Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Coffee corner » make U++ more elegant
make U++ more elegant [message #9204] Sun, 22 April 2007 02:28 Go to next message
Ulti is currently offline  Ulti
Messages: 108
Registered: September 2006
Experienced Member
four things will make U++ more elegant
1.use XML to store resource
2.signal slot mode event system
3.boost based core(this will make people use U++ with other lib easier)
4.focused on GUI

and maybe another good point:
RMI for C++
http://rmi.sourceforge.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9207 is a reply to message #9204] Sun, 22 April 2007 08:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Ulti wrote on Sat, 21 April 2007 20:28


RMI for C++
http://rmi.sourceforge.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php


Funny, this looks like a good example how not to present your project Smile

I do not know whether this is good or bad, but after 2 minutues trying to find any info about C++RMI, I gave up...

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9209 is a reply to message #9204] Sun, 22 April 2007 08:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
zsolt is currently offline  zsolt
Messages: 702
Registered: December 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Contributor
Ulti wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:28


1.use XML to store resource


You can use it. XML classes are very simple and useful. For theIde project files, plain text is much better, because it can be read, edit, merge very easliy.
Quote:


2.signal slot mode event system


Current callback system does the same with different terminology and simpler usage (Callback, THISBACK).
Quote:


3.boost based core(this will make people use U++ with other lib easier)


I don't think so. Boost is a very slowly growing, old fashioned thing.
Quote:


4.focused on GUI


I think Upp is focused on GUI.

Quote:


and maybe another good point:
RMI for C++
http://rmi.sourceforge.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php

The pages are password protected.
BTW I was thinking about something similar in UPP, because current callback system could be easily extended to work transparently on network.

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9210 is a reply to message #9209] Sun, 22 April 2007 09:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ulti is currently offline  Ulti
Messages: 108
Registered: September 2006
Experienced Member
I guessed you know java‘s RMI:
look these：

http://www.ddj.com/dept/cpp/184403949#2

and

http://java.sun.com/developer/onlineTraining/rmi/RMI.html

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9211 is a reply to message #9209] Sun, 22 April 2007 09:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ulti is currently offline  Ulti
Messages: 108
Registered: September 2006
Experienced Member
zsolt wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:47


I don't think so. Boost is a very slowly growing, old fashioned thing.


but a lot of things were written using boost and stl.if you want use
these things,always need translation between two.

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9212 is a reply to message #9207] Sun, 22 April 2007 09:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ulti is currently offline  Ulti
Messages: 108
Registered: September 2006
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:27


Funny, this looks like a good example how not to present your project Smile

I do not know whether this is good or bad, but after 2 minutues trying to find any info about C++RMI, I gave up...

Mirek

sorry,it's not my project,it was googled.the idea sounds good.
Razz

[Updated on: Sun, 22 April 2007 09:15]

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9213 is a reply to message #9209] Sun, 22 April 2007 09:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
zsolt wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:47


Quote:


and maybe another good point:
RMI for C++
http://rmi.sourceforge.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php

The pages are password protected.
BTW I was thinking about something similar in UPP, because current callback system could be easily extended to work transparently on network.


So do I Smile But my thinking is rather based on Serialize...

The real question(s) is:

- can we do RMI without IDL?
- is it worth the trouble?
- does it need to look like method invokation or we can can sustain a little bit less transparent solution (like passing structures with Serialize member)?

Mirek

P.S.: As this is an interesting topic, I am moving a copy to technology lab, if you have any ideas, let us continue there...

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9214 is a reply to message #9211] Sun, 22 April 2007 09:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Ulti wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 03:06

zsolt wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:47


I don't think so. Boost is a very slowly growing, old fashioned thing.


but a lot of things were written using boost and stl.if you want use
these things,always need translation between two.





Yes, that is unfortunately true. There is always some kind of tradeoff, you can use STL or you can have our applications run 4 times faster with U++ Core... (latest benchmark with new Core).

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9221 is a reply to message #9214] Sun, 22 April 2007 10:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ulti is currently offline  Ulti
Messages: 108
Registered: September 2006
Experienced Member
Two more links:
http://www.codeproject.com/threads/Rcf_Ipc_For_Cpp.asp
http://www.codeproject.com/threads/Rcf_Ipc_For_Cpp.asp

using boost::serlization
and some Macros

replace them with U++::serlization and template?

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9242 is a reply to message #9221] Mon, 23 April 2007 17:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
One of the things I like about Boost is that the official list has been vetted, and many of the things are being included into the ISO runtime library definitions (at least if I recall correctly). That formal review is one of the of the things slowing updates down... As for speed, execution time can often be cleaned up by simply tracking what all is being called by value instead of reference (and has to be created/instantiated on the function call)...

I am involved with a project that is looking to submit to Boost. If they do not want it I might post it here if people find it useful Wink

EBo --

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9283 is a reply to message #9214] Wed, 25 April 2007 16:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Novo is currently offline  Novo
Messages: 1430
Registered: December 2006
Ultimate Contributor
luzr wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 03:20

Ulti wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 03:06

zsolt wrote on Sun, 22 April 2007 02:47


I don't think so. Boost is a very slowly growing, old fashioned thing.


but a lot of things were written using boost and stl.if you want use
these things,always need translation between two.





