C++ needs some help

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
is to software what the wheel was to transportation?


I've been watching the latest serialization questions
on Stackoverflow for the past month or so.

http://stackoverflow.com/search?page=1&tab=newest&q=serialization

It looks like Java and C# are the two most popular
languages when it comes to that search. I believe
C++ has some advantages over those languages, but
their support for reflection has also given them an
advantage over C++ in this area.

The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
eliminate the advantage those languages have when
it comes to serialization.

I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .

If you like using C++ and would like to help it
become even more competitive than it already is,
I hope you will consider becoming an early adopter
of this approach. There are still some tier-1
user IDs available. These IDs are the equivalent
of handy domain names like bikes.com, wnd.com, etc.
I think these IDs will be increasingly valuable
because they only 1 byte needs to be processed for
the ID in code generation requests, thereby giving
tier-1 users an advantage over those who are slower
to start using the CMW.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - So far G-d has helped us.
http://webEbenezer.net

[David Brown]

On 06/10/15 00:40, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?
>

I have seen a few websites that have online code generation, and I guess
for some purposes it might be useful. It would not surprise me if such
systems became a little more popular, but they are very far from being
revolutionary or even being particularly important outside niche areas.

[Christopher Pisz]

On 10/5/2015 5:40 PM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?

No. Code generation is the devil.

--
I have chosen to troll filter/ignore all subthreads containing the
words: "Rick C. Hodgins", "Flibble", and "Islam"
So, I won't be able to see or respond to any such messages
---

[woodb...@gmail.com]

I don't think you would argue code generation is
unimportant. I guess you think that on line code
generation isn't important. To me that's the same
as saying code generation isn't important.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net

[Ian Collins]

There a many examples of an online something that is way less useful
than a local something.

Code generation is probably a component of most non-trivial build
systems, but moving it online would offer little if any benefit.

--
Ian Collins

[Norman J. Goldstein]

Code generation is a huge help in the work I do.
Given a simple struct S (public data members,
ostensibly just to store parameter values of any type),
I have written a command line utility that will generate
the source code for various IO methods for S, including

ostream& operator<<( ostream&, const S& );
istream& operator>>( istream&, S& );

This code generation has saved me lots of time, and I
feel free to modify S, without any hit for updating code
for S IO.

[Louis Krupp]

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:40:48 -0700 (PDT), woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

>The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
>eliminate the advantage those languages have when
>it comes to serialization.
>
>I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
>use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
>this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .

Ever watch the movie Philadelphia?

To quote Denzel Washington's character, pretend I'm a five-year-old
and tell me what C++ Middleware is and what the CMW does.

(I don't know that C++ needs any help, but I'm all for code
generation.)

Louis

[David Brown]

Code generation is sometimes useful - online code generation less so.

I also think that generating C++ code is a lot less useful than
generating C code for three reasons.

One is that generating C code is easier - it is easier to make it simple
and correct.

Two is that usually C is enough for the generated code - you don't need
the benefits of C++ such as encapsulation, overloads, type safety, etc.,
for generated code. A good deal of the benefits of C++ over C are for
developer productivity, code safety and correctness, code clarity, and
code re-use - all of which are pretty much irrelevant for
machine-generated code.

Third is that C++ already has excellent mechanisms for code generation -
known as "templates". And with each new version of C++, these get more
powerful. So a "C++ code generator" should - in many cases - be a
template library.


I don't know anything about the stuff you do - it is irrelevant to the
type of programming I work with. It could well be that in your
particular case, you have found a niche area in which code generation -
and in particular, online code generation - makes a substantial
difference with high benefits. What I object to is the claim that this
idea is as important and revolutionary as the wheel.


(And I would not consider using an online site that wants to provide
code, but requires "account creation" through gmail accounts and has no
clear discussion of licensing, costs, etc. The page about investments
of $1200, etc., make it even worse. The whole thing looks like a
Nigerian 419 scam of some sort. Obviously I know it is /not/ a scam,
but that's just because I know you from this newsgroup.)

[see.my....@gmail.com]

> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?

Certainly not (although off-line code generation itself is very useful).
The biggest issues I can see, apart from some distractions like setting on-line accounts, is the question of intellectual property. What happens to *my* IP when I upload my specifications to the on-line code generation server? Later, how can I use the generated code in my project?
Can I have a guarantee for service continuity for the next eleventy years? It would be a pity to find out that your service was abandoned when my project is already fully dependent on it and it needs some more code generated due to requirement changes, etc. Related to service continuity is a guarantee for repeatable builds, if I choose to generate the code again, some time in the future.

On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation. Looks like fun in a classroom, but I would not include it in any serious project development plan. Certainly this is not a "transportation wheel" level of innovation.

> The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
> eliminate the advantage those languages have when
> it comes to serialization.

C# and Java have (dis)advantages that are unrelated to any tool being on-line.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 12:42:12 AM UTC-5, Norman J. Goldstein wrote:
> Code generation is a huge help in the work I do.
> Given a simple struct S (public data members,
> ostensibly just to store parameter values of any type),
> I have written a command line utility that will generate
> the source code for various IO methods for S, including
>
> ostream& operator<<( ostream&, const S& );
> istream& operator>>( istream&, S& );
>
> This code generation has saved me lots of time, and I
> feel free to modify S, without any hit for updating code
> for S IO.
>

That sounds similar to my what I'm working on. The CMW
only supports binary serialization at this point, but I'm
not opposed to adding support for text in the future.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 5:52:51 PM UTC-5, Louis Krupp wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:40:48 -0700 (PDT), woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
> >eliminate the advantage those languages have when
> >it comes to serialization.
> >
> >I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
> >use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
> >this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .
>
> Ever watch the movie Philadelphia?
>

No.

> To quote Denzel Washington's character, pretend I'm a five-year-old
> and tell me what C++ Middleware is and what the CMW does.
>

It's a little bit like a search engine -- you give it a
high-level description of what you want and it sends back
details related to the input you gave it. Instead of
giving it English or another natural language though as
input, you give it C++ and get C++ output back.

Programmers want to send messages between computers. The
output from the CMW is intended to help them send and
receive messages.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 12, 2015 at 1:54:33 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
> On 11/10/15 04:02, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > I don't think you would argue code generation is
> > unimportant. I guess you think that on line code
> > generation isn't important. To me that's the same
> > as saying code generation isn't important.
> >
>
> Code generation is sometimes useful - online code generation less so.
>
> I also think that generating C++ code is a lot less useful than
> generating C code for three reasons.
>
> One is that generating C code is easier - it is easier to make it simple
> and correct.
>
> Two is that usually C is enough for the generated code - you don't need
> the benefits of C++ such as encapsulation, overloads, type safety, etc.,
> for generated code. A good deal of the benefits of C++ over C are for
> developer productivity, code safety and correctness, code clarity, and
> code re-use - all of which are pretty much irrelevant for
> machine-generated code.
>
> Third is that C++ already has excellent mechanisms for code generation -
> known as "templates". And with each new version of C++, these get more
> powerful. So a "C++ code generator" should - in many cases - be a
> template library.
>

The code that's generated is fairly simple C++. There is some
overloading and namespaces. We couldn't support C++ containers
though if we didn't support C++. They are important to modern
development, so we have to output C++.

>
> I don't know anything about the stuff you do - it is irrelevant to the
> type of programming I work with. It could well be that in your
> particular case, you have found a niche area in which code generation -
> and in particular, online code generation - makes a substantial
> difference with high benefits. What I object to is the claim that this
> idea is as important and revolutionary as the wheel.

With on line code generation there's the cycle - the event loop.
It's an important step in terms of efficiency. "Modern" compilers
aren't written that way. C++ templates are helpful for some
things, but C++ compilers can't generate marshalling/messaging
code as efficiently as the CMW.

>
>
> (And I would not consider using an online site that wants to provide
> code, but requires "account creation" through gmail accounts and has no
> clear discussion of licensing, costs, etc. The page about investments
> of $1200, etc., make it even worse. The whole thing looks like a
> Nigerian 419 scam of some sort. Obviously I know it is /not/ a scam,
> but that's just because I know you from this newsgroup.)

It's free to use. It's always been free to use. It simplifies
things quite a bit by making it free to use. The gmail thing
isn't the greatest, but I have to live with it until the company
grows some. I will add something about the licensing, but am
not sure what that should be. I hope it can be simple and limited
to one page on the site.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises -

"Go and look toward the sea," he told his servant. And he went up and looked.
"There is nothing there," he said.
Seven times Elijah said, "Go back."
The seventh time the servant reported, "A cloud as small as a man's
hand is rising from the sea."
So Elijah said, "Go and tell Ahab, 'Hitch up your chariot and go down
before the rain stops you.'" 1st Kings 18:43,44

http://webEbenezer.net

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:

>It's a little bit like a search engine -- you give it a
>high-level description of what you want and it sends back
>details related to the input you gave it. Instead of
>giving it English or another natural language though as
>input, you give it C++ and get C++ output back.
>
>Programmers want to send messages between computers. The
>output from the CMW is intended to help them send and
>receive messages.

How is your solution superior to XDR, ASN.1, JSON, RESTful interfaces
or SOAP?

What guarantee is there that your solution will be available a decade
from now?

How is your solution useful when the service and client are provided
by different entities?

