Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #79507 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-05-16 18:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2021-05-18 15:14 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 249 — 76 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-16 18:10 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-16 10:54 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-16 20:01 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-16 11:29 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 08:20 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_f4zl13qm@8lfoe01ih4ebku.com - 2021-05-17 09:26 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 12:52 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_yMgsa7x5@3ifr32ivepk32ia.org - 2021-05-17 11:29 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 13:42 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_zSl@bw3y07so7dr3go2x.tv - 2021-05-17 13:31 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-17 19:53 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 05:39 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-17 22:33 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_sey@tad.gov.uk - 2021-05-17 07:42 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 10:58 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_vj8xvznaud@d16tgqd.co.uk - 2021-05-17 11:32 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 12:03 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_gT9q@x057vr3tuoe9s_ht3c.net - 2021-05-17 13:18 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 14:02 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 16:36 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_rtfm7b8w@g403t8gw2b59awtit.tv - 2021-05-17 14:54 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 10:37 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-18 06:47 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_w2uom3_k07@47j.ac.uk - 2021-05-18 07:30 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-18 10:31 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_axe6hb@rq6ypc_knzvwr9.ac.uk - 2021-05-18 15:11 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 16:57 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-19 04:53 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-05-18 13:08 +0100
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-18 17:10 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-18 11:56 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 16:56 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 22:05 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-19 12:01 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-24 10:54 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-24 14:51 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-19 05:02 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-19 10:07 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-19 15:16 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Spud@nowheresville.org - 2021-05-19 07:19 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 00:53 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk - 2021-05-19 08:28 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:34 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com - 2021-05-19 08:44 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:50 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_54rouunX@x37ixhgx27ymvhwc5.net - 2021-05-19 09:31 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:39 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:46 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_nkfcgvl@7o616.biz - 2021-05-20 08:23 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-20 12:38 +0300
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_5Xl@m9q7d5ux5tl8o5.co.uk - 2021-05-20 14:38 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-05-20 17:43 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_dg01t9p2@m0m4iuefk1x.edu - 2021-05-21 09:16 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 13:38 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_L1peqs_@c81ltrsr_gfoo1.co.uk - 2021-05-21 13:39 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 15:46 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_km@gfepxabk0g_ytn7ta.net - 2021-05-21 14:48 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 17:03 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-21 14:15 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_6f@fypmp_.biz - 2021-05-21 14:57 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-21 15:05 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 09:42 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-05-21 14:44 +0100
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_4ptu0Yl4x9@2q77bsgmv.edu - 2021-05-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 05:31 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_va6psV1d@w5lywejmkchyss0h4d.gov - 2021-05-21 09:24 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 13:33 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_md3@zi2k.com - 2021-05-21 13:32 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 15:43 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_zq3a8xxm@t9c1d7aq5dby4al.gov.uk - 2021-05-21 14:44 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 17:07 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_hjgci2iT0@qtinm1mgdu.info - 2021-05-21 16:12 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 18:18 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-21 16:25 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-21 18:36 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-22 16:18 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-22 16:25 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-05-22 08:44 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-22 17:49 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 05:50 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 21:32 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 06:40 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 22:07 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 22:08 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 07:46 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:12 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:19 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:20 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:22 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:27 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:30 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:32 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:35 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:38 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:41 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:44 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:49 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:50 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:52 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:54 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:56 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:59 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:03 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:04 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:09 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:11 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:34 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:36 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:38 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:39 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:43 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:46 