@jetcitywoman said:
like a bad wife holding grudges and my system has to tell it "yes dear" just to shut it the hell up.
RL confirmation available.
@jetcitywoman said:
like a bad wife holding grudges and my system has to tell it "yes dear" just to shut it the hell up.
@morbiuswilters said:
What part of "lazily done" did you not understand?
Your point about larger numbers is pretty arbitrary as well, since this is PHP and it natively only handles signed 32-bit ints.
Oh, and it's great to be lectured on optimization by a guy who checks "isprime()" for every single number instead skipping all the even numbers.
Once you have a certain amount of experience, you probably will get offers from people you already know. Former coworkers, customers, etc. It will be much easier to talk to them than to strangers. Maybe you can mostly bypass the whole interview process at all.
@morbiuswilters said:
Are you fucking serious? The real issue is that the guy doesn't even understand basic math, let alone basic coding. Here's the right solution, lazily done:
For the generic case, it's still not optimal. Because finding the factors for all numbers 2..n is not necessary. And, with greater n, becomes expensive.
Pseudocode for a faster approach:
number smallestnumberexample(number n) {
number result = 1;
for (number i=2; i<=n; i++) {
if (isprime(i)) {
number f = trunc(log(i,n));
result *= exp(i, f);
}
}
}
where
isprime() is a prime test (for large numbers, prime testing is much faster than actually finding the prime factors)
trunc(x) finds the largest integer smaller than x
log(i,n) is the logarithm of n base ib
print 16*9*5*7*11*13*17*19
probably doesn't qualify, I guess? Because if you are using a loop for such a problem at all, it should be done properly.
Plz also send me teh codez.
Thread locked, before the pack gets you.
@Aaron said:
My "specific example" is your example - the region table. I can think of no conceivable scenario where it would be correct for the database to enforce uniqueness on a column, but not for the application itself to prevent the user from creating duplicate instances
Only the database can do that reliably. The application can try to prevent it, but race conditions can cause cases where the application fails to do so. So, if you build such logic into the application, you still have cases where the insert or update statement fails because of the unique constraint. Your application has to catch and handle that exception properly. This means: more complexity, probably an inconsistent user experience etc. In some cases it might be worth the price, but in general I would rather avoid that.
My kids (6+9yo) love them. Maybe it's just because they are so easy to put on and off, compared to real shoes.
In many countries, especially in Europe, the EULA cannot become effective if the buyer didn't agree to it before or while doing the actual act of buying the product. Even the "by clicking 'I accept' you agree to..." statements on the install screens have no legal relevance.
Because some of you have recently complained about over-moderation, I'll handle this thread through a completey democratic poll:
Should this thread be...
<font size="+3">[ ]</font> deleted
<font size="-2">[ ]</font> cleaned up (offensive posts removed)
<font size="-2">[ ]</font> locked
<font size="-2">[ ]</font> left unmoderated
A general thought: Some users, including me, will never ever use pirated software on their computers. Because no amount of McAfee, Symantec etc. "security software" can ever make sure that a pirated copy of a program does not contain malware features that makes it basically a trojan. I use my computer for important things too, so I don't want it infected.
For the same reason, I will never ever buy software that comes with rootkit-like DRM.
@Jeff S said:
What are people's opinions on what the software industry should do to curb pirating?
Fscking legitimate buyers is the wrong answer. When HL2 came out with all that steam problems, I didn't buy it. But I might have bought it in normal circumstance, since I own legitimate copies of HL1, Opposing Force, Blue Shift as well as Q3A, Q4, UT2K3, UT2K4, RTCW, NOLF, XIII, MaxPayne 2 etc. (I think you get the picture).
@bstorer said:
Most people aren't going to be inconvenienced by it. Who really gives a shit?
BTW, talking about nostalgia, does anybody know how to get System Shock 2 running on XP?
@DrJokepu said:
I guess the thread locking feature is somewhat buggy in CS.
Thread locking seems to work ok, but banning is definitely broken.
@chebrock said:
When was the last time you used something and said to yourself "this is a really well designed piece of software"?
The last software product that really impressed me was KDE2, back in 2000.
Currently I'm somewhat pleased by Google's Chrome browser.
@belgariontheking said:
@KTC said:
Maybe you should engage brain before opening mouth.Goddammit, joke much?
Don't think that your "I will never..." positions will hold forever.
10 years later, economy is bad, your wife has lost her job and there are three hungry kids at home. And then you regret that you have burned the bridges, since you don't care any more about how much of a jerk your boss is, as long as he pays you a decent salary.
Well, maybe the admin should ask the BSA, the RIAA and the MPAA about their opinion to this matter. Could turn out that the IT manager iis right and he isn't.
@tster said:
1. This WYSIWYG editor is totally fucked.
Anyway, I like Google Chrome. Nice screen layout, fast. The concept looks good to me.
@Brother Laz said:
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is how you advertise your online poker site on thedailywtf and improve your google rank.
I'm absolutely sure that PokerStars has absolutely no reason to refer to such tactics.
But, just for balance, here are some other sites that offer online poker:
Of course you should only play poker for money if you have too much of it.
I've found hints that <input type="int"> already exists, though firefox, opera and konqueror seem to ignore it...(IE not tested)
@tster said:
@ammoQ said:
At both my current and my previouse company we used self-made software for that kind of tasks.
So you're advocating reinventing wheels? I think they call that "not built here" syndrome.
I see your point, but on the other hand, since software like that is not too far from our other activities, you could also call it an "eat your own dogfood" approach.
@lpope187 said:
IMO, the browser is only half the battle. The web is sorely in need of a complete rethinking of the underlying technologies. HTML/JavaScript/CSS were not designed to deliver "rich" applications - it seems that building anything remotely complicated with them is an exercise of how many hacks can you come up with. If delivering full-featured applications via the web is what we want, we need to develop technologies designed to do so; not just mash crap together.
I think XForms is/was an attempt to build a new foundation for web applications, but as it seems, progress is incredibly slow, so I wonder if it will be fully supported by major browsers. Currently, I'd guess that AJAX frameworks have already delivered everything that XForms promises and a lot more.
Its pretty obvious where they are heading. They want the browser to be just as rock-stable and reliable as the operating system that runs it. Because as far as Google is concerned, the browser _is_ the operating system.
At both my current and my previouse company we used self-made software for that kind of tasks. It's not exactly rocket science to build such an application, and this way, the feature set is neither limited (anything goes if we _really_ need it) nor too complex to start with. Plus it is a nice "toy project" to develop/test new features of our frameworks. When the developers have to use those "toy projects" too, as they implicitely have with this application, they quickly find out what works well and what doesn't.
I can explain why I deleted the newbie "Could you explain programming please" ressurection post.
Three users independendly reported it as spam.
Spammers are always newbies, because they get banned quickly.
New honest users are obviously welcome, spammers are not.
@mjparme said:
Umm, no, not at all. Why would my methods end like that?
int myfunction() {
int r;
r = doSomething();
if (r==SUCCESS) {
r = doSomethingElse();
if (r!=ERROR) {
r =doYetAnotherThing();
if (r==SUCCESS_TOO) {
...
instead of
int myfunction() {
int r;
r = doSomething();
if (r!=SUCCESS) {
return r;
}
r = doSomethingElse();
if (r==ERROR) {
return r;
}
r =doYetAnotherThing();
if (r!=SUCCESS_TOO) {
return r;
}
...
Recruiters ususaly do not have the skills to check if you really have experience in C# or ADO.NET. So you should not expect questions like "what does method x in class y do?"
They ask those simple, generic questions and if you answer "5 years of C#, 4 years of ADO.NET" they will arrange an interview for a job that requires those skills. The nice people there will ask those more difficult questions. If you blow it (like: having no clue about C#), you won't get the job and the recruiter will be pissed off.
@vt_mruhlin said:
Also this http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4394002, but that's a longer story and not really in the same class as a bug.
This story doesn't sound very plausible to me.
@morbiuswilters said:
When it comes to politics, the other side is never ever ever right, no matter how much evidence, logic and reason they have on their side.
Incorrect. When the evidence becomes undeniable, "the other side just copied our ideas!".
@bstorer said:
@chebrock said:I do, but I feel revolted by it most of the time. Assuming we're talking about American politics, I find it unbearable what most americans respond to - Nationalistic drumbeating, over-simplified answers, macho chestbeating.This is not unique to American politics, just more visible.
Exactly. Here in Austria, an awful lot of the voters (up to 20-30%) can be baited with xenophobia, obviously unrealistic simple "solutions" to complex problems and envy.
@danixdefcon5 said:
Requiring us to do "rounded corners" back in 2004 was one of many WTFs we had: apparently some guy in Photoshop made the "design" with total disregard of HTML/CSS limitations. The result was a site made with ugly hacks into an existing CMS's templates, just to give them their stupid "rounded corners".
I had rounded corners (and drop shadows too) on my business-related website since the late 90s, works with anything from NS3/IE4. But exactly in 2004, I got rid of them, because ... I considered them overused. Ironically, my private website still uses rounded corners... the nice guy who made the design for me introced them last year.
@Lingerance said:
Isn't that like selling something you don't have?
It's rather a bet. In many cases, the customer doesn't really need the full coverage all the time, normal working hours is enough. Or the staff is obedient enough to just answer the calls on their mobile outside working hours, though there is no formal procedure to make sure that someone is available.
Maybe the boss just wanted to make sure that the OP was one of the type that can be called all day, all night. Obviously, calling/emailing him outside work times just to ask "how was your day" is pretty absurd, but once the developer get used to it, he'll be on hotline duty 24/7. It's not uncommon that (rather small) companies sell service agreements without having the necessary staff to cover the guaranteed service times.
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
And once again, ammoQ asked me to not go after various people who abuse the rules. Those rule include meta discussion and off topic discussion that derails threads. Others can (and have) backed me up on this, because they were told the same thing at the same time.
Indeed. Many of MPS's complaints are already taken care of by the time I read them (i.e. because I've seen the offending post and thought the same), in some cases I agree and moderate as requested and yet in other cases, I ignore the complaint.There is nothing wrong, as long as your own posts execeed the standard you expect from other people.
What you need is CompanyCreditManager5000+, the one and only program that lets you manage all the credits of you organisation. Low entry fees!
@ActionMan said:
Does anyone have a link to that TDWTF troll removing greasemonkey script?
http://userscripts.org/scripts/search?q=tdwtf
All the moderators have my full support. Just to make that clear. Have fun with each other while I'm on vacation.
@bstorer said:
Fine, how about Simula in 1967?
Hmm.. correct. The concepts are twice as old than what I said.
@brazzy said:
AFAIK the first version of Smalltalk came out in 1971, so it's more like 35 years.
According to wikipedia, the first publicy available version was Smalltalk-80.
@bjolling said:
Upgrading the program preserves all the business knowledge that has been built up in the past 10 years and is now stored within the application. A re-write is a huge risk.
True. But since the upgrading requires some work, there is still a risk that something is broken along the way. Keeping the old version alive is the most safe option.
@bstorer said:
@ammoQ said:I'm sure most of you also know that quite a lot of software is still written in Cobol, software that is in some cases older than most of us are.And the Y2K thing is an excellent example of how you always pay in the end. Think of all the money paid out to drag COBOL programmers out of retirement to bring those systems up-to-date. When your platform becomes obsolete, everything to do with it becomes rare, and subsequently more expensive.
At least in Europe, it's really hard to tell how expensive y2k really was. That's because in the same time as y2k, many local currencies were replaced by the €, so many programs dealing with money had to be adopted to support both currencies (old local currency and EUR) concurrently. Usualy, adopting software for y2k and eur was done in one project.
When your platform becomes obsolete, everything to do with it becomes rare, and subsequently more expensive.
In the long term, possibly yes. In the short term, your developers know VB6 better than VB.net, and retraining them takes time, money and at least for some time reduces productivity.
@bstorer said:
@ammoQ said:For a standard product that sells many times, you are right. But VB has often been used for custom software that is used by only one company. In such cases, porting to VB.net is something nobody wants to pay for.Eventually, you always pay. It is the goal of management to determine when it makes fiscal sense to pay. But just not upgrading is hardly a long-term solution.
In many cases, they will not bother with upgrading the program, but start a project to do a complete rewrite - to fix the design flaws, include new features, increase buzzword compliance etc. It's by far easier to sell when the output is not just a 1:1 copy of the well-working old program.
But I also know cases where old software (as in: written in Clipper Autumn'86) is still supported, running in vmware. I'm sure most of you also know that quite a lot of software is still written in Cobol, software that is in some cases older than most of us are.
@jetcitywoman said:
Microsoft guys rewrote some of the IBM'ers code, reducing it by 160%.
Impressive. Instead of 1000 lines, there were only -600 lines left. After IBM developers wrote another 600 lines, the file was empty again.
@bstorer said:
Are you calling Token Ring a WTF? Because Token Ring is freaking awesome? How many other networking protocols do you know based upon the idea of the talking stick?
Not at all (calling it a WTF) (sorry, I've edited my post several times...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Token_ring
IBM definitely had networking in the 80s.
@MasterPlanSoftware said:
@ammoQ said:
Assuming it takes more than a few hours, who will pay the bill?Your continued sales and existence?
For a standard product that sells many times, you are right. But VB has often been used for custom software that is used by only one company. In such cases, porting to VB.net is something nobody wants to pay for.