Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

C++14 Is Complete

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

  • Kemosabe
    replied
    Originally posted by nslay View Post
    QPoint
    Well, Qt maps EVERYTHING. There is QList, QMap and i am very sure there is a QMatrix no matter std::matrix exists or not ...
    I am unsure whether a standard math lib is really 100% a good thing or not...

    From a numerics point of view, C++ is still about as usable as it was back in C++03. At least they expanded on random number generators.
    Yup. VERY usable and flexible.
    Last edited by Kemosabe; 19 August 2014, 02:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • nslay
    replied
    Originally posted by Pseus View Post
    Wow, the committee is working fast nowadays. Great news. C++ is becoming much more usable with the additions and changes. I've been working with C++11 the past few months and I can't imagine going back to C++98/2003.
    Meanwhile, everyone continues to make their own Point and Matrix classes ... and their own numerics functions (like cross product). It's not a big deal until you start working with lots of other libraries that each have their own Point and Matrix class that you have to convert to/from.

    I seriously believe they should standardize a very basic N-D Point/Vector utility struct/class with basic operations (some of which exist with obscure names in <numeric>). The same goes with Matrix, and while contentious, I'm not suggesting to standardize some crazy sparse Matrix/Vector data structure but something that can be used to do, oh, solve small dense linear systems efficiently and in a numerically stable way. Maybe throw SVD and eigenvalue algorithms in there (everyone keeps rewriting these too ... let's see, Linpack, Lapack, OpenCV, Eigen ... am I missing any?).

    But yeah, QPoint, vnl_vector, vtkMatrix, vnl_matrix, QMatrix, boost? This is really really stupid. These utility classes and many algorithms associated with them are so common that they really should be standard.

    From a numerics point of view, C++ is still about as usable as it was back in C++03. At least they expanded on random number generators.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zan Lynx
    replied
    I so wish that Linux had a reasonable way to use the newest C++ compilers on older systems.

    It is a nightmare making a library in C++11 that will compile and link against software built with older GCC. Weird and crazy things with -Bsymbolic and static linking of libgcc and libstdc++. It's just not worth doing. So I can't use it.

    I've got to hold back to lowest common denominator so I can build on Ubuntu 10.04 and CentOS 5. I feel so sorry for myself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Calinou
    replied
    Originally posted by Pseus View Post
    Wow, the committee is working fast nowadays. Great news. C++ is becoming much more usable with the additions and changes. I've been working with C++11 the past few months and I can't imagine going back to C++98/2003.
    The biggest part of the fight is? fighting haters, as always.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pseus
    replied
    Wow, the committee is working fast nowadays. Great news. C++ is becoming much more usable with the additions and changes. I've been working with C++11 the past few months and I can't imagine going back to C++98/2003.

    Leave a comment:


  • phoronix
    started a topic C++14 Is Complete

    C++14 Is Complete

    Phoronix: C++14 Is Complete

    The ISO C++14 draft international standard was unanimously approved and is now clear for publication...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
Working...
X