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 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 00:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <s82g65$1ass$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79591 |
On 5/19/2021 12:19 AM, Spud@nowheresville.org wrote: > On Tue, 18 May 2021 16:56:42 -0700 > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >> Another possible gain is that I let you know that your behavior is >> unacceptable. Repeatedly insulting a troll just adds useless noise. > > I'm curious as to why you think someone criticising an aspect of C++ > is trolling. If this forum is merely to praise how wonderful the language > is to its acolytes then what purpose does it serve? > All criticisms are welcome. I can say, back when C/C++11 first came out, why was there not an eventcount or futex like thread sync mechanism? Well, shit happens. The fun part is that they can be coded up in pure C/C++11. Not ideal, but they can be coded. Then the response can be nice, or evil... The response can be to tell me to go snuff myself. That is a "troll'ish" response, well, imvvho, that is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 08:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s82i74$aag$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79598 |
On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 5/19/2021 12:19 AM, Spud@nowheresville.org wrote: >> On Tue, 18 May 2021 16:56:42 -0700 >> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Another possible gain is that I let you know that your behavior is >>> unacceptable. Repeatedly insulting a troll just adds useless noise. >> >> I'm curious as to why you think someone criticising an aspect of C++ >> is trolling. If this forum is merely to praise how wonderful the language >> is to its acolytes then what purpose does it serve? >> > >All criticisms are welcome. I can say, back when C/C++11 first came out, >why was there not an eventcount or futex like thread sync mechanism? >Well, shit happens. The fun part is that they can be coded up in pure >C/C++11. Not ideal, but they can be coded. Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. Arguably even having built in threading support in C++ is a step too far. After all, if it has threading why doesn't it have built in multi process support too?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 01:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <s82ii6$fgr$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79600 |
On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/19/2021 12:19 AM, Spud@nowheresville.org wrote: >>> On Tue, 18 May 2021 16:56:42 -0700 >>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Another possible gain is that I let you know that your behavior is >>>> unacceptable. Repeatedly insulting a troll just adds useless noise. >>> >>> I'm curious as to why you think someone criticising an aspect of C++ >>> is trolling. If this forum is merely to praise how wonderful the language >>> is to its acolytes then what purpose does it serve? >>> >> >> All criticisms are welcome. I can say, back when C/C++11 first came out, >> why was there not an eventcount or futex like thread sync mechanism? >> Well, shit happens. The fun part is that they can be coded up in pure >> C/C++11. Not ideal, but they can be coded. > > Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a > cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. > Arguably even having built in threading support in C++ is a step too far. Why? > After all, if it has threading why doesn't it have built in multi process > support too? Humm...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 08:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s82j4g$npm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79603 |
On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:34:15 -0700 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: >> On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 >> Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a >> cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. > >Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. You can't emulate OS level locking in a higher level context. >> Arguably even having built in threading support in C++ is a step too far. > >Why? Because some systems don't even support threads - eg PIC. >> After all, if it has threading why doesn't it have built in multi process >> support too? > >Humm... Humm indeed. I suspect its because the win32 process model is profoundly broken and since Windows dev was/is arguably the largest user base for C++ they didn't see the point.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 01:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <s82jgn$u4t$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79608 |
On 5/19/2021 1:44 AM, MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:34:15 -0700 > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: >>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 >>> Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a >>> cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. >> >> Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. > > You can't emulate OS level locking in a higher level context. Why not? I can emulate an eventcount, a futex is not that far off and can be emulated as well. in C++11. >>> Arguably even having built in threading support in C++ is a step too far. >> >> Why? > > Because some systems don't even support threads - eg PIC. That's fine. Why is that a problem? Does it support C++11? If so, the code shall run. >>> After all, if it has threading why doesn't it have built in multi process >>> support too? >> >> Humm... > > Humm indeed. I suspect its because the win32 process model is profoundly > broken and since Windows dev was/is arguably the largest user base for C++ > they didn't see the point. > Windows has nothing to do with it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_54rouunX@x37ixhgx27ymvhwc5.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 09:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s82lue$2f5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79610 |
