@dhromed said:
@Xyro said:
You fools! Don't you see?? THE MONSTER LIVES INSIDE US ALL!!So... is that HAS-A or IS-A?
Okay, never mind. I don't want to marry you anymore anyway.
>: (
@dhromed said:
@Xyro said:
You fools! Don't you see?? THE MONSTER LIVES INSIDE US ALL!!So... is that HAS-A or IS-A?
Okay, never mind. I don't want to marry you anymore anyway.
>: (
@dhromed said:
@Someone You Know said:
Better a bstrdized son that a bstorerized son.No.
No I will not marry you.
>: (
Please? I'll throw in an Alien Atomizer.
I don't know much about PHP. What happens if $message evaluates to false?
If you wrote something similar in, say, Java, it would not compile because "not all code paths return a value".
@blakeyrat said:
(Yes, that is a list of status messages in the form of a drop-down menu!)
This has been a feature of the Lotus Notes email inbox for a long time, leading me to think that the creator of this "Bucket Explorer" drew his inspiration from that wonder of wonders.
The thought that anyone could look at any part of the Notes interface and think 'hey, that's a good idea' is simply terrifying.
@bstorer said:
But the problem with that line of reasoning is that the String to switch on is not deterministic. What if a hash collision occurs with that string and one of the cases? What if I switch on "variants" and it sends me to the case for "gelato" (an actual hash collision, by the way)? This wouldn't happen often, but can you imagine trying to track down a bug in your application caused by the fact that switching on Strings uses a heuristic?
I've got a bit of a sweet tooth. I'd much rather be taken to the case for "gelato" than "variants". Though that conclusion is based on imperfect information, since I have no idea what variants taste like; I generally don't go out for dessert with VB programmers.
@bstorer (in a different post, so don't get confused) said:
This is such a common problem with Java's evolution. Every change is done after years of begging from the developers, and they always go just far enough to hush the crowd for a while. And, more often than not, they do them the wrong way.
The issue is that the metric they use for making design decisions for the language is to choose the alternative that generates the greatest number of angry blog posts. They haven't yet come up with a reliable method for determining which angry blog posts are written by people who know what they're talking about, so a run of bad luck has produced terrible design decisions. Java 8 will include a whole API for judging the sanity of an angry blog post, but the current proposals all have it extending java.util.Random.
@Xyro said:
I suppose I was using "syntactic sugar" as more of a relative term. Switch statements can be implemented in such a way that they're just more "sugary" if/else statements, or they can be implemented in such a way that they actually provide a performance benefit. Java's primitive-type switch statement does this, but the proposed method for implementing a String switch statement cannot possibly do it as well.@Someone You Know said:
If it doesn't, then this is like Java generics all over again — a feature that everyone wants, but when it's finally implemented, it's done in such a way that it's little more than syntactic sugar.You say that like it's a bad thing. All languages are is syntacitc sugar. It's truly an unfortunate thing that Java's designers likes their coffee black. Ideally, the language should be doing the hard work for me. Why should I have to waste my time typing out chucks of ugly else-if blocks? Why should I have to declare an abstract method abstract when it's obviously abstract because it has no body? Why should I have to explicitly declare the class and method signature of a single-method interface? Come on, language, work with me!
@Xyro said:
I agree with you that core Java objects shouldn't be blessed though, String in particular. Why can't I overload my operators? And another aspect of Project Coin will be blessing their Collections Framework. Nice, but not nice enough.
"Nice, but not nice enough" was essentially the unofficial subtitle for Java 5. This sort of thing is why people like C# better.
@bstorer said:
He's right, though; he just sucks at linking. Switching on String was accepted for Project Coin, which is the small language changes for Java 7.
I stand corrected. But take a look at this (emphasis mine):
@joe darcy said:
Instead, a switch should occur on a predictable and fast
integer (or long) function value computed from the string. The most
natural choice for this function is String.hashCode, but other functions
could also be used either alone or in conjunction with hashCode. (The
specification of String.hashCode is assume to be stable at this point.)
If all the string labels have different lengths, String.length() could
be used instead of hashCode. Generally a String.equals() check will be
needed to verify the candidate string's identity in addition to the
evaluation of the screening function because multiple string inputscould evaluate to the same result.
Since there exist multiple Strings that have different values but the same String.hashCode() value, the hashCode value alone can't be used as a switch constant. This guy proposes using String.equals() as well (presumably only if the hashCode values are equal). Is this really going to provide a significant performance increase over a series of if/else statements? If it doesn't, then this is like Java generics all over again — a feature that everyone wants, but when it's finally implemented, it's done in such a way that it's little more than syntactic sugar.
If you're going to go down that road — using a switch constant that may be the same for value-distinct switch values — why not allow switching on all Objects?
@blakeyrat said:
I don't give a shit about your preference. I'm saying that if the forum has feature X, and I use feature X, you can't chide me for it.
If you don't like the forum replying without quoting, then fix the code so it won't let me do that. If it lets me do that, then I'm going do-- in fact, now I'm going to specifically to piss-off Morbius.
Disregard that, I suck cocks.
[FTFY. -TheShadowMod]
Are you doing anything later?
(Not you, blakeyrat; I was talking to ShadowMod.)
@Jonathan said:
@Someone You Know said:
In Java, you can only switch on primitive types. (Strings are not primitives in Java.)Java's switch statements assign an integer constant to each case value, so that the whole thing can be optimized into a lookup table of instruction pointers. There is no obvious way to do this for a Java Object that will both a) always work the way you want it to and b) be faster than a series of if statements, especially if the runtime type of the object is not known at compile time. Thus, switching on an Object would just be syntactic sugar, which the language designers apparently felt was not worth the effort.
Java 7 will have switching on strings.
That's a proposal to include String switching in Java 7, not a statement that it will actually occur. There have been similar proposals for this feature pretty much every time there's been a new version of the language.
@bstorer said:
@SQLDave said:
Clearly all people in the world should kill themselves. That's the only way we can be sure we don't have a negative impact on the environment. Of course, there will be a short-term impact while life forms which thrive on decaying tissue (flies, scavengers, probably some microorganisms, etc.) suddenly find themselves at a smorgasbord, but eventually things will even out and the earth can go on to lead a nice, peaceful existence free from all human-related stressors. A true ZERO carbon footprint!Sounds good to me. Let's do it right now! Oh, you know what? I forgot something in the other room. No, no, don't bother waiting. You go ahead and start with out me. I'll catch up.
Worked for the Individual Eleven.
@XIU said:
@JohnWestMinor said:The REAL way to do it is this:
switch((int)strType.charAt(0))
{
case 110: return null;break;
case 71:
case 83: return "";break;
case 73: return new Integer(0);break;
case 70: return new Float(0.0f);break;
case 68:
case 84: return new java.util.Date();break;
case 66: return new Boolean(true);break;
case 79: return new Object();break;
default: return null;
}
TRWTF is the use of Float instead of Double, unless they've written their own math libraries, which is probably a NIHWTF in itself. And even then, they still have to deal with that silly 0.0f casting.Is the break really needed? The return will exit the method so it'll never get to the break right?
Correct. However, a lot of Java programmers have been taught to always put a break statement at the end of every case, to avoid potential bugs caused by falling through to the next case unintentionally. You occasionally meet people who think this is actually a requirement of the language.
@Lorne Kates said:
@morbiuswilters said:
I like derula; I'm just pulling his leg. At least he isn't a fag like dhromed.That isnt' derula's leg you're pulling, hypocrite.
Whose leg is it, then?
@Medezark said:
@Someone You Know said:
@dhromed said:
@bstorer said:
Java's lack of a useful switch statement.What do you mean.
Java doesn't have switch() { case "abc": } ?
In Java, you can only switch on primitive types. (Strings are not primitives in Java.)
Java's switch statements assign an integer constant to each case value, so that the whole thing can be optimized into a lookup table of instruction pointers. There is no obvious way to do this for a Java Object that will both a) always work the way you want it to and b) be faster than a series of if statements, especially if the runtime type of the object is not known at compile time. Thus, switching on an Object would just be syntactic sugar, which the language designers apparently felt was not worth the effort.
But there's so much in Java that the designers didn't feel were worth the effort. Making Java and Oracle a match made in heaven.
Yeah, I never said it was a good idea. The distinction in Java between primitive types and object types is a constant source of WTFs.
@dhromed said:
@bstorer said:
Java's lack of a useful switch statement.What do you mean.
Java doesn't have switch() { case "abc": } ?
In Java, you can only switch on primitive types. (Strings are not primitives in Java.)
Java's switch statements assign an integer constant to each case value, so that the whole thing can be optimized into a lookup table of instruction pointers. There is no obvious way to do this for a Java Object that will both a) always work the way you want it to and b) be faster than a series of if statements, especially if the runtime type of the object is not known at compile time. Thus, switching on an Object would just be syntactic sugar, which the language designers apparently felt was not worth the effort.
@bstorer said:
@Someone You Know said:
Marry me.It's going to take a few mininukes to convince dhromed. But not many, because he likes dicks.
Ah, dowries. Just like the good old days, only with more nukes. And dicks.
@morbiuswilters said:
If you're curious, I eventually settled on the decision that people who commit parking violations should be waterboarded, publicly flogged, hung and then drawn and quartered, with their remains stuck stop parking meters as a warning to others.
As a former bus driver, I support this whole-heartedly. Use of mini nukes is optional, but encouraged.
