- Users needed - 4 Updates
- Win32: WaitOnAddress vs. WaitForSingleObject - 1 Update
- merge-sort with alloca()-buffer - 3 Updates
| "Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Jan 26 05:16PM -0800 On Tuesday, 26 January 2021 at 23:22:05 UTC+2, Bonita Montero wrote: > > Basically, when you make general statements about how C++ is used and > > what is important, you will get it wrong. > Look at what I wrote. I didn't make a general statement. Why you erase what you lie about from quote and remove all attributions, asshole? |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Jan 27 08:37AM +0100 On 26/01/2021 22:21, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Basically, when you make general statements about how C++ is used and >> what is important, you will get it wrong. > Look at what I wrote. I didn't make a general statement. If you followed Usenet conventions - as you have been asked, repeatedly - with correct attributions and appropriate quoting, it would be immediately obvious to you that you /did/ make a general statement. (I'm going to assume you simply forgot what you wrote, or did not mean to write quite what you did - rather than assuming you are deliberately trying to be misleading.) If you want to continue discussing in this newsgroup, it would be much appreciated if you follow the practices and habits of the group. It is basic courtesy. Some of the important rules are: 1. Quote appropriately, and snip appropriately. 2. Keep all attributions for everything that is quoted. 3. Read what other people post. 4. Do not deny having written things that everyone can see you wrote. 5. Learn from other people, and from your mistakes. 6. Admit when you are wrong, so we can all move along. 7. Understand that there are other people here that know better than you do. Not about everything, perhaps - but about some things. Until you make progress on the communication basics, I can't see it being worth the effort trying to discuss anything C++ related with you. |
| "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com>: Jan 27 08:06AM -0800 On Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 2:37:23 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote: > If you followed Usenet conventions - as you have been asked, repeatedly > - with correct attributions and appropriate quoting, it would be > immediately obvious to you that you /did/ make a general statement. Citation? Are you referring to this Bonita Montero wrote: > C++ is used mostly for large scale program development. > And for this purposes the code-size doesn't matter. Did you read the first sentence as expressing an "overarching truth", which is a requirement for a "general statement"? Do you believe that James was justified in substituting "only" for "mostly", when commenting on it? > Some of the important rules are: > 2. Keep all attributions for everything that is quoted. Indeed. That's a problem. Daniel |
| Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>: Jan 27 09:01PM On Tue, 2021-01-26, David Brown wrote: > when reading the reference manual.) > -fvisibility-inlines-hidden > -fvisibility=hidden Nice -- thanks! I do use gcc, and a recentish one, too. I /did/ reflect on this when I saw that the debug info got that large: it seemed to me a lot of people would have issues with the default amounts of debug info (from heavily templated code). But I didn't dig into the documentation, and anyway we had a compiler from 2014 back then. > Also look at: > -gsplit-dwarf > -gz=zlib /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 26 09:09PM -0800 On 1/24/2021 4:32 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > It is a beautiful algorihtm that can be directly implemented in pure C++ > now, well now with C++11. Well, DWCAS, aka 100% lock-free on a double > word, MUST be lock-free in order for it to "shine", so to speak. [...] Btw, iirc, some asshole over at Sun tried to rip off Joe's patent over at IBM. I wrote about it over on comp.arch. However, I cannot find the post right now... Need to dig deeper. Iirc, it was this patent: 20060037026 Lightweight reference counting using single-target synchronization Joe wrote: Lock-free reference counting very similar to atomic_ptr or so it would seem. I basically proved how it violates Joes patent when he worked over at IBM. Its radically similar in multiple key areas. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 26 06:08PM -0800 On 1/26/2021 4:14 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> the content of the post. > Or when they start making untrue claims about someone's answer, and > stubborningly refuse to back off. So far, that sure seems to be a key aspect of her modus operandi. I find it somewhat amusing when she claims what a compiler must do. Or what a mutex must be comprised of, ect, ect... |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 26 06:12PM -0800 On 1/26/2021 4:14 AM, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> the content of the post. > Or when they start making untrue claims about someone's answer, and > stubborningly refuse to back off. Another thing that seems odd, is that she does not seem to acknowledge she has errors in some of her code. I found a really nasty memory visibility error in one of her semaphores. So far, she just seems to brush it off as if nothing happened. I have not had to time to examine all of her code, but I found a bad one. So bad, that her code might seem to work fine, then crash at a random time. Serious error. |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Jan 27 03:22PM +1300 On 27/01/2021 15:12, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > brush it off as if nothing happened. I have not had to time to examine > all of her code, but I found a bad one. So bad, that her code might seem > to work fine, then crash at a random time. Serious error. When you attempt a discussion with someone who can't even quote correctly, what else do you expect? -- Ian. |
| 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