Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #84082
| From | Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque |
| Message-ID | <20220513170449.0000502d@reddwarf.jmc> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <MeOdncpeZacPMeD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <20220513020134.00003f42@reddwarf.jmc> <D7WdnSvo4syeK-D_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <20220513080435.00002bdc@reddwarf.jmc> <zdmdnVntirsfHeP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| Organization | Jupiter Mining Corp |
| Date | 2022-05-13 17:04 +0100 |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On Fri, 13 May 2022 11:00:01 -0500 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote: > On 5/13/2022 2:04 AM, Mr Flibble wrote: > > On Thu, 12 May 2022 20:36:02 -0500 > > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote: > > > >> On 5/12/2022 8:01 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: > >>> On Thu, 12 May 2022 19:55:44 -0500 > >>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 5/12/2022 7:06 PM, Ben wrote: > >>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes: > >>>>> > >>>>> I've removed the philosophy group and comp.lang.c as this is > >>>>> C++. > >>>>>> C/C++ people please critique this as the basis for an > >>>>>> improvement to std::deque. > >>>>> > >>>>> You will get critiques of the code on whatever basis people feel > >>>>> inclined to comment! You can't limit the comments to some > >>>>> particular context. > >>>>> > >>>>>> It seems to have the key functionality of std::deque and > >>>>>> does it much more simply while saving time and space. > >>>>> > >>>>> It does not have any of the functionality of std::deque. > >>>> > >>>> That is a ridiculously stupid thing to say. It has the key most > >>>> important functionality of a std:deque > >>>> > >>>> Double ended queue > >>>> deque (usually pronounced like "deck") is an irregular acronym of > >>>> double-ended queue. Double-ended queues are sequence containers > >>>> with dynamic sizes that can be expanded or contracted on both > >>>> ends (either its front or its back). > >>>> > >>>> All of the rest of the functionality of std::deque can be added > >>>> as needed. > >>> > >>> Not with your chosen data structure of two std::vectors it can't > >>> as it wouldn't meet the complexity > >> > >> It already has the same complexity. > >> > >>> and referential integrity > >> > >> and better referential integrity. > > > > You are a fucking obtuse idiot, mate. > > > > /Flibble > > > > Prove that it doesn't. Prove to me that you are not an idiot by explaining what happens if vector Left is empty, vector Right is non-empty and you call pop_front? Hint: as your design currently stands it will crash. /Flibble
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 17:51 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-12 23:56 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 18:09 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 00:22 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 18:38 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 00:40 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 18:49 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 00:53 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 19:12 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 01:58 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 20:34 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-05-12 21:05 -0700
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 08:02 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque tth <tth@none.invalid> - 2022-05-13 09:10 +0200
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 10:47 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-13 17:22 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-05-13 19:31 +0300
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 10:58 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 17:02 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 12:44 -0700
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-12 19:23 -0400
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 18:32 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-13 01:06 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 19:55 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 02:01 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-12 20:36 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 08:04 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 11:00 -0500
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-13 17:04 +0100
Re: Implementing a two-way Turing Machine tape as an improvement to std::deque olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 12:05 -0500
csiph-web