MSVC++ is on LSD.
Quote:Original post by Arild Fines
So the conclusion is that Stroustrup is on LSD, then?
Well, considering the guy designed C++, I think it's fairly safe to assume he was on some sort of mind altering substance. Either that, or he's a few peas short of a pod.
Quote:Original post by bytecoderQuote:Original post by Arild Fines
So the conclusion is that Stroustrup is on LSD, then?
Well, considering the guy designed C++, I think it's fairly safe to assume he was on some sort of mind altering substance. Either that, or he's a few peas short of a pod.
See? everyone just lets remarks like this slide - but if it were someone trash-talking or making a joke about Microsoft products, people would come out of the woodworks to Microsoft's defense. It even happened in this thread!
Just an observation.
Quote:Original post by Anonymous PosterThat's because opinions differ on the quality of Microsoft products, but everyone agrees that C++ is insane. ;-)
See? everyone just lets remarks like this slide - but if it were someone trash-talking or making a joke about Microsoft products, people would come out of the woodworks to Microsoft's defense.
This is a 'quality of implementation' issue.
While your code was valid C++, the compiler probably should have issued a warning about the fact that a the the expression pt.x was neither used nor had any side effects.
While your code was valid C++, the compiler probably should have issued a warning about the fact that a the the expression pt.x was neither used nor had any side effects.
Quote:Original post by Anonymous PosterQuote:Original post by bytecoderQuote:Original post by Arild Fines
So the conclusion is that Stroustrup is on LSD, then?
Well, considering the guy designed C++, I think it's fairly safe to assume he was on some sort of mind altering substance. Either that, or he's a few peas short of a pod.
See? everyone just lets remarks like this slide - but if it were someone trash-talking or making a joke about Microsoft products, people would come out of the woodworks to Microsoft's defense. It even happened in this thread!
Just an observation.
Not really. For example, the general consencus here is that MSVC6.0 or MFC suck noodles. Noone defends it, in fact when someone mentions it he is usually told to drop it and use another compiler.
Out of curiousity, which version of MSVC++ did you encounter this phenonmena on? I'm not debating the explanation, just wondering how/when a warning should come up for something like this -- after all, if it is language-defined behaviour, I'd imagine no warning should pop up at all.
~Shiny
~Shiny
Quote:if it is language-defined behaviour, I'd imagine no warning should pop up at all.That's not completely true... consider this:
~Shiny
// VC++ 7.1void foo(){ void* p = NULL; p != NULL;}This results in a
Quote:warning C4552: '!=' : operator has no effect; expected operator with side-effect...warning, even though it's well-defined.
Quote:
...after all, if it is language-defined behaviour, I'd imagine no warning should pop up at all.
Assigning a double to a float is a language-defined behaviour(ie not illegal), but you do get a warning about possible loss of precision. Many situations like this exist.
Get over yourselves. You people at gamedev just whine about the basics and never get anywhere.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
