cheers for that, its enabled for me as well now. To bad you don't really know about it till it bites you (or someone else you know) in the ass though.
SandGroper
@SandGroper
Best posts made by SandGroper
Latest posts made by SandGroper
-
RE: Mac is for usability
-
Mac is for usability
I always thought that macs got where they are by putting usability and design first. Having just moved to a full mac shop, I now need to use one all the time.
I use two keyboard layouts frequently though out the day. I have just a 'feature' of Lion. Should you log out, the last language you were using is the one that you log in with. Better yet there is no indication of what laguage is currently set. And also, no way to change it.
Thank god my 'language' is just a remapping of the characters so I could get in without jumping through to many hoops, unlike this guy
-
RE: It works, it's not hard to figure out, but, but, but......
@KattMan said:
@Sutherlands said:
And that the function is camelCase.
Please I really don't care about how you case things, as long as it is consistant throughout the code.
Oh you were just showing your dickweedery.. never mind, carry on.
I have yet to come accross a .NET libary that doesn't use UpperCamelCase for method names (atleast the public ones). One needs to maintain consistancy with ones ecosystem aswell.
-
Webserver fail
I present you this awesome code. For those not familiar with ASP.NET, these are pretty much the first/last things that happen when serving a web request.
(Formating is preserved from original source)
protected virtual void Application_BeginRequest (Object sender, EventArgs e) { // One Request in time int i = 0; while (request) { Thread.Sleep(100); i++;
if (i > 10) break; } request = true; } protected virtual void Application_EndRequest (Object sender, EventArgs e) { request = false; }
Im still not sure why was there, maybe a version of the speed up loop?
-
Testing creates problems later
Recently we have been going though a bit of a management change and I have been slightly involved in discussing our new development procedures. By involved I mean I raise questions / give suggestions which are then ignored. One of these suggestions was that unit testing be 'mandatory', I.E. some form of metric for what constitutes as code has enough tests TBD.
The reply I got back from another member of the team (loved by management because he delivers flashy UI things):
"<MyName>, under the unit tests I understand testing of each class or even procedure in the code individually. Do not know if we understand in the same way unit tests that you want to do. I do not recommend this type of testing. It takes too much time and creates all kinds of problems with reworking the code later. After each change of code, you have to change the unit test."
As a result I was told that I should restrict myself to " 'smoke' tests as well as simplified unit testing" WTFTM. Mind you that does leave the definition of simplified up to me I guess.
-
Don't poll ....
On any given day I have to suppress urges to post here after I pull changes from a particular colleague (I actually think I could have a chance at out doing snoofle). This WTF along with about 5 others (in 2 days) have finally got me. I recently asked this guy to stop polling the server for updates because the API exposes events if something changes.
This is how he did that.
while (true)
{
Connect();
try
{
if (IsConnected)
{
// the same polling stuff from before
// Added registration to events}
}
catch
{
IsConnected = false;
}
while (IsConnected) // These two lines are new
Thread.Sleep(1000);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
} -
RE: Double-checking a deterministic process
@AndyCanfield said:
in case at least two of the first three failed
How do you know that two have failed? Wouldn't that just look like the single one thats correct is borked? Or even that the thing doing the compairing is doing it right.
I guess if they fall over one at a time you would be ok, apart from the fact systems are failing of course.