Formerly u/CanadaPlus101 on Reddit.
Hmm. I, on the other hand, tend to write a lot more code than I probably should before I do debugging, so there’s plenty to go back through again.
Although this looks like it’s for a browser, and for all I know debuggers work completely differently in there.
^ This is the person I want to develop with. My goodness, can I produce some tasty, broken first-pass code you can go wild on.
Well, yeah, but I was kind of hoping you’d explain why.
Can’t you just add the wrapper to the test as well, if it’s easy to do in the actual code?
Yeah, you definitely run fixed tests on the whole thing. But when it returns indecipherable garbage, you’ve got to dive in in more detail, and at that point you’re just doing breakpoints and watchpoints and looking at walls of floating point values.
I suppose Strassen’s is recursive, so you could tackle it that way, but for other numerical-type things there is no such option.
If I actually did have that kind of job, the tests-first philosophy would sound very appealing. Actually, build the stack so you don’t have a choice - the real code should just be an instantiation of plumbing on generic variables with certain expected statistical properties. You can do that when correctly processing unpredictable but repetitive stuff is the name of the game, and I expect someone does.
At a certain level of detail, tests just become a debugger, right?
I’m thinking of something like an implementation of Strassen’s algorithm. It’s all arithmetic; you can’t really check for macro correctness without doing a similar kind of arithmetic yourself, which is basically just writing the same code again. It resembles nothing other than itself.
Depending on what kind of coding you’re doing, there might not be an obvious, really atomic unit to test. Most people here seem to do the data-plumbing-for-corporations kind, though.
Well, sometimes it happens. Lemmy was semi-broken during the APIocalypse, and there still isn’t such a thing as a FOSS Facebook, or search engine backend for that matter.
And Linux/BSD are so good proprietary developers rip them off to whatever degree legally permissible.
At least on the official web app, that doesn’t render as a link. You’ve got to do it as [whatever](u/pageflight@lemmy.world)
Literally just put it in that way, for future notice - there’s no hidden formatting here.
Hopefully somebody else $DAYJOBs at GitHub and will see this.
Uhh, so looking carefully at the picture, it appears they shouldn’t have bothered with the inner pathway at all, and should have just connected the bridge over the canal (?) in the background to whatever is under the camera.
Not only does the current design fail to provide a short path in demand, it leaves a goofy little boulevard behind the benches in what appears to be a dense, desirable urban area where you shouldn’t waste space.
Just give the URL, I’ll do a federated link for you.
GreaseWeazle (link) FTW.
By now, I have just one, so thanks for the assist. There’s always that one (sometimes puzzling) downvote on anything factual.
The pumping lemma, for anyone unfamiliar. It’s a consequence of the fact an FSM is finite, so you can construct a repeatable y just by exhausting the FSM’s ability to “remember” how much it’s seen.
Yeah, but in an FSM all you have are states. To do it the obvious way, you need a loop with separate branches for every number greater than 2, or at the very least every prime number, and that’s not going to be finite.
So this is a definite example of “regex” that’s not regular, then. I really don’t think there’s any finite state machine that can track every possible number of string repeats separately.
I’m going to say it just is misinformation, if that’s what “lib” is here.