Suppose I have the following function: void foo(std::vector<int> vec, int n); If I call the function like this:
Class member access : section 3.4.5, point 2: If the id-expression in a class member access (5.2.5) is an
Some binary tree data structures (such as Splay trees) will re-balance on reads to move recently accessed items toward the root, such that the subsequent look-up time may be reduced.
Motivation:reason why I\'m considering it is that my genius project manager thinks that boost is another dependency and that it is horrible because \"you depend on it\"(I tried explaining the quality
int main() { std::vector<int> v; v.push_back(1); v.push_back(3); v.push_back(2); std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), std::cout << boost::lambda::_1 << \"\\n\");开发者_高级运维
The noexcept specification on move-constructors are known to have performance implications in C++0x. For example, std::vector<T>::resize, std::vector<T>::reserve may use a non-throwing mov
I\'m a little disappointed to find that the C++0x concurrency standard doesn\'t seem to 开发者_StackOverflowhave any native support for a message-passing Actors model.
I have a couple of libraries that were targetting multiple platforms, of which some realtime ones that did/do not have decent STL support, let alone tr1 or C++11. This means everything uses the librar
Will C++11 implementa开发者_如何学JAVAtions define NULLas nullptr? Would this be prescribed by the new C++ standard?From the horse\'s mouth
I\'m interested in learning C++ more thoroughly now that C++11 is apparently ratified.What compiler currently implements the closest thing available to full C+开发者_开发知识库+11 support?How close is
加载中,请稍侯......