“Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
21–30 of 418 posts
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#22Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#23This is funny, but it's like saying "Math is basically pluses and minuses". I see coding as playing with hardware without having to use soldering iron.
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#24And really, aren't loops just ifs and jumps under the hood? So coding is just ifs
Indeed. Jump on zero and integer manipulation are sufficient for turing-completeness. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_machine
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#25And really, aren't loops just ifs and jumps under the hood? So coding is just ifs
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Jump on zero and integer manipulation are sufficient for turing-completeness. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_machine
All you really need is `mov`. https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7EEoWg6Ekk
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#27Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Jump on zero and integer manipulation are sufficient for turing-completeness. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_machine
All you really need is `mov`. https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7EEoWg6Ekk
Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#29Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”
#30That first reply is so funny to me because it hits too close to home https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1466940940229046273 The more I do this, the more I gravitate towards the simple things.