lyfolos

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@sixteenliters @MagnusCarlsen @chesscom yeah, i somehow wrote 2n instead of 11 lol.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@yourfavesoftie @bonjourfoii @LeLouche7367 @HumansNoContext in case you didn't know, a similar phonemenon happens with „an hour” since the second word starts with a glottal stop.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@CallMe_Dollface @JRatlin @StygiesVIII @Emotionlessrac5 @stonetoss @superwaffle6883 what's he talking about is that you 'muricans really fucking love to make up nonsense terms, such as the aforementioned gender.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@DunningsBooger @nosoundstars @guy5678588 @TheRightCant you literally gave a response under 2 minutes.. don't you have anything else to do other than browsing twitter and posting stupid ass images all day long?

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@AleksejsIvanovs @skoarkid @fermatslibrary it scales linearly with the input size, we aren't supposed to care about the k because it has nothing to do with the input size.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@fatihkcansu @QuantaMagazine coppersmith-winograd algorithm is not the fastest. it's the one that has the best asymptotic complexity. it runs in O(n^2.4) time but the constant in the big o notation is so big that it's impossible to use the algorithm in practice.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@AleksejsIvanovs @skoarkid @fermatslibrary radix sort is not the same thing as bucket sort, also both of them scale linearly by the input size. so radix sort. has O(kn) complexity where k is the number of digits of the numbers and it's O(n+k) for counting sort where k is the range of. the numbers. does that make sense?

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@AleksejsIvanovs @skoarkid @fermatslibrary i just gave you the names, can't you read?

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@AleksejsIvanovs @skoarkid @fermatslibrary only for comparison sorts, whom has the O(n log n) lower limit, however if you're working with only nuibers then it is possible to sort in O(n) time using algorithms like bucket or radix sort.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@skoarkid @AleksejsIvanovs @fermatslibrary you already can do that though.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@raymondh explicit is better than implicit, in this case implicit conversion might cause lots of bugs and pain.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@bilongma @paulgenge @courosa well precalculus has some complex analysis in it i guess?

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@zeshan_ihsan @brunoeducsant @fermatslibrary it is good considering how rough the approximation is.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@Engineer_OKoli @fermatslibrary it doesn't say it will hold for none.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@colmtuite turquoise i guess?

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@Kadeo79 @Rainmaker1973 transferring data from another planet is quite hard.

[lyfolos @lyfolos]

@Kerthorok @fermatslibrary @NASAPersevere friction isn't something that differs from planet to planet though?