Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges"

From	Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges"
Date	2022-04-27 08:40 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<t4avhr$am$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<t47rhm$1v44$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t48d7a$u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t48epq$rh4$1@dont-email.me> <t48k16$7a5$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t4aud3$1euh$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:11:36 -0000 (UTC)
> Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> wrote:
>>Alf P. Steinbach <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The Ranges library adds not just an new huge API but another large 
>>> domain specific language which results in very brittle code, and huge 
>>> complexity, that maintenance programmers must deal with.
>>
>>So if you want the same functionality in your program it's preferable
>>to implement it yourself, making it significantly less tested and thus
>>less reliable, and probably even more "brittle" (whatever that means)?
>>Also maintenance is probably going to only increase because your version
>>will inevitably be buggy or lacking.
> 
> You seem to assume everyone apart from the C++ committee is an idiot and
> can't write basic algorithms correctly.

No. Most experienced programmers are pretty intelligent and smart, and
most if not all of them make programming mistakes, even with the simplest
of algorithms or tasks. Why do you think that testing (eg. unit testing)
is such a huge deal in programming? Because programmers, no matter how
intelligent, how smart, how experienced, how talented, make mistakes,
even with the simplests of tasks.

One of the archetypal examples of this is implementing a binary search
of a sorted array. Give this task to programmers and quite a surprising
amount of them will implement it incorrectly (most typically making an
off-by-one error).

That's why, in general (unless there's a good reason not to), it's
better to use std::lower_bound or std::binary_search instead of writing
your own: The standard library implementation is pretty much guaranteed
to be bug-free.

Also, if you are reviewing code, maintaining code, writing unit tests for
some code, you can safely skip having to check if that std::lower_bound
actually works correctly. With a custom implementation you can't (and for
good reason).

And that's just with an algorithm as simple as a binary search. Consider
much more complex algorithms (or data containers).

Thread

"Performance of C++20's Ranges" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2022-04-26 01:13 -0300
  Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-26 09:15 +0000
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-26 09:27 +0000
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-26 16:29 +0200
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:45 -0700
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 11:42 +0200
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-26 11:11 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 13:31 +0200
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-04-26 06:46 -0700
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 08:20 +0000
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 08:40 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:12 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-27 16:09 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 16:21 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-04-29 16:15 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-30 16:00 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 19:03 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-27 11:12 -0400
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-28 06:45 +0000
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 06:30 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-28 23:57 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-29 06:07 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-04-29 16:28 -0700
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-05-02 05:01 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-05-10 07:36 -0700
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-26 11:28 -0400
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2022-04-26 18:13 +0200
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-26 16:24 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2022-04-26 12:48 -0400
    Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2022-04-26 20:20 -0300
      Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 08:30 +0000
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-27 08:50 +0000
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 05:12 -0700
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:18 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 18:56 +0200
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 08:40 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-04-28 13:54 +0300
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 13:11 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:25 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:30 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:45 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:52 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:57 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:01 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:06 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:09 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:14 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:11 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:20 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:31 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:15 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 13:07 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:17 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:31 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:50 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 17:55 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:59 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:02 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 16:13 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 18:20 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:27 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 20:48 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 07:34 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-30 17:31 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 20:30 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-01 15:20 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:18 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-05-01 16:25 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-05-01 23:14 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:52 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-28 18:21 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-29 09:29 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-04-28 18:19 +0000
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 21:01 +0200
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-04-28 16:07 -0700
                Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:22 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-04-28 10:57 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-28 15:27 +0000
              Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2022-04-28 09:26 -0700
        Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 17:07 +0200
          Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-04-27 15:54 +0000
            Re: "Performance of C++20's Ranges" Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-04-27 18:35 +0200

csiph-web