Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Many Features Proposed For C++14

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    rMORE CONCURRENCY

    The thread safe deque would have my vote.
    I've also recently been bitten by the fact that (in g++) the default hashing template used by map and unordered_map will bomb with mutiple threads... Come on guys, what possible reason could a hashing function have for being anything but reentrant?!

    I'd like to see al the std containers have thread safe versions or optional thread safety at compile time.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by zanny View Post
      In defense of C++ on the char thing (though it isn't much of a defense) any reasonable modern language would be implementing chars as code points which, by being variable size, can't be contained in a fixed 8 bit integral value (does the cast return 2 bytes? where do you put / refer to those? Does it just return a short? What if its a 3 byte code point?) Though, C++ still uses ASCII raw chars and requires writing nonsense like u8"asdfpattie" with auto types or wchar_t nonsense (char16_t, char32_t... bleh).

      C doesn't have anything close to unicode support, though. It says something that Rust / Go, the two "newer" popular native languages are both only unicode.
      That's what C11 includes.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by bnolsen View Post
        having written high performance massively parallel software my experience with openMP is quite unimpressive. Gains are typically quite sub linear, more log-like. It's okay as a stop gap for trying to upgrade old non thread safe software. IMHO new vector unit technology can be dramatically faster. In my experience there are 2 levels of parallelization: instruction level. best left to vectorization techniques, and task level parallelism which is an issue of software design and not a coding problem.
        I agree with the others, I've gotten good results with OpenMP. The latest one got 5.5x throughput on 6 cores, close to linear.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by brouhaha View Post
          They've been in C since C99. Maybe 15 years is enough time for useful features to make it from C into C++?
          They aren't included simply because that's not how you initialize structs/classes in idiomatic C++.
          That's what constructors are for.

          Granted, if you must work with C structs to which definitions you got no access for, it's a bit of a pain.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re

            Originally posted by Ericg View Post
            C++ includes all of C, its just a matter of whether or not its being used.
            Don't tell a C and/or C++ programmer this thing, some people get really angry when you confuse this things.
            There are A Lot of things that C++ doesn't have from C, it is often not observed because compilers implement them as "extensions".
            Basic things are: char differences, restrict keyword, register keyword...
            There are a lot of things, but I doubt you are interested in them.

            Comment


            • #21
              pls herb, modular imports

              Comment

              Working...
              X