View source for User talk:Decimus Schomer/Scripts/Libraries/LSL MDAs

(about mda_val and mda_val_lens)
: ''I'm not sure what you're doing that makes this true; I've definitely never had this issue. Or do you just not want to have to pass the list names to the function every time? - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 18:41, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
::'' The problem is that several of the functions need to return two lists, and there's no way of returning them both (no structs or pointers, like there are in C) --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
::: ''Ah. That'd do it. You could always dump lists to strings and back again, but that'd be slow. Then again, this is too. (Although testing indicated that my revised version is about 5-10 times faster. Vague because there wasn't much testing. :p) Did you try the [http://www.lslwiki.net/lslwiki/wakka.php?wakka=LibraryMultidimensionalArray multidimensional array library] before writing this? - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 19:30, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
::::'' Actually, I didn't :( (tbh, I was told that it existed but forgot :p) And I'm not completely sure if I should trust a library written by someone who thinks that 0x20 = 20 :p
::::'' And why oh why can't LL just let us use the standard method of getting items from lists and allow lists of lists? (that's one problem with a lot of languages which are the only ones you can use for a given language - they can afford to be useless in many situations because you're forced to use it :( ) --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
::::: ''Because they wrote the compiler, and they're lazy.
::::::'' But the point of compilers is to let the people making the code be lazy! :p

::::: ''But they're moving to the [http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page mono] runtime environment soon. This means that scripts will run faster. Additionally, they plan to give us C# support, and LSL3 will support real arrays. "Soon" is in LL's timescale, however. I wouldn't take that as meaning "this year."''
::::::'' **Hopes that they'll also add C support - he's much more comfortable with C than C++ or C#** :p And yes, when a company says "soon we'll do x", it means more like "when our complaints lines become overloaded with complaints about the non-presence of x" :p

::::: ''And yes, the 0x20 = 20 thing is dubious. On the other hand, the characters don't actually need to be printable, since they never get printed. I can't say I've ever used it myself, so I won't vouch for the rest of it being any better. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 19:56, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
::::::'' Verily. As one of the resident pedants, I *have* to also point out that they can't spell 'indices' right either :p (or that people rarely manage to spell 'fora' correctly) --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
::::::: ''I dislike the word "fora" - I always misread it as "flora." As far as I can tell, both "fora" and "forums" are accurate in modern English. Having said that, "fora" does look and sound nicer than "forums." Hmm...''
::::::: ''Side note: the indentation is getting ridiculous  now. Side note 2: Spell check flags "fora" as incorrect, while "forums" is apparently correct. It's not an American dictionary either - "colour" is correct, while "color" is not. - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 20:07, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
::::::::'' Technically 'forums' is wrong - it's Latin, 2nd declension neuter - forum/forum/fori/foro/foro (singular), fora/fora/fororum/foris/foris (plural)
::::::::: ''This isn't English, it's Latin. But I'll go with "fora," seeing as that's what my dictionary says. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 20:15, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
:::::::::: ''Um, I meant "This isn't Latin, it's English." Oops. - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 20:15, 18 July 2007 (BST)''
:::::::::::'' Well it's still a Latin word. Similar to how the correct plural of 'index' is 'indices' - that's Latin, too --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
::::::::::::''Well, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the correct plural of index is  'indexes (also 7 index's) and indices'. The OED doesn't even contain the word 'fora'!'' Fox
:::::::::::::'' Well it's the Oxford '''English''' Dictionary, so it's hardly surprising that it uses English pluralisations for words from other languages... :p (though I suppose that learning all the different pluralisation methods for different root languages could confuzz some people :p) --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
:::::::::::::: ''And this is the '''English''' language - we take the words, but the pluralisations have changed in the last couple thousand years. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 16:56, 19 July 2007 (BST)''
:::::::::::::::'' True. But you could view it as a bit of Latin (or whatever other language) embedded into the English language. But this isn't getting anywhere, is it? :p --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]
:::::::::::::::: ''Nope. And the indentation is truely insane now. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 18:15, 19 July 2007 (BST)''
::::::::::::::::: ''If you argue that Latin words have to retain Latin plurals, then every other word would have to retain its original plural. Kayak would have to have a Greenland dialect plural and kimono a Japanese plural, and koala a native Australian plural. Schoolchildren would spend years just trying to learn plurals!'' Fox
::::::::::::::::::'' That's true, hence me saying "I suppose that learning all the different pluralisation methods for different root languages could confuzz some people :p". But meh :p
::::::::::::::::::: '' '''Some''' people? And this has little to do with mda_val and mda_val_lens any more. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 22:32, 19 July 2007 (BST)''
[[Category:Schome]][[Category:Talk]]
::::::::::::::::::::'' Yes, some people :p Some would have the brain capacity to '''not''' get confuzzed :p (and it doesn't really matter that we're off-subject :p)
::::::::::::::::::::: ''I'm not saying you'd get confused - I'm saying it'd take a while to learn the various roots of every word. Or you could just learn the roots for each language and where each word came from, which I guess would work. (And to an extent we do now, unless you're using American English, which takes the approach of just removing any difficult word.) I'm aware I said people would get confused, but that's not what I actually meant. :p - [[User:Katharine Berry|Katharine Berry]] 12:16, 20 July 2007 (BST)''
::::::::::::::::::::::'' It's not what you meant, but it's what '''I''' said and meant :p --[[User:Decimus Schomer|Decimus]]