|
Thread Rules 1. This is not a "do my homework for me" thread. If you have specific questions, ask, but don't post an assignment or homework problem and expect an exact solution. 2. No recruiting for your cockamamie projects (you won't replace facebook with 3 dudes you found on the internet and $20) 3. If you can't articulate why a language is bad, don't start slinging shit about it. Just remember that nothing is worse than making CSS IE6 compatible. 4. Use [code] tags to format code blocks. |
On January 16 2019 07:11 travis wrote: Given a 2d point, and a distance, I would like to output a point every 10 degrees on the circle that surrounds that point by the distance. It can start at 0 degrees, I don't really care. So, 35 points.
What is a good way to do that? Brain is pretty tired. I am using python but I am sure I could convert non python code to python if you want to write it in your favorite language (without relying on libraries).
SOH CAH TOA
I'm sure you can find a math library that does trignometry
circle(Point point, int dist) { Point [] circle = new Point [36]; for (i=0;i<36; i++) { circle.add(new Point ( point.x + dist*cos(i*10), point.y + dist*sin(i*10)); } return circle; }
Something like that?
edit:: oops forgot to add initial values, and changed it to be (x,y) instead of (y,x)
|
is that backwards? but yeah, that's what I want I think thank you
edit: ah you caught it edit2: i better never let potential employers see this thread. I could have solved this on my own, I promise
|
Or just use polar coordinates, at which point all of the points you want on the circle are simply (R, 10° * k) for k out of 0, 35
(or 2*Pi*k / 36) if you use radians.
|
Edit: I just lashed out, that was unseemly, I'm sorry.
|
edit: well if you see that it was mean then there is no longer any problem
|
@Travis - I like your enthusiasm. While any individual person has a low chance of solving one of those problems, if we stop trying we never will. Even if we do try we might never. This is known as the halting problem
Does anyone know of any built in way to call an HTTP endpoint from an AWS Step Functions flow? It seems like you can only call Lambdas. We are hoping to write 0 code while building a simple scheduler in AWS SF. Apache Airflow has the Simple HTTP Operator and we are hoping for similar here.
|
I asked my coworkers and apparently they announced something like a Simple Http Operator at ReInvent. We're going to use Lambdas for now.
Also, no programming language should have breaks, jumps, or continues. CMV.
|
On January 20 2019 02:13 WarSame wrote: I asked my coworkers and apparently they announced something like a Simple Http Operator at ReInvent. We're going to use Lambdas for now.
Also, no programming language should have breaks, jumps, or continues. CMV.
I literally could not imagine even attempting to program a complicated piece of code without breaks and continues, even less so how infuriatingly bad that code would have to look. P.S: Even goto's are a legit tool to use in certain scenarios (My rule of thumb is they should never jump up, only down. And even then I haven't used one in over a year).
If you dislike jumps, I can't even imagine how you're going to react to using events, which are essential for front end programming.
|
I agree about breaks and continues.. I rely on them constantly, especially continue.
Using "if X, continue" can replace an "if A or B or C or D or E or F or G... etc"
|
Hyrule18762 Posts
Break and continue are amazing, especially in batching. People who say to never use them and to just design stuff "better" are wrong.
|
On January 20 2019 07:03 travis wrote: I agree about breaks and continues.. I rely on them constantly, especially continue.
Using "if X, continue" can replace an "if A or B or C or D or E or F or G... etc"
Technically you can avoid that by filtering your collection first (for simple stuff). Depends on the use-case though, there sure are times when breaks and continues are invaluable.
|
When a guy like Bjarne Stroustrup (C++ inventor) is hesitant to give hard rules about not using something in C++ because he says that there are exceptions, I think not many people are around his level to be so sure to advise against using something in programming ever. You could be talking about a different programming language, but I think this idea still aplies.
For example, C++11 has smart pointers which deallocate memory based on scope. E.g.
void SomeFunction() { std::unique_ptr<Class> object = std::make_unique<Class>(constructor parameters here); } // memory is deallocated when function's scope ends
The usual advice is not to use "new" and "delete" anymore to reduce the chance of memory leaks. This isn't a hard rule because you still need "new" and "delete" even with smart pointers. For example, when you need a custom deleter function and one case for that is if you work with C implementation of something. Or, if you need to use a C++ library which expects an object but its implementation doesn't use smart pointers. In this case, you'd use "new" in constructor and "delete" in destructor of your class.
So, "new" and "delete" are still useful, you just need to use them less but giving a hard rule not to use them at all is meaningless when you don't have context. I think it's more important to understand *why* before learning a rule so you know when not to apply it.
|
On January 20 2019 19:47 SC-Shield wrote:When a guy like Bjarne Stroustrup (C++ inventor) is hesitant to give hard rules about not using something in C++ because he says that there are exceptions, I think not many people are around his level to be so sure to advise against using something in programming ever. You could be talking about a different programming language, but I think this idea still aplies. For example, C++11 has smart pointers which deallocate memory based on scope. E.g. void SomeFunction() { std::unique_ptr<Class> object = std::make_unique<Class>(constructor parameters here); } // memory is deallocated when function's scope ends
The usual advice is not to use "new" and "delete" anymore to reduce the chance of memory leaks. This isn't a hard rule because you still need "new" and "delete" even with smart pointers. For example, when you need a custom deleter function and one case for that is if you work with C implementation of something. So, "new" and "delete" are still useful, you just need to use them less but giving a hard rule not to use them at all is meaningless when you don't have context. I think it's more important to understand *why* before learning a rule so you know when not to apply it.
