Madelaine McMasters

Jaser Newell wrote: After further investigation I think I figured out what the issue was. My original script made use of "+=", creating the number as the script ran, as follows: Task = 3; Task += 0.1; Task += 0.03; This seems to sometimes create a slightly different value for "Task" than would be expected that is undetectable when it is converted into a string. While "(string)Task" will produce "3.130000", "Task" does not equal exactly 3.13. Since I have a user defined function that is always ran right after "Task" is changed, I just threw "Task = (float)((string)Task);" into it. Since the slight difference is undetectable when converted to a string, when the resulting string is converted back into a float it produces the value originally expected and allows the script to work. Right, you can not always count on the result of a floating point math operation to produce an exact result, as the decimal fractions you express as constants may have no exact equivalent in floating point. It's also common for math operations to result in rounding/truncation errors. For this reason, scientific calculations are often performed at floating point sizes well beyond the required precision for the result so that the accumulation of errors over the course of the algorithm does not corrupt the result. The FPU in your computer does internal calculations at 80 bits, even though a double float is stored in only 64 bits. I was sure I'd seen the error you describe in my own test with your code, but as I saw it only once, it 's just as likely I was in error. A simple assignment of a float constant value to a variable, followed by a test for equivalency, should work so long as the precision of the constant is declared to be the same as that of the variable. As I said earlier, LSL has only one size of float, so your original example should work. ETA: If you were attempting to code multiple sets of states a single variable, say assigning one set of states to the units digit, another to the tenths, another to the hundredths, etc, you could achieve the same result using integers and chunking your sets into little spans of bits. You could encode eight states in three bits, 32 in five, etc. But I think breaking the groups out into separate variables would be both easier to understand and easier to debug.

Hi Jaser, and welcome to the forums: I've seen this behavior before in other compilers, but after experimenting with your code in-world, I'm inclined to think there is some kind of bug in the system. I hand typed your code into a test object and it worked for me. I then pasted your code into the same script and it did NOT work. I thought there might be a hidden unicode character messing things up, so I reformatted your code and it began working. I was hopeful I'd figured out the bug, but wanted to confirm I could break it again by repasting from your post. That subsequent paste worked! I've been unable to reproduce the error since, even in new objects and even under my alt account. For future reference, you must be aware of how the compiler treats constants which do not have a declared type. In a system which has both floats (32 bit) and doubles (64 bit) a constant containing a decimal point would usually be treated as a double. Assigning that constant to a float variable will, depending on the compiler, either truncate or round the constant to the lower precision. Subsequent comparisons between the constant and variables may fail as a result. In such a system you'd avoid this problem by typecasting the constant: if (Task == (float)3.13){ llOwnerSay("Works"); } LSL has only one kind of float, and that's "float", so this should not be an issue here. As I am no longer able to make your code fail, I can't investigate further. Good luck!

LadySue's dress looks short enough to be safe, but if the bride's dress has a train you better be careful, Hippie. I've seen you walk and I fear the worst! ;-)

PudgyPaddy wrote: Candor Philipp wrote: the best option is to be between the extremes of what your target audience consider acceptable, and to try to preserve what is more important to them. What? This is not communist Russia! The "best" opinions are founded in reasoning and logic. I don't write opinion(s) to placate readers with flowery words so as to not offend misplaced sensibilities or to not cause emotional instability. I don't write opinions to win friends or win a popularity contest either. Going forward, whenever I read *your* opinion I will know that you didn't mean what you wrote--you just want to look good to the rest of us or the one. This is perhaps the worst statement that could have been written on an open and public forum. PS The OP didn't offer an opinion. The opening post asked a direct and specific question. As Canoro was discussing a "target audience" it's pretty clear to me he was not talking about opinions. He was talking about sales. Sellers do indeed placate buyers with stories that are likely to induce them to purchase their goods and/or services. There is a term for this sort of placation, it's called "marketing". Going forward, whenever I read your opinion, shall I make greater allowance for the possibility that you didn't understand the subject and that you just want to look good to "the one"?

I've never seen anything like that before, Nwyn. It looks like a nutty DOF setting. Do you have Shadows/DOF enabled? If so, try turning it off.