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 12, 2015 at 4:25:08 AM UTC-5, see.my....@gmail.com wrote:
> > Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> > is to software what the wheel was to transportation?
>

> Certainly not (although off-line code generation itself is very useful).
> The biggest issues I can see, apart from some distractions like setting on-line accounts, is the question of intellectual property. What happens to *my* IP when I upload my specifications to the on-line code generation server?

Hi, Maciej,

It's still yours. If you want your code to be removed from our
server, we'll do it.

There are four types of people:
One who says, "What is mine is yours, and what is yours is mine" is a boor.
One who says "What is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours" -- this is a median characteristic; others say that this is the character of a Sodomite.
One who says, "What is mine is yours, and what is yours is yours" is a chassid (pious person).
And one who says "What is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine" is wicked.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2099/jewish/Chapter-Five.htm

I want to be a pious man and help you protect your software
and resources. Some of your software is stored on our server
in order to optimize the process. It makes it easier on your
hardware and ours and takes less bandwidth and time to
complete requests.

> Later, how can I use the generated code in my project?

There are examples of that in the archive that
can be downloaded here --

http://webEbenezer.net/build_integration.html

> Can I have a guarantee for service continuity for the next eleventy years? It would be a pity to find out that your service was abandoned when my project is already fully dependent on it and it needs some more code generated due to requirement changes, etc.

In 2002 I wrote:

'The "life" of a client/server application is usually ten or more
years. It is important to those developing such systems that
the tools they choose be supported for the length of their
development and maintenance.'

That was written to investors and not on a newsgroup.
A company is needed in my opinion to help in this area.

Anyway, the financial and technical state of the company
is improving. This past summer I built a new server for the
company. It has 16GB of ECC ram and other server grade
components. I'm not completely finished with it, but it is
working and I've been hosting the site on it for a few months.

Once we get some external users the company will get even
stronger. As far as guarantees go, if someone is willing to
pay enough money they can have that guarantee. I'm not
asking for anyone to pay for the service, but if it is important
to them that's how they could guarantee it. I hope for there to
be organic growth in the company so there's no need to guarantee
it like that.

> Related to service continuity is a guarantee for repeatable builds, if I choose to generate the code again, some time in the future.
>

Currently there's only one version of the service available,
but having more than one version available isn't very difficult.
If the company does well, support for older versions can be
maintained.

> On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation.

Not really. On line code generation is a more efficient
way of generating code than what C++ compilers do today.
From what I've seen, on line compilation is a web site
front end to a compiler. Lipstick on a pig/hippo.

> Looks like fun in a classroom, but I would not include it in any serious project development plan. Certainly this is not a "transportation wheel" level of innovation.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers."
http://webEbenezer.net

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:

>> On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation.=20
>
>Not really. On line code generation is a more efficient=20
>way of generating code than what C++ compilers do today. =20

Efficient in what sense, exactly. You should be able to
quantify any efficiency gains.

Offset them with the need to have access to your on-line
generation system 24x7.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 8:09:56 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>
> >> On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation.=20
> >
> >Not really. On line code generation is a more efficient=20
> >way of generating code than what C++ compilers do today. =20
>
> Efficient in what sense, exactly. You should be able to
> quantify any efficiency gains.
>

C++ compilers are restarted for each file they compile.
If they were servers, they would compile many files between
restarts.

> Offset them with the need to have access to your on-line
> generation system 24x7.

Offset that with 4 million (according to Stroustrup) C++
programmers. And there are computer parts available today
that aren't as likely to break as in the past.

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 8:09:56 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>>
>> >> On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation.=20
>> >
>> >Not really. On line code generation is a more efficient=20
>> >way of generating code than what C++ compilers do today. =20
>>
>> Efficient in what sense, exactly. You should be able to
>> quantify any efficiency gains.
>>
>
>C++ compilers are restarted for each file they compile.
>If they were servers, they would compile many files between
>restarts.
>

So your service generates relocatable object code, then? For
which architecture? i686? ia64? x86_64? s390? armv7? armv8? mips?
powerpc?

Or do you just generate C++ source that the end-user compiles?

It seems to me that the network overhead to get to your compiler farm
would completely swamp the miniscule overhead of "restarting"
a compiler for each file being compiled - something that operating
systems are designed to do efficiently (to the extent that gcc
is part of the spec benchmark suite used by processor designers
and operating system designers to quantify system performance).
Particularly given the propensity of operating systems to cache
recently used files (read: header files) in memory.

>
>> Offset them with the need to have access to your on-line
>> generation system 24x7.
>
>Offset that with 4 million (according to Stroustrup) C++
>programmers. And there are computer parts available today
>that aren't as likely to break as in the past.

Total non sequitur.

