Preparing for the worst possible scenarios is an ongoing process, not a state. As the sea level rises, the risks will have to be recalculated, and the levee systeem upgraded. To make things worse, the land is sinking as well, and even with high levees, salt water can still intrude in the soil from below.
Sure, but even if there's a correlation with eating meat, that doesn't mean that meat is actually responsible. It could be something else that meat eaters are more likely to do (or not do, like eating fiber), and just cutting out meat from your diet wouldn't help.
A serving of 100 grams of Cremini mushrooms have only 2% of your daily B12 requirement (other sources say 3 or 4%). Tofu has even less. Seems that veganism isn't a natural lifestyle.
The problem with epidemiological studies is that it's very hard to account for all the confounders. And if the researcher is biased towards a certain result, it's very easy to get it. People who choose to live a vegetarian lifestyle also make a lot of other choices regarding their health.
I've been vegan for 5 years (since high school) and I've never had a vitamin deficiency of any sort and I don't take any any B vitamin supplements whatsoever.
Your liver can store enough B12 to last years. The fact that you don't have a (noticeable) deficiency after 5 years doesn't mean you're not exhausting your supply.
*Every* embedded software design standard expressly forbids recursion
My embedded software design standard doesn't.
because it is what changes the problem from one that is effectively unbounded to one that is provably bounded
Recursively searching a binary tree is bounded by the depth of the tree, just like many other recursive methods are naturally bounded by the data they work on. And If the original problem space is unbounded, your recursive code is crap, and needs to be fixed properly. Just changing it to a non-recursive method doesn't magically fix the problem, or make it bounded.
If you want to write programs without understanding the fundamentals
I do understand the fundamentals. That's why I can safely use recursion when the problem calls for it.
Slashdot Mirror
In many places geothermal energy only lasts a few decades. The ground holds a lot of heat, but the transfer of new heat is really slow.
At the end of the day, every renewable is backed up by a gas plant
At the end of the day, gas will run out/get expensive, and renewables will be backed by storage.
They won't be dirtier than door handles, buttons, hand rails and other stuff you touch every day.
Then you unstore the energy from before.
I think they would get more funding if they provided mixed and inconclusive results, and arguing that more research was required.
If you really want four fours, then do 4-4+4-4 and N times the increment operator.
The intriguing bit about the article is not the simplicity, but working within the limitation of four fours with operators.
Then you must really like working within the limitation of a single zero and one operator.
Preparing for the worst possible scenarios is an ongoing process, not a state. As the sea level rises, the risks will have to be recalculated, and the levee systeem upgraded. To make things worse, the land is sinking as well, and even with high levees, salt water can still intrude in the soil from below.
Millions of years ago continents broke apart, volcanoes erupted, shit fell from the sky and killed everyone
And here you are, getting upset about a slashdot article.
You can make any number from a single zero and the increment operator.
4) Huge swathes of inhospitably cold Canadian land will be sunny, warm, and liveable swamps.
FTFY.
There's a reason they call it global warming, and not Georgia warming.
The shelf is already floating on the water, so probably only somewhat mildly epic.
Now all we need is a new printer that doesn't jam when the paper is not perfectly smooth.
There's a difference between trading, and giving investment advice.
Sure, but even if there's a correlation with eating meat, that doesn't mean that meat is actually responsible. It could be something else that meat eaters are more likely to do (or not do, like eating fiber), and just cutting out meat from your diet wouldn't help.
it's going to make 99.9% of the population not only unnecessary, but an impediment to the 0.1%.
They may be able to get jobs as batteries.
Elderly care robots, of course.
or 5. Use an algorithm that keeps the trees (mostly) balanced.
A serving of 100 grams of Cremini mushrooms have only 2% of your daily B12 requirement (other sources say 3 or 4%). Tofu has even less. Seems that veganism isn't a natural lifestyle.
The problem with epidemiological studies is that it's very hard to account for all the confounders. And if the researcher is biased towards a certain result, it's very easy to get it. People who choose to live a vegetarian lifestyle also make a lot of other choices regarding their health.
There's also a link between eating red meat and deaths caused by falling from ladders. Correlation doesn't mean much.
I've been vegan for 5 years (since high school) and I've never had a vitamin deficiency of any sort and I don't take any any B vitamin supplements whatsoever.
Your liver can store enough B12 to last years. The fact that you don't have a (noticeable) deficiency after 5 years doesn't mean you're not exhausting your supply.
Recursion is heavy on stack use, and you cannot be sure that your target system has enough stack space available.
Of course you can. You just figure out maximum recursion depth, and then check if there's enough stack space.
C will not do that. So as always, you should understand your language and your compiler
GCC has no problem identifying tail recursion and optimizing it away. I'm sure other modern C compilers do the same thing.
*Every* embedded software design standard expressly forbids recursion
My embedded software design standard doesn't.
because it is what changes the problem from one that is effectively unbounded to one that is provably bounded
Recursively searching a binary tree is bounded by the depth of the tree, just like many other recursive methods are naturally bounded by the data they work on. And If the original problem space is unbounded, your recursive code is crap, and needs to be fixed properly. Just changing it to a non-recursive method doesn't magically fix the problem, or make it bounded.
If you want to write programs without understanding the fundamentals
I do understand the fundamentals. That's why I can safely use recursion when the problem calls for it.