However if you use the "o" form ("divwo.") then divide by zero will set the OE condition bit. However in both cases this still means that it is the job of the compiler to do the checking. The snag is that some languages, like C, say that the result of divide by zero is undefined and so they may not bother checking either (undefined means that the language implementation can do whatever it likes).
There is an answer, but it is not representable exactly except as a special value (NaN for floating point). So mathematically it is well defined (exept for 0/0), however in many programming languages it is explicitly stated that the results are undefined. What that means is that the implementer of the language is allowed to do whatever they want (because it's undefined).
Also the math does break down when you divide by zero, so while it's not meaningless it does mean that you can't properly use these values. For example:
"X/N * N == X" or "X/N * N/X == 1" These equations break down when N is 0
The thing is, if you get a crash with "divide by zero" as the result then it's easy to see where this happened and then follow the path back to see where the ultimate cause originated. But if the divide-by-zero error is ignored and code continues on, then the code may crash much later in time and the cause may be extremely difficult to track down, or you may enter an infinite loop even.
Save a few seconds of coding time by not checking versus wasting weeks trying to figure out why things are behaving unpredictably in the field.
But we also need to track the animals. This lets us determine how effective our animal-based advertising is in order to more fully monetize their internet usage.
This sounds so much like a beginning programmer question. Sorts of things I used to hear when being a teaching assistant. Too much effort, can this be simpler?
Now in some cases, people may not care. There are a lot of cases where one ignores errors in real life. But lots of programmers love to crash at a moment's notice: sprinkle the code liberally with asserts rather than try to recover, let main() catch all errors and then print an error and exit, etc. However if you're ignoring an error you should abort the operation you were doing in a way that lets you continue gracefully.
That means don't treat a divide-by-zero as zero ever, it means treat divide-by-zero as a notification that you should abort the operation you were doing. Continuing after a divide-by-zero error is just as bad as crashing. Throw away the answer rather than continue, otherwise it implies that the result of the calculation was irrelevant.
One language I thought was interesting was "Icon", where the type of a result could be "failure", and any operation on failure results in another failure.
Anyway, if someone wants to ignore divide-by-zero and to treat it as zero result, then they need a GOOD reason for it. And "it's tedious to check" is not at all a good reason.
Even the free one would require that you be on the Mac App store to get it, which requires you to be tracked by having an Apple ID. Far better to bypass the store entirely and get libre office directly.
Because blocking some of the ads is better than no blocking at all. For a supposedly evil whitelist, I have never once seen an ad show up with Adblock Plus.
Of course we know what to do with IoT. It exists today. It's not the gadget/smartphone loving hipster IoT that the media fawns over. But the smart grid is IoT, many SCADA systems could fit that description, other networks of sensor controllers that exist today, etc. Sometimes they do have passwords (which nobody enters by hand), sometimes they have to present certificates. There is a LOT of security in them.
However it's more than that. If there is no water flowing into the delta then we get salt water going upstream which damages a whole lot more than just smelt. There are some extreeeemely conservative people in the central valley claiming the whole thing is just a plot, and every politician, left or right, is mistrusted.
Also, if farmers and ranchers don't use the water this year, then they reduce how much water you get next year. Sort of like departmental budgets where you are penalized for being frugal. California and various water districts have some really stupid rules.
Everyone's pointing fingers are everyone else. But everyone needs to take a hit, you can't force it all onto just some people (or on just some fish).
However it is not the most water thirsty of the plants grown in California. It's just being scapegoated I think. Melons take far more water, but overall almods are a better cash crop at the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
However if you use the "o" form ("divwo.") then divide by zero will set the OE condition bit. However in both cases this still means that it is the job of the compiler to do the checking. The snag is that some languages, like C, say that the result of divide by zero is undefined and so they may not bother checking either (undefined means that the language implementation can do whatever it likes).
There is an answer, but it is not representable exactly except as a special value (NaN for floating point).
So mathematically it is well defined (exept for 0/0), however in many programming languages it is explicitly stated that the results are undefined. What that means is that the implementer of the language is allowed to do whatever they want (because it's undefined).
Also the math does break down when you divide by zero, so while it's not meaningless it does mean that you can't properly use these values. For example:
"X/N * N == X" or "X/N * N/X == 1"
These equations break down when N is 0
I suggest that you give up on programming and go into marketing. The hours are better and you still get to take credit for what the programmers do.
"It's so crazy that it might just work!"
"Well defined" is poorly defined here.
The thing is, if you get a crash with "divide by zero" as the result then it's easy to see where this happened and then follow the path back to see where the ultimate cause originated. But if the divide-by-zero error is ignored and code continues on, then the code may crash much later in time and the cause may be extremely difficult to track down, or you may enter an infinite loop even.
Save a few seconds of coding time by not checking versus wasting weeks trying to figure out why things are behaving unpredictably in the field.
What's actually happening? The only difference I see is a number up by the title. Do I have to turn off adblock and noscript before I see the changes?
But we also need to track the animals. This lets us determine how effective our animal-based advertising is in order to more fully monetize their internet usage.
Or a +1 Dope Slap button.
But programming is haaaard! Can't we make it simpler? Oh ya, and pay me more because I thought of the idea to make it simpler.
How is that a divide-by-zero? If you had $1,000,000 in sales and hardware sold nothing then their ratio of sales is 0/1000000 and not 1000000/0.
This sounds so much like a beginning programmer question. Sorts of things I used to hear when being a teaching assistant. Too much effort, can this be simpler?
Now in some cases, people may not care. There are a lot of cases where one ignores errors in real life. But lots of programmers love to crash at a moment's notice: sprinkle the code liberally with asserts rather than try to recover, let main() catch all errors and then print an error and exit, etc. However if you're ignoring an error you should abort the operation you were doing in a way that lets you continue gracefully.
That means don't treat a divide-by-zero as zero ever, it means treat divide-by-zero as a notification that you should abort the operation you were doing. Continuing after a divide-by-zero error is just as bad as crashing. Throw away the answer rather than continue, otherwise it implies that the result of the calculation was irrelevant.
One language I thought was interesting was "Icon", where the type of a result could be "failure", and any operation on failure results in another failure.
Anyway, if someone wants to ignore divide-by-zero and to treat it as zero result, then they need a GOOD reason for it. And "it's tedious to check" is not at all a good reason.
No finite number is closer or farther from infinity.
They provide their own crapware and tolerate no competition in that market.
True, but Microsoft Office is even worse.
Even the free one would require that you be on the Mac App store to get it, which requires you to be tracked by having an Apple ID. Far better to bypass the store entirely and get libre office directly.
You can tell he was a manager, because an actual developer would never think about "customer reach" when choosing a language.
Because blocking some of the ads is better than no blocking at all. For a supposedly evil whitelist, I have never once seen an ad show up with Adblock Plus.
You think SCADA systems have not improved security? A few examples of old systems with bad security and they're all supposed to be that inept?
Of course we know what to do with IoT. It exists today. It's not the gadget/smartphone loving hipster IoT that the media fawns over. But the smart grid is IoT, many SCADA systems could fit that description, other networks of sensor controllers that exist today, etc. Sometimes they do have passwords (which nobody enters by hand), sometimes they have to present certificates. There is a LOT of security in them.
However it's more than that. If there is no water flowing into the delta then we get salt water going upstream which damages a whole lot more than just smelt. There are some extreeeemely conservative people in the central valley claiming the whole thing is just a plot, and every politician, left or right, is mistrusted.
Also, if farmers and ranchers don't use the water this year, then they reduce how much water you get next year. Sort of like departmental budgets where you are penalized for being frugal. California and various water districts have some really stupid rules.
Everyone's pointing fingers are everyone else. But everyone needs to take a hit, you can't force it all onto just some people (or on just some fish).
However it is not the most water thirsty of the plants grown in California. It's just being scapegoated I think. Melons take far more water, but overall almods are a better cash crop at the moment.
Elop's first actions were to gut things. No attempt was made to improve the company.
In that case, time to wait for Microsoft to call you up to fill an executive position.