Comment On ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

Seeing that I somehow neglected to publish an article yesterday, I figured today would be a great day for a big ole smorgasbord of interesting code. Enjoy! [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6Next »

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:08 • by Skawt (unregistered)
323514 in reply to 323419
cynical cynic:
At last, the explanation to all the Bert Glanstrom comments!
public static boolean isFunnyOrInsightful(comment c)

{
return !isFunny(c) && !isInsightful(c);
}

Shouldn't the function be named isFunnyAndInsightful?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:10 • by shimon
323515 in reply to 323510
[quote author="Bob"]
Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.[/quote]
Ya see, Hebrew does not meet Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:11 • by Ramesses II (unregistered)
323516 in reply to 323511
Hitler:
Bob:
דותן כהן:
Larry:
the article:


if (_tblItem.getTable().getModel() != null
&& _tblItem.getTable() != null
&& _tblItem != null)


TRWTF is languages that read left-to-right.


סליחה?‏

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Really? Because it was hilarious in the 20th century!


Oh, that old joke?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:16 • by shimon
323517 in reply to 323453
Anonymous:

Hey there Ancient Mathematician, you might be just the person I need to help me with an ancient Roman math problem. The following sum is written in Roman numerals. Can you solve it and provide your answer also in Roman numerals?

(IV + I) - V = ?


(IV + I) - V = N, FTW.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:17 • by shimon
323518 in reply to 323515
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:20 • by Herby (unregistered)
When one considers

if (1 == 0) printf ("fail")

one must consider that in ancient times (the 60's come to mind), it WAS possible to change the values of constants in Fortran. Unusual? Yes! but it could be done. In Fortran ALL arguments to subroutines are passed by REFERENCE, including constants. So, when you passed a constant, the subroutine COULD change it. Not very advisable, but it could be done.

Some compilers could tell the difference between passed "read only" arguments, and others, but these were not common (I knew of one).

In additon, a good test of a Fortran compiler was to have the following statement:

IF (1 .EQ. 0) END

Many compilers had a fit on this statement!

So, yes, alternate universes DO exist, Strange but true!

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:21 • by Bob (unregistered)
323520 in reply to 323518
shimon:
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Really? WTF else speaks Hebrew? God?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:25 • by hatterson
323521 in reply to 323417
One:
Do we get to have a discussion about whether or not 1 is a prime number?


I would rather a discussion about whether .999... == 1

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:26 • by Matt (unregistered)
323522 in reply to 323453
Anonymous:

(IV + I) - V = ?


(IV + I) - V = LIMA_NON_REPERIO

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:40 • by Maurits
323523 in reply to 323505
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Uh...:
public static int RANDOM_PRIME_NUMBER = 215

Ok, I see how this might be random when he entered it, but I do not see how it is prime.

Of course it's prime. Just not in base 10, or anything else you might reasonably expect. (Try 6, or 36).


hex comes close... very close...

Here are the bases below 250 in which 215 is prime.

83 = 215 base 6
1181 = 215 base 24
1601 = 215 base 28
2351 = 215 base 34
2633 = 215 base 36
4283 = 215 base 46
6791 = 215 base 58
8783 = 215 base 66
11633 = 215 base 76
12251 = 215 base 78
15581 = 215 base 88
26111 = 215 base 114
30881 = 215 base 124
31883 = 215 base 126
38231 = 215 base 138
41621 = 215 base 144
43961 = 215 base 148
47591 = 215 base 154
67901 = 215 base 184
69383 = 215 base 186
91811 = 215 base 214
109751 = 215 base 234
119321 = 215 base 244
121283 = 215 base 246

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:52 • by Abdiel
/* This program will only run if the laws of mathematics hold */

if(is_prime(1))
{
fprintf("Oh crap - we are not running in the correct Universe\n");
exit(215);
}

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:52 • by bl@h (unregistered)
323525 in reply to 323429
<script type="text/javascript">document.write('
Anonymous:
I like the way there appears to be a dedicated error code for "not running in the correct Universe". I'd have gone for -42 instead of 17 but well done anyway. Wait, can you pass negative exit codes? I suppose it doesn't matter, if that error code ever gets returned we have to assume that the apocalypse is upon us.
+1 for the win')</script>

<noscript>
Anonymous:
I like the way there appears to be a dedicated error code for "not running in the correct Universe". I'd have gone for -42 instead of 17 but well done anyway. Wait, can you pass negative exit codes? I suppose it doesn't matter, if that error code ever gets returned we have to assume that the apocalypse is upon us.
+1 for the win</noscript>

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:54 • by Hex (unregistered)
/* This program will only run if the laws of mathematics hold */
if(1 == 0)
{
fprintf("Oh crap - we are not running in the correct Universe\n");
exit(17);
}



+++ Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 12:57 • by DaveK (unregistered)
323527 in reply to 323453
Anonymous:
Ancient Mathematician:
WthyrBendragon:
One:
Do we get to have a discussion about whether or not 1 is a prime number?


Well, it is only integer factorable to 1 and itself so, yes, 1 is prime.

However, random it is not.

Well, if you were old enough, you'd know that 1 is not even a number, so it can't be a prime.
And if you're young enough, you should know that 1 is a unit, so it can't be a prime.
Only if you're stuck some time between -200 and 1900 is 1 a prime.

Hey there Ancient Mathematician, you might be just the person I need to help me with an ancient Roman math problem. The following sum is written in Roman numerals. Can you solve it and provide your answer also in Roman numerals?

(IV + I) - V = ?

Captcha: nulla.

(Holy cow, I got lucky there!)

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:01 • by Anonymous (unregistered)
323528 in reply to 323521
hatterson:
One:
Do we get to have a discussion about whether or not 1 is a prime number?


I would rather a discussion about whether .999... == 1

Well, technically there is nothing to discuss because they most certainly are equal and it is a simple proof to confirm this beyond doubt. But damn, what a mindfuck eh? I remember when I first had to tackle this concept back in maths class, many years ago. Took a long time to get my head around. But once it clicked it was like a lightbulb going off in my head, I literally blurted out "fuck me!" in the middle of my maths class, directly to the lecturer. He was a bit of an old bastard and I thought he was going to go ballistic, but he just looked at me with a knowing smile and gently nodded. I had joined the club.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:07 • by undefined (unregistered)
323529 in reply to 323519
Herby:
one must consider that in ancient times (the 60's come to mind), it WAS possible to change the values of constants in Fortran.


JavaScript was funnier, it was possible to do false=true in it.
It does not work in modern browsers because ECMAScript 4 or 5 changed this.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:08 • by swedish tard (unregistered)
323530 in reply to 323529
undefined:
Herby:
one must consider that in ancient times (the 60's come to mind), it WAS possible to change the values of constants in Fortran.


JavaScript was funnier, it was possible to do false=true in it.
It does not work in modern browsers because ECMAScript 4 or 5 changed this.


#undef false
#define false true

if(true == true) asplode;

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:09 • by swedish tard (unregistered)
323531 in reply to 323530
swedish tard:
undefined:
Herby:
one must consider that in ancient times (the 60's come to mind), it WAS possible to change the values of constants in Fortran.


JavaScript was funnier, it was possible to do false=true in it.
It does not work in modern browsers because ECMAScript 4 or 5 changed this.


#undef false
#define false true

if(true == true) asplode;


Well. Doh.

if(true == false) obviously...

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:11 • by DaveK
323532 in reply to 323520
Bob:
shimon:
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Really? WTF else speaks Hebrew? God?
Jewish atheists, duh.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:14 • by An Non (unregistered)
323533 in reply to 323494
Just to point out - The proxy is there to allow visibility of the MBean in different classloaders (not simply 'JVM' as I brainfart-edly said in my first post) and even nodes in a clustered environment, i.e. the very reason you expose something as an MBean.
The underlying problem though is that if the functionality should be accessible by local components the MBean interface should not be the interface being used to access it (Rather the MBean should be exposing some local delegates behaviour).
So its not a WTF in the framework - rather, as is to oft the case, how the framework is being (mis)used.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:28 • by Jay (unregistered)
323534 in reply to 323457
Steve The Cynic:
Ah, but you forget that the things we call Roman numerals were for writing down numbers, not for performing arithmetic. One of the principal advantages of the modern versions of Arabic numerals (the 0..9 system that we use today) is that they use the same notation for writing down numbers and for doing arithmetic.


What a curious statement. Addition and subtraction are surely easier with Roman numerals than with Arabic. For addition, just stuff the two numbers together. I + I = II. XXI + XV = XXIXV, clean it up to XXXVI. Etc. Of course you have to learn when to "carry", for example IIII + I = V. (You do know, don't you, that the romans wrote 4 as IIII? The IV convention came much later.) But that's surely easy. You just stuff the two numbers together, then look for groups of 5 I's and replace them with a V, two V's with an X, etc. So XXXXVII + III = XXXXVIIIII, first clean up gives XXXXVV, second clean up XXXXX, third clean up L. I'm sure Roman school children learned to do this at one glance, just like we can add 987+13 and say 1000 without having to do the carries one at a time.

For subtraction, just remove things in the first number that are found in the second number. Like III - I, take one of the I's away, leaving II. Again, you have to learn to "borrow", i.e. turn a V into IIIII, etc. So VI - II = IIIII I - II = IIII.

Multiplication is only slightly harder. Just multiply digit by digit, like we do in Arabic, and then clean up. XV * II = XXVV = XXX. You quickly learn that X*V=L, etc, just like people with Arabic numbers learn their times tables. So XVI * V = X*V + V*V + I*V = L XXV V = LXXX. Note that Romans only had 7 "digits" -- I, V, X, L, C, D, M -- do their times table was 7 x 7 versus our 9 x 9, 49 versus 81, significantly less to learn.

I suspect that for someone just learning arithmetic, Roman numerals were easier than Arabic.

Division ... that starts to get hard. Writing very large number ... that's hard too. I'm not suggesting we go back to Roman numerals. Just pointing out that they had their advantages.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:29 • by MG (unregistered)
323535 in reply to 323514
Skawt:
cynical cynic:
At last, the explanation to all the Bert Glanstrom comments!
public static boolean isFunnyOrInsightful(comment c)

{
return !isFunny(c) && !isInsightful(c);
}

Shouldn't the function be named isFunnyAndInsightful?


Nope. Apply De Morgan's laws. (!p) && (!q) = !(p || q). Of course, isFunnyOrInsightful is not accurate either.

I am probably missing some joke.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:34 • by Jay (unregistered)
323536 in reply to 323532
DaveK:
Bob:
shimon:
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Really? WTF else speaks Hebrew? God?
Jewish atheists, duh.



And most first-century Christians.

Though technically you should probably say "Hebrew-speaking atheists". "Jewish atheists" would be something of a paradox, like "Buddhist Moslems". Not that people don't say it all the time.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:34 • by Anonymouse (unregistered)
The real WTF is this site's source around the "log code" hyper-hyper link.
That, and that a function to return this is very different from simply this, in the case of function pointers one is a WTF.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:38 • by smxlong
323538 in reply to 323521
hatterson:
One:
Do we get to have a discussion about whether or not 1 is a prime number?


I would rather a discussion about whether .999... == 1


They are equal.

If 0.999... != 1, then by the density of the real numbers, there must be some number X where 0.999... < X < 1. Suppose such a number exists. Please show me how to write this number.

(The above is not a proof, but hopefully it's convincing enough)

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:41 • by Captain Obvious (unregistered)
Come on, people, everyone knows the Roman numeral for 0 is _ !

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:54 • by 1st Century Christian (unregistered)
323540 in reply to 323536
Jay:
DaveK:
Bob:
shimon:
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Really? WTF else speaks Hebrew? God?
Jewish atheists, duh.



And most first-century Christians.

Though technically you should probably say "Hebrew-speaking atheists". "Jewish atheists" would be something of a paradox, like "Buddhist Moslems". Not that people don't say it all the time.


Hey, guys. I just climbed into my time machine to post this here, since you needed a non-Jew that speaks Hebrew. Just FYI we Christians are Jews too.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:59 • by Gunslinger (unregistered)
323541 in reply to 323445
briggs davis:
The Nerve:
Fixed?

//public interface ISelfAware {
//
// /**
// * Useful in an MBean so that it can return a live reference to itself as a
// * method call
// *
// * @return reference to this object
// */
// public ISelfAware getSelf();
//}

//if(completed == 1)
// if(startdate[1] != 2)
month = startdate[2];
// else
// month = startdate[2];
//else
// month = startdate[2];

if (&& _tblItem != null != null
&& _tblItem.getTable() != null
_tblItem.getTable().getModel())

/* This program will only run if the laws of mathematics hold
if(1 == 0)
{
fprintf("Oh crap - we are not running in the correct Universe\n");
exit(17);
}*/

public static int FIXED_NONPRIME_NUMBER = 215;

/*3 times because if we have filter on some column -
clean only that data, and after that cleans everything
else (2.), and the 3. is for lucky :)
worksheet.Cells.ClearContents();
worksheet.Cells.ClearContents(); */
worksheet.Cells.ClearContents();

Map<TransactionId, List<BillingTransaction>> workMap
= new HashMap<TransactionsId, List<BillingTransaction>>();

// Do not remove the following line. HashMaps are crazy and point
// to old reference data even if they were instantiated fresh!
//workMap.clear();

public static boolean isNotAlphaNumeric(char c)
{
return !isLetter(c) && !isDigit(c);
}

<!-- <script type="text/javascript">document.write('</div>')</script>
<noscript></div></noscript> -->

ironically, your comment contains many comments.


/* No comment */

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 13:59 • by Lego (unregistered)
323542 in reply to 323496
boog:
Anonymous:
Hey there Ancient Mathematician, you might be just the person I need to help me with an ancient Roman math problem. The following sum is written in Roman numerals. Can you solve it and provide your answer also in Roman numerals?

(IV + I) - V = ?

Important stuff to know. Consider the following real-world application:

Rocky V + Rocky II = ?


= ZZZZzzzzzz...

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:03 • by frits
323543 in reply to 323535
MG:
Skawt:
cynical cynic:
At last, the explanation to all the Bert Glanstrom comments!
public static boolean isFunnyOrInsightful(comment c)

{
return !isFunny(c) && !isInsightful(c);
}

Shouldn't the function be named isFunnyAndInsightful?


Nope. Apply De Morgan's laws. (!p) && (!q) = !(p || q). Of course, isFunnyOrInsightful is not accurate either.

I am probably missing some joke.


Of course you are. Also, the name is completely accurate in describing the Bert Glanstron thought process:

- I want to post something that is either funny or insightful.

- OK, what should I write? I know, "Dear whomever, In case..."

- Let me check this using my internal isFunnyOrInsightful function.

- Yep, it passes. Therefore, it must be funny or insightful. (Did I write unit tests for that function?)

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:04 • by Siskel and Ebert (unregistered)
323544 in reply to 323496
boog:
Anonymous:
Hey there Ancient Mathematician, you might be just the person I need to help me with an ancient Roman math problem. The following sum is written in Roman numerals. Can you solve it and provide your answer also in Roman numerals?

(IV + I) - V = ?

Important stuff to know. Consider the following real-world application:

Rocky V + Rocky II = ?

Is that the one where an aging Tommy Gunn fights a re-animated Apollo Creed?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:09 • by Silfax
323545 in reply to 323514
Skawt:
cynical cynic:
At last, the explanation to all the Bert Glanstrom comments!
public static boolean isFunnyOrInsightful(comment c)

{
return !isFunny(c) && !isInsightful(c);
}

Shouldn't the function be named isFunnyAndInsightful?


