Nobody shares knowledge better than this
-
@tdittmar said:
Provided that WMP can play backwards, not even that long. SSDS just uses the Media Control Interface to play videos.@SpectateSwamp said:
A noodle here and there and You could have SSDS playing video backwards.
Or I could just open up my video editing tool, push the "reverse" button and play my video backwards - even with backwards sound. Not that I'd ever felt the need to do so, really. That would take me, hmmm, 30 seconds? How long would it take me to "improve" SSDS?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
That bad code does a lot and is very extensible!
The code doesn't do much more than search a single text file and work the MCI interface. It doesn't even compile under anything more recent than VB5 and is a total mess of poorly named everything and goto / gosub - how is that extensible (answers involving the words 'jam' or 'noodle' are automatically wrong)@SpectateSwamp said:
This code can change.
Perhaps it can, compiling it is another matter entirely however.@SpectateSwamp said:
I can easily share the "old mill" pics because I'm in control. Not microsoft or some indexer app.
I can share pictures as well, takes no time at all to find, upload, email, burn to dvd etc. without the need for SSDS at all.
-
@bstorer said:
@tdittmar said:
Provided that WMP can play backwards, not even that long. SSDS just uses the Media Control Interface to play videos.@SpectateSwamp said:
A noodle here and there and You could have SSDS playing video backwards.
Or I could just open up my video editing tool, push the "reverse" button and play my video backwards - even with backwards sound. Not that I'd ever felt the need to do so, really. That would take me, hmmm, 30 seconds? How long would it take me to "improve" SSDS?
Actually, I think playing MPEG encoded videos backwards is not exactly trivial. You'd have to assemble all transition frames in a seperate run first. So if the MCI can't do that, you'll need more than a noodle for this.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
That bad code does a lot and is very extensible!
Which doesn't change the fact that your code SUCKS.
@SpectateSwamp said:
I can easily share the "old mill" pics because I'm in control. Not microsoft or some indexer app.
So, you mean you can have control even though you drop Microsoft? Strange, for a Visual Basic app that runs under Windows.
-
DerulaShare has photos
@derula said:
Well I could similarly share pictures from certain episodes of my life. Without any Microsoft, or indexer, or SSDS. It's called a file system.
File system. What a great idea. All our pics were unshareable in 15 or 20 photo albums. Glad to see just might share some episodes. Mostly indoors I bet.
-
Securing insecure knowledge
@bob171123 said:
Looks like someone still feels insecure about high school.
Using lack of knowledge against poor little children. No knowledge is better than using it as a hammer. I'm so smart knowing all these big words and other useless BS
-
Share knowledge like the Swampies
@tdittmar said:
Or I could just open up my video editing tool, push the "reverse" button and play my video backwards - even with backwards sound. Not that I'd ever felt the need to do so, really. That would take me, hmmm, 30 seconds? How long would it take me to "improve" SSDS?
I never had the need either. That's why it isn't in there. Good to see we are on the same wave length
You already helped improve SSDS. I'm not adding reverse. Others might put that button in!
-
jerkie jerk backwards
@PSWorx said:
@bstorer said:
@tdittmar said:
Provided that WMP can play backwards, not even that long. SSDS just uses the Media Control Interface to play videos.@SpectateSwamp said:
A noodle here and there and You could have SSDS playing video backwards.
Or I could just open up my video editing tool, push the "reverse" button and play my video backwards - even with backwards sound. Not that I'd ever felt the need to do so, really. That would take me, hmmm, 30 seconds? How long would it take me to "improve" SSDS?
Actually, I think playing MPEG encoded videos backwards is not exactly trivial. You'd have to assemble all transition frames in a seperate run first. So if the MCI can't do that, you'll need more than a noodle for this.
It would be easy to do with just the mcisendstring -- play 1/8 second -- backup 1/2 second -- play 1/8 second -- backup 1/2 second .....
But it might not look pretty. More of a jerkie jerk backwards than reverse play.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Mostly indoors I bet.
Of course. Outside is the sun. I hate the sun. And people. Uh.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Good to see we are on the same wave length
If we were I'd have to shoot myself...@SpectateSwamp said:
You already helped improve SSDS
Sorry, that was not my intention!@SpectateSwamp said:
I'm not adding reverse. Others might put that button in!
They won't. We know you are just lazy - even too lazy to support, maintain and improve your own program. You've proven this in various posts on the other thread here on TDWTF.
-
Share knowledge like the Swampies
@tdittmar said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
I'm not adding reverse. Others might put that button in!
They won't. We know you are just lazy - even too lazy to support, maintain and improve your own program. You've proven this in various posts on the other thread here on TDWTF.OK the Jerkie Jerk Backwards button is now the top top of my enhancements list.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
File system. What a great idea. All our pics were unshareable in 15 or 20 photo albums. Glad to see just might share some episodes. Mostly indoors I bet.
Is the concept of a file system something new and revolutionary to you? You seem to find it's mention here a bit of a revolutionary concept.@SpectateSwamp said:
Using lack of knowledge against poor little children. No knowledge is better than using it as a hammer. I'm so smart knowing all these big words and other useless BS
No knowledge is never better than possessing knowledge, arrogance however is not a justified use of the knowledge. Being able to express oneself in a clear, articulate and concise manner is not useless BS however.@SpectateSwamp said:
I'm not adding reverse. Others might put that button in!
Same old response - I won't / can't make the change so I will pretend others will. Since when did SSDS use buttons, shouldn't this be a new option like 'ffffffffffffff' for ease of use?@SpectateSwamp said:
It would be easy to do with just the mcisendstring -- play 1/8 second -- backup 1/2 second -- play 1/8 second -- backup 1/2 second .....
That would be a truly appalling idea, it wouldn't be so much playing in reverse as being a series of disconnected frames jerking on screen.But it might not look pretty. More of a jerkie jerk backwards than reverse play.
-
One has to wonder why he's desperately trying to sell his crap to us. We are not a representative sample of the market, we spot WTF's more easily. Well, all of us except SS.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
A noodle here and there and You could have SSDS playing video backwards.
Will playing any of your videos backwards tell us where you buried Paul?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
OK the Jerkie Jerk Backwards button is now the top top of my enhancements list.
SSDS has buttons?
-
Can we think of funny titles as well or is only SS allowed to do that?
@derula said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
OK the Jerkie Jerk Backwards button is now the top top of my enhancements list.
SSDS has buttons?
Obviously. There's an "OK" and a "Cancel" button.
-
Fooie to coding standards
That jerkie jerk backwards button isn't such a bad idea. Swamp search currently has the ability
to back up a time slice by entering a "." after the video has been interrupted by hitting enter.
Check the source. You'll see "23 April 2004" comments. We could add a noodle right there. A JJB
call to reverse the video until you see what you want then hit enter again to resume play. That
would be more than fine for backing up a second or two.Check it out yourself. Send me the code fix and I'll jam it.
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/stonedan/source.txtTry making any type of an enhancement with the other desktop search engines. Good luck.
If the intelligentsia tell you Swamp Search is such bad code and don't weigh in the results
the swamp search produces. Then all they have taught you about coding is lies lies lies.
It's about results first then nit picky, itsy bitsy, restrictive coding standards last.Sharing knowledge is about sharing truths, not PR or BS.
With Swamp search you can relegate the less useful (seldom used) knowledge to the computer. Bring the Fun, kindness and the now knowledge to the forefront of your mind with SSDS running randomly selecting and displaying those attributes.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
We could add a noodle right there.
Nobody has a clue what 'add a noodle' means, nobody can compile the code, nobody understands your code, nobody cares.@SpectateSwamp said:
Try making any type of an enhancement with the other desktop search engines.
Other desktop search engines do a single well defined task - that of searching your pc for files from the desktop, they do not claim to be media players or screen savers. Your 'software' isn't a desktop search tool as it only searches a single file, this makes it a file search not a desktop search. If I wanted to play a video and skip backwards I would use a different piece of software (such as WMP or VLC). Use the right tool for the job, not one tool for all jobs even if you now have to do the jobs a different way just so you can use the tool.@SpectateSwamp said:
If the intelligentsia tell you Swamp Search is such bad code and don't weigh in the results
Intelligentsia has nothing to do with it - your code is an unmaintainable mess and the results speak for themselves i.e. you have failed to remember how it works, you can no longer make any changes to it and constantly expect others to do so. The results are it can search a single text file of moderate size - previous threads have shown it failing on large text files and you choose to ignore this fact. The software doesn't even work on a first run - talk about poor first impressions.
the swamp search produces. Then all they have taught you about coding is lies lies lies.
It's about results first then nit picky, itsy bitsy, restrictive coding standards last.@SpectateSwamp said:
With Swamp search you can relegate the less useful (seldom used) knowledge to the computer. Bring the Fun, kindness and the now knowledge to the forefront of your mind with SSDS running randomly selecting and displaying those attributes.
I can store less useful knowledge on my PC and still retrieve it without SSDS so how does this become the only tool that allows me to do this? Random is not searching however - if I am trying to find photos, music etc. I have organised my file system in such a way I will pretty much be able to find what I need without any search tool, if I am looking for something a bit more obscure (maybe in a reference pdf or legacy source code) or a bit more unusual (i.e. all photos with a castle in them not just the ones from a particular trip) then WDS works a treat anyway - Random would not help, SSDS would not help.
-
Ok Ok everybody but spenk
@spenk said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
We could add a noodle right there.
Nobody has a clue what 'add a noodle' means, nobody can compile the code, nobody understands your code, nobody cares.@SpectateSwamp said:
Try making any type of an enhancement with the other desktop search engines.
Other desktop search engines do a single well defined task - that of searching your pc for files from the desktop, they do not claim to be media players or screen savers. Your 'software' isn't a desktop search tool as it only searches a single file, this makes it a file search not a desktop search. If I wanted to play a video and skip backwards I would use a different piece of software (such as WMP or VLC). Use the right tool for the job, not one tool for all jobs even if you now have to do the jobs a different way just so you can use the tool.@SpectateSwamp said:
If the intelligentsia tell you Swamp Search is such bad code and don't weigh in the results
Intelligentsia has nothing to do with it - your code is an unmaintainable mess and the results speak for themselves i.e. you have failed to remember how it works, you can no longer make any changes to it and constantly expect others to do so. The results are it can search a single text file of moderate size - previous threads have shown it failing on large text files and you choose to ignore this fact. The software doesn't even work on a first run - talk about poor first impressions.
the swamp search produces. Then all they have taught you about coding is lies lies lies.
It's about results first then nit picky, itsy bitsy, restrictive coding standards last.@SpectateSwamp said:
With Swamp search you can relegate the less useful (seldom used) knowledge to the computer. Bring the Fun, kindness and the now knowledge to the forefront of your mind with SSDS running randomly selecting and displaying those attributes.
I can store less useful knowledge on my PC and still retrieve it without SSDS so how does this become the only tool that allows me to do this? Random is not searching however - if I am trying to find photos, music etc. I have organised my file system in such a way I will pretty much be able to find what I need without any search tool, if I am looking for something a bit more obscure (maybe in a reference pdf or legacy source code) or a bit more unusual (i.e. all photos with a castle in them not just the ones from a particular trip) then WDS works a treat anyway - Random would not help, SSDS would not help.Random with search criteria. "oldie" goes through my family album text file until it lands on a match then shows it. Same with a particular artist. It will randomly play various songs of theirs or "country" "blues" whatever. Very very powerful this bad code.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Random with search criteria. "oldie" goes through my family album text file until it lands on a match then shows it. Same with a particular artist. It will randomly play various songs of theirs or "country" "blues" whatever. Very very powerful this bad code.
I can just type 'oldie' at the bottom of my start menu and find all photos etc. with the word oldie in them why is SSDS better? I can open a folder such as my mp3s (organised by artist and album) and find what I want or type a genre, artist, song title, rating into the little box at the top right of explorer and find all matching songs, how is SSDS better? Same can be done for photos, videos, documents, source code etc. - how is SSDS better.
If I want to play random music I can open WMP and type the artist, genre, album etc. into the little box and press the play button and music will play, if I click the 'shuffle' button it will play in a random order. This is also true of videos and photos - again how is SSDS better?
None of this requires me to have a 'family album text file' nonsense built and managed by me - it just works with the files on the file system all automatically, again how is SSDS better?
If I wanted to find a reference to a keyword or function in a pdf or in a source tree the above steps (bottom of start menu or open explorer at the top of the folder tree) will work without any manual index building on my part - how is SSDS better? When I am looking for a specific phrase or reference random is not useful, when I am wanting a slide show or music it might be - random however is not part of searching itself; it is rather something you do with the results of the search.
I honestly fail to see why you think this tool is so good when it forces me to do more work for less return and will not allow me to simply use simple things like files and folders as they are meant to be used. Give me one simple task that SSDS can perform that I could not also do quicker and easier with the appropriate built in windows feature (WMP, File system, Search etc) and I will be convinced. You have still never explained how to search for a file - every time you are asked this you either ignore the question or mutter something about noodly jam and fail to provide a simple step by step guide of how to use SSDS to perform a commonly requested usage scenario.
-
The Duck Quacks at Midnight
So, please explain to us what exactly you mean with "adding a noodle".
-
I like to pretend he means "Stick my dick in the fan grile and click compile on VB4"
-
@PSWorx said:
So, please explain to us what exactly you mean with "adding a noodle".
This refers to some older post where we tried to explain to SS that his code is just an unmaintainable mess of spaghetti-code. He took the term "spaghetti-code" and funnily (haha...) after that referred to changing/enhancing his code as "adding a noddle" to the pot of spaghetti.
-
@tdittmar said:
@PSWorx said:
So, please explain to us what exactly you mean with "adding a noodle".
This refers to some older post where we tried to explain to SS that his code is just an unmaintainable mess of spaghetti-code. He took the term "spaghetti-code" and funnily (haha...) after that referred to changing/enhancing his code as "adding a noddle" to the pot of spaghetti.Even worse he doesn't seem to understand the term "spaghetti code" is not a compliment either. Although being honest this is just another entry in the long list of things he either doesn't or refuses to understand, we can probably add "humour" to the list as well...
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
"oldie" goes through my family album text file until it lands on a match then shows it.
Notepad++ does the same thing. And guess what - it does it much faster than SSDS! Also: It does not even do it sequentially. I can search backwards and forward and I can also search ALL occurances of a word and have them highlighted!@SpectateSwamp said:
It will randomly play various songs of theirs or "country" "blues" whatever.
Any random media player will do that. And guess what - they do it much more easily than SSDS!If I want to share things, there are various web platforms where I can do that and reach millions of people! How many people exactly are using SSDS?
And don't come me with that "SSDS is easily extensible add noodle"-shit again. Your code is not maintainable - even you don't understand how it works anymore. The fact that the source code lives in a "source.txt" file speaks for itself...
-
@bob171123 said:
One has to wonder why he's desperately trying to sell his crap to us.
He's autistic, I think.
-
Maybe nobody ever will (share knowledge better than this)
@spenk said:
I can just type 'oldie' at the bottom of my start menu and find all photos etc. with the word oldie in them why is SSDS better? I can open a folder such as my mp3s (organised by artist and album) and find what I want or type a genre, artist, song title, rating into the little box at the top right of explorer and find all matching songs, how is SSDS better? Same can be done for photos, videos, documents, source code etc. - how is SSDS better.
If I want to play random music I can open WMP and type the artist, genre, album etc. into the little box and press the play button and music will play, if I click the 'shuffle' button it will play in a random order. This is also true of videos and photos - again how is SSDS better?
None of this requires me to have a 'family album text file' nonsense built and managed by me - it just works with the files on the file system all automatically, again how is SSDS better?
If I wanted to find a reference to a keyword or function in a pdf or in a source tree the above steps (bottom of start menu or open explorer at the top of the folder tree) will work without any manual index building on my part - how is SSDS better? When I am looking for a specific phrase or reference random is not useful, when I am wanting a slide show or music it might be - random however is not part of searching itself; it is rather something you do with the results of the search.
I honestly fail to see why you think this tool is so good when it forces me to do more work for less return and will not allow me to simply use simple things like files and folders as they are meant to be used. Give me one simple task that SSDS can perform that I could not also do quicker and easier with the appropriate built in windows feature (WMP, File system, Search etc) and I will be convinced. You have still never explained how to search for a file - every time you are asked this you either ignore the question or mutter something about noodly jam and fail to provide a simple step by step guide of how to use SSDS to perform a commonly requested usage scenario.
SSDS is better way better. It can play random segments of songs and video. Hit enter to play the full file
Kill SSDS at any time and the defaults remain. Then do a: start enter enter and you are back playing another random song in under 2 seconds.
SSDS can be set to run from a backup DVD playing the first few seconds of every song. What a great way to ensure the DVD burn was good.
With pics SSDS has the option to display the captions containing picture info: names, locations etc.
With SSDS pictures the shuffle speed can be set to near zero. See what your computer will do.With SSDS you can take your files with you on a USB drive. Show them off to your family, friends etc
Everything must be cataloged in one form or another. I bet 1/3 of your songs doesn't have any metadata. With SSDS the catalog function uses the metadata if there along with the file name and folder info.
Then go in and add to the information to improve the search catalog info.
And do it with notepad. Adding metadata to pictures songs and video isn't this easy.I can understand why some of you have trouble with the code. You have never seen a spaghetti artist before. I'll get around to doing a nice flowchart. That will make it easier for everybody. Even me.
Source tree? SSDS can do a directory of a drive to an output file called directory.txt Then search that for anything that has todays date using the "d" option as a search string. Fast easy.
Life without random would be prison. Computers without lots and lots of random would be the same.
Find a file. Either the (directory function) and search for the name. or the (merge function) and search the contents. The matches show the original file name displayed in the border.
I find that; other than for source code, file names don't mean that much. I just merge em and jam that.This group obviously knows far more about; what real desktop search should do, than any forum on the planet.
SSDS does the knowledge sharing bit and a lot lot more. Background jobs and video navigation.
That's why old spectate sits here and grows old waiting for any of the other Desktop search engines to take up the challenge. 3 or 4 Swampies and me could put on quite a show.
If there is something SSDS does that you don't like. Make the fix and pass it on to me. I'll jam it through VB5 and send the exe back to you.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS is better way better. It can play random segments of songs and video. Hit enter to play the full file
Why would anybody sane want to do that? Usually, when I listen to music or watch videos, I want to watch them completely, not to listen to segments.
@SpectateSwamp said:
With SSDS you can take your files with you on a USB drive. Show them off to your family, friends etc
Why can't I do that without SSDS? I have directories for a good reason.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Everything must be cataloged in one form or another. I bet 1/3 of your songs doesn't have any metadata. With SSDS the catalog function uses the metadata if there along with the file name and folder info.
All my songs are tagged. Thank you. And pretty much any audio player can search through metadata, so SSDS is not useful at all.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Life without random would be prison. Computers without lots and lots of random would be the same.
OK, let me apply random to your bank account. Did you enjoy it?
@SpectateSwamp said:
If there is something SSDS does that you don't like. Make the fix and pass it on to me. I'll jam it through VB5 and send the exe back to you.
I hate everything about SSDS. Get over it.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
That's why old spectate sits here and grows old waiting for any of the other Desktop search engines to take up the challenge.
In the last thread we proposed challenges, did real testing with real software, benchmarked and put up one scenario for SSDS to go through after the other. You either failed to stick to the rules, downright denied to take part in the challenge or just gave us some random bullshit (pun intended). So go play somewhere else.
-
Alien video shared 11Nov2009
30 second mpg video clip with shiny object at end shared.
http://www.archive.org/details/SpectateSwamp11Nov2009
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS is better way better. It can play random segments of songs and video. Hit enter to play the full file
I don't want to play random segments of videos and songs though - this is a pointless feature indeed. Playing videos or songs in a random order is a good thing but windows gives me tools that do this already - SSDS offers no benefit.@SpectateSwamp said:
Kill SSDS at any time and the defaults remain. Then do a: start enter enter and you are back playing another random song in under 2 seconds.
Why even bother running a tool that offers me no benefits though? Windows just works without needing defaults or enter, enter, ff, tt rubbish to be typed each time.@SpectateSwamp said:
With pics SSDS has the option to display the captions containing picture info: names, locations etc.
So can the built in tools.@SpectateSwamp said:
With SSDS pictures the shuffle speed can be set to near zero. See what your computer will do.
Pointless crap as a feature goes though - I have no desire to watch my pictures flicker past that fast.@SpectateSwamp said:
With SSDS you can take your files with you on a USB drive. Show them off to your family, friends etc
I can do that without SSDS as well though so this isn't a feature of SSDS in the slightest. Copy photos to a USB and plug it into another machine - windows will even offer to run them as a slideshow automatically.@SpectateSwamp said:
Everything must be cataloged in one form or another. I bet 1/3 of your songs doesn't have any metadata. With SSDS the catalog function uses the metadata if there along with the file name and folder info.
Nope - all my mp3s etc have full metadata and even if they didn't I could still search based on file name, why should I need to copy this metadata from the mp3 to a textfile via notepad myself. The fact the information must be catalogued is not the point - WDS does that part for me automatically, SSDS requires me to do it all by hand.
Then go in and add to the information to improve the search catalog info.
And do it with notepad. Adding metadata to pictures songs and video isn't this easy.@SpectateSwamp said:
I can understand why some of you have trouble with the code. You have never seen a spaghetti artist before. I'll get around to doing a nice flowchart. That will make it easier for everybody. Even me.
Just to clarify a point here - spaghetti code is a derogatory term and not a recognised coding style. There is no art involved, it simply means the code is a tangled mess of interconnected dependencies with no obvious structure or design. This is a very bad thing and not something to be proud of. The fact you have tried to make this seem a good thing shows you failure to grasp good coding practices.@SpectateSwamp said:
Source tree? SSDS can do a directory of a drive to an output file called directory.txt Then search that for anything that has todays date using the "d" option as a search string. Fast easy.
Why would I want to turn my source code into a single file just to search it? When I find a match it will be in this new merged file and not the original file I was actually wanting to find - you are completely missing the point of searching files here.@SpectateSwamp said:
Life without random would be prison. Computers without lots and lots of random would be the same.
Random is useful / entertaining in certain situations - random music playback for example; it is not how I want search results to work though - when I search I want consistency and not confusion.@SpectateSwamp said:
Find a file. Either the (directory function) and search for the name. or the (merge function) and search the contents. The matches show the original file name displayed in the border.
But why should I manually merge my files to search to then have to go locate the file by hand?With WDS I can just search and get results with no effort on my part. You really have no idea what searching for a file actually means do you? Please give me step by step instructions from a clean install of SSDS of what I would need to do to search my source code tree (d:\source) for all files that contain the word IDisposable and I will happily put this to the test and compare it to the built in tools. I will even video both attempts for you to save you the time and trouble.
I find that; other than for source code, file names don't mean that much. I just merge em and jam that.@SpectateSwamp said:
If there is something SSDS does that you don't like. Make the fix and pass it on to me. I'll jam it through VB5 and send the exe back to you.
Nobody can understand the source enough todo anything with it, you yourself have stopped maintaining it so why would anyone bother. There is nothing it does that anyone else is even remotely interested in nevermind passionate enough to care about fixing.@SpectateSwamp said:
That's why old spectate sits here and grows old waiting for any of the other Desktop search engines to take up the challenge. 3 or 4 Swampies and me could put on quite a show.
There is no challenge - every time anyone offers a valid challenge you ignore it and then claim superiority, SSDS is not a desktop search tool as it cannot search for files and that is the end of the argument. There are no swampies outside of your head and the show would be laughable at best.
-
@spenk said:
[bunched-up panties]
Are you being serious are just having fun with posting in an internet board?
-
@dhromed said:
@spenk said:
[bunched-up panties]
Are you being serious are just having fun with posting in an internet board?
I am doing this on work time, I get a sense of satisfaction from actually earning money while doing this.
-
I envy your happiness.
-
@dhromed said:
Although I would like to get a sane response from him just once, then I will be happy. A response without the words 'Jam', 'noodle' or 'make the changes yourself' would be a really good start IMHO.I envy your happiness.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Very very powerful this bad code.
I know for a fact that someone pumped the SSDS source through that printer that had its admin page open to the internet. Do you think your code is powerful enough to jam a printer?
-
@belgariontheking said:
You're damn right I did. Repeatedly.@SpectateSwamp said:
Very very powerful this bad code.
I know for a fact that someone pumped the SSDS source through that printer that had its admin page open to the internet.
-
@belgariontheking said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
Very very powerful this bad code.
I know for a fact that someone pumped the SSDS source through that printer that had its admin page open to the internet. Do you think your code is powerful enough to jam a printer?Sufficient noodles can jam anything. Ask Alan Cox about the power of noodle welding.
-
@bstorer said:
@belgariontheking said:
You're damn right I did. Repeatedly.@SpectateSwamp said:
Very very powerful this bad code.
I know for a fact that someone pumped the SSDS source through that printer that had its admin page open to the internet.
-
No No Spenk your wrong so wrong
(Spenk)
"I don't want to play random segments of videos and songs"In the big showdown we will focus on this capability. It will blow them away.
(Spenk)
"Why even bother running a tool that offers me no benefits though"I can be in and check the format I use to catalog this threads screen captures. Then catalog a
new one by typing a couple of lines into the text file and I'm done. Right on top of everything
everywhere and easy. Notes are even faster. The "e" option at prompt #2 and type away. It has
an optional date and time stamp. Those Screen captures will be around a lot longer than this forum.(we'll hilite all the benefits with SSDS)
(Spenk)
"so can the built in tools"Going head to head in display and caption features would be an easy whip for SSDS
(Spenk)
"Pointless crap as a feature goes though - I have no desire to watch my pictures flicker past that fast."If you want slow or go, SSDS can do both. This is not really a feature but the lack of a limitation on SSDS
(Spenk)
"I can do that without SSDS as well though so this isn't a feature of SSDS in the slightest. Copy photos to
a USB and plug it into another machine - windows will even offer to run them as a slideshow automatically."SSDS doen't need to index the files. Where windows does. We'll hilite the areas where windows is weak and
that is anywhere there is indexing.(Spenk)
"The fact the information must be catalogued is not the point - WDS does that part for me automatically,
SSDS requires me to do it all by hand."SSDS uses what available metadata there is. The catalog option "gf" allows for the appending of the file
path to the search string. Ie file name and metadata in the catalog string. It is far easier to use notepad
to add to this info than changing the metadata in jpg, mp3, mpg, wmv... We'll hilite the permanent catalog
capailites and how simple they are compared to knowing how to change metadata for these main file types.(Spenk)
"The fact you have tried to make this seem a good thing shows you failure to grasp good coding practices."Spaghetti code is still a valid coding standard. I'll make a point of showing off the source.txt If any techie
were able of recreating SSDS and all it's capabilities (Using proper coding practices). The source would
be nowhere as simple as this. I can stop/pause and restart SSDS quickly, all interrupts are trapped within 1
program. I can put SSDS code out there and the average person can have a look and understand what's going on.
