old thread: >>52518289
What are you working on, /g/?
>>52523249
So I hardcoded a function in my interpreterDEFS["foo"] = definition(["a", "b", "*"], ["a", "b"]);
and somehow the fucker works$ ./maths
>eval foo(1,2)
= 2
>eval foo(2,7)
= 14
>end
fucking magnificent
it should already be possible to define recursive functions, except that I haven't implemented conditionals so it would have to be recursive forever
but god when shit like this actually works it's like coke
>>52523249
So cute, is it a boy's love manga?
Friendly reminder that programming is not exclusive to computers and anyone that argues otherwise is an uneducated code monkey who probably doesn't even write their own algorithms.
>>52523264
anotherDEFS["bar"] = definition(["a", "b", "foo", "c", "+"], ["a", "b", "c"]);$ ./maths
>eval bar(1,2,3)
= 5
>eval bar(3,7,50)
= 71
functions in an expression are resolved and evaluated recursively
It's beautiful
>>52523300
>thinking anyone cares about this
Codeeval is progressively getting worse with every update.
First they made their test environment read-only so I couldn't fuck with the input file before running the program, then they made their environment so fragile, any tiny transgression like reading 1 byte outside of an allocated char array is cause for segfault.
Now their scoring system is claiming my programs take over 20 seconds to run and refusing to score me.
>>52523399
>any tiny transgression like reading 1 byte outside of an allocated char array is cause for segfault.
Are you honestly justifying reading data outside of allocated data? The fucking website should log you out for being this fucking bad.
>Now their scoring system is claiming my programs take over 20 seconds to run and refusing to score me.
Maybe your programs shouldn't be this fucking slow then.
>>52523399
Learn to code filthy code monkey.
>>52523399
>tiny transgression
>reading outside of allocated area
senpai how'd you get this retarded eh?
>>52523399
sadly i don't think this is bait
>>52523322
There's some old military videos that explain how battle ship computers worked. It's an interesting subject.
>>52523911
they're still called computers to be fair, although they're mechanical rather than digital.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1i-dnAH9Y4
>>52523911
>hurr analog computers aren't computors
