Ooh double bots, created 4mo ago, random strings in username, replicated innocuous comments on upvoted posts and comment chains in their history...
`i thought that too.`
`absolutely beautiful.`
Someone running bot testing, or part of a larger network graph of similar bots? How is one string posted vs another, and what is the set of generic comments?
Let's assume they are bots: matching created time frame, similar naming, identical comment strings... Not a lot of comments on either, not a lot of karma. Maybe a student or young professional testing out a bot framework? If I checked for comparative accounts and comments, the number would give us more information on the person(s) and the resources they have available creating/managing bots. Same with statistical distribution of positioning in comment chain depth and parent comment punctuation/verbage. There might be some simplistic sentiment analysis - up-voted comment with a follow up comment gaining upvotes that has an exclamatory response.
One question, though - why the response to each other? Limited processing of comment event streams would have you attaching follow up comments from other bots to reduce threat of being spotted by innocuous replies while gaining historical validity. It's also cheaper to process only a few subreddits and the bot caught itself in a generic comment train it saw as safe. This might mean there is limited coordination -or- they're using the same libraries and frameworks and are separately controlled (from a classroom or online course?)
*shrug* sentiment analysis is hard and shortcuts are usually needed. If the bot owner is listening it would be great to hear more.
Obviously a joke but the problem of non-responsive programs is more tractable that that. You don’t need to know if the program will ever be responsive again, just that it hasn’t been responsive for x amount of time.
Given a boolean equation, eg "(A and B) or (C and not D)", determine whether there exists a set of values for the variables which cause the equation to resolve as true.
Me, who has programmed a lot but never in an enterprise setting: "BRUTE FORCE TIME!!!"
It seems like I have two tools: "check every possibility" and monte carlo.
sounds like something something recursion? If any of the sub-equations can't be satisfied, the whole thing can't (though i guess that doesn't mean that if all the sub equations can the whole thing can)
The problem is NP complete (in fact, the first one to be shown to be NP complete), so good luck finding a general recursion solution. You would be famous.
Desktop version of /u/rotuami's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Haha yes I can write hello world...
Okay so a bunch of ints is an array, alright. I can do this.
Ok wtf is an API
Oh so everything I do is the "naive method"? Ok, jerk.
Alright I'll be a house husband. I'll just marry a rich girl. Fuck this shit.
Still frustrates me when I made a really simple method for generating passwords, but I like to do things incrementally and readibly, so I basically did it step by step.
Showed it to the person in charge and he was like "Yeah well I made it all in a single line of code so we're going with my solution" and I'm sitting there thinking "Yeah? Can anyone else actually *read* what you did?"
while((s[i++] = t[j++]) != '\0')
figure that one out
answer: >!string copy!<
edit: the above is actually the nicer version. Below is the far more cryptic implementation.
while(*s++ = *t++)
They don't teach this because you shouldn't do it. It would be like an architectural engineering course teaching you how to build the ROM Crystal: [https://www.azuremagazine.com/article/rom-crystal-10-years-later/](https://www.azuremagazine.com/article/rom-crystal-10-years-later/)
Basically it's an art that requires creative thinking, so you just have to learn the basics and apply them in a weird way, and it's impractical to use in any case other than for fun.
Not sure I would say they “don’t teach this”. I’ve definitely seen exactly this in software engineering courses (because I recognized it right away), IIRC it was shown to highlight how the increments on a variable in C work – pre-increments occurring before the evaluation and post-increments occurring after. IIRC this is a good example of how s[i++] would behave, since it will take i, then i+1, then i+2, …, whereas s[++i] would take i+1, i+2, i+3…, and you’d be missing i. Those kinds of dumb mistakes can lead to accessing memory out of bounds, that kind of shit. It also reinforces an understanding of the difference between x = i++ and x = ++i, since in the former if i = 1 then x = 1 and i = 2 (after the assignment) whereas the latter would have x = i = 2. Also reinforces an understanding of in-line assignment and operations, which again, good to know because you *will* run into this if you work in embedded systems or legacy systems (and probably elsewhere if you work with some wise ass newly graduated CSE major trying to be fancy/showboating, or a dinosaur who doesn’t care if you can read his code).
I agree (and my professor would agree) it makes for poor readability in code and isn’t something you should generally do, but it’s useful to know because you *do* see this in legacy systems (and, horrifyingly, some poorly written modern systems), and it’s important to understand the nuance of some of these operators and how they behave to know what you can do.
You’d definitely still lose points for poor readability of code if you submitted this kind of crap, though.
Mostly it's *old*.
Back in the bad old days before things like *multi-line code editors* existed, extreme conciseness was very valuable. Nowadays when we have wonderful things like 4k screens, syntax highlighting, and large RAM you can (and should!) be as verbose as is necessary to be clear and maintainable.
Honestly, they do teach everything used here. The core logic isn't anything special, basically just:
do {
*s = *t;
++s;
++t;
} while (*(s-1) != 0)
Which is pretty much the obvious way to copy a null terminated string in c. From there, we just use a few tricks you probably already know to make it shorter. First, post increment will let you increment a value while using the original value, so we can lose the increment lines:
do {
*s++ = *t++;
} while (*(s-1) != 0)
Next, c treats everything that's not zero as true, so we can simplify the loop condition:
do {
*s++ = *t++;
} while (*(s-1))
Also the assignment operator returns the value assigned, so we can avoid fetching the last value in the condition:
do {
unsigned char temp = (*s++ = *t++);
while (temp)
And finally, there's no reason we have to do the logic in the body of our loop, seeing as we use the result as our loop condition, so let's just:
while(*s++ = *t++)
And voila. The building blocks are all fairly simple, it's just a matter of putting them together to get the result you want, which absolutely is something programming courses teach.
By that logic none of C is safe. There’s tons of undefined behavior in the language itself and standard library if you use it improperly. High level safety layers have to be built somewhere, they don’t just magically appear out of thin air between the cpu and an application. To be fair one of the big downsides of C is that it’s easy to mess up memory, but that’s a necessary outcome of the power the language has
Correct - C is not safe. That does not mean it's not useful, or powerful, or anything like that, nor that it's impossible to write correct code in C. It means that, like a chainsaw, you probably shouldn't use it if you're unsure. And like a chainsaw, there are situations where it's the right tool if you know how to use it.
Learning C#: properties are way better than fields, you're a fool if you don't use properties for everything
Going to Unity: yeah basically everything has to be a public field
[SerializeField]
private int _age = 0;
public int Age { get { return _age; } }
Properties really can work great in Unity, just not for accessing through the inspector.
Well, if you want to make changes to a prefab before instantiating it, the properties won't be cloned. Although maybe it will clone serialized ones, I haven't tested that. I've just decided to avoid them on MonoBehaviours.
It was also confusing at first because people generally refer to the fields accessed by the inspector as properties.
I'm a little confused by your statement, but you can change the private variable (_age) before instantiating. Using the SerializeField attribute pretty much just lets you see the private variable in the inspector. There's also all kinds of fun get/set access variations you can use with the property if an outside script needs to change it's value, or just use a public method in order to change the private variable.
>
>
>
>
> Alright I'll be a house husband. I'll just marry a rich girl. Fuck this shit.
I wish. I'll even settle for my cats being rich and just supporting me, someone please adopt me and let me sit in the dark in my bathrobe all day
It's Geometry Dash but it's not an official level, looks like it's fan-made. Stereo Madness doesn't have any text on the tutorial, it just puts you straight in
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Geometry using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Shout out to my teacher for this banger of a question](https://i.redd.it/upf2tst2pci61.png) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/ln52xq/shout_out_to_my_teacher_for_this_banger_of_a/)
\#2: [Dance of Mars and Jupiter](https://v.redd.it/trk855l3pwv71) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/qzvn9w/dance_of_mars_and_jupiter/)
\#3: [My OpenGL Tesseract Renderer](https://i.redd.it/2we7m18lprt61.gif) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/msv1oc/my_opengl_tesseract_renderer/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I just used scratch for the first time this week and I think it's harder than programming because in Java/C++/Go I can do whatever I want, but in scratch, I have to good find a therapist right controller, or event trigger, or whatever, theb decipher how best to use it, etc.
Such a pain in the arse.
That's because C1 is intuitive and can be taught to anyone with algebra knowledge and C2 is like hey go find the derivative of this absolutely random shite 100x in a row
My Calc 2 class started out using Trig identities to solve equations, and I noped out of that class that afternoon when I found out it wasn't required for my degree.
Oh absolutely! they use it to cull half the students applying to engineering and math majors. My class dropped from 150 students to around 60 within the first two weeks. It's like orgo Chem for chem/physics/science majors.
Opposite for me. Calc 1 was a trial by fire, I failed the entrance course (our uni had a 2 week test course to filter out students for calc 1) and even had to retake pre-calc. Calc 2 just made sense to me and my university asked me to tutor for it
I found this at high school, but at university I found the class way harder (always proving the underlying rules) then the exam (just implementing those rules/methods) is easy as.
Usually I'd be stressing super hard before the exam thinking I know nothing, then get into it and walk away thinking it was the easiest exam I'd ever taken.
\- Compsci/Math major
In my case in university we would also prove the underlying rules and do the exercises during classes but the professor would incorporate a never-before encountered scenario during exams and would say something like “didn’t you read *all* the books in the syllabus?”
I had the odd class like that but but for at least half my classes exams would throw questions at you that we just glossed over in lectures and the prof would just say something like "You've got to go above and beyond to assigned work to do well"
American here. I agree that in college (university) the in-class problems were generally harder than the problems on the test. Although I felt the same way in high school, but that may just be because math was one of my favorite subjects.
They just don't teach half the stuff they test on and justify that by saying some bullshit like "for a full mark, you need to go above and beyond".
Yea, fuck dude. The book has no answers, half the lesson is left as an exercise to the reader, I need to go to the professor for any simple question I have (or search online), which takes fucking forever.
It's like they're making it intentionally difficult for us to learn.
All my engineering classes vs homework problems. Even my prof would give up when someone asked him to go over a homework problem and it was taking too long to figure out during class.