[David Brown]

On 13/10/15 18:39, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 8:09:56 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>>
>>>> On-line code generation is similar to on-line compilation.=20
>>>
>>> Not really. On line code generation is a more efficient=20
>>> way of generating code than what C++ compilers do today. =20
>>
>> Efficient in what sense, exactly. You should be able to
>> quantify any efficiency gains.
>>
>
> C++ compilers are restarted for each file they compile.
> If they were servers, they would compile many files between
> restarts.

Your servers are /generating/ C++ code. That is a completely different
task from /compiling/ C++ code.


There are one good way to make compiling C++ code more efficient -
replace the "include file" system with pre-compiled modules. It is not
uncommon for a 200 line C++ file to require a million lines of
compilation, due to include files. Modules, with clang and MSVC having
different experimental solutions, will hopefully be standardised for C++17.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 12:10:56 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
> >On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 8:09:56 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >>
> >> Efficient in what sense, exactly. You should be able to
> >> quantify any efficiency gains.
> >>
> >
> >C++ compilers are restarted for each file they compile.
> >If they were servers, they would compile many files between
> >restarts.
> >
>
> So your service generates relocatable object code, then? For
> which architecture? i686? ia64? x86_64? s390? armv7? armv8? mips?
> powerpc?
>

No.

> Or do you just generate C++ source that the end-user compiles?
>

Yes.

> It seems to me that the network overhead to get to your compiler farm
> would completely swamp the miniscule overhead of "restarting"
> a compiler for each file being compiled - something that operating
> systems are designed to do efficiently (to the extent that gcc
> is part of the spec benchmark suite used by processor designers
> and operating system designers to quantify system performance).
> Particularly given the propensity of operating systems to cache
> recently used files (read: header files) in memory.
>

I've been talking about the efficiency of the code generation
not the time to distribute the generated code. The CMW is
free if you use my server. If someone wants to, they can buy
a license and use the CMW locally.

We should go back to the original post though. Java and C#
swamp C++ when it comes to serialization. That may be
because those languages have more automated support for
serialization.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - This is my story, this is my song.
Praising my Saviour (Yeshua aka Jesus) all the day long.

http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 5:41:18 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?
>
>
> I've been watching the latest serialization questions
> on Stackoverflow for the past month or so.
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/search?page=1&tab=newest&q=serialization
>
> It looks like Java and C# are the two most popular
> languages when it comes to that search. I believe
> C++ has some advantages over those languages, but
> their support for reflection has also given them an
> advantage over C++ in this area.
>
> The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
> eliminate the advantage those languages have when
> it comes to serialization.
>
> I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
> use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
> this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .
>
> If you like using C++ and would like to help it
> become even more competitive than it already is,
> I hope you will consider becoming an early adopter
> of this approach. There are still some tier-1
> user IDs available. These IDs are the equivalent
> of handy domain names like bikes.com, wnd.com, etc.
> I think these IDs will be increasingly valuable

> because only 1 byte needs to be processed for

> the ID in code generation requests, thereby giving
> tier-1 users an advantage over those who are slower
> to start using the CMW.
>
>

On this page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization

Java has 404 words of description but C++ only has 90.
And Java is listed before C++. Are others interested
in seeing the languages listed in chronological order?
There doesn't seem to be any order to the listing now.

[Geoff]

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:48:09 -0700 (PDT), woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

>On this page
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization
>
>Java has 404 words of description but C++ only has 90.
>And Java is listed before C++. Are others interested
>in seeing the languages listed in chronological order?
>There doesn't seem to be any order to the listing now.

Alphabetical would be more logical.

[Jorgen Grahn]

However, what matters is what rules Wikipedia has around
such things.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 31, 2015 at 12:22:52 PM UTC-5, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-30, Geoff wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:48:09 -0700 (PDT), woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >>On this page
> >>
> >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization
> >>
> >>Java has 404 words of description but C++ only has 90.
> >>And Java is listed before C++. Are others interested
> >>in seeing the languages listed in chronological order?
> >>There doesn't seem to be any order to the listing now.
> >
> > Alphabetical would be more logical.
>
> However, what matters is what rules Wikipedia has around
> such things.

Either alphabetical or chronological would be an improvement.
If Java supporters insist on a long, boring description,
they should be willing to let shorter and sweeter descriptions
be placed before them.

[Scott Lurndal]

Good grief.

[gwowen]

On Sunday, November 1, 2015 at 4:28:52 AM UTC, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Either alphabetical or chronological would be an improvement.
> If Java supporters insist on a long, boring description,
> they should be willing to let shorter and sweeter descriptions
> be placed before them.

Still, you've managed to put an advert for your product in. That's the most important thing, and definitely what Jesus would've done.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

I think the most important thing is it's free.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - "Heal the sick, raise the dead,
cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received,
freely give." Matthew 10:8

http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Would others like to join me in making suggestions on how
to change that page? As Geoff mentioned, the order could
be alphabetical. That would be okay with me.

