Monday, December 31, 2018

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 4 topics

Ralf Goertz <me@myprovider.invalid>: Dec 31 05:21AM +0100

Am Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:23:53 +0100
> > mean you are not supposed to say "What are you looking for?" but
> > should say "For what are you looking?" instead?
 
> Yes, that is correct.
 
Hm, grammar girl seems to have a different opinion: https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/ending-a-sentence-with-a-preposition
 
BTW (to answer Stefan's SCNR), this is exactly the reason why I asked my
question here in a programming newsgroup. Here, there are many
intelligent native speakers whose focus is probably not grammar. Their
gut feeling about their language is quite a valuable input for me to
develop my own gut feeling. Although I must admit that I will never have
as strong a gut feeling for English as I have for my own language.

> or the evolution of language.
 
> "To boldly go where no man has gone before" - is it bad grammar, or
> has it changed the language?
 
It took my quite a while to figure out what could be objectionable in
that sentence. It seems to be the rule not to split an infinitive, a
rule about which I had no idea two days ago. (Apart from "Manner, space,
time makes your English fine" I don't remember being taught any style
rule at school.) Interestingly, for me both ending with a preposition
and splitting an infinitive feel very "English" probably because there
is no way you could use either construct in a German sentence.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 08:25PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 2:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> keep it moving forward.  Even if you don't change anything, but just
> make sure the interface to the prior-written thing continues to work,
> it may be of use to some people.
 
In new years 2019, will CAlive be in the form of source code, everything
in a single directory, or an install program?
Ralf Goertz <me@myprovider.invalid>: Dec 31 05:43AM +0100

Am Sun, 30 Dec 2018 11:09:40 -0700
 
> 'What do you got?' sounds ignorant to me, but I don't know what a
> grammarian would say. 'Do you have a pen?' and 'Have you got a pen?'
> both sound right to me but mixing 'do' and 'got' doesn't.
 
That's interesting. Your wording suggests it is less objectionable for
you than it is for me. "Do" when used as an auxiliary always needs to be
followed by an infinitive, that's the rule I learnt.

> what I remember of it, would be unbearably quaint. In high school we
> were still chewing our way through Fraktur although the
> Antiqua-Fraktur war was over.
 
Really? Fraktur was not taught at my time in German schools, I had to
learn it on my own and I only did it because we had some old books I
wanted to read.
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Dec 31 01:19AM -0800

On Monday, 31 December 2018 06:25:46 UTC+2, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > it may be of use to some people.
 
> In new years 2019, will CAlive be in the form of source code, everything
> in a single directory, or an install program?
 
At 15. October he said that he will have some sort of useful fruit "in a
year or so".
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.lang.c++/fmRcHJQP8T8/lS2LwMA3BgAJ
Unfortunately he seems to be in feature creep of odd syntactic stuff.
I hope being wrong but suspect that we see nothing in October 2019.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 31 01:45AM -0800

On Monday, December 31, 2018 at 4:19:27 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote:
 
> At 15. October he said that he will have some sort of useful fruit "in a
> year or so".
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.lang.c++/fmRcHJQP8T8/lS2LwMA3BgAJ
 
I am not on a schedule for release as by date. I am on a schedule
for release as by steps accomplished, and goals / milestones achieved.
 
My goals are to do things right, and to not skimp or sacrifice aspects
of design for release dates. I am not release date driven.
 
I've had something happen in my life this month which will alter
my plans by at least six months. We'll see how it ultimately impacts
my schedule.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Dec 31 02:33AM -0800

On Monday, 31 December 2018 11:46:07 UTC+2, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> I've had something happen in my life this month which will alter
> my plans by at least six months. We'll see how it ultimately impacts
> my schedule.
 
So I thought. IOW there will be no fruit from you in foreseeable future.
BTW "schedule" is basic time-management tool and without any
times set it sounds sort of like nonsense.
 
BTW Catholics have released their CALive:
https://itunes.apple.com/sc/app/calive/id971611664?mt=8
fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com>: Dec 31 02:40AM -0800

W dniu poniedziałek, 31 grudnia 2018 11:33:48 UTC+1 użytkownik Öö Tiib napisał:
> times set it sounds sort of like nonsense.
 
> BTW Catholics have released their CALive:
> https://itunes.apple.com/sc/app/calive/id971611664?mt=8
 
this release date is good example of imbecile dik lie:
 
he used tos bulshit to bump himself and be happy as imbecile, in parrallel he obviously lies (this bump is false, but for poor dick it is usable to bump himself in a mood, that is how idiots are happy when they lie about themselves
 
if idiot has no limit being truthful he may imagine he is great being in fact imbeclile idiot
 
thats why i say dont behave like halftrolls bartc or thomasson, who feeds dik imbecile and help him to greatly degrade thsi place mentally.. better kick this idiot out just to defend doses of mental level /inteligence here)
Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com>: Dec 30 01:00PM -0800

In article <q084io$qe1$1@dont-email.me>,
> in { setup_for_test1 }
> out { cleanup_for_test1 }
> enter { related_code_if_block_entered1 }
 
If you have GNU extensions,
 
if (({
setup_for_test1
bool test = some_test1
if (test) related_code_if_block_entered1
cleanup_for_test1;
test;
})) {
...
}
 
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 30 04:12PM -0500

On 12/30/2018 4:00 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> })) {
> ...
> }
 
So the general concept of encapsulation of this code is not such a bad
idea ... GNU added similar features. Good to know.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com>: Dec 30 01:31PM -0800

In article <q0bc9c$qln$1@dont-email.me>,
> > }
 
> So the general concept of encapsulation of this code is not such a bad
> idea ... GNU added similar features. Good to know.
 
In 1968 you could've done
 
if setup_for_test1; bool test = some_test1;
if test then related_code_if_block_entered1 fi;
cleanup_for_test1; test
then
...
fi
 
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 30 04:45PM -0500

On 12/30/2018 4:31 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> then
> ...
> fi
 
It only makes sense. It is another of those fundamental operations
that is not easily provided for in C/C++ today (without extensions
like those seen in GNU).
 
CAlive's goal is to provide for fundamental abilities. None of the
atypical ones have to be used by anyone. But, if you want to use
them in certain cases ... they'll be there. I probably won't use
many of the new features I'm adding most of the time, but I will
probably use most of them some of the time.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Bart <bc@freeuk.com>: Dec 30 10:17PM

On 30/12/2018 21:45, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> them in certain cases ... they'll be there.  I probably won't use
> many of the new features I'm adding most of the time, but I will
> probably use most of them some of the time.
 
 
The reference is to Algol68 where there is no distinction between
statements and expressions, which could be used interchangeably.
 
This is what I meant the other day about adding fewer, more general,
broader features rather than dozens of very specific ones.
 
Actually, my language until about six or so years ago worked exactly the
same way. My newer one doesn't - it is more conservative and limited by
design.
 
Because (1) I hardly ever used those features; (2) avoiding them leads
to easier-to-understand code IMO; (3) it makes code and algorithms more
portable; (4) it makes the language easier to implement; (5) it makes it
easier to trap a range of errors that otherwise have to be let through.
 
--
bart
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 30 05:22PM -0500

On 12/30/2018 5:17 PM, Bart wrote:
> easier-to-understand code IMO; (3) it makes code and algorithms more
> portable; (4) it makes the language easier to implement; (5) it makes it
> easier to trap a range of errors that otherwise have to be let through.
 
My goals with CAlive are the needs of development by other people. I
want to give them a robust set of tools in version 1.0. If, in by the
time version 5.0 is released some of the features are not in use and
not needed, I may consider removing them. However, my general phil-
osophy is that once something is written it's not that difficult to
keep it moving forward. Even if you don't change anything, but just
make sure the interface to the prior-written thing continues to work,
it may be of use to some people.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 31 03:19AM -0800

On Monday, December 31, 2018 at 5:33:48 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote:
> > my plans by at least six months. We'll see how it ultimately impacts
> > my schedule.
 
