Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register


Groups > comp.lang.c++.moderated

comp.lang.c++.moderated

6889 articles, 1185 threads (numbers 560 – 7448) — flat view

| Advanced

Subject Author Date
doctest - the lightest feature rich C++ single header testing framework - version 1.0 released! vik.kirilov@googlemail.com 2016-05-22 18:49 -0600
 
Non-recursive tuple implementation Sergey Strukov <sshimnick@this.is.invalid> 2016-05-19 14:49 -0600
 
How to programmatically change the ubuntu 16.04 System Monitor process name from cli or mono to an unique name? (1 reply) allswellthatendswell <FrankChang91@googlemail.com> 2016-05-18 06:27 -0600
   → Re: How to programmatically change the ubuntu 16.04 System Monitor process name from cli or mono to an unique name? red floyd <no.spam@its.invalid> 2016-05-18 15:51 -0600
 
uniform initialization of temporary reference MJanes <max.jns@googlemail.com> 2016-05-17 06:29 -0600
 
Templated Overloaded Operator (4 replies) Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-27 13:08 -0600
   → Re: Templated Overloaded Operator Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-27 17:12 -0600
     → Re: Templated Overloaded Operator Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-28 06:30 -0600
       → Re: Templated Overloaded Operator Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-28 15:01 -0600
   → Re: Templated Overloaded Operator Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> 2016-05-08 17:10 -0600
 
Lamda as Operator Overload (6 replies) Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-27 06:46 -0600
   → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-04-27 08:44 -0600
     → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@iki.fi> 2016-04-27 15:21 -0600
       → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-27 17:13 -0600
         → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-04-28 06:30 -0600
   → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-04-27 08:44 -0600
     → Re: Lamda as Operator Overload Adi Shavit <adishavit@googlemail.com> 2016-04-27 15:14 -0600
 
c++ language spec feature request (7 replies) Jim Michaels <jmichae3@this.is.invalid> 2016-04-23 07:01 -0600
   → Re: c++ language spec feature request Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-04-24 07:17 -0600
     → Re: c++ language spec feature request Cholo Lennon <chololennon@this.is.invalid> 2016-04-25 13:01 -0600
       → Re: c++ language spec feature request Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-04-26 09:20 -0600
         → Re: c++ language spec feature request Cholo Lennon <chololennon@this.is.invalid> 2016-04-27 06:45 -0600
   → Re: c++ language spec feature request Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> 2016-04-24 12:05 -0600
   → Re: c++ language spec feature request legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2016-04-26 13:32 -0600
     → Re: c++ language spec feature request Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-04-27 08:43 -0600
 
Global lambdas and ODR (4 replies) raskolnikov <magnicida@googlemail.com> 2016-04-07 19:56 -0600
   → Re: Global lambdas and ODR pfultz2 <pfultz2@this.is.invalid> 2016-04-11 19:30 -0600
     → Re: Global lambdas and ODR Juan Pedro Bolivar Puente <raskolnikov@gnu.org> 2016-04-12 06:49 -0600
     → Re: Global lambdas and ODR Juan Pedro Bolivar Puente <raskolnikov@gnu.org> 2016-04-12 06:49 -0600
       → Re: Global lambdas and ODR pfultz2 <pfultz2@this.is.invalid> 2016-04-12 12:53 -0600
 
Manipulating std::match_results? (2 replies) Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> 2016-04-04 17:44 -0600
   → Re: Manipulating std::match_results? Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-04-05 08:19 -0600
   → Re: Manipulating std::match_results? guy.tristram@googlemail.com 2016-04-05 08:19 -0600
 
A failure to handle exceptions (2 replies) James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com> 2016-03-27 07:29 -0600
   → Re: A failure to handle exceptions Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-03-29 07:02 -0600
   → Re: A failure to handle exceptions Ralf Fassel <ralfixx@gmx.de> 2016-03-29 13:38 -0600
 
a particular "explicit specialization" case (1 reply) phpete48@googlemail.com 2016-03-20 16:06 -0600
   → Re: a particular "explicit specialization" case Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-21 07:27 -0600
 
C++ exceptions are broken. (10 replies) Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> 2016-03-08 06:31 -0600
   → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. "James K. Lowden" <jklowden@speakeasy.net> 2016-03-09 08:25 -0600
     → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Elias Salomão Helou Neto <eshneto@googlemail.com> 2016-03-12 06:28 -0600
     → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> 2016-03-12 14:46 -0600
       → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> 2016-03-12 16:50 -0600
       → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. "James K. Lowden" <jklowden@speakeasy.net> 2016-03-13 15:55 -0600
         → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Gareth Owen <gwowen@googlemail.com> 2016-03-15 08:45 -0600
           → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk> 2016-03-15 12:22 -0600
             → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@googlemail.com> 2016-03-17 06:43 -0600
             → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> 2016-03-17 06:43 -0600
       → Re: C++ exceptions are broken. Gareth Owen <gwowen@googlemail.com> 2016-03-15 08:44 -0600
 
utf-8 string literal (2 replies) Sascha Schwarz <s4as5z@googlemail.com> 2016-03-14 06:49 -0600
   → Re: utf-8 string literal Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-14 17:10 -0600
     → Re: utf-8 string literal Sascha Schwarz <s4as5z@googlemail.com> 2016-03-15 08:45 -0600
 
Covariance and xxx_ptr (1 reply) Javier <iphone.javier.estrada@googlemail.com> 2016-03-05 07:00 -0600
   → Re: Covariance and xxx_ptr Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-07 12:11 -0600
 
Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? (17 replies) wij@totalbb.net.tw 2016-02-25 08:26 -0600
   → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-02-25 09:20 -0600
   → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> 2016-02-25 09:46 -0600
   → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Francis Glassborow <francis.glassborow@btinternet.com> 2016-02-26 06:47 -0600
     → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? wij <wij@totalbb.net.tw> 2016-03-02 06:34 -0600
       → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2016-03-02 11:07 -0600
         → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? wij@totalbb.net.tw 2016-03-03 06:27 -0600
           → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-04 06:44 -0600
             → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? wij@totalbb.net.tw 2016-03-05 06:58 -0600
       → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-03 06:27 -0600
         → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2016-03-04 11:01 -0600
           → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-03-05 06:57 -0600
   → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? wij@totalbb.net.tw 2016-02-26 06:47 -0600
     → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-02-26 09:31 -0600
       → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? "James K. Lowden" <jklowden@speakeasy.net> 2016-02-26 15:46 -0600
         → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2016-02-26 19:29 -0600
         → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> 2016-02-27 07:16 -0600
   → Re: Isn't it better using Qt than the 'standerd' C++? Cholo Lennon <chololennon@this.is.invalid> 2016-02-26 09:30 -0600
 
cv-qualified function type and type deduction (1 reply) wander <wandersys@googlemail.com> 2016-02-20 07:15 -0600
   → Re: cv-qualified function type and type deduction Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler@googlemail.com> 2016-02-22 19:49 -0600
 
Initialization of data members inside a class (2 replies) Joe Bentley <joe.foxhound@googlemail.com> 2016-02-21 13:20 -0600
   → Re: Initialization of data members inside a class Norbert_Paul <norbertpauls_spambin@this.is.invalid> 2016-02-22 06:47 -0600
   → Re: Initialization of data members inside a class legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2016-02-22 14:26 -0600
 
C++ refactoring test suite results updated legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) 2016-02-20 07:16 -0600
 
Is <cstdlib> required? (1 reply) Joe Bentley <joe.foxhound@googlemail.com> 2016-02-16 07:03 -0600
   → Re: Is <cstdlib> required? Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk> 2016-02-16 12:32 -0600
 
Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD (5 replies) Daniel <danielaparker@googlemail.com> 2015-12-13 12:01 -0600
   → Re: Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2015-12-14 06:52 -0600
     → Re: Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD Daniel <danielaparker@googlemail.com> 2015-12-15 07:08 -0600
       → Re: Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD Martin Bonner <martinfrompi@yahoo.co.uk> 2015-12-15 13:55 -0600
   → Re: Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD evansl <cppljevans@googlemail.com> 2016-01-11 06:46 -0600
     → Re: Alignment, placement new and struct with pointer to array of POD evansl <cppljevans@googlemail.com> 2016-01-12 07:21 -0600

~Page 1 of ~60 (articles 7368–7448) Older →


csiph-web