[Öö Tiib]

On Sunday, 15 November 2015 19:27:14 UTC+2, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Would others like to join me in making suggestions on how
> to change that page? As Geoff mentioned, the order could
> be alphabetical. That would be okay with me.
>

Suggestion is on top of page near the icon of broom:
"This article is written in the style of a debate rather
than an encyclopedic summary."

IOW it stinks. It mostly represents pride, greed, envy and
wrath of its writers after briefly mentioning what
"serialization" is.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 5:41:18 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?
>
>
> I've been watching the latest serialization questions
> on Stackoverflow for the past month or so.
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/search?page=1&tab=newest&q=serialization
>
> It looks like Java and C# are the two most popular
> languages when it comes to that search. I believe
> C++ has some advantages over those languages, but
> their support for reflection has also given them an
> advantage over C++ in this area.
>
> The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
> eliminate the advantage those languages have when
> it comes to serialization.
>
> I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
> use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
> this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .
>
> If you like using C++ and would like to help it
> become even more competitive than it already is,
> I hope you will consider becoming an early adopter
> of this approach. There are still some tier-1
> user IDs available.

I'm happy to say there are fewer of these tier-1 accounts
available today than when I started this thread. I believe
these top tier account numbers will be like Boardwalk and
Park Place in the future. This is your chance to get in
on the ground floor.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - So far G-d has helped us.
http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 11:27:14 AM UTC-6, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 3:48:33 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On this page
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization
> >
> > Java has 404 words of description but C++ only has 90.
> > And Java is listed before C++. Are others interested
> > in seeing the languages listed in chronological order?
> > There doesn't seem to be any order to the listing now.
> >
>
> Would others like to join me in making suggestions on how
> to change that page? As Geoff mentioned, the order could
> be alphabetical. That would be okay with me.
>

The oppression of C++ by Java continues on that page.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

> On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 11:27:14 AM UTC-6, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 3:48:33 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On this page
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization
> > >
> > > Java has 404 words of description but C++ only has 90.
> > > And Java is listed before C++. Are others interested
> > > in seeing the languages listed in chronological order?
> > > There doesn't seem to be any order to the listing now.
> > >
> >
> > Would others like to join me in making suggestions on how
> > to change that page? As Geoff mentioned, the order could
> > be alphabetical. That would be okay with me.
> >
>

Are there some who would like to see the Java description
reduced a lot? If some insist on leaving the long Java
description, I think it should be moved to after the C++
description.

[Daniel]

On Sunday, February 14, 2016 at 10:09:27 AM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization

>
> Are there some who would like to see the Java description
> reduced a lot? If some insist on leaving the long Java
> description, I think it should be moved to after the C++
> description.
>

Hi Brian,

I see you've added to the C++ section: "C++ Middleware Writer automates the creation of serialization functions." I think that puts you in the category of people that Wikipedia describes as "Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia" by virtue of "Narrow self-interest and/or promotion of themselves or their business".

So: you should either provide a reference to a book or article from a third party source that discusses the Middleware Writer in the context of C++ serialization, or delete that text.

Daniel

[Mr Flibble]

I have removed the advertisement from that Wikipedia article. Brian:
you cannot re-add it as doing so is a conflict of interest.

/Flibble

[Öö Tiib]

Good. However he was correct that the Java is oddly large brick of nausea
there.

One issue is that lot of Java is about technical details how it works
and what developer can do:
|> Primitives as well as non-transient, non-static referenced objects
|> are encoded into the stream. Each object that is referenced by the
|> serialized object and not marked as transient must also be serialized;
|> and if any object in the complete graph of non-transient object
|> references is not serializable, then serialization will fail. The
|> developer can influence this behavior by marking objects as transient,
|> or by redefining the serialization for an object so that some portion
|> of the reference graph is truncated and not serialized.

Who cares? That sounds rather uninteresting, read the manual if it
concerns you.

Other portion of Java is explaining something that is not somehow
related to Java. It basically tells that:

Q: Why some objects in a program *written* *in* *whatever* *language*
do not make sense to serialize without special additional effort by
programmer taken?
A: Three main reasons:
1) Not all runtime objects capture useful information for
serialized state. There are lot of such objects like resource handles,
file descriptors, threads, sockets and synchronization primitives of
underlying platform that can not be used if deserialized.
2) Software evolves over time and so does the data but different
version of same software are often in use side-by-side. Achieving
compatibility between versions requires additional efforts.
3) Lot of runtime objects contain sensitive or confidential data and
serializing such data needs special security precautions taken by
programmer if it is needed.

[Gareth Owen]

Mr Flibble <flibbleREM...@i42.co.uk> writes:

> I have removed the advertisement from that Wikipedia article. Brian:
> you cannot re-add it as doing so is a conflict of interest.

