Recent content by marty1

Back to the topic of bad coding practices... don't lose sight of the prize which is getting something to work the first time (using proven techniques) and being able to adapt it easily to new requirements in the future (using flexible and understandable techniques).

The power function is something that can be forever improved with different algorithms. There are many ways to implement it. If it is an operator, improving this would always require overloading the operator many times. The only black eye I see is that D.R. was more concerned with creating a...

So could it be equally "correct" to conclude that the light we are receiving from a distant source is climbing from greater to lesser gravitation? That would cause a red shift as well. Since it did come from the distant past, when the universe was more dense, this would make sense and...

No, not compare, receive a signal and know how much each of those two extremes contributed to changing it from what left the source (one way). How do I distinguish the effects of the intervening and changing (important part) curved space-time over vast distances from the acceleration of the source?

If you have to explain making an operation unambiguous using a paragraph, it is NOT C. This is just a bad idea, in my opinion. What you see should be what you get in C or C++. Just because something CAN be done does not mean that it SHOULD be done. overloading operators should only be...

This is exactly why it is not supported in the language. It forces significant white space and you are still stuck not having an exponentiation operator. How many white space do you intend the lexer to deal with to understand a power? a**b, assume power **b double deference. * * times...

Please allow me to simplify my question then. How can an observer using only the one way travel of light from a distant source distinguish between the acceleration of the source from a relativistic dilation of length and time that varies over time?

It was a question. Questions cannot be wrong. Only your answer can be right or wrong.

Even if I reversed my assumptions on the dilation? If the time between was less than the classical distance would calculated (more efficient to travel through space with less ambient gravity)?

Regarding the comment a few posts back about pow vs. **, this is an unfortunate grammatical situation. * is used for multiplication and for dereferencing the value pointed to by a pointer. As a result a**b would be a times the value pointed to by b or the contextually ambiguous dereferencing...

What I am asking is whether you could be fooled into thinking you are accelerating if the time it took for light to travel between you and a reference point increased at a rate greater than would be calculated classically from your actual velocities you knew you left each other at some point...

This is just a question I thought of reading these posts. Could the increasing distance between galaxies and decreasing gravitational tension between them lead to a non-linear increase in the time needed to travel between them--acceleration even though they are independently at constant...

outside of that cone, there is reflection only of the "darkness" from below.

Well, I brushed up a little bit on some of my ancient Fortran and what I see in Fortran after several decades being a professional c++ deveoper is that what is a best practice in one context is not always definitively best. There are some merits to monolithic, self-contained programs built for...

Don't overlook the grandest pre-program of all. The program that can program.