Sure, their API's broken (or whatever you call such an HTTP-based protocol). But if the data can fit into the NVP format, why bother with XML? XML for the sake of XML is a management anti-pattern. I've come to expect development anti-patterns here, but I thought we were mostly solid on XML overkill and why it's a bad thing.
Similarly... their little PHP snippet is an irrelevant abomination. But the notion of putting that crap in a database instead seems like overkill. It sound like you're just hoping for your favorite technologies even if they're overkill. That's not necessarily a WTF, but I do sort of understand your payment processor's mentality.
Posts made by bridget99
-
RE: XML is too difficult
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@Rhywden said:
@bridget99 said:
@boomzilla said:
@CodeNinja said:
That's like saying someone reports you for texting while driving in a company vehicle (with no proof) and loose your job over it while having your face and name plastered all over the place for it, letting everyone in the world know you text and drive in a company vehicle and open them up to litigation, which also has the side effect of possibly making it hard to find another job in your chosen career that requires you to drive a company vehicle. But it's all OK somehow because we made an example of one person who was (allegedly) acting like an idiot at the wrong place and wrong time, right?
Actually, your example is much worse. Texting while driving is much more serious problem. After all, it's not the nature of the evidence that's important, but the seriousness of the charge. Just ask Richard Jewell.
I don't have a moral problem with anything "and driving" unless /until actual damage is done. It's really a subjective judgment call before that point is reached. Being a sexist neckbeard is far worse.
Moronic attitude. I myself have almost been run over three times by such morons. Your driver's livense is given to you on the assumption that you'll abide by the rules you were taught. If you can't abide by those rules, you have no place moving a weapon on public streets.
I don't care what you're doing to yourself, but as soon as you're putting other people in danger through negligence, that's where your freedom to act like a jerk ends.
It's impossible to survive without driving where I live. Arguments that portray driving as a privilege or rely on facts about the driver's license just ring hollow with me. Support public transit and I'll listen. Anything short of that is just oppression.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@_leonardo_ said:
@Ben L. said:
@ComputerForumUser said:
@bridget99 said:
Well, if you don't have a beard, being wrong just makes you wrong.
If you have a beard, do you need to be wrong to be wrong?
Remember, bridget advocates against the use of logic and reasoning. Any statement'struthfulnesstruthiness comes directly from bridget's spleen.She did not say that, she said: "I believe reason, and rational discourse, to be profoundly overrated in today's society."
I agree with that statement. As evidence: the society which tries to fix complex chronic diseases with a single "silver bullet" pill, or a meeting where things which cannot be expressed on a 'powerpoint' slide basically cannot be communicated.
Black and White, 1 and 0, these are concepts in our minds with no counterpart in reality. To create a computer program, you generally need to assume that 1 and 0 not only exist, but that they cover all possible outcomes.
That's pretty much it. An example: code reviews. Is my desire to use my interlocutor's skull as a bowling ball any less valid than his reason-based comments about my variable names? I don't think so. My "feelings" are irrational, but they're also right... about the fact that having a variable name review is a profound waste of time. An attempt at reasonable discussion only clouds matters. I already know the right answer.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@Ben L. said:
@bridget99 said:
words
Yes, you are a troll, but could you at least try to speak conversational English and not 13th century English? Nagesh makes more sense than that shit.Edit: wait, are you saying that using logic and reasoning makes people wrong? I suppose you don't like computers, then, since they operate on nothing but logic.
I'm saying that all sorts of necessary adjuncts to reason are ignored by the Western culture you all seem to hold dear. I've been a participant in enough rational discourse to know that this approach gets things wrong about as often as the old, purely superstition-based approach did.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@ComputerForumUser said:
@bridget99 said:
Well, if you don't have a beard, being wrong just makes you wrong.
If you have a beard, do you need to be wrong to be wrong?
Yes... but you have already got a 50% head start on being Velcro if you're bearded, and also, Arab men won't proposition you sexually. That could be good or bad.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@spamcourt said:
@bridget99 said:
reason-biased
I had never heard that term before, what does it mean?I used it to refer to the typical Occidental view that there are pat, scientific answers to all, or at least most, of life's questions. This is basically the foundation of modern Western culture. It's an outgrowth of the Renaissance... before that, people were content to believe that gnomes caused crop failures, that God hand-selected the King, and so on.
I believe reason, and rational discourse, to be profoundly overrated in today's society. Emotions matter. Intuition matters. Both of these statements are true regardless of reason. And reason can lead us astray. Feelings seldom do. "Trust your gut," as the saying goes. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@CodeNinja said:
@bridget99 said:
@CodeNinja said:
@bridget99 said:
As a couple of young, snide, suburban, affluent white males, they don't deserve that.
Oh, so you've met these guys, then?
So, you'd be OK with me posting pictures of my women coworkers who go around making snide remarks about Common Access Cards (CACs)?
Which raises the interesting question, if the person is female, can they be a neckbeard? Whats the female version of a neckbeard?I saw pictures and read their online ouvre. That is the basis of my statements.
The closest thing I can come up with to a female neckbeard is this woman I saw at a public golf course one time. She was aggressively flirting with the bar cart girls, loudly commenting on slow and/ or bad play, etc. She didn't have Asperger's syndrome, she had the opposite of that.
You sound judgmental and confrontational. Do I work with you?
@Lorne Kates said:@CodeNinja said:
Whats the female version of a neckbeard?
Why? Why must you tempt me so? You know this forum. You know what gets posted. And yet, such a line gets uttered from your fingers.
Because the responses would piss Bridget99 off, and be hilarious at the same time?
@Lorne Kates said:YOUR MOM!
That's the best you've got? Somehow I expected more... :)I doubt I work with you. I've got some experience with people who call themselves "code ninjas" and they're seldom willing to suffer my presence beyond the half-hour arranged by their HR department.
And look, man: you don't have to convince me or anyone else that I'm an asshole. Consider that point conceded. I would be the world champion of assholes, except that that would almost sound like me winning something. I will also propose a corollary to this conceded point about me being an asshole: buried in the shit I spew on this forum are some lessons about where Bridget99s come from, and how all you nice, decent people can avoid making more of us. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@boomzilla said:
@CodeNinja said:
That's like saying someone reports you for texting while driving in a company vehicle (with no proof) and loose your job over it while having your face and name plastered all over the place for it, letting everyone in the world know you text and drive in a company vehicle and open them up to litigation, which also has the side effect of possibly making it hard to find another job in your chosen career that requires you to drive a company vehicle. But it's all OK somehow because we made an example of one person who was (allegedly) acting like an idiot at the wrong place and wrong time, right?
Actually, your example is much worse. Texting while driving is much more serious problem. After all, it's not the nature of the evidence that's important, but the seriousness of the charge. Just ask Richard Jewell.
I don't have a moral problem with anything "and driving" unless /until actual damage is done. It's really a subjective judgment call before that point is reached. Being a sexist neckbeard is far worse.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@CodeNinja said:
@bridget99 said:
As a couple of young, snide, suburban, affluent white males, they don't deserve that.
Oh, so you've met these guys, then?
So, you'd be OK with me posting pictures of my women coworkers who go around making snide remarks about Common Access Cards (CACs)?
Which raises the interesting question, if the person is female, can they be a neckbeard? Whats the female version of a neckbeard?I saw pictures and read their online ouvre. That is the basis of my statements.
The closest thing I can come up with to a female neckbeard is this woman I saw at a public golf course one time. She was aggressively flirting with the bar cart girls, loudly commenting on slow and/ or bad play, etc. She didn't have Asperger's syndrome, she had the opposite of that. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@CodeNinja said:
@bridget99 said:
Yeah, Adria does seem to have skipped straight from private outrage to public forum in a couple of instances. Here's why I don't have a problem with that: had she corrected these guys, they would have been apologetic. Cooler heads would have prevailed on both sides. And the hundreds of thousands of other sexually aggressive IT types wouldn't get called out by proxy. Believe me, what Adria did will have an effect.
Once we agree that Adria had her reasons for going public, it's easy to agree on the rest. No sane person is going to disagree with her on the stupidity of Unix conference innuendo, nor will anyone deny the utter stupidity of having a conference session with "money shot" in its title.
Wait... I was going to stay out of this, but you're seriously saying that it's OK that she went public instead of acting like a reasonable adult and trying to resolve the issue privately, instead causing this guy to loose his job and possibly ruined his career because 'the good of the many' solely on the weight of her accusations?
Bullshit.
