Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #67978 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-08-28 16:11 -0500 |
| Last post | 2019-09-09 01:09 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 165 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
"“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2019-08-28 16:11 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-29 02:36 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 11:02 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-29 22:21 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 13:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-29 23:35 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-29 20:00 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-08-29 13:29 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:04 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-08-29 23:11 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 10:14 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 07:42 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 14:54 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:07 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 05:14 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-29 06:08 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:10 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 01:00 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:16 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 01:26 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 06:30 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:59 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-30 07:42 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 14:44 +0000
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:07 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 17:13 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 14:53 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-08-29 13:14 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-29 15:38 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:09 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-09-04 08:31 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-05 16:55 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 13:28 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-06 02:36 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 08:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 08:38 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 08:51 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:18 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:31 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 10:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 10:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 11:41 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 11:56 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-30 13:08 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 13:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2019-08-31 18:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 18:21 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-31 23:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 05:16 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-01 03:21 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 12:25 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 12:35 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-09-01 04:13 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-01 23:18 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 14:04 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 07:20 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 16:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-01 18:22 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-01 15:23 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 22:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 06:47 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 11:12 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 17:52 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-02 18:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 13:05 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-02 19:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-02 17:16 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 06:49 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 08:31 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 08:39 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 09:06 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 09:19 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 10:30 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-09-03 07:11 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 13:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 15:29 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 15:42 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 15:51 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-03 17:35 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 17:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-09-03 18:51 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 20:03 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 21:53 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:42 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-05 16:56 +0000
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 11:07 -0700
Re: Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-05 19:23 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-06 08:25 +0200
Re: Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-18 16:55 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 07:10 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-06 17:16 +1200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-03 20:33 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:38 +0200
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2019-09-03 22:08 +0000
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:41 +0200
Re: "?Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly?: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:13 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 21:50 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-09-03 22:43 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-09-03 11:03 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 12:16 -0700
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-03 20:35 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 22:49 -0700
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 00:20 -0700
Re: Comments on third parties Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-09-07 06:59 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-05 17:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 09:03 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-09-05 20:18 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-09-05 17:16 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2019-09-05 14:40 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-06 10:05 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:33 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-03 22:14 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2019-09-04 10:47 +1000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-04 16:56 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-04 09:37 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2019-09-05 22:02 -0400
