Disputatio:C++

message: We need a page on c++, but someone's hello world is not all it should contain... Someone, possibly me if noone else beats me to it, needs to add some actual content here. --Alynna Kasmira 19:50, 31 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)

message: I'm creating the neologism "Objectis orientatus". which seems a good way to translate from the corresponding english term (object-oriented), or from other languages (orienté objet in french). Migou 13:38, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Because orientatus means "facing east" this does seem a very apt translation. I understand it to be a "language specialized for using programming objects" so my best try at translating "object-oriented programming language" is: "lingua obiectorum programmantum usui specializata" --Rafaelgarcia 06:02, 16 Octobris 2007 (UTC).

text: Hey Migou. What exactly is the English term you're going for? (I'm computer illiterate) Please do note the use of j is not supported here (after hours of debate) per Vicipaedia:Auxilium_pro_editione_%28latine%29#Noli_uti_litteris_J_et_j.21. Thanks! --Ioscius (disp) 14:03, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I added the english and french translation of the term. The meaning of "object oriented" can be made clearer with these paraphrases

text: :Programming language oriented towards the use of objects. Programming language devised in order to use objects. Where objects are computer data structures that can be seen as representations of objects of the world regrouping both the data and the instructions for processing this data. (for instance : the window of a computer programm will be an object, with its data, like its width, its height, its colors, and its caracteristic functions for closing the window, maximizing it, etc...)
replies: text: ::This page contains a lot of bad translations. Among other things, see Disputatio:Codex programmandi.--Rafaelgarcia 15:04, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::C++ est codex programmandi computatorii. = C++ is a book of the programming of a computer. ~ C++ is a book for programming a computer. Is that what's meant? ¶ "Programming language oriented towards the use of objects." Objects like, for example, crowbars, feathers, and cherry pies? If it's a technical term (and is therefore being used in an unusual sense), it needs an explanation. IacobusAmor 15:24, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::I think the intended meaning is "computer programming language" or "language for programming a computer"--Rafaelgarcia 15:30, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::He meant Codex as in code not as in trunk or book. Historically codex has been used to mean a lot of different things. I don't know the best translation but a less confusing alternative may be cipher. Something to think about, I suppose, but the whole issue can be easily avoided by translating as lingua computatralis or lingua programmatica.--Rafaelgarcia 15:41, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::::In imperial times, codex did apparently refer to a systematic arrangement of statutes, and from there it may have gotten generalized to refer to any systematic arrangement, so it's presumably possible here. In fact, a later sense for English 'code' recorded in the OED (but not before 1809 or after 1875) is 'A system or collection of rules or regulations on any subject'. IacobusAmor 16:26, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

text: ::::::Indeed, the intended meaning is "computer programming language". So should we replace the term "codex programmandi" by "lingua computatralis"  on the pages about a programming language? (including : Perl, C++, C (codex programmandi), Python, Java, Ocaml)
replies: text: :::::::I think so.--Rafaelgarcia 16:22, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

text: Apud Caesarem, code is "numeri", right? --Ioscius (disp) 16:49, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

text: Not that that wouldn't demand an explanation, too.--Ioscius (disp) 16:51, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::David Morgan: programming language = lingua programmationis (via Vox Latina). Harrissimo.
thread_title: neologism

message: In the version of 8 Iunii 2009, does this:
replies: text: Dictum inline, quo functiones singulae lineae definiri possunt 
mean 'which makes possible defining single line functions'...? If so, it is wrong. 'Inline' does not mean 'in a single line'. Actually, any C/C++ code can be written in a single line (except preprocessor directives). The meaning of the 'inline' keyword is: 'inserted (or: expanded) in the place of use'. The inline function will not get called – instead, its compiled body will be inserted in the place, where normally the call instruction would appear. That will produce the longer code but save the execution time. --CiaPan 21:06, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Dictum 'inline', quo functiones singulae lineae definiri possunt = 'The said "inline," by which the executions of a single line can be defined'. (Or: 'by which single executions of a line'; both phrases are equally grammatical.) IacobusAmor 23:48, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::When I wrote that, I meant "functions of a single line"; because inline is used instead of single line C preprocessor macro definitions; however, CiaPan is right that in C++ its use is more general and it has not very much to do with "single lines". So the text needs to be corrected for the correct definition.--Rafaelgarcia 01:28, 20 Maii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 'inline' keyword