And then you have a company, which has very weird own self implemented "smart pointer" constructs, developed somewhere in the early 90s, and since the code is full of those and all foundation frameworks use those, you are also forced to use those all the time ^.^ You can't imagine how much I wish that I would be able to use those C++11 smart pointers...
|
Do you guys know a good article to read about POSIX concurrency (threads and synchronisation) as well as signals? If not, I'll just stick to what I've found on Google so far.
|
On January 15 2019 22:49 ZenithM wrote: Even assuming AI is indeed the future, AI jobs are a bubble right now, but it will plateau or even dial down at some point. Having basics in machine learning will be very common for every scientist or programmer, but we don't need that many people working on data.
And like everything else, there is a spectrum of skill and expertise within AI/ML, after a while it won't be worth much to put that on your CV if all you did was take a class. I would say at this very moment it indeed looks good on your CV though. Even small businesses are looking for a dedicated "data scientist" even if they don't realize they need one full-time guy to do that. I'm a hired gun. I created and implemented a "customer handicapping system" for a direct marketing agency that employs ~30 people. i created the system. i did the coding. With the help of the full time IT people i/we figured out where to shoe-horn the decision/handicapping system into the existing transaction focused data processing systems.
its hard to find good coders a) with knowledge of existing data processing systems b) who know how to build software c) the math knowledge/ability to pull this stuff off.
As a result, many businesses with less than 100 employees go with a "gunslinger" as opposed to a full time employee. + Show Spoiler +
|
On January 20 2019 08:17 tofucake wrote: Break and continue are amazing, especially in batching. People who say to never use them and to just design stuff "better" are wrong. How so? Where would you reasonably use them that using sub functions wouldn't work so well and be much clearer?
|
On January 20 2019 22:54 SC-Shield wrote:Do you guys know a good article to read about POSIX concurrency (threads and synchronisation) as well as signals? If not, I'll just stick to what I've found on Google so far. Not an article, but the book "Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment" by W. Richard Stevens has a very good treatment of many UNIX systems programming concepts. There's an entire chapter on each of the subjects of signals, threads, and thread control.
I believe there's source for the book available so you can theoretically make your own PDF if you don't want to buy it.
http://www.apuebook.com/apue3e.html
|
On January 22 2019 01:15 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2019 22:54 SC-Shield wrote:Do you guys know a good article to read about POSIX concurrency (threads and synchronisation) as well as signals? If not, I'll just stick to what I've found on Google so far. Not an article, but the book "Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment" by W. Richard Stevens has a very good treatment of many UNIX systems programming concepts. There's an entire chapter on each of the subjects of signals, threads, and thread control. I believe there's source for the book available so you can theoretically make your own PDF if you don't want to buy it. http://www.apuebook.com/apue3e.html
Thanks. I think I won't have time to read it all before job interviews, but I'll see what I can learn. Also, I had 1 successful and 1 failed interview today. The unsuccessful interview lasted only 30 minutes because: - the interviewer turned out be provocative (HR warned me before that he had weird sense of humour) - the interviewer seemed more focused on C, and I insisted that I'm interested only in C++ to advance my professional career
Other than that, the interviewer was trying to provoke me by asking questions like, "can't you have instances of struct with function pointers instead of classes with methods?". I said: "Yes, you can but it's better use C++ because it's built for that.". Again, he was like: "But I can do object-oriented programming in Assembly" and overall his idea was to provoke me as much as possible to see how I think and to him programming languages are meaningless and it's important what to write. Also, he said C++ is used less and less but I said that I don't agree because there's C++11/14/17 and C++20 soon, so the language is getting updated quite often. Now I realise that I didn't explain much when I said it in interview, but I wasn't motivated to continue interview anyway. My idea is the language stays fresh, so I think more people will use it but even without new features, C++ has its uses.
In general, he was glad I didn't work for him and I'm glad I don't have to work for him. As a colleague says, interview isn't about employer interviewing you but the chance for you to also interview him. I definitely made mistakes, but it's also not the place for me to work there.
Edit: I also got questions about my personal hobbies and what year is a leap year. Absolutely random things. :D
I think if you're not in a hurry to get the first available job, interviews are very nice to show you your weaknesses just like a game of StarCraft. I just couldn't learn much from the last interview, but I'm sure I could learn more from next interviews.
|
Nice attitude, I think it will help you avoid getting into some job where you end up hating life.
|
On January 21 2019 06:01 WarSame wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2019 08:17 tofucake wrote: Break and continue are amazing, especially in batching. People who say to never use them and to just design stuff "better" are wrong. How so? Where would you reasonably use them that using sub functions wouldn't work so well and be much clearer?
It is easy to substitute simple looping with recursion. But then you can potentially run into a couple of problems: - if your language doesn't support TCO you will run into performance issues - if your language does support TCO you can't debug it properly since you lose the stack trace
Recursion will also be a real mess for cases like that:
outer loop outer a
inner loop inner a
if condition continue outer (without going to outer b)
inner b
outer b
Edit: This too depends on a language of choice of course. Some make looping easier for you.
|
|
|
|