@dhromed said:
@Lingerance said:
@dhromed said:That problem would be most especially solved with a couple mini nukes.Like how the most effective way to be comfortable around women is to have sex with women?That analogy is not valid.
Your women problem and women solution are not of the same form. Having sex with women is a side effect of being comfortable, and being comfortable is a side effect of having sex with them. It is not a chicken & egg problem because:
a) there are numerous ways of entering this side-effect feedback loop from the outside, such as beer, existing friends, or, indeed, mini nukes.
b) there are numerous side effects to both the having sex and the being comfortable.As such, the dichotomy you describe as being exclusively connected (of which chicken/egg problems are a subset) is entirely false.
In the case of mini nukes, we have a classic problem-solution combination, in that the problem is basically the inverse statement of the solution. There is no chicken and egg problem; merely the omittance of a side-effect problem or intermediate problem, namely: how to get more mini nukes. It is a tactical omittance for rhetorical effect, but is it technically true:
Problem: no mini nukes
Solution: get more mini nukesSo lack of mini nukes is kind of like deciding regex is a good solution to your problem, but it is certainly not analogous to the women-effect as you describe it.
You may, however, rephrase it:
Problem: no nookie
Solution: get off your ass and procure yourself some nookie, bitchYou may argue that I am confusing the terms "solution" with "goal", and you would be right because I just like to sound smart, but that nevertheless does not negate the fact that a lack if mini nukes would be perfectly solved with mini nukes.
Marry me.
@dhromed said:
@Someone You Know said:
If age were measured in dicks, I'd feel a lot older every time I visited this forum.Are you saying you become a bigger dick every day?
A bigger dick with bigger gourds, yes.
@bstorer said:
@Someone You Know said:
Older?@dhromed said:
@djork said:
like a present.Don't bother showing up on my birthday, you dick. >:(
He posted this on my birthday. How do you think I feel?
If age were measured in dicks, I'd feel a lot older every time I visited this forum.
@dhromed said:
@djork said:
like a present.Don't bother showing up on my birthday, you dick. >:(
He posted this on my birthday. How do you think I feel?
@bstorer said:
@dhromed said:
Bah, lockpicking is overrated. I rarely, if ever, have wished I had more lockpick skill. And the one to try hacking a terminal a second time? Completely useless because you can just quit the minigame before failing and start over again.@bstorer said:
but there's no need to force it.You could, but then you'd have to take that perk if you fail and wanted to attempt again.
If I recall correctly, it's always possible to win the hacking minigame, regardless of your skill level, because there's always a perfect strategy for completing it, and there's no time pressure. I can't remember if the same is true for the lockpicking minigame, but I think this is why there are computers that require a minimum level of Science skill to even attempt.
@Zecc said:
@derula said:
@bstorer said:Filed under: Only fags think Beckham is not a fag.So, what does Beckham think?
1) fag is not a fag, but fag fags fag is.
or
2) fag is a fag who doesn't fag fag is a fag.
2.1) In particular, fag is unable to fag.
or3) fag is one of the fags that fag fag is not a fag.
If mixed fags were illegal, I'd be having a fag.
typeof
FaG == 'fag'
FTFY.
@Helix said:
@Someone You Know said:
@Helix said:
@bstorer said:
@toth said:
@Airhead said:Not amused on two non-consecutive occasions:Time used to gather data about visits was just groving and groving so I had to find out what was the problem.People keep telling me I need to groov up, but I like being immature.
who is this old gaffer looks like a dong end?
The most famous mayor of Buffalo, New York.
what did the miserable old buffalo cunt say when her child died ?
"Bison."
Unfortunately, this joke might be lost on actual Buffalo residents, most of whom insist on pronouncing "bison" as "bye-zuhn".
@Helix said:
@bstorer said:
@toth said:
@Airhead said:Not amused on two non-consecutive occasions:Time used to gather data about visits was just groving and groving so I had to find out what was the problem.People keep telling me I need to groov up, but I like being immature.
who is this old gaffer looks like a dong end?
The most famous mayor of Buffalo, New York.
@morbiuswilters said:
And Alan Turing invented the computer, but I'm not going to ask him to recompile my kernel for me.
I think you'd be the one recompiling his kernel.
@dhromed said:
@Someone You Know said:
And if you're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order.That's a little pedantic, don't you think?
Oh, well, instead of sharing a cute little obscure Firefly reference, we better spend the next 50 posts debating the which pedantic weeds apply to which dick types.
@Charleh said:
Round these parts you usually get knifed for that sort of thing (or possibly raped, knifed then run over)
And if you're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order.
@blakeyrat said:
@Jaime said:
@blakeyrat said:
The only parts of T-SQL I actually use, however, are the parts in the SQL99 standardYou know that GETDATE isn't in SQL99, right?
