Afrikaans
Akan
Albanian
Amharic
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Basque
Belarusian
Bemba
Bengali
Bihari
Bosnian
Breton
Bulgarian
Cambodian
Catalan
Cebuano
Cherokee
Chichewa
Chinese (Simplified)
Chinese (Traditional)
Corsican
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
English
Esperanto
Estonian
Ewe
Faroese
Filipino
Finnish
French
Frisian
Ga
Galician
Georgian
German
Greek
Guarani
Gujarati
Haitian Creole
Hausa
Hawaiian
Hebrew
Hindi
Hmong
Icelandic
Igbo
Indonesian
Interlingua
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Javanese
Kannada
Kazakh
Kinyarwanda
Kirundi
Kongo
Korean
Krio (Sierra Leone)
Kurdish
Kurdish (Soranรฎ)
Kyrgyz
Laothian
Latin
Latvian
Lingala
Lithuanian
Lozi
Luganda
Luo
Luxembourgish
Macedonian
Malagasy
Malay
Malayalam
Maltese
Maori
Marathi
Mauritian Creole
Moldavian
Mongolian
Myanmar (Burmese)
Montenegrin
Nepali
Nigerian Pidgin
Northern Sotho
Norwegian
Norwegian (Nynorsk)
Occitan
Oriya
Oromo
Pashto
Persian
Polish
Portuguese (Brazil)
Portuguese (Portugal)
Punjabi
Quechua
Romanian
Romansh
Runyakitara
Russian
Samoan
Scots Gaelic
Serbian
Serbo-Croatian
Sesotho
Setswana
Seychellois Creole
Shona
Sindhi
Sinhalese
Slovak
Slovenian
Somali
Spanish
Spanish (Latin American)
Sundanese
Swahili
Swedish
Tajik
Tamil
Tatar
Telugu
Thai
Tigrinya
Tonga
Tshiluba
Tumbuka
Turkish
Turkmen
Twi
Uighur
Ukrainian
Urdu
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Welsh
Wolof
Xhosa
Yiddish
Yoruba
Zulu
Time to debug exercise number nine.
So we want to produce a lower triangular matrix from this predefine to the array and now a lower triangular
matrix is one where everything above the main diagonal is zero.
In this case, the values that indices zero one zero two and one two should be zero.
But if we run the current code, what are we going to get, let's see.
OK, Lisa didn't crash.
I'm going to have the usual breakpoint so I can at least visualize what the heck is happening here.
Launched the debugger.
We're at the first pass I zero is zero, nothing should happen when I injera zero, but this condition
is going to evaluate to true.
Sending this to.
So we'll take off the equal sign and try again.
OK, but now nothing happens in the first pass.
Or the second pass, which means whoever wrote this code did not know what they were doing.
OK, so I'm going to remove this code entirely because sometimes it's better to just start over than
to fix something that's completely broken.
OK, relaunched the debugger.
Starting again, I zero G is zero here, we don't want to do anything.
But now the inner loop suddenly breaks.
Hmm, now I is one.
Wait a second.
I need to update indices 01 and 02, but the way the inner loop code was designed, it's never going
to reach them.
It seems like they tried to get all fancy, but in reality, we need to loop through every single element
in each row so we can use a regular nested loop.
I don't know what the heck they were doing.
Relaunched the debuggers starting again.
I zero g zero.
Here, we don't want to do anything, but when I zero in just one.
Now we want to set this to zero.
OK, I think I found the pattern we should only set the element equal to zero if its index is higher
than the row index I.
So if Jay is higher than I.
Then we're going to set that element equal to zero.
OK, try it out now.
Here, the condition is false.
But now Jay is bigger than I said, the element equal to zero.
Once more here.
In the second pass, I equals one, this condition is going to be false for the first two elements in
that row, but then it's going to be true for inducts to.
And for the final row, the condition should be false through about.
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get subtitles in any language from opensubtitles.com, and translate them here.