Shadows; they'd be Doom 3-like. Several games have full stencil shadows and that's just how raytraced ones would look: sharp and straight.
Sharp and straight shadows? Check out this example or this one or yet another. Granted, these scenes rendering times are measured in hours, not fractions of a second... but eventually games will be at that level of quality.
The problem is the cable companies have so long enjoyed monopoly status that they have no idea how to behave in a real market. In a real market that $5 price point may become $10 for the ESPN channels and $0.10 for the Pass-The-Loot channels - they may even pay you to watch it.
What an awesome idea! A TV channel crammed with so many ads and really cheap content that they pay you to watch it. If you could get $1/month by adding it to your station subscription, why wouldn't you? Maybe the stipulation would be that you had to watch at least 1 hour of programming per week to qualify. The station would then see its viewership go up and, in turn, could sell more eyeballs to the advertisers, who might invest more in better, funnier ads which would increase viewership more.
I guess I am surprised. Thanks for the blast from the past... that was about 30 years ago that we switched our phones to tone dialing back when the phone company charged extra for that "feature". I didn't know there were phone companies which still allowed pulse dial.
Consider a multithreaded program, where one thread walks though the list while the other is reversing it.
Okay, so now it's multithreaded. Is there a reason why you wouldn't use resource locking, synchronization, etc. to handle this case? And, stepping back, if the amount of time to reverse the list and the frequency of requiring to do so makes it inappropriate to lock off the entire list and make other threads wait on a resource, then perhaps the design was faulty and it would have made more sense to have it as a doubly linked list.
Yes, I did read what you said. Assuming you're not just trolling, then clearly you're not understanding as you didn't understand what the other person who posted C code wrote. The remainder of the list isn't unreachable as you're storing a temporary pointer to it. http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/cpp/list_howto /#simple_implementation -- be sure to read the commentary on the code which explains how the reverse function works. It's O(n). See also Knuth's Art of Computer Programming, Volume 1 for this similar singly linked list reversal code.
If you have a 1% chance of getting AIDS on the street, and you had 8% more chance of getting it in prison, that would be 108%, or 1.08 times more likely.
You're correct, Mr. AC. It appears I read it as an 8% chance rather than 8% more.
CNN had a story on the magical TV that said you are 8 times, or 8% more likely to get AIDS in prision, than you would on the street. I do not know if it was 8 times, or 8%.
If your odds on the street are 1%, then both figures are accurate.
Recursion won't work very well on a linked list that has ninety million items now will it? You can just go through one by one. You have a pointer to current, a pointer to next. Store the next's next pointer in a temp variable and assign the next's next pointer to current. Keep going through the list until next is null, at which point you're at the head. Reassign the head. Handle the outlying cases (null list, one item list, etc.), clean up for my bad wording, and there's your algorithm.
An engineer with 20 years experience knows a few things:
1) He hasn't had to reverse a linked list in 23 years. 2) There are framework functions to reverse a linked list. Who cares how they work.
Questions like that are VERY age-biased. Because only someone right out of school, or someone with their head so buried in the code would remember that on the spot.
Oh come on. Reversing a linked list really isn't hard. I don't think I've ever had to do it and with about 15 seconds of thinking I can easily picture the exact procedure. Maybe I won't get the C syntax 100% correct, but I can sure as hell describe the process of doing it. If your experienced engineer needs to google for the answer, then you're probably hiring a manager and not someone with coding experience.
seeing as how whatever the hell it was he stole does have an actual real cash value, might law enforcement get interested? $130K isn't chump change, and you can't use a EULA to circumvent the law.
In EVE, it's not illegal to steal someone's ISK. The fact that the ISK can be sold for real-world money is irrelevant.
Even easier: if performing two 64-bit encryptions is the same as one 128-bit encryption, are you saying that performing a 1-bit encryption 128 times is just as secure?
Slashdot Mirror
But where's the Pit of Sarlacc when you need one?
You know, it was much nicer when you forgot to make your entire post monotype -- like you did in this post.
kill -9 -1
Go big or go home.
Dangerous precedence is calculating 1 + 2 * 3 and expecting 9 when it's really 7. I think you mean its homonym, dangerous precedents.
Be careful. There is no official scientific definition for the phrase "full spectrum," so marketers are free to use this term how they choose.
No kidding. I had to take some bulbs back because they weren't emitting nearly enough gamma radiation for my liking.
Ehoo sounds way better than Goobay.
Shadows; they'd be Doom 3-like. Several games have full stencil shadows and that's just how raytraced ones would look: sharp and straight.
