By the way, if you โseeโ this, ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ is coming โyourโ way.
Helping spreaf the word of someone elseโs work, next post.
after an hour of hard work, I present,
wasteof.astronomy
it has some pics from @astronomy and it changes the background of wasteof.money to them and itโs really cool and pretty
uh download here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JAOA79EzDwAC-e70T9LEMgokTstmHod5?usp=sharing
to install: go to extension manager, enable dev mode, click load unpacked, select wasteofastronomy folder, done!
Haha markov chain again next post
By the way, sorry for the notifications. Also an @immark post, next post.
Joke based on funny markov chain account, next post.
Serious post, go learn Factor after that, next post.
I have decided to start trying to learn C++. It is surprisingly not as complicated as I thought
Obvious joke, next post.
Relatable experience from the past, except I didnโt do Hot Cross Buns, mine was a different song which I already forgot. Next post.
Not exactly sure who believes what here, but seems like a serious post nonetheless. Next post.
Alright, Iโm going to examine only posts before this one, since those are the posts that @theawesome98 saw and decided to judge scolder as a bait account.
Iโve only seen the joebiden account a few times, so I think itโs easy to not understand the joke here. Next post.
i would like to retract my statement that wasteof users are smarter than twitter users after seeing this
sounds like shes getting in your headโฆ you seem a bit madโฆ why are you thinking about it so much if you arenโt worriedโฆ
I find it hilarious that theawesome98 thought it was a good idea to be incredibly mean, and that she even thought people would agree with her, and now she can't stand that people don't like it.
wait how
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
@Gilbert189 wrote:
apparently quote chains are a thing in wasteof
This revision created on Sat, 13 Mar 2021 02:03:51 by gifti (Rollback to 'Rollback to 'Rollback to 'Spam elimination''')
Since I reminded myself that concatenative programming exists, hereโs a description of it.
Programming languages can be split into two categories: applicative and concatenative. Iโm willing to guess that every single programming language you know is applicative, where the focus is mostly on applying functions/procedures to arguments.
Concatenative programming, on the other hand, has the focus mostly on composing several functions together on some kind of big data storage that the entire program runs on, usually a stack but can also be a deque or whatever it is that Om (https://concatenative.org/wiki/view/Om) does. The โconcatโ part of concatenative programming refers to how composing functions is just concatenating them together.
It might not seem like a big difference, but it actually leads to some nice features. For example, since concatenative languages are made specifically for putting together functions, it does it really concisely. No parameter names or variables, just functions.