Imagine a cruise control in a car. Let's say that speed is measured (this may be the way it is really done, but it is speculation) by monitoring a point on the wheel and every time it passes the vertical a subroutine runs that calculates the time difference by using the system clock time now and the last time the subroutine ran and then the speed by dividing the circumference of the wheel by the time difference.

If on two runs, the system clock reports the same time, I can think of two possibilities:

- the system clock is broken
- the wheel is rotating so fast that the system clock does not have enough resolution.

Would you prefer the subroutine to report the speed as 0 thereby causing the cruise control to put the pedal to the metal; "really really fast" thereby causing the cruise control to slam on the breaks, or at least cut all power; or "I don't know how fast we are going" thereby causing the cruise control to disengage, perhaps with a warning to the human driver?

This is better because, if there are three investors, the extra cent won't mysteriously disappear into the void.

On the other hand, if the loop runs zero times, no division has occurred at all which is sort of what we mean when we say you can't divide by zero.

100%? 0%? 53.7%? The question is meaningless if you didn't sell anything at all. If your code doesn't handle the case where itemsSold == 0, it is bad code.

They're not in any kind of state to care how many apples they have got, so you can tell them you gave them two apples and then run away.

They are regions of space-time from which even light isn't fast enough to escape. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity predicts a singularity at the centre of a black hole i.e. a non zero amount of mass is squished into zero volume. This seems impossible so most people think that GR breaks down in such extreme conditions and we need a new quantum theory of gravity.

i.e. the division by zero is an indication that the model is wrong.

or even the GPL.

It's distributed under the LGPL according to the Libre Office web site which is presumably the licence under which the version of OO from which was forked was distributed. The same issues should apply as with the GLP though.

It's not a language at all. It includes a C# compiler but you can use any language that has a translator to CLR code.

Nobody is keeping Assange in a dungeon. He could walk out of the building where he lives any time he likes. It's nobody's decision but his own to stay there. This would all be over now if he had not chosen to flee justice.

Do you honestly think that would actually happen to a man who has had as much publicity as Julian Assange?

This is all about avoiding the rape charge, nothing else. Assange clearly thinks that there is a chance he might get convicted.

That last sentence is speculation, but it is a more credible story than that the UK or Sweden would collude in a CIA kidnapping of a public figure.

He is a fugitive. He broke bail conditions from a British court and he is holed up in the Ecuador embassy in order to evade a European arrest warrant.

Since it's actually the exponent you lose (and maybe also some or all of the mantissa depending on what the value of the exponent was), I really think you need to start using a language that gently reminds you that converting from a double to an int is not necessarily a trivial exercise.

No it isn't. The Swift runtime is entirely different to the Objective-C runtime. However, if you want to write a usable app with a GUI, you do need to use the Cocoa libraries which are mostly written in Objective-C.

No.

You can get Xcode and all the SDKs for free either through the app store or by registering as a developer (free). You pay $100 for the ability to sign your compiled applications. On OS X this means people who download your compiled binaries won't get a warning that the code is unsigned.

On iOS you can't put unsigned code on any device, not even your own, without the signing cert so to do serious development, you need to pay $100 (your code will run in the simulator without signing, but the simulator runs x86 binaries so it's not a proper test of the code's behaviour on a real device). This isn't really a big deal because to develop for iOS you must have a Mac and some sort of iOS device so you can probably afford $100.

The $100 also gives you early access to all betas, so I could install El Cap now, if I wanted (I don't), however, over the last year or so, for me it's been most useful for access to Swift betas. The early versions of the Swift development environment were tragically unstable and produced code that was quite slow. You had to be on the bleeding edge to get all the bug fixes.

Brilliant idea. I can sign my tags with my ssh key... ... oh, wait....