Jump to content

For the techo-geeks


2Far

Recommended Posts

Bah....that back in 32-bit days. Now we're in 64-bit processors and the number we have to worry about is MUCH, MUCH bigger. For 64-bit,we won't hit that problem unless a number exceeds 9223372036854775807.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Often it would be better if the software engineer was knew more about why software fails.  You would probably make a good software engineer.  We learn by not making the mistakes others have made.

​Thanks Max.  But I like it much better on this side of the fence.  Much more enjoyable finding the faults of others.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an overflow bit.  Those who ignore it are lazy.

​Very true. Even if you are not down at the hardware level to see the overflow bit itself, modern programming tools will see that bit and throw and exception. Either way, it's a stupid error to miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I grew up writing software in raw machine code back in the day.  Assembly language was a great step forward.  So many young programmers are lazy.

I may not have written machine code, but ​I've spent time in the Assembly trenches. I understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Are there any naughty bits?

​Always.  Bits are not to be trusted.  They conspire to trip up young programmers at the slightest provocation.  They thrive on those who try to make the analog world fit into a binary matrix.

Edited by maddmaxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...