Leon CowleHahahahahahaha. Indeed!
shroomie/joan (of the agaric system)@leoncowle i know that it’s significant cause like, 256 is a multiple of eight, which is a even and computery number that people like, but is there a more specific reason to choose 256 over something else?
@shroomie It seems you're really asking (and not trolling). 255 is the largest number you can hold in an unsigned 8-bit integer (“11111111” binary equals 255 decimal), also called a "byte”. So if the internal variable they're using as their member counter for this is an unsigned 8 bit integer, then it can't hold a number larger than 255. And 0-255 is 256 numbers.
(Note: they could be using a larger variable (i.e. with more bits), but only reserved 8 bits of it for this counter).
@leoncowle so basically, they chose it because it’s the largest thing they could choose?
@shroomie Definitely making certain assumptions here, but yes, there's a fair chance they used the maximum value that their counter variable could be set to.
chuckadeus kummerer@leoncowle @shroomie if they actually chose an 8 bit uint they are idiots , I think what happened is closer to (quoting from memory from the unofficial c FAQ on arbitrary numbers): "if you have to choose an arbitrary number always choose a power of two or a power of two minus one because then people will assume there was some deep reasoning involved"
Ash_Crow@leoncowle @shroomie it still seems weird to worry about storing the counter on one byte instead of two, when 1. It's nothing on modern devices
2. the change is going to increase the memory use by far more than that anyway (as you have to store an additional 156 user IDs in your member list, not to mention the number of messages in the group which is deemed to increase, etc.)
2. the change is going to increase the memory use by far more than that anyway (as you have to store an additional 156 user IDs in your member list, not to mention the number of messages in the group which is deemed to increase, etc.)