Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.

Gnuplot 6 is now released to aid in developing mathematical
ideas:

https://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/

Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
arena:

https://github.com/parisolab/mathmod

https://github.com/geomview/geomview

Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.

GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists
and not for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.

Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:

>Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.
>
>Gnuplot 6 is now released to aid in developing mathematical
>ideas:
>
>https://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/
>
>Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
>lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
>arena:
>
>https://github.com/parisolab/mathmod
>
>https://github.com/geomview/geomview
>
>Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.

I think "coding" or programming is integral in computer science, but
math certainly is too, I had already taken calc2 before I dropped out
after three semesters, and if I'd tested into calc1 from high school
I'd have done either calc3 or another prereq-calc2 class, I took calc1
in summer school. Never got less than an A on any math exam from any
of the four classes (AlgebraTrig, which I additionally partially had
in HS, and precalc, being first), though.

>GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists
>and not for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.

You could do your math and computer shit with Mint.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 20:29:29 +0000, Diego Garcia wrote:

> Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.

mathplotlib works for me...

On 3/2/2024 2:29 PM, Diego Garcia wrote:
> Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.
>
> Gnuplot 6 is now released to aid in developing mathematical
> ideas:
>
> https://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/
>
> Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
> lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
> arena:
>
> https://github.com/parisolab/mathmod
>
> https://github.com/geomview/geomview
>
> Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.
>
> GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists
> and not for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.
>

I wrote my own plotting programs :) Even on Commodore 64.

The BASIC that came with it wasn't good enough for it. But Simons BASIC
had functions to access each pixle on the screen :)

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 20:29:29 +0000
Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:

> Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.
>
> Gnuplot 6 is now released to aid in developing mathematical
> ideas:
>
> https://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/
>
> Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
> lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
> arena:
>
> https://github.com/parisolab/mathmod
>
> https://github.com/geomview/geomview
>
> Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.
>
> GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists
> and not for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.
>

Does it do pie charts now?

--

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 20:29:29 +0000, Diego Garcia wrote:

> Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
> lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
> arena ...

Matplotlib is the ultimate. 2D, 3D, embellishment addons like Seaborn ...
just look over its gallery <https://matplotlib.org/stable/gallery/index>,
and let us know of any package (including proprietary ones!) that can
compare with that range.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:15:11 +1100, Borax Man wrote:

>
> Does it do pie charts now?
>

Only a brain-dead MBA in charge of a fast-food emporium
would be interested in pie charts.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 06:49:46 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>
> Matplotlib is the ultimate.
>

Eeeew! It's based in sophomoric Python, the salvation of all
talentless idiots.

The Python crowd can see only with their eyes and not their
brains (if they even have any).

Le 03-03-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 06:49:46 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>>
>> Matplotlib is the ultimate.
>>
>
> Eeeew! It's based in sophomoric Python, the salvation of all
> talentless idiots.

You have five versions of it on your system. For someone who doesn't
need it, it's pretty much.

> The Python crowd can see only with their eyes and not their
> brains (if they even have any).

You should remove every useless version of python from your computer to
prove you don't belong to the python crowd.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:15:11 +1100, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote
in <20240303151511.34f24480@Nostromo>:

> Does it do pie charts now?

I looked in the documentation, and it has
an example using inline data. I modified
it for your inspection:

_[ try.plot ]_ _ _
set xrange [-15:15]
set style fill transparent solid 0.9 noborder
plot "try.data" using 1:2:3:4:5:6 with circles lc var
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

_[ try.data ]_ _ _
0 0 5 0 30 1
0 0 5 30 70 2
0 0 5 70 120 3
0 0 5 120 230 4
0 0 5 230 360 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

I don't understand why the ":6" in the "using" clause.

On Linux Mint, I installed the gnuplot-doc package to get
all the documentation (including a nice pdf).

$ gnuplot --version
gnuplot 5.4 patchlevel 2

--
-v

On 3/3/2024 5:44 AM, Lonely Larry Piet wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 06:49:46 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>>
>> Matplotlib is the ultimate.
>>
>
> Eeeew! It's based in sophomoric Python, the salvation of all
> talentless idiots.

If you had any GuhNoo balls, you wouldn't rely on Python to administer
your Gentoo crapbox.

But we all know the kind of shameless hypocrite you are.

> The Python crowd can see only with their eyes and not their
> brains (if they even have any).

I've been looking for the 'brute-force' C shit-code you used to
kindergarten-solve Freak's birthday problem. Seen it lying around anywhere?

crickets

On Sun, 03 Mar 2024 10:44:22 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 06:49:46 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> just look over its gallery
>> <https://matplotlib.org/stable/gallery/index>,
>> and let us know of any package (including proprietary ones!) that can
>> compare with that range.
>
> The Python crowd can see only with their eyes and not their brains (if
> they even have any).

