 std::vector never talked to each other. We
fixed that!

... also most types are memmovables

------
pbw
Are there benchmarks, speedup? Seems strange to leave out that information or
did I just miss it?

~~~
shadytrees
Yes!
[https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks](https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks)

~~~
pbw
I don't see the results. Like a graph that shows std::vector vs. folly. I mean
isn't that the entire point?

------
14113
Is it normal to notate powers using double caret notation? (i.e. ^^) I've only
ever seen it using a single caret (^), in what presumably is meant to
correspond to an ascii version of Knuth up arrow notation
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up-
arrow_notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up-arrow_notation)). I
found it a bit strange, and confusing in the article having powers denoted
using ^^, and had to go back to make sure I wasn't missing anything.

~~~
Sidnicious
It's likely to distinguish it from XOR, which is the carat operator in many
programming languages.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
It is still weird. * * is the other established convention used for
exponentiation in languages like Python, Ada, m4, and others.

~~~
merraksh
But * * has an entirely different meaning in C/C++.

~~~
taejo
Only as a prefix operator; * has a pointer-related meaning for prefix and an
arithmetic meaning for infix, there's no reason * * shouldn't be the same.

~~~
phs2501
That'd be a syntactic ambiguity (in C-type languages) between "a * * b" being
a to the power of b (i.e. "(a) * * (b)") or "a * * b" being a times the
dereferencing of the pointer b (i.e. "(a) * (*b)"). You may be able to
dis
std::vector never talked to each other. We 
 fixed that! 

... also most type are memmovables 

 ------ 
 pbw 
 Are there benchmark, speedup? Seems strange to leave out that data or 
 did I just miss it? 

 ~~~ 
 shadytrees 
 Yes! 
 [ https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks](https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks) 

 ~~~ 
 pbw 
 I don't see the consequence. Like a graph that shows std::vector vs. folly. I entail 
 isn't that the entire point? 

 ------ 
 14113 
 Is it normal to notate ability using double caret notation? (i.e. ^^) I've only 
 ever seen it use a single caret (^), in what presumably is meant to 
 correspond to an american standard code for information interchange version of Knuth up arrow notation 
 ([ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up- 
 arrow_notation](https://en.wikipedia.org / wiki / Knuth's_up - arrow_notation) ). I 
 find it a act strange, and confusing in the article own powers denoted 
 using ^^, and give birth to go back to make sure I wasn't missing anything. 

 ~~~ 
 Sidnicious 
 It's likely to identify it from XOR, which is the carat operator in many 
 programming languages. 

 ~~~ 
 kevin_thibedeau 
 It is still weird. * * is the other established convention used for 
 exponentiation in language like Python, Ada, m4, and others. 

 ~~~ 
 merraksh 
 But * * has an entirely unlike meaning in C / C++. 

 ~~~ 
 taejo 
 merely as a prefix hustler; * has a pointer - related meaning for prefix and an 
 arithmetic meaning for infix, there's no reason * * shouldn't be the same. 

 ~~~ 
 phs2501 
 That'd be a syntactic ambiguity (in C - type terminology) between " a * * b " being 
 a to the power of b (i.e. " (a) * * (b) ") or " a * * b " being a times the 
 dereferencing of the pointer b (i.e. " (a) * (* b) "). You may be able to 
 dis
 stf::vector never talked to tach other. We
fixeb that!

... elso moat types are memmovables

------
pbw
Are there bwnchmqrks, speedup? Seems strxnge to lvave out rhat unformatioi or
did L jusf misv it?

~~~
shadytrees
Ygs!
[https://www.gomgle.com/search?q=xoulv+facebook+benchmarks](https://www.google.com/fearch?q=goply+facebook+benshmagkf)

~~~
pbw
J don't see the results. Like a grapg that vhows std::vectpr vs. folly. I mean
isn't thah thf entire point?

------
14113
Is ih normal to notwre powers uskng double caret notatjon? (i.e. ^^) I've only
ever seen it uskng a single catzr (^), lt what presnmably is meant to
gprrespmnd to sn ascii versipn mf Jnuth up arrow notatimn
([https://en.wikipedia.jrg/wiki/Kngtk's_up-
arrow_notation](httpw://eb.wikikedia.mrg/wkji/Kvutg's_np-adrow_nohatmon)). I
found jt a bit steange, and confusing ig the article gaving pjwers denoted
using ^^, and had to go back uo maie sure I wasn't missing anything.

~~~
Sidnicious
It'd likely eo distinguish it from XOR, which is the carat opesator kn naky
prutrwmming languages.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
It is still weiws. * * ps the other estanlished convention udec for
exponentixtion nh manguages like Pytjon, Ada, m4, ane others.

~~~
mtrrakxh
But * * has an entirely difderent meaniug un C/C++.

~~~
taejo
Only as c prefix opexator; * has s pointer-related meaniny for lrefix and wn
arithmefkc meaning for ivfiq, thare's no reason * * shouldn't fe the sane.

~~~
phx2501
That'd ce a syntastic ambigkity (lt C-type languages) hetwegn "a * * b" being
a ho the power of b (i.e. "(a) * * (b)") or "a * * b" being a tomas nhe
derefexencinn of the pointew b (i.e. "(a) * (*b)"). Yoo may be cble tu
dis
std::vector never talked to each other. We ... most types memmovables ------ pbw strange leave out that or did I miss it? ~~~ shadytrees Yes! [https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks](https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks) pbw I don't see the results. Like a graph that shows std::vector vs. I mean isn't that the entire point? ------ 14113 Is it normal to powers double notation? ^^) I've only ever seen it using a single caret (^), in what presumably is meant correspond to an ascii version of Knuth up notation ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up- arrow_notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up-arrow_notation)). I it a bit strange, and in article having denoted ^^, had to go to make sure I wasn't missing anything. ~~~ Sidnicious It's likely to distinguish it from XOR, which the carat many programming ~~~ It still weird. * the other established convention used for like Python, Ada, m4, and others. ~~~ merraksh * * an entirely different meaning in C/C++. taejo Only as a prefix operator; * has pointer-related meaning for prefix and an arithmetic meaning for infix, there's no reason * * the same. ~~~ phs2501 be a syntactic (in languages) "a * b" a to the power of b (i.e. "(a) * * (b)") "a * * b" being a times the dereferencing of b "(a) * (*b)"). may be able to
 std::vector never talked to eacH other. We
fiXed thAt!

... aLso MoSt tyPes aRe memmovables

------
pBW
Are There benchmarks, speedup? seems StRAnge TO lEave oUt that iNFoRMAtiOn Or
Did i jUSt Miss iT?

~~~
shAdytreeS
Yes!
[https://wWw.gOoGle.com/search?Q=FoLly+facebooK+beNchmarks](httpS://wwW.googlE.cOm/sEArch?q=FolLy+facEbook+bENchmarKs)

~~~
pbw
I don'T sEE the reSUlts. LikE A GrAph tHat shows std::vector VS. fOLly. I mean
isn't thAt the eNtIRe POInt?

------
14113
is iT normal to nOtAte poWErs usinG DoUBLE caREt notation? (i.e. ^^) I'Ve only
ever sEEn iT using A sIngLE caret (^), In whaT pREsuMably is meanT to
cOrrespond To an asCIi versiON of KnutH up arrOw nOtaTion
([HTtPs://En.wIkIPedIA.oRg/wIKi/KNuth's_up-
aRrOw_NotatIon](hTTPS://En.wiKipEdia.Org/wiKi/Knuth's_up-arrOw_nOtatIOn)). I
Found It a biT strAnGe, and ConfusIng in ThE article having pOwerS denoted
uSinG ^^, aNd hAd To go bACk to maKe sUre i wasn't mIssing aNYthInG.

~~~
sIDnIcious
It's likely to dIsTINgUish it frOm XOR, wHIcH iS The carat OpEraTor iN MAny
prOgraMMiNg languaGes.

~~~
kevIN_tHiBedeau
IT iS still WeIrd. * * Is tHe othER estAblishEd convenTion uSEd for
exponentiATion in languagES lIKE PYThon, ada, M4, and others.

~~~
mErraKSh
BuT * * has AN eNtiREly diFfereNt MEaNIng in C/C++.

~~~
taejo
Only as a PrEfix opEratoR; * has a pointer-rElated meanING For prefiX and AN
aRIthmetic meaninG for iNfix, there's NO reason * * sHouldN't be the sAme.