That's like saying someone reports you for texting while driving in a company vehicle (with no proof) and loose your job over it while having your face and name plastered all over the place for it, letting everyone in the world know you text and drive in a company vehicle and open them up to litigation, which also has the side effect of possibly making it hard to find another job in your chosen career that requires you to drive a company vehicle. But it's all OK somehow because we made an example of one person who was (allegedly) acting like an idiot at the wrong place and wrong time, right?I think it's good that she went public. As I said, had she corrected the neckbeards more discreetly, everyone would have made nice and we would be deprived of this object lesson in Neck-bro-sexism. She would have basically been doing them an undeserved favor. As a couple of young, snide, suburban, affluent white males, they don't deserve that.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
"Unix Conference Dignitaries." LOL. That's a pretty amusing description. I'm not sure if an unshaven 50-year-old man with obesity-induced lordosis and a book with a coelacanth on the cover really oozes "dignity." But I guess one has to call them something.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
Blakey, she seemed pretty clear about what she heard. I don't think the gray area you're trying to create ever existed.
You said this isn't how civilization works. I agree. This is not how our misogynistic, Eurocentric, reason-biased society has worked so far. We disagree on whether or not this is acceptable. I happen to think that the current system, with its quasi-polite, entrenched sexism, has yielded some pretty suboptimal results, like classless neckbeards getting paid big bucks to type into a scary-looking BASH window at sixty words per day. To stand up and call these people out on their crap is only good. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@blakeyrat said:
@bridget99 said:
Yeah, Adria does seem to have skipped straight from private outrage to public forum in a couple of instances. Here's why I don't have a problem with that: had she corrected these guys, they would have been apologetic. Cooler heads would have prevailed on both sides. And the hundreds of thousands of other sexually aggressive IT types wouldn't get called out by proxy. Believe me, what Adria did will have an effect.
Once we agree that Adria had her reasons for going public, it's easy to agree on the rest. No sane person is going to disagree with her on the stupidity of Unix conference innuendo, nor will anyone deny the utter stupidity of having a conference session with "money shot" in its title.She didn't even bother to confirm intent. She didn't talk to them at all.
I'm not sure what the intent could be that would make any difference. It is a bit unfair when people get turned into an example... but it's their own damned fault. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@CodeNinja said:
@Lorne Kates said:
Also, what's the deal with airline food?
It sucks, and I don't think it really classifies as 'food' except in the loosest terms.Don't order the low calorie meal on a return flight from England. It will almost certainly involve cucumbers.
-
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@PJH said:
@bridget99 said:
If you read the female victim
Bwahahahaha.
She's no victim. She's a professional offendee.
She did precipitate the whole incident because sheoverheardeavesdropped on a private conversation (albeit in a public place) during what shethoughtdecided to interpret as mild innuendo going on between two blokes that had nothing to do with her, then she went and published that photo on the internet claiming to be mortally offended without first doing any of
(1) asking them to STFU and pay attention to the conference
(2) going to the conference organisers and putting in a complaint.
She got everything she deserved for pretending to be a delicate little flower while in practise being, yet again, an overbearing, insufferable, shit-stirrer.
She has form in this department.
She's not adverse, of course, to making her own innuendo and other offensive remarks, in public, on twitter. That's allowed apparently.
This is a person whose job itiswas to encourage people to co-operate. The fact that she was engendering the exact opposite, (and publicly hurt her company in the ensuing publicity I suspect) is why she got sacked.
I think I know an honest, mature, female alternative who doesn't need a beard to show her wisdom.
Perhaps you should mention her then, because that certainly doesn't describe Adria Richards rôle in this incident.Yeah, Adria does seem to have skipped straight from private outrage to public forum in a couple of instances. Here's why I don't have a problem with that: had she corrected these guys, they would have been apologetic. Cooler heads would have prevailed on both sides. And the hundreds of thousands of other sexually aggressive IT types wouldn't get called out by proxy. Believe me, what Adria did will have an effect.
Once we agree that Adria had her reasons for going public, it's easy to agree on the rest. No sane person is going to disagree with her on the stupidity of Unix conference innuendo, nor will anyone deny the utter stupidity of having a conference session with "money shot" in its title. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@Algorythmics said:
@bridget99 said:
@Algorythmics said:
wow, you sure seem pretty angry about something! why don't you tell us all about it while being accusatory and aggressive!
