Prev: Bug in Salford's FTN95 compiler version 5.20.1?
Next: UPdate all Dependencies(CVF)
From: Gerry Ford on 2 Apr 2008 20:39


"Arjen Markus" <arjen.markus(a)wldelft.nl> wrote in message
news:d9078f0f-d62f-4d3b-8cea-caf6168f563d(a)e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On 1 apr, 06:20, "Gerry Ford" <ge...(a)nowhere.ford> wrote:

>> When I first read this a couple weeks ago, I wondered what this looks
>> like
>> in fortran:
>>
>> template <class StrictWeakOrdered>
>> inline StrictWeakOrdered& max(StrictWeakOrdered& x,
>> StrictWeakOrdered& y) {
>> return x < y ? y : x;
>>
>> }
>>
>> and
>> template <class StrictWeakOrdered>
>> inline const StrictWeakOrdered& max(const StrictWeakOrdered& x,
>> const StrictWeakOrdered& y) {
>> return x < y ? y : x;
>>
>> }

>
> That is an easy one:
>
> max(x,y)
>
> Well, this Fortran equivalent is a trifle less powerful than the C++
> one,
> but that does not mean it is not basically true :).

Stepanov thought it was important that one of the above was & and the other
was const &. The distinction is lost on me.

My problem with c++ is that when you take out Microsoft and C, I'm not left
with much. The template syntax is, e.g., beyond me.

I like Stepanov's emphasis on algorithms.
--

"That this social order with its pauperism, famines, prisons, gallows,
armies, and wars is necessary to society; that still greater disaster
would ensue if this organization were destroyed; all this is said only
by those who profit by this organization, while those who suffer from it
- and they are ten times as numerous - think and say quite the contrary."

~~ Leo Tolstoy


From: James Giles on 3 Apr 2008 17:45
Craig Powers wrote:
....
> You could write code like this with the former:
> max(x, y) = max(x, y) + 10;
>
> As a result, whichever of x or y contained the larger value gets 10
> added to it.
>
> (setting aside whether that would be appropriate -- keeping in mind
> even if, at first blush, it appears to be a bad idea, there may be
> other contexts where it is extremely useful for writing concise code)

Given that conciseness is never by itself a measure of code quality,
but both legibility and correctness are, it would still seem to be a
bad idea. Certainly any tool which does such a thing should
have that characteristic of its behavior encoded into its name in
some unmistakable way. Other precautions might also be relevant.

--
J. Giles

"I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies." -- C. A. R. Hoare


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Bug in Salford's FTN95 compiler version 5.20.1?
Next: UPdate all Dependencies(CVF)