 Feature Articles
 CodeSOD
 Error'd
 Forums

Other Articles
 Random Article
 Other Series
 Alex's Soapbox
 Announcements
 Best of…
 Best of Email
 Best of the Sidebar
 Bring Your Own Code
 Coded Smorgasbord
 Mandatory Fun Day
 Off Topic
 Representative Line
 News Roundup
 Editor's Soapbox
 Software on the Rocks
 Souvenir Potpourri
 Sponsor Post
 Tales from the Interview
 The Daily WTF: Live
 Virtudyne
Admin
Admin
[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.
Admin
Oh, that old joke?
Admin
(IV + I)  V = N, FTW.
Admin
Admin
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!
Admin
Admin
I would rather a discussion about whether .999... == 1
Admin
(IV + I)  V = LIMA_NON_REPERIO
Admin
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
Admin
Admin
<noscript>
+1 for the win</noscript>Admin
+++ Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
Admin
(Holy cow, I got lucky there!)
Admin
Admin
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.
Admin
#undef false #define false true
if(true == true) asplode;
Admin
Well. Doh.
if(true == false) obviously...
Admin
Admin
Just to point out  The proxy is there to allow visibility of the MBean in different classloaders (not simply 'JVM' as I brainfartedly 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.
Admin
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 XV=L, etc, just like people with Arabic numbers learn their times tables. So XVI * V = XV + VV + IV = 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.
Admin
Nope. Apply De Morgan's laws. (!p) && (!q) = !(p  q). Of course, isFunnyOrInsightful is not accurate either.
I am probably missing some joke.
Admin
And most firstcentury Christians.
Though technically you should probably say "Hebrewspeaking atheists". "Jewish atheists" would be something of a paradox, like "Buddhist Moslems". Not that people don't say it all the time.
Admin
The real WTF is this site's source around the "log code" hyperhyper 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.
Admin
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)
Admin
Come on, people, everyone knows the Roman numeral for 0 is _ !
Admin
Admin
= ZZZZzzzzzz...
Admin
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?)
Admin
Admin
Refactored via DeMorgan
Admin
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.
Admin
Admin
FWIW, the android SDK,
This error handler is NOT a wtf  its designed to be an applicationlevel version of a Kernel Ooops. This includes :
things like (for instance) file pointers to real files going poof
failing, returning true (I recall on some box without floating point helpers, this happened!)and most importantly, system functions throwing uncaught exceptions.
Admin
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.
Admin
You laugh, but the above code works when applied to wormholes.
Admin
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...
Admin
Can't use the delete button. Keeps kicking me to the home page.
Admin
Not really....I mean...it's still a number...so only 2 out of 3...
Admin
then?
Admin
yes, 43, but most of us quit at the first factor
Admin
yeah, some of this is pretty sad, it shouldn't even compile
Admin
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?
Admin
No two distinct real numbers are adjacent; there's always another number in between.
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.
Admin
Admin
Yesterday's failure to post an article is a What a Terrible Failure.
Admin
I like nothing more than going to places where EVERYONE is smarter than me :)
Thanks.
Admin
(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.