HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jeff@emily10.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ely)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Define WIN30/WIN31 ?
Date: 13 Dec 1992 01:32:26 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Statistics, U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: emily10.berkeley.edu
Summary: beginner's question

I am just learning C++ and windows programming and I am going through the
tutorial on OWL in the Turbo C++ documentation.  The tutorial takes you 
through the development of a windows application called Steps.  

Well I my first attempt at compilation was the step1.cpp program.  I was a 
little bothered that the compilation failed because "OWL applications require 
either WIN30 or WIN31 to be defined."  I know nothing about these macros (?)
and can find nothing about them in the documentation.  (I am guessing that
they are flags for which version of Windows is running) 

Just as an experiment I added the line #define WIN30.  I got past that fatal 
error only to get a whole bunch of new errors, the first of which were four 
repetitions of "Cannot access Object.H"  Why are there errors in Borland's
own example source files and header files ?!?  I know I'm missing something. 
Can anyone help?

Jeff Ely
jeff@econ.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: rkumar@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Rahul Kumar)
Subject: Neural Networks
Keywords: Neural Nets
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:58:20 GMT


Hello there!

	I am fourth year Computer Science student at Brock University
    and I am trying to implement Neural networks in object oriented 
    language.  What rule I do it in, is not important.
    So, if someone  could suggest, where I could find relevant matrial, 
    I would really appreciate it.

	Thanking you all in anticipation, and lloking forward hearing from
    you.


							Rahul Kumar.
-- 

				  Rahul Kumar 
 ****************************************************************************
  s9416876@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca  |  rkumar@spartan.ac.brocku.ca
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: jimad@microsoft.com (Jim Adcock)
Subject: Re: static members in derived classes
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:54:07 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Dec12.175244.17775@taumet.com> steve@taumet.com (Steve Clamage) writes:
|"Virtual static" has been proposed from time to time.  I don't know of
|any technical objections to it.  There are lots of good ideas for
|extensions to C++.  The question is always one of evaluating the costs
|and benefits of any proposed extension.

The technical argument against it is that the same capability can be
implementing using virtual functions.  If the complaint is that virtual
functions are too slow to implement "virtual statics" then the counter-
reply is that compilers can use a fat table implementation [or other
implementation] instead of the common vtable implementation in order 
to reduce the cost of the virtual function call in these cases.

Going the opposite direction people who propose "virtual static" do so
on the basis of an assumed vtable implementation of virtual functions.
In which case including "virtual static" begins to dictate one implementation
over other potentially faster implementations, which is not a good thing
to do.  Language should specify language, not dictate implementation.

Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: ulf@julius.c3consult.comm.se (Ulf Lagerstedt)
Subject: Inventory of methods for software development
Organization: Communicator C3Consult AB
Distribution: comp
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:39:18 GMT



 (I asked this a while ago in comp.software.eng, with limited success.
 If the subject is slightly inappropriate for this newsgroup, I apologize.
 I urge you to mail your answers. Thanks.)


I am about to do a survey or inventory of methods for software development.
With methods, I mean documented procedures and conceptual models for
either the entire development process or some parts thereof.

Anything worth being called a method in this sense is of interest.
Obviously, a complete inventory would be very large, but I hope
to be able to compile information about at least a large share of
the more widespread methods.

I wish to get as much information as possible about each method,
but the following will do fine:

                                                (for instance)

Name:                                           Coad/Yordon OOA and OOD
Key characteristics:                            Object oriented
Parts of development process concerned:         Analysis, design
Software tools supporting the method:           ...etc.
Result/output from method:
References:
- Documentation (title, author, etc):
- Organizations (commercial or other):


Please, if you have any references to a particular method, or if you
know of similar work elsewhere, mail me a reply. If there is enough
interest, I'll gladly post a summary. Your help is appreciated.

--
Ulf Lagerstedt, Communicator C3Consult, Sweden  /  ulf@c3consult.comm.se
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: hclam@cuse1.se.cuhk.hk (LAM Ho Cheong)
Subject: tlink error: arguments too long
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, The Chinese U. of Hong Kong
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:39:07 GMT

   I'm writing a program, which will invoke the Turbo C++ compiler to
   compile a windows application during run time.

   For compilation, I've written a make file, which will be called up
   by my program.  However, the tlink shows the following error,

   Fatal: Command arguments too long

   But all the arguments are necessary as the windows application
   includes several source files and several library have to be linked
   with it.

   So, is there anyone who could solve the "argument" error or even
   think of a better approach ?  Please send any suggestion to me at
   the address below...

   Thank you!

HC
hclam@se.cuhk.hk
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: What is this CFRONT 3.0 warning message trying to tell me?
Date: 19 Dec 92 16:00:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24450
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ

In article <1992Dec17.184841.4563@cadkey.com> erics@cadkey.com (Eric Smith) writes:

> Isn't there a problem with this code, since it checks to see if this
> is the same as the right hand side by pointer comparison?  Aren't
> pointer comparisons only defined if they point within the same object
> or array of objects?

Pointer comparisons for equality and inequality work even if the pointers
don't point within the same objects.  The other four relationals are
more constrained.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
From: jimad@microsoft.com (Jim Adcock)
Subject: Re: Complex Addition.
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:19:41 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <Bz3ynn.A1w@cs.uiuc.edu> pjl@cs.uiuc.edu (Paul Lucas) writes:
|In <1992Dec11.170849.18525@rs6000.bham.ac.uk> pickerig@eee.bham.ac.uk (Guy Pickering) writes:
|>inline complex operator+(complex a, complex b)
|>{
|>  return complex(a.re+b.re,a.im+b.im)
|>}
|
|>Doesn't the complex object go out of scope?
|
|*****>	It's not in the scope of the function; it's in a temporary for
|	the return-value of the function that gets destroyed sometime
|	thereafter.

Nit disagreement.  I'd claim that the return expression must be in
the scope of the function.  In this case the "complex(...)" must
be the return expression and thus must be in scope of the function.
Thus "complex(...)" creates an unnamed temporary object that is
in scope.  Its *another* unnamed temporary inited from this unnamed
temporary "that gets destroyed sometime thereafter."  Of course, the
compiler typically can realize that two unnamed temporaries are
unnecessary and optimize this down to one unnamed temporary, or mayne
even zero unnamed temporaries depending on calling context...
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: stanleyr@kramden.nyu.edu (Rick Stanley)
Subject: Re: C++ Courses in East Coast
Organization: New York University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:43:03 GMT

ram@ramsgi.erenj.com (ram rajagopalan) writes:

>HI,

>I am interested in attending a course to learn C++.  if anyone could recommend
>a good outfit in the east coast which offers courses in C++ I would 
>appreciate it.

Information Technologies Institute at New York University offers excellent
courses in C++, both Part I (Intro), and Part II (Advanced).  Contact
the department at (212) 998-7190 for information and a catalog.  Classes
start in early February.

-------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
Rick Stanley                         | R.S. Consultants  (212) 569-9304
stanleyr@acf14.nyu.edu               | 
Information Technologies Institute   |        C++ & C Language
New York University   NYC, NY  USA   | Programming, Training, Consulting
-------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
From: euamts@eua.ericsson.se (Mats Henricson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Initialization {} of Aggregates with Stati
Date: 15 Dec 92 09:47:09 GMT
Reply-To: euamts@eua.ericsson.se
Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden

In article Bwu@polstra.uucp, jdp@polstra.uucp (John Polstra) writes:
#I'd like some opinions on something that the ARM doesn't seem to address
#directly:
#
#    struct X {
#	int a;
#	static int b;
#	int c;
#    };
#
#    X foo = { 1, 3 };
#
#I believe that this is legal, and that foo.a and foo.c should get
#the values 1 and 3, respectively.  Static member b should remain
#uninitialized by the code shown here; it would have to be defined
#exactly once elsewhere in the program.
#
#ARM section 8.4.1 doesn't say such cases are illegal, but it doesn't really
#say what to do about them either.
#
#Cfront, High C/C++, Microsoft C++ 7.0 seem to agree with me.  Furthermore,
#the class library provided by Microsoft relies on this behavior.  G++ 2.3.2
#for i386-att-sysv4 generates bad stuff that causes the assembler to become
#indignant.
#
#Comments and/or ARM citations, anyone?

