Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: fir Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: logically weird loop Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 18:27:29 +0100 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <236a26d2af187766d727c784c9b7fe5cc949fe25@i2pn2.org> References: <0e1c6d2e74d44a715bf7625ca2df022d169f878a@i2pn2.org> <20241122160540.00001d69@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:27:30 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3666047"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="+ydHcGjgSeBt3Wz3WTfKefUptpAWaXduqfw5xdfsuS0"; User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.19 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 5163 Lines: 87 fir pisze: > Michael S pisze: >> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:04:32 -0000 (UTC) >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 07:06:43 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>> >>>> Actually, if you know Simula, coroutines are inherent part of that >>>> language, and they based their yet more advanced process-oriented >>>> model on these. I find it amazing what Simula provided (in 1967!) >>>> to support such things. Object orientation[*], coroutines, etc., >>>> all fit together, powerful, and in a neat syntactical form. >>> >>> Wirth did include coroutines in Modula-2. And a kind of object >>> orientation in Oberon, I think it was. >>> >>> But these are (nowadays) called “stackful” coroutines -- because a >>> control transfer to another coroutine can happen at any routine call, >>> each coroutine context needs a full-sized stack, just like a thread. >>> >>> There is this newer concept of “stackless” coroutines -- not that >>> they have no stack, but they need less of it, since a control >>> transfer to another coroutine context can only happen at the point of >>> an “await” construct, and these are only allowed in coroutine >>> functions, which are declared “async”. I think Microsoft pioneered >>> this in C♯, but it has since been copied into JavaScript, Python and >>> other languages. >>> >> >> By chance, few days ago I was writing a small GUI panel to present a >> status from the hardware board we just finished building. In C#, >> because despite me knowing C++ (at least "old" C++) 10 times better >> than I know C#, building simple GUI in C# still takes me less time and >> the result tends to look better. It was the first time I was doing UDP >> in .Net and going through docs I encountered UdpClient.ReceiveAsync >> method. Got excited thinking that's exactly what I need to wait for >> response from my board while still keeping GUI responsive. But it was >> not obvious what exactly this async/await business is about. >> Read several articles, including one quite long. >> https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/how-async-await-really-works >> More I read, less I understood how it helps me and what's the point. >> In particular, handling timeout scenario looked especially ugly. >> 5-10 hours of reading were 5-12 hours wasted most unproductively. >> At the end, just did it good old way by ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem() >> with everything done synchronously by separate thread. Took me, may be, >> two hours, including wrapping my head around Control.BeginInvoke and >> Control.Invoke. >> So much for innovations. >> > > if yopu pity for 5-10 hours being unproductive tell you boss something > is wrong with him.. maybe start be pity after reading for 2 weeks or > month (where you more soob be bored by this reading) but not 10 hours > > such time presure kills work.. its a fact ime the more slow you code the > more faster you code and the more faster you code the more slow you code > i wrotee the half of my furia compiler i got now by a month - and i consider it fast, only becouse i was doing it slow with no pressure..with pressure i could do that 2 years probably ;c (honestly i dont know) hovever the health problems are worst issue.. becouse now i totally dont feel like being on month so concentrated to write the second (and easier i think) part >>> Yes, Simula pioneered OO. But the concept has gone in different >>> directions since then. For example, multiple inheritance, metaclasses >>> and classes as objects -- all things that Python supports. >> >> What I read seems to suggest that Smalltalk had bigger influence on >> modern twists of OOP. But then, may be Simula influenced Smalltalk? >> Anyway, I don't like OOP very much, esp. so the version of it that was >> pushed down our throats in late 80s and early 90s. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >