I'd tell you but then it wouldn't be a surprise!!

welcome

It's called the "Bad Boys Love" mode, trying to avoid learning much more about it but apparently it's got a lot of horror elements.

Hatoful Boyfriend gets creepy? I thought it was just memes!!

video games real good

this is the biggest loss to gaming since ethics in journalism

i doubt it.

I disagree. video games... bad

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tbh I think it's a bit of sad that these old games are losing their mystique. The idea that there are ancient, forgotten tricks is very appealing, in a romantic way.

On the other hand, I really like the current collaborative optimization efforts, illustrated in their best shape in the recent super mario bros 4-2 progression video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1AHCaokqhg

In "King of Kong", Billy Mitchell is the mean villain who seems to get away with anything while Steve Wiebe is the unfairly maligned underdog.

Billy is a jerk lol

is this the guy that is super mean and cocky? or is it the other one i saw a doc of where he is kind of nice and mild

This one is particularly upsetting, it seems so sad to cheat when you're already so much a part of the history of the game.

i am amazed by how much time this probably took to make

people who cheat at videogames make me irrationally angry

oo it looks good

I'm really disappointed that the mod maker listed joints under "potions" instead of making a separate "Weed" category.

is this mod lore friendly

hey i love your cat

blunt was equipped

Theatre sounds fake tbh

Ooh I'm actually learning StandardML for a course of mine! I'll have to read these blog posts later too, I luv rants and I luv booleans so I'll probably love this

yes i have

edit: i have never heard of theatre

I actually first stumbled into rational number data type when I was 12 or 13 and learning Lisp (but that story didn't end well and which totally gave me a misleading view of how principled programming languages were). I think all the major functional languages have them as it's not hard to implement as an abstract data type. A super basic is just a product type of two integers and call one the numerator and the other denominator and implement the operations accordingly.

Even Coq has them and if Coq has something implemented, it's probably pretty widespread in Haskell, Standard ML, OCaml, Scala and various Lisps and what have you.

If you really want some numeric nonsense:

1. Bad implementations of complex numbers. The rectangular form a + bi is good for sums and re^(iθ) for multiplications. Ideally there should be one type for complex numbers and two classes like data Complex = Rectangular a b | Polar r θ in Haskell. This works ok if there are sum types, but apparently this is too avant garde for most languages.
2. The Haskell numeric tower makes zero sense and is implemented with type classes, which isn't first class and is antimodular to the extent I recommend beginners only use library defined ones and not make your own like at all for a while at least. Like the Num class for numbers: you need to implement the operations (+), (*), abs, signum, fromInteger, (-) where abs and signum are total party poopers as basically what Num is is a mathematical ring with an extra operation. But, for example, complex numbers don't have a notion of absolute value defined for them so this turns sour quickly. I don't know what would make the situation better, however. They'll never fix this, probably.

Also if you want to read a rant about Booleans... this is pretty good. Every time I'm writing a function that takes a boolean parameter, I split it in two functions or somehow avoid testing for equality in the function. Thus pattern matching is bae and matching constructors is heaven sent. The author's piece on why dynamic languages aren't a thing at all is good too.

Phew, I'm glad that I got all that out of my system!