L1[00:00:06] <raptop> !mission add You design a quad-propellant engine.

L2[00:00:07] <LunchBot> Added mission: You design a quad-propellant engine.

L19[08:02:36] <Mat2ch> packbart: I was loooong asleep then :)

L21[08:45:56] <FLHerne> .mission add Your new hyper-optimizing compiler determines that part of your code will encounter undefined behaviour in 14 years when a timer overflows, and thus can be disregarded entirely.

L22[08:45:56] <LunchBot> Added mission: Your new hyper-optimizing compiler determines that part of your code will encounter undefined behaviour in 14 years when a timer overflows, and thus can be disregarded entirely.

L23[08:47:14] <FLHerne> this sort of thing bugs me sometimes

L25[09:02:10] <Mat2ch> Unixtime overflow?

L26[09:03:11] <Mat2ch> And it's something me fellow developers overlook too often. I put quiet a lot of thinking into counter variables. Coming from microcontrollers I know how to abuse overflowing integers for my purpose.

L27[09:25:59] <FLHerne> Unintended overflows can be a pain, but I was complaining more about optimizing compilers saying "this is an infinite loop, therefore it's UB, therefore simply ignoring it and emitting no code at all is fine"

L28[09:26:18] <FLHerne> instead of even a warning in some cases

L29[09:27:14] <FLHerne> I know there are good reasons such things are hard to distinguish from reasonable optimizations, but as a user it's frustrating

L30[09:46:42] <Mat2ch> that sounds like a bug to me.

L31[09:46:57] <Mat2ch> The compiler shouldn't remove an infinite loop

L32[10:07:18] <FLHerne> https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1528.htm

L33[10:07:49] <FLHerne> it's (somewhat controversially) allowed under some conditions

L34[10:12:03] <Mat2ch> ok... two loops should never be merged together. If someone goes all the way writing two loops it has to have some reason...

L35[10:19:46] <sandbox> someone is talking about hitting a deer with their car, and I feel I can't say what I want to say

L36[10:20:28] <Mat2ch> free dogfood?

L37[10:20:51] <sandbox> d'oh, a deer, a female deer

L38[10:21:54] <sandbox> simpsons did it

L39[10:23:29] <Mat2ch> Oh deer.

L40[10:31:05] <packbart> at least in that case the driver has good chances of survival. hit a moose and it just flattens the roof

L43[10:33:22] <packbart> granted, a moose weighs about as much as a car

L45[10:40:49] <Mat2ch> packbart: what happens to a moose that gets hit by a 2t SUV?

L46[10:41:29] <Althego> whatever it is, probably doesnt look great

L47[10:43:19] <Mat2ch> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98ZK_kknP9U that's what it looks for a Volvo. (Test, no real moose harmed)

L48[10:45:22] <Mat2ch> but SUVs have a much higher bonnet, so they hit differently

L49[10:45:29] <FLHerne> .quote no elk

L50[10:45:29] <LunchBot> Buy Volvo - there are no elk in Japan.

L51[10:50:19] <packbart> yeah, but the test does show the problem. an elk is a ton of mass on high stilts, the bonnet with all its crash buffers goes right under it

L52[10:51:03] <Mat2ch> we need to build taller or - hear me out - lower cars!

L53[10:51:22] <FLHerne> straight under the elk?

L54[10:51:23] <Mat2ch> A Ferrari could clear that moose!

L55[10:51:35] <packbart> elks should be required by law to have effective side protection and underrun bars

L56[10:52:03] <FLHerne> or cars with sort of big vertical blades on the front, to shear them into more easily deflectable sections

L57[10:52:26] <Mat2ch> What about having elks require to look both ways before crossing the street? Or only crossing at dedicated crossings?

L58[10:52:44] <packbart> they are famous for bad eye sight

L59[10:52:54] <Mat2ch> So, glasses for moose?

L60[10:52:56] <FLHerne> special glasses for elk

L61[10:53:00] <FLHerne> jinx

L62[10:53:04] <Mat2ch> :D

L63[10:53:12] <packbart> if they want to cross roads, yes

L65[10:53:54] <Mat2ch> We could teach them to solve crossword puzzles, so they sit around more and don't cross streets so often

L66[10:54:28] <packbart> or have a guide chicken. chickens know how to cross the road

L67[10:54:41] <Mat2ch> .oO( why not do laser eye surgery from orbit with our special laser satellites? )

L68[11:16:26] <FLHerne> .outcome The PR department ask if it can kill fewer fish next time.

L69[11:16:26] <LunchBot> No outcome found matching "The PR department ask if it can kill fewer fish next time.".

L70[11:16:37] <FLHerne> .outcome add The PR department ask if this can kill fewer fish next time.

L71[11:16:37] <LunchBot> Added outcome: The PR department ask if this can kill fewer fish next time.

L84[19:25:58] <Mat2ch> https://imgur.com/a/PUCT74I

L86[19:26:09] <Mat2ch> what looks better? Rings far apart or rings close together?

L87[19:26:28] <Mat2ch> (and is this slightly overkill for a station around Jool? I don't think so.)

L97[21:39:21] <packbart> I like second one better, with rings closer together.