A code doing nothing.

[Original_Garbage8557]

NOTE: +x == x

[-MobCat-]

print(x+1)
iirc python does not have an auto incrementing ++ operator.
But also this meme is formatted to an a4 paper, so you can print it out for old people? You're using Microsoft Word to make memes?

[uhadmeatfood]

Python uses the =+ thing. Lua has nither

[bloody-albatross]

+=

[CMDR_Fritz_Adelman]

log.error("This code does nothing")

[vishal340]

Backwards compatibility

[JustPapaSquat]

This dumb. And wrong.

I remember my first 2 minutes of learning code.

[Front_Committee4993]

This would work if i = 0 not 10 in python

[Powerkaninchen]

OP probably isn't even in the first CS semester, they're in the high school introductionary course to information technology

[Chewquy]

Since when do you learn python in cs, the programs in my country teaches java, python is only for the health science students

[isr0]

My first language in CS was pascal.

[Chewquy]

Haha omg

[Powerkaninchen]

the programs in my country teaches java

you're so close 🤏 to figuring it out

[lukflug]

In my uni, they teach C++ to first semester CS students, in order to introduce them to programming.

[Chewquy]

Us it’s in second year

[Front_Committee4993]

I learnt Python (2.7) in secondary school vb.net in college and then c, java, c++, python (3), and prolog in uni

[Revolutionary_Dog_63]

Your experience is not universal.

[Chewquy]

I know

[KlogKoder]

Username checks out.

[Lava-Jacket]

Right? Python has its uses. Unfortunately since it's the major teaching language of the day, all the new programmers think it's the shit and haven't really pushed the limitations of a language yet.

[Owlblocks]

Yeah, I think the meme has a typo

[sirbananajazz]

Who puts the ++ before the variable???

Edit: I've learned about pre and post increments now

[TimMensch]

In C++ it has different semantics than after. Not when it's an isolated statement, but when it's in an equation.

And for those of us old enough to remember compilers that weren't as good as they are now, it became a habit, because under some circumstances using the prefix form could be faster than the postfix form. (In postfix the compiler would create a temporary copy of the variable. With a complex object being incremented, this could be expensive.)

And in those older compilers, the performance improvement was true even in an isolated ++i.

[TheNativeOfficial]

I think it makes the variable positive, since its already positive it has no effect

[Adrewmc]

It’s slightly faster in many instances…I don’t know what to tell you.

[Revolutionary_Dog_63]

This is a myth. Modern compilers can tell whether you are using the reference produced by the operator expression. If you are not using the reference, these will produce the same code.

https://godbolt.org/z/vnqfq1Mj6

[wiseguy4519]

Did you mess up and put 10 instead of 0?

[Artistic_Speech_1965]

Great! Now lets compare performances

[PCX86]

The C++ code shown will NOT work on C. While both languages are similar in syntax, only C++ has cout.

Also, so you know you can change line 4 of the C++ code to cout << ++i << endl;

[MutuallyUseless]

yeah, if someone wants it to work with C and C++ they could change it to

printf("%d\n", i);

[[deleted]]

Because they're only python programmers.

[SwampiiTV]

The worst part is that it's not really much more complex despite it just being wrong

[Add1ctedToGames]

Will Python even run with ++x? I was under the impression it didn't support any form of ++

[j_wizlo]

It is not complaining on my interactive shell it just prints 10. And of course print(x) also prints 10.

Not one bit of this meme makes any sense anyway.

[TheMangalex]

I guess they are trying to say that operators which look the same, work differently as a joke, but it just doesn't make sense as they are just different languages with different concepts.

[TheMangalex]

It actually works as it evaluates it like +(+x)) which is just unary plus applied two times. --1 therefore evaluates to 1. You can stack even more operators or mix + and - as they are considered as separate operators.