As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I haven't kept up lately with the C++ world. Exactly where do things stand these days regarding the standard?
Is TR1 adopted?
Is there a TR2?
How do these relate to C++0x? Are the subsumed?
Has a decision been reached on threading yet?
You can find an extensive article about the upcoming C++0x on wikipedia and the current state of C++ evolution here. It is also worth giving a look at the current GNU implementation in gcc
I'd recommend you to visit
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/
The information you want is available at the site pvnsp directed you to. To synopsize my understanding
Yes, TR1 has been adopted and C++0x is expected to subsume nearly all of the standard.
There is a TR2, it's still in development.
As far as I know, there is no decision on threading. Here's a document from open-std.org that discusses the matter.
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I could find two proposals to include ranges in C++:
N1871 is fairly old (2005), and N3513
However I could not find anything about ranges in the current C++14 draft (N3690). Does this mean that it will not be part of C++14? If that is the case, why is it so cumbersome to introduce ranges?
Does this mean that it will not be part of C++14?
Yes, indeed it will not be part of C++14. Unfortunately, nobody cared enough to work on a proposal.
If that is the case, why is it so cumbersome to introduce ranges?
Hard to tell. Sometimes the reason is that different people have different expectations on what should be standardized and how (see modules or concepts), and sometimes it is just because the feature is more complex to formalize than urgent.
Also, what most often happens is that Boost libraries are taken as an experimental, proto-standard implementation; and while there was enough experience and common consensus on libraries such as Boost.Thread, Boost.Function, and Boost.Bind - so they got standardized quite smoothly - not everybody is satisfied with Boost.Range, mostly because of its lack of an extensive, high-level support for functional programming.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I need to learn C++. Because I like the book's concept and I can already program in several other languages I thought "Accelerated C++: Practical Programming by Example" would be the best choice. However, the book is over 12 years old. Is it still a good idea to pick it up or would I be missing too many important new features of the language?
It remains one of the best books around. It's based on C++98, but C++03 is more bug fixes than anything else, and most programmers can't use anything more recent anyway. As with most languages that have been around for awhile, recent evolutions can be thought of as either fine tuning, or additional features to handle new issues (like threading).
I read some C++ books, and i recomend C++ Primer.
The way the author teaches the language is very insterestig.
Besides its a "heavy" book, you can learn more deeply the language and how to avoid errors.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I remember reading in Hacker News about a modern C-like language with pretty nifty features, but I can't find it again. The name I can evoke is "C9", but that's not yielding search results.
It was pretty much a superset of C, with multi-pass compilation (and thus, no need for headers and forward declarations) and namespaces, as well as dynamic array syntax and string handling sugar.
I'm about to embark in a low-level project, and this would be a fantastic opportunity to try it out. My C is a bit rusty, I'm afraid, after years of python and coffeescript, so it would surely come in very handy.
Any hope somebody in SO has heard about it, or a similar project?
I think I read the same article. It sounds like C2, including the multi-pass parsing.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Does anyone know of a really rock solid C++ library for suffix tries? Other than the one in Mummer?
Ideally, I'd like:
Some concept of concurrency.
Good caching behavior.
Permissive license.
Support for arbitrary alphabets.
Being a bioinformatician, my pick would be SeqAn (check out the sequence index section). It implements a lazy suffix tree and an enhanced suffix array (an equivalent data structure), both of which have good cache behaviour.
Having actually used and then forgotten PATL, I'd like to tuck in a link in an answer.
http://code.google.com/p/patl/
It's got a couple really distinct features, and is generally pleasant reading as well.
Most likely this is a tutorial but IMO worth reading and with source code: http://marknelson.us/1996/08/01/suffix-trees.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I am just a starter at using threads in my code. I use Boost threads usually.
But I don't think I have mastered this field yet.
I am looking for learning material specifically for advanced parallel programming. Could anybody suggest something.
There's an early access edition of C++ Concurrency in Action available at http://www.manning.com/williams/ He's very knowledgeable on the subject and AFAIK he's the author of boost threads and has also just released a version of std::thread conforming to the new c++0x standard.
I'm also reading Concurrent Programming on Windows by Joe Duffy which is a pretty good read so far: http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/books/winconc/winconc_book_resources.html
Update:
Also, see this link https://stackoverflow.com/questions/415994/boost-thread-tutorials/3951227#3951227
I think you should continue using Boosts threads, they will be usable on different OS's.
I haven't read any good books on multithreading, but you could take a pick (and preview) some at Google Books.