kwc.org Photos Spare Cycles MythBusters

Feeling lonely

So, it appears that I may have lost ~15 comments in my little snafu. It's rather silly, as the thing that broke it had never really been working anyways -- it just started not working in a very different way.

Anyway, I'm curious as to what those 15 comments were, so, if you're willing, comment away. Some examples:

  • "Everyone would have seen my answer to the number puzzle if you weren't such crappy admin."
  • "I was using one of the comment fields on your Web site to solve Fermat's Last Theorem, and now all my work is lost thanks to you."
  • "I was going to propose to my fiance on your blog, but instead we flew to London."

Important: if you post a comment on this entry and get a message saying that it's been moderated, send me an e-mail if you can as I might still be having problems.

Comments (5)

M Author Profile Page:

Wasn't Fermat's Last Theorem solved already a couple of years ago?

I posted two comments to you java code post...

The first one was a statement that while I hadn't programmed in Java for 8 years that I thought it had an overflow exeception and that the code would throw and uncought exception when the int overflowed...

The second comment was a synthisized code snipet that demonstrated something I considered to be completely egregious. It was a section of code where all the coments were explaining language syntax not what the code was supposed to do:
Example 1: i++; /* Incrament i by one */
Example 2: printf("\n"); /* New line */
Example 3 (the worst!):
while (mem[i] == &mem[i]){ /* while true continue test */
The other comment that failed to post was to the pictures you took at my wedding of the animals. The seal you posted should be in the background of the pro photos of me and my family taken before the wedding. I was taking pictures of the gopher and the pro photographer was taking pictures of me... It was a kind of meta photography...


As you can see it was nothing earth shattering...

kwc:

@m: Ah yes, it was -- but if you could fit Wiles (second) proof into this comments field, I would certainly be impressed.

@pqbon: must have been a perl programmer unaccustomed to unobfuscated code.

kwc:

@pqbon: the int won't overflow because it gets re-initialized at the beginning of each loop... i.e. it repeatedly calculates 50+1. Sadly, I don't think the loop will throw anything... it will just eat up all of your CPU until you force quit.

meta:

I have a proof, but it won't fit in this comment field.

related entries.

what is this?

This page contains a single entry from kwc blog posted on June 3, 2005 8:44 AM.

The previous post was Oopsy.

The next post is 3-series.

Current entries can be found on the main page.