|
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of non-generic men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and STL, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost traits. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and partial specialization those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the B.S. when I lay my templates upon thee."
Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen
FreeBSD is sexy.
STL will divide seas for you.
|
|
|
|
|
And you will know my name is the B.S.
The other names of this particular Holy Trinity are IMHO A.S. and A.K. (guess who?  )
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
A.K must be Andrew König, but as for A.S. I don't know 
Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen
FreeBSD is sexy.
|
|
|
|
|
Right as for the A.K.
A.S. stands for Alexander Stepanov, the one and (almost) only creator of STL, whom B.S. convinced to implement his ideas in C++.
A.S. is a pretty weird guy. In this interview he tells how the whole concept about generic algorthms came to his mind while in a state of delirium caused by food poisoning
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, you've read the interview then ? I forgot about the food poisoning bit. I loved his reference to Java as MOP - money oriented programming. He lost me when he started bagging out OO though.
I thought Stepanov used C++ before he met Stroustrup, although Stroustrup convinced him to make some changes prior to inclusion in the standard.
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm somewhat suspicious of STL though. My (test,experimental) program worked first time. Whats that all about??!?!
- Jon Hulatt, 22/3/2002
|
|
|
|
|
Arnold Schwarzenegger ???
I think I've heard "Hasta la vista, pointer!" or "eraser" or "terminator" or...
Umm, not sure, though
R.
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Stepanov and um Andrew Koenig ? I would have gone with Stepanov and Stan Lippman, because Stan wrote the first C++ implimentation of templates.
I read an interview with Stepanov yesterday, linked from an interview with Bjarne on his site, and it made for interesting reading. Stepanov is an opinionated old chap, obviously brilliant, but I don't agree with everything he says ( he says OO is a farce because you can't write a max function using it ).
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm somewhat suspicious of STL though. My (test,experimental) program worked first time. Whats that all about??!?!
- Jon Hulatt, 22/3/2002
|
|
|
|
|
( he says OO is a farce because you can't write a max function using it ).
Though his opinions are truly snobbish, I think he made an interesting point here. Having the sort of type conversions one have in maths is not an easy thing to model in C++ (nor other usual languages, save perhaps functional languages like CAML.)
As for the max conumdrum, Andrei Alexandrescu's article Min and Max Redivivus shows how the kind of genericity Stepanov sought for can be achieved within C++ --if by going thru great pains.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
I think that he's a hypocrite to on the one hand praise Stroustrup for defending generics and standing up for the idea that more than one approach is valid in programming, then to slam an entire methodology for being unable to deliver a particular function easily. Like Stroustrup said in the interview that linked me to this one, the point is that OO is not a panacea, but neither is generics. Generics is obviously what I reach to when I want to model something like max, and OO is clearly the place to go when I'm looking to represent an object model, such as a number of classes that represent different cars, but all have similar base functionality. I'd hate to live without either concept, but if I had to choose, I'd probably take OO over generics.
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm somewhat suspicious of STL though. My (test,experimental) program worked first time. Whats that all about??!?!
- Jon Hulatt, 22/3/2002
|
|
|
|
|
As many of you might know from reading things I have been saying about the C++ Standards, I have been struggling with a nagging bad feeling. Over the last few months I have decided that one of the problems is that I really can't tell the difference between the OO nuts and the Generics nuts.
I have done OO programming without any problems. Hell, my whole current application is based on OO ideals. In fact, given my design requirements, generic programming would have been a total failure for my product.
Both are valid tools that run a real risk of being used as a panacea.
I write algorithms to support my OO code. I create objects that utilize my generics (a.k.a. algorithms). I see them as two different sides of the coin. Depending on the application, I decide which side of the coin to emphasize.
Oh, and what was the crap Stev was talking about with math beginning with proofs and ending with axioms.
WRONGGGGGGGGGG.
Day 1 Analysis class: You start with the 10-17 basic axioms that will be used to prove math.
Day 2-infinity: Prove math.
Tim Smith
I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Smith wrote:
Over the last few months I have decided that one of the problems is that I really can't tell the difference between the OO nuts and the Generics nuts.
Exactly. And a good candidate for my next sig, methinks.
