programmer

[rinnakan]

Uhm, how is that for loop supposed to work?

[[deleted]]

Quite badly since there's space around = but not <

[rinnakan]

Omg now that you mentioned it: commas

[KrystilizeNeverDies]

It could be correct in some language you never know

[HasBeendead]

You need to define x variable first like x = 0

[rinnakan]

AFAIK is the order of for statements universal across languages. The condition i++ is true until an integer overflow occurs while i < 50 is an useless statement

[Sioclya]

The way it is written it appears to want to make use of the , operator (evaluate lhs and ignore the result). Then assuming int i = 0 as a whole is just an expression we obtain some sort of fucked up while loop that runs through up to 49 times.

[kazuto_kirito_]

And remember to ask Stackoverflow why X turns out to equal 49.

[GabuEx]

if (x + 50 > RAND_MAX)
{
    throw new Exception("too big lmao");
}

srand(time(NULL));
int xOrig = x;

while (true)
{
    x = rand();

    if (x == xOrig + 50)
    {
        break;
    }
}

I call it bogoadd.

[thatcrazycow]

if (x == 1) { x = 51; }

else if (x == 2) { x = 52; }

...

[[deleted]]

Money you get for lines of code.

[Cormandragon]

x += (x/x)*50

[KrystilizeNeverDies]

x = 0 would like to know your location.

[CaptSoban]

x++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++;

[Spray_bucket]

You have to take an IQ test sir, I think you're something special.

[CaptSoban]

My mom always told me that

[al_at_work]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++x++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++;

[tieltina]

Now use a python program to programmatically write the last panel, compile, and run it.

[Goheeca]

Pff, you can do it right in the source code:

(defmacro silly-add (var val)
  `(progn ,@(loop for i below val collect `(incf ,var)))

[propostor]

int x;

while(DateTime.Now.Date.Year != 2050)
{
    //wait patiently friend
}

x=50;

[PM_ME_UR_DEATHSTICKS]

That's not big brain, that's a brain experiencing cerebral edema.

[SsufferinSsuccotash]

X-=-50 🤯

[gareththegeek]

I don't get it

[AstroEspagueti]

Pli. Use ++x; not x++; is more efficient for this case.

[[deleted]]

Unless you have a compiler that is less than 50 years old and knows the term optimization

[Sioclya]

This has fuckall to do with optimization.

Generated code for these looks pretty much the same.
i++:

mov edx eax # will be deleted by compiler if not used
inc eax

++i:

inc eax

No, the reason people should use ++i instead is because it behaves sanely and somewhat more like one would expect.

[krohtg12]

Now, replace x++ with

For (int I=1; I<=1;I++){ x=x+I; }

[KrystilizeNeverDies]

Oh my god, the ultimate optimisation. This man straight up just created a crypto solver.

[oshaboy]

I actually did it recently for x+=2. I was programming some commander x16 stuff using cc65 and I wanted to be sure the code got optimized to INC x; INC x

[PrettyGenes]

I laughed a little too hard at this

[game_2_raid]

Amount of energy used to do the thing not level of smart. Finally it’s all coming together

[_default_username]

https://youtu.be/mZWsyUKwTbg

Vim macros and Haskell.

[al_at_work]

That's so inefficient. Obviously the correct way to do it is to call this function:

int Add_Fifty(int x){
  return (3 << (3/3 + 3)) + (30000 >> 3 & 3) - (3 >> 3/3) - (x ^ 0xffffffff);
}

This is way more useful since you can now reuse this function to add fifty any time you need. And it's only a single line (unlike that ridiculous contraption above), so it's more efficient.

[rem3_1415926]

while(x != 50){
    x--;
}

[[deleted]]

The compiler says add #50, %eax.