|
The box on a stick by the road is also used in Canada. But in both places, this is for rural areas, or areas that used to be rural and still have long driveways. The mail is delivered by a vehicle with a "wrong side" drive so the mailman can just lean out and stuff the mail into the box. It's efficient for countries that aren't the size of a postage stamp.
In large part, Canada doesn't even have urban mail delivery anymore. For over 20 years, new urban developments have "group mailbox" installations located in outdoor shelters. Ours is a 5-minute walk away and contains over 100 mailboxes. Even though we have a separate mailing address, we still have to regularly clean out all the junk that accumulates in it.
|
|
|
|
|
It's odd that so many Americans "love the way we Brits talk", but never do anything about it - i.e. learning to speak English properly..
|
|
|
|
|
I speak quite a bit of the queen's english because I keep odd hours so I wind up talking to a lot of you folks in the wee hours. You're almost intelligible.
I don't flaunt it though.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, I must be seeing something different as it looks quite acceptable to me.
OriginalGriff wrote: find out what Avery labels I need Ha, ha, you have a treat coming. The 'labels' are full size and designed only for parcels. I created a couple for our overseas cards and had to mess about reducing them to fit on a reasonable size envelope.
|
|
|
|
|
In Edge, it works ... in Chrome, for me it definitely doesn't.
Mind you in Edge, it's still useless, just you can see it ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Have you got some weird setting for Chrome as for me, both look exactly the same and are both very easy to read!
Obviously, that doesn't mean it actually works but after all, this is a large UK company formerly publicly owned, so we shouldn't expect too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Not as far as I know, it's pretty much standard with a couple of extensions.
I added a screenshot to the original post.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's a monitor thing as the screenshot looks fine to me with the Royal Mail logo the only slightly difficult bit to read.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to get your eyes tested!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@code-witch
Congratulations on your "Article of the month" win for last month! Well deserved!
Keep 'em coming.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks!
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Congrats, you legend! Which one was it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
JSON "object" fields can be in any order. They are not guaranteed to be in "schema order" or alphabetical/asciibetical order.
This makes it very difficult to query a JSON object without loading it into memory first.
Consider the following JSON:
{
"air_date": "2011-04-17",
"episode_number": 1,
"id": 224659,
"name": "The Fall of Sam Axe",
"overview": "The Fall of Sam Axe is a 2011 American television film based on the USA Network television series Burn Notice...",
"production_code": null,
"season_number": 0,
"show_id": 2919
}
Say I wanted to format a string like "S00E01 The Fall of Sam Axe"
Easy, right?
printf("S%02dE%02d %s\r\n",season_number,episode_number,name);
Where the three format vars come from the JSON fields of the same name.
The trouble is this: I don't know which order the fields come in. I can see they're alphabetical now, but the spec says I can't count on that.
So if I'm using a streaming pull parser over a forward only cursor I've got a bit of a problem.
One solution is to have the parser be able to skip to a field with a set of possible field names.
const char* fields[] = {"season_number","episode_number","name"};
while(jsonReader.skipToFields(fields,3,JsonReader::Siblings)) {
...
}
The trouble is implementing skipToFields() is extremely difficult because of the varying starting points. What happens in that while loop dictates where your cursor ends up, and finding the next fields from that is no joke. I don't keep a depth because certain operations like using the "All" axis cut right through the hierarchy and those searching/skipping functions only do partial parsing.
JSON is deceptively complicated.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Please use QA to ask specific technical questions.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
That would be great, if I was asking a question. I'll look for the question mark in my post which I clearly put in there by mistake.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say that JSON is suitable in environments where reading the structure into memory is The Thing To Do.
If you cannot read the whole thing into memory, maybe JSON isn't for you
This, of course, assumes that JSON is suitable at all.
But for a general comment: The very idea of a tagged record structure is to be independent of ordering. If the ordering where fixed according to some schema, an array would probably be a better choice. Then you could omit the tags altogether, saving both space and processing.
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: If you cannot read the whole thing into memory, maybe JSON isn't for you
The entire world of IoT would scarcely exist online if that were the case.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
...and that might not be such a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be out of work.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Somehow I imagine you could easily find something else!
|
|
|
|
|
But something I enjoy this much?
My core nature is not "software developer"
It's "builder"
I like to make things. The reason I got into software is when I was very young I was building simple digital circuits but i didn't have money to buy the neverending list of equipment and supplies to keep up the hobby, so I got into software, which required nothing upfront (at the time) but effort. I fell in love with it and just never stopped.
But ultimately I like to build. Under slightly different circumstances I could have been a metal fabricator and/or engineer.
The IoT stuff incorporates some of that physicality that I like.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|