?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Zorba the Hutt's Journal

> recent entries
> calendar
> friends
> mandible games development journal
> profile

Saturday, March 10th, 2001
3:37a
I'm mostly over her . . . sometimes it hits me pretty hard, though. I've lost her . . . it's over. Nobody to joke with about obscure programming humor. That's what's been getting me most lately . . .

A few days ago I overheard people talking about programming, and I remembered one of the more obscure programming facts. In C, there are datatypes called pointers - basically, they point (duh). If you've got a pointer ptr, you can get the thing it points to with *ptr. (simple.) They can also point to arrays. And if you've got a pointer called ptr to an array of integers, you'd access, say, the fifth element as ptr[ 4 ]. (the fifth because C starts counting from 0. it makes much more sense, once you get used to it.) So anyway. Clearly you could also use ptr[ n ], where n is some number, to access the appropriate element. Incidentally, *ptr is the same as ptr[ 0 ]. Now, another thing pointers do is you can add to them - for example, *( ptr + 3 ) is the same as ptr[ 3 ]. Which means that in general, *( ptr + n ) is the same as ptr[ n ]. Now - addition is commutive, remember? So, *( ptr + n ) must be the same as *( n + ptr ). Which is the same as n[ ptr ]. Or, for that matter, you could use 5[ ptr ] to access the 5th element of ptr. Which just looks plain stupid - it's the totally illogical extreme of totally reasonable facts. And it's perfectly legal C++. Which is, if you've got the right mindset for it . . . really really funny.

I showed this to her, that last week . . . I could start at about "Now, another thing" and go to right before "Which is the same as". And know that she'd take it the rest of the way. And she did, and she thought it was wonderful. It's one of the last good memories I have.

I'm crying again. I need to finish this entry first though.

What did it just a few minutes ago (I mean, before I started writing this) was talking to someone online. He used an acronym that I thought I knew what it meant (DKC - which presumably means Donkey Kong Country) but I had to be sure. So I wrote "DKC == Donkey Kong Country?".

Now, in C++, = is assignment. b = 5 means "store 5 in b". It doesn't mean anything even remotely related to comparison. == is comparison, so you'd write b == 5. This is a common source of trouble for beginning C/C++/Java programmers (it's the same in all three languages).

I remember once she asked me about that, jokingly.

Jokingly . . . about programming. yeah.

And I answered it anyway, in case she wasn't and because, well, she asks, I answer. And she was joking, of course. And I remember when we were first talking, and I asked whether she knew what overclocking was, and she got annoyed because apparently I was thinking she didn't know anything about computers because she was female. Which I wasn't doing at all, of course, I was just asking, and I grumbled about it . . . I don't remember if she apologized or not. And that's one of my first good memories I have.

and . . . sigh.

I loved her so much . . . I really did.

She's been talking with my mom. Apparently she doesn't think I want to still be friends. Despite the fact that I told her flatly that I do.

why doesn't she trust me? I never lied to her . . . except at the end, when I was shattered and she wasn't there, when I needed to think that maybe there was something, *anything* to grab hold of. (There was, and it wasn't her. Thanks again . . .) But . . . I was always truthful. I never misled or decieved. I only concealed from her when it was going to be a surprise for her.

sigh. dammit all. It's not fair . . . it's not fair at all.

And here I thought Murphy was giving me a break for once.


current mood: lonely/hurt/angry/dejected

(comment on this)


<< previous day [calendar] next day >>
> top of page
LiveJournal.com