Yes, that is unfortunately true. There is always some kind of tradeoff, you can use STL or you can have our applications run 4 times faster with U++ Core... (latest benchmark with new Core).

Mirek


Intrusive containers have been accepted to Boost lately, if I recall correctly. So, "4 times faster" won't last too long Smile

Regards,
Novo

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9289 is a reply to message #9283] Wed, 25 April 2007 21:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Novo wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 10:39


Intrusive containers have been accepted to Boost lately, if I recall correctly. So, "4 times faster" won't last too long Smile



What makes you think intrusive containers are going to change anything?

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9290 is a reply to message #9289] Wed, 25 April 2007 21:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Novo is currently offline  Novo
Messages: 1430
Registered: December 2006
Ultimate Contributor
luzr wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 15:20

Novo wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 10:39


Intrusive containers have been accepted to Boost lately, if I recall correctly. So, "4 times faster" won't last too long Smile



What makes you think intrusive containers are going to change anything?

Mirek



UPP Core is based on NTL, which provides more efficient containers relatively to STL. "4 times faster" is related to containers, if I understood your idea.

New intrusive containers in Boost are faster than containers in STL.

Am I wrong?

Regards,
Novo

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9291 is a reply to message #9290] Wed, 25 April 2007 22:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Novo wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 15:58


UPP Core is based on NTL, which provides more efficient containers relatively to STL. "4 times faster" is related to containers, if I understood your idea.

New intrusive containers in Boost are faster than containers in STL.

Am I wrong?



AFAIK, intrusive containers are faster / more effective in certain specific scenarios than STL. But that does not make it match U++ Core. In fact, from what I have read, intrusive containers mostly deal with node based elements, however the sole idea of node based containers is faulty. Continuous storage wins.

BTW, U++ Core and NTL relation: In fact, U++ Core was first. NTL was just failed attempt to take a part of U++ Core and make it a library of it own. It was our first attempt to make some code public... Smile

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9295 is a reply to message #9291] Wed, 25 April 2007 22:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Novo is currently offline  Novo
Messages: 1430
Registered: December 2006
Ultimate Contributor
luzr wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 16:07


AFAIK, intrusive containers are faster / more effective in certain specific scenarios than STL. But that does not make it match U++ Core. In fact, from what I have read, intrusive containers mostly deal with node based elements, however the sole idea of node based containers is faulty. Continuous storage wins.



OK. You convinced me Smile Actually, I've already read a book, which explains a similar technique. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to apply it yet.

Quote:


BTW, U++ Core and NTL relation: In fact, U++ Core was first. NTL was just failed attempt to take a part of U++ Core and make it a library of it own. It was our first attempt to make some code public... Smile

Mirek



As far as NTL is that much better, it worth submitting to Boost. In this case you'll get unlimited advertising for free Wink

I think Boost worth using it. For example you could use Boost.Spirit to parse upp config files instead of manual processing them. Formal parsers let you discover interesting things like one below.

library
	,
	,
	,
	,
	;


I found it in GridCtrl.upp

Regards,
Novo

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9296 is a reply to message #9295] Wed, 25 April 2007 23:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Novo wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 16:53


As far as NTL is that much better, it worth submitting to Boost. In this case you'll get unlimited advertising for free Wink



Not as simple. boost:: is extension of std::. U++ Core is negation of std:: Smile

Quote:


I think Boost worth using it. For example you could use Boost.Spirit to parse upp config files instead of manual processing them.



Yes, that is interesting concept. But I yet have to convinced that it will let me do more with less code.

Quote:


Formal parsers let you discover interesting things like one below.

library
	,
	,
	,
	,
	;


I found it in GridCtrl.upp



Yes, if I remember well, this is what .upp parser is supposed to accept Smile

Report message to a moderator

Re: make U++ more elegant [message #9297 is a reply to message #9296] Thu, 26 April 2007 00:14 Go to previous message
Novo is currently offline  Novo
Messages: 1430
Registered: December 2006
Ultimate Contributor
luzr wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 17:16

Novo wrote on Wed, 25 April 2007 16:53


As far as NTL is that much better, it worth submitting to Boost. In this case you'll get unlimited advertising for free Wink



Not as simple. boost:: is extension of std::. U++ Core is negation of std:: Smile




I'd say boost:: is a bunch of quite useful stuff, which extends and often replaces std::. For example Boost.Bind. There is no MPL in std::. There is no serialization in std::. There is no multi-indexed containers in std::. There is no lazy function invocation in std::. E.t.c.

STL is just about containers, iterators, and algorithms.

Regards,
Novo

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: MS Win-XP device drivers, U++, and MinGW
Next Topic: Gourmet coffee gift baskets
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Sat Apr 26 14:31:07 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01372 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.5.
Copyright ©2001-2013 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software