Sharp and straight shadows? Check out this example or this one or yet another. Granted, these scenes rendering times are measured in hours, not fractions of a second... but eventually games will be at that level of quality.
Oh, but surely you don't suggest they use regular street language! Everyone prefers the following:
"it's relatively poor in comparison to stock keeping units that we've reviewed recently"
Doesn't that sound way better? The only thing the article lacked was more information on the universal product code and serial number.
No kidding... and here I thought a "get a mac" campaign would be in the spirit of the old Get a Macintosh commercial.
(And, no, my QuickTime plugin worked fine in Firefox 1.5.0.6.)
Is that the degree to which something grees? Seemed odd, so I conducted some scientific research to back up the claim.
The problem is the cable companies have so long enjoyed monopoly status that they have no idea how to behave in a real market. In a real market that $5 price point may become $10 for the ESPN channels and $0.10 for the Pass-The-Loot channels - they may even pay you to watch it.
What an awesome idea! A TV channel crammed with so many ads and really cheap content that they pay you to watch it. If you could get $1/month by adding it to your station subscription, why wouldn't you? Maybe the stipulation would be that you had to watch at least 1 hour of programming per week to qualify. The station would then see its viewership go up and, in turn, could sell more eyeballs to the advertisers, who might invest more in better, funnier ads which would increase viewership more.
That's clearly yet another picture of the Nexus. You can't fool us with this Chinook nonsense.
I guess I am surprised. Thanks for the blast from the past... that was about 30 years ago that we switched our phones to tone dialing back when the phone company charged extra for that "feature". I didn't know there were phone companies which still allowed pulse dial.
Consider a multithreaded program, where one thread walks though the list while the other is reversing it.
Okay, so now it's multithreaded. Is there a reason why you wouldn't use resource locking, synchronization, etc. to handle this case? And, stepping back, if the amount of time to reverse the list and the frequency of requiring to do so makes it inappropriate to lock off the entire list and make other threads wait on a resource, then perhaps the design was faulty and it would have made more sense to have it as a doubly linked list.
Yes, I did read what you said. Assuming you're not just trolling, then clearly you're not understanding as you didn't understand what the other person who posted C code wrote. The remainder of the list isn't unreachable as you're storing a temporary pointer to it. http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/cpp/list_howto /#simple_implementation -- be sure to read the commentary on the code which explains how the reverse function works. It's O(n). See also Knuth's Art of Computer Programming, Volume 1 for this similar singly linked list reversal code.
Sometimes, being a bit more subtle goes a long way.
For all intensive purposes, your right. Its sad that their too stupid to improve their English and loose the bad grammar. It bug's me to no end!
I've heard it said that Linux is for those who hate Windows, while BSD is for those that love Unix. It would seem that ESR falls into this stereotype.
If you have a 1% chance of getting AIDS on the street, and you had 8% more chance of getting it in prison, that would be 108%, or 1.08 times more likely.
You're correct, Mr. AC. It appears I read it as an 8% chance rather than 8% more.
CNN had a story on the magical TV that said you are 8 times, or 8% more likely to get AIDS in prision, than you would on the street. I do not know if it was 8 times, or 8%.
If your odds on the street are 1%, then both figures are accurate.
Recursion won't work very well on a linked list that has ninety million items now will it? You can just go through one by one. You have a pointer to current, a pointer to next. Store the next's next pointer in a temp variable and assign the next's next pointer to current. Keep going through the list until next is null, at which point you're at the head. Reassign the head. Handle the outlying cases (null list, one item list, etc.), clean up for my bad wording, and there's your algorithm.
An engineer with 20 years experience knows a few things:
1) He hasn't had to reverse a linked list in 23 years.
2) There are framework functions to reverse a linked list. Who cares how they work.
Questions like that are VERY age-biased. Because only someone right out of school, or someone with their head so buried in the code would remember that on the spot.
Oh come on. Reversing a linked list really isn't hard. I don't think I've ever had to do it and with about 15 seconds of thinking I can easily picture the exact procedure. Maybe I won't get the C syntax 100% correct, but I can sure as hell describe the process of doing it. If your experienced engineer needs to google for the answer, then you're probably hiring a manager and not someone with coding experience.
seeing as how whatever the hell it was he stole does have an actual real cash value, might law enforcement get interested? $130K isn't chump change, and you can't use a EULA to circumvent the law.
In EVE, it's not illegal to steal someone's ISK. The fact that the ISK can be sold for real-world money is irrelevant.
Even easier: if performing two 64-bit encryptions is the same as one 128-bit encryption, are you saying that performing a 1-bit encryption 128 times is just as secure?