(V)C++ recorded talks at VS 2013 Launch

5 thoughts on “(V)C++ recorded talks at VS 2013 Launch”

1. @Herb
   tnx for the A…
   BTW I wonder if maybe auto* when combined with const more expressive in a sense that you can stick 2 consts on pointers(if the ptr changes, if pointed to changes) but this is mostly trivia for me, so I dont even wanna try, to figure it out, but if somebody cares g++ compiles this:
   const auto * const cptocv=p;

2. @nosenseetal: Using auto or auto* deduces the same type, just I guess auto* is mostly useful to explicitly say you want a raw pointer. Non-owning raw pointers are okay to observe an object that will outlive them, such as a tree node owned by its parent (via a unique_ptr(node), say) and observing its parent via a node*. I don’t have any more guidance than to say my impression is that it’s a style point whether you prefer code like “auto p = my_parent();” or “auto* p = my_parent();” — the type is the same in either case.

3. I was thinking about more of a small LRU cache, if you want to have flexible size you cant use contiguous “array” buffer because linear search will kill your perf.
   and for delete this i kind of dislike it because it means ppl containing this class need to be aware of its suicidal :P aspirations. :)

   BTW regarding that code:
   auto * context = static_cast(response._get_server_context());

   I have never before seen auto * before.(ignoring const I have seen only auto, auto&, auto&&)
   Do you have any comment on using auto*?

4. @nosenseetal: I’m not sure a circular buffer would be ideal — we don’t want to lose weak_ptrs while there are outstanding shared_ptrs and the number of outstanding live objects is not known in advance.

   As for ‘delete this;’, it is overused and dangerous in the wrong hands, but it can be appropriate for an object that controls its own lifetime and you know you won’t have pointers or references to it. In this case, just from the snippet you provided you can see the object is probably using intrusive reference counting and just implementing it by hand. I might prefer using standard smart pointers instead of reimplementing it by hand, possibly including using enable_shared_from_this if appropriate, but I haven’t inspected the code.

5. Herb this is offtopic, but regarding memory leak in your fav 10 liner…
   seems like a job for:
   Boost.CircularBuffer :)

   Also I know you probably hate to comment on quality of MS code but do you have opinion is this an ok modern C++ code or it could be done cleaner:

   if (–m_refs == 0)
   delete this;
   }

   from :

   https://casablanca.codeplex.com/SourceControl/latest#Release/src/http/listener/http_linux_server.cpp
   I ask because you once said you havent wrote delete in years. :)

Comments are closed.