Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
Two big moments today:
1. Holy hell, how did I ever get on without a proper debugger? Was debugging some old code by eye (following along and keeping track mentally, of what the variables should be and what each step did). That didn't work because the code isn't intuitive. Tried the print() method, old reliable as it were. Kinda worked but didn't give me enough fine-grain control.
Bit the bullet and installed Wing IDE for python. And bam, it hit me. How did I ever live without step-through, and breakpoints before now?
2. Remember that non-sieve prime generator I wrote a while back? (well maybe some of you do). The one that generated quasi lucas carmichael (QLC) numbers? Well thats what I managed to debug. I figured out why it wasn't working. Last time I released it, I included two core methods, genprimes() and nextPrime(). The first generates a list of primes accurately, up to some n, and only needs a small handful of QLC numbers filtered out after the fact (because the set of primes generated and the set of QLC numbers overlap. Well I think they call it an embedding, as in QLC is included in the series generated by genprimes, but not the converse, but I digress).
nextPrime() was supposed to take any arbitrary n above zero, and accurately return the nearest prime number above the argument. But for some reason when it started, it would return 2,3,5,6...but genprimes() would work fine for some reason.
So genprimes loops over an index, i, and tests it for primality. It begins by entering the loop, and doing "result = gffi(i)".
This calls into something a function that runs four tests on the argument passed to it. I won't go into detail here about what those are because I don't even remember how I came up with them (I'll make a separate post when the code is fully fixed).
If the number fails any of these tests then gffi would just return the value of i that was passed to it, unaltered. Otherwise, if it did pass all of them, it would return i+1.
And once back in genPrimes() we would check if the variable 'result' was greater than the loop index. And if it was, then it was either prime (comparatively plentiful) or a QLC number (comparatively rare)--these two types and no others.
nextPrime() was only taking n, and didn't have this index to compare to, so the prior steps in genprimes were acting as a filter that nextPrime() didn't have, while internally gffi() was returning not only primes, and QLCs, but also plenty of composite numbers.
Now *why* that last step in genPrimes() was filtering out all the composites, idk.
But now that I understand whats going on I can fix it and hypothetically it should be possible to enter a positive n of any size, and without additional primality checks (such as is done with sieves, where you have to check off multiples of n), get the nearest prime numbers. Of course I'm not familiar enough with prime number generation to know if thats an achievement or worthwhile mentioning, so if anyone *is* familiar, and how something like that holds up compared to other linear generators (O(n)?), I'd be interested to hear about it.
I also am working on filtering out the intersection of the sets (QLC numbers), which I'm pretty sure I figured out how to incorporate into the prime generator itself.
I also think it may be possible to generator primes even faster, using the carmichael numbers or related set--or even derive a function that maps one set of upper-and-lower bounds around a semiprime, and map those same bounds to carmichael numbers that act as the upper and lower bound numbers on the factors of a semiprime.
Meanwhile I'm also looking into testing the prime generator on a larger set of numbers (to make sure it doesn't fail at large values of n) and so I'm looking for more computing power if anyone has it on hand, or is willing to test it at sufficiently large bit lengths (512, 1024, etc).
Lastly, the earlier work I posted (linked below), I realized could be applied with ECM to greatly reduce the smallest factor of a large number.
If ECM, being one of the best methods available, only handles 50-60 digit numbers, & your factors are 70+ digits, then being able to transform your semiprime product into another product tree thats non-semiprime, with factors that ARE in range of ECM, and which *does* contain either of the original factors, means products that *were not* formally factorable by ECM, *could* be now.
That wouldn't have been possible though withput enormous help from many others such as hitko who took the time to explain the solution was a form of modular exponentiation, Fast-Nop who contributed on other threads, Voxera who did as well, and support from Scor in particular, and many others.
Thank you all. And more to come.
Links mentioned (because DR wouldn't accept them as they were):
https://pastebin.com/MWechZj912 -
I wonder how many timers, clocks, hello world's and random number generators have been created.
Ever.1 -
I envy how many programmers can come with really cool unique names for their projects and i am here using random name generators and other stuff struggling for hours or even days just to know it's used for another unrelated project.4
-
I asked on StackOverflow how to use Angular2 and NodeJS together, that's the foundations of MEAN stack. The answer was "use a generator". SERIOUSLY? It's the stack most famous ever and nobody knows how to serve a fucking static folder without using a generator? What if I've already my own generator? What if I want just to add API to my current project? What if I just want to know what fucking is happening under the hood? What the fuck? Seriously? A generator? Oh my God! A generator!2
-
I'm shitting there hammering out some code butchering some real problems when I suddenly realise I'm surrounded. I look around and yes it's the bloody committee.
The committee is what I call the rest of the department and it is dominated by the old guard which comprises of the programmers that have been around for longer.
None of the old guard can program particularly well but because they had been around the longest they'd all grown senior. The committee had free reign but anyone else doing anything differently has to get approval from the committee.
The only way to code otherwise was to copy and paste existing code then to primarily rename things. If anyone did anything that hadn't been seen before then it would have to be approved by the committee. Individual action was not permitted unless you were old guard.
I swept my headphones away expecting it to be something unimportant. It was.
First things first they announce. We're going to add extraneous commas to the last element of all possible lists separated by comma including parameters or so they say. Ask but why so I do.