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-08-31 13:20 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-08-31 23:45 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-30 14:08 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 13:37 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 13:48 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-30 15:18 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 14:24 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 16:23 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 14:40 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 16:57 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 19:19 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 03:05 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-31 12:18 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 11:43 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-08-31 17:17 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-31 16:28 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 00:06 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2019-09-01 15:49 +0300
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-01 16:12 +0200
Error handling strategies (was: Rust is the future of systems programming C is the new Assembly) legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 20:14 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-08 20:29 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Mel <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2019-08-30 15:42 +0200
Re: "???Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly???: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-08-30 21:03 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-31 09:42 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-08-30 23:53 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 06:24 -0500
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-06 13:51 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-06 22:03 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-07 10:57 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 18:17 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 18:48 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-09-08 12:40 +1200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-09-09 08:59 +0200
Re: Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-09-09 16:35 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-09-07 18:09 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2019-09-07 15:32 -0500
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-08-31 04:50 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2019-09-03 18:39 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-03 20:46 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2019-09-04 01:07 +0100
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" William Ahern <william@25thandClement.com> - 2019-09-03 20:04 -0700
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2019-09-04 06:46 +0200
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-09-04 04:48 +0000
Re: "“Rust is the future of systems programming, C is the new Assembly”: Intel principal engineer, Josh Triplett" "Chris M. Thomasson " <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-09-09 01:09 -0700
Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 22:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <U7BbF.103692$3s7.92204@fx01.fr7> |
| In reply to | #68176 |
On 03/09/2019 20:50, David Brown wrote: > On 03/09/2019 19:51, Mr Flibble wrote: >> On 03/09/2019 14:29, David Brown wrote: >>> have a project coming up with 2K flash and 128 byte ram on the device. >> >> Such a device sounds fucktarded this day and age. Get a better device or >> ask your employer to stop trolling you. >> > > It is an entirely suitable device for the task in hand. It has plenty of > flash and ram, has the required peripherals, is physically small (but not > /too/ small), and costs about $0.35. There is a good, free C and C++ > compiler (not entirely standards conforming, as you might expect - such as > no exception support). It is the best device for the job. That's why I > picked it. > > However, if you know my job better than me, know the microcontroller world > better than me, know my customer better than me, and know this particular > project and its requirements better than me, then maybe I should follow > your advice. What would you recommend? An embedded Linux card, for > example, so that it can run your gui library? It shouldn't increase the > cost of the system by more than a few orders of magnitude, and the > customer will surely be happy with a wallet-sized solution rather than a > coin-sized solution. > > Or perhaps you simply haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about? No I don't think you should choose a solution just so you can use a "gui library" as that would be just as fucktarded as your decision to use this antiquated technology. You chose wrong. /Flibble -- "Snakes didn't evolve, instead talking snakes with legs changed into snakes." - Rick C. Hodgin “You won’t burn in hell. But be nice anyway.” – Ricky Gervais “I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn’t believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens.” – Ricky Gervais "Suppose it's all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?" "I'd say, bone cancer in children? What's that about?" Fry replied. "How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault. It's not right, it's utterly, utterly evil." "Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That's what I would say."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 09:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qknoqo$6sk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68187 |
On 03/09/2019 23:43, Mr Flibble wrote: > On 03/09/2019 20:50, David Brown wrote: >> On 03/09/2019 19:51, Mr Flibble wrote: >>> On 03/09/2019 14:29, David Brown wrote: >>>> have a project coming up with 2K flash and 128 byte ram on the device. >>> >>> Such a device sounds fucktarded this day and age. Get a better device >>> or ask your employer to stop trolling you. >>> >> >> It is an entirely suitable device for the task in hand. It has plenty >> of flash and ram, has the required peripherals, is physically small >> (but not /too/ small), and costs about $0.35. There is a good, free C >> and C++ compiler (not entirely standards conforming, as you might >> expect - such as no exception support). It is the best device for the >> job. That's why I picked it. >> >> However, if you know my job better than me, know the microcontroller >> world better than me, know my customer better than me, and know this >> particular project and its requirements better than me, then maybe I >> should follow your advice. What would you recommend? An embedded >> Linux card, for example, so that it can run your gui library? It >> shouldn't increase the cost of the system by more than a few orders of >> magnitude, and the customer will surely be happy with a wallet-sized >> solution rather than a coin-sized solution. >> >> Or perhaps you simply haven't the faintest idea what you are talking >> about? > > No I don't think you should choose a solution just so you can use a "gui > library" as that would be just as fucktarded as your decision to use > this antiquated technology. You chose wrong. > The device I picked is less than two years old. It is okay to be ignorant of technology outside your usual field. It is not okay to assume that you do, when it is clearly totally alien to you. Now you get to choose. You can accept that some people are knowledgeable and experienced in fields that are beyond your own understanding. Or you can write another silly, rude, arrogant response to further confirm that you don't appreciate your own limitations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 11:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnftldw93b.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #68160 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
> On 03/09/2019 13:17, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> I don't believe you.
>>
>>> The fact that you haven't encountered significantly tight real-time
>>> requirements doesn't mean they don't exist.
>>
>> The folks here are Nerds without any experience on that.
>
> And you base that on what evidence?
[...]
