Wash: I'm not leaving her side, Mal. Don't ask me again. Mal: I wasn't asking. I was telling.

'Out Of Gas'


Buffistas Building a Better Board ++

Do you have problems, concerns, or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.


tommyrot - Jul 25, 2005 8:14:00 am PDT #26 of 4669
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

I thought the whole idea was that it was supposed to be a riff off of the name "C++."

Yes. But the name "C++" is a riff off of incrementing variables in C, which can actually be done two ways - eg: x++ or ++x. Putting the '++' after the variable means the variable is "looked at" before it's incremented. So, if Buffistas_Building_a_Better_Board = 1, and you have the expression y = Buffistas_Building_a_Better_Board++, y will = 1, as Buffistas_Building_a_Better_Board is not incremented to 2 until after y is assigned. OTOH, the expression y = ++Buffistas_Building_a_Better_Board will result in y=2 (as well as Buffistas_Building_a_Better_Board=2).

OK, that was way too much explanation, right?


amych - Jul 25, 2005 8:17:53 am PDT #27 of 4669
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?

OK, that was way too much explanation, right?

Yep, and it also perfectly matches the explanation I was given of why it really ought to be ++C


Topic!Cindy - Jul 25, 2005 8:21:26 am PDT #28 of 4669
What is even happening?

There should be more math. This could be mathier.


tommyrot - Jul 25, 2005 8:22:09 am PDT #29 of 4669
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

Yep, and it also perfectly matches the explanation I was given of why it really ought to be ++C

OTOH, if the variable only needs to be incremented, not "looked at," then the convention seems to be putting the ++ after the variable - eg, for-next loops are usually done like this:

for(x = 1; x < 10; x++){
  blah blah;
}

eta: Don't ask me what "blah blah" does, or I shall be forced to make something up....


Laura - Jul 25, 2005 9:44:25 am PDT #30 of 4669
Our wings are not tired.

head explodes


§ ita § - Jul 25, 2005 9:57:49 am PDT #31 of 4669
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

Unrelated to syntax, I have to say I hate the changes that mean a marked post is the first one displayed on the page. I liked being able to mark or unmark a post without changing what I'd "read" and what I hadn't "read." Same with blocking, etc.


Rob - Jul 25, 2005 10:12:30 am PDT #32 of 4669

Did we consider "Buffistas Building a Better Board += 1"? Actually, "Buffistas Building a Better Board << 1" would have been the nerdiest.

Edited because it's hard to type <.


Topic!Cindy - Jul 25, 2005 10:21:42 am PDT #33 of 4669
What is even happening?

Unrelated to syntax, I have to say I hate the changes that mean a marked post is the first one displayed on the page. I liked being able to mark or unmark a post without changing what I'd "read" and what I hadn't "read." Same with blocking, etc.

I would agree, except I hated much more what happened the old way. All my scrolling was undone, and I'd have to scroll back through what I'd already read, to find out where I was. If it could be leave me at the same point on the page, like a refresh does, I would like the old way better.


§ ita § - Jul 25, 2005 10:23:48 am PDT #34 of 4669
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

If it could be leave me at the same point on the page, like a refresh does, I would like the old way better.

That's between you and your browser, mostly. I mean, we could put something in that puts the post you just marked at the top of your window (not page), but if you had marked it while it was at the bottom of your window, you're still shifted around.


Topic!Cindy - Jul 25, 2005 11:25:11 am PDT #35 of 4669
What is even happening?

I mean, we could put something in that puts the post you just marked at the top of your window (not page)
Sorry, that is what I meant. But that isn't how it used to work, at least not for me. Before it was the way it is now, it would bring me back to the top of the page I had loaded, even if the post I marked wasn't anywhere near there. So if I was in natter, and loaded the page starting with post #51 to post #100, and then I read down to and marked post 72, it would bounce me back up to post 51. I hated that. Just sayin'.