Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #84323 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-05-29 02:59 +0200 |
| Last post | 2022-06-01 18:39 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 157 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 02:59 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-29 05:46 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 08:03 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 08:34 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-05-29 01:36 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 10:37 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-05-29 02:09 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 11:16 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-05-29 03:08 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 12:44 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-05-29 16:05 +0300
Re: Wikipedia Freethinker <freethinker@mymail.com> - 2022-05-29 15:19 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 15:27 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-29 17:26 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 19:18 +0200
Re: Wikipedia scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-29 17:49 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-05-30 00:25 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2022-06-04 13:00 -0400
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 19:19 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 11:48 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-30 06:06 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2022-06-04 13:02 -0400
Re: Wikipedia Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-29 17:18 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 18:22 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-30 06:08 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 04:41 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-30 06:06 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-30 19:31 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-30 19:52 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-05-31 14:34 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 15:15 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 18:00 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 19:06 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 18:43 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 19:48 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 09:26 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 09:44 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-06-01 01:47 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 13:53 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 17:05 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 17:06 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-02 04:57 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 07:43 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-02 08:53 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 12:56 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-02 12:46 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 14:56 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:14 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:19 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:26 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-06-03 14:22 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 15:34 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 07:24 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 14:56 +0000
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 08:06 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-03 17:30 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 10:37 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-03 20:33 +0200
Re: Wikipedia scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-06-03 18:59 +0000
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 12:35 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Freethinker <freethinker@mymail.com> - 2022-06-03 23:42 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-06-04 08:10 +0000
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 11:59 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-04 15:27 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-04 15:31 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-06-03 17:02 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 08:11 -0700
Re: Wikipedia "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 14:23 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 14:58 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-06-04 08:00 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-02 16:00 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 16:09 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 16:14 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2022-06-04 13:20 -0400
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 19:23 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 04:40 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 14:00 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-02 12:47 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 14:59 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:17 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:20 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:27 +0000
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-02 16:13 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 10:09 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-02 22:35 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:22 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:23 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:28 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:35 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 05:22 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 07:23 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 22:25 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 07:28 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 22:31 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 06:22 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 08:38 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 10:14 +0000
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:32 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 15:35 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 14:12 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-03 10:31 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-06-02 19:12 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> - 2022-06-04 13:09 -0400
Re: Wikipedia Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-02 17:54 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-06-02 20:40 +0300
Re: Wikipedia Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-02 18:50 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-06-03 04:25 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 14:21 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 06:17 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 15:34 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 07:13 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 16:55 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 16:29 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 16:56 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 07:58 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 17:07 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 17:50 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 18:11 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 17:41 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-06-01 17:42 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 09:12 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-06-01 18:35 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 18:36 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-06-01 18:59 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 19:04 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 10:04 -0700
