Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

POINTERS, STACK, CODESPACE, ETC

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-25 17:58

http://i30.tinypic.com/2z5itg5.jpg

Read and enjoy the lesson

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 13:15

>>39
[b]DON'T HELP HIM!![b]

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 14:10

>>19
(*foo).bar

>>40
You best be trolling.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 14:54

>>42
Can you assign to that?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 16:13

>>35
OO's inventor would disagree with your idiot teachers.

OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things.
-- Alan Kay

Q.E.D.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 16:25

>>43
I think so. You'd be assigning foo's bar.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 17:57

>>44
—Anal Gay

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 18:33

>>46
—Anal Gay, the inventor of OOP.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 19:35

>>44
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_jf47ht73Ht/doc_kay_oop_en
Well according to this, we're both right. According to the inventor of the term, OO is about self contained objects (cells that abstract, protect and encapsulate data) that communicate by passing messages (which is exactly what I was taught) AND do late binding do to their work (which was not taught and I've never bothered to think about).

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 20:58

>>48
I'm glad you halfway understand OOP.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 21:11

char *hax = "my anus";
printf("%x", &hax);
printf("%x", hax);
printf("%x", *hax);Anus was haxed

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 21:42

>>1

Good job.  Write moar plox.  Srsly.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 22:07

>>4
you forgot the fact that this:
int main(void){
  char s[1024];
  main();
  return(0);
}

is the same as this:
int main(){
 for(;;);
 return 0;
}

unless your compiler is absolute shit.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 23:04

>>52


you forgot the fact that this:
[code]int main(void){
  main();
  return(0);
}

is the same as this with -funroll-loops:
int main(){
 for(;;);
 return 0;
}

unless your compiler is absolute shit.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-26 23:22

>>53
[gcc bullshit]

Please refer to >>52
unless your compiler is absolute shit

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 0:02

>>54
BUT ITS SO FUN, BECAUSE IT FUN ROLL LOOPS LOL!!!!!

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 0:36

>>55
Does funroll-loops remind anyone else of Fruit Roll-Ups?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 0:57

>>56
Man, I thought I was the only one.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 7:38

>>53
-funroll-loops

RAGE at minor optimization instead of improved algorithms

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 8:09

>>58
instead of
RAGE at retarded assumptions instead of using everything at your disposal

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 8:52

>>58
RAGE at minor optimization instead of improved algorithms
-funroll-loops unrolls loops.
If you manually unroll a loop, the algorithm is changed; therefore -funroll-loops achieves more speed by changing the algorithm.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 10:26

Only niggers funroll their loops.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 19:16

>>59
If you manually unroll a loop, the algorithm is changed; therefore -funroll-loops achieves more speed by changing the algorithm.
Does not amount to an improvement in asymptotic runtime. Fail.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 21:05

>>60
That's not a change in the algorithm.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 21:10

>>63
Yes it is.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:07

>>64
No it isn't.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:10

>>65
Yes it is.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:11

>>1

which is more efficient in asm, using mov or lea when dealing with addresses?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:12

>>66
No it isn't.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:12

>>67
mov

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:12

>>69
lea

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:14

>>70
mov

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 22:16

>>66
No it isn't, fool/faggot. Fagool.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-27 23:16

>>68,72
Yes, it is.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 0:31

I love the last part.

Infinite memory assignment loop in my /prog/?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 0:34

8==============D

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 0:47

>>67

I wonder this as well. How many clock cycles does it take to MOVL as opposed to LEA?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 0:57

>>76
Depends on the processor.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 1:16

>>77

How would one go about learning of these things?

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 1:54

>>78
Read IASDM.

Name: Anonymous 2008-05-28 6:43

That infinite memory allocation loop is complete fail.

If you are using a decent OS it will kill the program. If you debug it it will tell you there was a stack overflow.
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -