#qi-hardware IRC log for Sunday, 2012-12-02

DocScrutinizer05larsc: wpwrak: pcercuei: I wouldn't know how T F to read this. The comment about code obfuscation contest was pretty much to the point01:18
pcercueiDocScrutinizer05: you program better when you understand things, that's why I asked01:19
DocScrutinizer05you program best when you avoid by all means that stuff that nobody understands01:19
pcercueiI disagree01:20
pcercueiyou program best when you avoid that sort of stuff, but you should understand why01:20
DocScrutinizer05maybe because it's ambiguous nonsensical syntax?01:20
DocScrutinizer05I don't need to know what   E' FC- means to avoid it01:23
pcercueithat's your opinion01:23
pcercueithe thing in question was ((-1) >> 1)01:23
DocScrutinizer05no, the ting in question been >>=01:25
DocScrutinizer05which might make a decent parser segfault01:26
pcercueiwell that's the same01:27
DocScrutinizer05I doubt '>>=' has any reasonable meaning in any language other than c, and even there it's extremely obfuscated01:28
pcercueiwhy would it be?01:29
pcercueiit's not more obfuscated than x += 101:29
DocScrutinizer05uhuh01:29
DocScrutinizer05aaah, well then blame it to my poor C skills, you're right01:30
pcercueiand as long as the Linux kernel's patch reviewing tool accepts it, I'll use it01:30
DocScrutinizer05anyway, the syntactical shortcut  <var1> <operator>= <var2>,  for <var1> = <var1> <operator> <var2>  tends to look ill-formed for operators that don't consist of a single char01:36
wpwrakpcercuei: maybe C needs a unary >> and << as well ? like   x = x+1;  ->  x += 1;  ->  x++;  with shift  x = x >> 1;  ->  x >>= 1;  ->  x>>; /* or similar */01:36
pcercueiI don't think that one exists01:37
wpwrakDocScrutinizer05: it's just a question of what you're used to. >>= and <<= are indeed relatively uncommon since incremental shifts often aren't expressed as such01:38
DocScrutinizer05x>>> then01:38
DocScrutinizer05or x>>>>01:38
wpwrakpcercuei: i just made it up :)01:38
wpwrakDocScrutinizer05: yeah, more consistent but a lot of >s01:38
DocScrutinizer05hmm, x»» then01:40
DocScrutinizer05makes for a nice x»=1 too01:41
DocScrutinizer05x»=7 ;-D01:42
wpwrakyeah. use a non-ascii character :)01:42
DocScrutinizer05well, iirc in some language *) been a transscription of }01:44
DocScrutinizer05pascal maybe?01:44
wpwrakyup01:45
DocScrutinizer05maybe /* is a transscription of italic-*01:45
DocScrutinizer05who knows, maybe >> is a transscription of »01:46
wpwrakto work around some ASCII-based character sets using { } [ ] etc. for umlauts or accented characters01:46
DocScrutinizer05;-P01:46
wpwrakthis is in fact a common transcription01:46
wpwrakbtw, C also has something like this. it's called "trigraph" and it's really pretty01:47
Action: DocScrutinizer05 gasps01:47
wpwrak(-:C01:49
DocScrutinizer05I guess you learnt about that in your compiler building times?01:50
DocScrutinizer05http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigraph#Programmiersprache_C  shudder01:53
wpwraknaw, i heard of it before. and quickly decided to ignore it :)01:53
DocScrutinizer05a ??!??! b01:53
DocScrutinizer05I honestly prefer begin; / end; instead of { / } over the concept that results in a ??!??! b01:55
wpwraknaw, nobody uses trigraphs01:56
wpwrakand  begin/end  is just too much typing01:56
DocScrutinizer05and x = x >> 7 is also too much typing. well, not for me01:57
wpwrakwell, it may have started as an optimization help. when compilers were really dumb.01:59
DocScrutinizer05otoh you frequently see fools typing stuff like bool b; if (b == true)01:59
DocScrutinizer05when i'd get a penny for each "== true", "== false", "!= true", "!= false" my eyes had to read, I'd be rich02:01
wpwrakor  if (foo != 0) ...02:03
DocScrutinizer05basically the same, but has at least a tiny bit of implicit documentation02:04
DocScrutinizer05if C wasn't so broken by design, you'd actually need that. Only the friggin loose typing of C allows using an integer as a boolean02:06
DocScrutinizer05it has it's advantages, sure02:08
DocScrutinizer05its02:08
DocScrutinizer05particularly all function returns which mean error if <0 and some different type if >0 or >=002:09
DocScrutinizer05otoh this is a botch of its own, a decent language would throw an error instead of return(E_FOO)02:11
whitequarkc is a fancy macroassembler :)02:28
whitequarkbtw, there are languages which allow all of >=, >>= and >>>=, the latter standing for arithmetic shift right.02:30
GunTheJuryI sure hope someone with a brain is here tonight...05:27
kristianpaul1000$ !!!14:43
kristianpaul:-|14:43
kristianpaul(piksi)14:50
wpwrakkristianpaul: is the new printer working well ? :)17:27
kristianpaulwpwrak: hah19:36
kristianpaula19:36
wolfspraulkristianpaul: what's interesting about that piski board?22:10
wolfspraulpiksi22:10
wolfspraul1000 USD?22:10
wpwrakthis one ? http://swift-nav.com/piksi.html22:22
wolfspraulyes22:24
wolfspraulI was wondering what is special about that board22:24
wpwrakthe samling rate seems unusually high22:25
wpwraks/samling/sampling22:26
wpwrakat least for GPS22:26
LunaVoraxHi22:43
kristianpaulnot sure, i tought they opensourced their correlator but is to closed to dated23:27
kristianpaulwpwrak: thats an usual sample rate for a IF ic that do not have separate phase and quadrature sampling23:29
kristianpaulwpwrak: i guess you meant high that 3-bit, 16.368 MS/s ?23:29
kristianpauland 3 bits may be a plus for indoors aplications23:29
kristianpaulwolfspraul: pehaps their libs but i dont find any else23:30
MistahDarcyIs there still active development going on with the Ben Nanonote?23:39
wolfspraulMistahDarcy: depends on how you define 'active'? :-)23:42
wolfspraulwhat do you mean?23:42
wolfspraulthe software is definitely being maintained and we try to improve it23:42
MistahDarcyThat's what I mean... in a nutshell. lol23:42
MistahDarcyThanks23:42
wolfspraulbut there is no big new target/goal that I'm aware of, at the moment23:42
wolfspraulall the main stuff works, music player, video player, etc.23:43
MistahDarcyNice. I'm considering getting one for the open hardware concept23:43
MistahDarcyBetween the nanonote or the Pandora, but I'm not entirely sure the pandora is open hardware?23:44
wolfspraulopenpandora didn't go as far as the nanonote in terms of trying to open up the whole thing23:45
MistahDarcyI see. Is the SPECTEC SDIO still the best option for Wifi?23:47
wolfspraulif you need wifi, get the openpandora :-)23:51
wolfspraul(if you can, the op team is still working on their 4-year old list of prepaid preorders...)23:52
MistahDarcyYeah... their business model seems kind of sketch23:53
wolfspraulwe tried wifi on the nanonote and got it to work to a certain degree, but I cannot recommend that23:53
wolfspraulwell they try23:53
--- Mon Dec 3 201200:00

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.9.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!