Isn't it just 2? I mean the smallest positive int is 1. The largest negative int is -1. (-1 is bigger than -2) so it's just 1 - (-1) which is 2.

There's a percentage of people that think they could beat up a lion bare handed, right? (Or is that bear handed.)

I'll go with the temp naming scheme used for new elements and call it a TriBi-Core.

GuyThiebaut wrote:

The one thing that has determined the success/failure of projects I have worked on has been the quality of communication between people in the team.

It's interesting you mention that. I say that because have you heard what one of the guys that came up with agile wanted to call it instead of agile? Conversational development, IE the way you do anything is to have a conversation between the involved individuals. Of course it also has to be stated that you can't have a conversation if one side doesn't respect the other, in that case you generally end up with a lecture. Unfortunately with a name like "Agile" plus all that dogma in the manifesto the core idea which you've hit upon gets lost doesn't it?

If you think that's bad you should seen how I've seen multiple items get added to an array which the pseudo code was pretty much Create new array that's one item bigger than the old array Copy everything from the old array into the new one Add one item to the slightly larger array.(The new array is now full) repeat the previous 3 lines until you're done adding however many items you need to add. Yes, I've literally seen that done in C++ and damn is it inefficient. (Slow and fragments memory like crazy.)

Got to second this. I see way too many people who work in developing software that have no understanding of various data structures and which one to use(So it's all arrays), how memory is being used, threading(a bool as a thread synchronization object?) and no ability in algorithmic analysis(O(N2) when you could have easily done O(nlog(n)) that I actually like the fact he stressed the basics for a lot of what he wrote. Always seems like the people that don't do those basics also don't use source control or lay out their code with any sort of reason.(No comments and words aren't spelled correctly either.) Their stuff looks great at first since they get it out quickly and it often works but when you're the guy who comes by to try and fix that mess years later it's nightmare. (Since the issues don't crop up in their testing, only when it's been out in the wild for a few years and they actually get a legit volume of usage do things start popping up.)