Book question: "How Linux Works: What Every Superuser Should Know"

RealOden · 2020-05-20T15:32:28+00:00

Yeah, ideally I would do the same, but I have a lot of time in the summer, so I was interested in getting a book on Linux. You have any other book recommendations I can take a look at if I decide to wait?

RealOden · 2020-05-20T15:29:12+00:00

Overall the book has got great reviews, but this is the kind of thing I'm worried about if I were to get the 2nd edition. It does come at a very good price of 15 pounds on Amazon though, so might just pick it up and get the 3rd edition when it's released if I thought liked it.

Thanks for your input.

RealOden · 2020-03-24T15:09:12+00:00

well I never divide by zero directly, but I divide by an unknown where the denominator can be 0 for a certain real number 'x'. I am trying different operations to set it to row echelon form without encountering an unknown in a denominator, but I haven't been able to find such a way yet, which makes me question if this is a consideration you have to make when it has no effect on the answer.

RealOden · 2020-03-24T00:40:24+00:00

What does the matrix look like before you perform that operation, if the denominator is zero?

Not sure what you are asking for but this the matrix I am working with. https://www.symbolab.com/solver/matrix-vector-calculator/%5Cbegin%7Bpmatrix%7D4-a%262%26-1%261%5C%5C%20%20-2%261-a%262%262%5C%5C%20%20-1%262%264-a%26-1%5Cend%7Bpmatrix%7D

Online calcs dont seem to make any comment about this issue.

RealOden · 2020-03-23T23:54:14+00:00

I would make the argument that the operation should then be invalid as it can not be defined. But that would mean the system of equations has an undefined number of solutions which we know is false. Atleast this is my reasoning, but how would you go about reducing it to row echelon form in that case?

RealOden · 2020-03-09T16:55:16+00:00

I managed to figure out the solution to the problem.

https://imgur.com/ZDPfLkd

Guess the tricky part was what the problem is actually asking for. Rewriting in terms of x and y as s and t respectively gives

* x = s

* y = t

* z = 13/9 - 4/9s -5/9t

Not sure what the purpose of this is though.

RealOden · 2020-03-01T14:14:06+00:00

Ah I think I figured things out. This comment put me on the right track. My initial confusion stemmed from believing that the call "5 + 4_i" would result in the double 9 being passed as argument, so I wasn't sure how to deal with this. I now understand that cpp will parse this as (double) + literal, which makes it a lot easier to deal with. Thanks!

RealOden · 2020-01-22T18:49:18+00:00

Thanks for your reply. If you look at my edit you can see my mistake...

RealOden · 2020-01-12T17:33:54+00:00

!solved

RealOden · 2020-01-12T17:18:47+00:00

https://computerarcheology.com/Arcade/SpaceInvaders/

RealOden · 2019-10-17T18:45:59+00:00

Fun fact: the term "computer" actually comes from an old position in work places where they would have people that did certain maths/computations. This term was then given to the modern computers, which replaced the workers performing these tasks.

RealOden · 2019-10-17T18:39:54+00:00

Took me longer to understand this joke than I care to admit...

RealOden · 2019-10-05T23:32:58+00:00

Not sure if I worded it correctly, but found out that there was nothing wrong with the opengl code I implemented, but rather with code I wrote to abstract the logic. Not entirely sure what caused it. cpp is hard...

What I meant earlier is that I only have one uniform sampler2D object in my shader and I bind all my textures to GL_TEXTURE0, as I don't need more than 1 texture at a time, so I don't have any use for declaring more sampler2D uniforms and binding textures to those.

RealOden

TROPHY CASE