This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ZippyDee
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 51
421
« on: May 03, 2011, 11:40:25 am »
Yes, with high resolution textures and multiple portal render depth. Also, a physics system.
Not even my computer can handle multiple portal render depth without lagging 
Looks like you're gonna need a slightly faster calculator to run that port then 
422
« on: May 02, 2011, 07:51:53 pm »
heh heh... I ask the one that always tells the truth. "where is the exit?"
The point is that you don't know which one tells the truth and which one lies -.-
423
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:27:59 pm »
Clearing cache did it  Thanks. I should have tried that first, sorry.
424
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:09:17 pm »
Google Chrome
425
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:05:02 pm »
The options don't seem to change anything.........I tried them all and they don't affect it.
426
« on: May 02, 2011, 03:02:52 pm »
I'm not saying that it wasn't Osama who was responsible for 9/11, I just don't know it. There isn't real proof(that I'm aware of) that Osama did it. It might be that Bush was responsible for this, and his plan was to find a reason to have war. But I truly don't know the truth.
To tell the truth, I'm not quite sure I buy that one -- I DO believe it was the mafia who killed JFK and probably not Lee Harry Oswald, but I doubt Bush would have anything to do with the setup of 9/11 -- He may be a little bit stupid at times, but you can't say that he wasn't patriotic and that he didn't have good intentions. Trust me, if anything he wanted to find a reason NOT to have a war. A war never looks good on a president's portfolio.
This is exactly my point as well. I am fine with the idea that maybe Osama wasn't responsible, but I am telling you there is certainly no good reason why Bush would want to do such a thing to his own country. As Ashbad said, Bush may have been stupid at times, but he was certainly patriotic. Planning this attack would not have helped his ratings in the least -.- (They certainly could have used some assistance, that's for sure)
427
« on: May 02, 2011, 07:07:08 am »
I am merely arguing against it. He can think what he wants. I won't stop him. I just think it's a ridiculous idea altogether. I'm sorry.
428
« on: May 02, 2011, 07:05:04 am »
Well, now I see nothing when I go to the page... Only the banner, Omnom, and the footer.
429
« on: May 02, 2011, 07:02:52 am »
You do not have permission to access this page 
430
« on: May 02, 2011, 07:01:39 am »
Why would you? What good would it do for Bush to have planned the whole thing? Why would he want to kill 3,000 of his own people? It did no good for the country in ANY way, and there was nothing to even slightly suggest that it MIGHT have done anything good for the country. Seriously, I don't care how many conspiracy theories you throw at me, there are stronger explanations against each claim than there are supporting each claim. If you really believe that Bush set the whole thing up, then I feel very sorry for you.
431
« on: May 02, 2011, 06:00:33 am »
He did terrible things. Many people hate him deeply. Laughter is an expression of joy. People don't laugh necessarily because they think it is funny, per se, but they laugh because it's a release of all the stress. Yes, it is immoral that Osama Bil Laden was killed, but that could be argued against as well. I apologize if you feel offended by other people laughing at this incident, but it's a really big thing for many, many people. I, personally, am neither laughing nor jumping for joy. Though, I am not mourning this occasion either. I am happy, though not because he is now dead. I am relieved that the whole fiasco is finally over. No laughter. No cheers. No jokes. Just a sigh of relief.
432
« on: May 02, 2011, 05:57:05 am »
Sounds awesome! I can't wait to see how it turns out! Also, welcome!  [insert peanuts that you've almost definitely already received somewhere else...]
433
« on: May 02, 2011, 04:48:38 am »
Exactly! And it's especially useful for things such as IRC where the content of each part changes (for instance the nick of the person speaking) but the restrictions stay the same (it only allows letters and numbers and undercore...and I guess in the case of OmnomIRC also ?)
In that case, you can use regex like something as simple as "</w+>" to capture the name found within < and > in a message.
(In regex, anything followed by + tells it to look for 1 or more of that character/character-group. /w represents the character group [A-Za-z0-9_]).
Obviously that's a very general example, but still
434
« on: May 02, 2011, 04:22:06 am »
That looks more cryptic than z80 assembly! 
It's really not. RegEx is actually fairly easy to learn, and it proves to be VERY useful in some situations. You really should at least take a look at it. Edit: here's a link if you feel like checking it out http://www.regular-expressions.info/tutorial.html
435
« on: May 02, 2011, 02:50:11 am »
I also voted no on the poll. I feel like even though the size of the compiled program will be the same, I still prefer to have smaller source code if it's possible. Seems like closing all parentheses just for the sake of it is an unnecessary addition that would just add bytes to my source code and take away from my free ram.
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 51
|
Show Posts