> So I thought. IOW there will be no fruit from you in foreseeable future.
 
You see what your own "eyes" generate for you, not the truth.
 
> BTW "schedule" is basic time-management tool and without any
> times set it sounds sort of like nonsense.
 
It's the difference between a business model and a task model. I had
a time schedule associated with my task schedule, but life things come
up unexpectedly. This one is of my own doing and I have needs to
address it ahead of other things.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com>: Dec 31 03:28AM -0800

W dniu poniedziałek, 31 grudnia 2018 11:40:56 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał:
 
> he used tos bulshit to bump himself and be happy as imbecile, in parrallel he obviously lies (this bump is false, but for poor dick it is usable to bump himself in a mood, that is how idiots are happy when they lie about themselves
 
> if idiot has no limit being truthful he may imagine he is great being in fact imbeclile idiot
 
> thats why i say dont behave like halftrolls bartc or thomasson, who feeds dik imbecile and help him to greatly degrade thsi place mentally.. better kick this idiot out just to defend doses of mental level /inteligence here)
 
as to if (not to make any propositions but to rethink some things a bit) i regularely use such think i 'invented' (saying invented as i use it but i guess people must use it too, its a bit to obvious to name it as invention)
 
static int initialised = 0;
if(!initialised)
{
//....
initialised = 1;
}
 
this would fit to extended if from like this one of extended loop: for
 
ife(static int ini = 0; !ini; ini = 1)
{
//...
}
 
hovever thsi looks rather idiotic
interesting is hovever resemblence beteween such if and for
 
for(static int ini = 0; !ini; ini = 1)
{
//....
}
 
this shows btw that someone if would be like in jjoking mood could turn all ifs in program into fors
 
both thiose syntaxes probably would look
better if turned
 
ife(!ini; static int ini = 0; ini = 1)
{
//...
}
 
for(i<100; int i=0; i++) { }
 
this is more readable imo, so what if it is not in natural order as putting those piecs of code here in that header breaks the sequentiality anyay
 
not saying that this kind of if is needed its more on pointing for and if resemblance and that those parts are rather in unreadeble order, it also may show that for would need shorter more oldschool form
 
int i=0;
for(i<100)
{

i++;
}
fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com>: Dec 31 03:46AM -0800

W dniu poniedziałek, 31 grudnia 2018 12:28:42 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał:
> {
 
> i++;
> }
 
also could be pointed as a curiosity
that those loops forms in c could be reduced (even quite logically) by throwing away while and for keywords only by combination of do and if
 
do //loop
{
 
}
 
 
do if(s) //while - do
{
 
}
 
//or maybe better if(s) do { }
 
//there is also option of if(s){} do
 
do //do-while
{
 
} if(s)
 
hovever in this last form i wonder if a word while would not be better as this is not normal if but backwarding if
 
there is also an option of 4-th form
 
do if(s)
{
 
} while(p)
 
 
[someone could else allowing putting additional codes into various places
 
int i=0; do
{
 
} (i++) while (i<100)
 
(its not any proposition only remerk on possible options)]
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 30 06:34PM -0500

On 12/30/2018 6:21 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> Wow. Really? Just, wow.
 
> What a nice message. Wow.
 
You think these things because you don't know scripture. You don't
know what's coming. You don't have a clue who God is. You don't
have a clue what your sin has cost you. You don't have a clue about
anything related to the spirit.
 
All you know is the flesh, Chris. The flesh is corrupt in sin, totally
deceived by the enemy.
 
THE ONLY WAY OUT is to seek the truth, which is to say seek Jesus Christ
(because He is truth -- John 14:6).
 
