Optimized from 14 bytes to 15 bytes, saving -1 bytes or -7.1% of the original size.
You might wanna fix this.
Yes, this is well known. You can easily find other references to it with a search.
This topic reminds me, I need to make that list of things the optimizer did wrong for Kerm. I'll do that later this week.

EDIT: Apperently any word with l-o-l in it is replaced by 0x5 (not just the word l-o-l).
blm22 wrote:
Optimized from 14 bytes to 15 bytes, saving -1 bytes or -7.1% of the original size.
You might wanna fix this.
It's just a miscount; it doesn't actually make the program larger.
Also I can't run your version of .83xp on my calc so IDK maybe you should work on how it compiles the script.
by the way when is the new version going to be realesed.
Ever hear of the edit button?
yeah but when I add the program it does not show up on my calc, so WTF.
blm22 wrote:
Also I can't run your version of .83xp on my calc so IDK maybe you should work on how it compiles the script.
What the heck is a .83xp? And it doesn't compile anything, and a program is not a script, and it's already flawless, and there's no new version planned at this point.
allynfolksjr wrote:
Ever hear of the edit button?

actually, I agree here, getting a tad bit annoyed with the double posting stuff.
rivereye wrote:
allynfolksjr wrote:
Ever hear of the edit button?

actually, I agree here, getting a tad bit annoyed with the double posting stuff.
As do I. When even Clementop and J... (what was his name? That insanely noobly kid? Jake? Whatever. )'s first posts look professional compared to your inane, unformatted ramblings, it's time to revise your style.
I am beginning to re-form my style a bit. I shall take your previous statement as a compliment, Kerm. If you leave Clementop and professional and cut out the rest, it makes me feel a whole lot better. Shock
I'm glad i didn't go into the triple posting spectrum...only the double posting(twice i think).
blm22 wrote:
Also I can't run your version of .83xp on my calc so IDK maybe you should work on how it compiles the script.


That would be your code not working, not SC2 Rolling Eyes
Kllrnohj wrote:
blm22 wrote:
Also I can't run your version of .83xp on my calc so IDK maybe you should work on how it compiles the script.


That would be your code not working, not SC2 Rolling Eyes
Yup, exactly. PEBKAC.
Is there another option on sourcecoder to output even non-UTF8 ASCII that can be pasted on PasteCode? PasteCode dosen't like the STO and serveral other characters...
There's no -> in ASCII, even extended ASCII. I had to jump to Unicode for that. You know that SC has it's own PasteCode-ish feature, right?
Yeah SC2 keeps finding hundreds of "errors" in my code but i go their and see none WTF.
Edit: I found the problem if you select the indent function it makes all the indents as errors. Kerm please fix this.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 1 of 1
» All times are UTC - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement