Lady in Love @Lady@cat.family

@wallhackio @aescling i stand by my claim that this is a clearly math major thing to do though

@wallhackio @aescling this answers my original question, “why would you calculate something the computer gives you as a compile time constant”

@aescling @wallhackio if i was going to pick a problem to solve by reading and parsing a comment from the source code i wouldn’t pick one that was trivially already solved by other means, because that fails to demonstrate anything meaningful or interesting about the technique, except that it is obviously a worse solution

@aescling @wallhackio i’m just going to assume the both of you are math majors at heart and are really into proofs that demonstrate things that have already been resolutely proven but with a weirder set of steps this time

@wallhackio why would you calculate something the computer gives you as a compile time constant

@wallhackio i am the code you are writing, i am glorious and stupid

@wallhackio this sounds like a lie perpetuated by IDE manufacturers to sell more IDE’s

@wallhackio you call it a rare situation. i call it another day in the life of a software programmer

@wallhackio this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidentally_in_Love_(TV_series)

@wallhackio accidentally in love; it was a netflix exclusive but then netflix pulled it so we’re watching sus thirdhand versions i found on the internet with terrible bad subs hardcoded in and good subs plastered over the top

@wallhackio @Satsuma @aescling commenters don’t know about AO3 i guess

@Satsuma @wallhackio @aescling you might need to share your epub

@wallhackio i mean if you want to call it alternating 5/4 & 3/4…

@wallhackio the fact that it repeats every 16 beats is a pretty strong tell

@wallhackio yeah