Well, yeah, but I was kind of hoping you’d explain why.

Can’t you just add the wrapper to the test as well, if it’s easy to do in the actual code?

Yeah, you definitely run fixed tests on the whole thing. But when it returns indecipherable garbage, you’ve got to dive in in more detail, and at that point you’re just doing breakpoints and watchpoints and looking at walls of floating point values.

I suppose Strassen’s is recursive, so you could tackle it that way, but for other numerical-type things there is no such option.

If I actually did have that kind of job, the tests-first philosophy would sound very appealing. Actually, build the stack so you don’t have a choice - the real code should just be an instantiation of plumbing on generic variables with certain expected statistical properties. You can do that when correctly processing unpredictable but repetitive stuff is the name of the game, and I expect someone does.

At a certain level of detail, tests just become a debugger, right?

I’m thinking of something like an implementation of Strassen’s algorithm. It’s all arithmetic; you can’t really check for macro correctness without doing a similar kind of arithmetic yourself, which is basically just writing the same code again. It resembles nothing other than itself.

Depending on what kind of coding you’re doing, there might not be an obvious, really atomic unit to test. Most people here seem to do the data-plumbing-for-corporations kind, though.

Huh, so it does. It looks like it shouldn’t at first, my bad.

Have you had any luck with the urban sprawl? We’ve brought in a bunch of urban densification stuff recently in Canada, and NZ was cited as an example to follow.

These days, a shallow folder system. I have an electronica folder, and a Blanck Mass folder that definitely would go in there but that is full enough to stand on it’s own. Actual taxonomic organisation would take way too many clicks, but flat organisation can result in trouble finding things, and just looks like you’re a slob. (Although I’m guilty of having unsorted hoarder folders for things I only needed once, too)

There’s probably a rule of thumb for optimal fanout on each GUI folder, related to our visual processing. Hmm. I wonder if there’s a way to make the tree self-balancing as well.

Wow. And you still have >5 million people? This list goes all the way down to what I’d call not quite villages, but very small towns (although your link is broken, you need to add the Wikipedia part).

That is funny!

Granada is pretty famous for tourist reasons, but unfortunately will be confused with Grenada, so it probably doesn’t count. Ibiza, maybe?

What’s your population threshold for city, here? Are there just a ton of rural people? It feels like a major country.

Not my experience, as a Canadian. I’m guessing Europe is a bit more ignorant, but they’ll still know about the other big cities and basic regions like the South. In the third world you might be right. No clue about East Asia.

I know Lockerbie. It came up a lot as Qaddafi went down.

I didn’t even know there were multiple villages in Luxembourg. I kinda thought it was a city-state.

I’ve actually heard of Oymyakon, just as a Canadian who knows geography facts. Ushguli is new information, though. (There’s definitely higher on other continents)

I take it it’s not Portland?

Or, like, Saskatoon. Ottawa is smaller than Toronto but it’s still big.

Dawson City is also a contender, at least domestically.

Probably Dildo, Newfoundland.

You know why.

Edit: Actually, I think Dawson City is smaller. It’s famous for being a big city back during the gold rush, despite being up near the arctic circle.