your scripture
here, your god will magically affect people's minds. In other words,
pretty much effectively you think that your words act like magic.
You believe that as you preach the gospel, it will cause God's power
and will to have an effect on people.
 
That's no different from a magical incantation. Of course you dislike
that term and vehemently deny it, but it's pretty much in essence
that: Words that you tell to people in order to have some kind of
higher power affect those people. In other words, a magic incantation.
 
Of course the only reason why you do all that is because it makes you
feel good about yourself. It makes you feel like you are earning
"heaven points" for the afterlife, even though you certainly deny
that even from yourself. You vehemently deny doing any of this to
"earn" anything or for your sake, but it's nevertheless the truth.
You do it because it makes you feel good, and because deep inside
you think that will earn you favors in the afterlife, even if you
don't even dare to think it does.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 02 11:47AM -0400

On 10/2/2018 11:40 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> is to try to pigeonhole a response from someone on the things
>> of God.
 
> You don't answer because you have no answers. You simply
\> regurgitate what other creationists have said, without knowing
 
--
Thank you! | Indianapolis, Indiana | God is love -- 1 John 4:7-9
Rick C. Hodgin | http://www.libsf.org/ | http://tinyurl.com/yaogvqhj
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Software: LSA, LSC, Debi, RDC/CAlive, ES/1, ES/2, VJr, VFrP, Logician
Hardware: Arxoda Desktop CPU, Arxita Embedded CPU, Arlina Compute FPGA
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 02 11:57AM -0400

On 10/2/2018 11:47 AM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>> is to try to pigeonhole a response from someone on the things
>>> of God.
 
>> You don't answer because you have no answers...
 
I urge you not to look at my limitations as a stopping point,
Juha, but to look to the body of evidence presented by the
faith community. They have the specific answers you seek:
 
http://www.answersingenesis.org
 
The topics they address abound, and they teach you the Biblical
perspective to see the same evidence everyone sees. They tie
what we see in real laboratories, in real archaeological digs,
in real observation of everything, back to the teachings of
scripture. There are no discrepancies when you look at things
from that point of view, and they answer many questions which
modern science cannot yet answer.
 
-----
My goals are to take your eyes off looking for specific instances
of physical proof, and to instead acknowledge that you have sin,
and to teach you that because of that sin your soul remains under
condemnation, your spirit is dead, and that you have no future or
hope apart from finding forgiveness for your sin.
 
What is sin? It is disobedience to God, rebellion against Him,
of embracing something that is not of Him, which is the same as
saying "embracing something false," because God is only truth.
 
You are valuable, Juha. God calls out to you to bring you back
to His Kingdom. It is an offering of love. It is an offering
of grace for your sin. He wants you personally to be a part of
His Kingdom.
 
It is an honor to be sought after by one such as Him.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 02 11:58AM -0400

On 10/2/2018 11:47 AM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> [snip]
 
I accidentally hit enter to send and sent the blank reply.
My apologies.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com>: Oct 01 02:26PM -0700

Hello,
 
More explanation about my Good random number generators version 1.0,
there source code inside the zip file are mersenne.pas and
splitmix64.pas, and they are powerful, please look at them, and you can
port them to C++.
 
Author: Amine Moulay Ramdane that has enhanced
both random number generators.
 
Description:
 
This is an enhanced versions of both Mersenne Twister that is a
good random number generator and Splitmix64 that is a fast random number
generator, both have passed the BigCrush tests.
 
Look into defines.inc file, there is many options:
 
{$DEFINE CPU32} and {$DEFINE Windows32} for 32 bit systems
 
{$DEFINE CPU64} and {$DEFINE Windows64} for 64 bit systems
 
Look at test.pas demo inside the zip file...
 
You can download it from:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/good-random-number-generators
 
Language: FPC Pascal v2.2.0+ / Delphi 5+: http://www.freepascal.org/
 
Operating Systems: Win , Linux and Mac (x86).
 
Required FPC switches: -O3 -Sd
 
-Sd for delphi mode....
 
Required Delphi switches: -$O+
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
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)