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:55 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:00 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:02 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:05 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:07 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:08 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:10 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:32 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:33 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:34 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:37 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:40 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:53 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 08:55 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:58 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:01 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:04 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 09:07 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:10 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 00:01 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 23:30 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_801o@21xmy7.gov.uk - 2021-05-24 08:31 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_8_g@ef863gl0.eu - 2021-05-24 08:34 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 11:49 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_9v@0v6uq5zonj66dteaq9.ac.uk - 2021-05-24 10:15 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 12:44 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 13:33 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_cjz9@ngfllgqd.edu - 2021-05-25 09:02 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:54 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_43zpj5@zrdy.biz - 2021-05-25 09:02 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-25 12:53 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_m0gtwlu6_g@j_cyo9l9.edu - 2021-05-25 09:05 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-25 16:22 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_wBhaki@w1dhf2q0pnagn57.eu - 2021-05-24 08:26 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 11:51 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_rfg_f9lmv@xechfnrqs23y.com - 2021-05-24 10:17 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 12:45 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-24 13:42 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 13:54 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 14:19 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 15:02 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_1shmhc5pEg@qedprf.biz - 2021-05-24 13:57 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 18:15 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-24 15:21 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 15:37 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_61Z@avwe8ulg.co.uk - 2021-05-24 13:49 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 18:14 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-24 16:58 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-24 18:51 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_o_4Ge4wpt@2iwg_s7sq47equu9a.edu - 2021-05-24 08:25 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-24 11:52 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-05-21 17:19 +0100
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_3l@rsdtj2x7.gov - 2021-05-24 08:22 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_f4@x4dcxggdi.eu - 2021-05-20 13:42 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-20 16:20 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-05-20 18:02 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-20 19:23 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-05-21 00:07 +0100
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_db0ucj9V@o6t54wlnnja_.co.uk - 2021-05-21 09:24 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_a102e@wnyqsthof.net - 2021-05-21 09:22 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:53 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:54 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 10:30 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:35 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:36 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 01:37 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 12:57 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:33 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-19 10:20 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 18:13 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 10:09 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 13:28 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_97@bxos5xe28b1i1n7kh.ac.uk - 2021-05-17 11:34 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 13:41 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk - 2021-05-17 13:29 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_imhoou@kq9.ac.uk - 2021-05-17 15:53 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_qg11H@ihwz2zmflqtcalb.gov.uk - 2021-05-17 16:06 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 18:21 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 16:38 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 17:58 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 14:03 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-05-17 16:37 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_7kof@5x9.edu - 2021-05-18 07:27 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_cOJ9@yr_8g_4nz.com - 2021-05-17 14:55 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 16:06 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_tt7xetn_st@d3zd4ilmme.gov - 2021-05-17 14:56 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 17:20 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-18 17:20 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_h2j5v@jq7cn18h8lm.com - 2021-05-18 15:35 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 17:57 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_0by_disXi@2hd58e950gxh.eu - 2021-05-19 07:22 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 09:41 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_ox7@4ieqo8ddusd3k1c8k.com - 2021-05-19 08:22 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 10:28 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_4t1542s@nz48t.gov - 2021-05-19 08:40 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 12:54 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_2ur@t65zb.com - 2021-05-19 11:08 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:11 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_a9r7@vdgtzl3x.gov.uk - 2021-05-19 11:19 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:33 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_of0j0vqHff@bap.com - 2021-05-19 13:29 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 16:17 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_83b6en@o2cr9.ac.uk - 2021-05-19 14:57 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 17:49 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-19 17:41 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 19:55 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 14:02 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-19 21:06 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 14:12 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 14:13 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-20 12:16 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-20 12:31 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-20 12:33 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-20 18:37 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-20 13:10 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-20 17:56 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-20 20:26 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-20 19:50 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-05-20 14:35 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:54 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 13:58 -0700
Re: Niuce C++14-feature David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-05-19 11:16 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_V1@aikd06tg1ez2i6hqi9.com - 2021-05-19 09:29 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-05-19 13:36 +0300
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 12:56 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_w5c@g2nz1m_2f4r2g8wqvgfd.co.uk - 2021-05-19 11:07 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-05-19 10:34 -0400
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_g1@mpi.com - 2021-05-19 14:55 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-05-19 16:15 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_uc82glu@4o0o4n889yatl8.ac.uk - 2021-05-20 08:19 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-05-20 17:46 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_mm9v3kgmmm@7_o9.co.uk - 2021-05-21 09:19 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 17:56 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-05-18 20:03 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature MrSpook_fDx9@a3i3cdf7_.info - 2021-05-19 07:27 +0000
Re: Niuce C++14-feature Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 09:41 +0200
Re: Niuce C++14-feature "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-18 15:14 -0700
Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 10:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <s836s4$l2j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79591 |
On 5/19/21 3:19 AM, Spud@nowheresville.org wrote: > On Tue, 18 May 2021 16:56:42 -0700 > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >> Another possible gain is that I let you know that your behavior is >> unacceptable. Repeatedly insulting a troll just adds useless noise. > > I'm curious as to why you think someone criticising an aspect of C++ > is trolling. If this forum is merely to praise how wonderful the language > is to its acolytes then what purpose does it serve? Trolling is defined as intentionally posting an upsetting message for the purpose of triggering a response, rather than a serious attempt to discuss the issue. It comes from the practice of trolling for fish, with the triggered response considered to be analogous to the fish going for your bait. Most trolling is also criticism. Whether any given piece of criticism is also a troll is often a very subjective judgement call, and if you honestly don't already recognize this particular criticism as trolling, I can't imagine what I could say to change your mind, so I won't bother trying.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 18:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s83dfn$9jj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79630 |
Trolling is when the provocation ends in itself and is not rooted in the real opinions of the trolls. There might be idiots with strange attitudes which might be provocating #that they seem to be trolling - but the stand behind their stupid opinions and thereby arent really trolls. Maybe MrSpook is such a stupid person.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 10:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87k0nu7ir3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #79591 |
Spud@nowheresville.org writes:
> On Tue, 18 May 2021 16:56:42 -0700
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Another possible gain is that I let you know that your behavior is
>>unacceptable. Repeatedly insulting a troll just adds useless noise.
>
> I'm curious as to why you think someone criticising an aspect of C++
> is trolling. If this forum is merely to praise how wonderful the language
> is to its acolytes then what purpose does it serve?
I don't, and it isn't. I've simply chosen to update my killfile
(actually a Gnus score file) to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of my
personal view of this newsgroup. If you wish to discuss it further, my
email address is valid.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 13:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7tk12$af9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79512 |
> Another solution looking for a problem and (as usual with C++) > an ugly hack to make it work. What a surprise. Not. Tell me why this is a hack.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_97@bxos5xe28b1i1n7kh.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 11:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7tkco$jrd$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79517 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:28:34 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Another solution looking for a problem and (as usual with C++) >> an ugly hack to make it work. What a surprise. Not. > >Tell me why this is a hack. using is_transparent = void; Is a hack. What's it for? If the compiler can handle multitype lookups using find() then it should just handle them, not require some bizarre compiler switch embedded in code.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 13:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7tkp2$etp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79520 |
> Is a hack. What's it for? If the compiler can handle multitype lookups > using find() then it should just handle them, not require some bizarre > compiler switch embedded in code. Of course it can, but there must be some sense in this. That's what I asked for. But as you also can see the sense in this keep quiet. C++ has been carefully designed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 13:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7tr44$6o2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79521 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:41:22 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Is a hack. What's it for? If the compiler can handle multitype lookups >> using find() then it should just handle them, not require some bizarre >> compiler switch embedded in code. > >Of course it can, but there must be some sense in this. >That's what I asked for. But as you also can see the >sense in this keep quiet. C++ has been carefully designed. ROTFL! :) Yeah, right! Thats why we have: - "= 0" nonsense for pure virtuals, t - idiotic reuse of various prior keywords and operators just to cause confusion such as "class" for templates until they finally saw sense and brought in "typename" and implicit precedence insanities such as cout << 1 << 2; - duplicate functionality instead of extending, eg using vs typedef - context sensitive grammar, eg blah(123) could be an object definition or a function call - static members have to be initialised outside of the class definition for [reasons] but static const? Go right ahead. Those are off the top of my head, there are loads of others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_imhoou@kq9.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 15:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u3hu$sfs$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79526 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 17:20:48 +0200
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm talking about the syntax , not the concept. Wtf is "= 0"? Its an ugly
>> syntactic hack. They already created the new keyword "virtual" so why didn't
>> they create another one called "pure"?
>
>That's not my fault that you don't understand pure-virtual functions.
Its not my fault you don't even appear to understand what I'm saying.
Which do you think is cleaner:
virtual func() = 0;
or
pure virtual func();
?
>> Syntax matters.
>
>Name me the troubles a programmer could run into because of this.
The only difference between most declarative programming languages is the
syntax. Is there anything C++ can do that C or assembler can't? No. The reason
it exists is to make life easier. Having moronic syntax has the opposite effect.
>>> You can declare them as inline so you won't need a declaration in
>>> a .cpp-file.
>
>> Oh FFS.
>
>There's a one-definition-rule which is inherited from C.
That rule could be enhanced. There is no good reason for this not to be
legal syntax:
class myclass
{
static int i = 123;
};
>But that's a perfect solution for this tiny problem.
All these "tiny" problems add up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_qg11H@ihwz2zmflqtcalb.gov.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 16:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u49k$1a74$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79529 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 17:58:16 +0200
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Which do you think is cleaner:
>> virtual func() = 0;
>> or
>> pure virtual func();
>
>It's the same for me but not for compulsive personalities.
Oh ok. Well why use words at all then? Why not have something like
@@func() = 0;
C++ could end up like the explosion in an ascii factory that is objective-C.
>> The only difference between most declarative programming languages is the
>> syntax. Is there anything C++ can do that C or assembler can't? No. The
>reason
>> it exists is to make life easier. Having moronic syntax has the opposite
>effect.
>
>That's not a practical reason.
A stupid response.
>> That rule could be enhanced. There is no good reason for this not to be
>> legal syntax:
>>
>> class myclass
>> {
>> static int i = 123;
>> };
>
>There is a good reason because there's only one definition of i.
Ok, you don't understand the concept of initialisation. Thanks for clearing
that up.
>> All these "tiny" problems add up.
>
>No, they stand side by side.
And with attitudes like that C++ will continue to be shunned by new
generations of programmers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 18:21 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7u56r$997$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79530 |
>>> Which do you think is cleaner:
>>> virtual func() = 0;
>>> or
>>> pure virtual func();
>> It's the same for me but not for compulsive personalities.
> Oh ok. Well why use words at all then? Why not have something like
> @@func() = 0;
That's a matter of habituation.
>>> The only difference between most declarative programming languages is the
>>> syntax. Is there anything C++ can do that C or assembler can't? No. The
>> reason
>>> it exists is to make life easier. Having moronic syntax has the opposite
>> effect.
>> That's not a practical reason.
> A stupid response.
No, I asked for practical reasons and not metaphors.
>>> That rule could be enhanced. There is no good reason for this not to be
>>> legal syntax:
>>>
>>> class myclass
>>> {
>>> static int i = 123;
>>> };
>> There is a good reason because there's only one definition of i.
> Ok, you don't understand the concept of initialisation. Thanks for clearing
> that up.
There is a good reason for this to be not legal: the one-definition
-rule. If you want it the way which is up to your taste define the
variable inline and compile the code with C++17.
>>> All these "tiny" problems add up.
>> No, they stand side by side.
> And with attitudes like that C++ will continue to be shunned by new
> generations of programmers.
You didn't name any real problems which coudn't be solved in a blink
of an eye.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 16:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u65b$9dm$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79534 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> A stupid response. > > No, I asked for practical reasons and not metaphors. Why do you even bother talking to the asshole?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 17:58 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7u3qp$rnb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79529 |
> Which do you think is cleaner:
> virtual func() = 0;
> or
> pure virtual func();
It's the same for me but not for compulsive personalities.
