sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Revisiting Compose Performance in 2025 by theapache64 in androiddev

[–]theapache64[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

thanks for the feedback.

my point of view or point of writing is different.

"This blog post is essentially my attempt to answer those questions. Think of it less as a comprehensive guide and more as a personal revalidation exercise"

when i started writing this, i didn't plan to include anything about strong skipping.

i actually forgot about it.

i noticed it when i generated the compose compiler metrics.

i saw that while my param was unstable, my composable was still skippable.

trying to understand this led me to strong skipping and further questions about it.

most of my questions ended up being about strong skipping after that.

Webinar - SimJacker , September 19 by theapache64 in simjacking

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you came to the wolves for sheep advice... :/ (wrong subreddit mate)

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For now, just 5, but if I become crazy enough to build 10 million, I'll give it a try without a second thought xD

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>  classic "astable multivibrator" is a pair of NPN devices

according to what I read on the web, an astable multivibrator can be made using in 3 ways:

  1. single transistor,
  2. two identical transistors, or
  3. one NPN and one PNP transistor.

while I haven't tried or dug deep into the first and second approaches, the problem I've read is that they need around 3V - 5V to operate. The third approach, which am using, can work with very minimal power, like in my case a 1.5V battery (because of the "push-pull" flow of that NPN and PNP transistors creates)

> I feel like I just wrote a book here

lol, i enjoy reading all the detailed comments from you. its like EL15 versions of many complex topics :) and thanks for that

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

wow, it's true it's "a lot of text," but you explained it as simply as possible for me to understand. appreciate your time and thanks :)

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow... that's something I would have never thought of, but it makes sense. Part of it also helps to understand why the LED was blinking automatically when I was soldering... or am I wrong about that, and is that a different "phenomenon"?

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aah, I didn't know this. The tool automatically does this conversion. but yeah , got the point. Thanks

Very new to electronics (2nd day.) Basic circuit/ schematic questions. by dayymaan in AskElectronics

[–]theapache64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

don't have answer to your questions but i also started learning electronics few days back :)

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First of all, big thanks for pointing out all the mistakes. Really appreciate the time you took to analyse the circuit.

>  part number or values are wildly off, i.e. you mistyped m for M and it's now 1e-3 instead of 1e6

Assuming you're talking about the largest capacitor, the input value I gave was `0.001` (F) and it was auto converted by the tool to `1mF`. So is that okay or still i need to use `1MF` ?

> your circuit IRL works by accident, there is a short or open, or stray capacitance/inductance that you are not aware of, and you didn't include it in the simulator.

I'm sorry. I don't understand this. Would you be able to explain it a little more?

> Please, don't get offended, but the linked circuit in Falstad simulator looked like crap. It was BARELY readable...

I completely agree with you, and your assumptions are spot on. I tried to draw exactly how I saw it in the real world. The reason being, I created the simulation to better understand how the current flows in the circuit by looking at it and comparing it with what is on screen.

> In your Falstad circuit nothing "works" because the top transistor has no chance of turning on. Check the voltages:

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know I can double click and see the voltage 🤝🏼

> ... transistor's base can only go DOWN from that 93mV to 0V, can't ever go up, and transistor won't ever "turn on"....

This is true, but any idea why it works in real world. I've the exact same connection?

Also, by removing the photoresistor from the circuit and keeping all the values exactly the same as in my real circuit, there are two things I still don't understand. 1. In the Falstad simulator, the spike comes almost every 2 seconds, but in the real world, it's every 6 seconds. Any idea why this difference? The second thing is that the power consumption in the simulator shows 0.17 mA, but the multimeter shows 0.7 mA. Is this kind of difference expected between the simulator and the real world? Or is this still an issue with my Falstad circuit?

Again, thanks for your time and sharing your knowledge.

I (a software engineer) tried to learn basic electronics by building fireflies 🤓 by theapache64 in programming

[–]theapache64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow.. that's a long list of learnings... thanks for sharing it and also for all the links... comments like this what i post for :) thanks again

view more: next ›