Received: from nobody by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XhLjN-0002Xr-49 for lojban-newreal@lojban.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 09:59:21 -0700 Received: from asweetoccasion.taterbodyelectric.com ([66.172.85.6]:36060) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XhLjH-0002Wk-U6 for lojban@lojban.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 09:59:19 -0700 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 09:59:03 -0700 From: Oz's Everyday Health-Tips Reply-to: Message-ID: <181982265136720141023092960342740KOma54.JavaMail.29345715@asweetoccasion.taterbodyelectric.com> To: Subject: Drop 8-lbs of Belly F-A-T every week Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_bar: -

Dr.Oz's Kickstart Your Fat-Loss (Part 2).

Dr. Oz explains the best "lazy way" method, that actually works.
Relax and take note:
www.oz/com/lazy-way-part-2.html

After all, You wanted to lose 20-lbs this year, remember?
With this 1 tip, you can actually drop that unwanted 21-lbs in 1 month.

 

oz-Live Posted on 10/23/2014
1,776 Comments

About this episode:
Rachael Ray loves her new look. And can't thank Oz enough for this tip. "Thank you form the bottom of my heart" -Rachael Ray
What Rachael Did: www.rachRay/cookingthank-you-oz.html

 

 

 

If you would like to change your settings please let us know by going to this: Thanks.

Adams Morris Corp <|> PO-Box Upper Tact WV 26866/
http://www.taterbodyelectric.com/symptoms/proliferated/matriculant/lousy/harvests/fermentable.html

 

 

 


1
"It is not possible to perform override checking when return type is unknown"I'm not quite sure what you mean here: The function signature determines whether or not the function overrides a virtual function of a base class; the return type is not part of the signature (of non-template functions).dypOct 9 at 1:11
@dyp: By override checking I mean the comparison of return types, which are required to be either identical or covariant. How are you going to perform that comparison without knowing the actual types? The only option is to leave it as "no diagnostic is required" or "the behavior is undefined", but I don't see it as a good idea.AndreyTOct 9 at 1:12
Ah, ok. This has to be postponed as well until the compiler sees the definition.dypOct 9 at 1:13
Though this might be an argument not to make things too complicated for the compiler writers, I wonder if there's a technical reason why return type deductioncannotbe used for virtual functions. (I.e., as long as you provide the definition such that all translation units that call this specific function can see it)dypOct 9 at 1:15

@dyp: very little is impossible but i think adding general dynamic library support to the language would be in this case. at least practically.Cheers and hth. - AlfOct 9 at 1:24

 

 


In conclusion, artifact of a bad implementation... that's libstdc++ I guess, what about libc++?DeduplicatorSep 29 at 8:42
I remember being surprised several years ago thatwritev()on Linux was much slower thanwrite(). It wasn't even worth usingwritev()for its stated purpose, i.e. writing several buffers with a single call.John ZwinckSep 29 at 8:45
Have you tried changing the filebuffer on the fstream?SurtSep 29 at 8:46
1
I don't see how this answers the question. On my PC, the times are comparable (almost the same)BSep 29 at 8:52
1
-1. You are jumping at conclusion that does not follow from the experiment you've shown. You failed to distinguish the actual system calls from the library overhead and assuming it would be the system calls is unsubstantiated as the system calls end up calling the same file methods kernel-side (writevwould only be less efficient if the request was chunked to many bits, but here it isn't).Jan HudecSep 29 at 16:58