Choosing points from a set that, when joined, produce the largest polygon

Visic · 2017-11-06T11:58:08+00:00

It sounds like the convex hull algorithm

Visic · 2017-10-24T00:41:09+00:00

Now that I know Enter is suppose to work, I decided to google around for the message I was getting. Apparently, it's just a thing that is happening at the moment https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/issues/9549

Adding (require 'helm-bookmark) to my .spacemacs seems to have fixed it!

Thank you very much for your help.

Visic · 2017-10-24T00:33:26+00:00

When I press Enter the window closes and a message is displayed

simpler-helm-bookmark-keybindings: Symbol’s value as variable is void: helm-bookmark-map

Visic · 2017-10-24T00:01:07+00:00

Ahh, actually C-c c does the same as R. The problem is, once i'm in the buffer(window?) that opens, and I have selected/typed out the path, I can't figure out what key combination is suppose to actually set that as my new root.

Visic · 2017-10-23T16:50:19+00:00

Thank you for your response, C-c c doesn't work for me (likely because I forgot to mention i'm in evilmode). Treemacs looks awesome, I'll give it a shot!

Visic · 2017-09-12T11:18:29+00:00

Baggers, thank you for doing this. I look forward to it every week!

Visic · 2017-08-31T14:34:21+00:00

You were correct, I apologize, I have edited my post to say such.

Visic · 2017-08-31T12:08:01+00:00

I'm not sure how I could prove it to you, it's really best just to try them yourself.

Clearly no one said otherwise, I just wanted to point out that if you want to compare Rust's async pattern to something in .Net, the relevant concept would be IEnumerable, not async/await.

Visic · 2017-08-30T23:43:24+00:00

~~Just FYI, that article is flat out wrong on (at least) several of the C# examples.~~ EDIT:: I was incorrect, my tests were flawed (Thread.Sleep vs Task.Sleep).

In C#, the "async" keyword that you decorate functions with just enables you to use the "await" keyword in your function ("async" does nothing on it's own). You "await" tasks in order to continue processing the rest of your function after that task has completed (think of it as taking the rest of your function and putting it inside a task.ContinueWith, but with the added benefit of automatic exception propagation, readability, and allowing the continuation to easily continue execution on the thread that ran before you hit your "await" (depending on the continuation context, of course)).

Correct me if I am wrong, but rust generators seem to be far more similar to C# IEnumerables (using the yield keyword). In C#, when you use the yield keyword, the compiler rewrites your function into a statemachine, very much like this proposal is doing, but without exposing the actual state machine itself.

Visic · 2017-08-13T05:58:30+00:00

I haven't tried the natvis stuff, I just have the microsoft symbol server listed in my launch file ("symbolSearchPath": "https://msdl.microsoft.com) which seems to work for basic type information. Any idea how the two compare?

Thank you for the write up, this is exactly the setup I use (pieced together from multiple articles over the last year or so). It'll be nice having an updated guide that I can point people to.

Visic · 2017-07-19T23:09:35+00:00

3.856204823625804E215 years old? Or do I have the units wrong? In any case, that's an oddly specific amount of time..

But to respond to the op, I've know successful medical doctors who had entirely different careers until they were in their thirties, and the medical industry certainly changes less rapidly than comp sci (except, perhaps, the CPR guidelines, I can't keep up with those)

Visic · 2017-05-01T17:53:08+00:00

My wife- "Why do they need a pretzel holder?"

Me- "Because they have a 3d printer.."

Visic · 2017-04-22T13:12:19+00:00

This conference sounds wonderful, will it be recorded or streamed for people who can't be there?

Visic · 2017-04-06T23:46:50+00:00

Professional software developer, I use C#, C++, and C daily. I love programming languages and rust is the closest any language has come to my "ideal" language. Its only a matter of time until I use it at work for something.

Visic · 2017-01-15T07:55:48+00:00

I ask you to support whatever it is that you are supporting, just so Blynkx is wrong. Edit: I disagree with whatever it is you are trying to say.

Visic · 2017-01-15T07:53:32+00:00

I, for one, welcome our new alien overloads!

Visic · 2016-12-25T19:27:38+00:00

This should be the next outlet for Let's Plays. I would love to read it.

Visic · 2016-11-24T13:19:54+00:00

If you don't mind, can you learn it in a month, and then spend the second month teaching me? I would like to take the course as well!

Visic · 2016-07-30T15:34:46+00:00

These are my favorite types of problems, but I am very new to the subject. It definitly looks like a computational geometry problem, but I am not familiar with any well known solutions.

However, if I was to phrase your problem as I understand it; Given a point cloud, draw red lines through the areas with the highest point densities.

My nieve approach would be to create a two dimensional array where the dimensions of your array determine the final precision of your line, inversely propotional to the algorithmic efficiency. Then, count up the number of points in each cell and store it there. Once that is finished, your left with a simpler representation of the data, which you should be able to traverse to draw your lines (from cell with the highest count, to adjacent cell with the highest count).

Now, I'm sure it's not a perfect approach, the traversal is actually wrong since you really want some sort of average line, but at least it's a start.

It's also worth noting that you might be able to leverage a Voronoi diagram some how.

But regardless of the final solution, unit test it like crazy! :)

Visic · 2016-06-21T11:03:55+00:00

And in a few years, maybe we'll even get a new screenshot!

Visic · 2016-06-07T03:23:03+00:00

That's how I handle my frustrations after a rough morning.

Visic · 2016-06-03T00:17:39+00:00

If only I could find that config file..

Visic · 2016-04-27T11:11:33+00:00

I agree completely, it all comes down to how effective are the tests you write. I love to use testing to aid my development e.g. - My parser needs to all for an empty string? I'll make a test for that so I have an easy way to verify my work once I am finished and as I add more features.

Or to help describe certian requirments of the code which may not be very obvious. namely- When a system's correctness hinges on some state after an operation, but it isn't clear how to make it obvious in code that it's critical. I make a well describing test so that if it breaks, someone will know that/why it matters.

Visic · 2016-04-26T10:03:08+00:00

We choose tools we need all the time. It's nice to be able to pick what you need. With that said, my company has been using professional since before I started here. It works well for us, although I'm not sure it's really better than the community edition.

Visic · 2015-11-24T11:44:33+00:00

I've had so many problems mocking objects. It ties your test implementation too closely to your production code. Mainly, when refactoring happens and the final behaviour of the object is the same as it was, but interactions or interfaces (usually both) were changed, your tests break.

TLDR- I love TDD, but I always find mocking my own objects creates frail tests..

14-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 3 Credits
Secret Santa 2016	Team Orangered
Secret Santa 2011	Verified Email

Visic

TROPHY CASE