The Rust Programming Language Forum Forum

well, as a mod who doesn't have the time to read everything here, I mainly see the things that are reported to us, so I only looked into the announcement category's statistics. Do you have any subjective insight into why some posts don't get replies? Maybe we can improve the category docs telling ppl how to get the most out of their posts?

oli_obk: the announcement category Is it not more the "code review" category that gets so many posts, and often no reply? The categories "help" and "tutorial" as well? Personally for me, many posts in this forum look quite "exotic" still, so I can't really understand them. And for posts I do understand, there is often a perfect reply from the experts after seconds -- sometimes I wonder if the experts ever sleep [EDIT} One more remark: If the announcement category is blocked here by default, people might stop announcing here, and perhaps do announcement only at Reddit. Do we want that?

Hi everyone! We (mods) noticed that the announcement category was getting more and more posts, but also the quality went down. This isn't just our subjective view, but also noticeable due to the fact that y'all don't really interact with announcement posts. It was overwhelmingly posts about newly written crates, and that is after we filtered out slop and ads. I have now muted this category for everyone, but you can manually resubscribe to it. Please let us know about any announcement topics that aren't categorized, we'll put them in the right category so that the latest/new/hot sections can contain more things ppl actually want to see. Thoughts? Opinions? Other QoL things we can do here?

Yeah there's going to be some pigeon hole principle or something. It's just that it's one of the specific types of maths that my brain fits into a "wanting to know this is a sign of a diseased mind" bucket for some reason. It's like an Ignobel prize but for the Fields medal.

on my guts, the denominator is 10^n + prime so I don't think that much brute force was involved

quinedot: The repeating pattern of the decimal representation of 1/10_000_000_019 contains every zero-padded ten-digit number at least once Every so often I am told about some maths fact that I can only assume someone went to prison for discovering

That could've worked too, though the more I think about it, 'a isn't actually that important like what Morgane55440 said, so I just elided the lifetime, without needing anything like for .

(Not a serious suggestion.) simonbuchan: Arguably you could overlap and share prefixes, but that is only likely to save you around 10%, so you're looking down the barrel of 40 GB here. The repeating pattern of the decimal representation of 1/10_000_000_019 contains every zero-padded ten-digit number at least once, so you "only" need ~10G (at the cost of non-constant lookup). bachchain: Currently, I only need from 0 to around 4000, which, if my math is correct, should only require about 15k. Or for (all) four-digit numbers, analogously store 1/10_007 's pattern in ~10K. [1] Edit: made an unsafe free version ↩︎

Because they do not want an owned buffer but a &'static str . If you want a buffer, you can use Display or recently format_into() like said above.

(i'll respond in English + would invite you to translate and re-post in that language so more people can understand + participate if they wish). Looking at the Rune revisions page , that project is at least 8 years old . so by no mean it's "recent" as you suggest. to your specific questions about the possibilities and future of that project/language, you're probably better off seeking answers directly from the authors of that project.

Even better, thsnks!. So, the question is why does topic starter need 4K strings? PS: or it also could be.. let start = '0' as u8; let i = (num / divisor) as u8; let c = (start + i) as char;

throwable-one: My point was to store a small static string of all possible digits You don't need to store a precomputed string of all possible digits to be able to trivially turn a number 0..=9 into a digit. b'0' + x (or b'0' | x ) will do it.