Dink FrontEnd not working
Whenever i try to open Dink FrontEnd, recently i started getting an error that says "Access Violation at adress 0040371D in module 'dinkFrontEnd.exe'. Read of adress FFFFFFF7." And then it doesn't work. Does anyone know what i might have done and or how to fix this.
FFFFFFF7 is Finally the Final Final Final Final And very Final Fantasy 7. As to the rest, I have not a clue... I have not gotten this error, and I do not know why it would occur.
Are you using DFARC 2?
Are you using DFARC 2?
Wow... your jokes are even worse than mine.
i use DFarc 2 as well i was just curious about dinkfrontend.
DinkFrontend will crash if you have around more than 50 D-Mods installed.
huh, fifty-two and counting, thanks redink
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, there's no limit!
Everybody to the limit!
Everybody to the limit!
Everybody to the limit!
You should have marked the pauses somehow!
No no, no nono no, no no nono, no nothere's no li-mit!
No no, no nono no, no no nono, no nothere's no li-mit!
Yeah, that's what Striker referred to, but he removed the "fhqwhgads" from his post.
Everybody come on fhqwhgads!
I used to love it. I forgot it after a while. Now I remember again. Good? Or... not so good?
I used to love it. I forgot it after a while. Now I remember again. Good? Or... not so good?
fhqwhgads is the longest word in the English language with only one vowel.
Can't you see he's trying to improvise? You have absolutely no sense of creativity, have you?
Everything has a limit. Even computers. Make a program that will randomly generate 2,000,000 DMODs and you'll see.
We'll just have to create a more powerful computer then...
One that can handle at least 2,000,001 DMODs...
One that can handle at least 2,000,001 DMODs...
There are quite a few problems that even the most powerful computers can't solve, even if the calculation continues till the end of time or so
Forty-two is the answer. Now, come up with the question, computer. And for every hundred million years you spend not giving me the answer, that's another ass whooping in your favor.
I know a guy who solves NP problems in his head.
(Well, not really, but it's close)
(Well, not really, but it's close)
Hey! He can say something on this message board just by thinking? How amazing is that?
But still it's impossible to write a program that can determine for every program if it has an eternal loop.
Prove it.
Behold, the source of evil.exe:
while (not.isEternalLoop ("evil.exe"))
do {}
A counterexample that proves not every program can be checked.
while (not.isEternalLoop ("evil.exe"))
do {}
A counterexample that proves not every program can be checked.
Yeah. This was illustrated by a simple example to me the other day. If you have 8 nodes you can connect in every way possible, it would take a 1 GHz computer 2.3 years to write a list of all these, given it could actually also write one billion of these networks every second. Now, increase that network's size to 10 nodes, and it would take something like 39 billion years... and we're only talking a size of 10 here. Your brain consists of several billion cells, try getting a computer to list all the possible connections between all these.
The amount of connections with n nodes is 2^(n*(n-1)), assuming there can only be one or no connection at all between two nodes, and a node cannot directly be connected to itself.
Sorry, had to.
Sorry, had to.
I thought evil.exe was more like:
while(MSWindows.isRunning())
{
MSWindows.crash();
}
fork("evil.exe");
Or maybe that was the Windows source code...I can't remember.
while(MSWindows.isRunning())
{
MSWindows.crash();
}
fork("evil.exe");
Or maybe that was the Windows source code...I can't remember.
evil.exe was written by Bill Gates... he made sure it included the blue screen of death... now THAT really is evil.
Well duh, the MSWindows.crash() function runs BSOD(random) when it isn't running.
I made a mistake, though... A really silly one.
It shouldn't be 2^(n*(n-1)), but 2^(n*(n-1)/2)
The full network of n nodes had n*(n-1)/2 connections. Every node (n total) connects to (n-1) others. However, we counted everything twice, so we divide by 2 (looked over that step... how easy is it to get lost of little details ). Now each of these connections can be "there" or "not there", offering a total of 2^(n*(n-1)/2) possible networks.
The recursive way is more fun to prove, altough much longer (but you still get 2^(n*(n-1)/2) as answer). I could show the recursive way, but that would just bore everyone away.
Since Phoenix' data of 2.3 years for 8 nodes and 39 billion years for 10 nodes fit with the incorrect formula (assuming 1 billion networks per second, 365 days per year), I didn't bother to double-check my derivation for errors. A square root of these results, which the /2 does, wouldn't fit his data. No, "you forgot leap year" is no explanation of an error this size.
It shouldn't be 2^(n*(n-1)), but 2^(n*(n-1)/2)
The full network of n nodes had n*(n-1)/2 connections. Every node (n total) connects to (n-1) others. However, we counted everything twice, so we divide by 2 (looked over that step... how easy is it to get lost of little details ). Now each of these connections can be "there" or "not there", offering a total of 2^(n*(n-1)/2) possible networks.
The recursive way is more fun to prove, altough much longer (but you still get 2^(n*(n-1)/2) as answer). I could show the recursive way, but that would just bore everyone away.
Since Phoenix' data of 2.3 years for 8 nodes and 39 billion years for 10 nodes fit with the incorrect formula (assuming 1 billion networks per second, 365 days per year), I didn't bother to double-check my derivation for errors. A square root of these results, which the /2 does, wouldn't fit his data. No, "you forgot leap year" is no explanation of an error this size.
I forgot to make a very important precision. The connections are one-way, meaning a connection from a-b is not the same as one from b-a. So my formula still stands, once you're aware of this precision.