Yes. <center></center>
isn’t part of HTML5. It is part of HTML4 though.
Yes. <center></center>
isn’t part of HTML5. It is part of HTML4 though.
For small projects, rewriting is often superb. It allows us to reorganize a mess, apply new knowledge, add neat features and doodads, etc.
This. I’m coding to contribute to a open-source software with very small amount of coders, and with a non-mainstream Domain-Specific Language. A lot of the code I did before has been proven to work from times to time, but they all could benefit from better outputs and better GUI. So, I end up reengineering the entire and that’ll take a really long time, however, I do a lot of tests to ensure it works.
I have to say, I really like the concept behind this. May be another tool for parsing strings I have besides Python.
I don’t understand your problem well enough to know, if you can (or want to) use this here, but you might be able to tap into that C performance with the radix conversion formatting of printf.
The problem is printing big binary to decimal. That’s not a easy problem because 10 is not a power 2. If we live in a base-hex world, this would be very easy to solve in O(n).
Also, I can’t access that as G’MIC is a language that can’t really communicate with other language as it’s not meant to share memory.
This could be an XY problem, that is, you’re trying to solve problem X, rather than the underlying problem Y. Y here being: Why do you need things to be in decimal in the first place?
I wouldn’t say it’s needed, but this is more of a fun thing for me. The only thing I’m using this is for Tupper’s Self-Referential formula, and my current approach of converting base 1>>24 to base 1e7 works instantly for 106x17 binary digits. When I load a image to that filter that’s greater than somewhere over 256x256, delays are noticeable because the underlying algorithm isn’t that great, but it could have to do with the fact that G’MIC is interpretative, and despite the JIT support in it, this is not the kind of problem it’s meant to solve (Domain-Specific). On the bright side of thing, this algorithm will work with any data type as long as one data type is one level higher than the other, and in this case, I’m using the lowest level (single and double), and the bigger data type, much faster it can be.
Even simpler is repeat 10 { }
} just stands for done.
I don’t think we do have a difference in opinion. What I’m saying is that some apps are done with many years of development, and in those case, C++ will likely be the only realistic option because it is way more time-consuming to switch. For example, Krita. I do agree that when there’s a choice, C++ is less relevant these day.
C++ is still used for some popular applications, and it still is the only realistic option for these ones. I think there should be more Domain-Specific Languages. I want one for vector graphics like G’MIC is for raster graphics.
I been meaning to learn Ruby to get around using Python. I like Ruby syntax better.
You mean a interpretative language with similar role to Python, but more like Rust/C++ style? I actually want that so that I can ditch Python even if I learned it and use this instead.
I kind of like it. I can understand where it start and end.
I only stick with these:
Easy.
Scala does look nice. Just a quick syntax view makes me want to give it a whirl when I want an alternative to Python. I used to code in C++, and C#. I use G’MIC (DSL) as my main. Scala seems right up my alley.