Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 15:07:35 12/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2002 at 17:58:22, Sune Fischer wrote: >On December 23, 2002 at 17:38:39, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>There are several possibilities: >>1. MSVC6 is not the most compliant compiler on earth, so don't expect anything >>2. Maybe you are using this the wrong way? If you wrap things in a class, you >>will have to explicitly give the type argument when you use the static member >>functions: >> >> int c=CUtil<int>::Max(a,b); >> >>Which is maybe not quite what you wanted. But that what you made :) >>You might want to wrap the functions in a namespace instead. > >Yes, I looked over the STL, and I think I prefer the namespace, although that is >cumbersome in its own way. > Cumbersome how? A namespace should be used whenever it is the best solution. A class is a namespace (a restricted one), a namespace is not a class. You can do almost anything with a namespace. >>There are several >>different ways of doing what you want to do. The best thing is for you to learn >>how on your own. And if you really have to ask somebody, ask in comp.lang.c++, >>not CCC :) > >LOL, those are the kind of answers i would have gotten in comp.lang.c++ those no >good for nothing "start small" and "learn how to program" advises, somehow I >find it very insulting :) > Sorry :) >Besides compared to the high number of posts containing little else than >personal attacks, I think this is on-topic. When I directed you to comp.lang.c++, it was not because I thought you were off-topic (I started the Two Towers thread :), but because I thought you would get better help there. CCC is good for chess programming questions, but the level of language knowledge isn't especially high in here. >For sure you people here can >understand why I can't possibly accept 15% loss of speed, in comp.lang.c++ they >would never understand that. Before you know it the whole thread has become a >debate of whether the 15% is "worth it" or not :) > People can understand that too in comp.lang.c++. >> >>Inlining hasn't been a practical problem with me, with MSVC. I just put the >>relevant parts in a header file. >> >>C++ isn't slower for chess programming than C if used right. C++ can easily be >>faster than C. The most important benefit though, is the type safety and the >>superior designs possible. >> >>/David > >Yes, you don't have to convice me :) Maybe I can convince the other readers :) >I have changed most of my macros to inlined functions, and have seen no drop in >speed yet. > Of course not. /David
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.