Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Embed this notice
   C:\KKJ\>:idle: (w84death@fosstodon.org)'s status on Tuesday, 19-Mar-2024 23:08:30 JST C:\KKJ\>:idle:

   This is my current challenge in making OS for AVR microcontroller. I got only 2KB of RAM and it's eaten by avery function all and variable used.

   In my text editor i started to get corrupted screen as the stack/heap started ovevriten screen buffer space ;)

   So much fun!

   #Arduino #Clang #Memory #OS

2. Embed this notice
   🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 (freemo@qoto.org)'s status on Wednesday, 06-Mar-2024 06:35:03 JST 🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱

   in reply to

   @LouisIngenthron If you are refering to the one and not hte rock then you are talking about the first case not the second. In the first case there are no rocks, just "1" which you have defined and circularly used.

   In the second case im talking about the idea withouth the numbers, which english isnt equipped to do. But i am talking about the fact that rocks are a comparable quantity irrespective of any numbers described to accomplish that. That is, that the qty is preseved from the individual components in the larger collection. That is, the actual real world scenario that math is being represented before the math or numbers were concepts that were defined.

   In other words, imagine a person with no linguistic or math understanding adding quantities of rocks using purely abstract understanding (no internal dialog). There is no 1 in that situation, there is an idea of a one in a very abstract sense that is rooted not by the concept of 1 but by the concept of where the boundaries of a rock is where beyond that boundary is a "different rock".

   To put it yet another way, without the numbers you are left needing to define where a thing begins and end. One you throw the numbers back in you realize it didnt really change that. Youjust have two things you need to define, its all still circular and by definition.

   As a counter argument we actually have math where 1+1 is either undefined or equals something other than 2, it just depends on the system of math and definition your using. In math we define these as what is called "rings", not all rings even allow for addition operations. In other words addition is a nonsensical operation under some systems of math, so how can 1+1=2 be universally true if it is only true under specific mathematical systems and false or undefined under others?

3. Embed this notice
   Dana Fried (tess@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 23-Nov-2023 19:05:21 JST Dana Fried

   One way we can write better shared code is to make the "shape" of the code communicate how it is intended to be used.

   In C++, this can be as simple as having proper const-correctness or declaring the correct mix of copy, move, and assignment operations for your class.

   But there's a principle I like to call "implicit code contract" that you can apply throughout your code that will make it a lot more usable and maintainable (remember that "someone else using my code" could be you in two years).

4. Embed this notice
   Grrrr, Darth Moose Shark (grrrr_shark@supervolcano.angryshark.eu)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2023 19:16:07 JST Grrrr, Darth Moose Shark

   in reply to

   Turns out my amazing memory and analytical skills are only amazing when I have time to be careful about how they are used.

   In other words, I'm smart enough, but the costs for me using my brain are much higher than for many other people.

   And so all of a sudden, all of that careful structure I built for myself became impossible.

   All of a sudden, I didn't really care if Google had a record of my voice and knew what time I got up in the morning and where I was.