David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this
person?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 12:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d7e485a6-b5e4-41ca-a442-577791db3be7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68172 |
On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 2:03:47 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: > > David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this > person? > Not wasting everyone's time with arguments, at least not mine, as I don't have experience programming on small devices, have limited real time experience, and appreciate David's informed perspective. On the other hand, I would suggest that writings along the lines of "ignorant ... blind, stubborn, willful and insistent ignorance ..." is unnecessary, as of course is "liar", not to mention "fucktarded". I would say "this person" is in many respects a very capable programmer, judging from her other postings. Best regards, Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 20:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <J8AbF.375518$yU1.173995@fx06.iad> |
| In reply to | #68175 |
Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> writes: >On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 2:03:47 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: >> >> David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this >> person? >> >Not wasting everyone's time with arguments, at least not mine, as I don't have >experience programming on small devices, have limited real time experience, >and appreciate David's informed perspective. On the other hand, I would >suggest that writings along the lines of "ignorant ... blind, stubborn, >willful and insistent ignorance ..." is unnecessary, as of course is "liar", >not to mention "fucktarded". I would say "this person" is in many respects a >very capable programmer, judging from her other postings. Funny, I get the opposite impression. She seems to be a "my way or the highway" programmer; someone with strongly held, but poorly justified positions who won't mesh well with any competent programming team.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 22:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <qknj9j$1q9g$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #68186 |
On 9/3/2019 1:35 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 2:03:47 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> >>> David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this >>> person? >>> >> Not wasting everyone's time with arguments, at least not mine, as I don't have >> experience programming on small devices, have limited real time experience, >> and appreciate David's informed perspective. On the other hand, I would >> suggest that writings along the lines of "ignorant ... blind, stubborn, >> willful and insistent ignorance ..." is unnecessary, as of course is "liar", >> not to mention "fucktarded". I would say "this person" is in many respects a >> very capable programmer, judging from her other postings. > > Funny, I get the opposite impression. She seems to be a "my way or the > highway" programmer; someone with strongly held, but poorly justified > positions who won't mesh well with any competent programming > team. > Very Pointed Ears? I hope not, in a sense. She has to be able to blend into a team. Learn its way of doing things, even down to the syntactic sugar it uses. styles... CamelCase? Okay, fine with me. Pascal, pascalCase, CamelCase? whatever. I can adapt to the teams coding quirks. How about the underscores, like POSIX? well_this_is_how_we_do_it, pthread_mutex_t... No problem. ;^) It does not matter. I am lucky enough to be part of the team in the first place. ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 00:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8c261175-782a-4bed-8eb6-f32c066500af@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68186 |
On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 4:36:02 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Funny, I get the opposite impression. True or not, it's not necessary to share these impressions, it doesn't contribute to civil discourse. That wouldn't have been allowed, for example, on comp.lang.c++.moderated, and some self moderation is always appropriate. If the arguments are sound, it shouldn't be necessary to supplement them with statements about how stupid or pig headed the other person is. Or as they say, when Peter talks about Paul, we learn more about Peter than we do about Paul. Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-07 06:59 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Comments on third parties |
| Message-ID | <86ef0sw6km.fsf_-_@mailhub.linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #68204 |
Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> writes: > On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 4:36:02 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote: > >> Funny, I get the opposite impression. > > True or not, it's not necessary to share these impressions, [...] It was you giving your impression that started it. If you think other people shouldn't do something then you shouldn't do it either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Manfred <noname@add.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 17:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkr8tf$e22$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #68186 |