I have a similar problem. Take a look at the code below:

#include <iostream.h>

class testbase 
{
   public:
      int y;               // If I remove this line...
};

class test : public testbase 
{
   public:
      int myVal;
      const test* myNext;
};

const test t1 = {7,1,0};      // If I remove "7,"
const test t2 = {7,2,&t1};    // If I remove "7,"  Then Error here
const test t3 = {7,3,&t2};    // If I remove "7,"  Then Error here

main()
{
    cout << "t1.myVal:" << t1.myVal << endl;
    cout << "t1.myNext:" << (int)(t1.myNext) << endl;
    cout << "&t1:" << (int)&t1 << endl;
    cout << "t2.myVal:" << t2.myVal << endl;
    cout << "t2.myNext:" << (int)(t2.myNext) << endl;
    cout << "&t2:" << (int)&t2 << endl;
    cout << "t3.myVal:" << t3.myVal << endl;
    cout << "t3.myNext:" << (int)(t3.myNext) << endl;
    cout << "&t3:" << (int)&t3 << endl;
}    

// I get:
// line 17: error: bad initializer type for test::myVal:
//          const test * ( int  expected)

As you can see: if I remove the int y in testbase and remove the 7s
that initializes it in the three statemants just above main(), I get
two errors. I also read 8.4.1 in ARM, but my pathetic brain is just
too simple to understand. Sorry.

Sun C++ 2.1.

Mats Henricson
Ellemtel
Stockholm
Sweden
From: jbn@lulea.trab.se (Johan Bengtsson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: static members in derived classes
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:03:54 GMT
Organization: Telia Research AB, Aurorum 6, 951 75 Lulea, Sweden
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 + PL8]

Jim Adcock (jimad@microsoft.com) wrote:
: In article <1992Dec12.175244.17775@taumet.com> steve@taumet.com (Steve Clamage) writes:
: |"Virtual static" has been proposed from time to time.  I don't know of
: |any technical objections to it.  There are lots of good ideas for
: |extensions to C++.  The question is always one of evaluating the costs
: |and benefits of any proposed extension.

: The technical argument against it is that the same capability can be
: implementing using virtual functions.

Agreed.

: If the complaint is that virtual
: functions are too slow to implement "virtual statics" then the counter-
: reply is that compilers can use a fat table implementation [or other
: implementation] instead of the common vtable implementation in order 
: to reduce the cost of the virtual function call in these cases.

I'd say it would take a pretty smart compiler to recognize the
"virtual static idiom", noticing that

virtual void f();
static void static_f();

in fact is equivalent to the (forbidden) construct:

static virtual void f();

And of course, this doesn't work, since you have to use two different
names, f() and static_f().

: Going the opposite direction people who propose "virtual static" do so
: on the basis of an assumed vtable implementation of virtual functions.
: In which case including "virtual static" begins to dictate one implementation
: over other potentially faster implementations, which is not a good thing
: to do.  Language should specify language, not dictate implementation.

I like "virtual static", and I do not need the vtbls to back me up.
It is more a question of orthogonality and removal of an exception
to language rules.

Even if it was true that "virtual static" must be implemented using vtbls,
you would only pay for it when you use it.  "Virtual static" could
in principle use a different scheme than other virtual functions.

Also, the equivalence between "static virtual void f()" and two separate
methods, one static and one virtual, is a direct disproof of your claim
that "static virtual" dictates a particular implementation (assuming
you are not also claiming that ordinary virtuals _must_ be implemented
using vtbls).

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Johan Bengtsson, Telia Research AB, Aurorum 6, S-951 75 Lulea, Sweden  |
| Johan.Bengtsson@lulea.trab.se; Voice:(+46)92075471; Fax:(+46)92075490  |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: TSR and resident programs .
From: rodnay@chen.bgu.ac.il (guy rodnay )
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 15:55:05 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

I would very much apreciate any help on TSR's and other Memory -
Resident programs (sources , if possible ) .

			Thanx in advance ,
				Zac P.


--
NAME Zac Pickholtz
EMAIL eacu158@menix.bgu.ac.il
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: krc@wam.umd.edu (Kevin R. Coombes)
Subject: Re: Survey: File Extension
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 14:52:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.211010.10318@rd.hydro.on.ca> twriter@rd.hydro.on.ca writes:
>warsaw@nlm.nih.gov (Barry A. Warsaw) writes:
>
>
>>Should the .h file extension matter?  Do compilers supporting
>>pre-compiled headers need to know the extension for header files?
>>Just wondering 'cause we use .cc and .hh
>
>Is there a good reason for having separate extensions for C and C++
>header files?  Why not share header files between C and C++ like so:
> [example omitted]
>
>One situation where I have found it useful to have separate extensions
>is for editors which choose a mode based on the extension.  However, I
>get around this with GNU emacs using file local variables e.g.
>

Emacs will default according to the extension, but this can be overridden
by the first line of the file. For example, the headers for libg++ all
start with:

// This may look like C code, but it is really -*- C++ -*-

Kevin Coombes <krc@math.umd.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: ded@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (nod sivad)
Subject: Re: Give me safe C++
Reply-To: ded@aplcen (nod sivad)
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 02:05:44 GMT


|the cry comes "oh powers that be, protect us from ourselves", and thus
|we get laws requiring people to wear seatbelts.  It is no that
|I am against seatbelts (or safety), but I was perfectly capable
|of wearing a seatbelt before the law existed. 

How we got from safe C++ to seatbelts is a mystery to me.  The trouble
with analogies is that they're usually slanted.  Here is one slanted
a rather different direction: Suppose your car has an unlabeled button
next to the radio control.  If you push this button the passenger seat
ejects.  C++ hackers love this feature because it is really handy
when a robber jumps into their car.  Project leaders hate it
because the programmers keep sending them through the roof while
searching for an obscure radio station.  Yes, the feature is handy 
in this carjacking world, but it's an obscure feature whose danger outweighs 
its benefit.  The same goes for some aspects of C++.  

Which leads to the following comment:

>No thanks!  Give me the *tools* necessary for safety -- the lapbelts, the
>shoulder harnesses, etc, and let *me* apply them myself.  Poorly applied
>safety devices are more dangerous than no safety devices at all!

I've said before that safety tools like ObjectCenter may be a nice
compromise between freedom of expression and safety.  

						me
From: warsaw@nlm.nih.gov (Barry A. Warsaw)
Subject: Re: Survey: File Extension
Reply-To: warsaw@nlm.nih.gov (Barry A. Warsaw)
Organization: Century Computing, Inc.
	<stanleyr.724172017@kramden> <Bz80Bu.HI4@knot.ccs.queensu.ca>
Date: 14 Dec 92 15:19:55 GMT


Should the .h file extension matter?  Do compilers supporting
pre-compiled headers need to know the extension for header files?
Just wondering 'cause we use .cc and .hh
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: maxtal@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (John MAX Skaller)
Subject: Re: A modest proposal...
Organization: MAXTAL P/L C/- University Computing Centre, Sydney
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 14:34:32 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.172729.20503@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (C. Armour-Kidson) writes:
>
>
>comp.lang.c++'ers,
>
>Due to amount of traffic on this group concerning Borland C++ and
>other DOS specific compilers, would it be rude to suggest that 
>such material be moved to another newsgroup, say, comp.lang.c++.borland
>or comp.lang.c++.dos or something?  I can't speak for everyone but
>it's getting hard to find articles specific to C++.
>
>I apologise if I've been beating a dead horse.

	Due to the amount of traffic concerning Sun workstations
and other Unix machines, questions about using X etc .... can
I suggest ... :-)

	How about 'comp.lang.c++.compiler' for compiler and
platform specific questions. Would enough 'experts' with
'already installed' systems actually read this, except when
*they* needed to?
	
	And how does the poor dumb user (most of use) know if
its a compiler or language problem? I agree with the above
sentiments about traffic, especially with a 2400 baud modem ...
but dont see a solution.

	How about if we started posting C++ questions
to comp.std.c++ instead, and left comp.land.c++ for all other
issues?

