| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Comments:
<0> before the includes?
<1> jottinger, yes
<2> i'm using bloodshed dev c++
<3> is iostream included in the precompiled header? not that it should matter...
<0> Twister2: no
<3> try removing the using namespace std; and use std::cin
<3> although, I am confused still
<0> g++ compiled it fine
<1> jottinger, of course, it's a trivial program
<0> gribouille: all the more reason for VC++ to not have a problem with it, IMO
<1> jottinger, why not ?
<0> I mean, this is like the most basic C++ there
<0> is
<3> I would reinstall it
<3> or something
<3> and double check the include files
<1> jottinger, did bill gates explicitly allow you to compile the program ?
<0> apparently not :)
<1> jottinger, so, why do you complain ?
<0> gribouille: just failed expectations, I guess
<1> jottinger, you should read the EULA again
<0> I figured it'd be able to compile *something* successfully
<3> try reinstalling it
<0> if I trim it to having a body of {return 0;}
<1> jottinger, did you forget you were using windows ?
<0> gribouille: can't :(
<0> It's all good, I've got decent unix tools, thought I'd try VC++
<1> jottinger, so don't ever think things should happen as expected
<0> a friend who's well-placed at MS had recommended it
<0> gribouille: I've been a programmer for over two decades, I know it's an adventure
<0> that's why I did a hello world thing, to validate things
<1> jottinger, was it conclusive ?
<3> jottinger, your install is broke
<0> I haven't done C++ in a loooong time, thought I'd try to learn it again
<3> or your settings, or your include dir
<0> Twister2: I don't have a huge need for vc++
<0> g++ works, so that'll be good enough
<1> jottinger, you should stick with linux and g++
<0> gribouille: linux? :)
<1> jottinger, or windows
<4> any of you tried opensolaris yet?
<0> gribouille: or solaris :)
<1> jottinger, of course
<0> my normal target env is solaris, but I do development on multiple OSes usually
<5> jottinger, good man
<1> jottinger, what programming language ?
<5> jottinger, portability is the key ;)
<5> gribouille, lol
<0> gribouille: java, ruby, perl
<1> threat, why ?
<0> I work for a fairly large java site
<1> perl is an ugly mess
<0> sure
<0> ruby is too, really
<1> jottinger, never used
<0> I've done C as well, but not much
<1> C++ is the best
<0> why?
<4> the plus means better
<0> heh
<1> jottinger, C++ doesn't force you to program in a particular way
<0> why is that "better?"
<0> and what's it better than?
<4> perl doesn't force you to program in a particular way, either :)
<1> jottinger, because you can choose the way that best suits your needs
<0> compared to...
<1> cn28h, perl doesn't have string typing, OO and tempmlates
<1> jottinger, java, for examle
<0> gribouille: perl has OO
<4> string typing?
<1> cn28h, strong typing
<0> gribouille: Java allows you to program pretty much any way you want as well
<4> well yeah, that's why they call it a weakly typed language ;)
<1> jottinger, perl doesn't have a complete support for OO
<0> although it definitely punishes you for being stupid
<1> jottinger, java has a strong bias for OO
<4> what about python?
<1> never used
<4> python has OO, doesn't force it, doesn't need templates because it's weakly typed
<0> gribouille: true enough
<1> cn28h, I don't like weakly typed languages
<4> python is pretty cool
<1> cn28h, the problem with theese languages is that you don't know what you manipulate
<6> huh
<6> Python is strongly typed
<1> jottinger, everyone compares languages
<6> the objects have types - the operations don't define them
<0> gribouille: yeah, but everyone does so in invalid ways
<0> http://epesh.blog-city.com/its_not_about_c_and_java_performance.htm
<1> jottinger, but it is possible to do it seriously
<4> true, object do have types, but you can't define a type for a variable
<0> gribouille: sure... but any serious comparison comes up with "Well, C++ is better for this, and ____ is better for that"
<6> cn28h: I don't know what you mean by that, but it is strongly typed, if you're arguing against that :)
<4> Cowmoo, I meant you don't say "int a" you say a = 5, and so a is an int, but then you can say a = "foo" and a becomes a string
<4> that's what I was thinking
<6> oh right
<6> that's dynamically-typed
<6> not weakly
<4> oh ok
<1> jottinger, sorry, I don't know any problem for which java is a better solution than C++
<6> as opposed to static typing (e.g. int foo)
<0> gribouille: distributed computing, enterprise stuff
<1> jottinger, what makes java a better solution for that ?
<0> cross-platform, different optimization techniques
<0> standards
<0> jvms today are quite good at runtime optimization
<1> Cowmoo, what is the difference between dynamically-typed and weakly-typed ?
<0> that epesh url was written when someone posted a "java is faster than C++!" benchmark on /.
<0> lots of java people thought it was great, were dancing in the streets
<0> I thought it was retarded
<7> you have something against retarded people dancing in the streets?
<0> even though it's true in some cases, it's not a big deal
<1> jottinger, java faster than C++ ? can something like that happen ?
<3> asm, c, c++, all the rest was the order last tiem I checked... (all optimized)
<0> azr|el: I have something against retardation
<0> gribouille: yes
<7> jottinger, me too...they get closer parking spaces
<1> jottinger, it would be a miracle
<6> hmm good point gribouille
<0> java is compiled to machine code at runtime and optimized during the runtime
<4> it takes a very advanced ***embly coder to beat an optimizing C compiler
<0> cn28h: an optimizing compiler can't predict runtime characteristics, though
<4> not sure what you mean
<0> if you write a path that has a suboptimal happy path, Java can optimize that over the runtime
<3> yes, but a good asm programmer will still end up with a faster, smaller executable...
<4> happy path? is that like the happy trail?
<0> Twister2: read that url
<3> but, the dev time offsets that in most cases
<0> cn28h: "happy path" is the "common cases" of requirements
<6> but weak typing seems to imply that something like 'hello' + 3 would be legal, which in Python is not, 3 needs to converted to a string too
<1> jottinger, optimizing the code takes time
<6> "weak typing", rather
<1> Cowmoo, I don't think so
<4> "hello" + str(3)
<0> gribouille: sure... but in java the low-hanging fruit are different
<0> no competent java programmer focuses on crap like that
<3> jottinger, I do not aspire to be a "poor C++ programmer who's also a poor Java programmer"
<3> that article means next to nothing to me
<0> Twister2: few would
<0> given similar levels of competency, java code will generally outperform C++ code, in certain areas
<3> how is java scaling for excessivley large projects?
<0> Twister2: very well
<3> what do you define as excessively large?
<0> erm... lots of TPS, distributed transactions, tons of LOC
<3> and I would like some proof for that statment. (the speed one)
<0> Twister2: easy enough to write, I guess
<0> but microbenchmarks **** in all cases
<3> its not difficult to compaire multiple programming lanugages... you take the same platform, the same algorithm, and the same hardware and let em fly
Return to
#c++
or
Go to some related
logs:
chroot /bin/zsh
#chatzone
submit Quotes dance
#chatzone
wget pokerroom
#AllNiteCafe
sqlite_open hangs
#java
#teens
mythtv home/.dmrc file
|
|