>>> Syntax matters.
>> Name me the troubles a programmer could run into because of this.
> The only difference between most declarative programming languages is the
> syntax. Is there anything C++ can do that C or assembler can't? No. The reason
> it exists is to make life easier. Having moronic syntax has the opposite effect.
That's not a practical reason.
>>>> You can declare them as inline so you won't need a declaration in
>>>> a .cpp-file.
>>> Oh FFS.
>> There's a one-definition-rule which is inherited from C.
> That rule could be enhanced. There is no good reason for this not to be
> legal syntax:
>
> class myclass
> {
> static int i = 123;
> };
There is a good reason because there's only one definition of i.
>> But that's a perfect solution for this tiny problem.
> All these "tiny" problems add up.
No, they stand side by side.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 14:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7tt2m$17jq$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79526 |
MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk wrote: > ROTFL! :) Why don't you go troll some other forum, asshole? Just fuck off.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 16:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u63s$9dm$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79532 |
MrSpook_cOJ9@yr_8g_4nz.com wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 14:03:04 +0000 (UTC)
> Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>>MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk wrote:
>>> ROTFL! :)
>>
>>Why don't you go troll some other forum, asshole?
>>Just fuck off.
>
> Awwww....
>
> _.~._
> ,~'.~@~.`~.
> / : _..._ : \
> { :,"''\\`".: }
> `C) 9 _ 9 (--.._,-"""-.__
> ( )(@)( ) `.
> `-.___.-' \
> ,' \ / ,` ;`-._,-.
> ,' ,'/ ,' `---t.,-. \_
> ,--.,',' ,'----.__\ _( \----'
> '///,`,--.,' `-.__.--' `. )
> '///,' `-`
>
Why don't you just go fuck yourself, asshole?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_7kof@5x9.edu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-18 07:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7vq8l$ceu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79536 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 16:37:18 +0000 (UTC)
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>MrSpook_cOJ9@yr_8g_4nz.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2021 14:03:04 +0000 (UTC)
>> Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>>>MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk wrote:
>>>> ROTFL! :)
>>>
>>>Why don't you go troll some other forum, asshole?
>>>Just fuck off.
>>
>> Awwww....
>>
>> _.~._
>> ,~'.~@~.`~.
>> / : _..._ : \
>> { :,"''\\`".: }
>> `C) 9 _ 9 (--.._,-"""-.__
>> ( )(@)( ) `.
>> `-.___.-' \
>> ,' \ / ,` ;`-._,-.
>> ,' ,'/ ,' `---t.,-. \_
>> ,--.,',' ,'----.__\ _( \----'
>> '///,`,--.,' `-.__.--' `. )
>> '///,' `-`
>>
>
>Why don't you just go fuck yourself, asshole?
LOL :) Looks like the swearbot is stuck on auto repeat!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_cOJ9@yr_8g_4nz.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 14:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u058$vbj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79532 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 14:03:04 +0000 (UTC)
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>MrSpook_b89m0or3@x1_pxvs4h8sxxi.gov.uk wrote:
>> ROTFL! :)
>
>Why don't you go troll some other forum, asshole?
>Just fuck off.
Awwww....
_.~._
,~'.~@~.`~.
/ : _..._ : \
{ :,"''\\`".: }
`C) 9 _ 9 (--.._,-"""-.__
( )(@)( ) `.
`-.___.-' \
,' \ / ,` ;`-._,-.
