Posts by Rashakil Fol

What is truly the purpose of this post? It seems demeaning, and almost as if you view yourself better than others.. Your smart rashakil, a bit of an ass.. But truthfully you aren't quite as intelligent as you think.. I've never seen any post of yours to be brilliant.. I'd say that you're about avg. intelligence.. with a bit more wit then some.. but nothing more.

Clearly, it's demeaning. You think people should send out their little reps saying "you're dumb" without getting demeaned? Since christina>you was ignorant of the behavior people have come to expect of her, you don't think she should be informed of that fact? She usually is the nicest person on the forum, but I don't think passive aggressive behavior needs to be tolerated. If she knows her behavior to be truly good and just, then she should regard my opinion of her reputation (if you'll excuse the pun) as the ravings of an idiot lunatic.

I don't see what you mean by "better than others." That doesn't make sense. You can't compare people and declare one to be "better" than another. Well, I suppose you could do such a thing, if you felt like being silly. Regardless, I don't think I've come across as acting as if intelligence is a primary virtue: if anything, it's curiosity, expressiveness, and recognition of the fundamental absurdity of things that I've treated as good characteristics in people.

The interesting question is the following: Why do you jump …

>How has the government helped me? The government has provided me with health care,

It does for you? And if it were gone, you wouldn't receive health care?

>police officers who protect us,

They aren't provided for by the federal government.

> the millitary who protect us,

You should congratulate them for a century of successfully protecting us from Canadian invasion.

> a nice $60 tax return,

That means it took $60 extra in taxes from you, which means it deprived you of the interest that amount of money would generate, or simply the freedom to have spent it earlier.

Edit: Seriously, are you _trying_ to make yourself look stupid?

> public schooling,

Schooling is provided at the state level or lower, depending on the state you're in. How has the federal meddling improved your education?

> electricity,

WTF are you smoking? Power companies provide you with electricity.

> plumbing,

Local communities, or if you're referring to the people that built your house, um, no, that's not the feds either.

> freedom of speech,

They don't give you that.

> the right to bear arms,

They don't give that either.

> the ability to travel freely between the states, etc.

They don't give that either. These they just don't take away.

> Some of these you may not consider to be ways in which the government has helped, but …

I don't understand why he thinks I'm going to bad rep him.

Because that's what you do? Why don't you rep him with "you're dumb"? That's what you do, right? And he's dumb. So tell him that! It'll make you feel good when it's done. You'll make your mark on the world, telling people that they're unintelligent. I'm sure then that they'll strive harder to achieve your level of perceptitude.

> You dislike the government, how it is run, and who runs it.. you want fundamental changes within the federal government.. this sounds liberal to me..

There's a difference between leftist and liberal. In the U.S. 'liberal' is distorted to refer to leftists, but here you're using it in the 'willing to change government' sense.

> And I'm still waiting for you to tell me how they haven't improved out lives. Besides, the purpose of any government is to protect its people..

One way they haven't improved our lives is that they haven't invented magic fairies that grant us free chocolate whenever we ask for it.

> Improving the lives of the people isn't necessarily a goal.

I agree; this happens automatically. So how can the size of the federal government be justified?

> However, the American government has improved all of our lives very much in the past 10-20 years. And until you come up with some evidence against this, I really don't find it necessary for me to list anything..

How? Name a way in which it has. Just name a few. I dare you.

I could name a few how it's helped mine. First, there's the leasing of the electromagnetic spectrum. Our government does this via a silly quota system, but the principle of providing for spectrum ownership is not unreasonable. You could count the general protection of property rights, particularly mathematical ones such as the spectrum and copyright, …

because human instincts are to murder, rape, kill, and generally be not very "civilized".

This is the most asinine statement I have read this year.

What makes you think these are human instincts? Do you know any people with these instincts? Have you studied anthropology? Do you have these instincts? Go see a psychiatrist.

I don't see any reason it's immoral to do things with non-thinking cells, as long as they're yours to do things with. Of course, government subsidization of this research is immoral.

Leftist views? Do you know what "leftist" means? Somebody opposed to government largesse is leftist? It looks like somebody Fourier transformed your dictionary.

Your "Our government is a well-run government because GTFO" line of reasoning is an amusing form of brain damage.

I'm still waiting for you to name some ways in which the federal government has improved your life.

Cancer research is the best way to throw your money away since the Church stopped selling indulgences.

This is true. The government did prolong the depression. Roosevelt's new deal, and his efforts helped to end the depression too. The shift from classical to Keynesian economics occured here.. It was the government's fault for not doing anything at first, but it was also them who saved us from the depression. The federal reserve did a pretty shitty job too..

Roosevelt presided over eight or nine years of high double digit unemployment rates. This should be regarded as utter incompetence. The fact that the depression ended during his reign should be attributed to the fact that he was in office for thirteen years, and to keep a nation under depression for such a period of time requires deliberate effort.

Also, your view of Keynesian economics makes it seem that you've taken AP Macroeconomics. I'm going to assume you haven't looked at other schools of economic thought or simply looked at things in a more nuanced manner (since the Keynesian view is rather primitive) and suggest that you do more research on your own.

> there was almost a recession again in 1981 (I think), but the Fed actually acted, and the chairman Volcker saved us from certain death :)

No, Volcker deliberately caused the recession, viewing it as a necessary evil to kill inflation.

huh? The government makes money in the same way that a department store makes money. You buy something from a department store, and you give them money. This money becomes their …

Could you be more specific? What would the T-shirt design feature be able to do? Once users have designed the T-shirt, should they be able to buy one and have it shipped to them?

And of course, this is indeed the wrong forum; a more appropriate one would be, probably, the Existing Scripts forum in the Web Development category (I'm not a regular there). Hopefully a moderator will move this...

You could use a binary search algorithm. (It would be easy to name better ways, but Meh.)

How does increased spending 'distort' the gdp?

Um, hello? When the spending is wasteful, it does not contribute to overall well-being. Thus the GDP is a weaker measurement of well-being than it would be without spending.

YOU DIDN'T POST A NUMBER!!!!

let polyeval x = foldl ((+) . (* x)) 0
in polyeval 10 [1,6,0,8]

Not in times of recession when unemployment is high. World War II helped end the Great Depression b/c of the high spending.

We're not in a recession.

It's true that spiking government spending temporarily can clear up the excessive cautiousness that inhibits trade, but that has nothing to do with the fact that wasteful spending distorts the GDP and unemployment as a measure of well-being. Do you have anything to say about the distortion of the meaning of the statistics as a result of wasteful government spending, or can I assume you agree with me?

Gravity waves still exist, just as electromagnetic waves exist.

Did I come across as if they didn't? :-/

We _do_ know a whole lot about electromagnetic waves, but I'm sure curiosity can never be satisfied :)

It is a legit term. Think about it, in times of war we proportion more money to the military, and government spending increases which makes employment increase, and generates jobs for Americans.

Private employers hiring people to do things "generates" jobs, too. Do you think nobody will come around and take advantage of unemployed people? And as a side effect, useful things that improve well-being get produced. Military spending is useful too, in that it cancels out the bad effects of having enemies around you, but whether you account the reduction in overall quality of life to the enemies who cause instability or the military spending has nothing to do with the fact that every extra dollar of military spending causes the GDP to overstate the well-being of the country by a dollar.

Well I just thought that there was a good chance somebody had written 1562 before I hit submit.

11001000110

"Generating jobs"? The notion of "generating" or creating jobs is a bogus notion used by politicians. The creation of jobs that do nothing prevents employers from coming in and hiring people to do useful things.

Unemployment is a somewhat bogus measurement of economic prosperity. As are all measurements. First of all, the only "unemployed" that count in the statistics are those that are actively seeking jobs. Second, it counts part-time workers equivalently to full-time workers. It's one tool in the chest of economic measurement tools, but it is not a discussion-ender. It's fine for comparing from year-to-year, but not with the economy three decades ago.