Yeah, I'm angry at the fact that the nerds who couldn't get into the police academy apparently learned UNIX instead. My experience is that twenty-something neckbeards are just one small part of the computing field, but their obnoxious disposition drives away the good guys (/girls). Loudly calling these people out in their preferred forum (teh Internet) is something that the rest of us increasingly see as a sacred duty. Your hostility is no surprise... hell, the woman I posted about got fired, presumably by someone with attitudes similar to your own.
and obviously any dissenting opinion presented will only serve to confirm the presenter as a vile neckbeard
Well, if you don't have a beard, being wrong just makes you wrong.
I thought it was funny that the perps here both had scraggly Nixbeards. I guess big beer guts and ketchup-stained shirts would be over the top. Those guys look like they might actually have a shot with the opposite sex if they would 1) shave and 2) stop making sex jokes based on Unix. It's 2013 FFS... whatever comedy material was present in Unix has almost certainly been exhausted by now. -
RE: Neckbeards Exposed!
@Algorythmics said:
wow, you sure seem pretty angry about something! why don't you tell us all about it while being accusatory and aggressive!
Yeah, I'm angry at the fact that the nerds who couldn't get into the police academy apparently learned UNIX instead. My experience is that twenty-something neckbeards are just one small part of the computing field, but their obnoxious disposition drives away the good guys (/girls). Loudly calling these people out in their preferred forum (teh Internet) is something that the rest of us increasingly see as a sacred duty. Your hostility is no surprise... hell, the woman I posted about got fired, presumably by someone with attitudes similar to your own.
-
Neckbeards Exposed!
Don't worry... their necks are still well-covered.
LINK
I love the look on the younger one's face. Yeah, dude, I can totally tell you didn't do anything. You're just watching the conference. The beard implies wisdom... right? What does hugging your jacket imply? I guess you can't really run to your girlfriend (or, more likely, mom) with this particular problem. So it'll just have to be you and Mr. Jacket there!
If you read the female victim's comments, it seems like she actually precipitated the incident in question by making an unsolicited, friendly comment in passing to the neckbeards. "Oh boy! A girl said something to me! She must want me... let's woo her by making 'dongle' jokes. That should work!"
I bet Mike Judge never imagined Beavis and Butthead would move to Seattle and make $50 per hour administering UNIX. Oh, except that at least one of the NixBeards here was fired... Rain Man style attempts at nonchalance notwithstanding.
The lady who made this courageous stand has apparently been fired, too. We're not supposed to talk about the repressed nerd sexuality that permeates the tech conference cesspool.
Everyone here talks a big game... maybe one of you is located in the Granola Belt and needs UNIX help? Or were you just going to hire your 20-year-old Nintendo buddy? If you find that you can't quite rip him away from "Band of Brothers Team Auto Theft: Ignoring the Call of Duty," I think I know an honest, mature, female alternative who doesn't need a beard to show her wisdom. -
RE: "That limits functionality, doesn't it?"
It sounds like they didn't even want security, and the development team tried to force it on them. That's a WTF. Security is just one more feature... despite the fact that developers with a Barney Fife complex think it's cool.
-
RE: Usage of profanity in this forum.
(Even though I'm pretty sure Tai Shan is a troll, not a bot per se.
-
RE: Usage of profanity in this forum.
@Tae Wong said:
You’ve been removing the German resources in SC UniPad using an Turkish version of Windows XP as an virtual machine. Google Translate is multilingual also including Korean which is your mother tongue. In Polish (and other Eastern European languages like Slovenian, Czech, Croatian etc.) an visible space should be inserted at the start of an word, for example: “Calm down, I’ll cut you out of there. Is that a tissue laser?A plasma cutter?” is the incorrect. “Calm down, I’ll cut you out of there. Is that a tissue laser? A plasma cutter?” is the correct.
↑My bot... I think I'll keep her!
-
RE: Job Request -
At least they didn't use the words "samurai," "ninja," or "code monkey."
-
RE: Epic Interview Fail! Need career advice! Also: Whining!
I've been there, and I've got the CS degree (summa cum laude) and lots of experience. The interview process has basically driven me out of the software development field. I've got a pretty good developer job at present, but I've resolved to never, ever go thorough the horrible process of finding another one. As a result, I'm taking classes in another field in preparation for a career change... all because I can't (or won't) get a job I consider worthy of my abilities. So I guess my advice to the OP is "if you want to be a programmer, keep your present job."
All too often, the technical interview devolves into trying to figure out which data structure some stammering 24-year-old virgin thinks is cool on one particular day. I've had a couple like that, including one where I was able to articulate a very good solution that my interviewer obviously hadn't considered. Unfortunately, he didn't care to consider it, either, having just read about Reverse Red/Black Spanning Croatian D-Trees (or whatever). And, of course, it's not just one interview... it's two or more, plus an online or written test, plus dinner with the CIO, etcetera. And it's all about as laid back and collegial as a pelvic exam conducted by a prison doctor. I think all of this may be roundabout way of figuring out whether you've got a real life and/or a brain that does something other than memorize class names, both of which seem to be considered undesirable in this field.
Much of this is precipitated by the wannabes: the over-tatooed twenty-somethings living with mom and dad, who heard they could walk right into a $70,000-per-year desk job. Those people have to be weeded out. Unfortunately, the shotgun approach taken to this task culls some really good people from the herd as well.
Also, I think Blakeyrat was dead on with that comment about "curiosity." I don't have as much of it as the people who get the really good jobs, and I've reached the point where I can admit that to myself. If you don't have that annoying Big Bang Theory-level curiosity about technical trivialities, you may be a damned productive programmer (I am), but you're not likely to climb the totem pole in any meaningful way. -
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@Ben L. said:
@bridget99 said:
"Zapitalize" lookz to my eyez like it zhould rhyme with "nize."
Point taken, but you've got at least two zeds in there that aren't right, even under the most phonetic of spellings. ZH is the sound in "measure," for example... not the sound in "shut."
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@Cassidy said:
@Zecc said:
I attribute the widespread use of English to a) cinema; b) computers; c) the internet
Strangely I attribute widespread americanizm contaminants in the English language to those three.
We still use -ISM over here in the third-I-mean-new world. We just don't use -ISE, and I think that's good. "Z" is the vocalized version of "S." "Capitalise" looks to my eyes like it should rhyme with "nice."
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@blakeyrat said:
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
including that jacked up Spanish they speak in Brazil
Portuguese.Jesus Christ, do you people not know what "troll" means!
Yeah, I was trolling our large contingent of Brazilian posters. I'm still pissed off over the way their country dominated CART in the 1990s. Also, I'm jealous of their dancing ability and despise Carnival. Deep inside, I know that the Portuguese language has a rich philology and is not really just a messed up version of Spanish.
-
RE: Usage of profanity in this forum.
@emurphy said:
Real Nagesh or Fake Nagesh? (Fake Nagesh is legion, likely as not.)
I was not aware of that distinction.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
And Unicode...OMG what a cesspool.
Unicodeは、翻訳するのに便利です (Unicode is useful for translations).
(from Google Translate, so may be gramatically dubious)
I like how Japanese writing unabashedly synthesizes the Chinese written language, the Roman alphabet, and its own syllabary into a single system. We could learn something from that: you don't have to (or want to) localize everything. If you're building a hotel, "FIRE" and "EXIT" are good signage choices, even if you don't speak English or even like people to do.
Let me know how your crusade to Amercanise the world goes. Sorry, that should be Americanize.I attribute the use of English in many realms to the fact that the English people were good sailors and entrepreneurs. It actually predates the century or so of American warmongering that we've just endured. Really, if we wanted to Americanize the world, we'd be better advised to make everything in Spanish, or Navajo or something like that. Yeah, the most important country in America does basically use a form of Pidgin English for daily discourse... but Spanish is the language of America (including that jacked up Spanish they speak in Brazil).
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
And Unicode...OMG what a cesspool.
Unicodeは、翻訳するのに便利です (Unicode is useful for translations).
(from Google Translate, so may be gramatically dubious)
I like how Japanese writing unabashedly synthesizes the Chinese written language, the Roman alphabet, and its own syllabary into a single system. We could learn something from that: you don't have to (or want to) localize everything. If you're building a hotel, "FIRE" and "EXIT" are good signage choices, even if you don't speak English or even like people to do.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@alegr said:
@boomzilla said:
LOL. Underscores FTW. I hate trying to read camel case.