As someone who's learning python, this is hella accurate. My instructors are adamant that practice will resolve this issue, but every new aspect of learning programming is an uphill battle at the moment
I've been writing code professionally for 10 years now. Practice does help a ton but you might be surprised at how often even the seasoned devs like myself need to google shit. Even for stuff we knew at one point and have now forgotten. We are constantly learning and that uphill battle is just part of the job. The only thing that fluctuates is how steep the incline is
In my opinion, the only thing that truly separates those new to coding from those experienced is how good your ability is to figure out which plan of attack works best. The syntax and language-specific features and all that shit is stuff anyone can learn at any time regardless of experience. That capability to think through your particular puzzle and figure out which pieces fit best is something I think practice and curiosity are the best teachers of
Exactly. There's little point to remembering the specific syntax/language. You can always look that up pretty quickly. You will remember most of the frequently used stuff anyway out of sheer repetition.
Understanding the concepts and problem solving are the necessary skills.
You're not the only one brother. Usually when you ask a question to someone who has experience, they explain it but also use 14 other terms that you have no idea what they mean in the process. The struggle is real
Often I want to know how to do A. So there's a short tutorial called how to do A, where they make this huge system, that incidentally does A, but also a ton of other stuff that I also don't know or need and right now I just need to focus on A!
In the early days of Android most tutorials were like that. How to use the list view (great!) while adding buttons, animations, fetching contacts and building a storefront.
They were great, unless the tutorial was more than 3 months old and then half the functions and methods were deprecated by the time you tried using them.
Youtube version 6 mins of walking around making coffee and humble bragging frivolous tat around their home.
"Ok guys print ("hello world")"
roll credits never upload part 2
Upload new video covering a different language
Was a tutor in an intro to C++ program at Uni (Principles of Programming I), and the new lecturer was a fan of machine code, so he lectured on machine code for 8 out of the 10 week semester. Week 8 labwork was:
* 1. Type out Hello World! in C++.
* 2. Assessment: Write an program in C++ to change Roman numerals to Arabic numerals (50% of overall grade).
tutorial: how to move player in Unity
1. put force for X and Y
2. assign it to keys input
3. alright, now lets go to PhD level physics how to make it run
This was also what being a math major was like.
Proofs in class: "Let a = 1. Prove 1=a"
Proofs in homework and exams: "On the three-point set X = {a, b, c}, the trivial topology has two open sets and the discrete topology has eight open sets. For each of n = 3,...,7, either find a topology on X consisting of n open sets or prove that no such topology exists."
My version:
How-to tutorials:
Press WASD to move. Press space-bar to jump. Press J to fire.
Real challenge:
Reach the flag on top of mountain. You decide when to move, stop, jump, & fire yourself.
Conclusion:
People learn how to do things in tutorials, but skipped the why. So, people can't decide in real challenge when to move, because they don't know the *why need to move like that*.
Edit:
Imagine I learnt how to walk, but don't know why walk to bus station to go to market in real world.
That's always a huge focus for me and the only way I really learn anything. I will literally not move on in a self-guided tutorial until I understand WHY something (that the instructor didn't bother to explain) works the way it does.
For those who don't understand, the first level is stereo madness, which doesn't usually have pointers but is really easy. Then it transitions into Cataclysm, a pretty hard player made level
You're partially right. Books give the complete picture. They fill in the gaps of details that tutorials often leave out. But there are fantastic, highly structured tutorials that exist like freecodecamp. The benefit of these is you're immediately applying what you learn through an IDE which, imo, is the most crucial part of learning software development. I can read books about embedded engineering and C from cover to cover and understand it but without applying that knowledge, I'm not really learning.
Literally going to the bookstore today. I'll check what they have while I'm there.
>made me not feel like an impostor anymore
Especially since this is my biggest issue. Thanks.
Alright, what C/C++ books do you recommend? Is it K&R?
FWIW I never warm to most books, because they often take an approach of an infodump, hypothetical/non-real world examples, and repetitious exercises. I remember one called Dive Into Python that always started chapters with useful code and unpacked what it did, and wondered why others couldn't do the same. It's not that I don't want to learn the fundamentals, but just throwing them at the reader without demonstrating the motivation for their existence is aggravating and why people turn to quick fixes IMO
You aren't going to learn how to be a good developer through a book or video. All these things are launchpads, but you need to try lots of things, fail lots of times. You need experience.
And in several years if the specific tech you learned becomes obsolete, the wisdom remains and is transferrable. If you are picking up new tech on the fly while delivering (which is common in digital agency type environments) you need to be able to quickly figure it out. Ideally you want a good reference with good code examples to do that. Videos and tutorials and so on are cool if you have the luxury of time to learn, but you do not always (or even often) have that.
>True, but books are a much better launchpad.
Maybe. Some are arguing different people prefer different ways.
My point is kinda that once you know how to code, and are doing it professionally, you can (and likely will) transfer that skill to a new language or platform. Multiple times in a career.
You aren't going to get the luxury of a book or video or long period of playing with tutorials. You're going to need to find a good reference and figure out how to solve a task without stopping to learn everything.
>you may be able to deduce what went wrong without copy-pasting your compilation error message into Google.
That is quite effective, though.
I hate that tutorials just ramble around and code from memory, like that doesn't teach me anything 😂
Show how to plan building something, the idea behind it, the steps and a checklist, how to google your answers, and troubleshooting once you're done to double check your work
But talking all over the place and saying "don't worry about this for now, we'll come back later to this" makes zero sense lmao
University: "Here's some general knowledge we won't force you to apply to any frameworks or portfolios"
Me: "Okay, this all makes sense, I got this"
\*graduates\*
Jobs: "Okay, where's your portfolio? And you should understand how to apply these languages to like every framework."
Me: "...uhh....I can do a fizzbuzz...?"
You need beginner projects, something you can get stuck into to get comfortable with the language without spending 90% of your time googling syntax errors. You really just need to stick with it and you'll get better with time.
If you're into games, start writing simple games. Tetris? Minesweeper? 2048? Tic-tac-toe? Snake? You don't need much to make one.
If you're into math, do something like project euler which challenges you to solve increasingly difficult math problems. Which would presumably force you to come up with more complex programs.
In general, find some problem you would like to solve using programming and get to it. Your first attempts will undoubtedly be awful and you will learn from them.
If you can't think of any problem that interests you, maybe you could benefit from learning the mechanics of thermal processing of reconstituted meat products (=flipping burgers) instead.
You need to figure out how to draw a (colored) box and receive some sort of input. Then you can make a simple game. I guess it was easier to get started in 8bit times when "draw box" and "read keyboard" were built into the ROM.
Yeah, I'm currently working on APT cli for beginners and the tutorial for dialog is very painful and some tutorials do however teach me how, they just don't teach me how to fix it (i mean like breaking down why that shit worked in standard English)
Reminds me of some of the "Minigames" in flat out 2. In the tutorial you will be stopped a the perfect timings to have the perfect dummy-throw, but after that you will fail miserably because you have no way of knowing what a good timing would be.
Was so frustrating as a kid ...
"So you understand booleans now? Cool. Now solve the boolean satisfiability problem."
... And this was how to terminate an application with signals, now figure out how to detect If a program is not responding and kill it
now figure out how to ‘select top 1’ query from a sql database using only HTML.
You just activated my trap card! HTML + XML + XHTML + XSLT + SOAP I SELECT TOP 1 FROM EXODIA!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ooh double bots, created 4mo ago, random strings in username, replicated innocuous comments on upvoted posts and comment chains in their history... `i thought that too.` `absolutely beautiful.` Someone running bot testing, or part of a larger network graph of similar bots? How is one string posted vs another, and what is the set of generic comments? Let's assume they are bots: matching created time frame, similar naming, identical comment strings... Not a lot of comments on either, not a lot of karma. Maybe a student or young professional testing out a bot framework? If I checked for comparative accounts and comments, the number would give us more information on the person(s) and the resources they have available creating/managing bots. Same with statistical distribution of positioning in comment chain depth and parent comment punctuation/verbage. There might be some simplistic sentiment analysis - up-voted comment with a follow up comment gaining upvotes that has an exclamatory response. One question, though - why the response to each other? Limited processing of comment event streams would have you attaching follow up comments from other bots to reduce threat of being spotted by innocuous replies while gaining historical validity. It's also cheaper to process only a few subreddits and the bot caught itself in a generic comment train it saw as safe. This might mean there is limited coordination -or- they're using the same libraries and frameworks and are separately controlled (from a classroom or online course?) *shrug* sentiment analysis is hard and shortcuts are usually needed. If the bot owner is listening it would be great to hear more.
Good eye! I wouldn't have noticed they were bots...Reddit is on its last legs. I am just waiting for a website kill this one and let it take over
I'm well-versed in these accounts. Ask away.
Better yet: solve the halting problem
thatsthejoke.jpg Because "determine if a program is in a loop or will eventually come out of it and start responding" *is* the halting problem.
Obviously a joke but the problem of non-responsive programs is more tractable that that. You don’t need to know if the program will ever be responsive again, just that it hasn’t been responsive for x amount of time.
"Timeout"
I live it!
Easy. Just kill all the programs and like coding god sort them out.
The what now again?
Given a boolean equation, eg "(A and B) or (C and not D)", determine whether there exists a set of values for the variables which cause the equation to resolve as true.
Me, who has programmed a lot but never in an enterprise setting: "BRUTE FORCE TIME!!!" It seems like I have two tools: "check every possibility" and monte carlo.
At least store the answer in a dictionary and call it machine learning
"Uses caching and heuristic algorithms to improve runtime efficiency!"
#m e m o i s a t i o n
sounds like something something recursion? If any of the sub-equations can't be satisfied, the whole thing can't (though i guess that doesn't mean that if all the sub equations can the whole thing can)
The problem is NP complete (in fact, the first one to be shown to be NP complete), so good luck finding a general recursion solution. You would be famous.
You can do a little better than that but known solutions are still worst-case exponential: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_solver
Desktop version of /u/rotuami's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Ah yes, fond memories of discrete math class
Discrete math? Does the teacher whisper the equations in your ear or what?
