|
That's the one you're more familiar with, regardless of what it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I know that. I also know someone who prefers coding in assembly what other people would code using C or even C++ . I dare say C is more convenient than assembly most of the time.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
I've often found that, in the UK, when it's hot in summer it's "in the eighties" (Fahrenheit) and when cold in winter it's "below zero" (Celsius).
|
|
|
|
|
I think the Met Office has pretty much abandoned Fahrenheit now. Perhaps they still use it to help poor old sods like me understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, exactly. And if we ever move to a global one the entire world uses... that's not inherently a bad thing. My poke was at the peeps that need to insult anything different. It's Friday. Had to do something.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I'm going to abandon the metric system, because, you know, on the Moon a liter of water...
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
My point is... making one system human-based is not "dumber" than making one system water based. I never said Celius sucked. But the people that insult Fahrenheit with some superiority complex do.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
There's no reason to insult Fahrenheit.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
First, he died in 1736, so you would be much too late.
|
|
|
|
|
As matter of fact I'm still blaming Pope Paul V.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: But the people that insult Fahrenheit with some superiority complex do.
Jeremy Falcon So ignore those people, and accept Celsius as the norm!
|
|
|
|
|
Leave me alone! I do not care for your replies, thoughts, or anything about you. Have enough self-respect to know this.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 16-Dec-23 9:25am.
|
|
|
|
|
UDHR Article 19. Or if you ignore the world outside your own country (as one may be tempted to suspect): First amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
IF YOU DO NOT STOP THE HARRASING, I'LL REPORT YOU. CP DOESN'T LET ME BLOCK YOU, BUT I CAN REPORT YOU.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Please do. Maybe they will consider your posts more harassing than mine.
My references to UDHR-19 must be considered appropriate, given your explicit attempts to censor me.
|
|
|
|
|
No disputes with respect to -40 degrees, because:
-40 degrees F = -40 degrees C
|
|
|
|
|
Oh? What does -40 Kelvin mean?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe not very relevant to -40 F being equal to -40 C, which would be approx. 233.14 K.
I wouldn't be surprised if negative Kelvin is used in some physics models. You can come across e.g. negative speeds (which are not positive speeds in the opposite direction), negative distances, negative whatever. Actually, I'd be surprised if negative Kelvin values never appear in the math of physics (although I can't recall any case were I have heard about it).
|
|
|
|
|
I created a Temperature class that caters to any preference. Also a Distance class. Otherwise, I use the approriate Calculator setting. Or perhaps access the internet.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
That's actually pretty cool man.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
i learned a bit of programming the other day whilst viewing a YouTube video w/ the intriguing title "Never write another loop again" . in particular re/ recursion "trailing call optimization" sometimes performed by compilers but i do not see why it can not be done by hand . namely
instead of :
void recurse(int count)
{
if (count == 0) return;
recurse(count-1);
}
this :
void recurse(int count)
{
start:
if (count == 0) return;
count -= 1;
goto start;
}
so the stack is never destroyed regardless of the depth of the recursion which is why i have always shunned recursion but now i have a new toy to play with .
|
|
|
|
|
BernardIE5317 wrote: so the stack is never destroyed regardless of the depth of the recursion which is why i have always shunned recursion but now i have a new toy to play with. I wish more programmers cared about stuff like this. I mean, don't get me wrong I'm a functional programming fanboy. So, in my world I'm tossing stacks around like they're going out of style.
Still, it's nice to see peeps care about stuff like this in a world where few people understand things like all strings are immutable and every concatenation is a reconstruction of objects, etc.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
One of my least favorite tasks is converting a recursive function to an iterative one.
It comes up more than I'd like because of embedded and limited stack space forcing my hand.
Still, it's rewarding once it's done.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Side note, if you ever pull off something like that in a real-world project, that's the kinda thing that deserves a comment explaining why. Most devs will probably look at that goto and consider it a code smell if they don't know the why.
I should say, if the goal is to prevent recursion, it's a good thing. If the goal is to prevent using a loop construct, you're better off not using the goto realistically.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I would rather write code that's easy to read and understand and let the compiler optimize the tail recursion.
|
|
|
|