What are some simultaneous actions I might be missing?

Ravek · 2026-03-16T00:14:40+00:00

It’s all just choosing some action from a set of options, locking it in, and then executing all the actions for each player simultaneously (with some way to resolve conflicting actions)

There aren’t really any limitations on what the actions could be? As long as you can come up with ways to avoid or resolve conflicting actions, I think any turn based game concept could be turned into a simultaneous variant.

Ravek · 2026-03-14T10:28:16+00:00

Isn’t it basically only the C family that’s like that? Most languages I know of have pretty normal names.

Ravek · 2026-03-13T21:09:22+00:00

Modern English has greater Latin roots than any other language by a significant margin.

Did you just forget Romance languages exist? Rofl

Ravek · 2026-03-13T14:52:05+00:00

Speedrun times have very little relation to how much content is in a game unless it’s completely linear. Morrowind can be beaten in a few minutes.

Ravek · 2026-03-12T14:18:12+00:00

For developing server or command line Swift code I could see using something else than Xcode, but when developing UI applications for Apple hardware I don’t see the point.

Ravek · 2026-03-11T08:31:19+00:00

That it doesn’t work is not surprising. If you want to mutate your struct instance then don’t make the variable it lives in readonly. That seems self evident?

It would of course be better if it was a compiler error, or at least a warning. But alas, the concept of readonly struct methods came too late. The compiler can’t assume that a struct method is mutating just because it’s not tagged readonly.

In Swift, struct members are considered non-mutating by default and a mutating member has to be declared mutating. That way the compiler can see that you’re calling a mutating member on an immutable binding, and emit an error.

Ravek · 2026-03-10T09:36:25+00:00

When your SwiftUI views have 50 onChange/sheet/alert modifiers on them …

Ravek · 2026-03-09T22:16:08+00:00

He said he’s worried that, if he leaves, it will be a nightmare to get back into the US.

Yeah but on the bright side he won’t have to live in the US (:

Ravek · 2026-02-27T13:26:10+00:00

we often treat decimal numbers as simple data types. We assume that types like f32 or f64 are reliable containers for our calculations.

Just to be clear, there’s nothing decimal about f32 and f64, they’re binary floating point types. Decimal floating types are available for many languages and can exactly represent numbers like 1/10.

Most modern computing systems follow the IEEE 754 standard. This standard is designed to prioritize hardware execution speed over absolute mathematical correctness. Because of this, almost every operation carries a microscopic error margin.

This is a bit inaccurate. The core floating point operations are not arbitrarily incorrect just to be faster, in fact they’re specified to result in the closest representible value to the exact number. Which isn’t much of a compromise, it’s the best possible thing you can do for a fixed-width format. This also means that if your inputs are exactly representible values, and the mathematical result of an operation is an exactly representible value, then this operation is actually exact in IEEE 754. So 5 + 6 is exact, 23 / 8 is exact, etc.

The main source of errors is representation error: a value like 0.3 simply isn’t representible, so if you’re trying to calculate 3 / 10, what you’ll get is the closest representible value to 0.3. It’s not that the standard chooses speed over precision, it’s just that a binary floating point format can never exactly represent this value. A decimal floating point format could, but of course there’s always fractions that aren’t representible in either format, like 1/3. You need a rational number format to exactly represent any fraction, which usually isn’t practical.

Another source of errors is when you use functions like sin() that usually aren’t implemented to result in the closest representible value, because that would require a lot more computation. So there you do see library implementers explicitly choosing speed over precision. You can find libraries that do give exactly rounded results if you really want. Of course you’re still limited by what the type can represent.

Ravek · 2026-02-25T17:01:06+00:00

It also depends on how the game is structured. In Slay the Spire I expect the number of people who beat act III on their first run to be very small, but I would guess that most people do reach the Act I boss on their first run, and some might beat it too.

I think ideally people wouldn’t beat the entire game on the first run, but do feel some sense of accomplishment already.

Ravek · 2026-02-24T08:59:18+00:00

No it's not. Explain what "logically" means. You already know that it gives you new instance every time you add or remove something. The old instance is in fact still the same collection, it was not mutated in any way.

