|
Quote: extra punched cards
I've heard of those things. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Be glad you never had to use them! 
When your code needs wheels to move it around, I guess you get the idea behind "modular programming"... 
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: 3 hours later...
:assume North West UK accent:
3 hours? You were lucky!
My first ever experience of programming was in Fortran, written on coding sheets, submitted for compilation - results back as a compilation listing 1 week later (at best).
Re-submit - wait a week.
Once clean compiled, then submitted for running, results back in 2 weeks (needed to be manually checked to avoid any silly hacking attempts)
When I first got my hands on a stack of cards and my own Holorith(?) card punch, I was over the moon - got stuff back from compilation OVERNIGHT!
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
COBOL for me, and I did try the coding sheets / punch girls - but the results were so poor in terms of accuracy (even with slashed zeros, barred sevens, and so forth, which I still use to this day) that I joined the queue of a couple hundred students trying to use 6 unreliable card punches with one finger typing...and eventually moved to the hand card punch[^], because it worked out a lot quicker!
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
I did COBOL for my first professional dev work - the Fortran was at school!
I also hand-punched cards as teh (albeit lovely) girls in the punch room tended to cause more problems
Slashed zeros and sevens were essential, weren't they? Quite how anyone cold punch
TOO
rather than
700
was beyond me
That hand card punch was what I called a Holorith (which I find is spelled Hollerith[^])
It appears his company became IBM!
Ahhh Happy Days!
MVVM # - I did it My Way
___________________________________________
Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011
.\\axxx
(That's an 'M')
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Ridoy,
I agree ... if we're discussing primarily CP Q&A ... that many questions asked are apparently blatant requests for someone to do an OP's homework, or just "gimme" requests.
I don't see anything wrong with "how to" questions, per se.
However, a factor I believe "native speakers" of, or those who are fluent, and literate, in English, who are trying to help folks on Q&A or other forums, need to take into account is: the person asking the question may not have great facility in using English, and/or they may be real newcomers to the the area of technology they are asking about.
Also, and I think I've mentioned this before on a discussion of this topic, on the "CP Suggs and Buggs" forum: there are people here, helping with the questions, who seem to have an almost "psychic" ability to see, in what may appear quite confused language in the question asked, the "real" question, and "cut to the chase," with an answer that is "a dead-center bullseye."
I perceive OriginalGriff as one of the rare persons here with a gift for answering the "hidden question," and often suspect of using "white magic"
Let me ask you a few rhetorical questions: does CP have the right to demand some minimum action by the person who asks a question in Q&A in order to accept their question ? Should CP allow someone to post a question without first taking the trouble to even specify what language in .NET, or whatever, they are working in ?
I am truly surprised that anyone is allowed to post a question without filling out some form first, which is not accepted for submission until certain fields are filled out, or certain checkboxes in certain categories are checked, etc.
But, believing it is evil to play-around on CP and post bogus messages, I have not written a Q&A question with the title, "why?", and the content: "why ? without one ounce of effort on my part, and not even one tag, am I allowed to post a question ?"
So: do I have an alternative in mind ... to adding more options to the "Report" facility ... ?
Well, I do (and it's something I've expressed before on the Suggs/Buggs CP forum), greeted with profound silence
My prescription is that:
1. after a Q&A question is asked:
2. and after someone has responded, by comment, to the question, with a serious, detailed, request for clarification of what the question is about, requested to know whether or not the question is asking about language being used (C#, WPF, ASP.NET, etc.), and so forth:
3. and the OP has not responded within 24 hours:
4. people at a certain level of reputation on CP in the "Authority" category should be allowed to:
5. "freeze" the question, so no solutions can be submitted until:
6. the OP has responded to the question(s) asked asking them to clarify, explain, their original question in more detail.
Oh yes, this type of mechanism would lead to a whole set of other problems than what we see now, no doubt.
But, a side-effect of this type of change in regulation of Q&A might be: a reduction in the vast number of "trivial" solutions now being gobsmacked onto questions in Q&A, by people who evidently believe that posting one or two links to MSDN constitute a solution (note: in some cases a link to an MSDN resource might be exactly what the OP needs).
It might also have a side-effect on certain people (with astronomical "Authority" reps) who now appear, to me, to be literally obsessive in responding to almost every question asked, often with a long-winded, over-intellctualized, response that has nothing to do with the question asked, and which includes citations of their own work on CP (again, unrelated to the question asked), and "virtual esoteric sermons" on how this, or that, is absolutely wrong, etc.
I call those folks "Rep-Machine Automatons," and I feel CP's inability to regulate such behavior is something which devalues the whole meaning of "reputation."