On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:50:32 -0700 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 5/19/2021 1:44 AM, MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com wrote: >> On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:34:15 -0700 >> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: >>>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 >>>> Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a >>>> cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. >>> >>> Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. >> >> You can't emulate OS level locking in a higher level context. > >Why not? I can emulate an eventcount, a futex is not that far off and >can be emulated as well. in C++11. Oh ok. So explain how you'd implement an atomic futex in userspace that say was used to implement a semaphore that other processes would use. >> >> Because some systems don't even support threads - eg PIC. > >That's fine. Why is that a problem? Does it support C++11? If so, the >code shall run. No, it wouldn't. Real time compilers often only support a subset of a language whether it be C or C++. >> Humm indeed. I suspect its because the win32 process model is profoundly >> broken and since Windows dev was/is arguably the largest user base for C++ >> they didn't see the point. >> > > >Windows has nothing to do with it. What is the reason then?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 13:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <s83t2u$q0e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79614 |
On 5/19/2021 2:31 AM, MrSpook_54rouunX@x37ixhgx27ymvhwc5.net wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:50:32 -0700 > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/19/2021 1:44 AM, MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com wrote: >>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:34:15 -0700 >>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 >>>>> Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - C++ is a >>>>> cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support futex's. >>>> >>>> Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. >>> >>> You can't emulate OS level locking in a higher level context. >> >> Why not? I can emulate an eventcount, a futex is not that far off and >> can be emulated as well. in C++11. > > Oh ok. So explain how you'd implement an atomic futex in userspace that say > was used to implement a semaphore that other processes would use. Oh, I cannot do that in pure C/C++. Only Intraprocess. > >>> >>> Because some systems don't even support threads - eg PIC. >> >> That's fine. Why is that a problem? Does it support C++11? If so, the >> code shall run. > > No, it wouldn't. Real time compilers often only support a subset of a language > whether it be C or C++. If a compiler says it supports C/C++11, then C/C++11 code should run on it? > >>> Humm indeed. I suspect its because the win32 process model is profoundly >>> broken and since Windows dev was/is arguably the largest user base for C++ >>> they didn't see the point. >>> >> >> >> Windows has nothing to do with it. > > What is the reason then? > I am not exactly sure what you mean, but Windows has a futex like mechanism. I cannot remember if they can be used for interprocess communication: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/synchapi/nf-synchapi-waitonaddress
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-19 13:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <s83tes$vca$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79643 |
On 5/19/2021 1:39 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 5/19/2021 2:31 AM, MrSpook_54rouunX@x37ixhgx27ymvhwc5.net wrote: >> On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:50:32 -0700 >> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 5/19/2021 1:44 AM, MrSpook_6efnqt73nm@nyyte.com wrote: >>>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 01:34:15 -0700 >>>> "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 5/19/2021 1:28 AM, MrSpook_pl1c1bg7i@7sxv4z8mvmyz_.ac.uk wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 00:53:41 -0700 >>>>>> Presumably the same reason they're not part of the C language - >>>>>> C++ is a >>>>>> cross platform language and some realtime kernel don't support >>>>>> futex's. >>>>> >>>>> Right. However, we can emulate an eventcount or futex in C++. >>>> >>>> You can't emulate OS level locking in a higher level context. >>> >>> Why not? I can emulate an eventcount, a futex is not that far off and >>> can be emulated as well. in C++11. >> >> Oh ok. So explain how you'd implement an atomic futex in userspace >> that say >> was used to implement a semaphore that other processes would use. > > Oh, I cannot do that in pure C/C++. Only Intraprocess. [...] Iirc, I did one a while back, before C/C++11 that hashed a pointer into a table of mutexes and condvars that was used as the addresses waitset. Iirc, I called that part of it a multimutex: https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c++/c/sV4WC_cBb9Q/m/Ti8LFyH4CgAJ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_nkfcgvl@7o616.biz |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-20 08:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s8569h$gqf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79643 |
On Wed, 19 May 2021 13:39:58 -0700 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 5/19/2021 2:31 AM, MrSpook_54rouunX@x37ixhgx27ymvhwc5.net wrote: >> Oh ok. So explain how you'd implement an atomic futex in userspace that say >> was used to implement a semaphore that other processes would use. > >Oh, I cannot do that in pure C/C++. Only Intraprocess. Quite. >> No, it wouldn't. Real time compilers often only support a subset of a >language >> whether it be C or C++. > >If a compiler says it supports C/C++11, then C/C++11 code should run on it? If it says the entire spec then yes. >>>> Humm indeed. I suspect its because the win32 process model is profoundly >>>> broken and since Windows dev was/is arguably the largest user base for C++ >>>> they didn't see the point. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Windows has nothing to do with it. >> >> What is the reason then? >> > >I am not exactly sure what you mean, but Windows has a futex like >mechanism. I cannot remember if they can be used for interprocess >communication: I was talking about multi process in general. If C++ supports threads why doesn't it support multi process too? My theory is because of the broken windows process model - any lowest common denominator API would be next to useless on unix. As it is C++ threads don't support 3 level locking (unless its been added recently) like posix threads do which makes them useless for certain use cases.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-20 12:38 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <s85amv$mc6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79654 |
