Why would you use anything other than Math.max?

TDD

const max12 = (x, y) => {
    if (x === 1 && y === 2) {
        return 2;
    } else if (x === 7 && y === 4) {
        return 7;
    } else {
        return x;
    }
};

Thief. Writing code is for chumps, and the more code you right, the more of a chump you are.

Where's the Julia programmer that hits every one of these with @benchmark and then works for six hours to shave three nanoseconds off of the fastest one?

(Example: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/faster-bernoulli-sampling/35209)

Mathematician 2 kinda blew my mind, kinda obvious, just can't believe I was never taught or thought about it.

Thief no doubt

Bit hacker 2 is really fascinating. It uses a bit mask of all 1s (-1) or all 0s (0) and takes advantage of the fact that y ^ (x ^ y) = x and y ^ 0 = y

Procrastinator + troll.

return x

wtf kind of cursed programming language is this? JS? it's so ugly, in no universe should a function look like that

but obviously as a rust enjoyer i have to do it like

fn max ⟨T: PartialOrd + Copy⟩(nums: ⁊[T]) -> Option⟨T⟩ {
    let mut greatest: ⁊T = ⁊nums[0];
    match nums.len() {
        0 => None,
        1 => Some(*greatest),
        _ => {
            for num in nums {
                if num > greatest {
                    greatest = num;
                }
            }
            Some(*greatest)
        }
    }
}

edit: lemmy formatting REALLY hates references and generics it seems... time to go back to medieval times

Mathematician 3

Max(x, y) = floor(ln(e^x + e^y))

#define max(x,y) ( { __auto_type __x = (x); __auto_type __y = (y); __x > __y ? __x : __y; })

GNU C. Also works with Clang. Avoids evaluating the arguments multiple times. The optimizer will convert the branch into a conditional move, if it doesn't I'd replace the ternary with the "bit hacker 2" version.

Procrastinator.

Okay, but seriously: "Thief". Why reimplement it if it’s already available in the language?

Thief

Master Thief const { Max: max } = Math;

Engineer I guess... Thief is the objectively better enterprise programmer option but I don't know why I always forget about it and just write a ternary ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

One, two and nine. Depending on the project, depending on the requirements.

Either engineer or bit hacker, depending on whether or not I'm trying to avoid branching.

Reminded of how truly little I know about programming despite the time have spent doing it

Ugh. I'll never be any good.

And then your customer changes their mind. Instead of two numbers, they will now input three numbers. How easy will it be for you to change your code?

And then the customer changes their mind. Instead of three numbers, they will now input any series of numbers. How easy will it be for you to change your code? And why didn't you already do this is the previous step?

And then the customer changes their mind. Instead of any set of numbers, they will now input numbers and text. How easy will it be to change your code?

And then the customer changes their mind. They now have no idea of what they're sending you or if they're even sending you anything. Nevermind the code now, you already did that in the previous step, right? How easy will it be to explain what you're invoicing them for?

If thief is actually an option, then thief.

Otherwise probably procreator or engineer 😅😬

Edit: errrrr that was supposed to say "procrastinator" 😬dyac

I'm the first and the last, it depends on my mood

Otherwise, realistically, I’m prob the worst of all worlds … the procrastinator waiting/hoping to be the pair programmer that has hopefully remembered to just be the thief.

I’m number 11.

max6(1, 2, 3)

Man that's going to cause some headaches...

I'm in this post and I'm offended.

Max11 is all my code. Why doesn't it work????🤔