|
honey the codewitch wrote: I got it working less than 10 minutes after you pointed me to it. =)
Congratulations. Now you see why I said the geometry was exceedingly simple. 
Geometry has become my new hobby over the last few years. I want you to know something personal. I've been a member here on codeproject for over 18 years. I never make any wild physics/math claims (except one a few months ago). Over a year ago I predicted that the core of gas giants are diffuse and contain multiple closed-packed spheres[^]. I posted a brief mention about it over on Ycombinator[^].
Last month they found that indeed the core of Saturn spans 60% of it's diameter[^]. I am just playing around with n-spheres (14-248) dimensional geometries. That news gives me some confidence that at least some of what I am modeling might be correct.
I wish that I could get more people interested in geometry, I am seeing some interesting things.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Randor wrote: I wish that I could get more people interested in geometry, I am seeing some interesting things
When I went over the high wall back in early 2017 I saw some things - the kinds of things you only see if you're crazy, because apparently I am.
Well, the most profound thing I ever saw - in my life - heck, if I live 6 lifetimes I will never see anything so beautiful - is the organic yet fractalish nature of reality itself, in motion.
It was infinite - folding back in on itself impossibly - the entire thing like a giant clockwork rose blooming, but exceptionally more beautiful.
So yeah, I can appreciate some geometry. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Well,
Anyway, now I am looking forward to your next Lounge post explaining how you were mistaken and that your most challenging algorithm was actually easy as pi.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
I'll edit my original, crediting you with my epiphany. Thank you again.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I was slow to reply because I guess algorithm implies a fairly contained piece of code. So I'd say it was an event dispatcher for telecom state machines.
It wasn't so much the algorithm, but the design around it. When you add lots of supplementary services to a basic call, building One Big State Machine creates a Big Ball of Mud. To keep the state machines separate, they run in an event-routing framework that allows state transitions to be announced, overridden, and/or supplemented. Chain of Responsibility plays a role in instantiating the state machines.
The algorithm for this was implemented in the state machine base class. I've thought about writing an article about it, but I doubt it would have much value because I haven't heard of another domain that requires this kind of solution.
|
|
|
|
|
I could see it in a message passer system like that used in microkernel operating systems.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Although today it would be quite trivial to do, I reckon that a graphical game of Reversi on a RadioShack TRS80 with only 4K of RAM was my most challenging ever. The computer was pretty much unbeatable on the 'hard' setting.
So old that I did my first coding in octal via switches on a DEC PDP 8
|
|
|
|
|
+1 for bringing a game into this instead of code. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, goes back a bit. In 1980 I had to use an HP41CV to invert matrices so I could determine 3D coordinates of four sided plane shapes, all linked to one another (it was a building roof like a tent).
I still remember the buzz from cracking it.
|
|
|
|
|
Not exactly an algorithm but certainly the most challenging I had to do was read data from a LIDAR, at almost 100MB/s (that is mega byte per second), while doing 3D object detection using a third generation embedded core i5 (can not remember if it was a 13W or 17W CPU) with only 1GB of RAM and without dropping any packets/frames/information.
The LIDAR required a dedicated gigabit Ethernet connection to the motherboard. Even a switch in the connection would mean packets were dropped. And that CPU struggled to keep up with the data rate let alone do 3D object detection.
I'm so glad that implementing path finding and object collision on top of that was not my job
Best regards
|
|
|
|
|
Can't narrow it down to one. But when I encounter them, it has the following 2 characteristics:
1) I can't remember writing it (but there's unfortunately evidence that I did)
2) It can't be discerned how it works, or ever worked.
|
|
|
|
|
There's no *laughing so I don't cry* emoji for this relatable content so I improvised as best I could.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Deciphering the HL7 (Healthcare) documentation.
|
|
|
|
|
find a way to compress 1 inch letters and symbols to fit on a small 2 inch tall screen with only 16K flash memory to work with
|
|
|
|
|
We are seeing it a lot in QA at the moment:
"I've written this in C++, but I remembered I need it in C and I'm running out of time - convert it for me?"
"I wrote this in Python, but I need it in C++ and I don't know Python - convert it for me?"
Normally with more spelling mistakes and much worse grammar.
What planet do you have to live on to run that through your head and think "Yeah, every one'll believe that"?
The assumption seems to be that anyone who answers question must be dumber than them - because nobody with a room-temperature IQ or higher would fall for it ...
The fun bit is that it probably doesn't do exactly what their homework wants anyway, and there is zero chance they will understand it enough to fix that, even if they do test it beyond getting a clean compile.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
You're not the only one who's noticed that.
It baffles me that they're not going to do the work to write the code, but instead look up something that looks like it'll work then beg someone to convert it for them. It's a really demonstration of "do the least amount of work possible for a grade".
"F off!" If they're going to turn in an assignment, they're going to do some damn work to get that grade. They have to either write the app themselves or convert the code themselves, but in either case, they're going to be forced to do the damn work.
|
|
|
|
|
Another thing could be to give them something that do similar enough but is written in a way, that there should be no way he could have done it at that point of the lessons, so that the teacher starts asking
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Middle management material - delegate without having any idea what's going on. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
You nailed it with the term lazy...either too lazy to do their own work or too lazy to actually try to understand how to go about it. Unfortunately, there are those who will work for reputation points and provide them with solutions instead of sarcasm...actually, you earn points for sarcasm as well right?
It's nothing new though. Half of the CIS students I graduated with couldn't write a program without help. I was a tutor for a while and remember helping many of them with their homework. It was often spoon feeding them the code line by line...giving them hints first trying to get them to think on their own, then getting aggravated when they didn't seem to be trying. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: Unfortunately, there are those who will work for reputation points and provide them with solutions instead of sarcasm...actually, you earn points for sarcasm as well right?
Well-crafted sarcasm might earn you additional rep-points from up-votes.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Well-crafted sarcasm might earn you additional rep-points from up-votes.
Shhh... don't tell it too loud...
We will now be flooded not only with poor questions but with poor attempts of sarcasm in the answers too 
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If they were not dumb then they would know the answer. But the increase in these numbers suggests that someone somewhere has tweeted "CodeProject dummies will do your work for you".
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: But the increase in these numbers suggests that someone somewhere has tweeted "CodeProject dummies will do your work for you".
More likely they found CP via google after getting banned on stackoverflow for posting the same tripe.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
The answer I've often wanted to give (but never quite had the courage to write) goes something like this:
1. Unplug your computer, screen, keyboard, mouse, and any other peripherals
2. Replace the computer, keyboard, mouse, screen etc. in their original packaging
3. Place everything in a large cardboard box, addressed to the vendor of your computer
4. Send it back for a refund, explaining that you are too stupid to use a computer
Unfortunately, we'd probably see messages in QA asking how to address a box.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
