a C++ library of mine.

This is a discussion on a C++ library of mine. within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by citizen Pardon me for speculating, but do you know what CGI is and what it does? Some ...

  1. #61
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,548
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    Pardon me for speculating, but do you know what CGI is and what it does? Some types of web sites will require interaction with the user -- if you so much as utilize form data -- and as Google wants to prove with Chrome, the web is becoming more and more like an application platform. It's not cute to ignore the possibility that you would need to write some perl or something for a website.

    And I really hope that you would choose an interpreted language for the web since it is much easier to use perl or php to interpret form data and draw pages on the fly.

    I believe that was the point zacs was trying to make. But you did admit that every job has a tool ...
    Yes, I do know what CGI (typically Perl) and PHP are.
    I've used PHP + mysql myself.
    Well yes, to be honest, I'd rather use C++ for server-side applications rather than PHP or Perl, if I could make it work. Honestly, I don't know how because I haven't done it.
    Mostly the reason is speed (native vs interpreted) and syntax (Perl syntax confuses me with all its operators and all that).
    If it was a job, then PHP or Perl would probably be used instead, part due to it being easier and part being that it's platform independent.
    But with server-side, it's not a 50+ OSes you have to worry about, though, unlike web pages.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  2. #62
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,438
    this is also why I like C++ - it can borrow and create strengths from other programming languages due to its flexibility. It doesn't support properties natively, but with some knowledge, I can emulate it.
    Well, C++ supports... err... properties natively. Strange would be an OOP programming language not supporting data members.

    The confusion you are drawing here is that you expect C++ to follow the semantics of other programming languages like VB. But that's obviously not the case, and "properties" in C++ are implemented through public data members or accessors. In fact the term property is even usually non-existing in the C++ OOP-related lingo. "Data Member" is the term used, regardless how it is interfaced.

    I can understand you liking the syntax offered by these programming languages. But you are better off using those languages instead of trying to emulate their behavior on a programming language that has a different syntax. And you should really know this by now. I'm surprised we are having this talk.

    As for opinions... maybe they aren't evil. But opinions can be dangerous.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  3. #63
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad_guy View Post
    No (I don't really do C++ that much and by association Boost) - could you provide me with a code example? If it can accomplish the same thing as succinctly and clearly I would be very impressed and interested in it (and I will retract my earlier point about not being able to do it as easily.)
    If I understand your earlier example correctly, it checks that all sorts of brackets in a string are balanced.

    That would look something like this:
    Code:
    namespace
    {
      rule<> term = // Term is ...
        ('(' >> term >> ')') | // ... parentheses around a term ...
        ('[' >> term >> ']') | // ... brackets around a term ...
        ('{' >> term >> '}') | // ... braces around a term ...
        (~chset<>("()[]{}") >> !term); // ... or anything but those characters, followed potentially by another term.
    }
    
    bool is_balanced(const std::string &input)
    {
      return parse(input, term).full;
    }
    Not quite as concise as the functional version, but quite good.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  4. #64
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    I can understand you liking the syntax offered by these programming languages. But you are better off using those languages instead of trying to emulate their behavior on a programming language that has a different syntax. And you should really know this by now. I'm surprised we are having this talk.
    I never change, do I? ;-)
    Until I find a better language, I'm going to continue to try creating my own "special" language.

    As for opinions... maybe they aren't evil. But opinions can be dangerous.
    Oh yes, I'm fully aware. I remember how many times they've gotten me in trouble...
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  5. #65
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    But with server-side, it's not a 50+ OSes you have to worry about, though, unlike web pages.
    Off my head, I can think of 6 at least partially binary-incompatible OSs you may have to think of for server applications which are in common use for servers: Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  6. #66
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,548
    I only know of Apache (typical Linux) and Windows Server. They seem to be the most popular if I'm not mistaken.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  7. #67
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    Those are web servers, not OSs (well, Windows Server is a Windows edition, but I think you mean IIS). Apache runs on any of the OSs I named.
    Of course, for server applications there's Apache, IIS, lighttpd, five or six different servlet containers (Tomcat, Jetty, WebSphere, ...), and probably some more.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,129
    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    Off my head, I can think of 6 at least partially binary-incompatible OSs you may have to think of for server applications which are in common use for servers: Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris.
    Pretty much all of those unices have binary compat packages for various platforms.