Of course there's got to be the pedantic
persondickweed. It wouldn't be a tech forum without pedants!
FTFY.
@dhromed said:
@Someone You Know said:
@stratos said:
I don't know what's funnier, that everybody knows the reference when talking about clubbering children to death, or that nobody has posted that in this context the correct perk is obviously little leaguer.
Not for the Deathclaw Gauntlet.
I wonder if children are truly invulnerable, or whether they just have a ridiculous DR, like 99,999,999 or something. In that case, the Gauntlet should kill em off easily, as it ignores armor.
You still can't break a window with it, though.
I believe they're actually invulnerable. I haven't decided whether that's better or worse than having no children in the game at all, which is how they addressed the same issue in Oblivion.
It wouldn't necessarily have to be a high DR, though; they could just give them a ridiculously high number of HP, so the Gauntlet wouldn't help. They did something similar with the simulation equipment in Anchorage, which had CND values in the neighborhood of a million, giving the appearance of non-degrading equipment.
@stratos said:
I don't know what's funnier, that everybody knows the reference when talking about clubbering children to death, or that nobody has posted that in this context the correct perk is obviously little leaguer.
Not for the Deathclaw Gauntlet.
The file="time.inc" part makes it look like JSP syntax, but not quite. The JSP include directive would look like this:
<%@ include file="time.inc
" %>
Note the @ at the beginning.
@blakeyrat said:
@Someone You Know said:
@blakeyrat said:
Depends on whether you have the Little Leaguer perk or not.
Not for the Deathclaw Gauntlet.
Oh, well, instead of sharing a cute little joke, we better spend the next 50 posts debating the which perks apply to which weapon types. Otherwise, people might just chuckle and move on without being pedantic dickweeds!
Ironically, you are in fact "Someone I Know" as I know a ton of people who ruin jokes by being pedantic dickweeds. I don't like those people, but I know them.
Good lord.
@blakeyrat said:
Depends on whether you have the Little Leaguer perk or not.
Not for the Deathclaw Gauntlet.
@DaveK said:
@dhromed said:
That's a kind of philosophical question. Can a null document really be said to be a null PDF, rather than a null JPG or a null file of any other type? Are you suggesting that we can distinguish this null file from others, in that, despite them all being null, this one specifically does not have a PDF header as opposed to some other null file which might, for example, not have a JPG header?Interesting.
So a truly barebones, empty PDF document may be produced by opening Notepad, not typing anything, and saving it as *.pdf?
If a null pdf gets its extension renamed in a forest, and no format-specific parser opens it, does the type of its contents change?
There's no reason a file can't be of more than one format. I'd be willing to bet that damn near any file you can find is a valid plain text file, for some character encoding.
@blakeyrat said:
@DaveK said:
@blakeyrat said:
Even better, let's treat important people the way we treat BRAAAAAAIIIINNNSSSSOr why don't we treat brains the way we treat important people
EncloseEnshell them tightly in a tight bone shell made of bone, and amply supply them with ample blood supplies of blood?
FTFY.
@Shondoit said:
@Jaime said:
@derula said:
@Jaime said:I work at an insanely huge companyLike... more than five people?Yes. Close to a six digit head count. We have thousands in IT alone.
So 100,000 heads, which, at 8% of your body weight, would correspond to 8000 people?
Why would you hire heads anyway?
To get ahead in the industry?
/runs
@bstorer said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Meanwhile, it has given me the fabulous idea of releasing my dick under the GPL.No good. This would mean tattooing the GPL onto your dick, and you'd run out of room two words into the preamble.
On the other hand, the first two words of the preamble are "The GNU", which is not the weirdest thing anyone's ever named his wang.
@morbiuswilters said:
Also, they tried to paint him as sympathetic, instead of a creepy-ass psycho. Seriously, that chick who fell in love with him must have been seriously fucked up.
Are we talking about Lars and The Real Girl or the Star Wars prequels?
@davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
@morbiuswilters said:@Cad Delworth said:
Good grief! Even M$ XML Notepad doesn't make stuff-ups like that!Convicted monopolist.
Park LanePark Place andMayfairBoardwalk? With non-foreign hotels?
FTFY.
@Cad Delworth said:
@bstorer said:@Cad Delworth said:
[FX: sniff, sniff]@Cad Delworth said:[FX: nods]I am punching you in the face with my mind.Nice try, but I'm afraid I'm a level 9 PsiCop.
'Have a nice day!' (as I believe they say in your country?)
Don't you have to be a P12 to be a Psi Cop?
@bstorer said:
@OzPeter said:
I think you are empathizing by experiencing male menopauseYou can't spell "menopause" without "men." You also can't spell it without "pause" or "amuse peon" or "emo ape sun." I don't really have a point here.
U pee on Sam?