I did that once too. He put it back the next day.

[Mr Flibble]

Yeah, I noticed. :) Houston, we have a problem.

/Flibble

[Alf P. Steinbach]

On 10/6/2015 12:40 AM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> So far G-d has helped us.
> http://webEbenezer.net

Well you (apparently, and I can't think who else) have also put a
reference to your software in Wikipedia.

That's a sin, and I'm editing it to remove that reference, as already
two others here have done.

References to your work will appear in Wikipedia if or when it's
deserved: it's not your job to put them there, and you're very wrong to
do so.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Privacy and private property are under attack here.
Those who attack a man's efforts to make an honest
living with his hands have problems.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - "At my first defense no one supported
me, but all deserted me; may it not be counted against them.
But the L-rd stood with me and strengthened me, so that
through me the proclamation might be fully accomplished, and
that all the Gentiles might hear; and I was rescued out of
the lion's mouth. The L-rd will rescue me from every evil
deed, and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom; to
Him be the glory forever and ever." 2nd Timothy 4

http://webEbenezer.net

[Daniel]

On Sunday, February 14, 2016 at 4:18:38 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Privacy and private property are under attack here.

No it isn't. What's being discouraged here is flouting Wikipedia's rules abut allowed content.

Daniel

[Mr Flibble]

Brian,

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a website for posting a free
advertisement for a product by its author. Pack it in mate.

If you add it again I will remove it again.

/Flibble

[Chris Vine]

More to the point, it is to protect widipedia from people who want to
use it for advertising purposes. If Brian were able to advertise his
business on wikipedia by editing pages, and anyone else were able to do
the same, if would be overcome by mountains of advertising spam.

Interestingly the original spam emailers raised the same argument that
Brian now does, against ISPs introduction of spam blocking, also
linking it to the first amendment (in the US). They failed miserably in
the court of law, and of course in the court of public opinion.

Brian probably thinks he is exempt from normal morality because he has
been appointed by God. Unfortunately I don't think there can be an
exception on those grounds because there are too many nutjobs who think
the same. You can accommodate the eccentricities of one or two of them
and put up with it for the greater harmony, but not a horde.

Chris

[woodb...@gmail.com]

I wonder if you recall me posting how "The Stone which
the builders rejected has become The Chief Cornerstone"?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalms+118&version=NASB

I'm sorry, but I don't think the other libraries mentioned
for C++ serialization options will endure like the the C++
Middleware Writer.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises -
"The L-rd will make you the head and not the tail, and you
only will be above, and you will not be underneath, if you
listen to the commandments of the L-rd your G-d, which I
charge you today, to observe them carefully, and do not
turn aside from any of the words which I command you today,
to the right or to the left, to go after other gods to
serve them." Deuteronomy 28:13,14

http://webEbenezer.net

[Chris Vine]

I think this is verging on blasphemy.

You would do much better if you refrained from further posting to this
newsgroup until you sort out your personal issues.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Java has 16 lines of description on this page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serialization

. C++ has 4 lines of description. Would others
like to see the Java description reduced to 5 or 6
lines? Another idea is to arrange the languages
either chronologically or alphabetically. I think
either of those would be an improvement.

[Mr Flibble]

If you think you can improve the article then do so: others will either
agree with your edits or they won't just don't be tempted to write
another fucking advert for your software.

/Flibble

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 7:24:46 PM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote:

> If you think you can improve the article then do so: others will either
> agree with your edits or they won't

I put the Java description after the C++ description.

Please don't swear here.

Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - "Do not be bound together with unbelievers;
for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what
fellowship has light with darkness?" 2nd Corinthians 6:14

http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 12, 2015 at 12:12:07 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>
> >It's a little bit like a search engine -- you give it a
> >high-level description of what you want and it sends back
> >details related to the input you gave it. Instead of
> >giving it English or another natural language though as
> >input, you give it C++ and get C++ output back.
> >
> >Programmers want to send messages between computers. The
> >output from the CMW is intended to help them send and
> >receive messages.
>
> How is your solution superior to XDR, ASN.1, JSON, RESTful interfaces
> or SOAP?
>
> What guarantee is there that your solution will be available a decade
> from now?

There's no guarantee, but the service has been on line since
2002. The company is stronger than ever and what we've been
anticipating is happening:

http://www.reseller.co.nz/article/590705/middleware-as-a-service-turns-enterprise-integration-its-head/

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 5:41:18 PM UTC-5, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there a growing sense that on line code generation
> is to software what the wheel was to transportation?
>
>
> I've been watching the latest serialization questions
> on Stackoverflow for the past month or so.
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/search?page=1&tab=newest&q=serialization
>
> It looks like Java and C# are the two most popular
> languages when it comes to that search. I believe
> C++ has some advantages over those languages, but
> their support for reflection has also given them an
> advantage over C++ in this area.

