627

submitted 3 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.zip to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

80 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] edinbruh@feddit.it 40 points 3 days ago

For a time on Reddit (some years ago when I still used it) there was a trend of finding the worst way of implementing is_even(x: int) -> bool. My contribution to that was a function that ran Ackerman(x,x) flipping a Boolean at every iteration, and check if it was true or false at the end.

It works btw, I will find the proof later

[-] uranibaba@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

I would love to see the implementaion.

[-] edinbruh@feddit.it 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The implementation is not very exciting, I capture a variable in python. It could have been done more cleanly.

1000041934

The proof is this. But, I could have made mistakes, it was many years ago.

1000041935

Note that in python you'll never be able to run is_even(5) the stack cannot handle it

Edit: daaaamn, that variable is ugly as hell. I would never do things like that now.

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 23 hours ago

That's , uh...

Yeah. Cooler than anything I could've achieved for purposefully bad is_even

My first idea of a purposefully bad is_even is this:

def is_even(i):
    return True if i == 0 else not is_even(abs(i)-1)

But I'm sure I could come up with worse given enough time.

[-] edinbruh@feddit.it 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

That's also slower than most of the stuff you could come up with, it is so slow that there is no hyperoperation fast enough to describe it. There were other approaches that were almost worse though, like "the function is a switch-case that returns false by default. As complaint tickets are opened, more cases get added to the switch-case"

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 20 hours ago

the function is a switch-case that returns false by default. As complaint tickets are opened, more cases get added to the switch-case”

Oh if that is acceptable, then my secondary idea of using an API call for this should work too. I thought that it would have to be guaranteed to be correct (as long as you don't reach a stack overflow or something)

[-] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It never occurred to me that you could assign fields to a function. I mean, it totally makes sense considering that functions are objects in Python. It just never occurred to me that this is a thing one can do. Crazy.

[-] edinbruh@feddit.it 1 points 22 hours ago

Please don't do that, I was stupid when I wrote that. But still, in very dynamic languages like python or js everything is an object, including functions, so you can just do object stuff on them.