Re: show disassembly
* Fil:
"Alf P. Steinbach" wrote:
* Fil -> Alex Blekhman:
I keep note of the vector
thing for later, when I am more confident with the classes.
On the contrary, unless you really want to struggle you should start using
std::vector immediately, and only use raw arrays for things like initialization
data.
C++0x will to a large extent obviate the need also for that use of raw arrays,
but we're not there yet.
'main' must have result type 'int' (even if MSVC incorrectly accepts 'void').
Why?
It sound so much better to put void if doesn't return anything and int if it
returns an int.
I guess there's a reason.
Mainly because, since the C and C++ standards impose this requirement, that's
the only 'main' result type you can count on being accepted by different compilers.
As to why the standards impose this requirement, it's pretty arbitrary, but if
you're interested you might post that question to the relevant standardization
groups.
Note: unfortunately, [comp.std.c++] is now, it seems, defunct; no new articles
have been accepted since early january. An alternative group for such articles
is [comp.lang.c++.moderated]. With the exception of formal Defect Reports, any
article that would be on-topic in [comp.std.c++] is on-topic in
[comp.lang.c++.moderated] (you can trust me on this, I'm one of the moderators).
[snip]
So far I am not interested in having the best algrithm, but just to make a
proper use of the concepts that are introduced in my online tutorial. I keep
note that ou wrote below, I understand that you would like newbies to learn
those below concepts to avoid all the hassle of pointers and memory
allocation/deallocation but I fear I don't have enough courage to leant now
since I have no other tutorial teaching me this in the background I could
refer to. Thi is the main reason. If I had your text book I would probably
choose your way.
Well I haven't published a text book (yet). :-) And alhough I did write a
tutorial, incomplete but still the only one listed in the FAQ, that tutorial
didn't get up to speed on standard library usage. So ungood for this purpose.
"Accelerated C++" is a good book to learn basics from.
There's also "C++ Primer" (note: different editions are very different, the
fourth ed. is the one assumed when talking about "C++ Primer" as a good
introductory book), although it's rumored to be a very fat and detailed book,
not as immediately accessible as "Accelerated C++", i.e., requiring /work/.
But I would refer to it later.
Thanks for the thourough explanation.
No, you should either sort in place, like
#include <iostream> // std::cout
#include <ostream> // std::endl, operator<<
#include <algorithm> // std::sort
// At newbie level, just regard this functions as magic:
template< typename T, std::size_t N >
std::size_t nElementsOf( T (&)[N] ) { return N; }
// Then:
int main()
{
int a[] = {6,3,5,7,1,2,4};
std::sort( &a[0], &a[nElementsOf(a)] );
for( std::size_t i = 0; i < nElementsOf( a ); ++i )
{
std::cout << a[i] << std::endl;
}
}
or use std::vector to make a copy (std::vector will deal with proper
deallocation, which otherwise is very difficult to get right).
Cheers, & hth.,
- Alf
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?