• meow
    62·
    1 year ago

    The title looks so horrible on Lemmy omg

    • d_k_bo@feddit.de
      28·
      1 year ago

      I think it wasn’t meant as a repost to this community. It was a post on mastodon that was picked up by lemmy because this community was credited:

      Found by: @programmerhumor

          • d_k_bo@feddit.de
            2·
            1 year ago

            Since mastodon has no equivalent to lemmy’s communities, it can’t handle lemmy’s !community@instance links.

            Communities are represented as a regular user on the mastodon side, if you mention a user (using @) on mastodon, it will be parsed as a markdown link on lemmy: [@lucy_idk](https://mastodon.world/@lucy_idk)

      • Lucy idk@mastodon.worldOP
        4·
        1 year ago

        @d_k_bo
        d_k_boyou are right. I wanted to share it with my mastodon account, but then there is only the url and not the picture in the post. Maybe there is a way i didn’t see. so i took the meme and credited with the source and shared it with my community. It becames funny bc @programmerhumor then reposted my repost from their meme… so a new dimension is createt ^2

        @Chais

        • TeaHands@lemmy.world
          3·
          1 year ago

          For future reference if you tag the Lemmy community in a reply instead of the top-level toot it won’t do this 😄

  • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
    13·
    1 year ago

    You pleabs are still on C(++)^4? Real men code in C(++)^11. Some of those dimensions are so small they don’t have deterministic outcomes. You write a “Hello, World!” program and you accidentally hack Taco Bell’s payroll department. Shit’s crazy.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        4·
        1 year ago

        They have that quantum compression in that right? Where the library of Alexandria is stored in the quantum state of a single electron? But it still eats up RAM like rednecks at a Golden Corral on crab leg night “getting their money’s worth”?

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 year ago

      Hum… I fail to see any difference to regular C(++)^1.

      In fact, I don’t see anything not possible with C(++)^0. Only the syntax changes.