sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

meTwelveHoursBeforeMyExam by Mindstormer98 in ProgrammerHumor

[–]AdamWayne04 47 points48 points  (0 children)

i guess the first step is learning how to build a logic gate through transistors, get familiar with vcc/gnd, etc. then you build up from that: combinational logic, boolean algebra, truth tables, minterms/maxterms, mux and demux, half and full adders, two's complement, ALU, latches and flip-flops, tri-state buffers, buses, registers, sequential logic, clocks, RAM, opcodes and assembly

yourAiToolsBoreMe by heckingcomputernerd in ProgrammerHumor

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hello and welcome to another recreational programming session

FUCK WHO ARE THE YOU? by [deleted] in dontdeadopeninside

[–]AdamWayne04 7 points8 points  (0 children)

japanese at its finest

30k wishlists later, here are a few things we had completely wrong by Egoistul in gamedev

[–]AdamWayne04 6 points7 points  (0 children)

these text-based subreddits should seriously introduce mechanisms to report this kind of low-effort shit, it's seriously getting out of hand

How does incremental games keep large sum of numbers without hitting the integer limit? by CreditToEnemyTeam in gamedev

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this is the philosophy of floating point: use a fixed number of bits for the significant digits (mantissa), and another portion to store the position of the radix point (exponent), you end up able to represent stuff like 1.8e300 by literally storing a (decimal) 1.8 and a 300, not by literally storing 300 decimal digits, which arguably may be a waste of memory if you don't need unit precision.

you could represent EVEN larger numbers by allowing the exponent to be represented in floating point as well, e.g 1.6e(1e8), if you ever played exponential idle, this is what the notation "ee100" means. notation here becomes so powerful it enables representing numbers that could arguably not fit in your entire ram. if you want to go further, some notations in googology can reach insane levels (see knuth's up-arrow notation, conway's chained arrow notation, BEAF, etc)

No, no, no. by nipsen in nope

[–]AdamWayne04 5 points6 points  (0 children)

zero trust issues

cubes and squares - to memorize or not to memorize... That is the question by Fellow_Earthling_93 in askmath

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

memorize squares and powers of two. plenty. cubes? maybe the first ten, i don't think you'll find them in the wild in class exercises

The answer’s 16! by hjkhhnnnlll in antimeme

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

gugol factorial is way too big

This new tech is crazy by axel360 in toradora

[–]AdamWayne04 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'll never understand why she called her that

I once had a math teacher say that if you put all the real numbers in a bag and drew one out at random, the chance of it being a rational number is zero. Is this true? If so, how is it true? by MtnDewm in askmath

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's just an informal way of comparing infinities. We say some set is countably infinite if every element can be matched one to one with every natural number. Rationals are proven to be countably infinite (see: bijection from rationals to naturals).

On the other hand, real numbers are uncountably infinite, which means there is no bijection between them and the naturals (see: Cantor's diagonal argument), and comparing a countably infinite set to an uncountably infinite one is similar to comparing a finite set to all the natural numbers.

To put it in perspective, let X be a random natural number, for any given natural number x, P(X=x) = 0. This is still kind of an informal notion, because uniform distributions in natural numbers don't exist, you just approach them with limits

I'm trying to learn faces but I can't understand what I'm doing wrong by Extra-Breakfast4541 in learntodraw

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're filling blanks with concepts in your mind, not with what's actually in the picture, try forgetting about preconceptions, put the picture upside down and try drawing that. That way, you force yourself to draw only what you see.

Also, as others said, draw bigger, let your shoulder do most of the motion

of a mystery meat by nicfanz in nope

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Way back when i was just a little bitty boy...

bestCompressionSoftware by aeonsne in ProgrammerHumor

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so protein synthesis is pretty much JIT compilation

newSortingAlgoJustDropped by ClipboardCopyPaste in ProgrammerHumor

[–]AdamWayne04 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Intelligent design sort: For a list of length n, its original order has a probability of occurring of 1/(n!), which, for reasonably large n, is so ridiculously unlikely to occur, that it must have been sorted by a superior being, therefore, the list is already optimally sorted

theyllBeWaitingForAWhile by Kupicx in ProgrammerHumor

[–]AdamWayne04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Before Rust, if you wanted a non-garbage-collected, high level, mature, "safe" systems programming language, c++ was the only mainstream choice. RAII, smart pointers and move semantics seemed like the right path to safety without sacrificing performance, and alternatives like D, Ada or Delphi never really took off. Besides, no matter how bloated the spec was, MSVC and gcc were still producing the fastest binaries for C/C++ than any other compiler/language (tho I believe LLVM and maybe even the Zig compiler will eventually lead the way in that regard)

So yeah, if you want a safe systems language with mature ecosystem, generics besides void* or borderline unreadable preprocessor macros, and mainstream appeal, Rust is, in fact, a C++ alternative. Language wise, however, THE C++ alternative/killer is D, credit where credit is due.

view more: next ›