Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

THINK ABOUT YOUR THINKING

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 4:08

YOU ARE NOW THINKING MANUALLY.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 4:27

I HAS A BRAINCELL

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 6:12 (sage)

>>2
NOT ANYMORE LOLOL I STOLED IT NOW I HAS TWO

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 8:16

Think about your thinking.
Think about thinking about your thinking.
Think about thinking about thinking about your thinking.
Think about thinking about thinking about thinking about your thinking.
Think about thinking about thinking about thinking about thinking about your thinking.
...

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 8:19

YOU ARE NOW THINKING ABOUT THINKING ABOUT THINKING ABOUT THINKING ABOUT YOUR THINKING MANUALLY

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 8:44

if(1) {
  think(); }
else {
  sleep(); }

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 11:59

function what(str) {
 return what('thinking about '+str);
}

alert('think about '+what('your thinking'));

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 12:29

>>7
I tested that, and it actually nearly froze up Opera (I managed to close the tab in time). You would think they'd put some sort of limit on how much memory or processing power a piece of Javascript can consume...

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-02 20:05

>>8
That's because Opera's Javascript support is horrendous. You were obviously not thinking about your thinking.

www.firefox.com

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 0:05

>>7
lol, "your" thinking
fuck the internet

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 3:56

>>9 That's a lot of downloading just to get a stack overflow error.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 6:16

>>9
javascript:x=function(){while(1){setInterval("open('javascript:x='+x.toString().replace(/\\n/g,'')+';x();')",1)}};x();

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 7:09

That's because Opera's Javascript support is horrendous.
And Firefox's isn't? HAHAHAHA.

Me? I think we should just get rid of that shit and use Lua. Not that it'd fix runaway processes, but at least we could do something useful with a language that isn't slow as a slug on every implementation out there.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 8:36

>>13
yeah, right, a language that nobody uses is sure to be faster than one that people have been using for years. i bet you think a web browser written in haskell would be faster, too.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 12:35

Me? I think we should just get rid of that shit and use Scheme. Not that it'd fix runaway processes, but at least we could do something useful with a language that isn't slow as a slug on every implementation out there.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 18:25

Hello, >>14. There's this thing called google. Repeat after me: G-O-O-G-L-E.

Ten seconds: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=lua&lang2=javascript

Plenty of people comparing Lua and Javascript on mailing lists too.

You fail.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-03 23:23

>>16
spidermonkey is one of the slowest javascript implementations there is.
also, i doubt every browser would use the same lua implementation.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 0:16

spidermonkey is one of the slowest javascript implementations there is.

Considering how dependent Firefox is on javascript, that's really sad. The only browser out there with an implementation that isn't slow as molasses is Opera. One browser. Still slower than Lua though. Does this tell you anything?

There's a JITed JS implementation out there, but nobody uses it. What good is it if it's never used?

i doubt every browser would use the same lua implementation.

Why not? It's under an MIT license. That single implementation is widely used and supported. You'd have to be an idiot to reinvent the wheel.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 2:19

>>14
Don't provoke me, boy. I just might write one in Haskell just to spite your uppity ass.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 2:39

The only browser out there with an implementation that isn't slow as molasses is Opera.
ever heard of konqueror? or icab? i suspect safari would be reasonably fast, too, but i've never used it.
also, how do you know opera's javascript implementation is slower than lua? opera doesn't have lua and there isn't a standalone version of opera's javascript implementation...

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 7:28

>>20
Learn how to google, dumb ass. I am so fucking tired of digging up links that you could find in a few moments if your stupid lazy ass bothered. What are you doing in this board if you can't even use a search engine?

This took me a whopping 30 seconds to find. Wow, am I good or what?
Straight Javascript (little DOM): http://celtickane.com/projects/jsspeed.php
But what about konqueror and icab (fapfapfap)? Here ya go (more DOM): http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html (hahahahaha)

Now if you know anything about math (Right? You do know elementary math at least? Addition, subtraction and mean? Right?), it's pretty easy to use spidermonkey as a baseline and determine how everyone else compares to Lua.

http://www.google.com/ okay? I know you can...

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 7:44

>>21

Well, you're the one who feels the need to prove himself, so he might as well let you do all the work.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 9:26

>>22
no u

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 11:42

>>21
why don't you try doing the tests yourself?
i tried the first one in konqueror and opera on my freebsd machine and konqueror was about 3 seconds slower.
then i tried it in icab on an old powermac i have (running os 9.1). i gave up on that after about 10 minutes.
then i tried to start opera... i gave up on that after about 15 minutes.
the second test stopped at "TEST 2" in both konqueror and opera.

Name: Anonymous 2006-10-04 18:44

>>24
I did, kthnx.

Now think how this relates to Javascript and Lua. You seem to be getting tied up in browser versus browser.

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 13:46

Trolls

Name: Anonymous 2009-01-14 13:50

>>26
I just ignore them ;-)

___________
Sent from my iPhone.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-06 9:27

Think all of that   instruction so it   all worked fine.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-08 21:55

Think about it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-01-10 0:17

>>29
Think about thinking about it

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-07 18:19

THINK ABOUT MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-07 22:56

>>31
But that's where you poop from!

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-14 4:04

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 8:37

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 19:39

Name: Sgt.Kabu흧酫kiman⤵촙 2012-05-28 20:17

Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List