- Available C++ Libraries FAQ - 1 Update
- About Flibble - 6 Updates
- Overuse of 'auto' - 1 Update
- Here is my new smart proverb - 1 Update
| Nikki Locke <nikki@trumphurst.com>: Jan 14 11:23PM Available C++ Libraries FAQ URL: http://www.trumphurst.com/cpplibs/ This is a searchable list of libraries and utilities (both free and commercial) available to C++ programmers. If you know of a library which is not in the list, why not fill in the form at http://www.trumphurst.com/cpplibs/cppsub.php Maintainer: Nikki Locke - if you wish to contact me, please use the form on the website. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 13 01:43PM -0800 On 1/12/2023 10:19 PM, Stuart Redmann wrote: > though). It enables us to export our data (2D geometries like polygons, > line strings, etc.) into an external viewer with a simple mouse click. It > can't get more convenient than that. A line of code would push_back an element into a std::vector. The damn debugger would show that the vector contained no elements, however, one was there. Then there are other oddities. I have never had this problem with MSVC before. |
| Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: Jan 14 09:52AM On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 13:43:06 -0800 >debugger would show that the vector contained no elements, however, one >was there. Then there are other oddities. >I have never had this problem with MSVC before. I don't know about VS, but if you use heavy optimisation with gcc then gdb will often lose the plot when stepping and examining variables. Perhaps that was the issue you had? |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp>: Jan 14 07:24PM On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 23:13:12 -0800, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> Message ends. > The god damn MSVC debugger is messed up pretty bad! Got another taste of > it! Are you using VS2022? I found it to be unusable: internal compiler errors and a broken debugger; I had to revert to VS2019. /Flibble |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp>: Jan 14 07:24PM On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 07:19:45 +0100, Stuart Redmann wrote: > though). It enables us to export our data (2D geometries like polygons, > line strings, etc.) into an external viewer with a simple mouse click. > It can't get more convenient than that. VS2022 is shoddy product: not sufficiently tested. /Flibble |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 14 01:13PM -0800 On 1/14/2023 11:24 AM, Mr Flibble wrote: >> it! > Are you using VS2022? I found it to be unusable: internal compiler errors > and a broken debugger; I had to revert to VS2019. I am using the following version: https://i.ibb.co/VYxHtLH/image.png |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Jan 14 02:44PM -0800 > I don't know about VS, but if you use heavy optimisation with gcc then gdb > will often lose the plot when stepping and examining variables. Perhaps that > was the issue you had? In debug mode. |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Jan 14 07:24AM >> [discussions] where one or more of the parties >> takes a "there's nothing controversial here, how could anyone disagree >> with me?" stance will run and run. There's the reading-between-the-lines again. I write: "Nothing of what I wrote is controversial." You read: "Nothing of what I wrote is controversial, how could anyone disagree with me?" I am not objecting to the disagreements. I am objecting to the repeated confrontational attitude shown by some people who seem to be set on trying to "deconvert" me from this heresy. Some people here seem to have taken this as their hill to die on. (You may accuse me of that very same thing, and you would have a point, but I am the one being on the defensive here.) I also find it funny how much of Google's coding guideline actually says exactly what I have been saying, but because another part says something I disagree with, some people here only take that one part and assert that Google fully disagrees with me. And then accuse me of just taking one part and ignoring the others. I am not ignoring the part of Google's coding guideline I disagree with. I quoted the part that I agree with, to highlight that it's not some kind of unique controversial stance. > said everything they have to say about the topic, and are simply repeating > themselves, lest someone keeps being wrong on the internet. It's a > little unfair to single out the OP. I do not disagree that I am also guilty of just going on and on about the same thing here even though the conversation doesn't seem to go anywhere, but I think it's a bit different to present an idea and then defend it against criticism, than it is to present criticism of someone's idea. If someone criticizes the thing I suggested, it's natural to respond to that criticism in defense of the idea. |
| gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack): Jan 13 02:57PM In article <tpjqe7$i6jj$3@dont-email.me>, >Am 08.01.2023 um 23:55 schrieb Amine Moulay Ramdane: >> Please ignore this post of mine, since i have just posted it in the wrong forum. >You always post in the wrong forum. You would know (about posting in the wrong forum). -- If Jeb is Charlie Brown kicking a football-pulled-away, Mitt is a '50s housewife with a black eye who insists to her friends the roast wasn't dry. |
| 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