I'm not saying its good.

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #58,821 by tuberculosis 10/23/02 11:59:02 AM Reply	I'm not saying its good. But rather than templates - why don't you just provide an abstract class for the back pointer and use that. Why must it be the specific implementation class? I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #58,876 by Arkadiy 10/23/02 1:57:40 PM Reply	Was trying to avoid virtual functions This stuff is potentially in a tight loop. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
Post #58,877 by deSitter 10/23/02 2:01:17 PM Reply	ROFL - "This prog might actually do something needing speed" -drl
Post #59,020 by tuberculosis 10/24/02 4:22:55 AM Reply	Write the program you want then optimize it. Not the other way around. The number of people who need to write performance critical code is at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than the people who think they need to write performance critical code. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #59,043 by Arkadiy 10/24/02 9:31:49 AM Reply	I know, I know. I have always heard that theory that templates are as powerful for generic programming as virtual functions. I decided to test that statement. In the end, templates worked out just fine, the code is no less elegant than it would be if I used an interface. And the code is not _really_ in a tight loop at the moment. In my defense I can only say that the code that's being replaced with the scheduler used to take 80% of CPU time, so I wanted the replacement to be very, very tight. May be tighter than it needs to be. -- We have only 2 things to worry about: That things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.

I've learned something new in C++ today! - (Arkadiy) - (36) - Oct. 21, 2002, 03:36:00 PM EDT

Criminy - (deSitter) - (2) - Oct. 21, 2002, 03:37:58 PM EDT

No, just what I needed :) -NT - (Arkadiy) - (1) - Oct. 21, 2002, 06:55:35 PM EDT

No Way! - (deSitter) - Oct. 21, 2002, 08:14:22 PM EDT

Re: I've learned something new in C++ today! - (wharris2) - (1) - Oct. 21, 2002, 11:47:12 PM EDT

Crawl? Run, run! -NT - (Arkadiy) - Oct. 22, 2002, 09:37:34 AM EDT

Don't forget your extra space - (tuberculosis) - (30) - Oct. 22, 2002, 06:37:58 AM EDT

Re: Don't forget your extra space - (Arkadiy) - (29) - Oct. 22, 2002, 09:40:20 AM EDT

Fear the syntax error messages... -NT - (admin) - Oct. 22, 2002, 10:37:44 AM EDT

No, wait, I need more context. - (tuberculosis) - (25) - Oct. 23, 2002, 07:21:44 AM EDT

Wow! - (Arkadiy) - (24) - Oct. 23, 2002, 10:05:52 AM EDT

Grammar police - (drewk) - (18) - Oct. 23, 2002, 10:30:54 AM EDT

No - (deSitter) - Oct. 23, 2002, 10:38:00 AM EDT

Spelling police - (Arkadiy) - (16) - Oct. 23, 2002, 11:38:00 AM EDT

Arrrgh! - (drewk) - (15) - Oct. 23, 2002, 11:40:55 AM EDT

Instantiation has been in use for a long time... - (admin) - (14) - Oct. 23, 2002, 11:44:12 AM EDT

Careful, keep this up and you'll be agreeing with ... - (drewk) - (13) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:11:23 PM EDT

Re: Careful, keep this up and you'll be agreeing with ... - (admin) - (12) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:15:22 PM EDT

Then I hereby nominate ... objectification - (drewk) - (11) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:22:27 PM EDT

Re: Then I hereby nominate ... objectification - (admin) - (10) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:24:56 PM EDT

He meant "objectifaction" - (deSitter) - (1) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:27:28 PM EDT

Re: He meant "objectifaction" - (admin) - Oct. 23, 2002, 12:29:04 PM EDT

Not as a noun, though - (drewk) - (7) - Oct. 23, 2002, 01:31:13 PM EDT

Objectification IS a noun, you knob. -NT - (admin) - (6) - Oct. 23, 2002, 02:21:20 PM EDT

Umm, well, yeah, but ... uhhh - (drewk) - (1) - Oct. 23, 2002, 02:43:50 PM EDT

Welll... - (admin) - Oct. 23, 2002, 02:44:36 PM EDT

You've been using that a lot lately. - (static) - (3) - Oct. 24, 2002, 02:01:53 AM EDT

Well I know where *I* got it from - (ben_tilly) - Oct. 24, 2002, 03:11:38 AM EDT

My (obvious) guess: Peter. - (CRConrad) - Oct. 24, 2002, 07:54:05 AM EDT

Dunno. - (admin) - Oct. 24, 2002, 09:07:48 AM EDT

I'm not saying its good. - (tuberculosis) - (4) - Oct. 23, 2002, 11:59:02 AM EDT

Was trying to avoid virtual functions - (Arkadiy) - (3) - Oct. 23, 2002, 01:57:40 PM EDT

ROFL - "This prog might actually do something needing speed" -NT - (deSitter) - Oct. 23, 2002, 02:01:17 PM EDT

Write the program you want - (tuberculosis) - (1) - Oct. 24, 2002, 04:22:55 AM EDT

I know, I know. - (Arkadiy) - Oct. 24, 2002, 09:31:49 AM EDT

Ow ow ow ow ow ow - (static) - (1) - Oct. 23, 2002, 07:18:46 AM EDT

Run away! run Away! - (boxley) - Oct. 23, 2002, 09:21:16 AM EDT

iwethey.org

Those chicken wings are really spicy! Don't eat those!
101 ms