On 9/3/2019 10:35 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 2:03:47 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> >>> David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this >>> person? >>> >> Not wasting everyone's time with arguments, at least not mine, as I don't have >> experience programming on small devices, have limited real time experience, >> and appreciate David's informed perspective. On the other hand, I would >> suggest that writings along the lines of "ignorant ... blind, stubborn, >> willful and insistent ignorance ..." is unnecessary, as of course is "liar", >> not to mention "fucktarded". I would say "this person" is in many respects a >> very capable programmer, judging from her other postings. > > Funny, I get the opposite impression. She seems to be a "my way or the > highway" programmer; someone with strongly held, but poorly justified > positions who won't mesh well with any competent programming > team. > My impression too. This is nowhere near my experience of a "very capable programmer" > > True or not, it's not necessary to share these impressions, It may be worth when it's about wrong statements being pushed as lessons of truth. The fact is that it is obviously impossible (and to a point thus pointless) to correct every mistake that is published on the internet. it doesn't > contribute to civil discourse. That wouldn't have been allowed, for example, > on comp.lang.c++.moderated, and some self moderation is always appropriate. If > the arguments are sound, it shouldn't be necessary to supplement them with > statements about how stupid or pig headed the other person is. Or as they say, > when Peter talks about Paul, we learn more about Peter than we do about Paul. It may be worth noting that it is Bonita herself that enjoys insulting the interlocutor in the first place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 09:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <333a5ea7-16bc-45ea-b858-a1733793d982@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68227 |
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 11:17:16 AM UTC-4, Manfred wrote: > It may be worth [it] I don't think so, civility matters. Even the C++ heavyweights, the heaviest of heavy, have been the recipients of derogatory comments on this group, and most no longer come here. It's unnecessary, arguments speak for themselves, derogatory comments drive people away. And as Bonita is possibly the only member of the female persuasion still active on this group, I think it would be a shame if that happened. Personally I find Bonita's posts a welcome breath of fresh air, I may be a minority of one, but perhaps not. Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Manfred <noname@add.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 20:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkrjgo$1jd$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #68229 |
On 9/5/2019 6:03 PM, Daniel wrote: > On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 11:17:16 AM UTC-4, Manfred wrote: > >> It may be worth [it] Bad grammar, sorry about that. > > I don't think so, civility matters. Even the C++ heavyweights, the heaviest of > heavy, have been the recipients of derogatory comments on this group, and most > no longer come here. It's unnecessary, arguments speak for themselves, > derogatory comments drive people away. I agree entirely, point by point. And it is for that exact reason that I dislike when Bonita addresses others as "mega-idiot" or "liar" (or any of the other N! epithets she has thrown in here). As I wrote elsewhere, freedom of speech is a precious value. It should not be wasted this way. And as Bonita is possibly the only > member of the female persuasion still active on this group, I think it would > be a shame if that happened. Agreed on this too, I would rather prefer she learned some politeness, thus allowing for the conversation to keep to a proper level. I am convinced that civil language is much more likely to carry interesting ideas, even (or maybe expecially?) in the context of pure technical stuff. Personally I find Bonita's posts a welcome breath > of fresh air, I may be a minority of one, but perhaps not. > > Daniel >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 17:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <qkrtve$pmj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68229 |
On 9/5/19 12:03 PM, Daniel wrote: > On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 11:17:16 AM UTC-4, Manfred wrote: > >> It may be worth [it] > > I don't think so, civility matters. Even the C++ heavyweights, the heaviest of > heavy, have been the recipients of derogatory comments on this group, and most > no longer come here. It's unnecessary, arguments speak for themselves, > derogatory comments drive people away. And as Bonita is possibly the only > member of the female persuasion still active on this group, I think it would > be a shame if that happened. I don't think Bonita's noticeably female, as far as her posts to this newsgroup are concerned. I mean that in two senses: content and style. As far as content is concerned, the subject of this newsgroup doesn't depend upon gender, and we seldom discuss anything that would reveal a person's gender. As far as style is concerned, there's nothing particularly feminine about Bonita's style of discussion. If anything, her confrontational approach fits male stereotypes better than female ones. > Personally I find Bonita's posts a welcome breath > of fresh air, I may be a minority of one, but perhaps not. Personally, it seems to me that she is knowledgeable of only a small range of different platforms, and thinks that what she knows about those platforms necessarily applies to all other platforms. That wouldn't be so bad if she were open to learning about the other environments that are different from the ones she's familiar with, but she isn't. I've seldom seen anyone with such an extreme combination of certainty and close-mindedness about computers (politics and religion are a different matter - in those areas, such a combination is not particularly rare).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 14:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f51e28b1-2cd1-4f38-8519-be3c2e15103c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #68241 |
