Loading user information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading user information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


Auxon Richard.Hein Read it: ​http://bitc​oin.​org/bitcoin.​pdf
  • I just got this message from my aunt about my other aunt ...

    "Mary wanted me to contact you cause she is afraid to send emails, she got somekind of a trojan that seems to have wiped MS off of her computer.  She can only get on the internet thru favourites & she can get into her documents but that is it.  Windows says there is no app, ms word comes up error or not found, or tells her to open with & the list of programs.  She tried to redownload her spyware & virus protect but wasn't sure what to do.  There is an icon on her desktop that she never saw before.  It is 2 doves & when she clicks it it says open office 3.2, then open with the list again.  Her Rundlle..exe is gone.  Not sure what if anything you can do from there but she thought you might have some input.  She can get on fb if she goes through favs.

    what do ya think LOL "

    Perplexed  WTF.  Perplexed

  • How did Microsoft lose millions of dollars

    Looks fun and interesting ... I'll have to try it out.

  • Attachmate lays off US Mono employees

    @Ray7:  They went .NET because there was already plenty of Java + JVM implementations.  They wanted to do something new on .NET/CLI.  It started out as a small group of developers.  Miguel got a lot of flack for it, but his attitude was that he liked .NET and C# and wished he could use it on Linux, so decided to build a compiler for it, and started building the libraries.

    Attachmate layoffs have nothing to do with Microsoft, so I don't know why people are blaming MS at all.

  • Attachmate lays off US Mono employees

    @beerinbelgium:  Why is it a waste of time and foolish?  It's supposed to be opensource ... so anyone is supposed to just be able to fork it and make another version.  Problem solved.  Or is there something standing in the way that I'm not aware of?

  • Bjarne Stroustrup: Trends and Future of C++

    , exoteric wrote

    Lastly, is there a C++0x implementation matrix for VS 2010 (and perhaps even the planned VS 2012)?

    I found this table, for VC++ 2010 RC:  http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2010/04/06/c-0x-core-language-features-in-vc10-the-table.aspx  There may have been changes in the RTM or SP1.  (Edit:  No changes in SP1.)


  • Bjarne Stroustrup: Trends and Future of C++

    , exoteric wrote

    I wonder if there is a book on idiomatic, modern C++ using (albeit draft) C++0x features? Also, are concepts completely dead (not in terms of 0x which obviously they are)?

    From a quick search, there are some books in progress, but nothing yet.  The final draft of the standard is available online.  From Wikipedia, "There are unofficial plans to have the concepts back in the standard in some form,[4] however no official decision has been made yet."

  • Bjarne Stroustrup: Trends and Future of C++

    @Sven Groot:  I know I made it sound like RAII to implement user types with value semantics was new, but I know the pattern isn't new (although I didn't know it had a name), because I see it used in a few places in the code base I'm maintaining, and it is familiar and makes perfect sense to a C# developer.  However, the question is why isn't it used more often?  Boris talks about that in his presentation - copying all that data.  The hit on efficiency with all the copying going on makes people go back to using pointers and dynamic allocation, giving up on value semantics.  That's where C++0x comes in, introducing RValue references and move constructors. 

    Also, as Boris also mentions, when dealing with things that can't or shouldn't be copied, but can be moved, such as file handles, then RValue references and move semantics again save the day.  Then again, Boris talks about shared pointers, and how you can still implement value semantics for members which you need to have more fine-grained lifetime control over.  (I realize that shared pointers have been part of Boost and TR1, but it's now part of the standard).  So, while RAII isn't new, it's now something you can use everywhere to implement value semantics.

    This makes me happy. Smiley

  • Does Youtube perform well for you lately?

    (EDIT:  Just read DCMonkey's post ... so I'm fixing mine ...) 

    @DCMonkey:  I have the same problem when I go fullscreen on only one of my systems, 50% (or so) of the time the video doesn't render - just a black screen with audio.  I then just have to escape out of fullscreen, and go back to fullscreen and the video renders again.  It's very annoying.  I'm using IE9 RTW, but that can't be the sole problem because on other systems with IE9 RTW I don't have any problems.  I also only ever see this with YouTube.

  • Bjarne Stroustrup: Trends and Future of C++

    @Charles:  I watched Boris Jabes' presentation twice, before and after reviewing a lot of other C++0x/11 stuff and watching your interview with Herb Sutter, and I've just reviewed the slides from Bjarne.

    From a novice C++ programmer, who hasn't had more than a few hundred hours of C++ altogether in real world usage (well, maybe 500 or so, if I really think about it, but not continuously; and more everyday now because I've been assigned to deal with our legacy C++ code at work since January), let me explain why I haven't really wanted to program in C++.  It's just so easy to screw up.  Plain and simple.  I love higher level languages because they make it easier to say what you intend from the top down.  C++ is so bottom up and confusing because of the massive amount of tricks people can employ to obscure what is going on.  If they fail to implement a copy constructor, then watch out!  If they fail to implement the = operator properly, doom and memory leaks.  It's just a nightmare of details that take you away from getting stuff done. 

    Just last week, I was debugging a memory leak.  There's a struct that contains an array of strings, but in some places, the strings are allocated with CoTaskMemAlloc, in others with new, in another, SysAllocString, and in another there's some realloc over the array.  Since the struct is passed around all over the place and/or set in various functions that are exposed to user code to invoke, and sometimes across COM boundaries to the CLR, then sometimes it requires CoTaskMemFree, but in other places, it has to be delete [] and so on, then how can I know how to free the string array properly when the destructor is called (since the struct is a member variable)?  Nightmare.  This isn't simple code. 

    Now I am glad to hear some of the experts, like Boris, talk about how C++ value type semantics are the way things should be, and now suddenly you can wrap up some handle in a struct or class with value type semantics and only have to ensure the destructor closes the handle.  You should never have to call delete x or delete [] xs again, except in the destructor where God intended it.  I love how Herb says, this is garbage collection.  Well, I never really thought about it that way until he said it.  I see what he means and agree.  Perhaps it's not automatic in the CLR sense, but it's automatic enough if you build your user defined types with value semantics and a destructor, while still being completely deterministic, and you can't leak memory.  What took so long?  Big Smile  Now, that just makes sense.  So, C++ is sane again.

    Look at Bjarne's slides about all the various kinds of initialization semantics (slides 69-80) , and how they don't play nice together.  It's entirely inconsistent.  Now, there's uniform initialization semantics that you can use for everything.  FANTASTIC!  Seriously, that's awesome.  Now I can use X{...} for anything and it will just work.  {} even helps prevent narrowing/truncation.  What a relief.  Doesn't help for reading legacy code, but, hey, one step at a time.

    I have more to think about when looking at the threading/concurrency and locking semantics of C++0x, but that also looks great so far. 

    Of course I also love the lambda expressions. Smiley  A language is no longer a real language without them, IMHO.  Wink

    In summary, I'm not much of a C++ programmer and never claimed to be, but I'm going to become a pretty good C++0x/11 programmer.

    Cheers Big Smile

  • Lambda Calculus lectures

    , fanbaby wrote

    @Richard.Hein: My bad, i thought you were talking functional programming.

    Well, I am since lambda calculus is the essence of all functional programming.  It's just that in this case I'm particularly interested in the nitty gritty details of the simplest possible programming language, which is lambda calculus.  Everything else is syntax sugar. Wink