Few of us here would have a clue when looking and the windows or google version.(Spenk)
"Why would I want to turn my source code into a single file just to search it? When I find a match it will be
in this new merged file and not the original file I was actually wanting to find - you are completely missing
the point of searching files here."The point of the initial search is to see where and how many references there is to a given element. 2 or 100
Once you have decided the best way to solve or do the change, then you become interested in the individual file.
If there are a number of file extensions that need to be (merged/appended) and in VB with .frm and .cls then
do them in 2 steps. using the append instead of new/overwrite. Check the source for "merge" I'd do this merge
to start and right before the changes were being made. Just to check the code hasn't changed. The display of
the initial search could be exported and printed using the "xxx" option at prompt #2. Use this hardcopy list
if there are lots of changes to be made.(Spenk)
"Random is useful / entertaining in certain situations - random music playback for example; it is not how I want
search results to work though - when I search I want consistency and not confusion."When running sequential. Match counts display. Total matches are important when looking at code changes.
we'll show off this feature and ask for a comparison from the other loosers.(Spenk)
"what I would need to do to search my source code tree (d:\source) for all files that contain the word IDisposable
and I will happily put this to the test and compare it to the built in tools. I will even video both attempts for
you to save you the time and trouble."That's very good of you Brave Brave Spenk
Just try starting the program and entering x (for exit) at every opportunity on initial startup.
Then on the second time everything should be ok.
At prompt #1 select one of the files listed or select 1 (this info is meaningless in a merge operation)
at prompt #2 enter "merge" then go thru the prompts to merge/append the various file types in a directory
and all sub-directories.
This all happens very fast. Text files arn't all that big. Even for massive system.(Spenk)
"There is nothing it does that anyone else is even remotely interested in nevermind passionate enough to care about fixing."That's why I keep looking for a showdown and taking on any post that talks about Desktop Search. When people
see their favs Google, Microsoft.. humiliated by SSDS. Then the Swampies will come out of the woodwork.Note. I have not tried this on Vista or Windows 7 Everything else upto XP
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
"I can do that without SSDS as well though so this isn't a feature of SSDS in the slightest. Copy photos to
a USB and plug it into another machine - windows will even offer to run them as a slideshow automatically."SSDS doen't need to index the files. Where windows does.
Windows does not. Copy files to USB stick, plug into other machine, launch preview. No indexing whatsoever. If you're talking about Windows features, you should be sure to know about them.
@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS uses what available metadata there is.
Liar. It uses the "metadata" that one needs to enter manually. As for my songs - my MP3s are automatically tagged correctly with ALL information without any keystroke on my side. I can geotag my photos by just pointing on a map at the location the foto was taken. Any capable foto viewer can then open a map and show me. How do you do that?
@SpectateSwamp said:
It is far easier to use notepad to add to this info than changing the metadata in jpg, mp3, mpg, wmv
No, it is not.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Spaghetti code is still a valid coding standard.
It has never been, is not and will never be a coding standard. Even in the VB5 days it was the worst you could do. Stop calling something a standard only because you're not capable of doing things the right way.
@SpectateSwamp said:
I can put SSDS code out there and the average person can have a look and understand what's going on.
I've been developing software for nearly 20 years now. I do not understand your source code. The average person does not know what's going on when you turn on the computer - how can you seriously expect anybody who has no clue of computers to understand any of your VB5 gibberish if even people with years and year of experience turn away from it in disgust?
@SpectateSwamp said:
The point of the initial search is to see where and how many references there is to a given element.
Wrong. The point of an initial search is to know where the references are. That means: in which files. SSDS can not do that.
@SpectateSwamp said:
If there are a number of file extensions that need to be (merged/appended) and in VB with .frm and .cls then
do them in 2 steps.WE. DO. NOT. WANT. TO. MERGE. FILES!
@SpectateSwamp said:
Just try starting the program and entering x (for exit) at every opportunity on initial startup.
Then on the second time everything should be ok.Oh great. I completely forgot that SSDS does not even start up properly.
@SpectateSwamp said:
At prompt #1 select one of the files listed or select 1 (this info is meaningless in a merge operation) at prompt #2 enter "merge" then go thru the prompts to merge/append the various file types in a directory and all sub-directories. This all happens very fast. Text files arn't all that big. Even for massive system.
Hm. I just open up a search box, select the folder to search, enter the search term and hit a button. As a result I get a list of all the files containing my search text. I can open each file individually - directly jumping to the match. This, again, is Notepad++. This takes me about 10 seconds. How long does it take SSDS to do the same?
@SpectateSwamp said:
When people see their favs Google, Microsoft.. humiliated is SSDS.
FTFY.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Then the Swampies will come out of the woodwork.
Now that we know where they live, I'd rather have that they stay where they are...
-
Re: No No Spectate you're wrong so wrong
@SpectateSwamp said:
So your proposed showdown will focus on features nobody wants! Great way to show off your skills.(Spenk)
"I don't want to play random segments of videos and songs"In the big showdown we will focus on this capability. It will blow them away.