I've said before I wish I could shake you and wake you up out of this
slumber you're in, this nonchalance about life. I don't want to do
any physical harm, but I want to wake you up so you realize what it
is you're just glossing over so mistakenly carelessly today. Breaks
my heart to see it ... such flippance. It's going to cost you your
eternal soul unless you wake up.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 01:16PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 10:00 AM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
 
> [snip]
 
> That was funny, but I liked part of your .sig better:
 
>> "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." Ricky Gervais
 
Yeah. If people choose to live a good life, everything would be much better.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 01:58PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 1:41 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> There is no way for men and women to live a "good life" without
> having a foundation which teaches them what good is, and why it
> is good compared alongside other things.
 
I humbly disagree with that statement. A baby starts to learn whats bad
if somebody steals their candy, perhaps the crime was committed by
another close by baby? The victim should start crying, and get really
pissed off. They will start to learn that the act of taking the candy
away was really bad, aka, stealing.
 
 
> In addition, the world's view of what is good is different from
> God's view.
 
Good is good. God and the world can agree on a lot of things. Is
stealing bad? Yes. It seems like some basic sins are coded in our minds
as being bad already.
 
 
> for us to be and do, rather than what Ricky Gervais believes
> we should do. God has it right. Ricky Gervais has it incom-
> plete and misleading.
 
Little kids just know the difference between right and wrong, and a lot
of them have never read the Bible. Now, there are some crazy people out
there that claim to not know the difference between right and wrong.
They are usually confined to the nut house.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 03:21PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 2:16 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> the periodic thievery that individual is involved in. People who
> only knew that individual tangentially could say how kind and lov-
> ing they are.
 
There are a lot of hypocrites.
 
 
> people who do sinful things are relatively nice people. They
> help their kids, families, friends, co-workers, etc..
 
> NONE OF THAT MATTERS in and of itself.
 
Wow. Really? Just, wow.
 
> Hell is going to be filled
> with moral, upright, even religious people, right alongside the
> axe murderers, prostitutes, adulterers, drunkards, and the like.
[...]
What a nice message. Wow.
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 03:23PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 2:16 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> that age. It's based on "I want that" and "You're keeping me
> from that." It's not based on reason. It's based on internal
> drives and desires, and these are focused on selfishness.
 
I can see it now... Some thief steals from Rick. Well now, Rick cannot
get mad because that would be selfish in nature. ;^)
 
[...]
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram): Dec 30 09:44PM

>heard about that damnation only rather recently. Does that mean you are
>not supposed to say "What are you looking for?" but should say "For what
>are you looking?" instead?
 
"Although I have been using networks for quite a while now,
it never occured to me to type 'ending a sentence with a
preposition' into a Web search engine or to ask questions
about English in the newsgroup 'alt.usage.english', where
they are on-topic. Instead, I prefer to ask about English
prepositions using a cross post into two
programming-language newsgroups." - SCNR
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Dec 30 08:10PM

On Thu, 2018-12-27, Keith Thompson wrote:
> POSIX.1-2001, POSIX.1-2008, 4.3BS
 
> It's defined by POSIX, but not by ISO C (which is what Bart
> presumably meant by "standard library").
 
Also, the "multi-channel" aspect is a bit inconvenient: it's still
global state, but you can switch it. Not good for e.g. threaded
use, or for people like me who like objects.
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
"Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid>: Dec 30 01:19PM -0800

On 12/30/2018 12:10 PM, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
 
> Also, the "multi-channel" aspect is a bit inconvenient: it's still
> global state, but you can switch it. Not good for e.g. threaded
> use, or for people like me who like objects.
 
It would become a huge bottleneck if all threads had to fight for a
single global state. However, if each thread had it own personal PRNG
with its own unique seed, then each thread would produce a unique stream
without any synchronization whatsoever. Much better.
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu>: Dec 30 04:10PM -0500

On 12/30/18 15:10, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-12-27, Keith Thompson wrote:
...
> global state, but you can switch it. Not good for e.g. threaded
> use, or for people like me who like objects.
 
> /Jorgen
 
The page in the POSIX specification for random() says "Threaded
applications should use erand48(), nrand48(), or jrand48() instead of
random() when an independent random number sequence in multiple threads
is required."
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)