Re: Wikipedia Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-06-07 08:28 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 21:22 +0200
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 13:43 -0700
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-02 10:07 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-06-07 08:21 -0700
Re: Wikipedia "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2022-06-10 07:18 -0700
Re: Wikipedia muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-31 18:34 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 19:37 +0100
Re: Wikipedia muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-31 18:42 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 20:00 +0100
Re: Wikipedia muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-31 19:19 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 20:28 +0100
Re: Wikipedia muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-06-01 18:07 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 20:28 +0200
Re: Wikipedia scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-31 19:37 +0000
Re: Wikipedia Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-31 21:27 +0100
Re: "std::" (was: Wikipedia) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-05-31 21:17 +0100
Re: "std::" (was: Wikipedia) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 06:33 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 09:34 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 05:40 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2022-05-31 17:18 +0100
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 18:25 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 09:38 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 09:46 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 10:16 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 10:21 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 17:13 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 17:15 +0200
Re: Wikipedia David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-06-01 18:12 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 18:18 +0200
Re: Wikipedia Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 18:39 +0200
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Freethinker <freethinker@mymail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 23:42 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7dv8v$1mb5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84515 |
On 03.06.22 20:59, Scott Lurndal wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: You guys could have written five programs > in the time you've wasted arguing about this. Sure, but this made a lot more fun. It's good entertainment for free.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 08:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t7f412$13p1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84520 |
On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 23:42:55 +0200 Freethinker <freethinker@mymail.com> wrote: >On 03.06.22 20:59, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > > You guys could have written five programs >> in the time you've wasted arguing about this. > >Sure, but this made a lot more fun. It's good entertainment for free. And is the whole point of usenet after all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 11:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5128f8e9-e470-463b-931f-d72363cc215en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #84514 |
On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 2:33:24 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote: > > > > Finally, they mention name clashes as a possible issue, but go on to say: > > "However, [a name clash] is not particularly likely to lead to a resolution > > that is not an error and people who use using namespace std are supposed > > to know about std and about this risk." _You_ may think that the > > risk of a name clash is too big of a risk to take, but Stroustrup and > > Sutter don't seem to think so. > They say it is a risk - they don't say if they recommend taking the risk > or not. You don't have to be a textual scholar to know that a sentence beginning with "However" is expressing another point of view than the sentence that preceded it, they're clearly saying that the compiler will likely catch the name clashes so it's not that big a deal. I can't say I've found any of your other points convincing, but I think everything that can be said on the subject has been said. Best regards, Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 15:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7fmjm$m0g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84516 |
On 03/06/2022 20:59, daniel...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 2:33:24 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote: >>> >>> Finally, they mention name clashes as a possible issue, but go on to say: >>> "However, [a name clash] is not particularly likely to lead to a resolution >>> that is not an error and people who use using namespace std are supposed >>> to know about std and about this risk." _You_ may think that the >>> risk of a name clash is too big of a risk to take, but Stroustrup and >>> Sutter don't seem to think so. >> They say it is a risk - they don't say if they recommend taking the risk >> or not. > > You don't have to be a textual scholar to know that a sentence beginning > with "However" is expressing another point of view than the sentence that > preceded it, they're clearly saying that the compiler will likely catch the > name clashes so it's not that big a deal. > > I can't say I've found any of your other points convincing, but I think > everything that can be said on the subject has been said. > Fair enough. Polite differences of opinion is the best we can ever hope for on Usenet! And agreement would be boring :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 15:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t7ftru$1jnl$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84510 |
daniel...@gmail.com <danielaparker@gmail.com> wrote: >> Perhaps someone could present a well-formulated argument to the authors >> about why that using expression shouldn't be there, as it teaches new >> C++ programmers bad habits. I think *avoiding* "using namespace std;" >> should be a Core Guideline. > > That's what _you_ think, that's what David thinks, and it may even be what I > think. But that's not what the Core Guidelines say. The Core Guidelines is not an immutable Holy Scripture that must never be changed lest you be smitten by God. The authors might be convinced to change that part of it if a good-enough persuasive argument is presented to them. If they decide not to change it the fine, but it would be nice if they at least offered an explanation of why.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Manfred <noname@add.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 17:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7d7q6$18tq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84507 |
On 6/3/2022 4:24 PM, daniel...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 9:22:37 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: >>> >> I will remove "using namespace std;" from the Wikipedia article >> sometime next week; and then again a few weeks later: I will not tell >> you exactly when I am going to change it forcing you to waste time keep >> checking it if you really want an edit war. >> > You could, of course, do that, there is little to stop you, Wikipedia is, > after all, free range. But it would be impolite, causing, as it were, > a certain amount of distress. Miss Manners would not approve. Are you calling for manners when Bonita is involved? Seriously? > > Perhaps you feel that somebody is being wrong on the internet, > and that duty calls. But at least consider that the C++ Core Guidelines > show a "good" example that also has "using namespace std" at file > scope. Perhaps having this line above 166 lines of code is not the > greatest wrong of all times. But if you're really worried about name > clashes, I have some very bad news for you, the code also includes > Windows.h ... > > Maybe go with politeness this time? > > Best regards, > Daniel > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 08:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <35217fb2-fbd2-467c-af9c-eb37143aa639n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #84509 |
On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 11:02:46 AM UTC-4, Manfred wrote: > Are you calling for manners when Bonita is involved? > Seriously? It would be nice, yes. Best regards, Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 14:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <t7du3v$90h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84507 |
On 6/3/2022 7:24 AM, daniel...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 9:22:37 AM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote: >>> >> I will remove "using namespace std;" from the Wikipedia article >> sometime next week; and then again a few weeks later: I will not tell >> you exactly when I am going to change it forcing you to waste time keep >> checking it if you really want an edit war. >> > You could, of course, do that, there is little to stop you, Wikipedia is, > after all, free range. But it would be impolite, causing, as it were, > a certain amount of distress. Miss Manners would not approve. > > Perhaps you feel that somebody is being wrong on the internet, > and that duty calls. But at least consider that the C++ Core Guidelines > show a "good" example that also has "using namespace std" at file > scope. Perhaps having this line above 166 lines of code is not the > greatest wrong of all times. But if you're really worried about name > clashes, I have some very bad news for you, the code also includes > Windows.h ... > > Maybe go with politeness this time? Yes, indeed. Also, try to define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN when appropriate... ;^)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 14:58 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7ac4f$s2m$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84468 |
> It's relatively clear that you are engaging in projection there, > assigning to others your own personal problems. ... Sorry, where do I behave like the people I desribe here ? Where do I dictate my taste to others ? Projection seems to be the only psychological word you know. That's kitchen sink psychology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 08:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86zgiszd5x.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #84468 |
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes: > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [...] > > [...] The only thing that amazes me is why anybody here takes you > seriously. [...] I daresay most regulars in the group simply ignore postings from Bonita Montero. Perhaps you should consider doing the same.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 16:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7afq1$rq6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84465 |
On 02/06/2022 12:56, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 02.06.2022 um 10:53 schrieb Juha Nieminen: >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Do you know every single name in the standard library? From a random >>>> list >>>> of names could you point out with accuracy which ones are used in the >>>> standard library and which ones aren't? How many programmers do you >>>> think >>>> would be able to do that? >>> >>> No, but my compiler does and gives me an error if there are any name >>> clashes. And in rare cases where I can't disambiguate a symbol which >>> could be part of multiple namespaces I right-click the symbol and >>> click "Go to definition" or "Go to declaration" and that is it. >>> So where's the problem ? >> >> Code should be readable ... > > You have a very compulsive opinion of what is readable. You and > some others here have an "occupational illness" of many programmers > that feel uncertain. That helps to see more details, but these people > see a lot of irrelevant details and have less capabilify to see com- > prehensive relations among those details and therefore shouldn't > program. That's also while lowers the emotional level below zero > that this kind of experiencing leaves some unhealthy enduring > effects with that persons. That's generally adverse but doesnt > forces to lead to mental illnes. But if these people think they > can dictate to how I program because they would be otherwise frus- > trated or angry, this is a strong sign for a severe personality > disorder (personality-disorders are mainly relational disorders > and that these people here have such a disorder is obvious). I'm not keen on personal topics, but you are starting to sound like Fir. That is just meaningless ramble, totally void of any content or rational argument. And I know you can write a lot better English than that. If this thread has got you so worked up that you are getting angry and frustrated, and can't discuss this from a technical viewpoint, then drop it. You are not helping your case.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 16:09 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7aga4$uuc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84473 |
Am 02.06.2022 um 16:00 schrieb David Brown: > On 02/06/2022 12:56, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 02.06.2022 um 10:53 schrieb Juha Nieminen: >>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Do you know every single name in the standard library? From a >>>>> random list >>>>> of names could you point out with accuracy which ones are used in the >>>>> standard library and which ones aren't? How many programmers do you >>>>> think >>>>> would be able to do that? >>>> >>>> No, but my compiler does and gives me an error if there are any name >>>> clashes. And in rare cases where I can't disambiguate a symbol which >>>> could be part of multiple namespaces I right-click the symbol and >>>> click "Go to definition" or "Go to declaration" and that is it. >>>> So where's the problem ? >>> >>> Code should be readable ... >> >> You have a very compulsive opinion of what is readable. You and >> some others here have an "occupational illness" of many programmers >> that feel uncertain. That helps to see more details, but these people >> see a lot of irrelevant details and have less capabilify to see com- >> prehensive relations among those details and therefore shouldn't >> program. That's also while lowers the emotional level below zero >> that this kind of experiencing leaves some unhealthy enduring >> effects with that persons. That's generally adverse but doesnt >> forces to lead to mental illnes. But if these people think they >> can dictate to how I program because they would be otherwise frus- >> trated or angry, this is a strong sign for a severe personality >> disorder (personality-disorders are mainly relational disorders >> and that these people here have such a disorder is obvious). > > I'm not keen on personal topics, but you are starting to sound like Fir. > That is just meaningless ramble, totally void of any content or > rational argument. ... My argumenta re very rational, but at the level really relevant here. There wouldn't be any problem leaving my Wikipedia code as it is. It's all about dictating taste.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 16:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7agk6$1ec$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84474 |
Am 02.06.2022 um 16:09 schrieb Bonita Montero: > Am 02.06.2022 um 16:00 schrieb David Brown: >> On 02/06/2022 12:56, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 02.06.2022 um 10:53 schrieb Juha Nieminen: >>>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Do you know every single name in the standard library? From a >>>>>> random list >>>>>> of names could you point out with accuracy which ones are used in the >>>>>> standard library and which ones aren't? How many programmers do >>>>>> you think >>>>>> would be able to do that? >>>>> >>>>> No, but my compiler does and gives me an error if there are any name >>>>> clashes. And in rare cases where I can't disambiguate a symbol which >>>>> could be part of multiple namespaces I right-click the symbol and >>>>> click "Go to definition" or "Go to declaration" and that is it. >>>>> So where's the problem ? >>>> >>>> Code should be readable ... >>> >>> You have a very compulsive opinion of what is readable. You and >>> some others here have an "occupational illness" of many programmers >>> that feel uncertain. That helps to see more details, but these people >>> see a lot of irrelevant details and have less capabilify to see com- >>> prehensive relations among those details and therefore shouldn't >>> program. That's also while lowers the emotional level below zero >>> that this kind of experiencing leaves some unhealthy enduring >>> effects with that persons. That's generally adverse but doesnt >>> forces to lead to mental illnes. But if these people think they >>> can dictate to how I program because they would be otherwise frus- >>> trated or angry, this is a strong sign for a severe personality >>> disorder (personality-disorders are mainly relational disorders >>> and that these people here have such a disorder is obvious). >> >> I'm not keen on personal topics, but you are starting to sound like >> Fir. That is just meaningless ramble, totally void of any content or >> rational argument. ... > > My argumenta re very rational, but at the level really relevant here. > There wouldn't be any problem leaving my Wikipedia code as it is. It's > all about dictating taste. And further: everyone wants that other people adapt to their rules. But that's all up to a certain level, beyond that there's a level where there's an accented personality with a surpassing level of this desire, and above that like we see here - that's really com- pulsive and disordered.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Popping Mad <rainbow@colition.gov> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 13:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <t7g4al$fkb$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #84465 |
On 6/2/22 06:56, Bonita Montero wrote: > That helps to see more details, but these people > see a lot of irrelevant details and have less capabilify to see com- > prehensive relations among those details and therefore shouldn't > program. that is bullshit also People code because they want to and it is not you to decide.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-04 19:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7g4do$ahl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84539 |
Am 04.06.2022 um 19:20 schrieb Popping Mad: > On 6/2/22 06:56, Bonita Montero wrote: >> That helps to see more details, but these people >> see a lot of irrelevant details and have less capabilify to see com- >> prehensive relations among those details and therefore shouldn't >> program. > > > that is bullshit also > > People code because they want to and it is not you to decide. I just described some pople's cognitive style while programming and which is absolutely not appropriate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 04:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2e7091e6-edc2-4b51-9255-18dbbf568775n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #84462 |
On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 09:53:22 UTC+1, Juha Nieminen wrote: > > I can't think of any situation where "using namespace std;" would > actually introduce some benefit to the code, in terms of readability > or otherwise. I can think of plenty of examples of the opposite. > I tend to include the C math library. The reason is that my code involves a lot of complicated mathematical formulae. The convention is that the identifier "cos" means "take the cosine". There's no broad convention for using "std::cos", "math.cos". or even "cosine". Also, the convention is that a formula is one expression. Breaking it up over several lines makes it harder rather than easier to read. So you've got long complicated expressions with calls to common functions embedded in them. It's clearly better to be able to use the accepted names for these functions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 14:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7a8ol$3fu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84466 |
Am 02.06.2022 um 13:40 schrieb Malcolm McLean: > On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 09:53:22 UTC+1, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> >> I can't think of any situation where "using namespace std;" would >> actually introduce some benefit to the code, in terms of readability >> or otherwise. I can think of plenty of examples of the opposite. >> > I tend to include the C math library. > > The reason is that my code involves a lot of complicated mathematical > formulae. The convention is that the identifier "cos" means "take the > cosine". There's no broad convention for using "std::cos", "math.cos". > or even "cosine". Are you nuts ? There may be a dozen of cos inside other namespaces !!!!! Hrhr.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 12:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t7abh1$6qe$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84467 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > Am 02.06.2022 um 13:40 schrieb Malcolm McLean: >> On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 09:53:22 UTC+1, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>> >>> I can't think of any situation where "using namespace std;" would >>> actually introduce some benefit to the code, in terms of readability >>> or otherwise. I can think of plenty of examples of the opposite. >>> >> I tend to include the C math library. >> >> The reason is that my code involves a lot of complicated mathematical >> formulae. The convention is that the identifier "cos" means "take the >> cosine". There's no broad convention for using "std::cos", "math.cos". >> or even "cosine". > > Are you nuts ? There may be a dozen of cos inside other namespaces !!!!! > Hrhr. Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you write things like that?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 14:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <t7ac6p$s2m$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #84469 |
Am 02.06.2022 um 14:47 schrieb Juha Nieminen: > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: >> Am 02.06.2022 um 13:40 schrieb Malcolm McLean: >>> On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 09:53:22 UTC+1, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>>> >>>> I can't think of any situation where "using namespace std;" would >>>> actually introduce some benefit to the code, in terms of readability >>>> or otherwise. I can think of plenty of examples of the opposite. >>>> >>> I tend to include the C math library. >>> >>> The reason is that my code involves a lot of complicated mathematical >>> formulae. The convention is that the identifier "cos" means "take the >>> cosine". There's no broad convention for using "std::cos", "math.cos". >>> or even "cosine". >> >> Are you nuts ? There may be a dozen of cos inside other namespaces !!!!! >> Hrhr. > > Do you really expect people to take you seriously when you write things > like that? I only want to show that any discussion on the level of those who want to dictate their taste is simply a waste of time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-03 04:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t7c20k$1b85$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84472 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > who want to dictate their taste You have been repeating that quite many times now. And then you are saying it's me who's obsessed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web