I've been keeping an eye on that search for the past
few months and it looks to me like C# and Java are
still the most popular. It also looks like Python
and PHP are used some.

>
> The C++ Middleware Writer (CMW) is my effort to
> eliminate the advantage those languages have when
> it comes to serialization.
>
> I'm interested in helping those who are willing to
> use the CMW in their projects. For more details see
> this page -- http://webEbenezer.net/about.html .
>
> If you like using C++ and would like to help it
> become even more competitive than it already is,
> I hope you will consider becoming an early adopter
> of this approach. There are still some tier-1

> user IDs available. These IDs are the equivalent
> of handy domain names like bikes.com, wnd.com, etc.
> I think these IDs will be increasingly valuable
> because they only 1 byte needs to be processed for
> the ID in code generation requests, thereby giving
> tier-1 users an advantage over those who are slower
> to start using the CMW.
>

Over the years I've done my best to warn people about
Obama and Obamacare... Now I've come across this video
by Twila Brase and Ginni Thomas:

http://www.cchfreedom.org/about.php


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - Over the years I've tried to warn
people about Obama and Obamacare. This video by Twila Brase
and Ginni Thomas is 100x better at exposing the lies than
my efforts:

http://www.cchfreedom.org/about.php

[David Brown]

On 14/10/16 20:06, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

> Over the years I've done my best to warn people about

<snip>

Please don't bring American politics into this group. It is a C++
discussion group, and an international forum. I don't use it to
complain about local politics in my little corner of the world - please
don't complain about politics in /your/ little corner of the world.

[Öö Tiib]

Note that Yanks have had some odd national paranoia outbreak
lately. Most of them believe into at least 3 different conspiracy
theories. Most of them feel urgency of spreading some sort of
scandal or panic about something. Usually it is something
unbelievably ridiculous, like their "creepy clown panic".
Even their presidential candidates are behaving like two rabid
dogs. WTF is going on there?

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both
Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other
hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%.

We have more than two candidates. I'll probably vote for
the Constitution Party candidate again.

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:

>On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 7:55:26 AM UTC-5, =C3=96=C3=B6 Tiib wrote:
>> On Monday, 17 October 2016 10:24:56 UTC+3, David Brown wrote:
>> > On 14/10/16 20:06, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:

>> >=20
>> > > Over the years I've done my best to warn people about=20
>> > <snip>
>> >=20

>> > Please don't bring American politics into this group. It is a C++
>> > discussion group, and an international forum. I don't use it to
>> > complain about local politics in my little corner of the world - please
>> > don't complain about politics in /your/ little corner of the world.

>>=20

>> Note that Yanks have had some odd national paranoia outbreak
>> lately. Most of them believe into at least 3 different conspiracy
>> theories. Most of them feel urgency of spreading some sort of

>> scandal or panic about something. Usually it is something=20

>> unbelievably ridiculous, like their "creepy clown panic".
>> Even their presidential candidates are behaving like two rabid

>> dogs.=20

>
>On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both
>Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other
>hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%.

Because the other 56% are smart enough to realize that
thirty years of republican attacks on the clintons may
be politically motivated rather than representative of
any significant shortcomings.

On the other hand, Donald "Hitler" Trump just needs to
open his mouth to prove his unfitness for public office.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Heare are some reasons to consider the Constitution Party.

“If you believe those tiny people living in their mother’s
wombs are “persons” and therefore deserving of life, choose
me. If not, any of the other candidates will do.”

“If you want the United States to return to being a free and
independent nation able to chart its own course in the world,
choose me. If not, any of the others will do.”

“If you want limited government and personal liberty, choose me.
But if not, any of the others will do.”

I think science agrees that life begins at conception.

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 11:30:51 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> woodb...@gmail.com writes:

>> >On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both
>> >Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other
>> >hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%.

>>=20

>> Because the other 56% are smart enough to realize that
>> thirty years of republican attacks on the clintons may
>> be politically motivated rather than representative of
>> any significant shortcomings.

>>=20
>

>=E2=80=9CIf you want the United States to return to being a free and=20
>independent nation able to chart its own course in the world,=20
>choose me.

The United States _is_ a free and independent nation and it does
chart its own course in the world. It doesn't exist in a vacuum,
however.

>=E2=80=9CIf you want limited government and personal liberty, choose me.=20

If you want limited government and personal liberty, feel
free to move to Somolia.

[Jerry Stuckle]

In this case, I agree with you, David. I have to put up with enough of
this crap every day. And being in the Washington, DC area, it's even
worse than the rest of the country.

