Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:slashdot and languages (Score 1) 259

by angel'o'sphere (#49786085) Attached to: How Much C++ Should You Know For an Entry-Level C++ Job?

C++ is harder than other languages.

E.g. "a constructor for a class is auto generated by the compiler when needed"

Under what circumstances does this rule apply?

Oh, and what are the pitfalls?

E.g.

class B {
int i;
float f;
}

class D : public B {
int s;
public:
      D() {
          s = 5;
      }
}

B b;
D d;

What value has b.i?
What value has d.i?

Hint: consider B and D to be in different compilation units.

My bet: your answer is wrong.

Wow: that above was a super simple example about problems in C++ that make C++ a very hard language

Comment: Re:None. Go meta. (Score 1) 259

by angel'o'sphere (#49785895) Attached to: How Much C++ Should You Know For an Entry-Level C++ Job?

Yes, it should.
But actually C++ is a beast of a language which no one so far quickly mastered.
All we have now in C++, like STL, boost etc. is stuff that was envisioned by people who minimum had 10 years language experience before they even came to the idea to (ab)use language features like that.
When I read the first time about the concepts of the STL (that was round 1993, and it was not even called STL then) I was shocked about its simplicity and that I was so dumb that I never came to that idea myself. Basically the only "genious" I had at that time was that I had invented "traits" myself ... because I needed them. (Had about 5 years C++ experience then)

Comment: Re:LOL; What a fucking bozo you are (Score 1) 268

And as to 4 above, that stands on its own. Again, OCO2 shows how much China emits, which is far far more than is generally admitted since Chinese leaders are lying.

How stupid are you?
Who cares what China is saying?
We know how much CO2 they produce by simply counting their oil, coal production, cars and power plants.
Man, what a no brainer.

No idea why you try to use propaganda links like the first one, which is an _american_ ... obviously they cheat with their "officially" released data, like you claim China would.

China's emissions from 1850 on, exceed America's total.
Very unlikely and no one can figure which is the case as we have no data bout that, neither from China nor from the USA, so it is completely brain dead to argue about that.

Comment: Re:LOL; What a fucking bozo you are (Score 1) 268

Your idea who produced how much CO2 in what times are all wrong.

Especially the retarded idea that in 10 years time frame China had produced more accumulated CO2 than the USA in 150 years.

A no brainer actually when you know that China just exceeded the US production a few years ago :D

Comment: Re:Any materialized predictions? (Re:Sudden?) (Score 1) 268

Ice on land is melting during summer.
That means fresh water is on top of the sea water ... during summer.
When it gets cold in winter that freshwater is freezing and giving the false impression there would be some mystery going on.
The sea ice we are talking about 50 years ago, was *permanent* ice.
No we have sporadic ice ... and the so called records are exaggerated, there is no record.

Comment: Re:Sudden? (Score 1) 268

The maximum was no maximum.

And most important it was not MASS but just area. And 6 month later all that "maximum" area ice melted in the summer again.

What is so hard to grasp that the problem is not melting or freezing of sea water?

The melting of ice on land is the problem, because it flows into the sea and rises its level.

That is actually a no brainer every child should grasp.

Comment: Re:tried this in NC (Score 1) 256

The links don't tell me anything new.

Except that the UK one starts with the claim, that UK would be the best place for wind power in the world.

Which is clearly wrong. The best place is antarctica, but no one there needs so much power.

A wikipedia article claiming a certain place is the best for wind power is just: bollocks.

Especially if the most important part: "WHY is that so?" is missing ;D

Regarding a clue, you where the one claiming Denmark would be north of UK ... while it is east last time I checked :D

More or less all of Scotland is north of Denmark.

Again, for the areas directly west of Denmark, that is mainly England and Wales and the southern part of Scotland: there is no plausible reason why those parts should have more wind than Denmark.

And I guess if you had more google foo, and I more patience, we simply could find a map in the internet showing the relevant wind speed factor for the UK and Denmark ...

"Your attitude determines your attitude." -- Zig Ziglar, self-improvement doofus

Working...