|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
news:web.492fa75bac6f151465d3b2410@news.povray.org...
> What do you say about us to them?
> It can't be much good :)
>
Don't think I've said anything. We mostly talk SQL. No surprise there
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail <gail (at) sql in the wild (dot) co [dot] za> wrote:
> Courtasy of one of the SQL MVPs (and reposted with his permission)
A version of this?
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-The-TSQL-Madlebrot.aspx
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:492fdf27@news.povray.org...
> Gail <gail (at) sql in the wild (dot) co [dot] za> wrote:
>> Courtasy of one of the SQL MVPs (and reposted with his permission)
>
> A version of this?
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Stupid-Coding-Tricks-The-TSQL-Madlebrot.aspx
Yup.
-- ORIGINAL AUTHOR: GRAEME JOB
One of the guys looked at it and said to himself, I can make that more
efficient, and proceeded to do go
Geek level 1 - writing something useless just for fun
Geek level 2 - rewriting it to make it run faster.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail wrote:
> Geek level 1 - writing something useless just for fun
> Geek level 2 - rewriting it to make it run faster.
Geek level 3 - rewriting it in an exotic Turning-complete gibberish
language just to prove you can.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Gail" <gail (at) sql in the wild (dot) co [dot] za> wrote:
> "Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
> news:web.492fa75bac6f151465d3b2410@news.povray.org...
>
> > What do you say about us to them?
> > It can't be much good :)
> >
>
> Don't think I've said anything.
>We mostly talk SQL. No surprise there
Rather you than me, then :)
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Gail wrote:
> > Geek level 1 - writing something useless just for fun
> > Geek level 2 - rewriting it to make it run faster.
> Geek level 3 - rewriting it in an exotic Turning-complete gibberish
> language just to prove you can.
There is certain fun in stressing programs or devices with unusual code.
It's a shame that almost no printer nowadays supports reading and
interpreting PostScript anymore (nowadays almost every single one of them
has a OS driver which interprets the PostScript on the computer and only
then sends the chewed up page data to the printer), but in the good old
days when PS files were sent *raw* to printers and the printer interpreted
it, it was fun to send a PostScript Mandelbrot for them to ruminate about.
http://warp.povusers.org/MandScripts/ps.html
Remember that back the first year I was at the University I tried it with
a printer there, and it took it something like a half an hour to print it.
Many years later I tried it again with a newer printer, and it had printed
it before I could get from the computer to the printer.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> It's a shame that almost no printer nowadays supports reading and
> interpreting PostScript anymore (nowadays almost every single one of them
> has a OS driver which interprets the PostScript on the computer and only
> then sends the chewed up page data to the printer), but in the good old
> days when PS files were sent *raw* to printers and the printer interpreted
> it, it was fun to send a PostScript Mandelbrot for them to ruminate about.
Hey, I STILL DO THIS! :-D
I know most cheap printers don't support PostScript, but IME
industrial-grade laser printers still accept raw PS as input. (E.g., our
recently-purchased HP LaserJet 4250 accepts it just fine.)
I think it's just cheaper to make the host do it then put a powerful
computer inside the printer itself. Makes the printer cheaper.
(Do you remember the scandle of "win modems"?)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail wrote:
>
> Don't think I've said anything. We mostly talk SQL. No surprise there
INSERT INTO laughable_things (name,scale) VALUES('povray.off-topic',5);
COMMIT;
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> INSERT INTO laughable_things (name,scale) VALUES('povray.off-topic',5);
> COMMIT;
You *know* you're not going to rollback on THAT one! ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:49301b62$1@news.povray.org...
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
>
>> INSERT INTO laughable_things (name,scale) VALUES('povray.off-topic',5);
>> COMMIT;
>
> You *know* you're not going to rollback on THAT one! ;-)
<groan>
The best I've seen recently over there (I can't say anything about the
discussion that lead up to it) was this:
UPDATE T OPTION (READ_MY_MIND) SET
3,
@this,
xyz + 5
WHERE IT BELONGS;
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |