Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
You are an idiot. Seems that you do not know neither C, nor C++. privilege control can be implemented in C without any trouble. C++ has _other_ advantages on C. Other advantages on C??? Do you know about any future in C++ that can't be implemented in C except inheritence and the ability to "protect" variables (which is NOT so easily implemented in C). If you are so smart why not you will list those futures and prove that they can't be implemented in C. And by the way, why not you will show us your implementation of how to (realy) "protect" variables in a C structure. What OO application in C++ have you written, a scientific calculator with a gtk-- interface?? Get yourself a life and don't talk about things which you obviously do not understand (thus - don't talk at all). Thx, Ilya 'rilel' Khayutin __ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Ilya Khayutin wrote: Other advantages on C??? Do you know about any future in C++ that can't be implemented in C For one, inline functions. Don't even get me started on macros. except inheritence and the ability to "protect" variables (which is NOT so easily implemented in C). Both are -- have a look at the Gtk+ object system If you are so smart why not you will list those futures and prove that they can't be implemented in C. Becasue C macros are pitiful. And by the way, why not you will show us your implementation of how to (realy) "protect" variables in a C structure. Why should he? you have obviously done no research to find out yourself. -- Moshe Zadka [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is no IGLU cabal. http://advogato.org/person/moshez = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Adam Morrison on Sun, Jul 23, 2000: I haven't sene many programmers who go and fiddle with struct __jmp_buf instead of using setjmp/longjmp. You don't have to look very far, actually. http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/course/os/Ex3/demo.c I know. I did this exercise too. But my point stands: I haven't seen many programmers fiddling with __jmp_buf or other "internal" structures directly. If you have a documented interface, you don't really need to enforce it, especially given that every "protection" is easy to "break". Vadik. -- Taunt not the sysadmin, for he can become you and make your life interesting. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Ury Segal on Sun, Jul 23, 2000: Yes. Do you know what is a standard ? Something that is widely implemented and followed, perhaps? Have you EVER been involved in standatrizing effort ? No, sadly. You? Did you ever READ a standard? Do RFCs or ISO standards qualify? In this case, yes. which is used by a VERY large amount of people. Same large amount of people who choose Windows and eat in McDonald's. Oh - you see, those people makes the economy. People like you lives on another, imagenary world. #ifdef OFFTOPIC I enjoy it there. I prefer to live in an imaginary world and not follow hordes. People tell me I need to know Windows to survive in the real world. I don't know it and still survive. According to the definition of these people, I live in an imaginary world. The point being that: 1. I don't need to deal with things I don't want to if I can do without it. 2. The fact that the majority eats at McDonald's, uses Windows, or programs in C++ doesn't make any of these products good. #undef OFFTOPIC The GNU compiler, g++, supports *_well_* 99.9% of the standard C++ Some C++ professional say otherwise, but I'm not one, so I won't comment on this. Give me one FUCKING "expert" that said that. For some reason, I haven't saved the addresses of FUCKING "experts", as you choose to define them. I didn't think it would be useful for me, as I don't normally use C++. C++ is an object-oriented programming language? Gimme a break. YOU do not define what is an OO language. The world aroud you, which you obviously Ignore, defined, long time ago, that C++ is an OO language. Oh. The World. Right. So some of the people who know lots of programming languages (not me) are parts of The World, and some aren't. So you, dear, don't dare to define Operating System. The World has defined DOS to be one. Nothing. People wrote object oriented code in C long before C++ was born. On SUCH a small scale, that you cannot give me one example of your enougmous exagragations. Well, one example (however, written long after C++ was born, so I hope it qualifies nevertheless) is "inheritance" and type recognition in the implementation of Soft Updates in recent 4.4BSD-based kernels. BTW, automatic type recognition is not in C++ yet. Lisp hackers claim that things like that are built into Lisp, but I haven't learnt the language yet (I intend to do it one day), so I'll say no more about it. Object orientation is a function of design, not language. You can write object-oriented assembly, and you can write C++ with gotos. So fucking what ? So fucking nothing. So? You can't _really_ hide what's inside. You always open your header files. Anyone can just insert "public:" into the header file and do