• redxef@feddit.org
    38·
    3 days ago
    def is_even(n: int) -> bool:
    if n < 0:
        return is_even(-n)
    r = True
    for _ in range(n):
        r = not r
    return r
    • Destide@feddit.ukOPEnglish
      81·
      3 days ago

      As we’re posting examples I’ll add how lovely it is in Elixir. Elixir def not putting the fun in programmer memes do. One reason I picked it because I can’t be trusted to not be the meme.

      def is_even?(n) do
  rem(n, 2) == 0
end
      • balsoft@lemmy.ml
        10·
        3 days ago

        I mean, it would be almost this exact thing in almost any language.

        fn is_even(n: i64) -> bool {
    n % 2 == 0
}

        even n = n `rem` 2 == 0

        def is_even(n):
    return n % 2 == 0

        etc

        • vinnymac@lemmy.world
          4·
          3 days ago

          Personal preference, but elixir just strikes a balance that doesn’t make me feel like I’m reading hieroglyphs so I’m actually happy to see it praised.

          • fushuan [he/him]@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            4·
            3 days ago

            I would have preferred for the function to be called mod, since it’s the modulo operation, which in math is represented with a percentage or “mod”. Most programming languages use a percentage because of that, so do a lot of calculators.

          • balsoft@lemmy.ml
            2·
            3 days ago

            Yeah, I agree that Elixir is a fine language for some tasks. I personally find the readability somewhat average, but it’s very maintainable (due to how it enables clear program structure), the error handling is great, and the lightweight process system is amazing.

  • pivot_root@lemmy.world
    473·
    3 days ago

    That code is so wrong. We’re talking about Jason “Thor” Hall here—that function should be returning 1 and 0, not booleans.

    If you don't get the joke...

    In the source code for his GameMaker game, he never uses true or false. It’s always comparing a number equal to 1.

    • Aqarius@lemmy.world
      6·
      3 days ago

      Frankly, it’s what I did, too, after coming out of Uni-level C.

      My code was goddamn unreadable.

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        9·
        3 days ago

        It’s the same for a lot of people. Beginners are still learning good practices for maintainable code, and they’re expected to get better over time.

        The reason people are ragging on PirateSoftware/Jason/Thor isn’t because he’s bad at writing code. It’s because he’s bad at writing code, proclaiming to be an experienced game development veteran, and doubling down and making excuses whenever people point out where his code could be better.

        Nobody would have cared if he admitted that he has some areas for improvement, but he seemingly has to flaunt his overstated qualifications and act like the be-all, end-all, know-it-all of video game development. I’m more invested in watching the drama unfold than I should be, but it’s hard not to appreciate the schadenfreude from watching arrogant influencers destroy their reputation.

        • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
          6·
          3 days ago

          He’s totally one of those people that’s sort of attractive and has an authoritative voice so s lot of people have probably folded to him in arguments through his life. I don’t like making generalizations like that about people but this isn’t the first time he’s acted like this. The one that really took the cake was the whole hardcore WoW raid debacle.

          The TL;DR is, as well as not trying to really spend time on the parts that don’t matter, he did some things that may or may not have been the right thing to do in the situation depending on your perspective. But whenever any of his guild mates or other viewers would criticize him he’d be so adamant that no, he didn’t do anything wrong, he did exactly what he was supposed to do, etc. People would even explicitly tell him “hey, what’s pissing us off now isn’t that you did it, it’s that you’re so adamant you couldn’t have possibly made a mistake, you’re not willing to see our perspective. You’re not willing to admit that maybe you could’ve been wrong. You’re not willing to apologize.” And still, his reaction to this was to triple down and just insist he didn’t do anything wrong.

          Like I literally even saw a clip of him talking to someone and he said “a lot of people think I’m being condescending when really I’m just providing context.” And the guy talking to him points out “yeah, it’s a problem that you think anyone disagreeing with you doesn’t understand the situation, it’s like you think they’re stupid.” It’s like it short circuited his brain. It’s like he’d never considered it.

          So yeah, I have a pretty low opinion of him. But I also recognize that maybe all these clips are taken out of context, who knows. It’s not like my opinion really matters. I don’t work with him or know him. I don’t care about streamers. I don’t really watch them.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        6·
        3 days ago

        I am working with C in embedded designs and I still use 1 or 0 for a bool certain situations, mostly lines level.

        For whatever pea-brained reason, it feels yucky to me to set a gpio to true/false instead of a 1/0.

        • xthexder@l.sw0.com
          6·
          3 days ago

          GPIOs are usually controlled by a single bit of a register anyway. Most likely you need to do something like:

          // Set high
PORTB |= 1 << PINB5;
// Set low
PORTB &= ~(1 << PINB5);
          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            3 days ago

            I am a lazy dev (not really, clients always want fast code), so I use the provided HAL libraries 99.9% of the time.

            But I have seen code where someone would write something like

            gpio_write(PIN_X, true)

            and it always stood out to me.

            • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
              1·
              3 days ago

              Define on as true or something? Or maybe that’s more confusing. I’m not a C dev so I’m not gonna pretend to understand idiomatic microcontroller code lol.

              • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                2 days ago

                Sometimes, people do that. But using 0/1 is explicit enough since you can refer to a line as ‘1’ or ‘0’ for high/low on the hardware as well

    • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      1625·
      4 days ago

      YanDev is a literal pedophile. It’s honestly mind boggling people care more about a guy who won’t sign a petition on preserving video games than pedophiles and bigots. I don’t get the hate.

      • deur@feddit.nl
        434·
        4 days ago

        Because this dumbass has existed for a lot longer than the single moment you are using to construct the strawman of “the enraged internet user over nothing other than a ‘petition’ (HUGE mischaracterization, he’s not eligible to sign in anyway)” and just like when yanderedev was finally widely controversial, the “yanderedev code is bad lol” memes and jokes were very popular.

        Can you at least pretend you understand how “the continuous flow of time works” before you post the dumbest shit ever?

      • shea@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        15·
        3 days ago

        it’s not that he “wont sign it”. lmao. its that he comoketely unprovoked started a hate campaign against it, literally on the spot hearing about it on stream, directed his viewers not to engage with the petition and started making up a bunch of reasons while talking in that confident-but-clulesss voice about how its destructive and awful and short sighted, making up a bunch of atuff about it that was immediately disproven, just spewing all this vitriol for no reason. Not engaging with it is one thing but actively fighting against a wonderul consumer rights campaign like this, not to mention how important iy is to gaming history to be able to preserve games, is so anti-gamer i dont understand how he ever got a following. Hes a dipsh who talks out of his butthole and he appeals to the kind of lobenly nerd that thinks being an asshole is cool

  • Kuma@lemmy.world
    71·
    2 days ago

    I am more amazed that he didn’t stop at 10 and think “damn this is tiresome isn’t there a one liner i could do?”. I want to know how far he went. His stubbornness is amazing but also scary. I haven’t seen this kind of code since back in school lol lol lol

  • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
    48·
    3 days ago

    No, no, you should group the return false lines together 😤😤

    if (number == 1) return false;
else if (number == 3) return false;
else if (number == 5) return false;
//...
else if (number == 2) return true;
else if (number == 4) return true;
//...
  • Euphoma@lemmy.mlEnglish
    24·
    3 days ago
    def even(n: int) -> bool:
    code = ""
    for i in range(0, n+1, 2):
        code += f"if {n} == {i}:\n out = True\n"
        j = i+1
        code += f"if {n} == {j}:\n out = False\n"
    local_vars = {}
    exec(code, {}, local_vars)
    return local_vars["out"]

    scalable version

    • xthexder@l.sw0.com
      6·
      3 days ago

      Not even else if? Damn, I guess we’re checking all the numbers every time then. This is what peak performance looks like

  • Aedis@lemmy.world
    32·
    3 days ago

    I’m partial to a recursive solution. Lol

    def is_even(number):
    if number < 0 or (number%1) > 0:
        raise ValueError("This impl requires positive integers only") 
    if number < 2:
        return number
    return is_even(number - 2)
    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      18·
      3 days ago

      I prefer good ole regex test of a binary num

      function isEven(number){
   binary=$(echo "obase=2; $number" | bc)
   if [ "${binary:-1}" = "1" ]; then
         return 255
   fi
   return 0
}
      • balsoft@lemmy.ml
        8·
        3 days ago

        Amateur! I can read and understand that almost right away. Now I present a better solution:

        even() ((($1+1)&1))

        (I mean, it’s funny cause it’s unreadable, but I suspect this is also one of the most efficient bash implementations possible)

        (Actually the obvious one is a slight bit faster. But this impl for odd is the fastest one as far as I can tell odd() (($1&1)))

          • balsoft@lemmy.ml
            2·
            3 days ago

            I don’t think there’s much to codegolf. The “obvious” solution (even() (($1%2))) is both shorter and faster. Don’t think it can be optimized much more.

        • tetris11@lemmy.ml
          3·
          3 days ago

          woah your bash is legit good. I thought numeric pretexts needed $(( blah )), but you’re ommiting the $ like an absolute madman. How is this wizardy possible

            • tetris11@lemmy.ml
              3·
              3 days ago

              Oh I see it, but for some reason I was taught to always use $(( arith )) instead of (( arith )) and I guess I’m just wondering what the difference is

              • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                7·
                3 days ago

                The difference is that (( is a “compound command”, similar to [[ (evaluate conditional expression), while $(( )) is “aritmetic expansion”. They behave in almost exactly the same way but are used in different contexts - the former uses “exit codes” while the latter returns a string, so the former would be used where you would expect a command, while the latter would be used where you expect an expression. A function definition expects a compound command, so that’s what we use. If we used $(( )) directly, it wouldn’t parse:

                $ even() $((($1+1)&1))
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `$((($1+1)&1))'

                We would have to do something like

                even() { return $(($1&1)); }

                (notice how this is inverted from the (( case - (( actually inverts 0 -> exit code 1 and any other result to exit code 0, so that it matches bash semantics of exit code 0 being “true” and any other exit code being “false” when used in a conditional)

                But this is a bit easier to understand and as such wouldn’t cut it, as any seasoned bash expert will tell you. Can’t be irreplaceable if anyone on your team can read your code, right?

                I can’t think of many use-cases for ((. I guess if you wanted to do some arithmetic in a conditional?

                if (( $1&1 )); then echo "odd!"; else echo "even!"; fi

                But this is pretty contrived. This is probably the reason you’ve never heard of it.

                This (( vs. $(( )) thing is similar to how there is ( compound command (run in a subshell), and $( ) (command substitution). You can actually use the former to define a function too (as it’s a compound command):

                real_exit() { exit 1; }
fake_exit() ( exit 1 )

                Calling real_exit will exit from the shell, while calling fake_exit will do nothing as the exit 1 command is executed in a separate subshell. Notice how you can also do the same in a command substition (because it runs in a subshell too):

                echo $(echo foo; exit 1)

                Will run successfully and output foo.

                (( being paired with $((, and ( with $(, is mostly just a syntactic rhyme rather than anything consistent. E.g. { and ${ do very different things, and $[[ just doesn’t exist.

                Bash is awful. It’s funny but also sad that we’re stuck with it.