haha... I think james started it off track using a program to rank myspace, facebook, and bebo(?) ;) And then, I had to respond with my own, of course.. everyone else just got carried away lol

Hehe... I see ;)

;)

Nope, now it's become a mix of quickly-whipped-up psuedocode; corrections to said psuedocode (which shows how much some of us, myself included, need a compiler/interprettor); and debate over assignments and comparators in different languages.

Well. This is the 'geeks'' lounge, so I suppose that's to be expected.

Well. This is the 'geeks'' lounge, so I suppose that's to be expected.

Hehe... of course.

lol.. what to discuss now?

philosophy, cabbages, and regular expressions?

Hahah...

or maybe onions?

.. we should convert this into another god v. atheism thread ;)

Lol... yeah we're good at that.

Hahah...

or maybe onions?

Strangely enough;

[^o]*(.*?)n(.*?)i[^o]*ns.

is a regular expression (perl form) that matches the string:

"philosophy, cabbages, and regular expressions?"

edit: oops. I certainly do need an interprettor. throw another dot in there:

[^o]*(.*?)n(.*?)i[^o]*.ns.

otherwise the last 'not o' ([^o]) in the expression ends right before the last o in the input text, and the expression wants an n..

optimization! This [^o]*(.*?) could just be: [^o], and this (.*?)i could be [^i]*, giving:

[^o]*n[^i]*[^o]*.ns.

Yay for useless code!

hmm... we could discuss phi (the golden ratio, -2*sin(666 deg.)) ;)

I think I'm missing something. Shouldn't that be 306 degrees? Or are you just blatantly parodying your own earlier 'God v. Atheism' statement?

Nope. The golden ration is ((square root of 5) + 1)/2

which ironically is equal ro -2*sin(666 degrees)

I was under the impression that sine and cosine were determined by degrees; after 360, you start cycling again. Ergo, it would seem to me that your 666 degrees would be equal to 360 degrees (one full cycle) plus 306 additional. If any of this is incorrect, please point out to me where I am in error.

Ah, I see what you were saying now.. And yes, of course they evaluate to the same answer. I just prefer writting 666 than 306 ;)

> [^o]*(.*?)n(.*?)i[^o]*ns. is a regular expression (perl form)
> that matches the string: "philosophy, cabbages, and regular
> expressions?"
How about: `(onions)+ +, +(philosophy)+ +, +(cabbages)+ +, +(regular expressions)+` Now you can have any amount of onions, philosophies, cabbages and regexes as you want, with the added advantage of multiple spaces being handled. ;-)

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.