Sure, underscored names would make bridget99 happy. Wait...I like the way names look with underscores, but I object to using a Shift character so heavily. I really prefer using a dash, but mediocre languages don't allow it. So, what I actually do (and direct my employees to do, when I'm in a leadership role) is use lowercase identifiers with no separation or distinction between words.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
What do y'all think about String.Empty? It seems a little silly, in light of the fact that one can use "" to equal effect.
"" could contain a zero-width space, String.Empty is guaranteed not to.
However, you're guaranteed to drag this down just like last time, so let's just cut to the end with your second present:
This time I used a better image.
You'd have to wilfully insert that into your code to make "" break. Just typing "" still works. And Unicode...OMG what a cesspool.
-
RE: Usage of profanity in this forum.
@locallunatic said:
@dhromed said:
@bridget99 said:
The question "why?" promises to be a revealing one.
Not as much as the question "who"
We should set up a quick betting pool to see who bridget99 chooses as the 12 regulars (plus or minus one) and which out of those are the 3 of them (25%) trolly mctrollerson labels as "annoying bots, insane trolls, or some combination thereof".
I was thinking of myself, SpectateSwamp.vb, and this new Tae Wong thingy. We've had a couple other weird ones but I'm not sure if they're active. Certainly, you could put Nagesh in the list.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@configurator said:
@bridget99 said:
String.Empty?
I hate it. I think it's useless, and not as clear as""
.I'm glad somebody else sees this. Few things turn me off more than String.Empty... seeing it in code is often a harbinger of other really wrongheaded coding practices.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
I can admit that maybe I've been a tad too doctrinaire on this issue. I guess everyone has differently shaped fingers and different opinions on what looks ugly.
What do y'all think about String.Empty? It seems a little silly, in light of the fact that one can use "" to equal effect. -
RE: Usage of profanity in this forum.
This forum has maybe a dozen regulars, and at least 25% of them are either annoying bots, insane trolls, or some combination thereof. The question "why?" promises to be a revealing one.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@configurator said:
@bridget99 said:
It is a stupid, useless piece of cruft
Except it shortens code that is needed in a lot of places, and avoids programmers mistakes as well.@bridget99 said:
the infantile way in which it is named
Following the naming convention of the entire platform doesn't seem infantile to me.I think that the naming convention Microsoft uses / recommends for .NET is pretty infantile. That would actually be the central point of this part of the seminar... the "recurring theme," so to speak.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
And frankly, I think that all this focus on maintainability of .NET code is just a bit misplaced.
'Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand he's outta there!' I'm so so so glad I don't maintain any of your code, and I feel sorry for anyone who does. Also, I recommend a career change to politics, where I think you'll fit right in.My whole point was that nobody maintains most of this crap. If you find a really elite shop that's using .NET, their core assets are almost certainly in a non-managed language. The .NET is just scaffolding. It's not the actual bridge, dam, skyscraper, etc. If .NET is actually what you're delivering to your clients, you're not really working in an elite shop. You're a consultant or something like that. And either way, your code is probably going to get thrown away. At least if you get it out the door, somebody might use it.
You can post memes, and spout the conventional wisdom you got from someone else all you want, but I'm the one attempting to engage in a rational discussion here.
-
RE: New job, horrible system.
XSLT builds the user interface... that's horrible. WTF is COM there for? It's not like there's much risk of "DLL Hell" when you're writing all the DLLs. And I love the vbCrLfs in the Javascript. I'm pretty sure you could just delete most of those and the end result would be the same... anyone who's ever done "View Source" in IE should realize that.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
And frankly, I think that all this focus on maintainability of .NET code is just a bit misplaced.
'Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand he's outta there!' I'm so so so glad I don't maintain any of your code, and I feel sorry for anyone who does. Also, I recommend a career change to politics, where I think you'll fit right in.My whole point was that nobody maintains most of this crap. If you find a really elite shop that's using .NET, their core assets are almost certainly in a non-managed language. The .NET is just scaffolding. It's not the actual bridge, dam, skyscraper, etc. If .NET is actually what you're delivering to your clients, you're not really working in an elite shop. You're a consultant or something like that. And either way, your code is probably going to get thrown away. At least if you get it out the door, somebody might use it.
-
RE: Excel clears the undo stack?
@derula said:
@bridget99 said:
I was responding to a user who claimed the Slovenian shortcuts were different.
