comp.lang.c - 4 new messages in 3 topics - digest

comp.lang.c
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c?hl=en

comp.lang.c@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* OT: Real Programmers drink ... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/25280f3feeb4a199?hl=en
* Experiment: functional concepts in C - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/7889fc59043eb32b?hl=en
* A tool that suggests optimized logic for a piece of code/module/function - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/8dc0c7e3c216aa24?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: Real Programmers drink ...
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/25280f3feeb4a199?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 25 2010 11:42 pm
From: gwowen

On Jan 25, 8:44 pm, ralt...@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) wrote:
> That depends. I know that the Irish are almost and the Scots not quite
> as tea-expertised as the Sais, but I know little or nothing of the
> bibulous habits of the Welsh, as I assume you from your name to be.

We exist solely on coal, Brains Beer and the charitable munificence of
Russell T. Davis.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Experiment: functional concepts in C
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/7889fc59043eb32b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 25 2010 11:52 pm
From: gwowen

On Jan 26, 6:37 am, jacob navia <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote:
>
> That is why lcc-win proposes a garbage collector, because is the only
> sensible solution.

And what language do you write your garbage collector in? ;)

Garbage collectors clearly have their place, and an (optional) one
would be a boon to any language that doesn't have one built in. But
there are perfectly good alternatives, besides manual reference
counting. The fact that COM screwed up reference counting, doesn't
mean that reference counting is a non-starter. In many circumstances
a smart pointer is preferable to GC, as it gives a programmer greater
control over deterministic destruction (RAII works a lot better on
managing mutexes than GC, for example -- lock()/unlock() cares about
timing in a way malloc()/free() doesn't). In many circumstance, GC is
preferable to smart pointers, as the programmer doesn't care about
those things.

As ever: There is no silver bullet.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Jan 26 2010 12:04 am
From: jacob navia

gwowen a écrit :
> On Jan 26, 6:37 am, jacob navia <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote:
>> That is why lcc-win proposes a garbage collector, because is the only
>> sensible solution.
>
> And what language do you write your garbage collector in? ;)
>

Boehm's GC is written in plain C. Yes, you can write a GC in C. There
are a few bits and pieces done in assembly, but for the most part
everything is in C.

> Garbage collectors clearly have their place, and an (optional) one
> would be a boon to any language that doesn't have one built in.

True

> But
> there are perfectly good alternatives, besides manual reference
> counting. The fact that COM screwed up reference counting, doesn't
> mean that reference counting is a non-starter.

COM did not "screw it". Reference counting has its drawbacks, that's all.

> In many circumstances
> a smart pointer is preferable to GC, as it gives a programmer greater
> control over deterministic destruction (RAII works a lot better on
> managing mutexes than GC, for example -- lock()/unlock() cares about
> timing in a way malloc()/free() doesn't).

That could be done in C if we had operator overloading, something I have
been trying to promote for years.

> In many circumstance, GC is
> preferable to smart pointers, as the programmer doesn't care about
> those things.
>

Yes.
> As ever: There is no silver bullet.

True. GC has its drawbacks too. For instance if you forget a reference to some
huge object you create an enormous memory leak since the collector can't
free it. Finding out where is that reference can be an incredibly complex
task.

Note that that is a problem for ALL GC's, java, lisp whatever.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: A tool that suggests optimized logic for a piece of code/module/
function
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/t/8dc0c7e3c216aa24?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jan 26 2010 12:03 am
From: Nick Keighley

On 26 Jan, 05:20, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalagur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 25, 5:31 am, toby <t...@telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> > On Jan 11, 3:07 pm, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalagur...@gmail.com>

<snip>

> > > Is there a tool for C language that
> > > could suggest an optimized/alternate
> > > programming logic for the function that
> > > is written ?
>
> > IMHO the most effective output it could make is: "Are you really sure
> > the best tool for this task is C?"
>
> My query is 'A tool that suggests
> optimized logic for a piece of
> code/module/function' .

we can read

> I am
> looking for a tool that suggests
> optimized logic for various
> modules/functions written in
> C language.

and I am doubtful that such a tool can exist

> The tool can be made of any
> language.

or none

BTW: are your lines so short so your posts look like poetry?

--
"By 1985, machines will be capable of doing any work that a man can
do"
Herbert Simon 1965

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "comp.lang.c"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to comp.lang.c+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en