Still waiting for your reply to my challenge ...

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 06:49:46 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> Matplotlib is the ultimate. 2D, 3D, embellishment addons like Seaborn
> ...
> just look over its gallery
> <https://matplotlib.org/stable/gallery/index>,
> and let us know of any package (including proprietary ones!) that can
> compare with that range.

There is a gnuplotlib if you want to support the underdog... Never used
it myself.

Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:15:11 +1100, Borax Man wrote:
>
>>
>> Does it do pie charts now?
>>
>
> Only a brain-dead MBA in charge of a fast-food emporium
> would be interested in pie charts.

Looks like I could update this, to swap out “Windows” for old Feeb here…

<http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2006/tanzania/safari_pie/Activity.htm>

-hh

Or those who work for those types, and have to make pie charts because
that is what management wants to see.

On 2024-03-03, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 15:15:11 +1100, Borax Man wrote:
>
>>
>> Does it do pie charts now?
>>
>
> Only a brain-dead MBA in charge of a fast-food emporium
> would be interested in pie charts.
>
>

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 09:47:48 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:

> Or those who work for those types, and have to make pie charts because
> that is what management wants to see.
>

Use LibreOffice. It can cook up a nice pie chart.

Gnuplot is a different league of user.

On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 10:08:00 +0000, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> wrote in
<17b9d66918d8508a$69480$1340741$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>:

> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 09:47:48 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
>
>> Or those who work for those types, and have to make pie charts because
>> that is what management wants to see.
>>
>>
> Use LibreOffice. It can cook up a nice pie chart.
>
> Gnuplot is a different league of user.

...and you didn't know how to do it anyway, did you? /s

--
-v

On 3/2/2024 3:29 PM, Lazy Larry wrote:

> Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.

Repeated whining of such idiocy will NEVER compensate for your failure
to code to a high standard.

Example: keyword counts in the 377 CS courses offered at Ga Tech:

design: 145
algorithm: 70
program/s/ming: 48
language: 31
structure: 29
math: 10
problem solving 8

https://catalog.gatech.edu/coursesaz/cs/

And the math prereqs are very sparse:

https://www.cc.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2021/copy_of_prereqs2018_2.pdf

Higher math is virtually useless in computer science and in programming.
Since C and python are too difficult for you, I suggest AppleScript.

I trust you now understand you're full of shit.

I did have to do basic 8th grade exponentiation, addition, subtraction,
multiplication and division (sometimes cumulatively OMG!) when recently
writing a C program to convert number bases.

Under construction, but a little taste:

//---------------------------------------------------------------------
//convert from base 10 to base N
//---------------------------------------------------------------------
char to_base_out(int cnt, int quot, int base_out, char result[]) {
    char remainder[2];
    while (quot > 0) {
printf("%d. %8d mod %d = %d (quotient = %d)\n", cnt++, quot,
base_out, quot % base_out, quot / base_out);
sprintf(remainder,"%d",quot % base_out);
strncat(result,remainder,1);
quot /= base_out;
    }
    result[strlen(result)] = '\0';
    str_rev(result);
}

$ ./base 11028 10 4
1. 11028 mod 4 = 0 (quotient = 2757)
2. 2757 mod 4 = 1 (quotient = 689)
3. 689 mod 4 = 1 (quotient = 172)
4. 172 mod 4 = 0 (quotient = 43)
5. 43 mod 4 = 3 (quotient = 10)
6. 10 mod 4 = 2 (quotient = 2)
7. 2 mod 4 = 2 (quotient = 0)
11028 (base 10) = 2230110 (base 4)

How short and sweet is that?

> Gnuplot 6 is now released to aid in developing mathematical
> ideas:
>
> https://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/
>
> Gnuplot is a fantastic program but its 3-D graphics are a bit
> lacking. Geomview and MathMod are far better in the 3-D
> arena:
>
> https://github.com/parisolab/mathmod
>
> https://github.com/geomview/geomview
>
> Let's have some goddamned, fucking comments.

Like D'Oliveiro showed, the permissively-licensed python package
matplotlib is far superior to that gnuplot slopware.

> GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists
> and not for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.

GuhNoo/Linux is for everyone, even murderers like Hans Reiser and
lowlife skeptics of the harm of pedophilia like Richard Stallman.

On Mar 5, 2024 at 9:25:03 AM EST, "DFS" <dfs@nospam.com> wrote:

> I trust you now understand you're full of shit.