@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS doen't need to index the files. Where windows does. We'll hilite the areas where windows is weak and
Neither does windows - I cancopy files to a USB stick and they will still be viewable and windows can still do a slideshow, SSDS would need it's control file (i.e. index) built for this to work however.
that is anywhere there is indexing.@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS uses what available metadata there is. The catalog option "gf" allows for the appending of the file
path to the search string. Ie file name and metadata in the catalog string. It is far easier to use notepad
to add to this info than changing the metadata in jpg, mp3, mpg, wmv... We'll hilite the permanent catalog
capailites and how simple they are compared to knowing how to change metadata for these main file types.Windows just uses the metadata as well though, however it just works in WDS and I don't need to type gf, tt or any other nonsense. WDS just works without any extra effort on my part. Windows itself will let me edit the metadata in place with no problems or effort either.
@SpectateSwamp said:
Spaghetti code is still a valid coding standard. I'll make a point of showing off the source.txt If any techie
It is not a standard it is an insult - the term means the code is unreadable / unmaintainable crap. We have all seen the source.txt and virtually nobody can figure out how any of it works or what any of the variable names mean. It is an awful, awful mess. An average person would have no chance in figuring it out as even experienced developers cannot follow the logic properly.
were able of recreating SSDS and all it's capabilities (Using proper coding practices). The source would
be nowhere as simple as this. I can stop/pause and restart SSDS quickly, all interrupts are trapped within 1
program. I can put SSDS code out there and the average person can have a look and understand what's going on.
Few of us here would have a clue when looking and the windows or google version.How quick you can start or stop an application is not a reflection of the quality of the code behind it though.
@SpectateSwamp said:
The point of the initial search is to see where and how many references there is to a given element. 2 or 100
My point is I can find the number of files etc using WDS without having to merge files or similar shit. With WDS I can just search the files as they are without manually creating indexes and attempting to keep them in sync. How can doing all this merging crap be easier than just typing the search terms?
Once you have decided the best way to solve or do the change, then you become interested in the individual file.
If there are a number of file extensions that need to be (merged/appended) and in VB with .frm and .cls then
do them in 2 steps. using the append instead of new/overwrite. Check the source for "merge" I'd do this merge
to start and right before the changes were being made. Just to check the code hasn't changed. The display of
the initial search could be exported and printed using the "xxx" option at prompt #2. Use this hardcopy list
if there are lots of changes to be made.@SpectateSwamp said:
When running sequential. Match counts display. Total matches are important when looking at code changes.
That makes no sense at all!
we'll show off this feature and ask for a comparison from the other loosers.@SpectateSwamp said:
That's very good of you Brave Brave Spenk
If you are willing then I will attempt this on my windows 7 install with a fairly large source tree, I will then do the same search with WDS and as part of the video I will include all steps required (unless you have any excuses I will use http://subversion.tigris.org/downloads/subversion-1.6.6.tar.bz2 as the source tree) - that ok by you? In the spirit of fairness I would be happy for you to perform the search using SSDS for a given term from those source files and I will duplicate the search on my own system.
Just try starting the program and entering x (for exit) at every opportunity on initial startup.
Then on the second time everything should be ok.
At prompt #1 select one of the files listed or select 1 (this info is meaningless in a merge operation)
at prompt #2 enter "merge" then go thru the prompts to merge/append the various file types in a directory
and all sub-directories.
This all happens very fast. Text files arn't all that big. Even for massive system.@SpectateSwamp said:
That's why I keep looking for a showdown and taking on any post that talks about Desktop Search. When people
Nobody wants the alleged features offered by SSDS, people want a desktop search to search for files and nothing much else.
see their favs Google, Microsoft.. humiliated by SSDS. Then the Swampies will come out of the woodwork.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
That's very good of you Brave Brave Spenk
How do I then search for a file! This just tells me how to merge all my files into one and then search this one big file, how do I then find the original file though? I asked for steps on how to search for a file and you have told me how to merge them together - can I use this to then locate the original file?
Just try starting the program and entering x (for exit) at every opportunity on initial startup.
Then on the second time everything should be ok.
At prompt #1 select one of the files listed or select 1 (this info is meaningless in a merge operation)
at prompt #2 enter "merge" then go thru the prompts to merge/append the various file types in a directory
and all sub-directories.
This all happens very fast. Text files arn't all that big. Even for massive system.
-
@spenk said:
How do I then search for a file! This just tells me how to merge all my files into one and then search this one big file, how do I then find the original file though?
Silly. You can always tell by context what file a particular selection is in. Just remember. Use your brain!
-
Code search knowledge shared
@spenk said:
How do I then search for a file! This just tells me how to merge all my files into one and then search this one big file, how do I then find the original file though? I asked for steps on how to search for a file and you have told me how to merge them together - can I use this to then locate the original file?
When a match is found; the stored file name from the last line that had "append start" in it contains the original file name, put there at merge time. The name is displayed in the form caption. Searching one huge file and not having the original file name when doing source code changes would be useless. Check out "show_files_yn" in source.txt to see some of the details.
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/stonedan/source.txt
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@spenk said:
How do I then search for a file! This just tells me how to merge all my files into one and then search this one big file, how do I then find the original file though? I asked for steps on how to search for a file and you have told me how to merge them together - can I use this to then locate the original file?
When a match is found; the stored file name from the last line that had "append start" in it contains the original file name, put there at merge time. The name is displayed in the form caption. Searching one huge file and not having the original file name when doing source code changes would be useless. Check out "show_files_yn" in source.txt to see some of the details.
So could you please give me a step by step series of instructions on how I would search a folder containing sub-folders, with files of different extensions for a term. I need to know exactly what to type in which dialog box. Ideally if you could try this on the link I gave previously and note down all the steps - then I can reproduce them here. Your previous instructions didn't make clear how to merge files when there are several different extensions in use (in fact I may not even know all the extensions in use without having to look myself).
I have looked at the lines containing show_files_yn and quite frankly they didn't help me to understand how to search for a file! Please give me the step by step instructions - assume I have no idea how SSDS works and need a complete step by step guide.
-
Merge faster than indexing - by a whole bunch
@spenk said:
I have looked at the lines containing show_files_yn and quite frankly they didn't help me to understand how to search for a file! Please give me the step by step instructions - assume I have no idea how SSDS works and need a complete step by step guide.
Check out control.txt at line 78. ie cmd(78) it has a list of the valid file extensions for merging. Add any new type of extension here. As an afterthought I probably could do without the check. Just let it crap out if a merge is tried on an invalid file type. Probably less confusing that way.
The merge command at prompt #2 then give it the directory ie "c:" then enter the "frm" or "cls" or "htm" etc and do an overwrite on the first pass. On the second pass enter "txt" or whatever else you want to put into the merge.txt file and use the "a" for append rather than overwrite. The merge happens fast. Much faster than indexing. The indexing is what pissed off most people with Vista.
I'm not all that sure that the merge will work for windows 7. I had to make a change to skip the "favorites" directory. Somehow its a little different.
Good going Spenk
-
No no tdittmar you're wrong so wrong
@tdittmar said:
Wrong. The point of an initial search is to know where the references are. That means: in which files. SSDS can not do that.
Most times code is searched to see what other elements are associated with an item. Anyone new to a system should use search to examine the code and become familiar with the logic.
Only 20 years. I've been coding for 40 years and seen a lots of code.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@spenk said:
I have looked at the lines containing show_files_yn and quite frankly they didn't help me to understand how to search for a file! Please give me the step by step instructions - assume I have no idea how SSDS works and need a complete step by step guide.
Check out control.txt at line 78. ie cmd(78) it has a list of the valid file extensions for merging. Add any new type of extension here. As an afterthought I probably could do without the check. Just let it crap out if a merge is tried on an invalid file type. Probably less confusing that way.
The merge command at prompt #2 then give it the directory ie "c:" then enter the "frm" or "cls" or "htm" etc and do an overwrite on the first pass. On the second pass enter "txt" or whatever else you want to put into the merge.txt file and use the "a" for append rather than overwrite. The merge happens fast. Much faster than indexing. The indexing is what pissed off most people with Vista.
I'm not all that sure that the merge will work for windows 7. I had to make a change to skip the "favorites" directory. Somehow its a little different.
Good going Spenk
Perhaps I am being thick but I have no fucking idea what is going on when I try to follow these instructions. On a first run I get a prompt that already has the file merge.txt entered - do I ignore this?
Going to prompt 2 merge isn't listed as an option but appears to work (go figure), I then enter the path and it prompts me for a file extension with 'TXT' being already entered, hitting enter then asks for a filename so I enter one and then at the next prompt I enter a and it then spends several seconds doing 'stuff' before bringing up another input box with a title that starts with ;session counts' - am I supposed to type something here or what? Regardless of hitting ok or cancel I go back to prompt 1 and notes.txt is already entered - do I ignore this again?
Going to prompt 2 and typing merge and then re-entering the folder path as it has reset to 'c:' asks me for a file extension again if I enter C it just resets itself to TXT and I seem to be stuck....
Trying your instructions above I open the control.txt and edit the line HTM, FRM, CLS, so it now reads HTM, FRM, CLS, C, and try to do the search again - it will not however let me use C as a file extension. This leaves me pretty much stuck with no way to actually even build the index in the first place.
Am I correct in assuming I would need to go through this merge process for every single file extension that is present in the folder tree? This is supposed to be user friendly, intuitive and obvious?
I then tried searching the results of merging the text files so in prompt 1 I enter the name of the merge file at prompt 2 I have no idea what any of the listed options mean so type help and after hitting the keyboard a few times it turns out 's' was the option despite it not being listed. I then enter a search term 'delete', I notice a couple of lines are 'too long' according to the status flashing in the title bar - what is too long for SSDS? When I get results I have no idea how to interpret them in the slightest so I have included a screen shot - could you please explain what the fuck is going on in it? How do I know which files contained the search term?
Being honest I had every intention of attempting this as a trial run before actually creating a video, however I have no idea how to get it to merge files with a .C extension so I cannot even start making the video. Please give me simple step by simple step instructions as I cannot make this do the most basic things. Could you do this on your pc and create a video just to show me what I would need to do to create a video myself as a valid comparison. I would love to actually show your SSDS performing badly against WDS however it isn't even working well enough for me to show it failing to perform a simple search.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Nope - searching is done to find things, end of story. If I wanted to find references etc. in source code then I would use the features of the IDE to navigate. All I want to do is know how to find a single fucking file from a folder structure based on the possible content.@tdittmar said:
Wrong. The point of an initial search is to know where the references are. That means: in which files. SSDS can not do that.
Most times code is searched to see what other elements are associated with an item. Anyone new to a system should use search to examine the code and become familiar with the logic.
Only 20 years. I've been coding for 40 years and seen a lots of code.
