C++0x

jonkiribati · 11-12-2011, 05:26 AM

Did you use it ? what do you think of it?

Doc CPU · 11-12-2011, 05:35 AM

Hi there,

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonkiribati

Did you use it ? what do you think of it?

what do you really want to know? If people use hexadecimal figures in C/C++?

I do, and quite frequently so. The closer you get to the internals of programming, the more often you deal with numbers that are multiples of 16. And these are very convenient to write down in hexadecimal. Besides, for some numbers or codes, it's simply common practice to give them in hex, such as character codes, memory addresses, bit masks for logical operations, and many more.

So what is your question really aimed at?

[X] Doc CPU

dwhitney67 · 11-12-2011, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc CPU

If people use hexadecimal figures in C/C++?

I believe the OP is referring to the yet-to-be-released update to the C++ standard. One can already use some features by specifying the compiler option -std=c++0x.

Personally, I have not had the opportunity to employ its use because I deal with software development in a strict environment, where developers must stick to "official" standards.

Sergei Steshenko · 11-12-2011, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwhitney67

I believe the OP is referring to the yet-to-be-released update to the C++ standard. ...

I think the standard has already been released: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11 .

And though I'm not fond of C++ in general, C++11 looks nicer than its predecessors. The Wiki article describes in detail changes/enhancements.

Doc CPU · 11-12-2011, 07:16 AM

Hi there,

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwhitney67

I believe the OP is referring to the yet-to-be-released update to the C++ standard.

oh, he might be.
I've never heard of that new standard so far, but the reason may be that I usually write plain C (sometimes refined with a pinch of Assembly language) and avoid C++ wherever I can help it.

[X] Doc CPU

dwhitney67 · 11-12-2011, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergei Steshenko

I think the standard has already been released: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11 .

Thanks for the link. I was wondering if I was going to reach retirement before the standard was ever released. Rumors stated that it would be released sometime before 2010, but when that year passed, I sort of lost faith as to when it ever was going to be released.

Sergei Steshenko · 11-12-2011, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwhitney67

Thanks for the link. I was wondering if I was going to reach retirement before the standard was ever released. Rumors stated that it would be released sometime before 2010, but when that year passed, I sort of lost faith as to when it ever was going to be released.

Backward compatibility is a severe problem, and C++ from the getgo is convoluted, so don't expect quick updates in the standard.

bigearsbilly · 11-14-2011, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwhitney67

Thanks for the link. I was wondering if I was going to reach retirement before the standard was ever released.

You could always wait for perl version 6 instead.

(I'm wating for the Gnu Hurd: expected launch date: Satan's winter olympics)

Sergei Steshenko · 11-14-2011, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigearsbilly

You could always wait for perl version 6 instead.

(I'm wating for the Gnu Hurd: expected launch date: Satan's winter olympics)

There is a working version of Perl 6, and they are making progress. But Perl 6 is long overdue.