• ulterno@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah, it might be optimal for that specific case, but that doesn’t really make it so everywhere.

    The item in the post would be fun for novelty though.

    • definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      The downvotes are, I assume, from the *WHOOSH* sound as the point flies over your head.

      This is the optimal packing of 17 squares in a minimum-size larger square. Of course it’s not optimal everywhere. It’s specific to 17 squares packed in a square.

      The joke is that there’s no reason to choose 17 squares as, clearly, a rectangular* array is optimal.

      *squares are, of course, rectangles.