If this gets a post ID of 65536, we advance! (The cooler version)

[Luigis_Pizza]

Lockdown went into lunch time what a buncha ****** ******* **** **** * ** * * * ******

[Luigis_Pizza]

Oh thats what I wanted to say:

I can swear as much as I want and if the auto-censor doesn't pick it up, then its allowed... right? oh no the family friendly law, but if I swear then whatever the auto censor changes it to is acceptable right

* im smart

[Gilbert189]

Code Select Expand

Write a function decorator `contextify` that can turn any function accepting an iterable into context managers that can be used with a `with` statement.

Here is an example on how one would use this decorator.
```
@contextify
def example(iterator):
print("initializing")
for x in iterator:
print(f"processing {x}")
print("finalizing")

with example as process:
process(1)
process(2)
process(3)

print("done")
```


[realicraft]

at some point i am going to need to figure out how spoiler tags will work in the archive

[Gilbert189]

yes

[Gilbert189]

can we trigger two errors at the same time

[Luigis_Pizza]

no

[Gilbert189]

no

echo '
                                        <div class="', empty($context['error_type']) || $context['error_type'] != 'serious' ? 'noticebox' : 'errorbox', '"', 
empty($context['post_error']) ? ' style="display: none"' : '', ' id="errors">
                                                <dl>
                                                        <dt>
                                                                <strong id="error_serious">', $txt['error_while_submitting'], '</strong>
                                                        </dt>
                                                        <dd class="error" id="error_list">
                                                                ', empty($context['post_error']) ? '' : implode('<br>', $context['post_error']), '
                                                        </dd>
                                                </dl>
                                        </div>';

ya sure about that

[solitaire]

it's hip to be square

[Luigis_Pizza]

no

echo '
                                        <div class="', empty($context['error_type']) || $context['error_type'] != 'serious' ? 'noticebox' : 'errorbox', '"', 
empty($context['post_error']) ? ' style="display: none"' : '', ' id="errors">
                                                <dl>
                                                        <dt>
                                                                <strong id="error_serious">', $txt['error_while_submitting'], '</strong>
                                                        </dt>
                                                        <dd class="error" id="error_list">
                                                                ', empty($context['post_error']) ? '' : implode('<br>', $context['post_error']), '
                                                        </dd>
                                                </dl>
                                        </div>';

ya sure about that

No Im definitely not sure, im not even sure i spelled definitely right

[solitaire]

No Im definitely not sure, im not even sure i spelled definitely right

you did 👍

[Luigis_Pizza]

No Im definitely not sure, im not even sure i spelled definitely right

you did 👍

yee

[PkmnQ]

It is known that tree(1) = 1, tree(2) = 5, tree(3) ≥ 844,424,930,131,960 (about 844 trillion), tree(4) ≫ g₆₄ (where g₆₄ is Graham's number), and TREE(3) (where the argument specifies the number of labels) is larger than
tree^{treetreetreetree8(7)(7)(7)(7)}(7)

but is TREE(3) prime

[PkmnQ]

I was kind of hoping I could reach 65536 posts before leaving the TBG forums, that's a shame

[Incendiary]

It is known that tree(1) = 1, tree(2) = 5, tree(3) ≥ 844,424,930,131,960 (about 844 trillion), tree(4) ≫ g₆₄ (where g₆₄ is Graham's number), and TREE(3) (where the argument specifies the number of labels) is larger than
tree^{treetreetreetree8(7)(7)(7)(7)}(7)

but is TREE(3) prime

If I can't get my own number, neither can Graham

[PkmnQ]

It is known that tree(1) = 1, tree(2) = 5, tree(3) ≥ 844,424,930,131,960 (about 844 trillion), tree(4) ≫ g₆₄ (where g₆₄ is Graham's number), and TREE(3) (where the argument specifies the number of labels) is larger than
tree^{treetreetreetree8(7)(7)(7)(7)}(7)

but is TREE(3) prime

If I can't get my own number, neither can Graham

Thus by contrapositive, since Graham has his own number, you can get your own. This is trivial, since there are only a finite number of people compared to the uncountably infinite real numbers. I pick 256 factorial.

[Incendiary]

It is known that tree(1) = 1, tree(2) = 5, tree(3) ≥ 844,424,930,131,960 (about 844 trillion), tree(4) ≫ g₆₄ (where g₆₄ is Graham's number), and TREE(3) (where the argument specifies the number of labels) is larger than
tree^{treetreetreetree8(7)(7)(7)(7)}(7)

but is TREE(3) prime

If I can't get my own number, neither can Graham

Thus by contrapositive, since Graham has his own number, you can get your own. This is trivial, since there are only a finite number of people compared to the uncountably infinite real numbers. I pick 256 factorial.

I'm picking 9001 factorial.

[solitaire]

𝄞

[PkmnQ]

Let f(n) equal the least possible tokens to get n or more elements on the stack in "pure Factor", a version of Factor where only tokens -roll, -rot, -rotd, 2bi, 2bi*, 2bi@, 2curry, 2dip, 2drop, 2dup, 2keep, 2keepd, 2nip, 2nipd, 2over, 2tri, 2tri*, 2tri@, 2with, 3bi, 3curry, 3dip, 3drop, 3dup, 3keep, 3nip, 3nipd, 3tri, 4dip, 4drop, 4dup, 4keep, 4nip, 4spin, 5drop, 5nip, bi, bi*, bi-curry, bi-curry*, bi-curry@, bi@, call, compose, curry, dip, do, drop, dup, dupd, keep, keepd, keepdd, nip, nipd, over, overd, pick, pickd, prepose, reach, roll, rot, rotd, spin, swap, swapd, tri, tri*, tri-curry, tri-curry*, tri-curry@, tri@, tuck, and with are allowed, kernel is automatically used, and  call has no restrictions (i.e. Underload but more powerful and without a (but it can still be implemented by [ ] curry) and S)). The number in this message is the smallest n such that f(n) is Graham's number or more.

[PkmnQ]

𝄞

is that what the 5 lines in your signature are for

[PkmnQ]

Let f(n) equal the least possible tokens to get n or more elements on the stack in "pure Factor", a version of Factor where only tokens -roll, -rot, -rotd, 2bi, 2bi*, 2bi@, 2curry, 2dip, 2drop, 2dup, 2keep, 2keepd, 2nip, 2nipd, 2over, 2tri, 2tri*, 2tri@, 2with, 3bi, 3curry, 3dip, 3drop, 3dup, 3keep, 3nip, 3nipd, 3tri, 4dip, 4drop, 4dup, 4keep, 4nip, 4spin, 5drop, 5nip, bi, bi*, bi-curry, bi-curry*, bi-curry@, bi@, call, compose, curry, dip, do, drop, dup, dupd, keep, keepd, keepdd, nip, nipd, over, overd, pick, pickd, prepose, reach, roll, rot, rotd, spin, swap, swapd, tri, tri*, tri-curry, tri-curry*, tri-curry@, tri@, tuck, and with are allowed, kernel is automatically used, and  call has no restrictions (i.e. Underload but more powerful and without a (but it can still be implemented by [ ] curry) and S)). The number in this message is the smallest n such that f(n) is Graham's number or more.

f(0) = 0 ()
f(1) = 2 ([ ])
f(2) = 3 ([ ] dup)
f(3) = 4 ([ ] dup dup)
f(4) = 4 ([ ] dup 2dup)
From there you can start using [ X ] dup call, so it becomes slightly less trivial

[PkmnQ]

Nevermind, it's only one word, so it becomes [ x ] x, which is 4 tokens

f(5) = 5 ([ ] dup 2dup dup)
f(6) = 5 ([ ] dup 2dup 2dup)
f(7) = 5 ([ ] dup 2dup 3dup)
f(8) = 5 ([ ] dup 2dup 4dup)
f(9) = 6 ([ ] dup 2dup 4dup dup)
f(10) = 6 ([ ] dup 2dup 4dup 2dup)
f(11) = 6 ([ ] dup 2dup 4dup 3dup)
f(12) = 6 ([ ] dup 2dup 4dup 4dup)

[Byron_Inc_TBG]

?!

[PkmnQ]

?!

there's a 1 character version of this

[realicraft]

𝄞

is that what the 5 lines in your signature are for

i thought those were for a garage door