|
Cody227 wrote: I was alyways convinced that you need to know how a computer works at low-level to be able to write decent code...
Incorrect. Most developers write code for business applications. Most of the code they write is specific to solving business needs. So understanding the business and the application is how one writes "decent code".
It might however help to know some aspect of low level hardware but that is not only less likely that it was in the past and even less likely to be possible. At least depending on what "low level" really means. For example if you are running your newest server on a cloud server you certainly need to know what '16 gig of memory' means but it is absolutely useless to know the kind of memory. And if one ends up writing code for windows, Macintosh, iPhone, Android, Linux with even some old main frame adaptor code then attempting to learn everything is impossible.
Cody227 wrote: But then there are things that really annoy me about C like null-terminated strings. They are so damn slow!
Business application performance problems almost never resolve to low level language problems. They are almost always architecture and design problems. Even more so when in less structured team environments (which is the norm and not the exception.)
Cody227 wrote: And at the same time he asked how to send an array of pixels with WinSock because the appropriate delphi-function only accepts strings.
And are you are expert in every possible technological API that you might reasonable encounter in the modern world? How are your iPhone skills? Done much real time programming for embedded software on a raid driver card? What about interfacing to the cash drawer on a PC? Or really creating an XML/XSD that actually does support international data and not just claiming that it does? What about optimizing a Oracle database and a MS SQL Server database? And how does one set up a geographically redundant data center (and what are the trade offs with hosting yourself or the various cloud possibilities?)
The vast, vast array of technologies means it is impossible to be an expert in all but a few. And one is likely to do more damage to the career by even attempting to span several rather than sticking with a few (for example embedded real time drivers versus standard web business applications.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: And are you are expert in every possible technological API that you might reasonable encounter in the modern world?
I never claimed to be an expert or even intermediate. Besides, that was not a problem regarding the API, the problem here is that beginners who learn a very high-level language first do not know what data really is. (It wasn't even explained in various C/C++ books) In fact everything in memory is made of the same binary code and you can not tell what it is. It could be a picture, a string, a number or even executable code. The typechecking is only a way to help us remember what we want to do with this piece of memory. For an experienced coder like you that might be obvious, but for the beginner it's not. IMHO knowing that is very important no matter what language you choose (not HTML though xD) because it allows you to bypass typechecking if you need to. In my example you could use this knowledge to split the pixel-array into pieces and cast them to a pascal string so you can send them with WinSock and after receiving rejoin them together. Ofcourse you would also need to know that the first byte in a pascal-string determines it's length and that it wouldn't work with null-terminated strings. (which is kinda important too because many WinAPI functions use null terminated wchar strings). A basic knowledge about stack, heap, stackframes, pointers and things like that might be very useful as well (for example when recursive functions cause a SO or unsafe functions like gets() cause unexplainable behaviour). It also explains why you shouldn't put very big data on the stack and why you should call by reference when using functions which need that data.
|
|
|
|
|
Cody227 wrote: I never claimed to be an expert or even intermediate.
However the point is that your example is one single API. And there are a vast number of them. Even as a general concept it will still fail to help in a vast number of APIs/technologies.
Cody227 wrote: In fact everything in memory is made of the same binary code and you can not tell what it is. It could be a picture, a string, a number or even executable code....
"In fact" ...I have been coding for 40 years and started before Java/C# were even ideas and first encountered C++ before there was even the idea of a standard for it. And I have written assembly, created some drivers and written code that wrote/read directly to memory, disk drives and other hardware. I only work on server side applications and even now a great deal of my time is spent interacting with externals systems which have a very wide array APIs.
So I don't need a tutorial on what the problem is that you are discussing.
But perhaps because of the breadth of of my experience I understand how impossible it is to grasp every possible API variation. The vagaries of different types seldom matters. And keep in mind that my focus/expertise tends to require that I must use far more of these than the average developer.
To be fair what matters far more is that it is very likely that a single API/technology is very likely to be inadequately documented. And thus even if one has an idea of how a specific method of an API should be used doesn't guarantee success. Matter of fact is it possible that two methods within one API might differ internally on something that should be the same.
|
|
|
|
|
BASIC and assembly were the first languages I used to program, and I thoroughly enjoyed both (though they could be frustrating at times). I reminded myself recently about assembly and binary arithmetic and related topics, simply because I find them enjoyable. I then went on to use C++, then C# (non-Web based), then Java, PHP and JavaScript et al. I enjoyed C++, and still use it on occasion, and got annoyed when I was 'coerced' to switch to C#, but after a while I preferred C#, though I never ever really got into ASP.NET, I just don't like it. Then I preferred Java, as I could think more about the purpose of the code I was writing and less about syntax or what pointers were doing. Then I went back to playing with assembly, because I enjoy it. However, having done all that I still feel like a Noob, because I have very little commercial experience (not my aim to get much either). So my point is - knowing about binary arithmetic and registers etc. is fun, but it isn't that much use today, except perhaps for the odd creative use of binary operators. That said, a keen programmer will surely learn about these things eventually, just out of curiosity - surely?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Couldn't this be done in Excel?
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes Excel could do the same, but far less flexible. Here are a few key reasons why using any kind of spread-sheeting for this is worse:
- Reordering items requires the user to cut the row, insert a new row and finally paste the row back in. There is no decent way of quickly reordering an item.
- Non-native Windows interface. In my opinion a spreadsheet equivalent will never look as clean or friendly.
- Not user friendly, especially for those like my parents who would find Excel confusing and are only accustomed to browsing the internet.
- Requires expressions (somewhat like coding) to make a similar sheet in Excel.
- Upcoming features in Rolling Total disabling items (for temporarily removing them from being counted) is not possible in Excel.
- Not everyone can afford Excel, and Google Docs Spreadsheet has a good second or so delay between changes (initially what infuriated me enough to push me to create Rolling Total).
- Item Quantity (prefix of "2x" in the item name doubles to item total) not possible in Excel without some fairly complex expression.
- Inline Calculator (upcoming feature) also not possible in Excel.
modified 22-Dec-13 5:36am.
|
|
|
|
|
First post is boosting your software.
Equals spam, equals spammer.
You will note that the original message is already gone.
See how we feel about this?
|
|
|
|
|
What!? This is a bewilderingly opposite reaction I was expecting, I would even have preferred to have been completely ignored than this.
I was no boosting my software, I was simply asking for feedback to understand better what people think of it . Hence why I titled this "First Impressions For My Software".
I am gutted to see the original post deleted, as the moderators seem to have thought it was spam. I would expect people to see how for example I was asking for feedback, and to see how I personally replied to d@nish. A spammer would post with generally poor grammar, a vague message with a link and run.
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree it didn't look like spam, it did (to me, anyway) look like thinly-veiled advertisement.
That's the curse of a product that you ask money for. Any mention of it is interpreted as advertisement.
|
|
|
|
|
And when it's your first post as well... 
|
|
|
|
|
I usually am not active on forums very much. I didn't even think much of how this was my first post. I was going to greet everyone for the first time, but I couldn't think of a collective way to refer to all of the members, other than "Code Projecter's" (which I thought sounded off).
This has prompted me to think quite a bit. I need to be more cautious when talking about something of mine (especially with links) in the future on any forum.
I know this is all my doing. I seriously wish it started off better...
|
|
|
|
|
Don't sweat it. We all make mistakes - in a week, no one will remember anyway! 
|
|
|
|
|
CPians to how the users of CodeProject are often called.
|
|
|
|
|
Your first post leads to an advert.
Even if thinly disguised, it's still an ad.
You're lucky you still have an account!
AquaGeneral wrote: A spammer would post with generally poor grammar, a vague message with a link and run
Not all of them. We get a lot of spam, some of it is as you describe - particularly the live streaming rubbish - but not all of it is by a long shot. Some of it is educated, scholarly stuff which just happens to be for a paid product which looks like an adequate article. Some of it is site driver or "external link" count booster. We're all getting pretty good at spotting this kind of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
I apologize for my reaction earlier and I am coming to terms with how it my original post may have come off as spammy.
I did say "Hi All!" since I wasn't sure how to great the users of CodeProject in a snappy way. Saying "Hi Code Projecter's" seemed wrong.
I promise I had no intention of using my post to promote my software. I couldn't sidestep in showing my website and tour video, while at the same time looking for feedback.
It looks like the response is understandable considering the horrendous amount of spam there is all over the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
"Hi All!" is fine.
Personally, you can pretty much call me what you want to, as long as it isn't late for lunch...
Welcome aboard! The exits are located here, here and here, and the sick bags are in the pouch in the back of the PC in front of you. (You may need that if you ever get an MVP award...)
|
|
|
|
|
First off, your message comes across a bit 'spammy' so is unlikely to survive.
I had a quick look at your website and feel it is safe to say that you will never get a purchase.
For all it does, even in an app store, it wouldn't be valued at more than 50 cents. It doesn't do enough to justify a price, it is the sort of thing that is thrown together as a one off tool and given away.
Just take a look at my articles and the apps/tools I have written, and they are all given away.
Look at some of the other users of codeproject, e.g. dan.g Todo list, again free.
|
|
|
|
|
That is understandable. I made it with myself in mind, not at all as something I would expect plenty of people to use. I did overestimate how successful it might be, but I know there are going to be at least some people who will find it useful.
It is not just a simple tool, nor was it something thrown together. I use software just like that on a occasion, and I am grateful it exists and understand why it is free (with support for donations usually). I feel Rolling Total is definitely more complex than ToDo apps and other similar software.
I feel as though now Rolling Total's future may lead into becoming freeware by the response. Not that I feel as though it's not worth a cost (there is also a time-unlimited demo available with some restrictions such as no ability to save).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed it is, but to me there is something to be said about the complexity and the non-native Windows look of it.
I see what you mean though, it's fully featured (and more) yet open source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you better learn how to make links clickable. It is not as if there is a button for it in the message editor 
|
|
|
|
|
You are rigth. Ok here it is not realy important. But in q&a, how can I refer to an other answer and also to an other member?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is just as important here as anywhere else.
Veni, vidi, abiit domum
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