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm somewhat suspicious of STL though. My (test,experimental) program worked first time. Whats that all about??!?!
- Jon Hulatt, 22/3/2002
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Smith wrote:
Over the last few months I have decided that one of the problems is that I really can't tell the difference between the OO nuts and the Generics nuts.
Christian, I'm glad you know what Tim's talking about, because I haven't a clue. Could you explain a little more, Tim? Thanks.
CodeGuy
The WTL newsgroup: over 1400 members! Be a part of it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
|
|
|
|
|
Basically I have a big problem with anyone who totally dismisses OO or generic programming. They are both powerful tools.
One of my concerns about the standard is that we are currently riding a wave of generic hype that matches the original OO hype. It is just a concern, I have no proof or am making any accusation that this is the case.
When it comes to the standard, I feel we should be VERY conservative about additions. Lets make sure the directions we are going are truly valid and just don't seem to be correct. I fear that all too often we are creating new silver bullets of programming that just turn out to be just big slugs of lead. I see people lament the problems of old-school programming while turning a blind eye to all the problems their new solutions create.
Tim Smith
I know what you're thinking punk, you're thinking did he spell check this document? Well, to tell you the truth I kinda forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this here's CodeProject, the most powerful forums in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question, Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk?
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Smith wrote:
When it comes to the standard, I feel we should be VERY conservative about additions. Lets make sure the directions we are going are truly valid and just don't seem to be correct.
And Stroustrup has always said the same, so why is he suddenly supportive of a C++ standard thread and GUI model ?
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"But there isn't a whole lot out there that pisses me off more than someone leaving my code looking like they leaned on the keyboard and prayed that it would compile.
- Jamie Hale, 17/4/2002
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, do I get a gold star for getting both names ? I promise I didn't peek !!!!
Why Koenig ? Am I right in thinking he's partly responsible for C ?
Christian
The tragedy of cyberspace - that so much can travel so far, and yet mean so little.
"I'm somewhat suspicious of STL though. My (test,experimental) program worked first time. Whats that all about??!?!
- Jon Hulatt, 22/3/2002
|
|
|
|
|
By the way, do I get a gold star for getting both names ? I promise I didn't peek !!!!
Sure I'll have to figure out how to give you that one by electronic means.
Why Koenig ? Am I right in thinking he's partly responsible for C ?
He's partly responsible for C++, if that's what you meant. Well, this is just my particular opinion, but B.S. refers him enough times in his books and some features (e.g. "Koening lookup") are named after the guy.
Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent!! Well done Jörgen 
Cheers,
Joao Vaz
Unhappy TCL programmer
|
|
|
|
|
Nish
If I am awake and my eyes are closed, it does not necessarily mean that I am thinking of naked women.
|
|
|
|
|
You can only have if I can have one for being first 
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote:
I voted for all 10 of them.
Why?
Derek Lakin.
I wish I was what I thought I was when I wished I was what I am.
Salamander Software Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Lakin wrote:
Why?
Why not?
Nish
If I am awake and my eyes are closed, it does not necessarily mean that I am thinking of naked women.
|
|
|
|
|
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote:
Why not?
Because it doesn't affect the results in any way shape or form and won't contribute towards a final winner.
I guess it's Chris's fault for letting us bid for them all in the first place
Derek Lakin.
I wish I was what I thought I was when I wished I was what I am.
Salamander Software Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Lakin wrote:
Because it doesn't affect the results in any way shape or form and won't contribute towards a final winner.
Oh!
I didnt think of that 
Like now it's same as if I hadnt voted at all
Nish
p.s. Maybe Chris M will mail me a free T-Shirt knowing how I cant afford it
If I am awake and my eyes are closed, it does not necessarily mean that I am thinking of naked women.
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Lakin wrote:
guess it's Chris's fault for letting us bid for them all in the first place
That's right - blame the Hired Help. :P
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote:
That's right - blame the Hired Help
Do I get a T-shirt for not joining him in blaming you?
Nish
If I am awake and my eyes are closed, it does not necessarily mean that I am thinking of naked women.
|
|
|
|
|
No, nor do you get a T-shirt for being the person to ask 'do I get a T-shirt' the most times in a single hour
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
