|
I think that the EMP (electromagnetic pulse) generated by such a large number of explosions would do a very good job of turning out the lights - and everything else that wasn't hardened.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
'ol Boom Boom was effectively DOA since it's Environmental Impact Statements were written on the assumption that pure fusion bombs would be available to power it.
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
|
|
|
|
|
Back in the seventies a mad German scientist (Friedrich Bassler by name) suggested Egypt should flood the Qattara Depression using 'nuclear engineering'- i.e. blow a damn' great hole in Egypt so the Med could flood into Qattara. It would have used a modest 213 atomic bombs in boreholes  to dig the trench. I used the sobriquet 'mad' because it would probably have made North Africa uninhabitable for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, with the glow-in-the-dark effect, the whole thing wouldn't have needed streetlights...
|
|
|
|
|
@jsc42 I got it working! Woo
Let me know if you'd like me to adjust the size or anything. It won't look too good much smaller than this though. Such is the nature of ASCII art. It's still neat though.
i.
.i. M@o
.oM@@o ioV: :M@@@V o@@: .iVMM.
o@@@@@@o i@@@@@io@@@@@M i@@M Vi :@@@@@@@
.@@@@V@@@@ M@@@V.i@@@@@Mi :@@@. M@i o@@@VV@@@
V@V: .@@@@ M@@@o o@@@@V .@@@o V@@. i@M. M@@M
o@@@M V@@@M o@@@@o @@@M i@@V M@. i@@@:
@@@@o.@@@@. i@@@@V M@@@. :@@@: i@V .@@@V
i@@@@.:@@@V .@@@@M V@@@i .@@@V .@@@@
M@@@V @@@M @@@@@. i@@@@V@@@@@. @@@@:
i@@@@: V@@@@@@@@i .@@@@@@@@@@V M@@@:
.@@@@M V@@@@@@M .o i@@@@Vi@@@@. .M@@@i
V@@@@. V@@@@@. M@ VVi i@@@o .@@@@o :oVM.
:@@@@o i@@@@V V@. @@@@. .@@@@o :o@@@@@o
@@@@@ .@@@@@i :@@i i@@@V .@@@@@V@@@@@Moi
o@@@@: i@@@@@@MV@@i V@@@. @@@@@@@@@o:
:@@@@V o@@@@@@@@@@@i M@@V .@@@@@@V:
M@@@@ .V@@@@@VV@@@@M: :@M @@@@o.
V@@@@..M@@@@@o. :ooi .oi
o@@@@: .@@Mo:
i@@@@o
:@@@@V
M@@@M
o@@M
:i
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
That is awesome!
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you! It was quite difficult to code that, even I had a lot of help from some public domain code. I wound up retooling most of that code so it could stream directly from the font file, and render via callback instead of using bitmaps, which was part of why it wasn't working in the original code - the bitmaps overlapped each other.
I still have a lot of refactoring and more testing to do but pretty soon my open_font class will be in GFX
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! Trying it in a sig with font-size: 10%
i.
.i. M@o
.oM@@o ioV: :M@@@V o@@: .iVMM.
o@@@@@@o i@@@@@io@@@@@M i@@M Vi :@@@@@@@
.@@@@V@@@@ M@@@V.i@@@@@Mi :@@@. M@i o@@@VV@@@
V@V: .@@@@ M@@@o o@@@@V .@@@o V@@. i@M. M@@M
o@@@M V@@@M o@@@@o @@@M i@@V M@. i@@@:
@@@@o.@@@@. i@@@@V M@@@. :@@@: i@V .@@@V
i@@@@.:@@@V .@@@@M V@@@i .@@@V .@@@@
M@@@V @@@M @@@@@. i@@@@V@@@@@. @@@@:
i@@@@: V@@@@@@@@i .@@@@@@@@@@V M@@@:
.@@@@M V@@@@@@M .o i@@@@Vi@@@@. .M@@@i
V@@@@. V@@@@@. M@ VVi i@@@o .@@@@o :oVM.
:@@@@o i@@@@V V@. @@@@. .@@@@o :o@@@@@o
@@@@@ .@@@@@i :@@i i@@@V .@@@@@V@@@@@Moi
o@@@@: i@@@@@@MV@@i V@@@. @@@@@@@@@o:
:@@@@V o@@@@@@@@@@@i M@@V .@@@@@@V:
M@@@@ .V@@@@@VV@@@@M: :@M @@@@o.
V@@@@..M@@@@@o. :ooi .oi
o@@@@: .@@Mo:
i@@@@o
:@@@@V
M@@@M
o@@M
:i
|
|
|
|
|
No, not orthodonture.
Has anyone else noticed that Microsoft has reformatted all of their online documentation to use K&R style braces instead of Allman style? I personally prefer the previous (Allman) style.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Got an example? The few things I looked up haven't changed their formatting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yuk! No, no, no. This will not do.
At the very least, they need to implement an option to pick the formatting you want.
I find that format a problem because newbs seem to mis-match braces all the time while using it.
|
|
|
|
|
And that's exactly why I dislike that style, because it makes it difficult to, as Randor said, see where the scopes begin and end.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well,
I think it's important to remember that coding styles are personal preferences and opinions. Although I also prefer the BSD style I must admit.... being exposed to several styles increases my code comprehension levels.
Here is a very old survey from the 7th of May 2012 with my comments on the subject.
Do you have a coding style?[^]
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with your comments. The BSD style does improve readability regarding scope.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: I agree with your comments.
I wrote that comment nearly a decade ago. It's interesting that my opinion has not changed. By the way, what we were discussing earlier regarding namespace using-declarations is also just an opinion. These things are not really important. It's about personal preference.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Totally correct. There is the Allman style and everything else.
I am so retentive about this, I surround single line indented lines like this.
if (foo)
{
single_line();
}
Sometimes real world function get longer than will fit on one or even two screens. Being able to clearly see and understand the organization of a complicated bit of logic makes it more likely the code is doing what you actually wanted it to do.
And don't get me started on Hungarian notation. I guess if you are coding on paper or a chalkboard it makes sense. Otherwise, what a ridiculous concept.
|
|
|
|
|
Allman makes the braces easy to match up. But more importantly, it makes conditions easy to read because the left brace is alone on the following line. Most styles squander horizontal space but are miserly when it comes to vertical space.
|
|
|
|
|
That is because readability becomes less important when publishing. Vertical space means $$$, so it trumps readability.
|
|
|
|
|
That's probably how K&R started, so people then thought it was the right way to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Curiously, the actual header file itself use the Allman style. The curious part being it was changed for the documentation.
typedef struct addrinfoW
{
int ai_flags; int ai_family; int ai_socktype; int ai_protocol; size_t ai_addrlen; PWSTR ai_canonname; _Field_size_bytes_(ai_addrlen) struct sockaddr * ai_addr; struct addrinfoW * ai_next; }
ADDRINFOW, *PADDRINFOW;
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Well,
Historically the employees that write the MSDN documentation are not FTE (Blue) but V-dash or A-dash[^] employees. The contribution they make is very much appreciated but they usually have restricted access to resources and source code. The documentation reflects that.
Recently there has been an internal push for some dedicated FTE and resource allocations dedicated to documentation.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
