It’s probably hungry, feed it a mouse.
The actual best thing to do, apart from getting professional help, would probably setting the climate control to the lowest temperature to make the snake slow and sluggish before doing anything else.
Well, if I asking for help, it’s probably because I am wrong about something. So I know who to trust.
Having the sign bit in front, makes them compare like sign-bit-integers and if they are compared/sorted like 2s-complement integers, the negatives are reversed but still come after the positives.
This doesn’t change it to a png, but your image viewers recognize it as webp. You should just associate .wepb with your image viewer in the OS.
deleted by creator
Rust doesn’t allow type inference in function signatures, c++ does with auto. IIRC, they recommended against using it, because of -you guessed it- compile time.
You could save 0.64 bit per char more if you actually treated you output as a binary number (using 6 bits per char) and didn’t go through the intermediary string (implicitly using base 100 at 6.64 bits per char).
This would also make your life easier by allowing bit manipulation to slice/move parts and reducing work for the processor because base 100 means integer divisions, and base 64 means bit shifts. If you want to go down the road of a “complicated” base use base 38 and get similar drawbacks as now, except only 5.25 bits per char.
Unless you only copy and compare you have to decode it, or implement more complicated logic for everything from searching to concatenation (which is normally just memcopy).
I can’t comment whether learning C first improves your rust, but it certainly makes you appreciate what the rust compiler does.
Also learning rust improved my C.
C++ already has much more of the required language constructs, which is why there is already an attempt to add borrow checking to C++ called circle. Until that standardizes, I wouldn’t expect it in C.
As if a white space sensitive language protects from this fuckery.
Anyone able to find the prime factors of 35 in their head is able to outperform state of the art quantum computers.
Rust has monomorphisation like C++ and every function has the aliasing guarantees of restrict, a keyword rarely seen in C code bases use and C++ doesn’t even support.
This means you can get more optimisations while writing in an intuitive style, where C/C++ requires some changes to the code.
On the other hand rustc has some hiccups with argument passing and rvo. One could argue that that’s just the compiler while the aliasing problems are part of the language in the C/C++ case, but while there is only one rust compiler its performance is the languages performance.
For most use cases they are about equally fast.
Who do you think is better at writing assembly? @harbard@fedia.io or a modern compiler with hundreds of contributors.
There are also react devs creating the windows 11 start menu.
At least be fair and cut out the .into()
The humble !! operator.
maybe we removed the last n characters
If you want to have a library that can also be a standalone executable, just put the main function in an extra file and don’t compile that file when using the library as a library.
You could also use the preprocessor to do it similar to python but please don’t.
Just use any build tool, and have two targets, one library and one executable:
LIB_SOURCES = tools.c, stuff.c, more.c
EXE_SOURCES = main.c, $LIB_SOURCES
Edit: added example
Maybe if you have to check if the object is one you already hold a lock for or account for some similar consequence of questionable architecture.