OTHER C++ tuts? - Developers

You know he could've written that avatar 10x faster and easier if he just used Ruby.

[QUOTE=nekomimi aficioNYAdo;16304074]You know he could've written that avatar 10x faster and easier if he just used Ruby.[/QUOTE] Seriously we should stop learning OOP and learn Haskell and F# instead.

[QUOTE=gparent;16304107]Seriously we should stop learning OOP and learn Haskell and F# instead.[/QUOTE] D'aww your avatar makes me feel all fuzzy and warm inside. I love you. ..

[QUOTE=gparent;16304107]Seriously we should stop learning OOP and learn Haskell and F# instead.[/QUOTE] Ruby went there, did that [QUOTE=PieClock;16304122]D'aww your avatar makes me feel all fuzzy and warm inside. I love you. ..[/QUOTE] What the FUCK do you have against hamsters then??? you sick bastard

[QUOTE=jA_cOp;16304136]Ruby went there, did that What the FUCK do you have against hamsters then??? you sick bastard[/QUOTE] :iiam:

[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;16304044]Your avatar has a memory leak.[/QUOTE] There is no memory leak :v: If you're talking about not deleting me, Me refers to the object, if I deleted *this from within the objects all sorts of bad memory voodoo would happen when the person who created the object (In this case I would guess Facepunch) tried to delete the memory the correct way. [b]Edit:[/b] Actually now that I look at it you can't really determine it unless you look at the constructor for Avatar :v: since Avatar me = *this is dependant on the constructor of Avatar. Page P Created Avatar me Created Members from *this copied to members in me (Dependant on constructor) p.render called on me P Data freed (Out of scope) me data freed (Out of scope) As I understand it.

[QUOTE=t0rento;16304248]There is no memory leak :v: If you're talking about not deleting me, Me refers to the object, if I deleted *this from within the objects all sorts of bad memory voodoo would happen when the person who created the object (In this case I would guess Facepunch) tried to delete the memory the correct way.[/QUOTE] Good luck deleting a variable on the stack, really did you copy that snippet off the internet and simply pretend to understand it?

[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;16304273]Good luck deleting a variable on the stack, really did you copy that snippet off the internet and simply pretend to understand it?[/QUOTE]I just made it up so it would fit in the frame. Why would there be a snippet that looks like that on the internet?

[QUOTE=t0rento;16304295]I just made it up so it would fit in the frame. Why would there be a snippet that looks like that on the internet?[/QUOTE] Just jerkin ya gherkin bro.

[QUOTE=t0rento;16304295]I just made it up so it would fit in the frame. Why would there be a snippet that looks like that on the internet?[/QUOTE] Why is there a picture of a man spreading his anus on the internet? Nobody knows...

[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;16304313]Just jerkin ya gherkin bro.[/QUOTE] You got me good there :v:

[QUOTE=t0rento;16304248]There is no memory leak :v: If you're talking about not deleting me, Me refers to the object, if I deleted *this from within the objects all sorts of bad memory voodoo would happen when the person who created the object (In this case I would guess Facepunch) tried to delete the memory the correct way. [b]Edit:[/b] Actually now that I look at it you can't really determine it unless you look at the constructor for Avatar :v: since Avatar me = *this is dependant on the constructor of Avatar. Page P Created Avatar me Created Members from *this copied to members in me (Dependant on constructor) p.render called on me P Data freed (Out of scope) me data freed (Out of scope) As I understand it.[/QUOTE] I don't think there's a this in a global function ;) It wouldn`t compile. ...unless you have a global variable 'this'.

whats going on guys.

[QUOTE=ZeekyHBomb;16305309]I don't think there's a this in a global function ;) It wouldn`t compile. ...unless you have a global variable 'this'.[/QUOTE] That snippet could be a part of the Avatar class. We may never know. :v:

So... The fuck... Someone suggest a book instead of just saying they're bettar?

I've found that books are much easier than sites, as they are alot more organized, and that most of the time are written by professionals

[QUOTE=Anti-Flag;16316196]So... The fuck... Someone suggest a book instead of just saying they're bettar?[/QUOTE] ... C++ for dummies volume 4.

imma go to library n get one now

[QUOTE=Anti-Flag;16316196]So... The fuck... Someone suggest a book instead of just saying they're bettar?[/QUOTE] Check the sticky.

[QUOTE=gparent;16319455]Check the sticky.[/QUOTE] If he would of, he wouldn't of made such a shitty topic.

[QUOTE=efeX;16322866]If he would[b]'ve[/b], he wouldn't of made such a shitty topic.[/QUOTE] Thus why I reminded him :)

For me, I learned c# in school, wrote a raytracer with the standard .net GDI and right now I'm learning exactly from cplusplus.com and it's pretty easy for me since I already know c#, so... You probably CAN just learn from the internet, since most of the programming is not knowing the language, it's more like solving problems, the language is just the tool for that... Of course, when it comes to optimizing your programs, ah whatever IMO learning from the internet is just fine...