Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 110 of 110

Thread: Cairo Proposed To Become Part Of ISO C++

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pal666 View Post
    iso is not ieee
    posix is standard for unix, not for generic operating system
    c++ does not care who controls what, it is intended to be used by everyone
    posix is quite generic now.
    Most modern OSes are unix, except Windows which is "poorly reinvented unix".
    You can install "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" on Windows, which means Windows has all unix functions. It only has different api.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,153

    Default

    Did this pal guy just make ten one-line posts on top of each other? Wow, someone must have hit a nerve.

    Quote Originally Posted by pal666 View Post
    you can't teach some random library as part of c++ course. how many portable clean modern c++ libraries do you know ?
    Off the top of my head: Qt, opencv, VTK, ITK, SFML, nall, OpenSceneGraph, Ogre3d, Coin3d.

    All of them written in standards-compliant C++98/11.

    you live in an alternate universe without java and c#, period
    The C# ISO spec does not cover UIs. Educate yourself.

    java.awt should serve as a warning on why you should not add a UI to the C++ standard.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    posix is quite generic now.
    Most modern OSes are unix, except Windows which is "poorly reinvented unix".
    You mean "poorly reinvented VMS" from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT :

    "Microsoft hired a group of developers from Digital Equipment Corporation led by Dave Cutler to build Windows NT, and many elements of the design reflect earlier DEC experience with Cutler's VMS[17] and RSX-11. The operating system was designed to run on multiple instruction set architectures and multiple hardware platforms within each architecture. The platform dependencies are largely hidden from the rest of the system by a kernel mode module called the HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer)."

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by s_j_newbury View Post
    You mean "poorly reinvented VMS"
    Yes and VMS was poorly reinvented UNIX.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    Dou you really think every fucking webserver (see, I can swear, too) out there has access to a GPU?
    you are just plain stupid. i didn't say that. i said that ppl smarter than you want to use accel when it is available. it means using api which can use accel when it is available.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pal666 View Post
    you are just plain stupid. i didn't say that. i said that ppl smarter than you want to use accel when it is available. it means using api which can use accel when it is available.
    The API can't use anything, as it's just an interface. You can make it interface any complying implementation you want, and this can use or not hardware acceleration, it's up to the one who implements it.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    posix is quite generic now.
    Most modern OSes are unix, except Windows which is "poorly reinvented unix".
    You can install "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" on Windows, which means Windows has all unix functions. It only has different api.
    you don't seem to understand. nobody is interested in your definition of modern oses or genericity
    "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" is meant not for developing windows apps, but for compiling unix apps on windows. you can use same argument for adopting win32 into c++ standard due to existence of wine.
    it does not support whole posix, it is not supported on every windows flavour and not every non-unix os is windows

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Off the top of my head: Qt, opencv, VTK, ITK, SFML, nall, OpenSceneGraph, Ogre3d, Coin3d.

    All of them written in standards-compliant C++98/11.
    portable means portable to every platform with c++ compiler, not just some flavours of win/linux/mac
    modern means c++11, not c++98
    i'm not going to check every one of them, but considering you called qt clean, it is obvious that your bar is pretty low
    btw these 3 features are conflicting with each other, so why did you even try to answer

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post

    The C# ISO spec does not cover UIs. Educate yourself.
    but its standard library does. as will be c++'s. it seems that no amount of education is going to help in your case.
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    java.awt should serve as a warning on why you should not add a UI to the C++ standard.
    you seem to be bitten by java in childhood. first, cairo is not ui, second, if you don't like dome java lib it does not mean that c++ lib in same domain will be bad.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    403

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    The API can't use anything, as it's just an interface. You can make it interface any complying implementation you want, and this can use or not hardware acceleration, it's up to the one who implements it.
    how does it contradict anything i said, considering we were talking about user of api, not implementor ?

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pal666 View Post
    you don't seem to understand. nobody is interested in your definition of modern oses or genericity
    "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" is meant not for developing windows apps, but for compiling unix apps on windows. you can use same argument for adopting win32 into c++ standard due to existence of wine.
    it does not support whole posix, it is not supported on every windows flavour and not every non-unix os is windows
    My point is "all" (modern: not DOS) OSes support features required for POSIX.
    Win32 API changes every Windows release (yes, it is mostly backward compatible) and documentation is poor. Not to mention it is ugly.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •