492
oddly specific (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
(page 3) 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago

A lot of things arbitrarily limit what they can do to more "human friendly" numbers.

[-] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Wouldn't max value for 8 bit (unsigned) integer be 255? Like the number has 256 distinct values, but that includes 0.

[-] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

If this is about a counter for users in the chat, sure. But if this is an array of users indexed by an 8-bit number, then it will fit 256 slots with the first slot being numbered 0.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

Right but having a group chat of size 0 isn’t very useful.

[-] khapyman@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 weeks ago

Not to be snarky, in programming there's rarely (in situations like this) a reason to keep count. Computers are exceptionally good at counting integers so they'd just count individual client id's (however they've implemented that system), not keeping toll on how many clients are in a group chat.

So one client, be it at position zero is a one client group. Add another client at position one and you have two clients and a two person group.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 2 weeks ago

I don't think it's the variable for counting the number of us in a group that's the issue here. There'll be some internal tracker that gives everyone in the chat group a local ID probably for the purposes of ensuring that everyone stays in sync.

If you leave the group and then go into a different chat group you'll probably have a different number in that group because the internal counter is specific to the chat, not to the user ID which will be a unique ID used across all interactions for that phone number.

[-] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 weeks ago

What would 0 represent then?

[-] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

The limit isn't on the actual count of people, it's likely the size of the chat user id number.

[-] 18107@aussie.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago

In this case the limit was entirely arbitrary.

The programmers were told to pick a limit and they liked 256. There are issues with having a large number of people in a group, but it wasn't a hardware limit for this particular case.

[-] Revan343@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

But it's still not oddly specific, they picked a nice round number

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
492 points (99.2% liked)

Microblog Memes

8618 readers
580 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS