Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #120154 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-09-21 15:43 -0400 |
| Last post | 2024-09-25 15:23 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 258 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-21 15:43 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 08:06 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 10:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 08:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:03 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 09:08 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:51 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 15:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 07:39 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 10:54 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 09:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 11:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 13:56 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 14:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-23 15:48 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:52 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-23 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 07:20 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 09:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 08:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:17 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:52 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 12:54 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:05 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 11:07 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 13:51 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 15:56 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 15:43 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 17:48 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 07:19 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 11:30 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 09:49 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 08:24 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 11:32 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 11:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:30 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:43 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:50 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:22 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:12 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:35 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 19:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 11:36 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 13:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 13:31 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 13:52 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:06 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:22 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 11:12 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:30 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:01 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:23 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:36 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:39 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:04 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 17:14 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 16:23 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:18 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:26 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 21:24 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 20:37 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 13:49 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:03 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 15:17 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 15:49 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:52 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:55 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:08 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:24 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:28 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:44 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 14:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:49 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:34 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 10:20 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:46 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:51 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 11:20 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:17 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:27 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:32 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-26 12:23 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 11:25 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:20 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 10:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 14:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-27 02:27 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-27 11:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-27 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-27 15:25 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-27 18:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 09:12 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-28 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-29 13:41 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-29 13:48 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-29 14:49 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-29 11:23 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com - 2024-09-30 07:26 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 07:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 12:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-30 17:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 10:57 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-30 05:29 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-30 14:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 15:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 16:00 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 16:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-30 19:43 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:31 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 11:01 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 10:06 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:58 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 12:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:14 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 19:43 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 07:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 09:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:57 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-30 10:18 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 19:51 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 10:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 10:42 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 12:53 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 10:02 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 13:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:13 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 21:50 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-01 20:06 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts User <noreply@user.com> - 2024-10-02 05:47 +0100
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-04 06:52 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-04 13:57 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-02 13:02 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-04 06:57 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-06 14:19 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-06 14:22 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-07 09:11 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-07 22:53 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-08 18:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-08 22:48 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 00:12 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 01:06 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 08:25 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-09 08:28 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 10:26 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-09 09:31 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 13:58 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 14:39 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 19:59 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 22:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-10 11:47 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-11 04:58 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-11 16:03 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-12 07:41 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-12 08:18 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-11 03:57 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-07 19:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 07:13 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 13:06 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 10:01 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 13:08 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 19:44 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:56 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 13:01 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-29 15:00 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-29 14:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-29 15:42 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-29 15:47 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-28 04:28 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 13:55 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:33 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 17:16 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 16:22 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:34 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:27 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 22:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:38 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 10:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 10:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:29 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 14:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:17 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:07 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-26 18:22 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:55 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:50 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 12:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-22 07:58 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 14:10 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 11:08 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 15:21 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 17:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 07:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 10:55 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 09:33 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 13:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:02 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 14:05 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:10 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 12:55 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 16:24 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 14:43 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 18:59 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:06 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:10 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-24 09:15 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 07:23 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 09:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 08:14 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:18 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-24 08:59 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 15:02 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:37 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Jack <noreply@mandrill.com> - 2024-09-23 00:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 08:48 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-22 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 13:35 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:43 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-22 17:00 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-22 14:50 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 10:32 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:55 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-23 08:11 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 08:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-25 15:23 -0400
Page 7 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 Next page →
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-29 13:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vdbepn$1o405$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120446 |
Am 29.09.2024 um 13:41 schrieb David Brown: > The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not /values/. > I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety of languages > (including functional programming languages), but have not heard the > phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to get /you/ to say > what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you and a few other > people use for pattern matching. I think when it's not in Wikipedia, it's not a common term.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-29 14:49 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240929144913.000051e4@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #120446 |
On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 13:41:27 +0200 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > On 28/09/2024 17:47, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: > > On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 17:33:46 +0200 > > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled: > >> On 28/09/2024 11:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: > >>> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:24:11 +0200 > >>> Not sure how that differs with value polymorphism. > >>> > >> > >> I explained that - look at my answer below for another attempt. > > > > No you didn't because like Bonita you have no idea what value > > polymorphism is. > > > The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not > /values/. I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety > of languages (including functional programming languages), but have > not heard the phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to > get /you/ to say what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you > and a few other people use for pattern matching. > May be, 'polymorphism by type of return value' is what he has in mind?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-29 11:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <861q122ua0.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #120448 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
> On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 13:41:27 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>
>> On 28/09/2024 17:47, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 17:33:46 +0200
>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled:
>>>
>>>> On 28/09/2024 11:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:24:11 +0200
>>>>> Not sure how that differs with value polymorphism.
>>>>
>>>> I explained that - look at my answer below for another attempt.
>>>
>>> No you didn't because like Bonita you have no idea what value
>>> polymorphism is.
>>
>> The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not
>> /values/. I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety
>> of languages (including functional programming languages), but have
>> not heard the phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to
>> get /you/ to say what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you
>> and a few other people use for pattern matching.
>
> May be, 'polymorphism by type of return value' is what he has in mind?
In a previous posting Muttley cited this url:
https://chrisdone.com/posts/value-polymorphism/
In a different previous posting Muttley gave this example (slightly
reformatted for line length):
def main(argv) ->
func("",["hello","cruel","world","this","is","a","test"])
: 0
;
def func(_,[]) -> "";
def func(_,[head<tail]) ->
printnl head,",",tail : func(head[0],tail);
def func("world",[head<tail]) ->
printnl "GOT WORLD" : func(head,tail);
It's not clear what programming language is intended here. Based on
my experience with other functional languages, it looks like this
example is (a) defined wrongly, (b) wouldn't compile because of a
type mismatch, and (c) is not polymorphic. But of course we can't
be sure without knowing more about what language is intended.
The web page does use the phrase "value polymorphism", but it's
about something else altogether. The programming language Haskell
has a facility that might be called "variable overloading". It's
like what C or C++ would be if they allowed, for example:
int poly;
double poly[10];
and later on in the program a declaration such as
double *p = poly;
would know to use the double array 'poly', because the other 'poly'
doesn't type check.
My guess is Muttley is out of his depth and doesn't really know what
he means by these different phrases. But I found it impossible to
tell because in his postings he doesn't interact in any meaningful
way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 07:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vddjqc$257hc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120456 |
On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 11:23:51 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> boring babbled:
>Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
> def main(argv) ->
> func("",["hello","cruel","world","this","is","a","test"])
> : 0
> ;
>
> def func(_,[]) -> "";
>
> def func(_,[head<tail]) ->
> printnl head,",",tail : func(head[0],tail);
>
> def func("world",[head<tail]) ->
> printnl "GOT WORLD" : func(head,tail);
>
>It's not clear what programming language is intended here. Based on
>my experience with other functional languages, it looks like this
>example is (a) defined wrongly, (b) wouldn't compile because of a
>type mismatch, and (c) is not polymorphic. But of course we can't
>be sure without knowing more about what language is intended.
Christ you are so up your own arrogant backside. It was a language used in
a specialist task, it wasn't made public. Here your go smartass:
fenris$ cat testprogs/functional3.fl
def main(argv) ->
func("",["hello","cruel","world","this","is","a","test"])
: 0
;
def func(_,[]) -> "";
def func(_,[head<tail]) -> printnl head,",",tail : func(head[0],tail);
def func("world",[head<tail]) ->
printnl "GOT WORLD" : func(head,tail);
fenris$ fling < progs/functional3.fl
['hello'],['hello']['cruel','world','this','is','a','test']
['cruel'],['cruel']['world','this','is','a','test']
['world'],['world']['this','is','a','test']
GOT WORLD
['is'],['is']['a','test']
['a'],['a']['test']
['test'],['test'][]
fenris$
>The web page does use the phrase "value polymorphism", but it's
Its not only in the URL , its on the first bloody line! Are you a complete
idiot??
>My guess is Muttley is out of his depth and doesn't really know what
LOL! Look in the mirror mate!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 07:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vddkki$25aqg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120469 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 07:26:04 -0000 (UTC) Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com boring babbled: >fenris$ cat testprogs/functional3.fl >fenris$ fling < progs/functional3.fl And before anyone mentions progs vs testprogs, its a soft link: fenris$ ls -ld testprogs lrwxr-xr-x 1 la332 staff 5 30 Jan 2019 testprogs -> progs
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 12:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vddu9c$26mnv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120469 |
On 30/09/2024 09:26, Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com wrote: > On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 11:23:51 -0700 > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> boring babbled: >> But of course we can't >> be sure without knowing more about what language is intended. > > It was a language used in > a specialist task, it wasn't made public. > Oh, that makes it /much/ clearer. Basically, you use "value polymorphism" as your own private term, and have tried to explain it using a link to a web page describing something entirely different, and some example code in your own private language. Time to drop this, I think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vdeh5p$29ria$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120472 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:24:43 +0200 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> boring babbled: >On 30/09/2024 09:26, Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com wrote: >> On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 11:23:51 -0700 >> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> boring babbled: > >>> But of course we can't >>> be sure without knowing more about what language is intended. >> >> It was a language used in >> a specialist task, it wasn't made public. >> > >Oh, that makes it /much/ clearer. Its a pretty clear language using similar constructs to other functional languages so I have no idea what your comprehension problem is. >Time to drop this, I think. Yes, best before you and some others make total fools of yourselves. You're so stuck in the C++ programming paradigm your minds can't cope with one completely different.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 17:58 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vdehrl$29uai$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120476 |
Am 30.09.2024 um 17:47 schrieb Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org: > Yes, best before you and some others make total fools of yourselves. You're > so stuck in the C++ programming paradigm your minds can't cope with one > completely different. The term value polymorphism is your invention.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 10:57 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vddp69$25tmd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120456 |
On 29/09/2024 20:23, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 13:41:27 +0200
>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/09/2024 17:47, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 17:33:46 +0200
>>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled:
>>>>
>>>>> On 28/09/2024 11:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:24:11 +0200
>>>>>> Not sure how that differs with value polymorphism.
>>>>>
>>>>> I explained that - look at my answer below for another attempt.
>>>>
>>>> No you didn't because like Bonita you have no idea what value
>>>> polymorphism is.
>>>
>>> The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not
>>> /values/. I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety
>>> of languages (including functional programming languages), but have
>>> not heard the phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to
>>> get /you/ to say what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you
>>> and a few other people use for pattern matching.
>>
>> May be, 'polymorphism by type of return value' is what he has in mind?
>
> In a previous posting Muttley cited this url:
>
> https://chrisdone.com/posts/value-polymorphism/
>
> In a different previous posting Muttley gave this example (slightly
> reformatted for line length):
>
> def main(argv) ->
> func("",["hello","cruel","world","this","is","a","test"])
> : 0
> ;
>
> def func(_,[]) -> "";
>
> def func(_,[head<tail]) ->
> printnl head,",",tail : func(head[0],tail);
>
> def func("world",[head<tail]) ->
> printnl "GOT WORLD" : func(head,tail);
>
> It's not clear what programming language is intended here. Based on
> my experience with other functional languages, it looks like this
> example is (a) defined wrongly, (b) wouldn't compile because of a
> type mismatch, and (c) is not polymorphic. But of course we can't
> be sure without knowing more about what language is intended.
>
> The web page does use the phrase "value polymorphism", but it's
> about something else altogether. The programming language Haskell
> has a facility that might be called "variable overloading". It's
> like what C or C++ would be if they allowed, for example:
>
> int poly;
> double poly[10];
>
> and later on in the program a declaration such as
>
> double *p = poly;
>
> would know to use the double array 'poly', because the other 'poly'
> doesn't type check.
>
You can get some way towards all this with template variables in C++,
and with classes with templated type conversion operators to give return
type overloading. But typically you need a bit more explicit mention of
the type than is described in that web page or your example, and that's
perhaps no bad thing.
For the "poly" case, you can write :
typedef double double_array[10];
template <typename T> T poly;
template<> int poly<int>;
template<> double_array poly<double_array>;
double * p = poly<double_array>;
You'll get a compile-time error if the last line uses a poly<T> of an
incompatible type, but you do need an explicit type. There could, after
all, be many poly instances that are compatible with assignment to
double*, and IMHO it's better that you have to be explicit rather than
having the language determine the "best" choice in some way.
You can also do something like this :
struct Poly {
template <typename T> static T poly_imp;
template <typename T> operator T () { return poly_imp<T>; }
};
Poly poly;
template <> int Poly::poly_imp<int> = 123;
int xx = poly;
double * p = poly;
auto q = (std::array<double, 10>) poly;
> My guess is Muttley is out of his depth and doesn't really know what
> he means by these different phrases. But I found it impossible to
> tell because in his postings he doesn't interact in any meaningful
> way.