20.05.2021 11:23 MrSpook_nkfcgvl@7o616.biz kirjutas: > I was talking about multi process in general. If C++ supports threads why > doesn't it support multi process too? My theory is because of the broken > windows process model - any lowest common denominator API would be next to > useless on unix. The issue with posix style process creation (fork()) is that it does not play well with multithreading. Fork() creates a new process out of a single thread in the old process, but inherits all the memory space of the old process, including any mutex locks currently held by other threads. As in the new process these other threads do not exist, nobody will release these locks and the process can easily deadlock. Even if the locks could be released somehow (e.g. by pthread_atfork() or otherwise) the data structures they protected might easily remain in an inconsistent state. This is a direct quote from "man fork": "After a fork() in a multithreaded program, the child can safely call only async-signal-safe functions (see signal-safety(7)) until such time as it calls execve(2)." So what we effectively get is pretty similar to the Windows process creation model: a lot of complicated setup with limited functionality, and a new fresh process started with a new executable. Thus one may argue it's the posix process creation model which is broken and does not fit well the current multithread-dominated software design. One might try to limit multi-processing to single-thread programs only and getting fork() to work in Windows, but in practice this is not possible, even the simplest Hello World program immediately gets invaded by foreign threads created by antiviruses and shell extensions. I don't like this either, but there you are.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_5Xl@m9q7d5ux5tl8o5.co.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-20 14:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s85s8o$17a9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79656 |
On Thu, 20 May 2021 16:20:24 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> I disagree. The windows process model which starts a new process from the >> beginning each time with no state carried over (except for command line args) > >> is extremely limited in its usefulness. Posix can do that plus fork at a >given >> point with the new process being a carbon copy of the old one ... > >This is good for nothing. Keep demonstrating your ignorance, its very amusing :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-20 17:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <gdxpI.462565$laG.230570@fx16.ams4> |
| In reply to | #79659 |
On Thu, 20 May 2021 14:38:16 +0000, MrSpook_5Xl wrote: > On Thu, 20 May 2021 16:20:24 +0200 Bonita Montero > <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I disagree. The windows process model which starts a new process from >>> the beginning each time with no state carried over (except for command >>> line args) >> >>> is extremely limited in its usefulness. Posix can do that plus fork at >>> a >>given >>> point with the new process being a carbon copy of the old one ... >> >>This is good for nothing. > > Keep demonstrating your ignorance, its very amusing :) Do you even know why fork() actually exists? Because back in the day THREADS weren't a thing. If you want to COPY lots of program state using fork() then why the fuck aren't you using threads? Processes are heavyweight OS primitives compared to threads. These days fork() and associated horribleness like Linux's overcommit are an anachronism. /Flibble
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_dg01t9p2@m0m4iuefk1x.edu |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 09:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s87tq7$1g60$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79665 |
On Thu, 20 May 2021 17:43:40 GMT Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> wrote: >On Thu, 20 May 2021 14:38:16 +0000, MrSpook_5Xl wrote: > >> On Thu, 20 May 2021 16:20:24 +0200 Bonita Montero >> <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I disagree. The windows process model which starts a new process from >>>> the beginning each time with no state carried over (except for command >>>> line args) >>> >>>> is extremely limited in its usefulness. Posix can do that plus fork at >>>> a >>>given >>>> point with the new process being a carbon copy of the old one ... >>> >>>This is good for nothing. >> >> Keep demonstrating your ignorance, its very amusing :) > >Do you even know why fork() actually exists? Because back in the day >THREADS weren't a thing. If you want to COPY lots of program state using Threads were a thing back in mainframe days you dick, along with VMs too. >fork() then why the fuck aren't you using threads? Processes are Because in serious applications - ie nothing you write - robustness trumps speed of creation. A single process starts, loads up init then when a user or some other event needs servicing you fire off a seperate process so if that process dies it doesn't take town the whole fucking application. Oracle uses this method for good reason. Some browsers recently switched to a process-per-tab model too. It always amuses me when people who've only ever coded on windows spout a load of crap about things they know nothing about. >heavyweight OS primitives compared to threads. These days fork() and >associated horribleness like Linux's overcommit are an anachronism. Whatever you say Dilbert. https://dilbert.com/strip/1995-06-24
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 13:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s8862s$9cp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79674 |
> Oracle uses this method for good reason. ... Look at MS SQL Server - a DB-Server with a much modern architecture - it runs solid with MT since the first version in the 90s.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_L1peqs_@c81ltrsr_gfoo1.co.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 13:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s88d70$11a3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79680 |
On Fri, 21 May 2021 13:38:03 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Oracle uses this method for good reason. ... >Look at MS SQL Server - a DB-Server with a much modern architecture >- it runs solid with MT since the first version in the 90s. Clearly you never used the early versions. No one would bet their company on SQL Server back then, it was an unreliable toy compared to Oracle. Even today its feature list is poor compared to Oracle plus Oracle runs on virtually every OS that it can, SQL Server is Windows only.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 15:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s88dji$mrm$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79682 |
> Clearly you never used the early versions. ... I did use it since the 90s. You don't. > No one would bet their company on SQL Server back then, > it was an unreliable toy compared to Oracle. Have you ever noticed the periodic volleys of hundreds of fixes from Oracle in the press ? Have there ever been so much fixes on SQL Server ? You're really stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_km@gfepxabk0g_ytn7ta.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 14:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s88h89$12gu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79685 |
On Fri, 21 May 2021 15:46:25 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Clearly you never used the early versions. ... > >I did use it since the 90s. You don't. > >> No one would bet their company on SQL Server back then, >> it was an unreliable toy compared to Oracle. > >Have you ever noticed the periodic volleys of hundreds of fixes >from Oracle in the press ? Have there ever been so much fixes >on SQL Server ? You're really stupid. Yes, I'm weally weally shtupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 17:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s88i36$mld$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #79690 |
> Yes, I'm weally weally shtupid. As we say in Germany: insight is the first step towards improvement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 14:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5gPpI.412158$ST2.114507@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #79682 |
MrSpook_L1peqs_@c81ltrsr_gfoo1.co.uk writes:
>On Fri, 21 May 2021 13:38:03 +0200
>Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Oracle uses this method for good reason. ...
>>Look at MS SQL Server - a DB-Server with a much modern architecture
>>- it runs solid with MT since the first version in the 90s.
>
>Clearly you never used the early versions. No one would bet their company
>on SQL Server back then, it was an unreliable toy compared to Oracle.
Sybase (the code base that SQL Server was based on) was a fairly
robust and popular RDBMS in the day. Of course, SQL server ran on unix
at that time (Ashton-Tate/Microsoft SQL Server 1.0). Microsoft received
sole license to x86 in 1988.
August 1991: Sybase goes public at a split adjusted price of $4.40.
Sybase SQL server 4.0, and later 4.8 (the first smp server)
and 4.9.1, all outperformed competitors by significant margins
in standard benchmarks.
1993: Sybase and Microsoft dissolve their partnership. Microsoft
receives a copy of the SQL Server code base. In exchange Sybase
is free to deploy on the x86 platform which has now become the
chip of choice for Unix. Sybase SQL Server version 4.2 and Microsoft
SQL Server are identical. Their Transact-SQL (T-SQL) procedural
language is the same, as is the basic process architecture. From this
point the products diverge as Microsoft includes more Windows features
whilst Sybase adds Enterprise features (performance and scaling).
(in 1998 my former co-worker John Chen became CEO of Sybase after a stint at Pyramid).
Sybase was noted for storing data in columns rather than rows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Column-oriented_DBMS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MrSpook_6f@fypmp_.biz |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-05-21 14:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s88hp9$1an2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #79687 |
On Fri, 21 May 2021 14:15:29 GMT scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote: >MrSpook_L1peqs_@c81ltrsr_gfoo1.co.uk writes: >>On Fri, 21 May 2021 13:38:03 +0200 >>Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Oracle uses this method for good reason. ... >>>Look at MS SQL Server - a DB-Server with a much modern architecture >>>- it runs solid with MT since the first version in the 90s. >> >>Clearly you never used the early versions. No one would bet their company >>on SQL Server back then, it was an unreliable toy compared to Oracle. > >Sybase (the code base that SQL Server was based on) was a fairly >robust and popular RDBMS in the day. Of course, SQL server ran on unix Sybase was ok, I used it for quite a long time in finance as it was popular there due to a much lower install cost than Oracle. To give it credit T/SQL is a much nicer language than Oracles PL/SQL, but its dirty read transaction system was hopeless and it had no deadlock handling mechanism other than the kill one of the deadlocked processes which is frankly fucking useless and a PITA when it happens in the middle of the night - which it did, often. Oracle when presented with a deadlock does a silent rollback on one of the transactions and suspends it until it can proceed. > 1993: Sybase and Microsoft dissolve their partnership. Microsoft > receives a copy of the SQL Server code base. In exchange Sybase > is free to deploy on the x86 platform which has now become the > chip of choice for Unix. Sybase SQL Server version 4.2 and Microsoft x86 chip of choice for Unix in 93? Who wrote that, Darl McBride? PA-RISC and Sparc had the unix space carved up between them back then with RS/6000 bringing up the rear. x86 was SCO which was a bit part player in the unix arena.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web