21–30 of 107 posts
Wondering how Swift will play in this arena now that is open sourced - and performance ? According to this ( http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2014/12/swift-performance ) for some workloads does approach C++.
Wondering how Swift will play in this arena now that is open sourced - and performance ? According to this ( http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2014/12/swift-performance ) for some workloads does approach C++.
What's the state of Swift for web development? Are web frameworks starting to appear?
> Manual memory management is the most popular misconception of C++. Since C++11, it is now recommended to use std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr for automatic memory management. There is a small computational cost to maintaining referenced pointers but it’s minuscule and the safety outweighs this cost. I think another misconception is that you need pointers at all. Smart pointers are still pointers. Its better to us…
> Manual memory management is the most popular misconception of C++. Since C++11, it is now recommended to use std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr for automatic memory management. There is a small computational cost to maintaining referenced pointers but it’s minuscule and the safety outweighs this cost. I think another misconception is that you need pointers at all. Smart pointers are still pointers. Its better to us…
Wondering how Swift will play in this arena now that is open sourced - and performance ? According to this ( http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2014/12/swift-performance ) for some workloads does approach C++.
What's the state of Swift for web development? Are web frameworks starting to appear?
> Manual memory management is the most popular misconception of C++. Since C++11, it is now recommended to use std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr for automatic memory management. There is a small computational cost to maintaining referenced pointers but it’s minuscule and the safety outweighs this cost. I think another misconception is that you need pointers at all. Smart pointers are still pointers. Its better to us…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Programming - principles and practice using C++[1] should be appropriate for beginners. It's a long book at 1000+ pages, but it is designed for novices and explains subjects such as why one needs functions, how to handle errors, GUIs, testing, etc. The C++ Programming language (4th ed)[2] is for experienced programmers. A tour of C++ is the short version of the former.[3] [1]: http://www.stroustrup.com/programming.ht…
Ohh... thnx! Nothing changed since I graduated in 2001 ... I recollect Stroustrup since then. It's still C++ bible.
> Manual memory management is the most popular misconception of C++. Since C++11, it is now recommended to use std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr for automatic memory management. There is a small computational cost to maintaining referenced pointers but it’s minuscule and the safety outweighs this cost. I think another misconception is that you need pointers at all. Smart pointers are still pointers. Its better to us…
Unless its such a large huge object that stackoverflow is a possibility I cant imagine why would one do that.
> Manual memory management is the most popular misconception of C++. Since C++11, it is now recommended to use std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr for automatic memory management. There is a small computational cost to maintaining referenced pointers but it’s minuscule and the safety outweighs this cost. I think another misconception is that you need pointers at all. Smart pointers are still pointers. Its better to us…
Because copying the entire in-memory database you're using on every function call is kind of expensive?
It's sad that you need to justify using one of the most established and longest serving languages/platforms ever.