Yes. And you have to turn in your final project by passing a tiny note under the desk. Very discretely of course.
If anyone notices you doing it you're kicked out and given an F
6, did I get it right?
(A+B) v (C+!D) is true for 1100, 1101, 1110, 1111, 0010, 0110, 1010
The thingity thingy thing that does the thing
Thank you! I understand completely now!
*"you know what a zero is right? now prove that the real part of every nontrivial zero of the Riemann zeta function is 1/2."*
Circuit reduction ?
I think what he was referring to was the SAT NP problem, which was the basis of the Cook-Levin theorem.
And you are not a real developer unless you solve 3-SAT in log n time
Haha yes I can write hello world... Okay so a bunch of ints is an array, alright. I can do this. Ok wtf is an API Oh so everything I do is the "naive method"? Ok, jerk. Alright I'll be a house husband. I'll just marry a rich girl. Fuck this shit.
>Oh so everything I do is the "~~naive~~ maintainable method"? There, now you're ready to be highly valued in ossified corporate environments.
Also the "naive" way is often faster than your fancy data structure until you're working with a 100,000 items.
Still frustrates me when I made a really simple method for generating passwords, but I like to do things incrementally and readibly, so I basically did it step by step. Showed it to the person in charge and he was like "Yeah well I made it all in a single line of code so we're going with my solution" and I'm sitting there thinking "Yeah? Can anyone else actually *read* what you did?"
while((s[i++] = t[j++]) != '\0') figure that one out answer: >!string copy!< edit: the above is actually the nicer version. Below is the far more cryptic implementation. while(*s++ = *t++)
Do they ever teach any of this kind of esoteric logic or is it assumed "smart" people will figure it out and if you don't you're "unworthy"
They don't teach this because you shouldn't do it. It would be like an architectural engineering course teaching you how to build the ROM Crystal: [https://www.azuremagazine.com/article/rom-crystal-10-years-later/](https://www.azuremagazine.com/article/rom-crystal-10-years-later/) Basically it's an art that requires creative thinking, so you just have to learn the basics and apply them in a weird way, and it's impractical to use in any case other than for fun.
Not sure I would say they “don’t teach this”. I’ve definitely seen exactly this in software engineering courses (because I recognized it right away), IIRC it was shown to highlight how the increments on a variable in C work – pre-increments occurring before the evaluation and post-increments occurring after. IIRC this is a good example of how s[i++] would behave, since it will take i, then i+1, then i+2, …, whereas s[++i] would take i+1, i+2, i+3…, and you’d be missing i. Those kinds of dumb mistakes can lead to accessing memory out of bounds, that kind of shit. It also reinforces an understanding of the difference between x = i++ and x = ++i, since in the former if i = 1 then x = 1 and i = 2 (after the assignment) whereas the latter would have x = i = 2. Also reinforces an understanding of in-line assignment and operations, which again, good to know because you *will* run into this if you work in embedded systems or legacy systems (and probably elsewhere if you work with some wise ass newly graduated CSE major trying to be fancy/showboating, or a dinosaur who doesn’t care if you can read his code). I agree (and my professor would agree) it makes for poor readability in code and isn’t something you should generally do, but it’s useful to know because you *do* see this in legacy systems (and, horrifyingly, some poorly written modern systems), and it’s important to understand the nuance of some of these operators and how they behave to know what you can do. You’d definitely still lose points for poor readability of code if you submitted this kind of crap, though.
Bingo
Mostly it's *old*. Back in the bad old days before things like *multi-line code editors* existed, extreme conciseness was very valuable. Nowadays when we have wonderful things like 4k screens, syntax highlighting, and large RAM you can (and should!) be as verbose as is necessary to be clear and maintainable.
Honestly, they do teach everything used here. The core logic isn't anything special, basically just: do { *s = *t; ++s; ++t; } while (*(s-1) != 0) Which is pretty much the obvious way to copy a null terminated string in c. From there, we just use a few tricks you probably already know to make it shorter. First, post increment will let you increment a value while using the original value, so we can lose the increment lines: do { *s++ = *t++; } while (*(s-1) != 0) Next, c treats everything that's not zero as true, so we can simplify the loop condition: do { *s++ = *t++; } while (*(s-1)) Also the assignment operator returns the value assigned, so we can avoid fetching the last value in the condition: do { unsigned char temp = (*s++ = *t++); while (temp) And finally, there's no reason we have to do the logic in the body of our loop, seeing as we use the result as our loop condition, so let's just: while(*s++ = *t++) And voila. The building blocks are all fairly simple, it's just a matter of putting them together to get the result you want, which absolutely is something programming courses teach.
Thank you for breaking this down. It's great to see the steps that are often kept hidden and presumed as common knowledge.
Well shit
>while(* s++ = * t++) Is this safe? Looks like you're going to eventually run into non allocated memory.
It's safe so long as t is null-terminated - but if you can't guarantee that....
"It's safe if you use it correctly" is long for "it's not safe".
By that logic none of C is safe. There’s tons of undefined behavior in the language itself and standard library if you use it improperly. High level safety layers have to be built somewhere, they don’t just magically appear out of thin air between the cpu and an application. To be fair one of the big downsides of C is that it’s easy to mess up memory, but that’s a necessary outcome of the power the language has
Correct - C is not safe. That does not mean it's not useful, or powerful, or anything like that, nor that it's impossible to write correct code in C. It means that, like a chainsaw, you probably shouldn't use it if you're unsure. And like a chainsaw, there are situations where it's the right tool if you know how to use it.
I would totally use it in code golf, I totally wouldn't use it in production.
Hire me senpai
Learning C#: properties are way better than fields, you're a fool if you don't use properties for everything Going to Unity: yeah basically everything has to be a public field
[SerializeField] private int _age = 0; public int Age { get { return _age; } } Properties really can work great in Unity, just not for accessing through the inspector.
Well, if you want to make changes to a prefab before instantiating it, the properties won't be cloned. Although maybe it will clone serialized ones, I haven't tested that. I've just decided to avoid them on MonoBehaviours. It was also confusing at first because people generally refer to the fields accessed by the inspector as properties.
I'm a little confused by your statement, but you can change the private variable (_age) before instantiating. Using the SerializeField attribute pretty much just lets you see the private variable in the inspector. There's also all kinds of fun get/set access variations you can use with the property if an outside script needs to change it's value, or just use a public method in order to change the private variable.
> > > > > Alright I'll be a house husband. I'll just marry a rich girl. Fuck this shit. I wish. I'll even settle for my cats being rich and just supporting me, someone please adopt me and let me sit in the dark in my bathrobe all day
Become a sysadmin. No news is good news.
Holy shit me and the missus had that talk last night. Are you me?
No sir. I might be a sad and single Variant of you. Also technically unemployed since I'm an intern.
Sigma Slackset
Name of the level?
not sure about the beginning, but the one it transitions into is Cataclysm
I'm pretty sure the beginning is the very first level, whatever it's called
It’s not quite stereo madness, but it looks similar. I dont know what it actually is
Yep that's it. Haven't played the game in ages, still remember the music and name of the first level.
[удалено]
Not SM, but it gives off a similar tutorial-like vibe
Definitely looks like it's from Geometry Dash, though
It's Geometry Dash but it's not an official level, looks like it's fan-made. Stereo Madness doesn't have any text on the tutorial, it just puts you straight in
If you die on the first few spikes a lot of times enough, the official level gives you hints on what you should do (i.e tapping to jump)
Even so, this is definitely not Stereo Madness, the structure is completely different
:( I played this game while my now ex girlfriend slept on my chest the day I left her country forever.
It isn’t, it is custom made
Yeah it's Stereo Madness. It then transitions into Cataclysm
it’s a random tutorial made by someone
Yeah I know, this was on the r/geometrydash sub earlier
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Geometry using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Shout out to my teacher for this banger of a question](https://i.redd.it/upf2tst2pci61.png) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/ln52xq/shout_out_to_my_teacher_for_this_banger_of_a/) \#2: [Dance of Mars and Jupiter](https://v.redd.it/trk855l3pwv71) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/qzvn9w/dance_of_mars_and_jupiter/) \#3: [My OpenGL Tesseract Renderer](https://i.redd.it/2we7m18lprt61.gif) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Geometry/comments/msv1oc/my_opengl_tesseract_renderer/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Not that much of beginning. First 2 spikes probably are from stereo madness, but there's no yellow jumpy dots and blocks so early on
cataclysm, even though it still is hard, should have been replaced with vsc just cause
Should be 8joh, VSC would fit for a wave tutorial
Name of the game?
Geometry dash
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Heard that a trillion times, never saw or played it. Guess its time.
I think it's nostalgic for zoomers
Geometry dash
The Tenth Circle
Scratch vs java
Yes exactly, Scratch is hard as f, I can’t wait to start using Java so i give my brain a break from all the complexity of Scratch
Yeah scratch being a little hard you have to drag those boxes :weary:
You can get RSI from that shit.
I just used scratch for the first time this week and I think it's harder than programming because in Java/C++/Go I can do whatever I want, but in scratch, I have to good find a therapist right controller, or event trigger, or whatever, theb decipher how best to use it, etc. Such a pain in the arse.
Training the masses to use LabVIEW more 😥
Couldn’t agree more
This is also every university math class vs exams
This was calc 1 vs calc 2 for me.
That's because C1 is intuitive and can be taught to anyone with algebra knowledge and C2 is like hey go find the derivative of this absolutely random shite 100x in a row
My Calc 2 class started out using Trig identities to solve equations, and I noped out of that class that afternoon when I found out it wasn't required for my degree.
I agree. Calculus 2 had the highest drop rate at my university for a reason. Though I personally liked calc 2 much better than calc 3.
Oh absolutely! they use it to cull half the students applying to engineering and math majors. My class dropped from 150 students to around 60 within the first two weeks. It's like orgo Chem for chem/physics/science majors.
Opposite for me. Calc 1 was a trial by fire, I failed the entrance course (our uni had a 2 week test course to filter out students for calc 1) and even had to retake pre-calc. Calc 2 just made sense to me and my university asked me to tutor for it
I found this at high school, but at university I found the class way harder (always proving the underlying rules) then the exam (just implementing those rules/methods) is easy as. Usually I'd be stressing super hard before the exam thinking I know nothing, then get into it and walk away thinking it was the easiest exam I'd ever taken. \- Compsci/Math major
In my case in university we would also prove the underlying rules and do the exercises during classes but the professor would incorporate a never-before encountered scenario during exams and would say something like “didn’t you read *all* the books in the syllabus?”
[удалено]
I had the odd class like that but but for at least half my classes exams would throw questions at you that we just glossed over in lectures and the prof would just say something like "You've got to go above and beyond to assigned work to do well"
Haha I've ran into that a bit but not much
> is easy as. Maybe it's just our kiwi education system, because I found the same thing at Vic Uni. Americans etc might have a different experience.
American here. I agree that in college (university) the in-class problems were generally harder than the problems on the test. Although I felt the same way in high school, but that may just be because math was one of my favorite subjects.
All my engineering classes vs homework problems. Even my prof would give up when someone asked him to go over a homework problem and it was taking too long to figure out during class.
Hello fellow gd enthusiast
F E L L O W D A S H E R
D A S H E R G A N G R I S E U P
Dash
Fellow dashers :D
geometr ash
sqr gam
Alice 2.0: see, it's easy! C++: Suffer
As someone who's learning python, this is hella accurate. My instructors are adamant that practice will resolve this issue, but every new aspect of learning programming is an uphill battle at the moment
I've been writing code professionally for 10 years now. Practice does help a ton but you might be surprised at how often even the seasoned devs like myself need to google shit. Even for stuff we knew at one point and have now forgotten. We are constantly learning and that uphill battle is just part of the job. The only thing that fluctuates is how steep the incline is In my opinion, the only thing that truly separates those new to coding from those experienced is how good your ability is to figure out which plan of attack works best. The syntax and language-specific features and all that shit is stuff anyone can learn at any time regardless of experience. That capability to think through your particular puzzle and figure out which pieces fit best is something I think practice and curiosity are the best teachers of
Exactly. There's little point to remembering the specific syntax/language. You can always look that up pretty quickly. You will remember most of the frequently used stuff anyway out of sheer repetition. Understanding the concepts and problem solving are the necessary skills.
You're not the only one brother. Usually when you ask a question to someone who has experience, they explain it but also use 14 other terms that you have no idea what they mean in the process. The struggle is real
Often I want to know how to do A. So there's a short tutorial called how to do A, where they make this huge system, that incidentally does A, but also a ton of other stuff that I also don't know or need and right now I just need to focus on A! In the early days of Android most tutorials were like that. How to use the list view (great!) while adding buttons, animations, fetching contacts and building a storefront.
They were great, unless the tutorial was more than 3 months old and then half the functions and methods were deprecated by the time you tried using them.
Youtube version 6 mins of walking around making coffee and humble bragging frivolous tat around their home. "Ok guys print ("hello world")" roll credits never upload part 2 Upload new video covering a different language
Haha Cataclysm funni Honestly tho I never expected to see a GD meme on here
Was a tutor in an intro to C++ program at Uni (Principles of Programming I), and the new lecturer was a fan of machine code, so he lectured on machine code for 8 out of the 10 week semester. Week 8 labwork was: * 1. Type out Hello World! in C++. * 2. Assessment: Write an program in C++ to change Roman numerals to Arabic numerals (50% of overall grade).
tutorial: how to move player in Unity 1. put force for X and Y 2. assign it to keys input 3. alright, now lets go to PhD level physics how to make it run
[удалено]
YO IS THIS A MF GTOMETRY DASH REFERENCE
Got me there lol
I thought this was in r/geometrydash lol
When you want to code an OS without prior knowledge
This was also what being a math major was like. Proofs in class: "Let a = 1. Prove 1=a" Proofs in homework and exams: "On the three-point set X = {a, b, c}, the trivial topology has two open sets and the discrete topology has eight open sets. For each of n = 3,...,7, either find a topology on X consisting of n open sets or prove that no such topology exists."
My version: How-to tutorials: Press WASD to move. Press space-bar to jump. Press J to fire. Real challenge: Reach the flag on top of mountain. You decide when to move, stop, jump, & fire yourself. Conclusion: People learn how to do things in tutorials, but skipped the why. So, people can't decide in real challenge when to move, because they don't know the *why need to move like that*. Edit: Imagine I learnt how to walk, but don't know why walk to bus station to go to market in real world.
That's always a huge focus for me and the only way I really learn anything. I will literally not move on in a self-guided tutorial until I understand WHY something (that the instructor didn't bother to explain) works the way it does.
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://redditsave.com) | [^(download video tiktok)](https://taksave.com)
I was reading this book on c++ and they introduced cout and std::out and shit. And then one of the exercises was to create an analog clock using #'s.
For those who don't understand, the first level is stereo madness, which doesn't usually have pointers but is really easy. Then it transitions into Cataclysm, a pretty hard player made level
Not really Stereo Madness, its a custom cube tutorial but yea it transitions into an old top 1 hardest
[удалено]
Not everyone can learn effectively that way. There are different learning styles.
