Geeky-licious Challenge

[superjill]

Anyone remember my telling of the day of glory at the Nerd Slam in Austin this summer

Comments

then how about

[mrdatass4g]

while(u & i > 0) {
fun++;
}

Re: then how about

[superjill]

awww. that's cute. ;)

does that mean that the code that's already there is in good form?

Re: then how about

[mrdatass4g]

oh! you want it actually to compile, run, and produce a result? could do all kinds of interesting stuff... oops. it's after saturday. does it matter?

while(u *look = &i[smile]) {
heart++;
difference[you][me]--;
}

also, you may find join syntax differs depending on the flavour of SQL. loosely,

select a.name,b.name from person a,person b
where a.heart + b.heart = 1;

[anonymous]

It looks good to me, but it's been a few years for me, too.

I'd get tsked for not putting the i.heart++ i { } s, though.

while (u.breathing == true ){
i.heart++
}

Also, to avoid the chance of a typo type bug,
you should do it as

while( true == u.breathing ){
i.heart++
}

[mglizak]

That was me, BTW.

[superjill]

thx! i'll put in the curlies fo sho, and will decide on the true order. (erm, sounds kinda dictatory, doesn't it?)

so unless people who have been geeks more currently than us speak up....

got thoughts on if/how i can include the pointer? it's kinda humorous but i don't know if i can fit it in.

[sloot]

Jill: for clarification, your code wasn't wrong or incorrect, the modifications suggested by mglizak were style modifications.

Personally, I preferred the original, simpler code. Or even this simpler version.

while (u.breathing)
i.heart++;

SQL

[sloot]

first:

SELECT a, b FROM persons WHERE (a.heart + b.heart) = 1

(only one = )

that would involve objects being stored in the database, which I'm not familiar with.

Maybe something like

SELECT a.name, b.name
FROM persons a
, persons b
WHERE a.heart + b.heart = 1

although to that you should add

AND a.heart > 0
AND b.heart > 0

because you wouldn't want one of those people to be heartless now would you?

I'm not sure what attribute of the persons table you would want to select... maybe this should be the select clause

SELECT a.name || ' & ' || b.name || ' 2gether 4ever'

Re: SQL

[superjill]

excellent. what a great resource. thank you!

i'm digging the middle section suggestion.
is there a reason for the tables to be listed on separate lines?

the heartless thing made me *laugh*.
if i add those, they should be appended at the end?

if no one is answering about my pointer question fer the c++ code, does that mean i should drop it? no pointer?

Re: SQL

[sloot]

I'd drop the pointer issue ... it doesn't make sense to me (like the other ones do) so maybe that's why the question has been ignored

SELECT a.name, b.name
FROM persons a
, persons b
WHERE a.heart + b.heart = 1
AND a.heart > 0
AND b.heart > 0

and yes, each of the persons on different lines is style, the following is completely acceptable and works

SELECT a.name, b.name
FROM persons a, persons b
WHERE a.heart + b.heart = 1
AND a.heart > 0
AND b.heart > 0

Re: SQL

[superjill]

ok, one more question, if i may.
i got some feedback that this code is wrong entirely, but i'm not sure what i think of it because this code has a chance of sort of being understood by non-cody people, whereas the new suggestion doesn't, i think.

BUT. if this one is really that wrong then i should find some good balance between the 2.

SELECT a.*,
b.*
FROM persons AS a
INNER JOIN persons AS b ON a.heart + b.heart = 1

Re: I put work into this, LOVE it. =)

[superjill]

<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3

*LOVE*

You should add this to your poem repertoire. Really.

This reminds me of when we were working on my geek poerm at your house in August.

I still have the similar logic love poem you wrote in my book.

(∃x)(Fx) -> (∃y)(Lyj)

Kylie, we should run away together and have artsy fartsy logic babies. The world will thank us for our powerful contribution(s) to society, in the form of demented little genius beings.