|
I don't know why or how but it did work twice for me without needing to input anything. I don't even remember which peripheral it was but after a single run of troubleshooting it started working.
I blame gremlins.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
How will I ever fix my crashed PC with Dr Watson, that crashed more than the other applications?
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
According to its creators, it reads like Ruby and runs like C — or faster If it comes with reports, RUN!
Fortunately, it's been long enough that I can't remember the problem with them.
|
|
|
|
|
Did another graduate student think they knew everything about programming languages? Or do they just want new ways to have their resumes tossed?
|
|
|
|
|
We were all required to create a language to pass the exam of Formal Languages and Compilers, someone actually believes that is the real world.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: We were all required to create a language to pass the exam of Formal Languages and Compilers
This is taking xkcd: Standards[^] to an brand new dimension
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.
|
|
|
|
|
The social media and metaverse company is undergoing a process that is being referred to internally as the “flattening,” in which managers will be asked to do things besides endlessly go to meetings. The conull set?
|
|
|
|
|
If the next headline isn't "Meta fires all but three middle managers" they aren't serious.
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Woodbury wrote: If the next headline isn't "Meta fires all but three middle managers" they aren't serious.
Corollary:
Most of the companies above 10k people should do that, and many of the ones below 10k 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.
|
|
|
|
|
I would flatten a lot of former bosses and a couple of current ones.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Researchers from the University of Sussex and Universal Quantum have demonstrated for the first time that quantum bits (qubits) can directly transfer between quantum computer microchips and demonstrated this with record-breaking speed and accuracy. They found the cat?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: They found the cat?
which one? The alive one or the dead one?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: The alive one or the dead one?
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
Beat me to it 
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
ChatGPT restrictions on the creation of illicit content are easy to circumvent. "The street finds its own uses for things"
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: "The street finds its own uses for things"
namely faster than you can say "Jack Robinson"
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.
|
|
|
|
|
We look at value-oriented programming, a programming paradigm that the Val programming language [Val] proposes, and how this paradigm can improve safety, local reasoning, and the act of programming. Stand up for your values (but not your references)!
I was going to go with "Because 0.30000000000000005 would be silly", but I think I used that recently
|
|
|
|
|
Up next: languages named Virtue and Diversity
|
|
|
|
|
Both laying 2974'th and 2975'th respectively on the popularity list of our limited languages available. 
|
|
|
|
|
The guy lost credibility with me when he referenced the following statements:Kent Sharkey wrote: ACCU[^]: "In terms of syntax, we’ve experimented just about everything; we’ve probably seen all types of syntax we can have. If we look at the semantic class of a programming language – i.e., the paradigm that the language emphasizes – we don’t have too many choices."
Both of these statements show a complete dearth of experience and a remarkable lack of imagination. Anyone who has been writing software more than a few years has seen countless varieties of both syntax and semantics.
Text languages as fixed-field lines (FORTRAN) where each line is a statement, variable text where statements are delimited, and text where spacing is significant (or not). Procedural languages, stack-based languages (LISP and FORTH) where the stack is implicit in the source, and weirdies like APL. Macros and scripts created by recording the user's actions. Non-text languages where the programmer's intent is expressed graphically and the source 'code' is an opaque data structure or data base. No-code and low-code 'programming'.
Semantics are similar. Machine language, structured, object-oriented, functional, etc. programming. Headless (batch or service) applications versus command-line, GUI, or web.
I know that reasoning-by-example isn't rigorous, but many of these elements did not exist when I start programming professionally in 1980. If anything, the pace of new concepts has only accelerated in the time since.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
This is a well thought out concept about new paradigms basically restricting the way programmers can figuratively shoot themselves in the foot. I don't know if Val as a language will go anywhere, but suspect that like its predecessor CLU in the object oriented world many of the concepts will eventually show up in mainstream languages.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I hope/think that's the longer term goal for them. I think it's going to be hard for a non-Algol-like language to rise to the top these days.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I would not put that on stone. Just find one or two morons influencers that bit the bait and start shouting the buzzword bingo...
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I was trying to write about floating point yesterday, and I found myself wondering about this calculation, with 64-bit floats Because 0.30000000000000005 would be silly
|
|
|
|
|
The mistake highlights the biggest problem of using AI chatbots to replace search engines — they make stuff up. So, just like Google search then?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
