- Why do some people hate namespace prefixes? - 6 Updates
- Auto-incrementing or auto-decrementing values at compile-time - 16 Updates
- "Modern C++ Won't Save Us" by alex_gaynor - 2 Updates
- special string-implementation - 1 Update
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Apr 24 01:34PM > I think if you have code dominated by a sea of "std::" then that is a > problem that needs solving. Why? On the contrary, the more you use standard library tools, usually the better (assuming you know and understand the performance of those tools). If you use your own implementation of something that's provided by the standard library, you are needlessly increasing the complexity of your code and introducing additional sources of potential bugs. The standard library implementations have been, after all, tested millions of times (probably quite literally) and it's pretty safe to assume they are bug-free (when used as per their specs). Therefore the more "std::" you see in the code, usually the better! (Of course it's still very possible to use standard library tools in a very inefficient manner. Just using them does not guarantee efficiency. Know your tools and use them where appropriate.) > std::cout << "Hello, world!\n"; > } > I find that "std::" irritating. Why? Why do you have a problem with it? Why does it bother you? It makes the name much more unambiguous. There's pretty much zero doubt that this name is actually from the standard library, and not something else. Why would this bother you? |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Apr 24 01:35PM >> a name in the standard library, or a custom name? > Then you google in 5 seconds "C++ name" if a name is already defined > in the standard-library or any relvant C++-library. So instead of seeing directly from the code that the name is from the standard library, you need to resort to googling it. And you think that's a *good* thing? |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Apr 24 01:41PM > Which would be more readable, a ten character name prefixed bay thirty > characters of namespaces, or a using directive and a ten character name? Actually, and I'm not kidding, I regularly use names in my production code like for example: Core::GameMode::Classic::levelData Especially since such names (like "levelData" here) appear in several such namespaces, the disambiguation is very helpful, not just to make the code compile, but for readability. I want to see *which* "levelData" is being used here, rather than have to guess. I suppose I could get rid of that "Core::" or even "Core::GameData::" prefix, but I honestly don't find the urge nor the need to. I have since very, very long time got completely rid of the (somewhat strange) desire to write code that's as short as possible. Good riddance, I say. |
| Bart <bc@freeuk.com>: Apr 24 03:46PM +0100 On 24/04/2019 14:34, Juha Nieminen wrote: > It makes the name much more unambiguous. There's pretty much zero doubt > that this name is actually from the standard library, and not something else. > Why would this bother you? Look at the question I posed at the end of my post: why does C++ (and a few others) make such a meal of it when in most languages you basically just use 'print'. Suppose built-in types could also be part of a library, would std::int be acceptable? How about operators like "+"; how do I know that the "+" here: a + b is either standard "+", or the "+" from library X, or the "+" from Y? Should all such code be written as a std::+ b, or a X::+ b? And if a and b are globals, should it be: X::a std::+ Y::b just to remove all doubt? Look at file systems, which can also have long absolute paths. But most of the time you don't need that path to distinguish F from A/F or B/F or C/F. F is usually taken to be ./F, and usually you don't need to write the "./". Using std:: is like insisting all file names must be written in canonical form with absolute paths. What a PITA that would be. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Apr 24 04:59PM +0200 > So instead of seeing directly from the code that the name is > from the standard library, you need to resort to googling it. If you don't know the name you would have to check the documentation anyway, no matter if its prefixed or not. |
| "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>: Apr 24 05:15PM +0200 On 24.04.2019 16:46, Bart wrote: > the "./". > Using std:: is like insisting all file names must be written in > canonical form with absolute paths. What a PITA that would be. I agree. But I think you're arguing with people who find the qualified names useful, because they're unable to keep the outer context in mind. If that hypothesis is true then your arguments are doomed to fail to convince, because the intended audience is unable to grok what you say. Cheers!, - Alf |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Apr 24 04:00PM +1200 On 24/04/2019 10:42, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> words of cranks and pseudo-science to established science. You glibly >> reject any evidence that contradicts your beliefs as the works of Satan. > Bring any point forward and we'll investigate it together. That's already been tried, examples being fossils and debunked case of blood in fossil dinosaur bones. >> together to reject ignorance and embrace all of our brother and sisters. > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. > There's a real change that takes place when you're born again. A change that appears to blind you to the truth, common with cults. -- Ian |
| seeplus <boardmounrt@gmail.com>: Apr 23 11:42PM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 8:42:38 AM UTC+10, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. ? |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Apr 24 01:36AM -0700 On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 22:51:32 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > is to the fact that he covers his ears and will not hear the truth. > He's Hell-bent on believing whatever he wants to believe without > regard to any facts or evidence which come his way. No, it describes yourself. You believe that master of this universe booted up some sort of multiplayer MineCraft game for eternal souls (actual us) somewhere within last 10 thousand years. The game contains unimaginably huge physical universe where even closest stars are outside of any hope to reach and everything in it (physics, astrophysics, paleontology, geology, genetics etc.) perfectly indicates that the whole thing is billions of years old. However all the souls have limited to live on one tiny rock of it in body of ape-like mammals for couple of decades in average (some for days, others for century). And the whole goal of this game is to torture all those souls who do not believe that story for eternity after they have played that game. BTW what about the hundreds of generations of American natives who lived before that book of truth was brought there six centuries ago? Hell bent not to know what they were obliged to believe? Will their souls be tortured or not? How you explain why maker of such universe has such communication disabilities? > I've honestly never met anyone like him, except for five year olds > who cover their ears and repeat "blah blah blah" very loud to be > defiant and avoid the adult who's speaking to them. Look into mirror then. Everybody here have tried to talk with you but you just ignore all facts provided and also ignore all questions asked. Instead you write long and boring judgement day descriptions back. Exactly Blah blah blah. Have you been there? So no, you can't know any of it. It is not something someone sane *could* somehow discuss. Snipping that usual "If you do not believe that you will be tortured for eternity then you will be tortured for eternity" togma. Everybody have got that message fully from *lot* of sources by now. It does only get less convincing when repeated ad nauseum instead of answering concrete questions about it. |
| guinness.tony@gmail.com: Apr 24 03:02AM -0700 On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 23:42:38 UTC+1, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Do not take my word for it. Go and see for yourself. > -- > Rick C. Hodgin "I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but [my blind acceptance] is not." You've lost it, Freddy. |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.removethisbit.co.uk>: Apr 24 12:55PM +0100 On 23/04/2019 23:42, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. LOL. > stand, but go to local churches and ask to speak to born again > Christians. You'll hear their testimonies and you'll see how > they bear resemblance one to another. It's not something those who have not experienced it can under- stand, but go to local psychiatric wards and ask to speak to the mentally ill. You'll hear their delusions and you'll see how they bear resemblance one to another. /Flibble -- "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "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>: Apr 24 05:04AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 12:00:56 AM UTC-4, Ian Collins wrote: > > Bring any point forward and we'll investigate it together. > That's already been tried, examples being fossils and debunked case of > blood in fossil dinosaur bones. What points are you referring to? You do realize there is a disinformation network at work within the scientific community to make legitimate findings and reports be deemed something else, and therefore "explained away." Falseness has that luxury. It can report on data using lies and fabrications. Truth cannot. Truth always wins in the end. > > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. > > There's a real change that takes place when you're born again. > A change that appears to blind you to the truth, common with cults. Cults often have blindness, there is no doubt. I am not blind. I am as the former slave trader and vile man John Newton wrote after he was saved in the late 1700s. He later went on to write the song Amazing Grace, which includes these words: "I once was lost, but now am found. Was blind, but now I see." Until a person comes to Christ and is forgiven, they cannot know what I'm talking about with regards to the new spirit nature. I would not have believed it possible BEFORE it hap- pened to me. In fact, I said that aloud many times after I was saved. It really is a new life. It's like Optimus Prime in Transformers 2 receiving all the new abilities from taking that SR-71 Decepticon's blue thing into his own body. All of the new abilities which went along with it came to him and he was able to know and do things he wasn't able to before. A pale comparison when placed alongside the restoration of a man's soul and spirit from sin ... but it is something people who have not yet experienced that transformation could relate to: Begins at 2:00 in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJs_peEATiU&t=2m Prime was never the same after that. In later movie install- ments we see him still able to fly. It is the same with Christians who have their sin forgiven and are born again. They are never the same again, and the new spirit life communes with God's Holy Spirit directly, and He affects and impacts and influences and guides us to move here in this world, preparing us for eternity. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Apr 24 05:05AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 2:42:13 AM UTC-4, seeplus wrote: > On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 8:42:38 AM UTC+10, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. > ? Not ? ... but rather ! -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Apr 24 05:34AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 4:36:11 AM UTC-4, Öö Tiib wrote: > No, it describes yourself. You believe that master of this universe > booted up some sort of multiplayer MineCraft game for eternal > souls (actual us) somewhere within last 10 thousand years. 6,000 years ago approximately. We do not have the months of people's births or deaths recorded in the Bible, but if you assume about half were before the mid-point, and half were after, and coupled to some Biblically recorded events which correlate with non-Biblical timeframes that are documented, you arrive at a day that places creation approximately 4,003 years B.C., meaning that we are approximately 6,021 years old now. If we consider that Jesus lived on the Earth for approx- imately 33 years, that gives us approximately 12 years until we would reach a time of 6,000 years minus Jesus' time here on Earth. No one knows the true day or year though. Based on the number of months in a year, and the number of dates recorded in the Bible, it's possible to be anywhere from the late 90s to the early 2030s or thereabouts. But regardless, it is about 6,000 years. > closest stars are outside of any hope to reach and everything in > it (physics, astrophysics, paleontology, geology, genetics etc.) > perfectly indicates that the whole thing is billions of years old. If you were to create a video game, what would be your limits on how big things could be? Logically you'd have a focus area, but the game itself could go on to the limits of floating point precision. If God created this universe in a similar way, He could've in- stantiated the universe as He saw fit, including making each thing on the day of its creation, not because He had to do it that way, but for some purpose in teaching us. In any regard, no one knows the true nature of the universe, not any Christians even, so we take on faith that what God has told us is true. > However all the souls have limited to live on one tiny rock of it > in body of ape-like mammals Science teaches us "ape-like mammals," but the Bible is very clear that man was made separate and distinct from the animals, including the apes. The reason why you see similar patterns in the life on Earth is because it stems from a common designer (God) who made the animals one-by-one and brought them to Adam to name. These were animal kinds, not every species. The di- versificaiton into species was encoded into the root animals' DNA, much the way breeders specialize various breeds by choosing offspring with particular traits. Within each of the original animals created by God were all the species that would later be seen. > (some for days, others for century). And the whole goal of > this game is to torture all those souls who do not believe that > story for eternity after they have played that game. God made the world perfect. He made man perfect. But He gave man free will. The enemy (Lucifer, later Satan -- which means "accuser" because Satan accuses us day/night before God for all our iniquity and sin) came in to tempt Adam and Eve, and man acquiesced to Lucifer's prompting. It was sin that destroyed man. God came to save man from the punishment of that sin, and makes it available to everyone to- day. People refuse to receive His free gift, and keep them- sevles under judgment. > ago? Hell bent not to know what they were obliged to believe? > Will their souls be tortured or not? How you explain why maker > of such universe has such communication disabilities? The Bible records in Revelation that there are people from all tribes and tongues in Heaven, meaning some are saved from all places with or without the message of Christ going forward by man's lips. In one way or another God has revealed Himself to all people. He has prompted them by His own Holy Spirit internally, teaching them the truth, giving them the opportunity to hear His guidance, and then seeing whether or not they follow it. Billy Graham addressed this point years ago and was widely mocked for saying that Christ isn't the only way to Heaven. Those mock- ers did not understand what he was saying. Billy was saying that in the absence of a Christian outreach and teaching message, God still doesn't just summarily abandon people. He reaches into their heart and guides them and those that follow His voice are saved. I believe He also saves every child. He made a point of having a special ministry calling to children in the gospels. > Look into mirror then. Everybody here have tried to talk with you > but you just ignore all facts provided and also ignore all questions > asked. I used to be where the people who try and teach me alternate ways of God are. I used to be an atheist. The majority of the argu- ments I hear from people I used to use against Christianity. And until the change happened to me, and I WAS NOT looking for it, but rather it took me completely by surprise, I would not have ever believed it were possible. I believed that because it's not a work of the flesh. The flesh knows what the flesh knows, but what comes through Jesus is a new thing. It is spirit and new spiritual life. It's only when that happens that a person can discern and under- stand the new life. It's like if someone were blind. They can't know what it's like to see until they get new eyes and are then able to see. With spiritual matters, the flesh-only person cannot know what it's like to be alive spiritually until they get new spirit life. I'm not joking or exaggerating. It's why I ask each of you to go to local churches and speak to born again Christians and listen to their testimonies personally, and to not take my word for it. Go and speak to multiple people and see for yourself if what I'm telling you is true or not. Visit 15 churches. Speak to 50 Christians who state they are born again and hear what they have to say. It's not just me. > back. Exactly Blah blah blah. Have you been there? So no, you > can't know any of it. It is not something someone sane *could* > somehow discuss. One thing about the truth is it cannot lie. It is not me telling you about the future day of judgment. It is God who has told all of mankind through the Bible. It is His wish that all would hear the message. In fact, the last day will not come until all do hear the message (Matthew 24:14), which is why there's such a world-wide movement to silence Christ- ianity in this world today, and why President Obama and Hillary Clinton used words like "Easter worshippers" rather than Christians to describe the Sri Lanka Easter day terrorist massacre. They are guided by demon spirits which will not acknowledge Christ as He is, nor give His people credit they're due. > Snipping that usual "If you do not believe that you will be > tortured for eternity then you will be tortured for eternity" > togma. It's not that "if you don't believe that you will be tortured for all eternity" but rather right now, already, because of sin, and because of you not having a spirit and your soul being under condemnation because of sin, you are already judged, and your soul will be cast into Hell for all eternity. What Christ brought us, and what Christians teach, is the ONLY way out of that fate. So when we say, "You must repent and believe," it's not a "You're okay today, but when that last day comes if you reject Him then you'll be in trouble" kind of thing. We're teaching you that YOU ARE ALREADY in trouble, and that this is your one way out. And there are reasons why that is. It's not just because it's one of the thousands of religions in the world. It's because of who Jesus is, and what He did at the cross (going there in- nocent before God, yet condemned by man, and therefore able to take on the full weight of sin upon Himself at the cross and die to it, thereby saving everyone from judgment by His atoning death at the cross where He literally took away our sin and set us free from judgment). It is logical. It can be followed, even with the carnal mind. > sources by now. It does only get less convincing when > repeated ad nauseum instead of answering concrete > questions about it. Each of us (Christians) are called to teach those around us. God places that continuous reminder before you because for all people who are saved at some point in their life (age 10, age 50, on their deathbed at 90), there was a time prior in their life when they were not saved. Nobody knows the day of a man's salvation, so we continue to reach out and teach for those few who will be saved. It is our hope in Him, and for our love of Him and mankind, that we continue to teach despite the mocking and ridicule and hatred we receive ongoing, because we recognize the source of that hate is not men (or women), but rather the evil spirits that are guiding everyone in sin in this world to their own blind destruction. Christians are the voice of reason stepping up to teach people the way out of that end, but men love sin so much they will not even give ear to the truth. But for those who will, they will be saved, and it is for them that all Christians labor, for those harvest few that will be saved. I pray you're one of them. You are precious and valuable to God and to man, and I would like to see you thriving in Heaven. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Apr 24 05:37AM -0700 > "I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, > but [my blind acceptance] is not." > You've lost it, Freddy. You think I've lost it because you do not believe the things I am telling you. I do not have blind acceptance. The knowledge of my salvation does not come from my flesh, but from the new born again nature living inside of me which is spirit (read John 3 to under- stand). https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3&version=KJV;NIV If you were born of God you would hear my words and understand them, but because you are not born of God you are unable to hear them, and you do not understand them. You can only conclude that I have lost my mind because the things I speak about are not possible for the flesh, but only the spirit. It is the same for all born again believers, for we have been called out of this world's nature and understanding, and are given a new nature, and a new understanding, which is why we move contrarywise to all of the goings on of this world. It is not because we are madmen, but because we are new men. Our new spirit life changes us from within, and we move in new ways be- cause of it. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Apr 24 05:39AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 7:55:50 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > On 23/04/2019 23:42, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > I agree that blind acceptance is irrational, but mine is not. > LOL. See my reply to guinn...@gmail.com. > stand, but go to local psychiatric wards and ask to speak to > the mentally ill. You'll hear their delusions and you'll see how > they bear resemblance one to another. You already have it figured out, Leigh. You are on the correct and true path, right? So you do not need to worry about anything I have to say. You can mock me and espouse "And Satan invented fossils, yes?" all day long knowing that your way is right and true, right? If so, walk in your faith and trust that your way is the right way and be confident in your knowing the same, for you know deep down inside that it will serve you well in the end ... right? -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.removethisbit.co.uk>: Apr 24 01:41PM +0100 On 24/04/2019 13:34, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > for those harvest few that will be saved. > I pray you're one of them. You are precious and valuable to > God and to man, and I would like to see you thriving in Heaven. And Satan invented fossils, yes? /Flibble -- "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "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." |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.removethisbit.co.uk>: Apr 24 01:49PM +0100 On 24/04/2019 13:39, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > If so, walk in your faith and trust that your way is the right > way and be confident in your knowing the same, for you know deep > down inside that it will serve you well in the end ... right? That's right, our lives do have an end afterwhich there is nothingness. Perhaps you are learning something by osmosis? If only you would accept that your life is finite and there is no afterlife you might not waste so many of your finite hours on delusion. BTW this is not an opportunity for you to recite your prior life as an atheist for the Nth time. Your faith is predicated on a dream and subsequent psychosis: you have admitted as much. And Satan invented fossils, yes? /Flibble -- "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "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>: Apr 24 06:07AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 8:49:45 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > > way and be confident in your knowing the same, for you know deep > > down inside that it will serve you well in the end ... right? > That's right, our lives do have an end afterwhich there is nothingness. Walk in it. Live your life as you see fit under that guidance. The warning from God is this: You will reap what you sow by adhering to your personal beliefs, rather than in the teachings of God. > Perhaps you are learning something by osmosis? If only you would accept > that your life is finite and there is no afterlife you might not waste > so many of your finite hours on delusion. If it is a delusion I would've spent my life teaching people to love one another, to be good to one another, to help one another, and to believe that there is a foundational truth that exists which is not subject to the multitude of lies that exists every- where in this world except in God. And then I would die and you and I would share the same fate of nothingness after death. But if I am right ... if I'm right, it will end badly for you, and for eternity. It's worth some consideration. > opportunity for you to recite your prior life as an atheist for the Nth > time. Your faith is predicated on a dream and subsequent psychosis: you > have admitted as much. Many people in the Bible have been guided by God in dreams. And it wasn't the dream that brought me to faith, but it was a witness where I, as an atheist, saw His eyes and I, as an atheist, KNEW from the core of my being deep-down in that instant that He was God, and good, and right, and true, and everything that goes along with it. God guided Joseph and Mary when Jesus was still in the womb by sending Joseph dreams to leave his country, and to later return. God guides us in ways that are unlike the ways of the world. > And Satan invented fossils, yes? He did invent your belief about fossils, Leigh. But he had no part in what you're trying to say to me here with this sentence. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.removethisbit.co.uk>: Apr 24 02:11PM +0100 On 24/04/2019 14:07, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> And Satan invented fossils, yes? > He did invent your belief about fossils, Leigh. But he had no > part in what you're trying to say to me here with this sentence. And Satan invented fossils, yes? /Flibble -- "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "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>: Apr 24 06:29AM -0700 On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 9:11:22 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: > And Satan invented fossils, yes? I write custom replies to you, Leigh. I do so because I care about you and want you to know the truth. God cares about you more than I do, by the way. His love for you was demonstrated at the cross. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.removethisbit.co.uk>: Apr 24 02:33PM +0100 On 24/04/2019 14:29, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > about you and want you to know the truth. > God cares about you more than I do, by the way. His love for > you was demonstrated at the cross. And Satan invented fossils, yes? /Flibble -- "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "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." |
| Mel <mel@zzzzz.com>: Apr 24 09:57AM +0200 On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 17:47:49 -0500, Lynn McGuire > https://alexgaynor.net/2019/apr/21/modern-c++-wont-save-us/ > Neither will Rust or Swift. > Lynn Rust is nice but you can't do almost anything in safe Rust. Tell mi how to pass reference to object while in same time calling member function of contaning interface in safe Rust. Needed because Rust doesn't have inheritance. -- Press any key to continue or any other to quit |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Apr 24 06:07AM -0700 On Wednesday, 24 April 2019 01:48:07 UTC+3, Lynn McGuire wrote: > https://alexgaynor.net/2019/apr/21/modern-c++-wont-save-us/ > Neither will Rust or Swift. > Lynn The std::string_view is performance optimization so I would reject its usage in review unless it is performance issue under work (that I won't give to novices anyway). However for "std::optional<std::unique_ptr<int>>" in code I would suggest to end the work contract. Either it was deliberate sabotage or the author is totally net negative moron, anything that such people touch turns into awfully inefficient and unmaintainable poop. |
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Apr 24 04:25AM -0700 On Tuesday, 23 April 2019 21:38:52 UTC+3, Bonita Montero wrote: > > Sure there are such classes. Fair amount of optimizations can be > > done by using std::array or mundane array plus std::string_view. > string_view isn't mutable. How so? It is not Java String. It has remobe_prefix(), remove_suffix() and operator=(). I meant string_view is supported in lot of places of standard library as alternative to std::string. So you can use it as interface to array (that isn't accepted in those places). It is sure, less flexible than std::string but you need it only as performance optimization. Performance optimizations are worth to be done only in about 5% of code base. That 5% is what takes up 95% of run-time when we profile our product's run. So 95% of our std::strings can remain std::strings forever without any difference and only about 5% we can consider if there is point to optimize or not. If you really need full flexibility of appends, erases, inserts and replaces of string then you can consider combo of char array, custom allocator for "managing" the array, basic_string using that allocator for mutating operations and std::string_view for passing the result to outside world. That combo can all be enwrapped to class and can nicely sit in stack as whole but takes some coding and testing for to combine it nicely together. |
| 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