Algorithms, solution methods, comparison of their performance - page 8
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I would like to point out that, unlike everyone else here, Peter probably has the greatest patience - and a willingness to write monotonous code. I can't explain otherwise how he managed to write so many things
Is this tendency towards monotonous code an "Indian" style?
Or what do you mean by that?
)
I just have one question, why not use an int array or better yet, use a listing if you have enough of these wizards ?
Why use a string to do this ? so you can enter letters as well ? or even better, you can count in the 16 bit system ! or even cooler, go straight to 128 bit...
Is the penchant for monotone code an "Indian" style?
Or what did you mean by that?
)
Bingo!!! didn't want to say it myself
Is the tendency towards monotonous code an "Indian" style?
Or what did you mean by that?
)
Russian style with the endless urge to rewrite everything is not particularly ace either - especially in large projects
There are only two variants of string either it has maximal size (in reserve), or memory is allocated and in your case during addition process it is allocated every time.... So, it is the same as changing the size of an int array. 1in1 well maybe int is allocating memory for 10% longer than string is allocating memory for 1 character, if you compare more characters then i guess int wins
It would be interesting to check your statement in practice. If constant resizing of int array with rewriting data back and forth is as fast as working with string, I'd certainly prefer int.
But I highly doubt the speed will be the same. Intuition.
It would be interesting to check your assertion in practice. If constant resizing of int array with rewriting data back and forth will be as fast as working with string, I'll certainly prefer int.
well check - the code there is simple.... I also advise to loop the code 100 000 times, so it will be more clear and less dependent on extraneous factors.
I thought this topic was originally intended for such comparisons.
I would like to point out that, unlike everyone else here, Peter probably has the greatest patience - and a willingness to write monotonous code. Otherwise I cannot explain how he managed to write so much
Bingo!!! didn't mean to say it myself
Againfxsaber is right- invisibility of posts and topics of characters from his "Black List" for every user on this forum is already a necessity. to maintain a healthy society. And the individual...
Otherwise as a mockery of the profession this thread is not perceived.
(
That's a bold statement, can you back it up with something?
OK, Peter develops GUIs - in writing GUIs OOP helps us to simplify and simplify code more than anywhere else. But we write without it - and here we can't call this method fast, but persistence takes its toll and we can see some GUI) .... Of course, I'm not comparing those people who have 30 hard OOP lines each with defunct macros of classes like #define micrcalss(CALSS, PARENTS) class CLASS : public PARENTS ......