Farley Fucktard is the only person here who does not understand that.

On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:03 -0500, DFS wrote:

>
> > Computer science is mathematics and NOT coding.
>

Right on! I could not have said it better myself.

>
> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
> //convert from base 10 to base N
> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> [snip horrendous junk]
>

Your shit code will bomb on inputs like:

45645178781578787818771656462681881516816868156568165641579796464651664155461246461654646

A REAL PROGRAMMER will have no difficulty in doing this job:

Convert any base up to base-62 to any other base (up to base-62)
with any precision, e.g. 10000 digit input.

A dumb-fuck code monkey like you could never do it.

But why base 62? Because to express a base 62 number we need
all 10 digits (0-9) plus lower case (a-z) and upper case (A-Z):

10 + 26 + 26 = 62

UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z is base 62.

> GNU/Linux is for educated mathematicians/computer scientists and not
> > for ignoramus, deadbeat distro lackeys.
>

He should've added "not for dumb-fuck code monkeys."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

Nuxxie wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

>> [snip horrendous junk]
>
> But why base 62? Because to express a base 62 number we need
> all 10 digits (0-9) plus lower case (a-z) and upper case (A-Z):

Fun fact: MIDI variable-length coding is basically base 128.

--
You will be audited by the Internal Revenue Service.

On 3/5/2024 10:54 AM, Lameass Larry Piet wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:03 -0500, DFS wrote:

>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> //convert from base 10 to base N
>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [snip horrendous junk]
>>
>
> Your shit code will bomb on inputs like:
>
>
45645178781578787818771656462681881516816868156568165641579796464651664155461246461654646

clown

> A REAL PROGRAMMER will have no difficulty in doing this job:

That's definitely not you.

> Convert any base up to base-62 to any other base (up to base-62)
> with any precision, e.g. 10000 digit input.
>
> A dumb-fuck code monkey like you could never do it.

Over the years, you've proven yourself to be less than a "code monkey".

Now SandFreak comes along using the same term, and he's a shit
programmer too. What are the odds?

> But why base 62? Because to express a base 62 number we need
> all 10 digits (0-9) plus lower case (a-z) and upper case (A-Z):
>
> 10 + 26 + 26 = 62
>
> UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z is base 62.

I was gonna deal with just bases 2-16, but now that you mention it:

~$ ./base UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z 62 10
1. 35 * 62^ 0 = 35
2. 4 * 62^ 1 = 248
3. 3 * 62^ 2 = 11532
4. 26 * 62^ 3 = 6196528
5. 14 * 62^ 4 = 206868704
6. 13 * 62^ 5 = 11909726816
7. 13 * 62^ 6 = 738403062592
8. 35 * 62^ 7 = 123256511217280
9. 8 * 62^ 8 = 1746720844679168
10. 9 * 62^ 9 = 121833778916371968
11. 25 * 62^10 = 20982484146708504576
12. 10 * 62^11 = 520365606838370959360
13. 18 * 62^12 = 58072801723162199851008
14. 17 * 62^13 = 3400485167567386739474432
15. 5 * 62^14 = 62008847173287641996066816
16. 4 * 62^15 = 3075638819795066520736890880
17. 3 * 62^16 = 143017205120470598162067750912
18. 32 * 62^17 = 94582044986337894547347006816256
19. 31 * 62^18 = 5680834076991919978149414132776960
20. 30 * 62^19 = 340850044619515217135708921676169216

UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z (base 62) =
346625606899805372193646708944535552 (base 10)

Look right?

I can't speak to the correctness of the products of the exponents.
They're floats, FWIW.

(In my code increased 2 numeric limits, and added the line counter.
That's it. Talk about well-designed.)

On 3/5/2024 10:54 AM, Nuxxie wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:03 -0500, DFS wrote:

>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> //convert from base 10 to base N
>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [snip horrendous junk]
>>
>
> Your shit code will bomb on inputs like:
>
> 45645178781578787818771656462681881516816868156568165641579796464651664155461246461654646

> A REAL PROGRAMMER will have no difficulty in doing this job:

That's definitely not you.

> Convert any base up to base-62 to any other base (up to base-62)
> with any precision, e.g. 10000 digit input.
>
> A dumb-fuck code monkey like you could never do it.

Over the years, you've proven yourself to be less than a "code monkey".

Now SandFreak comes along using the same term, and he's a shit
programmer too. What are the odds?

> But why base 62? Because to express a base 62 number we need
> all 10 digits (0-9) plus lower case (a-z) and upper case (A-Z):
>
> 10 + 26 + 26 = 62
>
> UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z is base 62.

I was gonna deal with just bases 2-16, but now that you mention it:

~$ ./base UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z 62 10
1. 35 * 62^ 0 = 35
2. 4 * 62^ 1 = 248
3. 3 * 62^ 2 = 11532
4. 26 * 62^ 3 = 6196528
5. 14 * 62^ 4 = 206868704
6. 13 * 62^ 5 = 11909726816
7. 13 * 62^ 6 = 738403062592
8. 35 * 62^ 7 = 123256511217280
9. 8 * 62^ 8 = 1746720844679168
10. 9 * 62^ 9 = 121833778916371968
11. 25 * 62^10 = 20982484146708504576
12. 10 * 62^11 = 520365606838370959360
13. 18 * 62^12 = 58072801723162199851008
14. 17 * 62^13 = 3400485167567386739474432
15. 5 * 62^14 = 62008847173287641996066816
16. 4 * 62^15 = 3075638819795066520736890880
17. 3 * 62^16 = 143017205120470598162067750912
18. 32 * 62^17 = 94582044986337894547347006816256
19. 31 * 62^18 = 5680834076991919978149414132776960
20. 30 * 62^19 = 340850044619515217135708921676169216

UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z (base 62) =
346625606899805372193646708944535552 (base 10)

Look right?

I can't speak to the correctness of the products of the exponents.
They're floats, FWIW.

(I increased 2 limits, and added the line counter. That's it.)

On 3/5/2024 10:54 AM, Nuxxie wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:03 -0500, DFS wrote:

>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> //convert from base 10 to base N
>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [snip horrendous junk]
>>
>
> Your shit code will bomb on inputs like:
>
> 45645178781578787818771656462681881516816868156568165641579796464651664155461246461654646

heh! You really are just a fool.

> A REAL PROGRAMMER will have no difficulty in doing this job:

That's definitely not you.

> Convert any base up to base-62 to any other base (up to base-62)
> with any precision, e.g. 10000 digit input.
>
> A dumb-fuck code monkey like you could never do it.

Over the years, you've proven yourself to be less than a "code monkey".

Now SandFreak comes along using the same term, and he's a shit
programmer too. What are the odds?

> But why base 62? Because to express a base 62 number we need
> all 10 digits (0-9) plus lower case (a-z) and upper case (A-Z):
>
> 10 + 26 + 26 = 62
>
> UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z is base 62.

I was gonna deal with just bases 2-16, but now that you mention it:

~$ ./base UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z 62 10
1. 35 * 62^ 0 = 35
2. 4 * 62^ 1 = 248
3. 3 * 62^ 2 = 11532
4. 26 * 62^ 3 = 6196528
5. 14 * 62^ 4 = 206868704
6. 13 * 62^ 5 = 11909726816
7. 13 * 62^ 6 = 738403062592
8. 35 * 62^ 7 = 123256511217280
9. 8 * 62^ 8 = 1746720844679168
10. 9 * 62^ 9 = 121833778916371968
11. 25 * 62^10 = 20982484146708504576
12. 10 * 62^11 = 520365606838370959360
13. 18 * 62^12 = 58072801723162199851008
14. 17 * 62^13 = 3400485167567386739474432
15. 5 * 62^14 = 62008847173287641996066816
16. 4 * 62^15 = 3075638819795066520736890880
17. 3 * 62^16 = 143017205120470598162067750912
18. 32 * 62^17 = 94582044986337894547347006816256
19. 31 * 62^18 = 5680834076991919978149414132776960
20. 30 * 62^19 = 340850044619515217135708921676169216

UVW345Hiap98zdDeq34Z (base 62) =
346625606899805372193646708944535552 (base 10)

Look right?

I can't speak to the correctness of the products of the exponents.
They're floats, FWIW.

(I increased 2 limits, and added the line counter. That's it.)

On 3/5/2024 9:54 AM, Nuxxie wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:03 -0500, DFS wrote:
>

>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> //convert from base 10 to base N
>> //---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [snip horrendous junk]
>>
>
> Your shit code will bomb on inputs like:
>
> 45645178781578787818771656462681881516816868156568165641579796464651664155461246461654646
>

Huh. That Nazi monkey posted a base changing code?

Tell that monkey "N" doesn't look like a number other than integer. What
morons can see my posts here.

Also tell the Nazi before he was fucked into existence, I wrote the
general code only as an exercise in a PL/I book. Something like the 3rd
little code I'd written in my life at the time.

A monkey cannot be not monkey. Now make him a Nazi one too. Fucking
cro-magnon.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com