Monday, June 17, 2019

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 4 updates in 3 topics

Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Jun 17 11:50PM +0100

> On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 8:02:43 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> Cool story bro. Also, Satan invented fossils, yes?
 
> You'll find out soon enough, Leigh.
 
And Satan invented fossils, yes?
 
/Flibble
 
--
"Snakes didn't evolve, instead talking snakes with legs changed into
snakes." - Rick C. Hodgin
 
"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."
Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Jun 17 11:47PM +0300

On 17.06.2019 23:09, Chris Vine wrote:
> effect. It is a feature of the language. The fact that it might lead
> to an exhaustion of memory for other allocations doesn't seem to me to
> count as an observable effect.
 
A typical memory allocation routine modifies the state of the memory
allocator data structures, either global or thread-specific. I guess
this would qualify as an observable side effect, regardless of memory
exhaustion.
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Jun 17 10:01PM +0100

On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 23:47:35 +0300
> allocator data structures, either global or thread-specific. I guess
> this would qualify as an observable side effect, regardless of memory
> exhaustion.
 
I don't think so. I did think about whether the fact that an allocator
synchronizes its book-keeping data in a multi-threaded program, and
therefore as a side effect in some sense synchronizes between any
threads using the allocator, counts as an observable effect, and
concluded that it didn't. It seems to me that it is an observable
effect in the abstract machine which we are looking for. Perhaps the
one or two posters who read the C++ standard ten times before breakfast
could help us.
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Jun 17 08:58PM

On Mon, 2019-06-17, Keith Thompson wrote:
 
>> http://sergeystrukov.github.io/CCore-Sphinx-3-60/brief/brief.html
 
> I suggest that your "brief.html" could be improved if it included,
> at the top, a brief description of *what CCore is*.
 
Not to mention the parent posting. "Someone has released a version of
some software I've never heard of" doesn't generate a lot of clicks.
 
/Jorgen
 
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
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: