@KitZ.Fox I had intussusception once; it was horrible, and then they said I was fine and sent me home only to have the second-look radiologist call me back in. New pet-scan and said it resolved itself. Such luck; could have gone horribly awry, or if found I woulda had a very unpleasant surgery. Luckily it resolved itself before anybody found it- luckily it was resolved at all.
Inexplicable extreme gut pain and every doc looking at me with a lot of "Huh? You're young and healthy. You don't have anything wrong with you.. ehh we do scan? Hmm nothin' there..wat do...kthxbye? Yes; kthxbye." <-- I was less than friendly in a lot of pain with docs telling me nothing was wrong. I think they figured I was just trying to get some pills.
With the sending hospital saying yes and the receiving hospital saying no and our pediatrician pointing out that the barium enema used to make the diagnosis was 1. extremely dangerous to do without a pediatric surgeon scrubbed and ready and also probably 2. therapeutic which would explain why the receiving hospital thought we were all crazy.
Hmm, my unit tests are good. But perhaps generating 10kb test strings was ill-advised... Codeception appears to be making many many many copies. The PHP process is currently sitting at 640Mb in RAM
@BarryTheHatchet fuck buildings. Jerks; think they get to be big and bricky and jerkfacers just because some asshole is a mason and a welder and whatever. Fuckin' buildings.
codeception.com/docs/05-UnitTests#BDD-Specification-Testing What this neglects to mention is that using ->specify('') will make your unit tests take AGES. Full test suite without it runs in 903ms, with it the same tests take over 1 minute. Good bye mildly preferable syntax.
I am bamboozled by function pointers.
Here is an example code:
#include <iostream>
class test
{
inline
void output_plumber_1(int* const arg_out, const int* const arg_in)
{
*arg_out = -*arg_in;
}
inline
void input_plumber_1(int* const arg_out, const int* const ...
Related: Prevent protecting questions under certain circumstances
...we're considering removing the option to protect from questions that haven't received at least one answer from a new user. That's a bit of a no-brainer - by definition, you can't have new users vandalizing a question with t...
@gnat with this image, it was totally unclear to me what you were pointing out, I started following the vein of "Ok Jimmy Page rock legend... and Johan Sebastian Bach... I guess this Adrian fellow is some musician I've never heard of?"
I mean, if 3 musician names posters all answered the same question on P.SE, you would absolutely be the one to find it and bring it to everyone's attention
a much clearer option would've been to circle the "protect" on the right and the empty space where it should be on the left, and nothing else; those two circles get the point across without distracting focus on the user names or anything else
I'm skimming over the recently closed P.SE questions list and realizing bad titles or titles suggesting the offtopicness of a question... make me not even bother opening them to check
it is very common for me to see a certain kind of title in the feed and immediately click it with intent to nuke (though I do actually read it first to validate the assumption; it's always valid)
@Ixrec and at no point during that process did you want to gouge your eyes out with a soupfork? Because that's what I want to do to you after reading that.
@Ixrec have you tried genericizing a "WidgetFactoryizer" so you can just write normal code and compose or utilize that object somehow to create stupid factoryish things from them? Make it manage recursive graphs by tying its knot and it'll create a Factory that's as good as a FactoryFactory or a FactoryFactoryFactory
@Ixrec on failure to resolve- or only a partial resolution (did it resolve to something that still doesn't complete the requirement?); return self for further resolution. This is an approach I've used in resolutiony-things like factories in the past that results in a Factory returning a Factory which returns a Factory which .. just tying the knot
Also, @Ampt I expect you to primary today :| my wife made me do that shit (caucus - what a fukt process), and if I have to, then you other jerkfaces do too.
(I'm replacing "cell template" boilerplate for one grid-like widget with "widget factory" boilerplate for a newer better grid-like widget, 99% of the real logic is already shared between these two things)
in hindsight I kinda wished I'd waited until today to start it, because then I could finish it tomorrow (my actual day off before travelling) rather than having a whole day off without champagne
@BarryTheHatchet you also presume you won't just get the itch and buy another bottle tomorrow. Let's make a deal: Buy one of those little drinker half-bottles like 200ml or whatever it is tomorrow instead of a whole 750 when you find your hand gravitating towards alla that; and I'll write an actor model in C++
@Ixrec I am willing to bet money that not having his homework done for him then being socially pressured into deleting the request, precipitates misery
Your second paragraph describes archaic customs. The world has moved on from binary gender stereotypes. — BarryTheHatchet54 secs ago
used to be we would put in a screen full of messages a day and it would all be about one thing. now we can fill a screen in 10 minutes about 5 different things
not telling anyone to stop, just saying that the way things used to be done might not work the same way now - having a seperate chat room for re-open topic might be alright
Better in what sense? I have heard that, if you don't fully embrace agile/scrum/whatever, you're not really practicing Agile. As a developer, I would be more receptive to something that helped me stay organized and cohesive within my team. I would be averse to some half-assed Agile that was just there for the sake of being Agile. — Robert Harvey1 min ago
I am bamboozled by function pointers.
Here is an example code:
#include <iostream>
class test
{
inline
void output_plumber_1(int* const arg_out, const int* const arg_in)
{
*arg_out = -*arg_in;
}
inline
void input_plumber_1(int* const arg_out, const int* const ...
Related: Prevent protecting questions under certain circumstances
...we're considering removing the option to protect from questions that haven't received at least one answer from a new user. That's a bit of a no-brainer - by definition, you can't have new users vandalizing a question with t...
The Whiteboard
The Whiteboard