So it's not just me that thinks this.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 05:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86jzet1g0x.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #120448 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 13:41:27 +0200 > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > >> On 28/09/2024 17:47, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 17:33:46 +0200 >>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled: >>> >>>> On 28/09/2024 11:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:24:11 +0200 >>>>> Not sure how that differs with value polymorphism. >>>> >>>> I explained that - look at my answer below for another attempt. >>> >>> No you didn't because like Bonita you have no idea what value >>> polymorphism is. >> >> The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not >> /values/. I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety >> of languages (including functional programming languages), but have >> not heard the phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to >> get /you/ to say what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you >> and a few other people use for pattern matching. > > May be, 'polymorphism by type of return value' is what he has in mind? We have now learned from a subsequent posting that the language used in the example Muttley gave "was a language used in a specialist task, it wasn't made public." So we aren't able to draw any conclusions about what he meant (and apparently that has been his intention all along - any attempt to elicit more information has resulted in insults and nothing more).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 14:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vde5s5$2856d$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120473 |
Am 30.09.2024 um 14:29 schrieb Tim Rentsch: > We have now learned from a subsequent posting that the language used > in the example Muttley gave "was a language used in a specialist > task, it wasn't made public." So we aren't able to draw any > conclusions about what he meant (and apparently that has been his > intention all along - any attempt to elicit more information has > resulted in insults and nothing more). He works specifically for the secret service with secret technologies so that he cannot be refuted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 15:21 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vde8ki$28003$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120448 |
On 29/09/2024 13:49, Michael S wrote: > On Sun, 29 Sep 2024 13:41:27 +0200 > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > >> On 28/09/2024 17:47, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 17:33:46 +0200 >>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled: >>>> On 28/09/2024 11:12, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 18:24:11 +0200 >>>>> Not sure how that differs with value polymorphism. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I explained that - look at my answer below for another attempt. >>> >>> No you didn't because like Bonita you have no idea what value >>> polymorphism is. >> >> >> The term "polymorphism" is used in reference to /types/, not >> /values/. I am not new to programming, and have used a large variety >> of languages (including functional programming languages), but have >> not heard the phrase "value polymorphism" before. So I am trying to >> get /you/ to say what /you/ mean by it. Maybe it's just a name you >> and a few other people use for pattern matching. >> > > May be, 'polymorphism by type of return value' is what he has in mind? > Certainly that is an established kind of polymorphism, and pretty much the only hit when googling "value polymorphism" is "return value polymorphism". It is found in Ada, Haskell, and Rust (I think). You can also do it in C++, at least to some extent, by making types with conversion operators to different types. (It can be used in expression templates, for example.) But that does not at all fit with the examples he gave in his "specialist" language, which was just pattern matching. It fits better with the link he gave, though that was more like C++ template variables. I think Tim's conclusion that Muttley is confused is more likely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 16:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vdehu2$29uog$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120475 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:21:22 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> boring babbled:
>Certainly that is an established kind of polymorphism, and pretty much
>the only hit when googling "value polymorphism" is "return value
>polymorphism". It is found in Ada, Haskell, and Rust (I think). You
>can also do it in C++, at least to some extent, by making types with
>conversion operators to different types. (It can be used in expression
>templates, for example.)
>
>But that does not at all fit with the examples he gave in his
>"specialist" language, which was just pattern matching. It fits better
>with the link he gave, though that was more like C++ template variables.
>
>I think Tim's conclusion that Muttley is confused is more likely.
Please explain what you find so complicated about a polymorphic function
call being based on the VALUE of one or more parameters passed to it rather
than the type of parameter? Imagine in C++ if you could do:
void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
int main()
{
for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
func("hello");
func("world");
}
I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that would run
now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 16:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vdeif2$2a1tg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120478 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org boring babbled:
>void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
Before the pedants pile in, yes it would have to be:
void func(int i == 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
for c++. Typed it on the fly so...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-30 19:43 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20240930194343.00005a04@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #120478 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:21:22 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> boring babbled:
> >Certainly that is an established kind of polymorphism, and pretty
> >much the only hit when googling "value polymorphism" is "return
> >value polymorphism". It is found in Ada, Haskell, and Rust (I
> >think). You can also do it in C++, at least to some extent, by
> >making types with conversion operators to different types. (It can
> >be used in expression templates, for example.)