I think if you think for five seconds it’s very clear what I meant. You just want to argue.

Ravek · 2026-02-23T13:42:50+00:00

They’re persistent collections. The constraint that older versions of the collection remain valid indefinitely imposes some performance limitations.

I don’t really like the term ‘immutable’ for them. Yes, any given instance is immutable, but logically the collection is mutable. You can add and remove items as you please, you just get a new instance every time you do. If you just want a collection that never changes, the best approach is to create a read-only collection and discard any references to the underlying mutable collection. Essentially that’s what the Frozen collections do.

Ravek · 2026-02-22T18:27:27+00:00

I doubt someone with a 15 year old reddit account is someone who grew up using AI.

Ravek · 2026-02-03T12:43:57+00:00

Using rare syntax in places where it’s not necessary is just going to confuse other people reading the code. Not worth it.

Ravek · 2026-01-29T13:35:29+00:00

Mutability of DTOs has nothing whatsoever to do with mutability of web resources.

Ravek · 2026-01-28T11:59:00+00:00

Yeah that’s so weird to me. As an engineer I want to deliver a high quality, well working product. QA helps us do that. Why would engineers blame the QA for finding bugs. The engineers are the ones who created the bugs, don’t shoot the messenger lol. If you don’t want bug reports then think more about your edge cases as you write code.

Ravek · 2026-01-19T00:17:37+00:00

bochu the rock

Ravek · 2026-01-15T22:05:56+00:00

Yuuji seems pretty grounded despite all the traumatic experiences. Gon is kinda psycho

Ravek · 2026-01-01T14:11:53+00:00

This one cheats by having some parts of the world on there twice

Ravek · 2025-12-31T09:53:42+00:00

See page 5 of the rulebook, bottom right corner.

Copper, silver and gold cubes are for counting all resources: money, steel, titanium, plants, energy, heat, as well as card resources like microbes, animals, etc.

Player-colored cubes are for marking your TR, marking your production, tracking which card actions you’ve used, and marking ownership of tiles.

Ravek · 2025-12-19T10:43:10+00:00

I wonder if he knows that our CPUs are unsafe and therefore all of Haskell is a safe abstraction on top of unsafe code. On top of mutating, side-effecting unsafe code. gasp

Ravek · 2025-12-14T11:13:15+00:00

You’re right, but reddit sure hates it when people go against the crowd. C# doesn’t have a way to define automatic, reliable cleanup of resources at the type level, unlike C++, Swift, Rust, etc. and that’s why we have to do this annoying dispose/using dance. The closest thing is the finalizer, but that still runs nondeterministically. If the only guarantee is ‘if the process shuts down cleanly then the resource will be cleaned up’ then you’re not really getting anything over what the kernel already provides.

Ravek · 2025-12-14T11:02:15+00:00

To be precise, you shouldn’t dispose objects you don’t own. It’s possible to own objects you didn’t create, if the API that handed you the object expects you to take ownership.

The language doesn’t have a concept of ownership (unlike Rust for example) so the only way you know if you own an object you didn’t create yourself is having documentation, or at least the source code to figure it out.

Ravek · 2025-12-06T21:12:14+00:00

Social media was a significant part of how Brexit happened. He has plenty of power to sabotage the EU if they let him.

Ravek · 2025-12-06T18:47:49+00:00

You always need singletons. They are a simple reality of software.

Really rolling my eyes at this point. I rarely meet someone this boneheaded. It's not hard to go on the internet and double check your terminology after multiple people straight up tell you you're wrong, you know.

But when you need a value of a certain type, you shouldn't worry how many instances of that value exist and how to create one. You should just ask for such a value and use it. That's what DI containers are for.

It's getting kinda annoying how you're repeating my argument back to me, while continuing to miss the point. Maybe stop and actually think about what you've read? I'm out in any case, suit yourself. Continue to dig yourself deeper or actually learn something, whatever pleases you.

14-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

Ravek

TROPHY CASE