On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 5:16:39 PM UTC-4, James Kuyper wrote: particularly feminine about Bonita's style of discussion. > If anything, > her confrontational approach fits male stereotypes better than female ones. > Well, there is such a thing as a spunky female. But I'll leave it at that, and say no more. Best regards, Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-06 10:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkt40d$ae9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68229 |
On 05/09/2019 18:03, Daniel wrote: > On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 11:17:16 AM UTC-4, Manfred wrote: > >> It may be worth [it] > > I don't think so, civility matters. Even the C++ heavyweights, the heaviest of > heavy, have been the recipients of derogatory comments on this group, and most > no longer come here. It's unnecessary, arguments speak for themselves, > derogatory comments drive people away. And as Bonita is possibly the only > member of the female persuasion still active on this group, I think it would > be a shame if that happened. Personally I find Bonita's posts a welcome breath > of fresh air, I may be a minority of one, but perhaps not. > > Daniel > It is possible there are more women posting than you think - it is not uncommon for women to use male pseudonyms in technical groups, and of course there are lots of anonymous or pseudonym posters on Usenet. I think it is a terrible shame that some people feel they have to hide an aspect of themselves - whether it be their gender, nationality, age, sexuality, religion, or anything else that is irrelevant to discussions here. This is a technical group, for discussing C++ and issues relating to the language. I have a total disregard for whether someone is male or female, or any other non-technical matter. I expect the same standards of politeness and respect from anyone. And that is how it should be, and that is how most of this group feels (as far as I can judge). There are a few posters that are openly misogynist or otherwise bigoted, but they are only a small minority and their worst excesses are condemned by other posters. If there is an off-topic thread in which other aspects of someone's life are relevant (some people here are happy with occasional off-topic threads, others are not - but that is another matter), then it is fine to bring it up. Otherwise, Bonita deserves no difference in how we treat her, or what standards she should hold, due to her gender. I don't welcome Bonita to this group because she is a women - and doing so is disrespectful, patronising and misogynist. I welcome /anyone/ to this group - whether they are male, female, hermaphrodite, or an intelligent slug from the planet Zog. All I ask is that they try, at least roughly, to follow in the broad standards of the group. An example of that is including attributions in posts - Bonita has explained in posts in another group (comp.arch) that she snips them intentionally, with a total disregard for anyone else, because she prefers it that way for her own newsgroup reading. It is an active choice to put here own wishes first and viewing the specific requests of others as irrelevant and beneath her. To me, this is a much bigger issue than calling me a "liar" - I've been called far worse in these technical groups, including by people whose opinions matter to me (and I thank them for their honesty). A person who holds the egoistic attitudes shown by Bonita is not a person I would want to deal with in real life, regardless of any programming ability. And being a women in a male-dominated profession is not an excuse of any kind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 09:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qknpcg$9iv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68175 |
On 03/09/2019 21:16, Daniel wrote: > On Tuesday, September 3, 2019 at 2:03:47 PM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: >> >> David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this >> person? >> > Not wasting everyone's time with arguments, at least not mine, as I don't have > experience programming on small devices, have limited real time experience, > and appreciate David's informed perspective. On the other hand, I would > suggest that writings along the lines of "ignorant ... blind, stubborn, > willful and insistent ignorance ..." is unnecessary, as of course is "liar", > not to mention "fucktarded". I would say "this person" is in many respects a > very capable programmer, judging from her other postings. > I admit that I have not been as polite as I should have been, and normally am, in this thread. I have no doubt at all that Bonita is ignorant about many of the things she has been claiming, and in this thread you can easily see her digging herself deeper and deeper in the same hole, rather than trying to learn something. But I have not been very diplomatic about how the conversation was going, and how I handled it. I assume - as I have no reason to think otherwise - that Bonita is a perfectly capable programmer within her field. She may even be an exceptionally good programmer. But expertise in one field of programming does not impart knowledge of other fields.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-03 22:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qkmhi9$bhe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68172 |
On 03/09/2019 20:03, Keith Thompson wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >> On 03/09/2019 13:17, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>>> I don't believe you. >>> >>>> The fact that you haven't encountered significantly tight real-time >>>> requirements doesn't mean they don't exist. >>> >>> The folks here are Nerds without any experience on that. >> >> And you base that on what evidence? > [...] > > David, might I suggest you not waste everyone's time arguing with this > person? > Yes, I think that is probably a good idea. I am not particularly happy with some of the posts in this thread, but I have still been trying to correct factual errors or fill in missing information.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 10:47 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <kQDbF.185496$Yo.136042@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #68160 |
On 3/9/19 11:29 pm, David Brown wrote: > My interest in this discussion has been about sharing experiences and > knowledge, and perhaps giving people something to think about or some > ideas of programming issues beyond those that are familiar to them from > before, and maybe correcting some misconceptions. That is usually what > I look for myself in discussion threads. > > It is painfully clear, however, that you are unteachable - your reaction > to being shown something new is denial and insults. This is a shame, > and I hope you will realise it and make an effort to change. David, respect. Your reputation remains untarnished with me. But please, "someone is wrong on the Internet" is not a good reason to continue this. Bonita has that special kind of ignorance - willful ignorance. There's none so ignorant as one who chooses to be so. Clifford Heath
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 16:56 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <gt8ug0FnafoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #68191 |
On 04/09/2019 12:47, Clifford Heath wrote: > On 3/9/19 11:29 pm, David Brown wrote: >> My interest in this discussion has been about sharing experiences and >> knowledge, and perhaps giving people something to think about or some >> ideas of programming issues beyond those that are familiar to them from >> before, and maybe correcting some misconceptions. That is usually what >> I look for myself in discussion threads. >> >> It is painfully clear, however, that you are unteachable - your reaction >> to being shown something new is denial and insults. This is a shame, >> and I hope you will realise it and make an effort to change. > > David, respect. Your reputation remains untarnished with me. > > But please, "someone is wrong on the Internet" is not a good reason to > continue this. Bonita has that special kind of ignorance - willful > ignorance. There's none so ignorant as one who chooses to be so. Well said! The snipping of attributions is a clear sign of willful ignorance which makes engagement pointless. -- Ian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-04 09:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qknpkh$ape$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #68191 |
On 04/09/2019 02:47, Clifford Heath wrote: > On 3/9/19 11:29 pm, David Brown wrote: >> My interest in this discussion has been about sharing experiences and >> knowledge, and perhaps giving people something to think about or some >> ideas of programming issues beyond those that are familiar to them from >> before, and maybe correcting some misconceptions. That is usually what >> I look for myself in discussion threads. >> >> It is painfully clear, however, that you are unteachable - your reaction >> to being shown something new is denial and insults. This is a shame, >> and I hope you will realise it and make an effort to change. > > David, respect. Your reputation remains untarnished with me. > > But please, "someone is wrong on the Internet" is not a good reason to > continue this. Bonita has that special kind of ignorance - willful > ignorance. There's none so ignorant as one who chooses to be so. > > Clifford Heath <https://xkcd.com/386/> I'll continue with posts in reply to other people, but cut out my replies to Bonita (in this thread at least).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-09-05 22:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <E7jcF.128337$GI3.37526@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #68151 |
Bonita Montero wrote: >> Nor do you. The difference is, others understand their experiences >> and limitations, understand the differences in various fields of >> programming, and try to expand their knowledge beyond their fields >> (even when they never actually work on those systems). They don't >> extrapolate wildly from one small area of software, and they don't >> make wild claims with no evidence or reference. > > No one here has experience with systems where they think exception > -handling should be inappropriate for performance-reasons; that's > all pure phantasy. Well, let's see here.. EPOC32 by Psion (later known as Symbian by Symbian consortium) was a decent RTOS for the time (could reliably mete out some 10 micros jobs at some 5-10 Mhz CPU -- not a small feat). "Decent" in a sense of well-written kernel and API *features* that is. The system gained a lot of traction, was running