Many measurements overstate the effectiveness of the economy when you're at war, in which case some of that employment is completely unproductive. Much of the GDP ends up in the fluff economy, the part that doesn't have much to do with well-being, including wars, inefficient health care businesses, absurd transportation schemes, etc.

I'd guess you'll see overall economic discomfort rise as more baby-boomers get closer to retirement.

"gravity" isn't a wave -- in the same sense, electric fields are not waves. It's variations in gravitational fields that propagate. For example, the variations in gravitational fields created by a binary star system, or by the Sun-Earth system.

I hope you are smart enough to realize the coding style of the code you posted is just awful. Here are some tips, although they should not be read as if they are written in stone. Pay attention to the indention, placement of braces and hints about spelling. Making your code more readable should be your next goal before doing anything else.

Considering that it's an example of a tricked up exam problem, why assume otherwise?

Umm ...... yeah. Like I said, I didn't write the parser. It's open source. Go complain to the project leaders.

If it's open source, that means you can go into geshi/cpp.php and change

'Keywords' => array(
			1 => 'color: #0000ff;',
			2 => 'color: #0000ff;',
			3 => 'color: #0000dd;',
			4 => 'color: #0000ff;'
			),

to

'Keywords' => array(
			1 => 'color: #0000ff;',
			2 => 'color: #0000ff;',
			3 => '',
			4 => 'color: #0000ff;'
			),

Exactly.
Most married couples I know that go to my church use birth control. I don't think the Bible says anything against it.

Have you read the Bible?

1563

cout << "Hello, world!" << endl;
std::cout << "Hello, world!" << std::endl;
foo << "Hello, world!" << endl;

First, it could be invoked with [code=cpp] instead of cplusplus. Second, cout is just a value; it is not any more specialer than foo and shouldn't be highlighted any differently. I demand that you fix this within thirty minutes or else I'll tell people about the secret dinosaur sex image boards you have on this site.

I like c++

You should try Haskell, you might like it.

How can you people have different opinions on TV shows than me? My gosh, you must all be retarded.

No I don't. Treat me as an intelligent being. (something that most humans are not)

See, it's immature statements like that that make me treat you like a thirteen-year-old.

I find it insulting that I am stereotyped with the rest of 14 year olds in America. I just wanted to distince myself from the average teenager and that I do not deserve to be treated as one.

What's next, you won't want people to treat you like a human?

so what are you talking about?

What, are you implying that posts made more than thirty seconds ago are not yours?

DO NOT EVER DISCRIMINATE AGAINST MY AGE.
It is not some thing I tolerate or accept.

No, I'm talking about an ultimatum. That is not an ultimatum right there :-)

Well... you're delivering ultimatums to people.

DO NOT EVER DISCRIMINATE AGAINST MY AGE.

Then don't act your age.

Edit: and make sure you brag about your AMC scores when you take that.

And here I thought somebody had switched to Python.

If you want people to help you, you're better off isolating the problem and identifying what you don't understand. Using nonstandard header files that only work on obscure compilers isn't increasing the probability of people finding your problem, either.

I recommend that you take a more proactive stance towards avoiding mistakes. In particular, write your code in a more clear fashion. Match your braces' indentation levels; don't stack closing braces all on one line. Don't use magical numeric constants, and avoid monstrosities like for(x1=210,y1=34,x2=420,y2=140,i=4;i<8;i++,y1=y2+5,y2=y2+106) Can you really understand what this is doing? If so, then you're too smart, and you need to treat yourself like a dumb person when writing code. Incomprehensibilitude is best left for writers of tax law.

LISP is a prefix language, so it is obvious that the binary tree structure you have is also prefix.

What do you mean, in that it is "prefix"?

Your argument that everything is physically determined is actually contrary to what many quantum physicists say. They would say that the universe is actually fundamentally random, at the quantum level. Or, they would say that there's no evidence otherwise. There is of course the possibility of undetected machinations underneath, but there's no point in debating something about which there is no evidence. Of course, randomness would not provide free will, either. Then again, I don't understand exactly what people mean by "free will". And they don't either.

