You, I heard you have some memory to waste

Doesn't even save time on computation, cache abuse since it destroys locality and what else... Horrible code

What? Why would this shit return a long long?

Are you fucking kidding me... This code is a disgrace...

@filthyranter because they are dumb. They thought that if you give a long long, you should get a long long, even though it maxes out in value at fucking 18.

looks like ascii art

* code porn!

Technically correct... B+

Return num.length()-1;

Except for first use case roughly, treat num as string

@hoggchan it's more like code rape and homicide.

I use a one liner for that; see pseudocode:
int n
nLength = floor(log10(n)) + 1

Ha! What prat wrote that code? Obviously he should have used a for loop instead...

@ryanmhoffman lol

There may be good reasons for writing such code, although I believe there are none in this case, as proven by the return type and the redundant >= tests

@bkwilliams this is floating point math, you don't need it here

@iam13islucky I know that the author of that code is dumb.

Come on guys, at least it's got documentation 👍😎👌

Looking at is again, thanks to notifs; it's also wrong for negative numbers there is no default return.

@bkwilliams +1 for thinking log10 :)

This hurts me, i am cry

I'm thinking about how even if someone intentionally wanted to write that, they'd run a loop to print the code.

I like how there's a staircase of small travesties leading up to the big one. It helps the reader mentally prepare.

I predict, that you haven't ever heared about logarithms =) a guy above posted a good inline form of counting nunber of digits in the number ( floor(log10(x)) + 1) )

@OrestH my guess actually is the code in the image is more efficient (discounting the long long and unnecessary comparisons) because there would be one instruction for each case.

A log is probably a few instructions, one more for add, one comparison...

I'll confess I probably would have used sprintf and strlen because I'm lazy and that's the worst option..

@alebianco the cpu will likely execute the instructions out of order - i.e. in parallel in the same core, since there are no real interdependencies there. So it may very well be faster than any floating-point operation (or a conversion to string, or an unrolled loop)

I think convert to string and count length is slightly faster than log? I guess it depends on the language

What really bugs me is that on line 10 the semicolon is suddenly displaced by 3 to the right instead of 2 on the other lines

This is being reposted too much

@mzpro10 this was posted 3 weeks ago.

The patience it took to write this....

@soulkicks it was dead, no necromancy!!

@iam13islucky what is dead may never die

You know, if you don't want to use one-liners, you could always use a counter and a temporary clone of the value to calculate the length inside of a while-loop with the condition temp != 0.

return num.toString().length;

Is he paid by the number of lines of code that he writes?

int length = 1;
int temp = numberToCheck / 10; // Integer division
while (temp != 0)
{
length++;
temp /= 10; // Integer division
}

// Might not be the most efficient way to do this but it's simple and probably more efficient than converting it into a string
// Derived from getting the digit sum