Nobody ever said that. They said the "letters" are different, which you misread as the letters for keyboard shortcut. They meant the letters on the toolbar icons.
Oh; thank you.
I don't think letters incorporated into icons should change based on my current language selection, or any other computerized notion of what language I might prefer. I'm really surprised that anyone would feel otherwise... it almost seems like a symptom of obsessive / compulsive disorder or something. It's probably also a recipe for confusion of the sort I posited in my previous post about keyboard shortcuts. For instance, here's a question for you: if the icon for "bold" changes to some Slovenian word's initial letter, shouldn't the keyboard shortcut do so as well? You're saying that such is not the case. How is the user supposed to know? Wouldn't just using English for a few things in life (or, just not un-doing English in a few select places) basically solve this issue in the simplest way possible? After all, that's how quite a few things work in actual non-Microsoft Windows practice. -
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
My goal for my .NET code is to get it up and running quickly, and to make it easy to understand.
Side-by-side:if (x == null || x.Length == 0)
if (String.IsNullOrEmpty())
That second one looks suspiciously like a valid English sentence...
Word of advice: if you're gonna troll, at least be consistent about it.
I said "up and running quickly" first. That's the goal that is ill-served by having to type finger-twisting crap like IsNullOrEmpty. And the fact that we have Intellisense, i.e. that there is an IDE available where an out-of thread actor will insert your code for you, does not really sway me here. That doesn't mean that we should countenance unreasonable naming standards. After all, we're all typing IsNullOrEmpty repeatedly in this thread. Wouldn't you rather not have the discussion at all (which would be facilitated by leaving out cruft), or, alternatively, wouldn't you rather have discussions about "is-null-or-empty" or even just "isnullorempty"? Both are much easier to type. (And I doubt you really thought I was subtracting "or" from "null" in the first suggestion, nor do I find the second suggestion inordinately hard to read.)
And frankly, I think that all this focus on maintainability of .NET code is just a bit misplaced. Getting stuff up-and-running quickly is the main appeal of .NET for me. It is good for prototyping, scripting, and wrapping DLLs written in C; but I'm not going to agonize over the elegant maintainability of my C# or VB.NET code. .NET code is really pretty transitory. It's not cross-platform; in fact, it's rendered obsolete (or at least deprecated) on its own platform with alarming rapidity. It's easy to reverse engineer; yeah, I could get some sort of obfuscator, or I could just write the good parts in C (which tends to be a good idea anyway). And .NET code is always susceptible to being replaced, precisely because it is easy to write. That .NET code you wrote that you thought would be around forever will not be around forever. And even if it does somehow manage to endure to the point where some hypothetical maintenance programmer might be confused by it, he's got a nuclear-strength debugger to help him figure everything out.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@configurator said:
Interesting that you could care about each and every function call so much that you'd want to avoid
String.IsNullOrEmpty
but you don't care aboutx == ""
which is significantly more work.Read my last post. I don't care at all about reducing function calls in .NET. If I need something to be fast, I write it in something that isn't .NET. My goal for my .NET code is to get it up and running quickly, and to make it easy to understand. When I said I didn't need to use a function, what I meant is that neither I nor anyone else needs for IsNullOrEmpty to exist at all. It is a stupid, useless piece of cruft, and the infantile way in which it is named is an additional source of consternation. People who use names like that are impotent fools who should be neutered like dogs.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
I would use == to compare the string to "".
Thus opening yourself to a world of pain.
== is overloaded for strings such that is does a test for equal data (not for pointer equality). Yeah, if you artificially force things to be instances of Object, you'll get a reference comparison and bad things will happen. That's more of a problem with using Object than a problem with using == in my estimation. And really, if you want to write ".Equals(String.Empty)" I'll still think you're an anal retentive fucktard, but much less of one than the guy who calls IsNullOrEmpty.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@Sir Twist said:
.Length is a property, using it as an rvalue calls the getter. That is a function call. Maybe it's not visible, but it's there.
Well, if you want to pick nits, they're all method calls, not function calls. But if I were really writing this, I would use == to compare the string to "". I'm sure that results in at least one method call beneath the surface... but that's not really what bothers me. I just think that having a static method of the string class called IsNullOrEmpty is stupid.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@Sir Twist said:
@bridget99 said:
My first issue with it is that it's trivial to construct a boolean expression that manages the same thing without a function call.
