What are /prog/'s thoughts? I read earlier that one /prog/rammer
was coding C in C++ just so he could use STL's list. WOuld SGLIB
be a solution for these situations?
>>14
Idiotarians, as coined by the manly Eric S. Raymond.
Name:
Anonymous2012-04-25 21:49
>>13 SGLIB stands for Simple Generic Library and it consists of single header file written in C programming language.
So they put everything in a single giant file? Am I the only one who finds this fucking retarded?
>>17
It's just a whole bunch of preprocessor directives. There isn't really any other way to do it.
Unless you mean it should be done as several header files. That would just make it more annoying to use.
>>18
Now you have to recompile everything if just a single thing is changed, wouldn't it make more sense to only include whatever part of it you're using?
Name:
Anonymous2012-04-25 23:44
>>15-16
No, I honestly don't know which of those you are referring to.
Name:
Anonymous2012-04-25 23:48
>>16
Hey I don't care what you fat stupid americans are up to as long as you aren't fucking around with my civil rights.
Name:
Anonymous2012-04-26 0:37
>>19
It's a set of macros that can be used at any stage of development. It is unnecessary to design your system from the beginning to make use of it.
I read earlier that one /prog/rammer
was coding C in C++ just so he could use STL's list.
That was me, and I was saying that I use C++ just so that I can use the STL, not just std::list. Why don't you just do that? The great thing about the STL is that the containers manage their own memory. It's not GC, it's just a bunch of containers that allocate memory as you add elements and free it when they go out of scope.
>>24
The problem with that is that Sepples compilers produce shittier output (and do so more slowly) than C compilers for identical input, because the Sepples syntax is such a clusterfuck.