Refactored via DeMorgan

public static boolean isNotFunnyOrInsightful(comment c)

{
return !(isFunny(c) | isInsightful(c));
}

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:18 • by hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh (unregistered)
323546 in reply to 323490
Anonymous:
Severity One:
Unless 1 == 0, that's Java.

So I appreciate that Java supports generics now, as per my previous comment, but I have to take exception at the above statement which is patently false. The code provided is valid C# syntax, assuming one had written a custom class called HashMap<T,T>. So your assertion is false because 1 != 0 but it is still possible for that code to be C#.

</pendantry>


to be a bit more pedantified, and note i have not read further than this comment nor gone back to the original code, they would also have had to implement an abstract class/interface called Map. So it's either Java, or someone who loves Java forced to write C# at gunpoint. Or something.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:18 • by yetihehe (unregistered)
323547 in reply to 323488
sep332:
/* This program will only run if the laws of mathematics hold */
if(1 == 0)
{
fprintf("Oh crap - we are not running in the correct Universe\n");
exit(17);
}

weird, I'm listening to a Pronobozo album right now called Zero=One=Everything !

*(0) = 1; //Invalid write exception ;)

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:19 • by Indrora
FWIW, the android SDK,
wtf(...)


This error handler is NOT a wtf - its designed to be an application-level version of a Kernel Ooops. This includes :

things like (for instance) file pointers to real files going poof
fclose()
failing,
2.5 + 2.9 < 5
returning true (I recall on some box without floating point helpers, this happened!)

and most importantly, system functions throwing uncaught exceptions.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:24 • by ShatteredArm (unregistered)
323549 in reply to 323538
smxlong:
hatterson:
One:
Do we get to have a discussion about whether or not 1 is a prime number?


I would rather a discussion about whether .999... == 1


They are equal.

If 0.999... != 1, then by the density of the real numbers, there must be some number X where 0.999... < X < 1. Suppose such a number exists. Please show me how to write this number.

(The above is not a proof, but hopefully it's convincing enough)


Why does there have to be a number between the two?

Maybe there is a proof, but this is how I look at it:

What is the largest number that is less than 1? I think you'd have to conclude that it is 0.999... wouldn't you?

And if a < b, then a != b.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:26 • by vo (unregistered)

if(completed == 1)
if(stardate[1] != 2)
month = stardate[2];
else
month = stardate[2];
else
month = stardate[2];


You laugh, but the above code works when applied to wormholes.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:32 • by Mythran
Correct path is

developer DOT android DOT com slash reference slash android slash util slash Log DOT html

Not letting me enter any type of address...

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:35 • by Mythran
323552 in reply to 323416
- DELETED -

Can't use the delete button. Keeps kicking me to the home page.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:36 • by Mythran
323553 in reply to 323416
Mad Adder:
"This is in our production code," notes Joseph Daigle, "I can only hope they rolled a die to ensure this was actually random."
public static int RANDOM_PRIME_NUMBER = 215;


Hrmm... not random, not a prime number. Looks like we got a winner here.


Not really....I mean...it's still a number...so only 2 out of 3...

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:41 • by nonymus (unregistered)
323554 in reply to 323553
Mythran:
Mad Adder:
"This is in our production code," notes Joseph Daigle, "I can only hope they rolled a die to ensure this was actually random."
public static int RANDOM_PRIME_NUMBER = 215;


Hrmm... not random, not a prime number. Looks like we got a winner here.


Not really....I mean...it's still a number...so only 2 out of 3...

public static int RANDOM_PRIME_NUMBER = 's' + 'd';

then?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:42 • by schlabotnik (unregistered)
323555 in reply to 323430
yes, 43, but most of us quit at the first factor

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:43 • by schlabotnik (unregistered)
323556 in reply to 323431
yeah, some of this is pretty sad, it shouldn't even compile

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:44 • by Markp
323557 in reply to 323540
1st Century Christian:
Jay:
DaveK:
Bob:
shimon:
shimon:
Bob:

Welcome to the 21st century. News Flash: Judaism is no longer funny.

Ya see, Hebrew does not equal Judaism, you antisemitic schmuck.

Just a fix.

Really? WTF else speaks Hebrew? God?
Jewish atheists, duh.



And most first-century Christians.

Though technically you should probably say "Hebrew-speaking atheists". "Jewish atheists" would be something of a paradox, like "Buddhist Moslems". Not that people don't say it all the time.


Hey, guys. I just climbed into my time machine to post this here, since you needed a non-Jew that speaks Hebrew. Just FYI we Christians are Jews too.


A lot were, but the majority didn't speak Hebrew. They predominantly spoke Aramaic and Greek. Even among the Jews of that period, only those religiously educated knew Hebrew. Kind of like Catholics and Latin.

Are we going in circles?

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:44 • by Mark (unregistered)
323558 in reply to 323549
ShatteredArm:
Why does there have to be a number between the two?


No two distinct real numbers are adjacent; there's always another number in between.

Maybe there is a proof, but this is how I look at it:

What is the largest number that is less than 1?


This argument is really just begging the question. Yes, if 0.999... were "the largest number less than 1", then it would not be equal to 1; but you're assuming it's not equal to 1 when you call it "the largest number less than 1"; reaching your answer by way of assuming your answer is TRWTF.

In fact, there is no such thing as "the largest number less than 1" (at least not if we're working in the real numbers). "The largest number less than 1" is a series of words wtih no meaning. It's like asking how deep a hole has to be before you cannot walk around it.

If you assume there has to be an answer to the question "what is the largest number less than 1", then tell me this: what is the largest number less than 0.999...? Surely that's just as valid a question.

In base 10, 0.999... and 1 are just two different notations for the same number, just as the fraction (2/2) is another notation for the same thing.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:47 • by Tough Eddie (unregistered)

<script type="text/javascript">document.write('</div>')</script>
<noscript></div></noscript>

Too bad JavaScript is interpreted: if it were a compiled language, it would have filtered this out.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:48 • by Shinji (unregistered)
Here is a wtf related to the last one. I just made it up but I'm sure someone has done it. Those dang email protection scripts.

<SCRIPT TYPE="text/javascript">
document.write('someone@' + 'email.com')
</SCRIPT>
<noscript>someone@email.com</noscript>

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:49 • by ÃÆâ€â„ (unregistered)
Yesterday's failure to post an article is a What a Terrible Failure.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:52 • by schlabotnik (unregistered)
323563 in reply to 323523
Maurits:
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Uh...:
public static int RANDOM_PRIME_NUMBER = 215

Ok, I see how this might be random when he entered it, but I do not see how it is prime.

Of course it's prime. Just not in base 10, or anything else you might reasonably expect. (Try 6, or 36).


hex comes close... very close...

Here are the bases below 250 in which 215 is prime.

83 = 215 base 6
1181 = 215 base 24
1601 = 215 base 28
2351 = 215 base 34
2633 = 215 base 36
4283 = 215 base 46
6791 = 215 base 58
8783 = 215 base 66
11633 = 215 base 76
12251 = 215 base 78
15581 = 215 base 88
26111 = 215 base 114
30881 = 215 base 124
31883 = 215 base 126
38231 = 215 base 138
41621 = 215 base 144
43961 = 215 base 148
47591 = 215 base 154
67901 = 215 base 184
69383 = 215 base 186
91811 = 215 base 214
109751 = 215 base 234
119321 = 215 base 244
121283 = 215 base 246


I like nothing more than going to places where EVERYONE is smarter than me :)

Thanks.

Re: ISelfAware, Very Thorough, Crazy Hashmaps, and More

2010-09-29 14:53 • by jc (unregistered)
323564 in reply to 323453
(IV + I) - V = nulla

Roman for nothing. True fact, check it out.

But it gets crazier than that in roman numerals, they didn't really have any numbers represented greater than 1,000, which was used interchangeably for infinity.
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6Next »

Add Comment