Because the language now supports it. They added support for it so it must be the right way someone proclaimed. Does it? I didn't realise we were waiting for it. Why do we want it though?
Didn't you hear? It's all over the blogosphere. It massively improves merge requests. But how I ask?
Five minutes later I grow tired of the chin stroking, elbow harnessing, slanted gazes into the yonder and occasionally hearing maybe its because and ask if they mean when you for example add an element the last element registers as changed from adding a comma. Turns out that's all it is.
How often do we see that tiny distraction and isn't it pointless to make the code ugly just for a tiny transient reduction in diff noise I ask. Everyone's stumped. This went on and on and got worse and worse. But it makes moving things around easy half of them say in unison like the bunch of slobs that they are. I mean really. It doesn't make expanding and contracting statements from multiline to single line easy and it's such a stupid thing. Is that all they do all day? Move multi-line method parameters up and down all day? If their coding conventions weren't totally whack they wouldn't have so many multiline method prototypes with stupid amounts of parameters with stupidly long types and names. They all use the same smart IDE which can also surely handle fixing the last comma and why is that even a concern given all the other outrageously verbose and excessive conventions for readability?
But you know what, who cares, fine, whatever. Lets put commas all over the shop and then we can all go to the pub and woo the ladies with how cool and trendy we are up to date with all the latest trends and fashions then we go home with ten babes hanging off each arm and get so laid we have to take a sick day the following to go to the STD clinic. Make way for we are conformists.
But then someone had to do it. They had to bring up PSR. Yes, another braindead committee that produces stupid decisions. Should brackets be same line or next line, I know, lets do both they decided. Now we have to do PSR and aren't allowed to use sensible conventions.
But why, I ask after explaining it's actually quite useful as a set of documents we can plagiarise as a starting point but then modify but no, we have to do exactly what PSR says. We're all too stupid apparently you see. Apparently we're not on their level. We're mere mortals. The reason or so I'm told, is so that anyone can come in and is they know PSR coding styles be able to read and write the code. That's not how it works. If you can't adjust to a different style, a more consistent style, that's not massively bizarre or atypical but rather with only minor differences from standard styles, you're useless. That's not even an argument, it's a confession that you've got a lump of coal where your brain's supposed to be.
Through all of this I don't really care because I long ago just made my own code generators or transpilers that work two ways and switch things between my shit and their shit but share my wisdom anyway because I'm a greedy scumbag like that.
Where the shit really hit the fan is that I pointed out that PSR style guide doesn't answer all questions nor covers all cases so what do we do then. If it's not in PSR? Then we're fucked.4 -
I had a pretty good year! I've gone from being a totally unknown passionate web dev to a respected full stack dev. This will be a bit lengthy rant...
Best:
- Got my first full time employment dev role at a company after being self-taught for 8+ years at the start of the year. Finally got someone to take the risk of hiring someone who's "untested" and only done small and odd jobs professionally. This kickstarted my career, super grateful for that!
- Started my own programming consulting company.
- Gained enough confidence to apply to other jobs, snatched a few consulting jobs, nailed the interviews even though I never practiced any leet code.
- Currently work as a 99% remote dev (only meet up in person during the initialization of some projects.) I never thought working remotely could actually work this well. I am able to stay productive and actually focus on the work instead of living up to the 9-5 standard. If I want to go for a walk to think I can do that, I can be as social and asocial as I want. I like to sleep in and work during the night with a cup of tea in the dark and it's not an issue! I really like the freedom and I feel like I've never been more productive.
- Ended up with very happy customers and now got a steady amount of jobs rolling in and contracts are being extended.
- I learned a lot, specialized in graph databases, no more db modelling hell. Loving it!
- Got a job where I can use my favorite tools and actually create something from scratch which includes a lot of different fields. I am really happy I can use all my skills and learn new things along the way, like data analysis, databricks, hadoop, data ingesting, centralised auth like promerium and centralised logging.
- I also learned how important softskills are, I've learned to understand my clients needs and how to both communicate both as a developer and an entrepeneur.
Worst:
- First job had a manager which just gave me the specifications solo project and didn't check in or meet me for 8 weeks with vague specifications. Turns out the manager was super biased on how to write code and wanted to micromanage every aspect while still being totally absent. They got mad that I had used AJAX for requests as that was a "waste of time".
- I learned the harsh reality of working as a contractor in the US from a foreign country. Worked on an "indefinite" contract, suddenly got a 2 day notification to sum up my work (not related to my performance) after being there for 7+ months.
- I really don't like the current industry standard when it comes to developing websites (I mostly work in node.js), I like working with static websites (with static website generators like what the Svelte.js driver) and use a REST API for dynamic content. When working on the backend there's a library for everything and I've wasted so many hours this year to fix bugs and create workarounds related to dependencies. You need to dive into a rabbit hole for every tool and do something which may work or break something later. I've had so many issues with CICD and deployment to the cloud. There's a library for everything but there's so many that it's impossible to learn about the edge cases of everything. Doesn't help that everything is abstracted away, which works 90% of the time but I use 15 times the time to debug things when a bug appears. I work against a black box which may or may not have an up to date documentation and it's so complex that it will require you to yell incantations from the F#$K
era and sacrifice a goat for it to work properly.
- Learned that a lot of companies call their complex services "microservices". Ah yes, the microservice with 20 endpoints which all do completely unrelated tasks?
Top Tags
Weekly Rant
View