> >
> >But that does not at all fit with the examples he gave in his
> >"specialist" language, which was just pattern matching. It fits
> >better with the link he gave, though that was more like C++ template
> >variables.
> >
> >I think Tim's conclusion that Muttley is confused is more likely.
>
> Please explain what you find so complicated about a polymorphic
> function call being based on the VALUE of one or more parameters
> passed to it rather than the type of parameter? Imagine in C++ if you
> could do:
>
> void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
> void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
> void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
> void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
> void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
>
> int main()
> {
> for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
> func("hello");
> func("world");
> }
>
> I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that
> would run now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
>
You forgot to mention what you expect as an output.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-10-01 07:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vdg8h7$2l5mv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120480 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:43:43 +0300
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> boring babbled:
>On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
>> void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
>> void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
>> void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
>> void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
>> void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
>> func("hello");
>> func("world");
>> }
>>
>> I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that
>> would run now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
>>
>
>You forgot to mention what you expect as an output.
You seriously can't figure it out?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-10-01 11:01 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <20241001110129.000061f6@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #120489 |
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 07:31:51 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:43:43 +0300
> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> boring babbled:
> >On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
> >Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
> >> void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
> >> void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
> >> void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
> >> void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
> >> void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
> >>
> >> int main()
> >> {
> >> for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
> >> func("hello");
> >> func("world");
> >> }
> >>
> >> I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that
> >> would run now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
> >>
> >
> >You forgot to mention what you expect as an output.
>
> You seriously can't figure it out?
>
No, I can't.
I see two possibilities and don't know which one was chosen by
definitions of your private language.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-10-01 10:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vdgahd$2ldir$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120493 |
Am 01.10.2024 um 10:01 schrieb Michael S:
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 07:31:51 -0000 (UTC)
> Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:43:43 +0300
>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> boring babbled:
>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
>>>> void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
>>>> void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
>>>> void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
>>>> void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
>>>> void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>> for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
>>>> func("hello");
>>>> func("world");
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that
>>>> would run now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You forgot to mention what you expect as an output.
>>
>> You seriously can't figure it out?
>>
>
> No, I can't.
> I see two possibilities and don't know which one was chosen by
> definitions of your private language.
There's no output but may compiler errors because the code defines
three identical overloads for the int call and twi identical overloads
for the string call.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-10-01 09:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vdgh4p$2mcll$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120494 |
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 10:06:17 +0200
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boring babbled:
>Am 01.10.2024 um 10:01 schrieb Michael S:
>> On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 07:31:51 -0000 (UTC)
>> Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:43:43 +0300
>>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> boring babbled:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:00:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:
>>>>> void func(int i = 1) { cout << "One\n"; }
>>>>> void func(int i = 2) { cout << "Two\n"; }
>>>>> void func(string s = "hello") { cout << "Hello!\n"; }
>>>>> void func(int i) { cout << "Int default\n"; }
>>>>> void func(string s) { cout << "String default\n"; }
>>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>> for(int i=0;i < 5;++i) func(i);
>>>>> func("hello");
>>>>> func("world");
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure even a thickheads like you and Rensch can figure how that
>>>>> would run now it has your familiar comfy C++ syntax.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You forgot to mention what you expect as an output.
>>>
>>> You seriously can't figure it out?
>>>
>>
>> No, I can't.
>> I see two possibilities and don't know which one was chosen by
>> definitions of your private language.
>
>There's no output but may compiler errors because the code defines
>three identical overloads for the int call and twi identical overloads
>for the string call.
Because its not valid C++! I was using modified C++ syntax to keep people happy
since they couldn't figure out the syntax of the functional language I used.
I'm beginning to wonder if I'm talking to bots.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-10-01 12:58 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vdgkkc$2muco$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120500 |
Am 01.10.2024 um 11:58 schrieb Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org: > Because its not valid C++! I was using modified C++ syntax to keep people happy > since they couldn't figure out the syntax of the functional language I used. Talk about real languages an not languages you've invented ad-hoc. The code you've shown doesn't make sense at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web