June 16-21, Sofia, Bulgaria
September 13-19, Aurora, CO, USA
October 25, Pavia, Italy
November 6-8, Berlin, Germany
November 16-21, Kona, HI, USA
By Blog Staff | Mar 14, 2013 03:05 PM | Tags: intermediate
Andrzej continues with a third installment in his series on preconditions.
Preconditions, Part 3
by Andrzej Krzemieński
In this post, I examine a couple of cases and try to answer the question when and how to specify preconditions, and when it is better not to do it. I believe it gives a deeper insight into the nature of preconditions.
By Blog Staff | Mar 14, 2013 02:31 PM | Tags: intermediate
Ed.: Most standardization papers are about technical changes. It's not often you get a tutorial written by a world-class expert submitted as a WG21 paper. Thanks, Walter!
A new WG21 paper is available. A copy is linked below, and the paper will also appear in the next normal WG21 mailing. If you are not a committee member, please use the comments section below or the std-proposals forum for public discussion.
Document number: N3551
Date: 2013-03-12
Random Number Generation in C++11
by Walter Brown
Excerpt:
For programmers seeking to familiarize themselves with the
<random>component of the
C++11 standard library, we provide background information and tutorial guidance with numerous
usage examples.1 Introduction 1
2 Getting started 2
3 An anti-pattern 3
4 Initializing an engine 3
5 What else can an engine do? 4
6 Engines in the standard library 5
7 Sharing an engine 5
8 Distributions in the standard library 6
9 What else can a distribution do? 8
10 A simple toolkit 9
11 A final example 9
12 Caveat lector! 10
13 What’s next? 11
14 Acknowledgments 11
15 Bibliography 11
16 Revision history 12
By Blog Staff | Mar 12, 2013 11:49 AM | Tags: intermediate
Quick A: Because exceptions occur (or not) dynamically.
Why is C++0x's
noexceptchecked dynamically?I am curious about the rationale behind noexcept in the C++0x FCD.
throw(X)was [deprecated], butnoexceptseems to do the same thing. Is there a reason thatnoexceptisn't checked at compile time? It seems that it would be better if these functions were checked statically that they only dcalled throwing functions within atryblock.
By Blog Staff | Mar 12, 2013 04:45 AM | Tags: basics
Quick A: When correctly implemented per the standard, you get in-place construction with perfect forwarding.
Longer question:
push_back vs emplace_back
I'm a bit confused regarding the difference between push_back and emplace_back.
void emplace_back(Type&& _Val); void push_back(const Type& _Val); void push_back(Type&& _Val);As there is a push_back overload taking a rvalue reference I don't quite see what the purpose of emplace_back becomes?
By Blog Staff | Mar 11, 2013 04:53 PM | Tags: intermediate
Quick A: A lot. They can bind to anything callable, not just functions. And they can perform conversions on parameter and return types.
Is there a use case for std::function that is not covered by function pointers, or is it just syntactic sugar?
The notation for
std::functionis quite nice when compared to function pointers. However, other than that, I can't find a use case where it couldn't be replaced by pointers. So is it just syntactic sugar for function pointers?
By Blog Staff | Mar 8, 2013 04:57 PM | Tags: None
Over the past year, UDLs have started to become available in some popular C++ compilers, including gcc 4.7 and Clang 3.1. As people are adopting those compilers in real code and starting to be ablel to use this feature, a natural question is how useful they are and how to use them:
What new capabilities do user-defined literals add to C++?
C++11 introduces user-defined literals which will allow the introduction of new literal syntax based on existing literals (int, hex, string, float) so that any type will be able to have a literal presentation.
Examples:
// imaginary numbers std::complex<long double> operator "" _i(long double d) // cooked form { return std::complex<long double>(0, d); } auto val = 3.14_i; // val = complex<long double>(0, 3.14) // binary values int operator "" _B(const char*); // raw form int answer = 101010_B; // answer = 42 // std::string std::string operator "" _s(const char* str, size_t /*length*/) { return std::string(str); } auto hi = "hello"_s + " world"; // + works, "hello"_s is a string not a pointer // units assert(1_kg == 2.2_lb); // give or take 0.00462262 poundsAt first glance this looks very cool but I'm wondering how applicable it really is, [...] do you feel this feature will justify itself? What other literals would you like to define that will make your C++ code more readable?
By Blog Staff | Mar 6, 2013 12:24 PM | Tags: basics
Quick A: Because it doesn't have to be. It's "the C++ way" to prefer library solutions, and initializer_list shows how far you can get with a pure library solution, then the rest of the way with minimal language support to create initializer_list objects.
Recently on SO:
Why isn't
std::initializer_lista core-language built-in?It seems to me that it's quite an important feature of C++11 and yet it doesn't have its own reserved keyword (or something alike).
Instead,
initializer_listit's just a template class from the standard library that has a special, implicit mapping from the new braced-init-list{...}syntax that's handled by the compiler.At first thought, this solution is quite hacky. ...
By Blog Staff | Mar 5, 2013 01:03 PM | Tags: intermediate
See also "Generalizing Observer", written ten years ago when std::function was first adopted.
The Importance of std::function
by Malte Skarupke
... Classically an update loop would be implemented something like this: ...
And this is a good solution at first. But you’ve got that inheritance in there, and that doesn’t scale. You will probably want to add a render loop and maybe a separate update loop for the editor. Once you’ve got that many base classes it makes sense to combine them into one. And now you’ve just started on the way of having a big base class that gets used everywhere. Soon enough adding something different to the update loop involves a whole lot of unnecessary work.
Here is an alternate update loop using
std::function: ...
By Blog Staff | Mar 5, 2013 10:56 AM | Tags: basics
Quick A: With a lambda function. Try const mytype myobj{ []{ /* compute value */ return value; } }.
How would you initialize a const vector of function results using C++11?
Is it possible to use something like
generate_nto create aconst vectorof, say, random numbers? I couldn't think of a way to do it without derivingvectorand doing the assignment in the constructor.
By Eric Niebler | Mar 1, 2013 01:36 PM | Tags: basics
Marshall Clow gives some helpful tips for C++ programmers migrating to to XCode 4.6:
C++ and XCode 4.6
So, you’ve installed Xcode 4.6, and you are a C++ programmer.
You want to use the latest and greatest, so you create a new project, and add your sources to the project, and hit Build, and … guess what? Your code doesn’t build!