Conversion from UTF32 to UTF8 for review
in [MFC]
|
From: Rui Maciel on 1 Jun 2010 17:00 Peter Olcott wrote: > Unless and until there is a comp.unicode.programmer newsgroup what > alternative do I have to ask Unicode programmer questions? When all fails you do have comp.programming. Yet, these topicality issues usually are very silly and tend to do more harm than good. Rui Maciel
From: Peter Olcott on 1 Jun 2010 17:09 On 6/1/2010 12:35 PM, Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: > see below... > On Mon, 31 May 2010 14:54:48 -0500, Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > >> On 5/31/2010 2:35 PM, Giovanni Dicanio wrote: >>> "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: >>> >>>> He needed to find some excuse to denigrate my code. He has had a >>>> personal grudge against me for several months. I don't really know >>>> what I said to offend him, but, it must have occurred sometime after >>>> he sung very high praises about my patent a few months ago. >>> >>> I don't think so. >>> >>> Joe helps lots of people here (and is a nice guy in person!). >>> >>> You must have misunderstood. >> >> No I really don't think so. He helps lots of people, and other than his >> disdain for me may be a really nice guy. He is certainty not speaking >> accurately about the quality of my developmental code. The degree of >> this inaccuracy indicates a strong negative bias against me. > **** > You did not present it as "developmental code" I did say: >>I would like this reviewed for algorithm correctness: << and then you proceeded evaluate my code on every other basis besides what I asked for. Maybe to allow for the ADHD mindset that these forums seem to promote I should have said: This is only developmental code please do not evaluate it on any other basis other than whether or not it produces correct results. Please do not evaluate it for performance, style, conformance with a particular convention or anything at all other than whether or not it produces correct results. > nor state that it was other than a finished > product. Instead, you have repeatedly insisted that any alternative I suggested could not > possibly be as fast as the code you write, then present an example of code that is > certainly not as fast as it could be. I find the contrast bizarre. I have a strong > negative bias to people who claim X, and when they deliver< X, claim it is actually X > they are delivering. In other contexts, we call them "politicians" and refer to "campaign > promises". I have little respect for people who claim they are perfect, and deliver as > proof of their perfection code which is less than perfect by most reasonable metrics, such > as performance, utility, flexibility, etc. > > I guess the new form of logic is "I am perfect. The proof that I am perfect is that > anyone who questions my perfection will be threatened with a lawsuit". In other contexts > we refer to this using terms like "religion" and "heresy" and "inquisitition". > **** >> >> Other people here have picked apart several aspects of his negative >> assessment and thus sided against this negative assessment. > **** > No, Giovanni pointed out that with the use of reserve(), push_back() is faster than if you > don't use reserve(), which is absolutely true and self-evident. But I was objecting to > the promises of "fastest possible" embodied by code that is *not* fastest-possible. And > while push_back() *is* faster with reserve(), it is not as fast as ++dest to increment a > destination pointer, therefore it is not as fast as possible. > > So the objections to my observation did not change the validity of the observation. Only > the magnitude. But you had made promises of absolutes. And the code is inconsistent with > that. > > And you still talk about "fast designs" as if this made sense. Only running code can be > measured, and only running code which has been scientifically measured is a valid > confirmation of performance. > **** >> >> When viewed within the specific context that the sole purpose of this >> code is to validate the correctness of the algorithm the code is >> objectively at the very least very good quality. > **** > I was interpreting "correctness" to mean correctness of the code. If I were to use that > code in a Windows app it would not be correct. If your goal was to produce the fastest > possible code with maximum utility, that code is not it. But why is it OK for you to > claim your code is always the fastest possible, then produce an example that violates your > own claim, and why is it libelous of me to point this out? Or are we back to > proof-by-intimidation? (Maybe I missed that particular logical methodology in my several > courses in mathematical logic) > joe > **** >> >>> >>> >>>>> std::vector<uint8_t> toUTF8(const std::vector<uint32_t> & utf32); >>>> >>>> For most compilers this requires making an extra copy. >>> >>> Before move semantics, I think several C++ compilers implemented the RVO. >>> >>> Giovanni >>> > Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] > email: newcomer(a)flounder.com > Web: http://www.flounder.com > MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
From: Peter Olcott on 1 Jun 2010 17:15 On 6/1/2010 4:07 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote: > Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: > >> On 6/1/2010 1:38 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote: >>> Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 6/1/2010 5:52 AM, Oliver Regenfelder wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Leigh Johnston wrote: >>>>>> Also printf sucks, this is a C++ newsgroup not a C newsgroup. >>>>> >>>>> This is not even a general C++ newsgroup but an MFC one. So >>>>> strictly there is zero relevance of his posting to this >>>>> newsgroup. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> So no one using MFC (such as I) would ever need to decode UTF-8? >>> >>> People using MFC also wear coats. Are you going to, then, start talking >>> about clothing and consider /that/ on-topic? >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Paul Bibbings >> >> Unless and until there is a comp.unicode.programmer newsgroup what >> alternative do I have to ask Unicode programmer questions? > > How about somewhere like http://unicode.org/consortium/distlist.html. > For some reason you seem to have chosen to ignore any possibility of > suitable fora outside of Usenet. If you allow yourself to think only a > little outside of the box you will find that the `Unicode Email > Distribution Lists'...: > > - facilitate a "Discussion list for Unicode and general > internationalization issues"; > > - have "About 750 members world-wide" and "discuss such subjects as: > implementing the Unicode Standard, discussion of new proposals, > etc." > > where: > > "Everybody is welcome to join the public email list to pose questions > to the community of Unicode users." > > Or... you /could/ post your question to microsoft.public.vc.mfc, a group > for people specifically programming in the Microsoft Visual C++ > environment and focussing specifically on the Microsoft Foundation > Classes library components, or ... you /could/ post your question to > comp.lang.c++, a group for people learning or programming in the C++ > language who want to ask questions about `the C++ programming > language' (note: *not* about particular things that people might be > doing in particular areas *with* the language, but *about* the language > itself). > > Regards > > Paul Bibbings The most sensible long term solution would be to get people together to create the comp.unicode.programming usenet newsgroup. I tried a discussion list thing before. It is so cumbersome that not enough people are involved to get answers to difficult questions.
From: Paul Bibbings on 1 Jun 2010 17:30 Peter Olcott <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: > On 6/1/2010 1:38 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote: >> Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >> >>> On 6/1/2010 5:52 AM, Oliver Regenfelder wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Leigh Johnston wrote: >>>>> Also printf sucks, this is a C++ newsgroup not a C newsgroup. >>>> >>>> This is not even a general C++ newsgroup but an MFC one. So >>>> strictly there is zero relevance of his posting to this >>>> newsgroup. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Oliver >>> >>> So no one using MFC (such as I) would ever need to decode UTF-8? >> >> People using MFC also wear coats. Are you going to, then, start talking >> about clothing and consider /that/ on-topic? >> >> Regards >> >> Paul Bibbings > > Unless and until there is a comp.unicode.programmer newsgroup what > alternative do I have to ask Unicode programmer questions? I have only just now posted a response that I would call `helpful'. This is a /different/ response that I have wanted to split off from the first being certain that, by the time that I have finished it, you will have already responded to reject the first. You appear to feel that you have some inalienable right to be answered. This is not so. If it happens that there is, in fact, no suitable forum for your particular area of questions, or if there is but it doesn't please you in some way to pursue it, then how is your question (above) to be answered; what /is/ your alternative? Your alternative, in this case, is to merely *accept* that you do not have what you would wish for. (Your alternative is, perhaps, to /create/ that forum.) On the other hand, your alternative is *not* to merely inflict irrelevance on groups that you may otherwise select according to some criteria of your own as a "next best thing." There *is* no "next best thing." If you are outside of the purpose of /any/ particular group with the question that you want to ask then you must stop; you *must* simply accept the reality that there is no platform for your particular need at this time. This group (comp.lang.c++) and, I am sure, microsoft.public.vc.mfc, do not want to hear any more of your "what alternative do I have." You may have some, you may have none. The outcome for these groups is the same either way - you *desist*. And, by the way, do not crosspost. Even more so, do not crosspost off-topic. Regard Paul Bibbings
From: Peter Olcott on 1 Jun 2010 18:03
On 6/1/2010 4:30 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote: > Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: > >> On 6/1/2010 1:38 PM, Paul Bibbings wrote: >>> Peter Olcott<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 6/1/2010 5:52 AM, Oliver Regenfelder wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Leigh Johnston wrote: >>>>>> Also printf sucks, this is a C++ newsgroup not a C newsgroup. >>>>> >>>>> This is not even a general C++ newsgroup but an MFC one. So >>>>> strictly there is zero relevance of his posting to this >>>>> newsgroup. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> So no one using MFC (such as I) would ever need to decode UTF-8? >>> >>> People using MFC also wear coats. Are you going to, then, start talking >>> about clothing and consider /that/ on-topic? >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Paul Bibbings >> >> Unless and until there is a comp.unicode.programmer newsgroup what >> alternative do I have to ask Unicode programmer questions? > > I have only just now posted a response that I would call `helpful'. > This is a /different/ response that I have wanted to split off from the > first being certain that, by the time that I have finished it, you will > have already responded to reject the first. > > You appear to feel that you have some inalienable right to be answered. > This is not so. If it happens that there is, in fact, no suitable forum > for your particular area of questions, or if there is but it doesn't > please you in some way to pursue it, then how is your question (above) > to be answered; what /is/ your alternative? > > Your alternative, in this case, is to merely *accept* that you do not > have what you would wish for. (Your alternative is, perhaps, to /create/ > that forum.) > > On the other hand, your alternative is *not* to merely inflict > irrelevance on groups that you may otherwise select according to some > criteria of your own as a "next best thing." There *is* no "next best > thing." If you are outside of the purpose of /any/ particular group > with the question that you want to ask then you must stop; you *must* > simply accept the reality that there is no platform for your particular > need at this time. That is not an acceptable alternative. > > This group (comp.lang.c++) and, I am sure, microsoft.public.vc.mfc, do > not want to hear any more of your "what alternative do I have." You may > have some, you may have none. The outcome for these groups is the same > either way - you *desist*. Feel free to ignore me. > > And, by the way, do not crosspost. Even more so, do not crosspost > off-topic. > > Regard > > Paul Bibbings |