parsnip283874

joined 2 years ago
2
PrBoom+ (Doom) (github.com)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

A source port for Doom that supports vanilla and Boom formats. Fast and highly-configurable, my Doom source port of preference.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Has anyone here read the Katz translation? How does it compare to the other two?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Nah not surprised at all, I knew good ol’ England could do it ;)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I was actually convinced at stumps on day 4 that Aus were going to win, but Eng managed to pull through in the end. Also glad this series is done, having an emotional connection to one of the teams playing in a Test series is fun, but gets quite stressful.

However, I’m with Ponting that the ball change was poor and should be investigated. Shame one bad decision made such an impact on the game.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Seems fair enough except for the finishing on a high wrt this test I suspect, but maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Was there another reason he gave beyond wanting to be with his family? Didn’t really see anything else in the Cricinfo article.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Looks like a minimum of 3 hours play today (possibility of rain from 3) and probably whole day’s play tomorrow. Looks like the weather won’t be ruining another Test.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (7 children)

What a damn, damn shame

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

One day in, and with the way Australia have been carrying on I don’t think an English win is likely. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see the same scores from the last test, just with the teams swapped.

 

(a OR b) -> c

= ~(a OR b) OR c

= (~a AND ~b) OR c

= (~a OR c) AND (~b OR c)

= (a -> c) AND (b -> c) as required

I haven’t formally learnt logic so I’m not sure if my proof is what you’d call rigorous, but the result is pretty useful for splitting up conditionals in proofs like some of the number theory proofs I’ve been trying. E.g.

Show that if a is greater than 2 and a^m + 1 is prime, then a is even and m is a power of 2

In symbolic form this is:

∀a >= 2 ( a^m + 1 is prime -> a is even AND m is a power of 2 )

The contrapositive is:

∀a >= 2 ( a is odd OR m is NOT a power of 2 -> a^m + 1 is composite )

and due to the result above, this becomes

∀a >= 2 ( a is odd -> a^m + 1 is composite ) AND ( m is NOT a power of 2 -> a^m + 1 is composite )

so you can just prove two simpler conditionals instead of one more complicated one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Effing Mancunian weather

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If it’s the weather that stops us from winning from here, I might cry

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

Ofc it was Crawley with a knock which may end up keep us in contention for the Ashes…

view more: next ›