,' ,'/ ,' `---t.,-. \_
,--.,',' ,'----.__\ _( \----'
'///,`,--.,' `-.__.--' `. )
'///,' `-`
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 16:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7tt9p$kc7$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79526 |
> - "= 0" nonsense for pure virtuals, t In most OOP-languages you've to declare pure virtual functions. > - idiotic reuse of various prior keywords and operators just to cause confusion > such as "class" for templates until they finally saw sense and brought in > "typename" and implicit precedence insanities such as cout << 1 << 2; Minor cosmetics ... > - duplicate functionality instead of extending, eg using vs typedef That's not a problem. > - context sensitive grammar, eg blah(123) could be an object definition or a > function call That's not a problem. > - static members have to be initialised outside of the class definition for > [reasons] but static const? Go right ahead. You can declare them as inline so you won't need a declaration in a .cpp-file.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_tt7xetn_st@d3zd4ilmme.gov |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 14:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s7u07h$10jl$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79533 |
On Mon, 17 May 2021 16:06:48 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> - "= 0" nonsense for pure virtuals, t > >In most OOP-languages you've to declare pure virtual functions. I'm talking about the syntax , not the concept. Wtf is "= 0"? Its an ugly syntactic hack. They already created the new keyword "virtual" so why didn't they create another one called "pure"? >> - idiotic reuse of various prior keywords and operators just to cause >confusion >> such as "class" for templates until they finally saw sense and brought in >> "typename" and implicit precedence insanities such as cout << 1 << 2; > >Minor cosmetics ... Syntax matters. > >> - duplicate functionality instead of extending, eg using vs typedef > >That's not a problem. Syntax matters. > >> - context sensitive grammar, eg blah(123) could be an object definition or a >> function call > >That's not a problem. Syntax matters. > >> - static members have to be initialised outside of the class definition for >> [reasons] but static const? Go right ahead. > >You can declare them as inline so you won't need a declaration in >a .cpp-file. Oh FFS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-17 17:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7u1kh$8cd$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79540 |
> I'm talking about the syntax , not the concept. Wtf is "= 0"? Its an ugly > syntactic hack. They already created the new keyword "virtual" so why didn't > they create another one called "pure"? That's not my fault that you don't understand pure-virtual functions. > >>> - idiotic reuse of various prior keywords and operators just to cause >> confusion >>> such as "class" for templates until they finally saw sense and brought in >>> "typename" and implicit precedence insanities such as cout << 1 << 2; >> Minor cosmetics ... > Syntax matters. Name me the troubles a programmer could run into because of this. >>> - duplicate functionality instead of extending, eg using vs typedef >> That's not a problem. > Syntax matters. Name me the troubles a programmer could run into because of this. >>> - context sensitive grammar, eg blah(123) could be an object definition or a >>> function call >> That's not a problem. > Syntax matters. Name me the troubles a programmer could run into because of this. >>> - static members have to be initialised outside of the class definition for >>> [reasons] but static const? Go right ahead. >> You can declare them as inline so you won't need a declaration in >> a .cpp-file. > Oh FFS. There's a one-definition-rule which is inherited from C. This rule applies also to some other languages. But that's a perfect solution for this tiny problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Manfred <noname@add.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-18 17:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s80lvb$irv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79540 |
On 5/17/2021 4:56 PM, MrSpook_tt7xetn_st@d3zd4ilmme.gov wrote: > On Mon, 17 May 2021 16:06:48 +0200 > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>> - "= 0" nonsense for pure virtuals, t >> >> In most OOP-languages you've to declare pure virtual functions. > > I'm talking about the syntax , not the concept. Wtf is "= 0"? Its an ugly > syntactic hack. They already created the new keyword "virtual" so why didn't > they create another one called "pure"? This was indeed somewhat weird of a choice. I used to have a sense that it was meant to be somehow expanded to other uses where the '0' would be replaced with something else. But this never turned out to be the case, at least in standard C++. I seem to remember that the Borland C++ compiler would allow some extension like virtual LRESULT OnPaint(...) = WM_PAINT; Which sounds appealing, but in fact it fades away in very old memories - maybe someone else may recall anything more clear about that, if this was indeed a thing at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web