Increasing the CPU optimization by 0.02% does seem crazy to me. If you’re going to spend time working on something, make it worthwhile. Also, isn’t while(true) {print(money)} Microsoft, Apple and Amazon:s business model?
This is basically what the bank are doing when you get a loan.
When you get a $25k loan from a bank the banker does not take money from somewhere to put it in your bank account. The banker basically just add a +25k in your bank account that comes from nowhere.
It’s a double joke. For programmers, it’s pretty useless unless your in high performance computing.
If you’re on the nitty gritty OS or CPU itself, 0.02% optimization can mean significant improvememt of different things but because it is otherwise unitless, it is equally useless to the reader.
Killing children, class systems, so many programming language names, the ridiculous ways equality and order-of-operations are done sometimes. Plenty of recursion jokes to be made. Big O notation. Any other ideas?
I started coding with TurboBasic, which included the helpful innovation of GOTO {label} instead of GOTO {line number}, which allowed you to have marginally-better-looking code like:
GOTO bob
…
bob:
{do some useless shit}
return
which meant you essentially had actual, normal methods and you didn’t have to put line numbers in front of everything. The problem was that labels (like variables) could be as long as you wanted them to be, but the compiler only looked at the first two letters. Great fun debugging that sort of nonsense.
One of the slave node’s child process failed, so the master node sent a signal to terminate the child and restart the slave
There’s pretty solid reason my research group is pushing to use “head node and executor nodes” nomenclature rather than the old-school “master node and slave nodes” nomenclature, haha
programmer_humor
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.