Comments for Well, technically...

Comment on Address Space Monitor 0.6 Release by Travis

Travis — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:23:49 +0000

With more experimentation, I found the problem occurred only when I tried to install both 32-bit and 64-bit versions, or just 32-bit. It did not occur when installing only the 64-bit version.

Comment on Address Space Monitor 0.6 Release by Travis

Travis — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:50:04 +0000

I downloaded the address space monitor and the virus scanner said it was clean. When I went to install it on my Windows 7 computer, though, the scanner caught a “Generic BackDoor!dxz” virus.

Comment on Address Space Monitor 0.6 Release by paul

paul — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:29:25 +0000

I have been using address space monitor recently and found it very useful but have noticed that if I have a process with LARGEADDRESSWARE set and the /3GB boot.ini option then it monitors the 3GB space but if I run the same 32bit process on x64 windows where it gets a 4GB space ASM only monitors the first 2GB.

Comment on Exponent operator overloading by Andy Balaam

Andy Balaam — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 17:33:40 +0000

Convert to exponent, then apply exponent. It kind of makes sense.

I vote for more operator overloading evil.

Comment on Implementation of operator+ by Andy Balaam

Andy Balaam — Tue, 19 May 2009 10:43:05 +0000

Or rather, miss the lack of an &.

Comment on Implementation of operator+ by Andy Balaam

Andy Balaam — Tue, 19 May 2009 10:42:49 +0000

I must say I much prefer Take 3 over the original implementation, just for its clarity (to me). I could easily miss an & and be confused.

Comment on Dependent bases, virtual functions, what does this call? by Andy Balaam

Andy Balaam — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:42:30 +0000

I could live with it if it were everywhere. It is the inconsistency that hurts me.

Python requires ‘self.’, which is fine. Nice and explicit.

Comment on Dependent bases, virtual functions, what does this call? by hashpling

hashpling — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:39:48 +0000

In which case you have a different set of problems and a diktat of ‘never use this->’ is an acceptable stance as the chances of them being in a situation where ‘this->’ is required and not understanding that the diktat can and should be ignored is vanishingly small. (Assuming that, like me, you are against unnecessary ‘this->’ which is often a sign of over-reliance on so-called ‘intellisense’.)

Comment on Dependent bases, virtual functions, what does this call? by Andy Balaam

Andy Balaam — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:27:40 +0000

They always look blank.

Comment on Dependent bases, virtual functions, what does this call? by hashpling

hashpling — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:47:41 +0000

Just ask them if they are accessing a member of a dependent base via an otherwise non-dependent expression. If they look blank, then it’s your queue to shout: “so why are you using ‘this->’?”.

I made this point on a SO question, but it’s so low down that no-one’s even bothered to downvote it.