You don't know what you're talking about; the space gets allocated on the stack, not the heap, and it is allocated implicitly. chars don't get initialized. If you disagree, go compile a function with char output[20]; inside it and show us the assembly language instructions that allocate the space on the heap.

The obvious question would be WHY ?!

Given that you have a spectecular aura about, I'm sure you know that in case of static type var = new type() ; memory is allocated only once as stmt is executed only once and in type arr[size_t] ; , everytime.

The statement char output[MAX_SIZE]; takes exactly zero instructions to execute...

Use ceil(log10(x))! It makes that code twice as fast too!

Not on my computer.

int main()
{
	time_t t;
	time(&t);

What is this for?

yl;
	cls;

And what is that?

frz;

And what is that?

To summarize: because the standard says so.

The distance from the origin, assuming you're using Euclidean distance, is sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + z^2).

The dot product? Google it.

can be changed to just put a single '\0' at end
and change output to a static var (would help in multiple calls):

static char* output = new char[MAX_SIZE];
strncpy(output, input + i, n);
output[n-i+1] = '\0' ; //or output[n-i] = '\0' ;, whichever is correct. :)

There's no point in making a static char* pointing somewhere else in memory. You might as well just use space on the stack.

char output[MAX_SIZE];
...

What's with the color fetish?

I'm going to tear into this paragraph as if I wanted to hurt your feelings, because I think it's very bad.

Cell phones are technologically advancing everyday [b](Duh.)[/b], and they will posses the ability to do many technologically advanced functions [b](You just said this, and duh.)[/b], such as building applications for the business’s users.  [b](Cell phones don't build applications, people do, and this fact is redundant, since that's the whole point of software.  What business, what users, why?)[/b] Cell phones are rapidly advancing to an extent, [b](You just [i]said[/i] this.)[/b] which would eventually allow them to replace laptops and computers.  [b](In the next ten years, or not?  You think qwerty keyboards will go out of style?)[/b]  This will reduce software and hardware costs for businesses, since the cell phone would provide multiple services, such as creating applications, and many other things such as credit card, GPS locater and a television.  [b](How does this indicate that software or hardware costs would be reduced?  Software won't be any less complex unless it doesn't do things that are done now, and hardware technology has nothing to do with the development of efficient programming techniques.  Why would software be cheaper?  Why would the hardware be cheaper than non-miniaturized equivalents?)[/b] Since cell phones are widespread, they will eventually replace normal land line phones, due to their portability. [b](Okay.  But being widespread isn't the reason they'll replace land line phones.  You need to think from the businessman's perspective.  If you're …

Thanks for the insightful comment?

It's assigning an uninitialized FILE* to another value? There's something wrong with that picture. Anyway, it looks like the yyin member is of type std::basic_istream<char, struct std::char_traits<char> >*, and the code is trying to assign a FILE* to it. At least, that's what the error message says.

You look at the extension of the filename and see what it is. Using programming. And then use if statements to control your behavior based on the extension.

Okay, I'll put my more-polished entry up, for category three. I'm assuming valid input, because it's category three. It's pretty much my previous version with a bugfix. For example, it runs 180 times faster than pixl's version in the test program I wrote, after I removed the error checking from pixl's version and put the arguments in the right order, when compiling with g++ -O3. Also it works properly when x is a power of ten (pixl's doesn't).

unsigned long extract_digits (unsigned long x, size_t n, size_t i) {
  static const unsigned long tenpows[]
    = {1,10,100,1000,10000,100000,1000000,10000000,100000000,1000000000};

  size_t len;
  if (x < 1000) {
    len = 1 + (x >= 10) + (x >= 100);
  }
  else {
    if (x < 1000000) {
      len = 4 + (x >= 10000) + (x >= 100000);
    }
    else {
      
      if (x < 100000000) {
	len = 7 + (x >= 10000000);
      }
      else {
	len = 9 + (x >= 1000000000);
	if (n == 10) {
	  return x;
	}
      }
    }
  }

  x = x / (tenpows[len - i - n]);
  
  return (x % tenpows[n]);
}

Perhaps you could use the Spirit parser combinator library instead.

There are 2^(n-1) types of two types of people in the world jokes.