Author Topic: survivalRP - holywtf bump! and maybe finishing up some loose ends??  (Read 111248 times)

I think he's saying that you overcomplicated it.

I think he's saying that you overcomplicated it.
It doesn't matter, it's correct.

It may be correct but it's inefficient and that's the point I was making. Maybe it's just because I'm a professional programmer and I understand the impact bad code can have on performance.

It may be correct but it's inefficient and that's the point I was making. Maybe it's just because I'm a professional programmer and I understand the impact bad code can have on performance.
You can talk to Sun about that.

It's amazing how you can misunderstand everything I say.

Code: [Select]
mCeil(getRandom() * 100);
That is less efficient than this:

Code: [Select]
getRandom(1,100);
Do you understand yet?

It's amazing how you can misunderstand everything I say.

Code: [Select]
mCeil(getRandom() * 100);
That is less efficient than this:

Code: [Select]
getRandom(1,100);
Do you understand yet?
Is it deeply inefficient?

Nope, but it is. And inefficient code adds up to give an inefficient application. If you write stuff, you get stuff.

Nope, but it is. And inefficient code adds up to give an inefficient application. If you write stuff, you get stuff.
Why didn't you just explain that in the first place?

Because it's more fun to draw hilarious comparisons to showcase your incompetence? Don't worry though, you're no more incompetent than this guy now:

It doesn't matter, it's correct.

Yay, Ephialtes didn't shoot me in his killing spree

It's redundant to shoot roadkill.

Anyone good with emitters?

Edit: Also, how are resources coming?

It's redundant to shoot roadkill.
I think Ephi quotes may be on the rise.

It's redundant to shoot roadkill.
New sig :D

Edit:
Baw, no room.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2009, 11:36:28 AM by Niliscro »