gender: impl Any
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025
272 points (89.8% liked)
Programmer Humor
19990 readers
1064 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
My gender is a null-pointer.
Clearly your gender field is a boolean. Which means it can be either true, false, null, or undefined. Except in javascript where for some reason it can sometimes be NaN, but only when you try to compare two people.
My gender is
{ toString: ()=>{String.prototype.toString = ()=>">:3"; return ":3";} }
A boolean, so 8 bits of freedom to fill up
Even booleans take up 8 bits. And that's a lot of wasted space.
That's only due to technical reasons on weird platforms like x86, 64bit x86 or ARM.
That's why you use bitarrays and bitflags instead when you need more than just one or two arguments for a function.
Only if it's performance sensitive. Otherwise you're wasting programmer time both writing and reading the code, and you've made it less maintainable with more complexities where bugs can creep in.
The vast majority of the time you can afford a few wasted bits.
Honestly though I don't quite understand why a compiler couldn't optimise this process. Like it knows what a boolean is, surely it could reduce them down to bits.
Well, to get a boolean out of a bit array you have to do some operations. So at first it doesn't make it more performant. Compilers probably don't automatically make them bitarrays because of that.
However, the memory savings means less cache used. And a cache miss is way more expensive than those bit operations. So they should be more performant. I'm sure someone out there has done the actual research and there's a good reason why compilers don't make all booleans bitarrays.
Solution: 1 bit computer
Bold of programmers to assume gender can be expressed accurately in a finite discrete system. Gonna have to bust the Taylor series for some better approximation.
I guess in theory as there will only ever be a finite number of individuals, there will also necessarily only ever be a finite number of different gender expressions, so finite discrete probably works. (Not to say that peoples experiences of gender are fixed and equidistant, but more so that you could have a "gender enum" with an entry for each individual)
Of course, trying to say how many bits this would require is almost impossible because theres always going to be more people and more genders, but it is technically finite.
In any case, bagsies on (leading zeros)100101001
Me on my way to define everyone's gender:
enum Gender {
AARON,
ALEX,
ANN,
...
I will always read it as ay-ay-ron
Hell yeah although you might want to construct an identifier from like, name and surname and datetime of birth?
finite number of individuals, there will also necessarily only ever be a finite number of different gender expressions
This only demonstrates that there will be a finite number of genders at any given instance. One could be more fluid and a responsive gender such that it maximizes the gay of any particular kiss they are having at the time.
Sure but thats their experience of gender right? Their experience of gender will never be "not their experience of gender" even if it changes from instant to instant
Sure, but just because sine is one function doesn't mean it's accurately replicable in a finite discrete system.
I read your previous comment as making the point that because there are finite people, there will be finite values of gender, and therefore discrete and replicable. If it's continuous and variable, even if there are finite individuals that have finite methods of expressions their gender, gender itself spans the reals.
I was more approaching it from a programming perspective than a mathematical one - we could theoretically "label" all the gender experiences (perhaps just with the name of the individual that experiences it)
Of course this would be like labeling different variations of the sine function, and other functions, to use the analogy you made
The thing thats represented by the label may be discrete or continuous or anything
To be clear, I'm not attempting to represent gender as a continuous spectrum between Man and Woman - I'm throwing the gender binary out entirely and imagining each gender as some arbitrarily defined thing, ie for some people its a sine function (again to use your analogy) with different coefficients
If one wanted to represent the "gender space" as some 1d number line or 2d space with cartesian axes, then absolutely you'd need to fulfil the infinite and continuous criteria and I agree with you.
Though, to ramble a bit, I don't know what you'd use to label the axis/axes because we sure as hell can't use Man to Woman when agender folk exist, and we can't even use Man to Woman and Agender to Allogender because some folk would fall outside of those axes still.
Valid and this is very certainly my math bias poking through. Though I think to consider the false case of a gender binary, the 1-bit value being M or F would suggest it's describing the scope of gender expressions in memory values, and this interpretation seems to continue with the meme of it needing to be a 64-bit gender. So in correcting that falsehood, it would be a the space that have spots for all possible gender expressions.
While I agree the tautological approach of person['gender'] = "{Person's gender}" would accurately label all genders, I think the radical point to make is that the space itself is the confining factor. My point being the systems needed to properly represent a gender expression can only be approximated with finite discrete systems.
Agreed the difficulty of describing the gender space even would be near impossible! I always say the simplest way I can describe mine is: Ae^iαt^|💪> + Be^iβt^|💅> + Ce^iγt^|🤖>
|💪>, |💅>, and |🤖> of course being the base vectors I find most useful as invariant under my transformation.
Though, to ramble a bit
Please, this is a very serious conversation about very serious things like an n-dimensional gender hyperspace! Please refrain from nonsensical ramblings.
I guess the real question is, what would best represent your eigenvectors?
You're 100% right that is the most logical extension from the basis of 1 bit m-f - I completely overlooked that!
I'm glad to stumble upon someone on the internet who has the same crossover of programming, math, and gender (so unlikely! I know!) as well as silly humour in this regard :D
Gender is a pointer
Now is the time for quantum computing
Gender is a second order tensor, so you should store it as a pointer to an array of pointers for maximum read/write speed.
Gender: true
Why not a linked list? Or a hash-table?
isMale
import isFemale
def isMale(Person):
if isFemale(Person):
return False
else:
return Truepublic boolean isMale() {
return !isFemale();
}
public boolean isFemale() {
return !isMale();
}
StackOverflowException was unhanded
Gender is obviously a signed byte.
Gender is a struct
struct Gender {
byte binaryBias; ///Determines male (+) or female (-) bias if present
ubyte binaryAm; ///Determines the amount of binary gender(s) present
bool isTrans; ///True if assigned at birth gender does not equal with current one
ubyte xenoAm; ///Determines the amount of xenogender
uint xenoGen; ///Xenogender selection, 0 if not applicable
Sex* sex; ///Pointer to the person's current sex
}
Now this is a gender definition I can get behind. None of that string/enum crap, just raw data.
That's a lot of implementation detail. Is there just a service interface I can inject to know what bathroom a person's RFID fob should open?
Just don't have gendered bathrooms, simple as that.