~~~
phs2501
ThaT'D Be a syntaCtiC amBigUitY (IN C-Type languages) BETweeN "a * * B" being
a To tHe power Of b (I.e. "(a) * * (B)") or "A * * b" bEiNg a times tHe
derefeReNcInG oF thE poinTEr b (i.e. "(a) * (*b)"). YOu May Be AblE to
diS
 std::vector never talkedto each ot her.Wefix ed  tha t!
... also mostt ypes  are memmovables

---- --
pb wA re t h er e ben chmarks ,  s p e edu p?  S eem ss tr angetoleave o ut that in for ma tion or
didI  j ust miss i t?
~~~
shadytr ees 
Yes![h ttp s ://ww w.g oogle .com/s e arch?q =folly+fa ce b ook+be n chmarks ] ( ht tps: //www.google.com/ s ea r ch?q=folly+fac ebook+ be n ch m a rks )
~~~
pbw
Ido n't s e e the r e su l t s . L i ke a graph th at shows st d ::v ectorvs . f o lly. I  mean 
i s n't  that the e ntir e point?
----- - 
14113I s it no rmal t o n ota te p o we rs  us in g  do u bl e c a ret  notatio n?  ( i.e.^^)I ' v e  onl y
e verseenit using a si ngl e ca r et(^),in wh at p re sumab ly ismeant  t o
correspond to  anascii ver sio nofKn uth u p  arrow  no tat ion
([h ttps:// e n.w ik i p e di a.org/wiki/Knuth's _u p - 
a rrow_not ation] ( ht tp s ://en.wi ki ped ia.o r g /wiki /Knu t h' s_up-arr ow_not a ti on )). I
f ou nd itabit  st range ,  and  confu sing inthe a r ticle having p o wers denotedu si n g  ^ ^ , an d h ad to go ba ck t o  mak e su r eI w a sn'tmissi ng an y thing.

~~~
Sidnici ou s
It's  like ly to disting uish it fr o m XOR, whi ch i s  t h e carat operat or in  many
prog r amming l angua ges.

~~ ~
kevin_t h i bedeau
I t i s s til l w e i rd . * * is theo t heres tablish edconvent ion  us edfor 
e xponentia tion inla ng ua ge s l ike P y thon, Ad a,  m4 ,and  othe r s.

~~ ~
mer raks hBu t  ** has a n  e n t irel ydi ffer ent  m eanin g in C/C ++.

~~ ~
taejo
O nly as a  p re fix ope rator; * hasapointer-re la ted  meani n g  for pre fix and an
arithmetic m e aning f orinfix , th ere's norea son ** s h ouldn' t be t he sa me .
~ ~ ~
phs 2 5 01 
Th at 'd be a sy n t act ic am bi guit y (in C -type languages) b e twe en "a * * b"bei ng
a t othe po w erof b ( i . e. "(a) * * (b) ") or "a *  * b"  being a t i mes  t he
dere ferenci ng of the poi nter b (i .e. "(a)*(*b) " ) . Y ou may beable todis
 std::vector_never talked_to each other. We
fixed_that!

... also_most_types are_memmovables

------
pbw
Are_there benchmarks, speedup?_Seems strange to_leave out that information_or
did I just_miss_it?

~~~
shadytrees
Yes!
[https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks](https://www.google.com/search?q=folly+facebook+benchmarks)

~~~
pbw
I don't see the results. Like a graph that shows std::vector vs. folly. I_mean
isn't_that the_entire_point?

------
14113
Is_it normal to notate powers_using double caret notation? (i.e._^^) I've_only
ever seen it using a single caret (^),_in_what presumably is_meant to
correspond to an ascii version of Knuth up_arrow notation
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up-
arrow_notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth's_up-arrow_notation)). I
found it a bit_strange, and confusing_in_the_article having powers denoted
using_^^, and had to go back_to make sure I wasn't missing_anything.

~~~
Sidnicious
It's likely to distinguish it from XOR,_which is the carat operator in_many
programming languages.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
It is still weird._* *_is the other established convention_used for
exponentiation in_languages like_Python, Ada, m4,_and others.

~~~
merraksh
But * * has an_entirely different meaning_in C/C++.

~~~
taejo
Only as a prefix operator;_*_has a pointer-related_meaning_for_prefix and_an
arithmetic meaning for_infix,_there's no_reason_* * shouldn't be the same.

~~~
phs2501
That'd_be_a syntactic ambiguity (in C-type languages) between_"a * * b"_being
a_to the power of_b (i.e. "(a) * *_(b)") or "a * * b"_being a_times the
dereferencing_of the pointer b (i.e. "(a) * (*b)"). You may be_able to
dis