Re: Oozing poison

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: Oozing poison
Date	Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:01:50 +1300
Lines	64
Message-ID	<9oghluF8j0U3@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<ee928a54-720f-4beb-bdd3-2f1f112f0036@24g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> <9038aa7f-e263-4309-a67e-f70d2caafe26@t8g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <jemtb3$m61$1@dont-email.me> <9563593d-8d88-49a8-b390-e07b77d27faa@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <jfpm34$91j$1@speranza.aioe.org> <4f217fc2$0$4387$7b1e8fa0@news.nbl.fi> <ILhUq.10761$Jp3.1129@news.usenetserver.com> <jfsc2b$bkp$1@speranza.aioe.org> <T4jUq.10763$Jp3.2627@news.usenetserver.com> <9of1duF8j0U1@mid.individual.net> <MCDUq.107191$487.97@news.usenetserver.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	individual.net hYBah7Dw84KVG1Q3g8XSywys/6g2wEfNi1d9MXWDjQA6YreQ6m
Cancel-Lock	sha1:bAvYg8tHMq9EODA7V67AoVul06Q=
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; SunOS i86pc; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20111003 Thunderbird/6.0.2
In-Reply-To	<MCDUq.107191$487.97@news.usenetserver.com>
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:13611

Show key headers only | View raw

On 01/28/12 09:16 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Ian Collins<ian-news@hotmail.com>  writes:
>> On 01/27/12 09:55 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> Cholo Lennon<chololennon@hotmail.com>   writes:
>>>> On 26/01/2012 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>> The readability of C++ seems to get worse with each new version of the
>>>>> standard.   Once the<XXX>    elements (static/dynamic casts, templates) were added
>>>>> to the language, it became worse than perl for readability.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Do you think C++ cast operators go against readability? For me
>>>> is the opposite: At glance, for example, they give you more information
>>>> than the traditional C cast and, as a result, they are (IMHO) more readable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Buenas,
>>>
>>>      I think they may provide better _maintainability_ at the expense of _readability_.
>>>
>>>      It may also be that for someone coming from a C background (starting in 1978),
>>> the dynamic/static cast syntax just looks alien and out of place.
>>>
>>>      Templates and exceptions on the other hand, have a distinct impact on code size
>>> (thus icache footprint, thus performance).
>>
>> The only performance impact I have ever measured from the use of
>> exceptions is improvement.  I have been testing compilers since the mid
>> 90s and I have only found one compiler/platform (that compiler refused
>> to inline any function that could throw) where exceptions had a
>> detrimental impact on performance.
>>
>> In overall performance terms, templates are no worse and often a
>> significant improvement over the direct C equivalent (macros) because
>> they aren't necessary inlined.  They can also provide significant
>> performance improvements over another C alternative, the use of void*
>> and function pointers (sorting being the classic example).
>>
>> Yes you can end up with multiple instances of class methods, but that is
>> the price you pay for type safety.  Anyway, what proportion of a decent
>> sized project would that represent?  For containers of pointers one can
>> easily use inline wrappers round a container of void* to avoid bloat
>> while retaining type safety.  In most code I have seen, containers of T*
>> are more numerous than containers of T
>>
>> Thus with contemporary tools, the twin myths of exception performance
>> and template code bloat are just that: myths.
>
> Unless you are writing an operating system or hypervisor where every byte
> counts.

A large proportion of my work is in embedded devices, where the byte 
count is even more important!

These days of low cost, plentiful RAM, the most important factor in 
hypervisor or operating system is performance, not code size.

As I said above, if code size is an an issue, there are well known 
coding practices that can be employed to minimise it.

There are also techniques used by embedded tool chains to minimise code 
size.  However more often than not these techniques are detrimental to 
performance and should only be employed when physical resources are tight.

-- 
Ian Collins

Thread

Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 04:35 -0800
  Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-10 15:19 +0000
    Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 00:43 -0800
      Re: Oozing poison "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 10:01 +0100
        Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-11 22:09 +1300
          Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 01:42 -0800
            Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-11 13:36 +0000
              Re: Oozing poison John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2012-01-11 10:08 -0600
              Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-12 06:08 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-12 14:13 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:08 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Henrik Faber <hfaber@invalid.net> - 2012-01-17 12:50 +0100
                Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-13 02:18 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:24 -0800
      Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-11 16:50 +0000
        Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-12 06:04 -0800
          Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-12 10:13 -0500
            Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:19 -0800
              Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-17 08:04 -0500
              Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-18 13:51 +0900
                Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 04:40 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Quint Rankid <qbr567@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 09:05 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Wil Evers <bouncer@dev.null> - 2012-01-21 18:52 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Quint Rankid <qbr567@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 11:33 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 02:23 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 02:07 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-25 07:59 -0500
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 07:54 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-21 22:43 -0500
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 21:05 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-22 18:21 -0500
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-23 15:55 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-01-23 08:37 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-24 22:48 -0500
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-25 19:44 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 08:56 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-25 23:04 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 03:24 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:13 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-27 00:12 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison "MikeWhy" <boat042-nospam@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-26 22:44 -0600
                Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-28 14:25 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-02-26 22:16 -0600
              Re: Oozing poison "Gernot Frisch" <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-24 18:21 +0100
                Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-24 12:41 -0500
                Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 03:25 -0800
              Re: Oozing poison Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 19:44 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 09:44 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-26 10:36 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:18 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 20:42 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-01-26 16:30 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:24 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 17:13 -0300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 20:55 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 22:08 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 00:32 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-01-28 12:59 +0100
                Re: Oozing poison Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 18:28 -0300
                Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-29 18:02 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 20:18 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-27 18:09 +0900
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 20:29 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 10:06 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 21:26 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 12:22 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 04:18 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-28 13:44 +0900
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 21:31 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 11:32 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-28 14:55 -0800
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 11:59 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-30 17:08 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 18:06 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 22:49 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 12:22 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 20:16 +0000
                Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 10:01 +1300
                Re: Oozing poison Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-01-28 16:00 +0000
  Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-10 21:42 +0000
    Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:31 -0800

csiph-web