220 11483 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nevin Liber Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Controversy and debate: Uninitialized variables by default is a bug Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 18:02:05 +0200 Lines: 64 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <60caa4ef-b32d-40fe-97b6-8918fbb2bd51@isocpp.org> <91f8064b-a08a-4a23-98f4-f3ccde0a2213@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba97a884a59f804fc0a4644 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1403020976 10167 80.91.229.3 (17 Jun 2014 16:02:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:02:56 +0000 (UTC) To: "std-proposals@isocpp.org" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCE35H5S6IDBBJWNQGOQKGQEEU2ORRA@isocpp.org Tue Jun 17 18:02:50 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-la0-f72.google.com ([209.85.215.72]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WwvqR-0005u3-O3 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 18:02:47 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f72.google.com with SMTP id e16sf2191150lan.7 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=2RyPSAxXGC4tNmoo4TeJCM3eo4UBDGgnwRd7N6aPtr4=; b=FHP1VNp4lEdtU3Qc4C3s0uD3JdaWCqQEyns407iFqn2BGPEf1rdeCKHzTQdNS3IHIZ CwowF36zJz87znTOilAQi86XQnfWRNClQ/PkrJ/nM1GFbOdXcRtlKomOtbGr0fxldruQ hWyaJ4Rw/4k8QfPXw90pz0s4EKY9lq3YNWPSK/T5eNHREDqkGa0v6ZFjdXxIJSSy4i3J YDtwyYJVXDsiL8xWMiJ5fiXXY3sJz5eTwEzRVYp6kixIPZO4SJ7Y2/OwG5cUgpb4Le9J LOKaVx/WVow6v7bJAdgWZlWOOcXCWgFP41Z64D7Kebh9NH9gdMPxgmStAMBHMWloKr5Q SlmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmuat+OqfE+JcN1RvKWh7J4vWWw0QgS6XzuqdpChZhnLcBbpEvc09v3CtcFu58DPxst9x1L X-Received: by 10.112.140.170 with SMTP id rh10mr2257879lbb.7.1403020967565; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:47 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.180.36.134 with SMTP id q6ls472062wij.48.canary; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.181.8.198 with SMTP id dm6mr37594898wid.30.1403020966401; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:46 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-wg0-x232.google.com (mail-wg0-x232.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c00::232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id vh9si24832780wjc.146.2014.06.17.09.02.46 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:46 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nliber@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::232 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::232; Original-Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id x13so7159836wgg.33 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.63.46 with SMTP id d14mr39857416wjs.24.1403020965991; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Sender: nliber@gmail.com Original-Received: by 10.194.122.71 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:02:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <91f8064b-a08a-4a23-98f4-f3ccde0a2213@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: nevin@eviloverlord.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nliber@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::232 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nliber@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:11483 Archived-At: --047d7ba97a884a59f804fc0a4644 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 17 June 2014 18:00, Matthew Fioravante wrote: > > ost of the time when people talk about initialization costs, they are > doing something like constructing a vector of objects. This initialization > cost is already in the standard because vector will initialize the objects. > Nothing I am proposing here changes that or makes it worse. > Where can we see your benchmarking code and results? -- Nevin ":-)" Liber (847) 691-1404 -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. --047d7ba97a884a59f804fc0a4644 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 17 June 2014 18:00, Matthew Fioravante <fmatthew5= 876@gmail.com> wrote:

ost of = the time when people talk about initialization costs, they are doing someth= ing like constructing a vector of objects. This initialization cost is alre= ady in the standard because vector will initialize the objects. Nothing I a= m proposing here changes that or makes it worse.

Where can we see your benchmarking c= ode and results?=C2=A0
--
=C2=A0Nevin ":-)" Liber= =C2=A0 <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com>=C2=A0 (847) 691-1404

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
--047d7ba97a884a59f804fc0a4644-- .