Comment on Just one more square bro
ulterno@programming.dev 5 days agoYeah, it might be optimal for that specific case, but that doesn’t really make it so everywhere.
The item in the post would be fun for novelty though.
Comment on Just one more square bro
ulterno@programming.dev 5 days agoYeah, it might be optimal for that specific case, but that doesn’t really make it so everywhere.
The item in the post would be fun for novelty though.
definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
The downvotes are, I assume, from the *WHOOSH* sound as the point flies over your head.
This is the optional packing of 17 squares in a minimum-size larger square. Of course it’s not optional everywhere. It’s specific to 17 squares packed in a square.
The joke is that there’s no reason to choose 17 squares as, clearly, a rectangular* array is optimal.
*squares are, of course, rectangles.