whatever they bloody want. Everybody can do whatever in whatsoever language. Not entirely true, but nevermind. What is your point, or are you wasting our time ? Yes, I'm wasting your collective time. My point being that C++ isn't worth its complexity, _and_ same things may be achieved in C with not a lot of effort. What about this: C is a small simple elegant language. It's relatively easy to learn. There are lots of people who actually know all of C by heart. C++ is a bloated pig which just grew into existance. It has helluva lot of features. There are very few people who actually know all of C++. Everybody knows some subset, You are right on this, but - and the problem is that everybody knows a different subset of the language. Tell me please, on what research, or ANYTHING, are you basic this idiotic sentense ? Alright, the last "everybody" was wrong. To phrase it better: People who know subsets of C++ often know different subsets thereof. And I based it on my personal experience. Some know templates but don't know multiple inheritance, some know operator overloading but have difficulties with "protected". Yeah right. There was some programmer that reported that in his experience C++ programs were almost always bigger and almost always needed longer time to write than functionally equivalent C programs. I wrote 100's of 1000's of lines in both C and C++, and for big projects, C++ kicks C every time. In what respect? Are the programs smaller? Do you write C++ faster than C? Now THIS programmer tell you that. Well, opinions differ. Who told you THIS stuff? Some based on what other people told me (or wrote for the general public), some on my experience. Do you know C++ at all ? A subset. I have that nice brown book, _The C++ Reference Manual_ by Stroustrup and someone whose name I can't recall ATM (the book is not here right now), which I recommend to anyone who insists on using that language. That's where I learnt most of the C++ I know from. Vadik. -- It was state of the art, he said. The art in this case was probably pottery. -- Terry
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
VV Something that is widely implemented and followed, perhaps? You must mean Microsoft Office *ducks* *runs* *hides* VV No, sadly. You? ITYM "no, luckily". It isn't real flamewar unless it is over One True Standard. VV For some reason, I haven't saved the addresses of FUCKING VV "experts", as you choose to define them. I didn't think it would Well, taken any random expert, there's a good chance that he had... Oh well, I better shut up just now. VV Everybody can do whatever in whatsoever language. VV VV Not entirely true, but nevermind. Given enough time and resource - definitely. Having made entire DB solution in pure Javascript (no, it wasn't fun), I'm firm in this. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells phone +972-3-9316425/\ JRRT LotR. http://sharat.co.il/frodo/ whois:!SM8333 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote: VV Something that is widely implemented and followed, perhaps? You must mean Microsoft Office *ducks* *runs* *hides* for that matter, YES. M$office is a DE FACTO standard. question is are we discussing de-facto or de-jure standards. you have to be more specific, because in the computer world it's the de-jure standard to mean "de-facto standard" when using the word "standard", however this list is anything BUT the rest of the computer world. Given enough time and resource - definitely. Having made entire DB solution in pure Javascript (no, it wasn't fun), I'm firm in this. now THAT sounds impressive. does it parse XML too? do publish it in OpenSource :-) may I offer an "advanced tricks in Javascript" symposium too? Chen told me she fudged inheritence for it, you can have shared object libraries if they are elsewhere in the frameset... all in all it's pretty strong compared to what most people use it for (scrolling status bars... yyyech.) -- Ira Abramov, GNU/Linux advocate. (@- member IGLU, Israeli Linux Users Group //\ (there's no iglu cabal) v_/_Use Linux or die. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
IA Given enough time and resource - definitely. Having made entire DB IA solution in pure Javascript (no, it wasn't fun), I'm firm in this. IA IA now THAT sounds impressive. does it parse XML too? do publish it in IA OpenSource :-) No, it didn't (though I guess I might do that too, in limited sense of it). And it was commercial project, and I hope nobody will ever see code behind that. That was ugly. Also, it wasn't really _complete_ DB - it was read-only, i.e. you could search/fetch, but not write. IA may I offer an "advanced tricks in Javascript" symposium too? Chen told IA me she fudged inheritence for it, you can have shared object libraries Well, basically since you can dynamically generate Javascript code in Javascript, you can do all sorts of mess over there. The only problem is interaction with outer word, which requires help from the browser and/or some beckend (e.g. in Perl). But that is really ugly hacks, you need to sweat for hours for things that are done in 2 statements in normal languages. Also, most browsers often get crazy when you do such things - that was obviously not what their creators intended when they wrote Javascript support. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells phone +972-3-9316425/\ JRRT LotR. http://sharat.co.il/frodo/ whois:!SM8333 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo on Mon, Jul 24, 2000: [standard] VV Something that is widely implemented and followed, perhaps? You must mean Microsoft Office *ducks* *runs* *hides* Now, Frodo, this is MEAN. Vadik. -- Spelling is a lossed art. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Ilya Khayutin on Fri, Jul 21, 2000: From this thread I got the impression that most people here think that C++ is still that language which has no standart, used by small groups of people and is realy useless. Well guys... IT IS NOT THE 80s ANYMORE!!! Pity. It is year 2000 and C++ is a standartized language Yeah right. Yes. Do you know what is a standard ? Have you EVER been involved in standatrizing effort ? Did you ever READ a standard? which is used by a VERY large amount of people. Same large amount of people who choose Windows and eat in McDonald's. Oh - you see, those people makes the economy. People like you lives on another, imagenary world. The GNU compiler, g++, supports *_well_* 99.9% of the standard C++ Some C++ professional say otherwise, but I'm not one, so I won't comment on this. Give me one FUCKING "expert" that said that. Also, exprience has proven that using an OO design for large software packages is MUCH more efficient than plain function based design. C++ is an object-oriented programming language? Gimme a break. YOU do not define what is an OO language. The world aroud you, which you obviously Ignore, defined, long time ago, that C++ is an OO language. Someone said that because gtk+ uses its own implementation of an OO architecture in plain C, there is no reason to it to use C++. WHAT??? Nothing. People wrote object oriented code in C long before C++ was born. On SUCH a small scale, that you cannot give me one example of your enougmous exagragations. Object orientation is a function of design, not language. You can write object-oriented assembly, and you can write C++ with gotos. So fucking what ? There is a big diffrence between a C++ class and a C struct: PRIVELEGE CONTROL!! So? You can't _really_ hide what's inside. You always open your header files. Anyone can just insert "public:" into the header file and do whatever they bloody want. Everybody can do whatever in whatsoever language. What is your point, or are you wasting our time ? What about this: C is a small simple elegant language. It's relatively easy to learn. There are lots of people who actually know all of C by heart. C++ is a bloated pig which just grew into existance. It has helluva lot of features. There are very few people who actually know all of C++. Everybody knows some subset, You are right on this, but - and the problem is that everybody knows a different subset of the language. Tell me please, on what research, or ANYTHING, are you basic this idiotic sentense ? The biggest mistake in design of C++ was to base it on C. It makes the code MUCH less buggy. Yeah right. There was some programmer that reported that in his experience C++ programs were almost always bigger and almost always needed longer time to write than functionally equivalent C programs. I wrote 100's of 1000's of lines in both C and C++, and for big projects, C++ kicks C every time. Now THIS programmer tell you that. Who told you all this stuff? Your programming language teacher? Who told you THIS stuff? Do you know C++ at all ? Vadik. -- If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one? -- Tom Cargill, C++ Journal, Fall 1990. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, Vadim Vygonets wrote: Only if you're writing in the wild west. In most other places, people try not to shoot themselves in the foot by using undocumented APIs. Hello? Private class members have nothing to do with API _or_ documentation. It just hides the internal structure. What do you mean "hides"? The private class members are right there in your face in the header file. Perhaps you mean "disallows access?" -- well that is just a form of documentation (don't use that member). If you simply write in the documentation "don't use that member", intellegient programmers won't use it. And unintellegient programmers will make stupid mistakes no matter how you try to protect them. -- Moshe Zadka [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is no GOD but Python, and HTTP is its prophet. http://advogato.org/person/moshez = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Moshe Zadka on Sat, Jul 22, 2000:
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, Vadim Vygonets wrote:
Private class members have nothing to do with API _or_
documentation. It just hides the internal structure.
What do you mean "hides"? The private class members are right there in
your face in the header file. Perhaps you mean "disallows access?"
Yes, sorry. This would be a much better definition.