I don't want to have to deal with it in a technical newsgroup. Rick's
crap is bad enough.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 1:33:51 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
> >On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 11:30:51 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> >> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>
> >> >On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both
> >> >Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other
> >> >hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%.
> >>=20
> >> Because the other 56% are smart enough to realize that
> >> thirty years of republican attacks on the clintons may
> >> be politically motivated rather than representative of
> >> any significant shortcomings.
> >>=20
> >
>
> >=E2=80=9CIf you want the United States to return to being a free and=20
> >independent nation able to chart its own course in the world,=20
> >choose me.
>
> The United States _is_ a free and independent nation and it does
> chart its own course in the world. It doesn't exist in a vacuum,
> however.

The national debt has more than doubled while Obama has been
in office. Neither Hillary nor Trumpy offer any help in
turning that around. We are currently going into debt over
$1,000/month for every household in the country:

Federal Debt in FY 2016 Jumped $1,422,827,047,452.46--That's $12,036 Per Household

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/federal-debt-fy-2016-jumped-142282704745246


Hillary seems to have a cloud of dirt that hovers over her
in terms of attacking women who accused Bill of rape and
sexual assaults, email and national security issues. Every
day is another scandal for her or more details about an existing
scandal.

I'm not advocating for Trump. He's probably as rotten as
she is. Ben Shapiro writes:

"Perhaps years of Democratic rule from the White House has
forced Republicans to abandon the notion that character matters
in the slightest; perhaps we've just decided to become Democrats
of the right. If so, let's be honest about it. But let's also
recognize where such voting logic leads: directly to the worst
people in positions of the greatest power."

http://www.dailywire.com/news/10265/honest-question-all-voting-americans-ben-shapiro

I think character matters and I'm thankful to be able to
vote for a third party candidate who isn't obviously corrupt.

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
>The national debt has more than doubled while Obama has been
>in office.

That's what happens when you reduce taxes during wartime.

You can thank your buddy Mr. Bush Jr and his cohorts in the
congress for that.

Please, don't pollute this newsgroup with politics or religion.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 11:44:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> woodb...@gmail.com writes:
> >
> >
> >The national debt has more than doubled while Obama has been
> >in office.
>
> That's what happens when you reduce taxes during wartime.
>
> You can thank your buddy Mr. Bush Jr and his cohorts in the
> congress for that.

I didn't vote for George W. Bush in 2000 or 2004. At least
one of those elections I voted for the Constitution Party
candidate. W. Bush wasn't very conservative in terms
of expanding Medicare, bailing out companies like GM, Chrysler
and AIG. I lived in Texas when Bush was governor and he did
fool me the first time he ran for governor. I was young and
naive at the time. Calvin Coolidge was one of the last
conservative presidents that we've had. Eisenhower was
somewhat, but not like Coolidge or Grover Cleveland.

>
> Please, don't pollute this newsgroup with politics or religion.

It's been C++ and beyond for as long as I can recall.

[Chris Vine]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 11:44:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

[snip]

> > Please, don't pollute this newsgroup with politics or religion.
>
> It's been C++ and beyond for as long as I can recall.

That reminds me of the meeting of our local residents' association some
months ago. A number of people complained that someone had been
letting their dog shit in the nearby children's playground. This had
been going on for some months, until the culprit was sighted and
challenged. "But there has been dog shit in this playground for ages.
This playground has had dogs shitting in it for as long as I can
recall", he said.

Please take your dog shit somewhere else Brian.

[Ian Collins]

On 10/29/16 05:10 AM, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> The national debt has more than doubled while Obama has been
> in office.

"The" national debt? We run a surplus down here... Keep local politics
out of international groups.

--
Ian

[Paavo Helde]

+1. Obama is not in office here.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

I think this hiring "push" goes beyond banking.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-28/wall-street-coders-wanted-elite-college-degrees-not-necessary

Is there any chance this will carry over to this newsgroup?
I could bring up some of the topics and questions that I've
posted previously that I would like more help with.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - So far G-d has helped us.
http://webEbenezer.net

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 1:52:51 PM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:

Please pray for my country (USA) and please don't swear here.

[asetof...@gmail.com]

Us has problem in all insurances they obligate people, if they have to pay the doctor pay the doctor not the insurance...

[Chris Vine]

On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 18:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 1:52:51 PM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:
>
> Please pray for my country (USA) and please don't swear here.

Please take your dog shit somewhere else Brian. Go to a newsgroup
concerned with prayer, politics or the USA.

[Öö Tiib]

I think sci.electronics.design is a technical group where they more
often discuss politics, religion and other such dog shit than electronics.

[red floyd]

Fuck off.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 10:55:50 PM UTC-5, red floyd wrote:

Oh give me a home where the buffalo roam
Where the deer and the antelope play
Where seldom is heard a discouraging word
And the skies are not cloudy all day.