class object initialisation

[White Wolf]

Re: class object initialisation

Gary Labowitz wrote:
[SNIP][color=blue]
> Well, I like your obfuscation! I didn't understand anything! It's
> ready for publication!
> On the serious side, the fact that there are invalid combinations of
> bits for types introduces a whole new complexity for me, and makes
> the standard almost unbearably complex. Oh well, reality must be
> faced.
> On the whole, I rather prefer Java: nine simple types to learn about,
> all well defined with regard to bit usage and size, no surprises.[/color]

Nine types? No surprises? I dunno, but whenever I had to try to find
something in the Java libraries (find+understan d) I finally gave up. It is
like having to talk to all Chineese and Indian people to find a street
address. Messy.

Anyways. C++ is a general purpose programming language with systems
programming in mind. Comparing it to Java is like comparing apples to the
moon.

--
WW aka Attila

[White Wolf]

Re: class object initialisation

Gary Labowitz wrote:[color=blue]
> Thank you. If this be the case, then all my musings are incorrect.
> Hmm... check sum bits in a value. Yes, it could. Then invalid bit
> combinations could exist. All resulting in undefined behavior I
> should think.[/color]

Yep. In fact of life it is quite unusual for the "common people" to find a
HW which works like this. Anyways using a garbage value is not a really
good thing to do, even if one can get away with it without a crash.
[color=blue]
> Back to the drawing board!!!
> [Gee, what did we go back to before they invented drawing boards?][/color]

Me go bangbang wife. :-) Or maybe: back to the cave wall. :-)

--
WW aka Attila