  9. #69
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by zacs7 View Post
    > I meant compiled on-the-fly. Like a dynamic recompiler or stuff.
    Why not? Even when it can provide a speed advantage?
    The only place it can have a speed advantage is when you're using an x64 OS and the native app is written for 32bit. Otherwise, native apps are often designed to check if a processor feature exists and if it does, they use that feature when it's useful.

  10. #70
    Disrupting the universe Mad_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    258
    Not quite as concise as the functional version, but quite good.
    I will very much say a lot better than I expected! :]

    (nitpick: the example earlier was factor code, which is not a functional language but a stack based one, along the lines of Forth.)

    The only place it can have a speed advantage is when you're using an x64 OS and the native app is written for 32bit.
    Citation needed. Otherwise this is just nonsense.

    Otherwise, native apps are often designed to check if a processor feature exists and if it does, they use that feature when it's useful.
    I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Do you mean the application determines at runtime if e.g. SSE4 instructions are available and use them? If so, I've never seen a compiler insert things like this into the code path - things like instruction availability (e.g. SSE/MMX) are generally speaking turned on by options at compiled time and if done that immediately makes it incompatible with processors that do not share the same specifics (you are likely to get illegal instruction errs or something of the sort.) If you are speaking of determining things like this at runtime then, again, citation needed.

    (Unless of course you are talking about compile time, but determining such things is really more a function of your build system than anything I would imagine.)
    Last edited by Mad_guy; 09-12-2008 at 12:30 AM.
    operating systems: mac os 10.6, debian 5.0, windows 7
    editor: back to emacs because it's more awesomer!!
    version control: git

    website: http://0xff.ath.cx/~as/

  11. #71
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    mplayer does it. But the detection is hand-written, not compiler-supported. At startup, it detects the CPU capabilities and sets a few function pointers accordingly.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  12. #72
    CSharpener vart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Rishon LeZion, Israel
    Posts
    6,484
    If so, I've never seen a compiler insert things like this into the code path
    Intel compiler does this thing
    It can compile 2 versions of the assembly code into the exe - 1 using some High-end processor intructions specified by compilation flag, another - using some basic set of instructions (for example any PIII) and adds the switch in the beginning of the main function - that selects the appropriate code to be working based on the CPU type installed
    The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the time,
    the last 10% takes the other 90% of the time.

  13. #73
    Reverse Engineer maxorator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    2,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad_guy View Post
    Citation needed. Otherwise this is just nonsense.
    The source of this citation is me. But you can always prove me wrong if you want to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mad_guy View Post
    If you are speaking of determining things like this at runtime then, again, citation needed.
    I have seen it in media players, also I have seen it in the disassembly of games and other graphics applications.

    Edit: This can be done with the cpuid instruction or by WinAPI function IsProcessorFeaturePresent(). cpuid instruction is often used in Windows applications because the WinAPI function for that was introduced in Windows NT, so this way it is compatible with older Windows versions.
    Last edited by maxorator; 09-13-2008 at 03:00 PM.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. What's an import library?
    By chiefmonkey in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-19-2009, 05:00 PM
  2. Property Set Library (PSL) - Announcement
    By vultur_gryphus in forum Projects and Job Recruitment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-29-2008, 06:04 AM
  3. Makefile for a library
    By sirmoreno in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-04-2006, 04:52 AM
  4. very weird .h problem
    By royuco77 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-11-2005, 07:55 AM
  5. better c string functions
    By samps005 in forum C Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-04-2003, 12:28 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21