• djingis1 (unregistered)

    I'll be the frist to note that PL/SQL cannot possibly be worse than MUMPS/

  • where are the good programmers (unregistered)

    i think a solution in "Brainfuck" is missing.

    this would be the right problem for this solution.

  • Herby (unregistered)

    l of this proves the axiom that bad code can be written in any language (as demonstrated here), and some languages are well known for their ability of making this process easier than others.

    Of course, there are programmers that also fit into this category. Those that write always write bad code, and those that recognize that at least some of their code will be bad (we all aren't perfect). Hopefully with that knowledge we as programmers will recognize this and upon recognizing bad code strive to re-write it in a "non-bad" way.

    We can only hope (SIGH).

  • Dirk Dongler (unregistered) in reply to Herby

    "Oh god! Oh god! Oh god!" <--- Your dad while I'm plowing his tight butthole. ๐Ÿ˜Ž๐Ÿ˜‰๐Ÿ˜Ž

  • Abner Qian (unregistered)

    A slight correction/clarification on my own submission:

    Ruby does use 64 bits for its regular integers (Fixnums). When I said 62 bits, I forgot that negative integers existed so really it uses 63 bits for its integers. I'm honestly not 100% sure on how the internals of Ruby works but I believe the final bit is used to mark if it is just an integer (a Fixnum) or if it's actually an object reference (to a Bignum). When you go beyond the limit of a Fixnum it gets converted to a Bignum automatically so if you REALLY REALLY wanted to, you go even beyond 4611686018427387903 by 4611686018427387904 arrays.

  • Sole Purpose of VIsit (unregistered) in reply to Abner Qian

    I'd really, really, like to see the comment for an identity matrix of dimension 4611686018427387904.

  • terijdo (unregistered)
    Comment held for moderation.

Leave a comment on “Your Private Foursome”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article