Monti Messmer wrote: At work i have an 18" CRT. Boss "Bigger screens dont speed up work u just want to watch ......" lol Sorry for that excurse back to topic. Monti Monti Messmer wrote: At work i have an 18" CRT. Boss "Bigger screens dont speed up work u just want to watch ......" lol Sorry for that excurse back to topic. Monti I had this discussion with my colleagues. Some of them thought that getting the fastest CPU was important. I argued that having a bigger screen was more important, except under certain circumstances. I continue to believe that. The time I waste moving stuff around on a cramped desktop can't be made up by a fast CPU. Graphics or compute intensive things like SL or gene sequencing argue for speedy chips, but for everything else, give me an expansive display.

Dillon Levenque wrote: I was going to ask, "But what if one is only a paramecium in a puddle even in SL?", but I probably don't wanna know.:smileywink: As one who is only an amoeba in SL, I can comfort myself with this...

Monti Messmer wrote: 2 or 3 monitors ? Good lord posh folks One 24" monitor - widescreen what makes a difference to old 16:9 Monti It helps to use those two or three monitors for work, then you can rationalize almost anything. ;-)

I checked 27" but that only tells part of the story. My main 27" iMac (2560x1440) uses my old 27" iMac (2560x 1440) as a monitor on the left unless I'm also using that iMac for SL. I also have a 28" (1920x1200) display to the right. I'll also agree that pixels are more important than inches. I'd love to have a single 8Kx4K 32" monitor. But even with all my screen real estate, I truly dislike both the large size of the SL UI elements and the inability to drag them out of the app window. When running other apps, I often drag lesser used control windows out to the side monitors. SL is one of the few apps I use which is confined to a single window. ETA: I just did a quick check of applications I use often. SL is the ONLY one that is confined to a single window.

Folds up her easel and takes a seat in the audience to watch the beginning of SL as we'll know it. ;-)

Janelle Darkstone wrote: ( Okay, I'll stop. Just extremely bored and with way too much time on my hands today... :smileywink: )

Sephina Frostbite wrote: NOOB SOUNDING ALERT!! Whats linking? Most of the things you see in SL are made of more than one prim. To keep those prims together in one single object, they must be linked. If you've rezzed multiple prims, you shift-click on them while in edit mode. Each prim you click on while the shift key is down gets added to the growing collection. The last prim you click on this way will be the root-prim when you finally select "Link" from the edit window. The root prim is like the foundation of the linkset. When you later wish to move the linkset, the root-prim's center is where you'll find the editing axes. Building is great fun, Sephina. If you'd like help learning, Hippie and his friends offer classes.

FIFY = Fuzzy Innie? Freaking Yucky! Who are you going to believe?

16 wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: ...sits on your front porch and looks all humble. you can come inside and stay bc you must be really poor but .... !! you have to learn to get up really early ok. bc we even more poor. so the usual rules ok. like first up. best dressed but .... more !! Janelle moved in already ok. so have to get even earlier now than before. bc since she move in then is now: first up. best dressed. and fresher breakfast jejejjjejejejje (: You go ahead and believe that the first to rise does best while I make sure I'm the last to fall asleep. ;-)

Dillon Levenque wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Dillon Levenque wrote: 16 wrote: + I think I better invade your lands before you serf start breeding. bc my massive army of one is not much outnumbered at this time Egad. I shall alert the Border guards. Just as soon as I have some. And you have more than one border. It's that damn road: they can come at me from either direction! I tried putting up barricades but the Lab keeps sending them back to me. I don't need a road.

Dillon Levenque wrote: 16 wrote: + I think I better invade your lands before you serf start breeding. bc my massive army of one is not much outnumbered at this time Egad. I shall alert the Border guards. Just as soon as I have some. And you have more than one border.

