Prev: return false from ajax
Next: sorry for the link in the footer
From: Ry Nohryb on 26 Apr 2010 17:58
On Apr 26, 9:34 pm, John G Harris <j...(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Now read
>   <http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/blast.html>
> (...)

Nah, here's his most truly enlightening talk :
http://artlung.com/smorgasborg/Invention_of_Cplusplus.shtml
--
Jorge.
From: Stefan Weiss on 26 Apr 2010 18:10
On 26/04/10 23:58, Ry Nohryb wrote:
> Nah, here's his most truly enlightening talk :
> http://artlung.com/smorgasborg/Invention_of_Cplusplus.shtml

....and after reading that truly enlightening interview, it may be a good
idea to read this: <http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#IEEE>


--
stefan
From: Dmitry A. Soshnikov on 27 Apr 2010 05:10
On Apr 26, 7:06 pm, "Dmitry A. Soshnikov" <dmitry.soshni...(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

> Although, I don't know -- maybe it is even so at implementation
> stage, I didn't read C++ specification.

I checked in MS 2005 compiler. It is so, C++ reference concept *is
just a syntactic sugar* for a pointer. I can statement it now
precisely.

Example to check: <URL: http://gist.github.com/380515>

1 C++ source:
2
3 void call_by_reference(int& x)
4 {
5 x = 20;
6 }
7
8 void call_by_pointer(int* x)
9 {
10 *x = 20;
11 }
12
13 void by_value(int x)
14 {
15 x = 20;
16 }
17
18 int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
19 {
20 int y = 0;
21
22 call_by_reference(y);
23 call_by_pointer(&y);
24 by_value(y);
25
26 return 0;
27 }
28
29 Disassembly:
30
31 The most important lines are 50-51 (by-reference) and 55-56 (by-
pointer)
32 as we see, the same -- load effective address and push to stack.
33
34 int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
35 {
36 00F81480 push ebp
37 00F81481 mov ebp,esp
38 00F81483 sub esp,0CCh
39 00F81489 push ebx
40 00F8148A push esi
41 00F8148B push edi
42 00F8148C lea edi,[ebp-0CCh]
43 00F81492 mov ecx,33h
44 00F81497 mov eax,0CCCCCCCCh
45 00F8149C rep stos dword ptr es:[edi]
46 int y = 0;
47 00F8149E mov dword ptr [y],0
48
49 call_by_reference(y);
50 00F814A5 lea eax,[y]
51 00F814A8 push eax
52 00F814A9 call call_by_reference (0F81005h)
53 00F814AE add esp,4
54 call_by_pointer(&y);
55 00F814B1 lea eax,[y]
56 00F814B4 push eax
57 00F814B5 call call_by_pointer (0F8100Fh)
58 00F814BA add esp,4
59 by_value(y);
60 00F814BD mov eax,dword ptr [y]
61 00F814C0 push eax
62 00F814C1 call by_value (0F8100Ah)
63 00F814C6 add esp,4
64
65 return 0;
66 00F814C9 xor eax,eax
67 }

P.S.: Also, C++ creator Straustrup also notice that at implementation
level, a reference is just a sugar for the pointer. And this pointer
is dereferenced every time when we deal with a reference operation.

Dmitry.
From: Dmitry A. Soshnikov on 27 Apr 2010 05:11
On Apr 26, 11:42 pm, John G Harris <j...(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 at 08:06:32, in comp.lang.javascript, Dmitry A.
>
> Soshnikov wrote:
> >On Apr 26, 6:28 pm, John G Harris <j...(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 at 11:25:31, in comp.lang.javascript, Dmitry A.
>
> >> Soshnikov wrote:
>
> >> <snip>>I repeat, regardless that reference-concept is just a
> >> >sugar for the pointer in C++,
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> That isn't true. In C++ a reference is a synonym. The compiler doesn't
> >> have to use a pointer. If it's possible and if it wants to it can treat
> >> it like a macro instead. (See 'frog', use 'jump').
>
> >It doesn't matter.
>
>   <snip>
>
> Spreading misinformation always matters.
>

Now who from us a two is spreading misinformation? I'm waiting.

Dmitry.
From: Dmitry A. Soshnikov on 27 Apr 2010 05:27
On Apr 27, 1:10 pm, "Dmitry A. Soshnikov" <dmitry.soshni...(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

> I checked in MS 2005 compiler.

Sorry, typo, even in 2008.

Dmitry.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Prev: return false from ajax
Next: sorry for the link in the footer