Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #14341

Re: Learning to code by reading code

From Mike McCarty <mcmccarty@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: Learning to code by reading code
Date 2012-02-20 15:27 -0800
Organization http://groups.google.com
Message-ID <21967632.3616.1329780456157.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbvr2> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <jhqde4$grl$1@speranza.aioe.org> <d3b454ac-ae8e-4bd6-b67e-2e8e4050f849@w4g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <jht2uv$qnq$1@speranza.aioe.org> <2bc2a617-e283-44c7-9fd3-63d2887b896e@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> <jhuhvb$6sr$1@speranza.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On Monday, February 20, 2012 4:36:39 PM UTC-6, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> "Nick Keighley" <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > exceptions, closures, continuations, modads,
> >
> > lost of stuff C doesn't provide.
> 
> Don't you mean: lots of stuff C doesn't need? ...

That's arguable but I think most C++ programmers would say "With C++ I no longer need C." - and they are correct and happy to be able to say it.

> 
> (The great majority of them do or did.  That includes C++ at one point in
> time via Cfront.  Nearly all modern dynamicly typed languages do.)

Irrelevant.  You could've written them all in assembler if you so desired.  It means nothing regarding the utility of the language.

> > in my experience compiler bugs are very rare
> 
> Well, you must not have much experience.  Or, you've just never noticed the
> errors because 1) you've never studied or verified the assembly output and
> 2) the error was never "triggered".  I've found either compilation errors or
> library coding errors with most of the C compilers I've used.  One compiler
> optimized away code that shouldn't have been, but only for one intermediate
> optimization level.  All optimization levels above or below the intermediate
> level worked correctly.  Another had type conversion errors in the assembly
> when a specific type was used with any other type.  In one library, an
> erroneously coded function was supposed to return three states, but returned
> only two.  Issues like these were not found in compilers where you'd expect
> them, say SmallC, but in quality compilers, like GNU C, OpenWatcom, etc.
> The problem with not looking at the assembly is that errors can exist for
> exceptionally long time periods before being noticed.

This is all very likely true but... what's your point?  That software is buggy?  That proving your program is bug-free is hard/impossible?  

To hell with the buggy compiler, the OS is buggy.  
To hell with the OS, the device drivers are buggy.  
To hell with the device drivers, the hardware is buggy.  

At what level of abstraction are you going to stop in your futile effort to prove that your program will execute correctly?

Earlier you stated:
> What if you missed something you could've caught had you
simply just read the assembly? 

What if you missed something because you wasted all of your time analyzing assembler?  Which of these two scenarios do you suppose is more likely to happen?

Every once in a while, a colleague of mine will make some comment about adding some needless syntactic sugar to some code "just in case the compiler screws it up".  99 times out of 100, I respond "Well, if the compiler screws this up, we have much bigger problems than just this little bit of code."  You can't predict bugs.  If you could, the bugs probably wouldn't exist in the first place.

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The way to read STL source code Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 23:18 -0800
  Re: The way to read STL source code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-17 07:29 +0000
    Re: The way to read STL source code Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 00:56 -0800
      Re: The way to read STL source code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-17 01:11 -0800
      Re: The way to read STL source code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-17 12:31 +0000
        Re: The way to read STL source code Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-02-17 16:35 +0000
          Re: The way to read STL source code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-17 20:38 +0000
            Re: The way to read STL source code Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-02-21 21:17 +0000
        Re: The way to read STL source code Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 16:55 -0800
          Re: The way to read STL source code Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-18 14:13 +1300
          Re: Learning to code by reading code (was: The way to read STL source code) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-18 19:00 -0500
            Re: Learning to code by reading code "MikeWhy" <boat042-nospam@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-18 22:34 -0600
            Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-19 03:54 -0500
              Re: Learning to code by reading code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-02-19 10:42 +0100
              Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-20 03:39 -0500
            Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-19 03:54 -0500
              Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-19 08:40 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "MikeWhy" <boat042-nospam@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-19 13:17 -0600
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-20 02:32 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-20 13:02 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-20 05:09 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-20 15:11 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-20 07:39 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-20 04:14 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-02-20 11:14 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-20 02:49 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-20 13:02 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-20 05:18 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-02-20 13:53 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-21 01:32 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-21 16:16 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-21 08:40 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-20 17:36 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Mike McCarty <mcmccarty@gmail.com> - 2012-02-20 15:27 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-02-21 00:45 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-21 04:35 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-21 08:48 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-22 00:12 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-22 06:12 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-22 04:30 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2012-02-22 10:45 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-23 01:12 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-23 07:34 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-23 05:46 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:38 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:40 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-24 09:38 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-25 05:25 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-02-25 12:50 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-25 06:13 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-02-26 07:20 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-21 08:23 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-21 08:43 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-21 04:47 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-21 10:09 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-22 05:38 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-21 04:31 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-02-21 10:05 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-02-21 12:21 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-22 06:04 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-02-21 11:01 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-22 05:59 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-21 01:27 -0800
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2012-02-20 22:25 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-02-26 08:47 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-02-26 10:55 +0000
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-02-22 08:59 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-22 05:59 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-02-22 13:47 +0100
                Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-23 06:21 -0500
                Re: Learning to code by reading code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-22 00:08 -0800
            Re: Learning to code by reading code "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2012-02-19 03:54 -0500
              Re: Learning to code by reading code Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2012-02-19 05:24 -0800
            Re: Learning to code by reading code Marco van de Voort <marcov@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-19 11:27 +0000
          Re: Learning to code by reading code (was: The way to read STL source code) Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2012-02-18 20:02 -0800
            Re: Learning to code by reading code (was: The way to read STL source code) 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-02-18 21:51 -0800
            Re: Learning to code by reading code (was: The way to read STL source code) "Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk> - 2012-02-19 16:10 +0100
          Re: The way to read STL source code Mark Elston <m.elston@advantest-ard.com> - 2012-02-21 16:40 -0800
    Re: The way to read STL source code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-17 01:06 -0800
  Re: The way to read STL source code Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2012-02-16 23:36 -0800
    Re: The way to read STL source code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-17 01:12 -0800
      Re: The way to read STL source code Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 03:57 -0800
        Re: The way to read STL source code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-17 05:15 -0800
          Re: The way to read STL source code Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 06:02 -0800
          Re: The way to read STL source code Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2012-02-17 17:08 -0800
            Re: The way to read STL source code Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-02-19 16:52 +0100
  Re: The way to read STL source code Krice <paulkp@mbnet.fi> - 2012-02-24 00:38 -0800
  Re: The way to read STL source code 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-02-25 10:46 -0800
    Re: The way to read STL source code 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-02-26 14:57 -0800
    Re: The way to read STL source code Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-27 03:02 -0800

csiph-web