-- 
;----------------------------------------------------------------------
        JOHN (MAX) SKALLER,         maxtal@extro.ucc.su.oz.au
	Maxtal Pty Ltd, 6 MacKay St ASHFIELD, NSW 2131, AUSTRALIA
;--------------- SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING SOFTWARE ------------------
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: jlieb@is.morgan.com (Jerry Liebelson)
Subject: WANTED: Comprehensive and annotated list of C++ class libraries
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Company, Inc.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:44:32 GMT

Does anyone have a list comparing all or most of the presently available
commercial and public domain C++ class libraries? 

-- 
Jerry Liebelson
jlieb@is.morgan.com
Compuserve: 73477,2740
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: burr@seas.gwu.edu (Timothy J. Burr)
Subject: Public Domain Vector and Matrix Class
Keywords: Vector Matrix
Organization: George Washington University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:28:53 GMT

Could someone point me to a ftp site where I could get a Vector
and Matrix Class.  I don't want to recreate the wheel.

Tim

burr@seas.gwu.edu  or burr@enews.nrl.navy.mil
From: rkb6116@zeus.tamu.edu (MR. WEATHER)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Beginner needs help
Date: 12 Dec 1992 12:38 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

I'm teaching myself c++, and I'm looking for an Msdos c++ compiler.  I'd hate
to actually spend any money of software, so I'm looking for an ftp site that
has what I'm looking for.  If not, I'd like reccomendations on what I
should buy.

thanks

Mr. Weather <> aka Ken Blair <> rkb6116@zeus.tamu.edu <> Aggieland USA
From: mark@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: HELP - Changing Borland C++ graphics to Microsoft C
Date: 17 Dec 92 13:40:32 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

	I have a program in Borland C++ that takes a .bgi file and puts it out
on the screen using the putimage function.  I need to do the same thing using
Microsoft C.  Does anyone know what format the graphics file must be in to use
Microsoft's putimage function?  What's the easiest way to do this?

	Please e-mail any responses.  Thanks in adavnce.

	-Mark
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: jdp@polstra.uucp (John Polstra)
Subject: Initialization {} of Aggregates with Static Members
Organization: Polstra & Co., Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 03:00:15 GMT

I'd like some opinions on something that the ARM doesn't seem to address
directly:

    struct X {
	int a;
	static int b;
	int c;
    };

    X foo = { 1, 3 };

I believe that this is legal, and that foo.a and foo.c should get
the values 1 and 3, respectively.  Static member b should remain
uninitialized by the code shown here; it would have to be defined
exactly once elsewhere in the program.

ARM section 8.4.1 doesn't say such cases are illegal, but it doesn't really
say what to do about them either.

Cfront, High C/C++, Microsoft C++ 7.0 seem to agree with me.  Furthermore,
the class library provided by Microsoft relies on this behavior.  G++ 2.3.2
for i386-att-sysv4 generates bad stuff that causes the assembler to become
indignant.

Comments and/or ARM citations, anyone?
-- 
   John Polstra                              polstra!jdp@uunet.uu.net
   John D. Polstra & Co., Inc.                  ...!uunet!polstra!jdp
   Seattle, Washington USA   Phone (206) 932-6482, FAX (206) 935-1262
   "Self-knowledge is always bad news."                 -- John Barth
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: fogel@promis.com (Richard Fogel)
Subject: Should char arrays be deleted with delete[]?
Keywords: C++
Organization: PROMIS Systems Corp.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:13:38 GMT

Should char strings allocated as follows:

char *str = new char[10];

later be deleted by:

delete []str   OR    delete str  ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, this would be a great help, as the texts do not realy address this
issue, and I understand that the wrong delete approach will cause unexplained
results.

Richard Fogel
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
From: stanleyr@kramden.nyu.edu (Rick Stanley)
Subject: GNU RCS
Summary: GNU RCS for DOS wanted
Keywords: GNU RCS
Organization: New York University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 17:29:57 GMT

I am interested in obtaining the DOS port of GNU's RCS (Revision Control
System).  This could either be a ftp site or a BBS.  If anyone knows of
it's location, please let me know by email.

Thank you in advance.

-------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
Rick Stanley                         | R.S. Consultants  (212) 569-9304
stanleyr@acf14.nyu.edu               | 
Information Technologies Institute   |        C++ & C Language
New York University   NYC, NY  USA   | Programming, Training, Consulting
-------------------------------------+-----------------------------------

Newsgroups: uw.dcs.general,comp.lang.c++