|
OK, people. If someone *really* were going to do this, they shouldn't have been given that job *in the first place*.
This is "The Lounge", is it not? You know, a place where ya go for a break, maybe down a soda or something, and banter with others about things just to slip yer mind out of 'code mode' for a few minutes before ya dig back in?!
It's not like I'm saying go add yellow food coloring into the clear-see-through water dispenser.
And, with all the postings submitted here about having to "take over someone else's crappy set of code", if the last option isn't actually truth, if even to a simple degree, then a) quit posting about having to take over someone else's code, b) vote down the post, or c) delete the OP, for Pete's sake (then post an explanation as to who "Pete" is and why it's for his "sake"), then d) take a few dozen chill-pills.
OH, wait, I forgot an emoticon in the OP denoting it's HUMOR or adding such the disclaimer. Sheesh!
====
EDIT: There, Emoticon added to the OP denoting it's proffered as humor/silliness and not some actual recommended action. Again, Sheesh!
|
|
|
|
|
If it makes you feel better, I could tell you were not being serious about it but just "shooting the breeze." 
Written communication can be terrible because you miss a lot of little nuances of communication.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
So, my post has a slight chance of being nominated as "Post of the Year", then?!
Oh, OK. You're gonna nominate it for "Post of the Decade" instead, then?
 Fair enough! 
|
|
|
|
|
I found the people taking you seriously even funnier than the original post!
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing to do, actually: your code is pretty ugly as it stands, already.
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
Was obviously lookin' at someone's profile pict when coding that day ... perhaps even my own! 
modified 26-Dec-13 17:52pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Hahaha, this is fantastic. I've definitely found some interesting comments in my own code a few months later on a day I was feeling particularly snarky or quirky. One of my favorites was for a calendar control. It's just a few lines of 'Brand New Day' from Doctor Horrible with some ♪ ♪ ♪ for good measure.
|
|
|
|
|
MacSpudster wrote:
Taking over someone else's code is like taking over another pirate ship. <br />
Let the Treasure Hunt begin! Map? What Map?!?
Definetely i will add this to my code files! 
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't any of those, taking over the code I inherited from someone else is punishment enough.
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
... so I downloaded MinGW and CodeBlocks and started to write some code. I wrote a pseudo random number generator with a 256 bit internal state. The first unit test checks the generated number sequence against the Gaussian normal distribution and up to now it's very close.
Not bad if you take into account that I use the following hexadecimal values to do the actual number generation:
unsigned int uiFeedbackValue[SHIFT_REGISTER_LENGTH] = {0xDEADC0DE, 0xC0CAC01A, 0x1BADBABE, 0xABAD1DEA,
0xC0DEBA5E, 0xDEADBEEF, 0xB16B00B5, 0xBADCAB1E};
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
I hold an A-7 computer expert classification, Commodore. I'm well acquainted with Dr. Daystrom's theories and discoveries. The basic design of all our ship's computers are JavaScript.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you may find very interesting results just using a drunk probability distribution.
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
MinGW original or MinGW-w64?
Getting information off the Internet is like taking a drink from a fire hydrant.
- Mitchell Kapor
|
|
|
|
|
MinGW32, so it's the original. For a C++ develpment environment created out of thin air in 30 minutes it should be sufficient.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
I hold an A-7 computer expert classification, Commodore. I'm well acquainted with Dr. Daystrom's theories and discoveries. The basic design of all our ship's computers are JavaScript.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me to dust off my old Virgil Fox albums.
Go Virgil![^]
|
|
|
|
|
I'd never heard of him so thanks for introducing him 
Bach needs to be played with passion just as Gould used to hum when he played.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Well, several plot lines have been explained and Matt Smith did some acting. All in all, an enjoyable end to his tenure as the Doctor.
|
|
|
|
|
And a whole new regeneration cycle to boot!
I wonder what colour his kidneys are.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not really a fan of doctor who, but wasn't regeneration limited to a number like 13 times?
|
|
|
|
|
I think they ran out of regenerations, so they invented some waffle to give him more discovered that it wasn't so much of a limitation after all.
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
There was a limit of 12 regenerations but there is precedence in Doctor Who for this limit being lifted.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, 25 years ago the Time Lords gave The Master a new regeneration cycle, they have done the same for the Doctor.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
According to canon, they gave the Master another regeneration cycle for the Time War as well.
|
|
|
|
|
So, if they can give those cycles more than one time, why bother having cycles? they can just regenerate ad eternum.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
