c++ ctor calls(confusing), another summary

See more details in my post https://bintanvictor.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/c-no-arg-ctor-call-without-new-confusing/. Is there anything new
here? No, just another summary.

On heap (“new”) or with ctor args, things are more clear-cut and we make fewer mistakes. My confusions are the no-arg ctor calls on
the stack.

Animal a1; //ctor. Standard idiom but I would try to use the alternative form below.
Animal a2 = Animal(); // ctor – temp obj. This form is possibly less efficient, but this form is flexible —
Animal a3 = Animal(someArt)

// Above syntax may or may not create additional temp objects, in c++03 or c++11.

Animal aX(); // NOT ctor
throw Animal(); //ctor – temp obj
function6(Animal() );//ctor – temp obj

Rule of thumb — All the Animal() expressions create a temp.

2 simple singleton classes – c++

 

#include
#include
using namespace std;

template
class StaticFieldSingleton {
private:
  static StaticFieldSingleton instance_;
  StaticFieldSingleton() {
    cout << "StaticFieldSingleton() ctor\n";
  }
  StaticFieldSingleton(StaticFieldSingleton const &);
  StaticFieldSingleton& operator=(StaticFieldSingleton const &);
public:
  static StaticFieldSingleton& getInstance() {
    return instance_;
  }
};
template StaticFieldSingleton StaticFieldSingleton::instance_;

class SimpleSingleton { //based on [[effectiveC++]] P222
  SimpleSingleton() {
    cout << "SimpleSingleton()\n";
  }
  SimpleSingleton(SimpleSingleton const &);
  SimpleSingleton& operator=(SimpleSingleton const &);
public:
  static SimpleSingleton& get_instance() {
    static SimpleSingleton instance;
    return instance;
  }
};

int main() {
  StaticFieldSingleton::getInstance();

  SimpleSingleton& ins1 = SimpleSingleton::get_instance();
  SimpleSingleton& ins2 = SimpleSingleton::get_instance();
  cout << &ins1 << endl;
  cout << &ins2 << endl;
}

execution algo^algo strategy

I think the “exec algo” type is lesser known.

  • VWAP is best known example
  • bulk orders
  • used by many big sell-sides (as well as buy-sides) to fill client orders
  • the machine acts as a robot rather than a strategist
  • goal is not to generate alpha, but efficient execution of a given bulk order

 

marginal probability density: clarified #with equations

(Equations were created in Outlook then sent to WordPress by HTML email. )

My starting point is https://bintanvictor.wordpress.com/2016/06/29/probability-density-clarified-intuitively/. Look at the cross section at X=7.02. This is a 2D area, so volume (i.e. probability mass) is zero, not close to zero. Hard to work with. In order to work with a proper probability mass, I prefer a very thin but 3D “sheet” , by cutting again at X=7.02001 i.e 7.02 + deltaX. The prob mass in this sheet divided by deltaX is a number. I think it’s the marginal density value at X=7.02.

The standard formula for marginal density function is on https://www.statlect.com/glossary/marginal-probability-density-function:

How is this formula reconciled with our “sheet”? I prefer to start from our sheet, since I don’t like to deal with zero probability mass. Sheet mass divided by the thickness i.e. deltaX:

Since f(x,y) is assumed not to change with x, this expression simplifies to

Now it is same as formula [1]. The advantage of my “sheet” way is the numerator always being a sensible probability mass. The integral in the standard formula [1] doesn’t look like a probably mass to me, since the sheet has zero width.

The simplest and most visual bivariate illustration of marginal density — throwing a dart on a map of Singapore drawn on a x:y grid. Joint density is a constant (you can easily work out its value). You could immediate tell that marginal density at X=7.02 is proportional to the island’s width at X=7.02. Formula [1] would tell us that marginal density is

labels:cope^pain^threat^GTD

I would say choose one among

gzCope, gzPain, gzThreat, GTD

In rare cases, use simultaneous categories.

Also, the relevant posts in the pripri/open blogs, I feel better move to this blog and mark them private. Easier to manage in one place.

GTD is more specific than Cope. In a sense, all GTD posts are also part of Cope but actually Cope is more about job market, moving up, choosing specializations.