Strawberry Singh wrote: Since you guys were wondering, I thought I'd share a raw shot of the picture, with no photoshop: http://grabilla.com/03314-8eeb085f-a48e-4ba3-aa94-ce9562793a12.png Also yes, those are the SLink mesh feet, all of my style credits to that image are available on my blog here: http://strawberrysingh.com/2013/02/20/secondlife-com-spring And I'm not always half naked, sometimes I wear more clothes. Thanks to everyone for appreciating the pic! <3 Sometimes I wear less, Strawberry. Like two bird's nests and a pocketwatch. And I am forever thankful to you for finding the hair I've been wearing for nearly two years. I don't look as quite as good as you did modeling it, but that was never my intention. It's as me as I've ever seen. ;-)

I will not swoon. I will not swoon. I will not...

Perrie Juran wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Just like I said - I do look good in pjnk Do you do fashion consultations? Sometimes I think I could really use some help. Stop it you two, I'm going to get the vapors!

Treasure Ballinger wrote: That was surely taken at the Cartel hangout, see the sofas and table with the kitty, in the background. You were lovely, Phil. :matte-motes-sunglasses-3: ... swoons. Yep, that's the Cartel Hangout. I recognize the railing, which left an indelible impression in my derriere (from sitting on it!).

Orca Flotta wrote: Impossible. That's not even a SL avie. The depicted girl in the graphic has no skin and painted hair, so what do you expect to achieve? A badly silk-screen printed avatar? My RL self is not an SL avie, nor is the Peanuts' character Lucy Van Pelt. I've mimicked both in SL as well as a cloud (not intentionally), a mouse, a ghost, a transparent hippie and Ms. Pac Man. I'm beaming over having done the impossible not only once, but many times!

Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Suspiria Finucane wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: DissertationAnarchy wrote: I am currently doing my undergraduate dissertation in Human Geography. My dissertation is looking at SL as a space that does not have a state. Someone else in this thread mentioned feudalism, and that's a pretty good description, of how SL works. Feudalism; the dominant social system in medieval Europe, in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord’s land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection. SL is nothing like that. That's because you're taking the word to mean one thing. But "feudal" has a broader definition as a systemic structure. The word "feudalism", in the since that I , and several other people, used it here in this thread, is an analogy to the systemic structure of SL. Noble sim "owners" (who are actually renters) pay tier to the LL Crown, which gives them military service (full estate rights and a theoretically higher level of customer support). In turn, the Sim Nobles rent to the peasants (the rest of us) in exchange for the space we've rented, plus in some cases a subset of the Nobel's military protection (ban rights on the estate, perhaps more). There's room in that hierarchy for additional layers (fewer if you are on mainland and report directly to the Crown), but at virtually every layer, the control over what's below is very high. That's close enough to Feudalism for me.

Maryanne Solo wrote: Janelle Darkstone wrote: A Capybara (Hippotamusus Bucktoothus Moosus SansAntlerus) Thufferinthukotash me don't believe that and Im not even going to google it lol. Your text is as good as your cartoons Janelle Ye of little faith. Janelle is absolutely correct. Within the same genus, there is a related and complimentary species called the YogiBerra (Deja-vu'us Repiticus). While not as vicious as the predatory capybara, the Yogi is a cunning scavenger. The capybara's clearly predatory look and demeanor makes it easy to spot for prey, and so it must depend on sheer speed and maneuverability to make a kill. A capybara sprinting at full speed moves its legs so fast that you can't see them, but their hum is unmistakable. The Yogi's chameleon-like abilities allow it to masquerade as a tourist, boarding Carnival cruise liners undetected. Once aboard, the Yogi wreaks havoc with ships engines and generators, causing passengers to panic. It then seizes the opportunity to sate it's revenous appetite on all the spoiled foodstuffs left behind in the ship's galley. The Yogi's life cycle encapsulates the phases that delineate separate subspecies of capybara. A young male Yogi will grow a set of antlers which, later in life, fall off as the adult tusks come in. Here is an adolescent YogiBerra... And a wiley adult... Ain't nature grand?

valerie Inshan wrote: 11:35 AM for me: that's definately Tuesday. *shouts WAKE UP GUYS!!! HAPPY TUESDAY!" ...pulls the pillow over her head and goes back to sleep.

Hippie Bowman wrote: Good morning all! Happy Tuesday! Peace! It's too early to be Tuesday! Who gets up at this hour?