Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #13609
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Oozing poison |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| References | (5 earlier) <4f217fc2$0$4387$7b1e8fa0@news.nbl.fi> <ILhUq.10761$Jp3.1129@news.usenetserver.com> <jfsc2b$bkp$1@speranza.aioe.org> <T4jUq.10763$Jp3.2627@news.usenetserver.com> <9of1duF8j0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| Organization | |
| Organization | UseNetServer - www.usenetserver.com |
| Message-ID | <MCDUq.107191$487.97@news.usenetserver.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2012-01-27 20:16 +0000 |
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> writes: >On 01/27/12 09:55 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Cholo Lennon<chololennon@hotmail.com> writes: >>> On 26/01/2012 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>> The readability of C++ seems to get worse with each new version of the >>>> standard. Once the<XXX> elements (static/dynamic casts, templates) were added >>>> to the language, it became worse than perl for readability. >>> >>> Really? Do you think C++ cast operators go against readability? For me >>> is the opposite: At glance, for example, they give you more information >>> than the traditional C cast and, as a result, they are (IMHO) more readable. >>> >> >> Buenas, >> >> I think they may provide better _maintainability_ at the expense of _readability_. >> >> It may also be that for someone coming from a C background (starting in 1978), >> the dynamic/static cast syntax just looks alien and out of place. >> >> Templates and exceptions on the other hand, have a distinct impact on code size >> (thus icache footprint, thus performance). > >The only performance impact I have ever measured from the use of >exceptions is improvement. I have been testing compilers since the mid >90s and I have only found one compiler/platform (that compiler refused >to inline any function that could throw) where exceptions had a >detrimental impact on performance. > >In overall performance terms, templates are no worse and often a >significant improvement over the direct C equivalent (macros) because >they aren't necessary inlined. They can also provide significant >performance improvements over another C alternative, the use of void* >and function pointers (sorting being the classic example). > >Yes you can end up with multiple instances of class methods, but that is >the price you pay for type safety. Anyway, what proportion of a decent >sized project would that represent? For containers of pointers one can >easily use inline wrappers round a container of void* to avoid bloat >while retaining type safety. In most code I have seen, containers of T* >are more numerous than containers of T > >Thus with contemporary tools, the twin myths of exception performance >and template code bloat are just that: myths. Unless you are writing an operating system or hypervisor where every byte counts. scott
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-10 04:35 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-10 15:19 +0000
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 00:43 -0800
Re: Oozing poison "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 10:01 +0100
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-11 22:09 +1300
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 01:42 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-11 13:36 +0000
Re: Oozing poison John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2012-01-11 10:08 -0600
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-12 06:08 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2012-01-12 14:13 +0000
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:08 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Henrik Faber <hfaber@invalid.net> - 2012-01-17 12:50 +0100
Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-13 02:18 -0800
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:24 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-11 16:50 +0000
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-12 06:04 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-12 10:13 -0500
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:19 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-17 08:04 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-18 13:51 +0900
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 04:40 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Quint Rankid <qbr567@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 09:05 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Wil Evers <bouncer@dev.null> - 2012-01-21 18:52 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Quint Rankid <qbr567@gmail.com> - 2012-01-21 11:33 -0800
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 02:23 -0800
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 02:07 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-25 07:59 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 07:54 +1300
Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-21 22:43 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 21:05 +1300
Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-22 18:21 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-23 15:55 +0000
Re: Oozing poison gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-01-23 08:37 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2012-01-24 22:48 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-25 19:44 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 08:56 +1300
Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-25 23:04 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 03:24 -0800
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:13 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-27 00:12 +0000
Re: Oozing poison "MikeWhy" <boat042-nospam@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-26 22:44 -0600
Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-28 14:25 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-02-26 22:16 -0600
Re: Oozing poison "Gernot Frisch" <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-24 18:21 +0100
Re: Oozing poison Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2012-01-24 12:41 -0500
Re: Oozing poison Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 03:25 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-25 19:44 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 09:44 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-26 10:36 +0000
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:18 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 20:42 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-01-26 16:30 +0000
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 19:24 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-26 17:13 -0300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-26 20:55 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-26 22:08 +0000
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 00:32 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-01-28 12:59 +0100
Re: Oozing poison Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 18:28 -0300
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-29 18:02 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-27 20:18 +1300
Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-27 18:09 +0900
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 20:29 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 10:06 +1300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 21:26 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 12:22 +1300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 04:18 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-01-28 13:44 +0900
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 21:31 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 11:32 +1300
Re: Oozing poison 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-28 14:55 -0800
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 11:59 +1300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-30 17:08 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 18:06 +1300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-28 22:49 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-29 12:22 +1300
Re: Oozing poison scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2012-01-27 20:16 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-28 10:01 +1300
Re: Oozing poison Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-01-28 16:00 +0000
Re: Oozing poison Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-10 21:42 +0000
Re: Oozing poison AD <isquat@gmail.com> - 2012-01-17 02:31 -0800
csiph-web