• 0 Posts
  • 74 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle

  • Most of the laptops I’ve had open lately have had about the top third be the motherboard and the bottom two-thirds be battery, with maybe some ports and speakers tucked down the side. So I’d expect that last of replacements to include the battery, too.

    I might check whether the hard drive survived - a decent M.2 is small, expensive and reusable - and maybe the RAM if it’s not soldered in.


  • I’d imagine that they’re unproductive because of the long hours that they spend in the office. It’s been a source of mystery to me (European) how our offices in America manage to put in 60 hour weeks every week, often with a crazy commute before and after, and yet never seem to make fuck all progress on anything. Better to concentrate on how to be as productive as possible for time that you are there, than to fetishise the total amount of time?


  • Writing in ASM is not too bad provided that there’s no operating system getting in the way. If you’re on some old 8-bit microcomputer where you’re free to read directly from the input buffers and write directly to the screen framebuffer, or if you’re doing embedded where it’s all memory-mapped IO anyway, then great. Very easy, makes a lot of sense. For games, that era basically ended with DOS, and VGA-compatible cards that you could just write bits to and have them appear on screen.

    Now, you have to display things on the screen by telling the graphics driver to do it, and so a lot of your assembly is just going to be arranging all of your data according to your platform’s C calling convention and then making syscalls, plus other tedious-but-essential requirements like making sure the stack is aligned whenever you make a jump. You might as well write macros to do that since you’ll be doing it a lot, and if you’ve written macros to do it then you might as well be using C instead, since most of C’s keywords and syntax map very closely to the ASM that would be generated by macros.

    A shame - you do learn a lot by having to tell the computer exactly what you want it to do - but I couldn’t recommend it for any non-trivial task any more. Maybe a wee bit of assembly here-and-there when you’ve some very specific data alignment or timing-sensitive requirement.




  • addie@feddit.ukto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneI don't make the (rule)s
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I feel that ‘gender’ is probably a misleading term for the languages that have ‘grammatical gender’, it rarely has anything to do with genitalia. ‘Noun class’, where adjectives have to decline to agree with the class would fit better in most cases.

    English essentially does not have decline adjectives, except for historical outliers like blond/e where no-one much cares if you don’t bother, and uses his / hers / its / erc using a very predictable rule. So no ‘grammatical gender’.






  • addie@feddit.ukto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneRule
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s been a perpetual source of surprise to me that curry houses are so ‘non-specific’. Pakistan and India together make about 1.7 billion people, about a third of the planet’s population, and I’d have thought an easy way to distinguish a restaurant would be to offer something more region-specific, but it’s fairly rare.

    Here in the UK, the majority of curry houses are Bangladeshi - used to be the vast majority, now it’s more like 2/3rds. We’ve a couple of ‘more specific’ chains - both Bundobust and Dishoom do Mumbai-style, and they’re both fantastic - and there’s a few places that do well with the ‘naturally vegan’ cuisines, but mostly you can go in to a restaurant and expect the usual suspects will be on the menu.

    Same goes for Chinese restaurants - I don’t believe that a billion people all eat the same food, it’s too big a place for the same ingredients to be in season all the time. Why are they not more specific, more often?


  • It’s a simple alphabet for computing because most of the early developers of computing developed using it and therefore it’s supported everywhere. If the Vikings had developed early computers then we could use the 24 futhark runes, wouldn’t have upper and lower case to worry about, and you wouldn’t need to render curves in fonts because it’s all straight lines.

    But yeah, agreed. Very widely spoken. But don’t translate programming languages automatically; VBA does that for keywords and it’s an utter nightmare.


  • If you move past the ‘brute force’ method of solving into the ‘constraints’ level, it’s fairly easy to check whether there are multiple possible valid solutions. Using a programming language with a good sets implementation (Python!) makes this easy - for each cell, generate a set of all the values that could possibly go there. If there’s only one, fill it in and remove that value from all the sets in the same row/column/block. If there’s no cells left that only take a unique value, choose the cell with the fewest possibilities and evaluate all of them, recursively. Even a fairly dumb implementation will do the whole problem space in milliseconds. This is a very easy problem to parallelize, too, but it’s hardly worth it for 9x9 sodokus - maybe if you’re generating 16x16 or 25x25 ‘alphabet’ puzzles, but you’ll quickly generate problems beyond the ability of humans to solve.

    The method in the article for generating ‘difficult’ puzzles seems mighty inefficient to me - generate a valid solution, and then randomly remove numbers until the puzzle is no longer ‘unique’. That’s a very calculation-heavy way of doing it, need to evaluate the whole puzzle at every step. It must be the case that a ‘unique’ sodoku has at least 8 unique numbers in the starting puzzle, because otherwise there will be at least two solutions, with the missing numbers swapped over. Preferring to remove numbers equal to values that you’ve already removed ought to get you to a hard puzzle faster?



  • Genesis is a different style of game tho, isn’t it? Diablo-like rather than third-person hack and slash?

    Love the series. Personally prefer 3 due to its more limited scope; the other two are great, but to on for a very long time, and I really can’t be bothered playing through the Portal-like bits again. Happy if 4 is the same length as 3.


  • Yeah. Unless they’ve some ulterior motive for porting their RE engine to iOS, then this is insane. That kind of cash will barely fund a senior engineer for a month once you’ve paid out overheads as well.

    If they’re planning to have some kind of phone tie-in to the next Resi game, then maybe it might have made sense to work the compatibility issues out. An app that runs on your phone that makes it “your phone in game”, so you can receive texts from the president’s daughter while shooting some definitely-not-Spaniards on your Playstation, bit of an augmented-reality thing. Could be a laugh to have your phone be in control of a drone so that you can see round corners, while juggling the other things you’re doing? But probably mostly so that you can get dinged for microtransactions.


  • Stephen King’s books tend to be both very long and contain a lot of internal monologue. That’s very much not film-friendly. “Faithful” adaptions tend to drag and have a lot of tell-don’t-show, which makes for a “terrible” film. Unfaithful ones tend to change and cut a lot, which makes them “terrible” adaptions. For instance, “The Shining” film has very little to do with the book, but is an absolutely phenomenal movie. King hated it.

    “IT” the Tim Curry version has Tim Curry in it, who was absolutely fantastic. A lot of material from the book was cut out - I’m thinking it could be 80% or more. That includes the scene where the children have a gang bang in the sewer. Out of nowhere, with no foreshadowing, and it’s never mentioned again if I remember correctly. That might make it a “terrible” unfaithful adaption, but you know something? I’m alright without seeing that.


  • addie@feddit.uktolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldbtw
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I don’t think that even 8 years ago, the ‘business’ choices would have been SUSE / Fedora / Debian. If you’re paying for support, then you’d be paying for RHEL, and the second choice would have been Centos, not Fedora. Debian in third place maybe, as it was the normal choice for ‘webserver’ applications, and then maybe SUSE in fourth.