I've also floated the idea, on Suggs/Buggs, that allowing people with certain rep levles to transfer questions from what are supposed be general discussion forums (like the C# language forum) to Q&A would be one way to keep the integrity of those forums solid. That's gone over like a "lead balloon"
But, whatever is done, or not done, there will still be screaming, and gnashing of teeth, that's for sure. For every increase in regulation, there will be howls of "infringement of my rights;" for every decrease in regulation, there will be yelps of "chaos." As Mr. Natural said: " 'Twas ever Thus."
To reframe all this in the most positive way I can think of: whatever the structure of CP Q&A is: how can it promote education and real learning for the people who ask questions, and how can it stimulate, reinforce, and motivate, volunteer helpers to post responses that are relevant to the question asked, and have real technical depth, that are, perhaps, a contribution to the bigger-picture technical quality of CP, as a "whole" ?
I may not need to add: in my mind "education and real learning" involve more than just answering a question, they involve assisting the person helped to move forward to learn the skills to solve the problem at hand, and, hopefully, in the future, to apply those same increased skills to solve other problems. That to me, usually involves a kind of dialogue, which, in western culture's pedagogy, is called "Socratic."
You may be thinking right now: "oh what an idealist;" and that's fine: I can only reply to that with John Lennon's words in "Imagine:"
"You, you may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you will join us
And the world will be as one"
bill
Google CEO, Erich Schmidt: "I keep asking for a product called Serendipity. This product would have access to everything ever written or recorded, know everything the user ever worked on and saved to his or her personal hard drive, and know a whole lot about the user's tastes, friends and predilections." 2004, USA Today interview
|
|
|
|
|
Yes,your ideas were very good and could change the Q&A section's efficiency(i think so),especially i like the freezing question idea.I also proposed a related term in suggestions and bugs to filter a question before answering it.Probably, CP will admit these things one day,
Shuvro
|
|
|
|
|
Couldn't find the Office/Excel page in CP, so I'm posting my question here.
I seem to recall a way to eavluate equations in Excel. I'm currently using Excel 2010, and I can't seem to figure out how to evaluate strings of equations in one cell into another cell.
Example:
A1 = "2+3" (string)
B1 = "=EVALUATE(A1)" (which evaluates to 5)
There used to be an Evaulate function, but it seems to be missing. INDIRECT and VALUE don't seem to work for some reason.
Anyone knows how to do this in Excel 2010?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I did Google it and I did try that. It refuses to do just that in (my version of) Excel 2010. Excel won't even see the macro even though I enabled all macros and disabled all security. I was curious if maybe it was taken out finally.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you put it on a macro page? Or a spreadsheet page?
Not a wise crack... I've made that mistake before.
|
|
|
|
|
Impossible to put in a worksheet page. It would not allow me. Problem solved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't find a page in future, post it in QA : http://www.codeproject.com/Questions/ask.aspx[^]
That way you don't post programming questions in a forum which clears says "don't post programming questions here"...
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
In all fairness, it wasn't a programming question. Turns out it had a programming answer though.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Anything which starts "Couldn't find the Office/Excel page in CP, so I'm posting my question here." is a question in my book!
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not every question is a programming question though. Every answer could be a programming answer if you tell them to write a program to get the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
I seems that it does not pay to be successful!
See here[^]
I like the quote:
To determine the fair value of a startup company, multiply the number of engineers by $250,000, add $250,000 for each engineer from IIT, and then subtract $500,000 for each MBA
|
|
|
|
|
On a coffee break so I haven't had time to read it properly, but saw one quote that made me shake my head "think outside the box", the box is there for a very good reason, what's in the box tends to work/cost less money. You only venture out of the box when whats in the box doesn't work!  in my view anyway!
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree completely.
Companies that innovate get ahead.
Companies that keep doing the same thing stagnate.
I have worked for a number of companies that have been at the top of their field. Because they are at the top there is nothing to challenge what they are doing so they keep doing what they are doing.
Meanwhile competitors change what they are doing and catch up or overtake.
As soon as you limit your thinking you are limiting what you can achieve.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
Well good point, in hardware design you tend to get the "clever" people who just change things for the sake and two years down the line when you get handed the smoking remains of the project, you look through it and go why on earth didn't they use a standard SPI bus but no, they "thought outside the box" and came up with a method that was so special.... bitter no! 
|
|
|
|
|
The thinking is always good, the doing not necessarily.
Recognising when it is best to stop after the thinking is the hard part.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
For every person innovating, there are a dozen people supporting them in a box. Having a box does not mean the end of innovation for the company. It just allows companies to track things better. The companies who refuse to redefine the box are the ones that have a hard time catching up, but everyone is in a box more or less. Some are just spacier than others.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
