• Andrei Alexandrescu (3/3) Feb 08 2011 https://gist.github.com/817504
• bearophile (6/9) Feb 08 2011 Good :-)
• Andrei Alexandrescu (3/6) Feb 08 2011 Added a comment too (andralex).
• Christopher Nicholson-Sauls (6/11) Feb 08 2011 I would argue that (a & 1 == 0) is a cheaper simple test for evenness...
• spir (9/20) Feb 09 2011 Isn't this, precisely, a typical case of expected compiler rewrite? whil...
• Max Samukha (3/6) Feb 09 2011 I am amazed at how Java guys still prefer their crappy, noisy and
• bearophile (4/6) Feb 09 2011 Well, compared to C++, a Java programmer needs to keep in mind far less ...
• Max Samukha (4/10) Feb 09 2011 I was referring to the particular posters who praised the Java solution,...

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

https://gist.github.com/817504

I added a D version.

Andrei

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Andrei:

 https://gist.github.com/817504
 
 I added a D version.

Good :-)

They have missed the lazy Python2.x version:
(x for x in xrange(1, 5) if not x % 2)

Bye,
bearophile

Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:

On 2/8/11 8:02 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 https://gist.github.com/817504

 I added a D version.

 Andrei

Added a comment too (andralex).

Andrei

Christopher Nicholson-Sauls <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:

On 02/08/11 19:02, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 https://gist.github.com/817504
 
 I added a D version.
 
 Andrei

I would argue that (a & 1 == 0) is a cheaper simple test for evenness...

</gratuitous-nitpick>

Good show.  Not really sure what the point of the list was... but
sometimes these things are just (for) fun.

-- Chris N-S

spir <denis.spir gmail.com> writes:

On 02/09/2011 07:02 AM, Christopher Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
 On 02/08/11 19:02, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 https://gist.github.com/817504

 I added a D version.

 Andrei

 I would argue that (a&  1 == 0) is a cheaper simple test for evenness...

 </gratuitous-nitpick>

 Good show.  Not really sure what the point of the list was... but
 sometimes these things are just (for) fun.

 -- Chris N-S

Isn't this, precisely, a typical case of expected compiler rewrite? while n%2 
far better expresses the concept in source (in absence of to-be-inlined 
isEven() or general isMultipleOf(), indeed).

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com

Max Samukha <maxsamukha spambox.com> writes:

On 02/09/2011 03:02 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
 https://gist.github.com/817504

 I added a D version.

 Andrei

I am amazed at how Java guys still prefer their crappy, noisy and 
efficient way. And sadly they represent the majority.

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Max Samukha:

 I am amazed at how Java guys still prefer their crappy, noisy and 
 efficient way. And sadly they represent the majority.

Well, compared to C++, a Java programmer needs to keep in mind far less
arbitrary details, that if forgotten cause many bugs in C++ programs. Java
compiler is strict and catches many bugs, it works well enough, and you just
need small jars to distribute the compilation result. Today Java works on many
machines, on 32 and 64 bit well enough, there are tons of libraries, Java
programmers that you are able to hire, tons of tools to edit/debug/improve Java
code, Java is today pretty fast and its GC is first world class. There are even
other languages like Scala and Jthon that run on the JVM and interoperate with
it and its libs. Given all that, the verbose syntax of Java becomes a minor
thing. Java is full of faults and downsides, but most other languages/language
ecosystems are worse.

Bye,
bearophile

Max Samukha <maxsamukha spambox.com> writes:

On 02/09/2011 08:06 PM, bearophile wrote:
 Max Samukha:

 I am amazed at how Java guys still prefer their crappy, noisy and
 efficient way. And sadly they represent the majority.

 Well, compared to C++, a Java programmer needs to keep in mind far less
arbitrary details, that if forgotten cause many bugs in C++ programs. Java
compiler is strict and catches many bugs, it works well enough, and you just
need small jars to distribute the compilation result. Today Java works on many
machines, on 32 and 64 bit well enough, there are tons of libraries, Java
programmers that you are able to hire, tons of tools to edit/debug/improve Java
code, Java is today pretty fast and its GC is first world class. There are even
other languages like Scala and Jthon that run on the JVM and interoperate with
it and its libs. Given all that, the verbose syntax of Java becomes a minor
thing. Java is full of faults and downsides, but most other languages/language
ecosystems are worse.

 Bye,
 bearophile

I was referring to the particular posters who praised the Java solution, 
which is obviously inferior to nearly every 'filter' variant provided by 
other posters.