MrMcCall

50 ms·

571.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
It all depends upon the problems you are solving, and they are only bounded by your own creativity.
572.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Perfection is a difficult foe, and requires a fanatical devotion to even match, and there are levels upon levels of perfection.
573.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Thanks. My son and I first started watching together for Magnus-Fabi, so it's something we enjoy doing together. I enjoy the sporting aspect of it even though I've never been a particularly good chess player. I'm more interes
574.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
His quote from the interview was "six and a half to seven", so I rounded to 11 years, as he is now 18.
575.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
He certainly has created a bit of buzz.
576.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Yes, they amass thousands upon thousands of games at a very young age. I did the same programming my C64 in 8th-10th grades. The hours just fly by, doing what you love. One other factor is that 3500-level chess engines are freely available
577.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Absolutely. Nepo and Magnus seem to be cut from a different cloth, although Magnus has never had a moment where he could demonstrate whether or not he can be humble, because he has always just crushed. Anish Giri kind of took a shot at Magn
578.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Ding has nothing to be ashamed of. He fought like a true warrior. He was a great champion, with class and brilliance. I just don't think he was physically as strong as he could be, and that affects one's ability to think as they m
579.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
And the graciousness to keep his joy in humble reserve, knowing how much Ding would be crushed. Truly a young man of God.
580.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Gukesh took him into the deep water the entire time, putting every possible strain on Ding's energy and reserves. It was the unrelenting pressure of an 18yo badass that cracked Ding, whom I truly feel sorry for. He is a great player an
581.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Wow. What a match. Been watching with my son, a chess lover since we started watching the Magnus-Fabi match. Now, my son loves his chess club and has retired me from playing :-) Two thoughts: 1) Gukesh took Ding into the deep water the enti
582.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I don't find those compelling reasons and, to the contrary, I think that kind of semantic circumvention to be a symptom of a poorly developed industry. How can we have properly functioning programs without clearly-defined, and sensibl
583.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Isn't it more sensible to just check that the params that are about to be sent to memcpy be reasonable? That is why I tend to wrap my system calls with my own internal function (which can be inlined in certain PLs), where I can standar
584.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
The best I've found are languages like F# that allow you to return a pair of values, which for your example would be a tuple of (bool, bool), where the first is isError and the second is the evalResult. Of course, you better not mix `e
585.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
IIUC, using your function with an empty set in SPSS or SAS will result in a NULL value, which is neither True nor False (NPI). Do you know the truth tables that include NULL? I don't off-hand, but I seem to remember that combining NULL
586.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
You have given me a broad smile, friend. Thanks for that.
587.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
"More or less" is the key and the rub. The specific semantics must be determined and utilized in place. For me, the evaluation of the empty set should have separate semantics than that for how a non-empty set's elements are l
588.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
But you have specifically initialized your AND and OR results to be True and then False, respectively, thus specifying the resulting value for their processing of the empty set. What I'm saying is that you always need to specify that d
589.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
The same operators don't need precedence rules; each language is processed left-to-right or vice versa. Usually it's left-to-right, in my experience with maybe a dozen languages professionally, maybe twice that in exploration.
590.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Thanks for breaking that down for me. I guess, to me, a programmer logician not a mathematician logician, the real problem for me here is the definition of "liar" as it applies to how we parse the problem statement's facts.
591.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Uninitialized variables are 90% of our bugs, or so I've been told. I don't consider a boolean "and" or "or" of a list of bools to be automatically true or false of an empty set, my friend. To me, the specific c
592.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I agree. I would appreciate it if you would correct my thinking on the subject, if I have erred: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42365506 Thanks in advance.
593.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
As human beings, we can create our own reasons for anything we do, from the horrific to the beautiful, from the selfish to the selfless. We can conjure reasons to oppress other human beings, or contrive reasons to help them be happier. We c
594.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
That's why I suggest we just don't move them.
595.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I don't have formal logic or any math beyond calculus, either, and it appears that this fact is to our advantage.
596.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
That's why I always use parentheses, i.e. I never rely on operator precedence. Therein lie troubles, lad. And, as usual, the xkcd is fantastic.
597.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
Why would you conclude that the liar is telling the truth that they have any hats at all?
598.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I think the question is more about liars than it is about hats.
599.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
It is either that: a) they don't have any hats, i.e. that they are lying about having any hats at all. b) they have some number of hats (n >= 1) and at least one is not green, because they are lying about the color of all their ha
600.
by MrMcCall 2y ago
I need a great deal of help. This world is overrun by a combination of the cruel and those indifferent to its cruelty. We need as many people as possible to learn how selfless compassion is the solution to all our problems. As to help, I ge

More ›