Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2016 April 18

Computing desk
< April 17	<< Mar | April | May >>	April 19 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 18

Finding a website's owner

I'm sure that we have an article about the concept of a website that lists who owns what ___domain names, but I don't know what to call it. I figured it was "DNSR" or something of the sort, because when I try to go to a nonexistent website, my TWC Internet service sends me to http://www.dnsrsearch.com, but neither DNSR nor DNSR server exists. The site's preferences page mentions that I can opt out of the "___domain landing service", but ___domain landing service also doesn't exist. Nyttend (talk) 01:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WHOIS? --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So it is. http://www.domaininformation.de/whois provided the information I need (in this case, the fact that http://www.gogle.com, an easy-for-me-to-make typo, is owned by the folks that operate http://www.google.com. I had no idea that WHOIS handled this kind of thing; I thought it was just for looking up the entity to whom an IP address was registered. Nyttend (talk) 01:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WHOIS is used to look up the organization for whom a block of IP addresses is registered as well as look up the registrant information for a ___domain name. It is becoming more and more popular for ___domain name registrations to be private, so you can't use WHOIS to get ___domain name owners from that. Further, the owner of a ___domain name is not necessarily the owner of a website. I own many ___domain names that go to websites that I do not own in any way. I am paid to let the website owners use my ___domain names. 209.149.115.199 (talk) 11:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

C++ term for a trivially memcpy-able object

There's a C++ term-of-art, which is on the tip of my tongue but I can't remember. It's used to describe a class whose instances the compiler can safely copy without a copy constructor - i.e. the compiler simply emits an inline memcpy. So it's for classes with only members of elementary types without constructors (or aggregates thereof). It's an acryonym - something like SPOSH or SPOD or the like. I don't see it in Copy constructor (C++) or Object copying. Can anyone remember what the C++ folks call these things? Thanks. 87.114.241.105 (talk) 20:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The abbreviation you're thinking of is probably POD, plain old data, although the technical term is "trivially copyable". See, for example, this site. Tevildo (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed - PODS was clearly what I was almost remembering. Should there be a link to that in the Copy constructor (C++) article? Thanks for your help. 87.114.241.105 (talk) 22:06, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]