successful and significant consumer electronics (e.g. Psion Series 5 palmtop computer (more powerful than 16-bit Palm Pilot) and the Nokia "Communicators" series -- first seriously smart phones). BUT, they made an unfortunate decision to use a proprietary C++ API for accessing OS services (later they added some C POSIX level as an after-thought but it was half-hearted and too late so it did not save the baby). What was worse than just using C++ API and probably the crux of their problems and eventual death is that they decided (I am guessing that it was at advice of some C++ exception aficionado "expert") is to use exceptions exclusively to communicate OS call failures (remember, all these calls were C++ APIs). That is, the app programmers (hereinafter users) did not have a choice of using error code -- unless they did not use any OS services in their apps -- that was, well, never in my experience (killed a couple of years developing for the OS). To relate to your many times reiterated point that exception is something to use at I/O failure or resource exhaustion only, in my experience 99+% of system call failures fall squarely to this category. So I hope you agree (but please feel free to correct me if I am wrong) that the EPOC32 decision to use C++ exceptions to communicate system call failures shall agree with your recipe to C++ exception applications. Here is what happened next: Early in the game someone at Psion figured out (presumably from hard experience) that a) standard C++ exception handling mechanism with stack unwinding was too slow for RTOS, I/O errors or not b) that C++ lack of compile-time-checked exceptions was an invitation for unsafe, poorly tested and inscrutable software. Not to be scared (the origins of the system was British and then two Scandinavian nations and Japan jumped in so I guess Tor and samurai spirit were with them), they devised a solution to both of the above minor issues: -- They modified their embedded gcc port to not unwind C++ stack automatically (trust me this people knew a thing or two about performance and their RTOS beat all competition of GUI-capable RTOSes with accessible API at the time -- I should know because I did the comparison before deciding to go for it so they must have had a good reason to do such a labor consuming and controversial thing). Instead they provided a user-controlled API to "cleanup stack" where people would manually place their resources. This was supposed to cure a) (and I guess it did). -- they created a special naming convention for all functions whereas the function was affixed with L and/or C letters (by now I forgot whether they were prefices or suffices) to indicate whether a function may "leave" (in normal C++ terms, throw an exception) or must take care of its portion of cleanup stack at normal exit. This was supposed to mitigate b); you are free to guess how well it worked. ---- To HELP people in following the conventions, they created some code checker to check that L- functions can only be called from C- functions or whatever the implications were (can't recall this crap precisely now); and ---- To ENFORCE the convention in deployed APPs (and not give their pristine OS a bad name by sloppy app programming) they introduced (possibly for the first time in history or maybe it is just me who met this first with them) some production-ids that one had to receive from Psion (later, probably, Symbian consortium) after they verified the code for these (and other) conventions AND INDEPENDENTLY TESTED BY EPOC32 engineers and only apps with such production ids could be deployed on the devices and sold (this was mainly enforced legally, I think; but you can see Apple is no way first in this kind of bureaucracy in accepting an app for the platform; the only difference was, it did not cost this much with EPOC32 IIRC). Well, the results of these efforts is history. From my experience, C++-with-exceptions system API was absolutely the biggest reason for their death. From what I remember from their support mailing lists (that time social media), the C++ exceptions were by far most hated feature of the RTOS (truly, it did not have much else to complain about; much later it started to lag, mainly in GUI features; but this was obviously due to narrow acceptance by users (app developers) that in turn caused money issues). A failed (too late, too little) attempt to provide an alternative limited POSIX API (which is no way perfect in my opinion, even if they implemented complete POSX; but it would be infinitely better than C++ API with exceptions) is a proof that the management got it, too, eventually -- but too late to save it. What did it leave me with? Bitter after-taste for two lost could-be-productive years (well, almost, I designed non-EPOC32 software during that time, too) and life-long resolution to never use C++ exceptions for anything. Have been happy so far following it, never had to look back. Sometimes I start to think Java-style compile-time-checked exceptions would not be a bad addition to C++; but then I start to recall that, in practice, exception handling in Java was always wordier and not necessarily more readable than scoped status collectors and return codes in C++ (and measurably slower than return codes, even for Java land) and such my stupid thought leaves me. Now that std::optional and std::variant are being standardized (I guess, being borrowed from Haskel's Maybe and Either and Scala's Option and result) I feel like I almost have more tools under my belt for error handling than I will ever need. Bye-bye C++ exceptions, rest in peace.. -Pavel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web