Bullshit.Really? I never use that method, but I'm frequently checking to see if strings are empty or null. Are you using VB.NET? If that's the problem, go read up on OrElse... or else.
-
RE: Interview question
@dhromed said:
I wish you'd start drinking again so your posts become funny.
I wish the women I deal with on a daily basis were more like Shania Twain and less like Roseanne Barr.
-
RE: Interview question
@dhromed said:
@savar said:
Unless you are working on something like a AAA game title, or embedded code that runs on a pacemaker, the greatest obstacle to the program's success is managing the growing complexity that comes with any moderate-to-large software project.
Why do you make an exception for two random things that are also programming?
Thank you! Few things annoy me more than the pervasive assumption that everyone's writing enterprise bloatware in Java or some imitation thereof... or even that the majority of people are. All of this auto-garbage-collected crap is really just one part of programming. It's not the good part, but apparently it's the loud, annoying part. I wish businesses would just go back to using typewriters and fax machines and shit, instead of trying to do everything using crapware.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
@The_Assimilator said:
ITT: people who still work in languages where avoiding "unnecessary" function calls is more desirable than writing readable code.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
The real WTF is String.IsNullOrEmpty(). My first issue with it is that it's trivial to construct a boolean expression that manages the same thing without a function call that the compiler <font size="7">can</font> optimise by inlining, thereby removing the function call overhead completely anyway.
FTFY
Hey, someone who actually understands that the guys who created .NET are much smarter than the majority of the programmers on the planet, and would've thought about things like this!
I was much more concerned about the simple difficulty of accurately typing IsNullOrEmpty() than about the "extra" function call. But I will tell you that relying upon a compiler to optimize things in a way that conforms to the developer's own imagination is a sign of amateurism, in my opinion. The thought process of such amateurs seems to be "gosh, those compiler-writing people are so smart, surely they're code will do such-and-such." Having actually written and maintained a few compilers, better developers understand that it's not necessarily so. All sorts of practical considerations come into play.
Thought I'd make that word a bit bigger, since you obviously missed it first time.
I don't know how to make super-huge letters like that... I just settle for having super-huge genitalia. BUT I think this is one of those cases where "may" fits the situation better than "can." And I stand by my general assertion that people who rely on compiler optimizations to explain why their code doesn't suck are unskilled hacks.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@joe.edwards said:
Could someone quantify the performance boost inlining a function really has? I couldn't see it making a measurable, real-world impact unless you're checking millions of strings.
99% of the time the overhead of a single function call (just the call, not what the function does) is something a programmer shouldn't have to think once about.
I work with a lot of devices that have a hardware stack for return addresses. Typically this holds from seven to twelve addresses. Some of the newer devices can be configured to trigger an interrupt service routine if the maximum call depth is exceeded... the older ones just fail silently. An "extra" function call can mean the difference between "wow, that's some really accurate positioning" and "gaaaaa my arm, pull the plug." So, function calls are not free... and you can discount this as a "special case," but there are literally millions (maybe billions) of the devices I'm referring to in production. They're not relevant to .NET, but they are a good counterpoint to a lot of the high-and-mighty, by-the-book OOP pronouncements that the regulars here like to issue.
-
RE: Finally on Try blocks? We've heard of that too.
@The_Assimilator said:
ITT: people who still work in languages where avoiding "unnecessary" function calls is more desirable than writing readable code.
@RaceProUK said:
@bridget99 said:
The real WTF is String.IsNullOrEmpty(). My first issue with it is that it's trivial to construct a boolean expression that manages the same thing without a function call that the compiler can optimise by inlining, thereby removing the function call overhead completely anyway.
FTFY
Hey, someone who actually understands that the guys who created .NET are much smarter than the majority of the programmers on the planet, and would've thought about things like this!
I was much more concerned about the simple difficulty of accurately typing IsNullOrEmpty() than about the "extra" function call. But I will tell you that relying upon a compiler to optimize things in a way that conforms to the developer's own imagination is a sign of amateurism, in my opinion. The thought process of such amateurs seems to be "gosh, those compiler-writing people are so smart, surely they're code will do such-and-such." Having actually written and maintained a few compilers, better developers understand that it's not necessarily so. All sorts of practical considerations come into play.