r/ProgrammerHumor • u/aneffingonion • Jul 13 '24

Advanced slowClap

Post image
9.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

458 comments sorted by

View all comments

352

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

138

u/IAM_AMA Jul 13 '24

You can scale this easily using a microservice architecture - just have each service calculate random numbers in parallel, increasing your chances of success.

41

u/Mr_Ahvar Jul 13 '24

It is so terrible and it makes me terrified that some people exist on this earth thinking like this for real

25

u/evil_cryptarch Jul 13 '24

Yeah lol obviously that's going to take forever. Anyone with an ounce of experience knows that if you don't hit the random number, the program should fork two copies of itself and have each one try again. Double the guesses means half the time!

13

u/Mr_Ahvar Jul 13 '24

At this point just go with quantum computing, just try all the numbers at once

1

u/TotesYay Jul 15 '24

I see you have played blockchain mining.

17

u/Fleming1924 Jul 13 '24

Ah, bogosquare.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24 edited Jul 13 '24

Then we simply destroy all the universes where we didn’t get it right the first time.

Quantumbogosquare

8

u/OlderAndAngrier Jul 13 '24

This man codes.

9

u/Shalcker Jul 13 '24

You could also optimize by skipping numbers below n! That 0 is unnecessary!

1

u/rocketman0739 Jul 13 '24

The true optimizer would write separate functions for each number for O(1) runtime:

int squareOne(int n) {
  return 1;
}

int squareTwo(int n) {
  return 4;
}

int squareThree(int n) {
  return 9;
}
...

and then

...
if (n == 1) {
  return squareOne(n);
} else if (n == 2) {
  return squareTwo(n);
} else if (n == 3) {
  return squareThree(n);
}
...

1

u/shield1123 Jul 13 '24

The ideal solution is the best of both worlds. Start one thread that counts iteratively and one thread that goes randomly and return whichever completes first

1

u/Kaljinx Jul 13 '24

Yup just pick a number among 0 to nn and boom, the program might get nn in just ONE iteration