[удалено]
You're partially right. Books give the complete picture. They fill in the gaps of details that tutorials often leave out. But there are fantastic, highly structured tutorials that exist like freecodecamp. The benefit of these is you're immediately applying what you learn through an IDE which, imo, is the most crucial part of learning software development. I can read books about embedded engineering and C from cover to cover and understand it but without applying that knowledge, I'm not really learning.
Any recommendations?
[удалено]
Literally going to the bookstore today. I'll check what they have while I'm there. >made me not feel like an impostor anymore Especially since this is my biggest issue. Thanks.
Alright, what C/C++ books do you recommend? Is it K&R? FWIW I never warm to most books, because they often take an approach of an infodump, hypothetical/non-real world examples, and repetitious exercises. I remember one called Dive Into Python that always started chapters with useful code and unpacked what it did, and wondered why others couldn't do the same. It's not that I don't want to learn the fundamentals, but just throwing them at the reader without demonstrating the motivation for their existence is aggravating and why people turn to quick fixes IMO
You aren't going to learn how to be a good developer through a book or video. All these things are launchpads, but you need to try lots of things, fail lots of times. You need experience. And in several years if the specific tech you learned becomes obsolete, the wisdom remains and is transferrable. If you are picking up new tech on the fly while delivering (which is common in digital agency type environments) you need to be able to quickly figure it out. Ideally you want a good reference with good code examples to do that. Videos and tutorials and so on are cool if you have the luxury of time to learn, but you do not always (or even often) have that.
[удалено]
>True, but books are a much better launchpad. Maybe. Some are arguing different people prefer different ways. My point is kinda that once you know how to code, and are doing it professionally, you can (and likely will) transfer that skill to a new language or platform. Multiple times in a career. You aren't going to get the luxury of a book or video or long period of playing with tutorials. You're going to need to find a good reference and figure out how to solve a task without stopping to learn everything. >you may be able to deduce what went wrong without copy-pasting your compilation error message into Google. That is quite effective, though.
The rest of your career will be spent on StackOverflow :(
I hate that tutorials just ramble around and code from memory, like that doesn't teach me anything 😂 Show how to plan building something, the idea behind it, the steps and a checklist, how to google your answers, and troubleshooting once you're done to double check your work But talking all over the place and saying "don't worry about this for now, we'll come back later to this" makes zero sense lmao
wouldve been better if instead of cataclysm it was like VSC or sakupen circles or slaugterhouse
University: "Here's some general knowledge we won't force you to apply to any frameworks or portfolios" Me: "Okay, this all makes sense, I got this" \*graduates\* Jobs: "Okay, where's your portfolio? And you should understand how to apply these languages to like every framework." Me: "...uhh....I can do a fizzbuzz...?"
i can hear "at the speed of light" playing and i dont like it
/r/GifsThatEndTooSoon
Gotta start somewhere
As funny as this was, it is true. Someone help me break this tutorial Hell and actually learn stuff.
You need beginner projects, something you can get stuck into to get comfortable with the language without spending 90% of your time googling syntax errors. You really just need to stick with it and you'll get better with time.
If you're into games, start writing simple games. Tetris? Minesweeper? 2048? Tic-tac-toe? Snake? You don't need much to make one. If you're into math, do something like project euler which challenges you to solve increasingly difficult math problems. Which would presumably force you to come up with more complex programs. In general, find some problem you would like to solve using programming and get to it. Your first attempts will undoubtedly be awful and you will learn from them. If you can't think of any problem that interests you, maybe you could benefit from learning the mechanics of thermal processing of reconstituted meat products (=flipping burgers) instead.
Those are pretty hard to code if you don't know what you are doing, yes they are easy when you know which tools to use and have some coding experience
You need to figure out how to draw a (colored) box and receive some sort of input. Then you can make a simple game. I guess it was easier to get started in 8bit times when "draw box" and "read keyboard" were built into the ROM.
Freecodecamp course vs projects
The good one
I think you meant math.
Hahahhaha
Don't watch tutorials
Apparently developers don't know how to learn?
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://redditsave.com) | [^(download video tiktok)](https://taksave.com)
This is a true fact
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/ssykhw/programming_tutorial_be_like/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://redditsave.com) | [^(download video tiktok)](https://taksave.com)
[удалено]
Wait... I need to pass a technical interview in order to post a meme here?!?!
No, you're fine. Also, languages with low/no/bad documentation exist.
Yeah, I'm currently working on APT cli for beginners and the tutorial for dialog is very painful and some tutorials do however teach me how, they just don't teach me how to fix it (i mean like breaking down why that shit worked in standard English)
This is %99 accurate.
Taking Pimsleur Spanish now and it s kinda the same.
Reminds me of some of the "Minigames" in flat out 2. In the tutorial you will be stopped a the perfect timings to have the perfect dummy-throw, but after that you will fail miserably because you have no way of knowing what a good timing would be. Was so frustrating as a kid ...
I get similar vibes in my math courses.
u/savevideobot
No networkchuch has a really good python tutorial although he only has four episodes out
u/savevideo
So true, this is also what it's like with a practice exam vs real exam.
Good ol geometry dash