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

Sepplecocks

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-07 18:58

``it's fast bcuz it dont has a gc gc are sloooooow''
Do you still think that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C++0x#Allow_garbage_collected_implementations
Is C++ now considered slow?

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 9:55

>>38
ISO/IEC 9899:TC2, 7.19.1 Introduction, the second fucking paragraph
Only relevant if the file supports positioning requests.

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 10:01

Once, somebody made a garbage collector for C++. They abandoned the project when it collected the whole language.

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 10:04

>>41
And how, pray tell, you are going to use a non-seekable file for emulating TM tape?

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 10:16

ITT: butthurt LITHPU fanboys

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 10:19

>>44
That goes for pretty much any thread.

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 12:20

>>40
I am not able rightly to comprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a statement. Next thing you would claim that loops and conditional statements are not a part of C++, merely a domain-specific language for looping and branching, built in C++ compilers and required by the standard. Damn, I feel more stupid for just repeating this.

Is the C preprocessor part of the C language? It doesn't even comprehend its syntax, and I can use it anywhere. Yes, templates comprehend C++'s syntax, but what part of domain-specific didn't you get?
You feel stupid because you are, like your moronic example.

We are not discussing imaginary programming languages.
They removed new and delete from C++?

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 13:19

Is C++ now considered slow?

Depends on whom you ask.

C++0x is considered slow by C++ programmers.
C++ is considered slow by C programmers.
C is considered slow by ASM programmers.

They are all correct!

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 14:19

>>47
They are all considered unpythonic by Guido van Rossum.

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 17:28

>>43
I'm glad you asked: the simplest way would probably be to make a finite circular tape with a guard value. To rotate one way, you read the first value, copy the rest to a new stream, and add the first value to the end. To rotate the other way you first do a reading pass where you only store the last value, then another pass writing first the value and the rest of the stream. If you run out of tape, increase the size and restart.

>>46
Is the C preprocessor part of the C language?
Yes, obviously.

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 17:30

>>49
Is the C preprocessor part of the C language?
Yes, obviously.
HIBT?

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 17:46

>>50
C provides certain language facilities by means of a preprocessor, which is conceptionally a separate first step in compilation.
Are you going to claim that includes are not a part of the C language?

Name: Anonymous 2011-03-10 17:49

>>51
They are just an hack, just like the whole preprocessor. It's part of the standard, not of the language.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-22 20:31

These lisp are made for sucking dicsk.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 2:37

There's a reason C++ doesn't support garbage collection. If it did, the GC would destroy the entire language.

Name: !89o8tyI8Nk 2011-04-23 3:06

>>54

Old, tired, fucking shitty joke.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 3:32

>>55
fuck you ,,faggot''

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 7:49

Loops and conditional statements are not a part of C++, merely a domain-specific language for looping and branching, built in C++ compilers and required by standard. That's why C++ can't be Turing complete.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 7:51

I remember making this thread.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 8:22

>>57
Don't you mean conditional expression?

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 11:19

YOU CAN STEAL MY FARTS, BUT YOU CAN'T STEAL MY GNU FREEDOM!

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 11:48

Bracket's and whatever are not part of Lisp, merely a domain-specific language for looping and branching and all the other stuff, built in Lisp compilers/interpreters required by standard. That's why Lisp can't be Turing complete

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 11:51

>>61
Brackets (`[' and `]') are not required by the standard.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 12:25

your fartism is not required by standard

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-23 12:34

>>63
Exactly, you're redundant and unnecessary.
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 -