Mind over power
Increasing Brain Power <Drake.Dunn@rothbrainboosters.com> Thu, 19 March 2015 14:21 UTC
Return-Path: <DrakeDunn@idslive.rothbrainboosters.com>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77DA91ACCF3
for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 07:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01]
autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id G5ypFnH0O35k
for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Thu, 19 Mar 2015 07:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from idslive.rothbrainboosters.com (idslive.rothbrainboosters.com
[107.181.133.4])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12341ACCEA
for <krb-wg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 07:21:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 06:21:53 -0800
Message-ID: <45074776232855520150319060785311.6db7daa22e91161578c156b107c98961@rothbrainboosters.com>
From: Increasing Brain Power
<Drake.Dunn@rothbrainboosters.com>
Reply-to: <Drake.Dunn@rothbrainboosters.com>
Subject: Mind over power
To: <krb-wg-archive@lists.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="===============2492738344440435761=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Re: Krb-wg-archive Can you please send over what we need for the meeting? I was unable to see the updated reports you send the other day. thanks for getting back to me so fast. Breaking News: FDA Approves Brain Power Booster http://www.rothbrainboosters.com/739-hedonic/unapportioned/nonradical.html ///>//////>////// CNN-- With much media praise controversy is on the rise for the brainpower booster in a bottle, dubbed 'Fuel for the brain' (http://www.rothbrainboosters.com/739-hedonic/unapportioned/nonradical.html) . Reported to increase brain power by 89.2%, sharpens your mind and sky-rockets energy levels. Read More >> (http://www.rothbrainboosters.com/739-hedonic/unapportioned/nonradical.html) ///>//////>////// With such overwhelming evidence and media mention, the question is not whether it works, but whether it should be legal. http://www.rothbrainboosters.com/739-hedonic/unapportioned/nonradical.html If you were able to get your hands on this would you try it? US Edition | Video | TV | Opinions | Rem-settings (http://www.rothbrainboosters.com/7585_wombier_6510_chrysolite.php) | CNF Reports Live | 9306 Bova :: Louisville :: KY 40291 :: Thanks ///>//////>////// Thanks~ Maybe I should use "raw data" to replace "binary data" because all data in computer is binary... It's true that writing raw data is a dangerous behavior for a cross-platform application. But for applications on embedded systems which focus more on efficiency rather than portability, this may be a helpful approach :) Mr. Ree Feb 18 at 3:02 1 @Mr.Ree: for sure - the functions are there to be called - just ever-so-slightly harder to do so for class/struct types, needing that cast. Regarding the dangers - if there are virtual functions, pointer data members etc. you're in trouble even on an embedded system, but C++ provides traits you can easily assert to ensure your struct data should be safe to read/write as a binary block.... Tony D Feb 18 at 4:39 @Mr.Ree: appended a response to another of your questions to my answer. Cheers. Tony D Feb 18 at 4:51 I agree with what you have written. But, Java has 3 different layers of classes for reading text from a file (a stream, a reader and a buffered reader). I am not defending their design decisions but this also shows that current std::iostream implements different responsibilities into one gigantic construct. Using std:: objects are usually encouraged by Stroustrup himself just because of their RAII behavior. So instead of fwrite there should be a better alternative for current stream classes in the standard for byte streams imho. zahir Feb 18 at 16:58 @zahir: from one perspective I agree with you it "ticks a box", from another it seems excessive, verbose and confusing for new devs to have an extra set of stream classes that only differ by having read and/or write functions take void* instead of char* - the Standard is long enough already. Users who want it can trivially roll their own. Buffering variations are already supported - see
- Mind over power Increasing Brain Power