-- well
that is just a form of documentation (don't use that member).
If you say so. For me, there should be a *real* documentation
saying what the API of the class is.
If you
simply write in the documentation "don't use that member", intellegient
programmers won't use it. And unintellegient programmers will make stupid
mistakes no matter how you try to protect them.
For example, one of the OSes I use defines jmp_buf as:
struct __jmp_buf {
int jb_eip;
int jb_ebx;
int jb_esp;
int jb_ebp;
int jb_esi;
int jb_edi;
int jb_mask;
int jb_pad[3]; /* preserve historical mistake */
};
typedef struct __jmp_buf jmp_buf[1];
I haven't sene many programmers who go and fiddle with struct
__jmp_buf instead of using setjmp/longjmp. Another OS defines
jmp_buf even better:
typedef struct { int _jb[_JBLEN + 1]; } jmp_buf[1];
Vadik.
--
Bell Labs Unix -- Reach out and grep someone.
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Ilya Khayutin wrote: There is a big diffrence between a C++ class and a C struct: PRIVELEGE CONTROL!! In C everyone can directly intefere with any variable in the program, same with gtk+ which written in C. In C++ I can make some variable in a class private or protected, and only the methods of this class will be able to intefere with it. It makes the code MUCH less buggy. Only if you're writing in the wild west. In most other places, people try not to shoot themselves in the foot by using undocumented APIs. (Oh, and yeah right, C++ is type safe. Casts is just some nightmare I had the other day) -- Moshe Zadka [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is no GOD but Python, and HTTP is its prophet. http://advogato.org/person/moshez = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Moshe Zadka on Fri, Jul 21, 2000: On Fri, 21 Jul 2000, Ilya Khayutin wrote: There is a big diffrence between a C++ class and a C struct: PRIVELEGE CONTROL!! In C everyone can directly intefere with any variable in the program, same with gtk+ which written in C. In C++ I can make some variable in a class private or protected, and only the methods of this class will be able to intefere with it. It makes the code MUCH less buggy. Only if you're writing in the wild west. In most other places, people try not to shoot themselves in the foot by using undocumented APIs. Hello? Private class members have nothing to do with API _or_ documentation. It just hides the internal structure. Vadik. -- Strange Fruit. A brilliant way to describe somebody hanging from a tree... -- Marcus Miller = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: C++ today (was Re: GTK 1.3.1)
Quoth Ilya Khayutin on Fri, Jul 21, 2000: From this thread I got the impression that most people here think that C++ is still that language which has no standart, used by small groups of people and is realy useless. Well guys... IT IS NOT THE 80s ANYMORE!!! Pity. It is year 2000 and C++ is a standartized language Yeah right. which is used by a VERY large amount of people. Same large amount of people who choose Windows and eat in McDonald's. The GNU compiler, g++, supports *_well_* 99.9% of the standard C++ Some C++ professional say otherwise, but I'm not one, so I won't comment on this. Also, exprience has proven that using an OO design for large software packages is MUCH more efficient than plain function based design. C++ is an object-oriented programming language? Gimme a break. Someone said that because gtk+ uses its own implementation of an OO architecture in plain C, there is no reason to it to use C++. WHAT??? Nothing. People wrote object oriented code in C long before C++ was born. Object orientation is a function of design, not language. You can write object-oriented assembly, and you can write C++ with gotos. There is a big diffrence between a C++ class and a C struct: PRIVELEGE CONTROL!! So? You can't _really_ hide what's inside. You always open your header files. Anyone can just insert "public:" into the header file and do whatever they bloody want. What about this: C is a small simple elegant language. It's relatively easy to learn. There are lots of people who actually know all of C by heart. C++ is a bloated pig which just grew into existance. It has helluva lot of features. There are very few people who actually know all of C++. Everybody knows some subset, and the problem is that everybody knows a different subset of the language. The biggest mistake in design of C++ was to base it on C. It makes the code MUCH less buggy. Yeah right. There was some programmer that reported that in his experience C++ programs were almost always bigger and almost always needed longer time to write than functionally equivalent C programs. Who told you all this stuff? Your programming language teacher? Vadik. -- If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one? -- Tom Cargill, C++ Journal, Fall 1990. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
