absurd MacOS High Sierra bug

[John Newman]

On November 30, 2017 10:54:58 AM EST, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > First thought was "thoughts", but the electron synapse reaction
>time
>>> > is rather measurable I believe, and so in principle the
>manifestation
>>> > of the thought as a set of images (or words or what have you), is
>>> > most likely O(1).
>>> >
>>> > Perhaps O(0) is things that could have happened, but did not
>happen?
>>>
>>> In C, printf("Hello world.") is an O(1) function (the number of
>>> charactes is constant), but in Python, I'm suggesting that it might
>be
>>> O(0) due to Python being designed as a high-level language, where
>the
>>> # of characters isn't considered for computing the function, but as
>>> seen as one operation.
>>>
>>> That's my take...
>>
>> That's not what it means / how it works. I'm not much of a
>> mathematician, but O(1) simply means a routine that will always
>> take the same amount of time, regardless the input data.
>
>But what of a call like PRINT 1?  It is different than a call like
>PRINT "How many characters will have to be output", yes?  So, I
>believe there is a meaningful difference to actually make an O(0)
>designation for the sake of completeness.
>

No, not the non-existent O(0). You're confused.


>Thank you.  You may be seated.
>


You may go back to your homework :)



>Marxos
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20171130/27bd114e/attachment-0002.sig>