|
  Thanks!
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
The way an adage registers on its hearers will vary depending on context, where context includes body language ... movement of body and eyes, facial expression, etc. And, where context includes the entire interpersonal ambiance, the roles people are playing (gender, occupational), whether the interaction is one-on-one, in a group, etc. Not to mention ... tone and pitch of voice, and perceived status.
Then, you add all the rich possibilities of cultural and linguistic differences.
As you consider the infinity of factors coming to bear on the subjective reality of the most trivial human encounter, I am sure you will agree with me that understanding is virtually impossible, and, that analyses like these are superfluous.
But, please, don't imagine for a moment that if we agree with each other (on this) that we understand each other.
cheers, Bill
«While I complain of being able to see only a shadow of the past, I may be insensitive to reality as it is now, since I'm not at a stage of development where I'm capable of seeing it.» Claude Levi-Strauss (Tristes Tropiques, 1955)
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Then, you add all the rich possibilities of cultural and linguistic differences.
+ Sports! 
In Cricket, A "strike" means a good thing. I guess in Baseball it is not.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Vunic wrote: In Cricket, A "strike" means a good thing. I guess in Baseball it is not.
That depends on which side you are on.
This past year I noticed that there is more urging of fans to cheer when the home team's pitcher has two strikes on a batter.
|
|
|
|
|
right!
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
If you wish to avoid misundersting I would advice you to use "scores again" for positive meanings.
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
 I get it.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: The mate that mistook this , mentioned something with the "Baseball"
While the reference to a game of baseball is a negative, "strikes again" is used in the vernacular as a second victory.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never seen it in a positive context.
|
|
|
|
|
A friend of mine, who is absolutely clueless about computer, asked me "what is this multithreading error I was talking about, about?"
And I came up with this brilliant analogy, even if I do say so myself, to explain it: "it's like when you have 3 different managers all asking you to do different conflicting top priority things. in the end nothing much might happen!"
She got it right away! 
|
|
|
|
|
You should be a teacher.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yay! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
cute!
and close..
|
|
|
|
|
Multithreading? Drive to work every morning and you can learn all about it. Traffic lights show you everything about locks, deadlocks, race conditions and the strange phenomenon that some threads keep misunderstanding some part of green or red.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
|
|
|
|
|
On the one hand, you want to have your cake; on the other hand, you want to eat it too.
|
|
|
|
|
good one hey!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: even if I do say so myself, to explain it: "it's like when you have 3 different managers all asking you to do different conflicting top priority things. in the end nothing much might happen!"
Ahh...and then a deadlock would be....
When you just say f*ck it and leave work early for happy hour.
|
|
|
|
|
My mom is watching a TV show, and a woman on it was going on about a two page speech she had written about the pain and suffering she had gone through making Jell-O (Yes. Jell-O). Her husband (I think) then interrupted her and told her to stop being so Jell-O-dramatic.
I Laughed.
What corny jokes do you guys have?
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Man that joke was like paper.
Because it was tearable.
Pretty basic stuff from my end.
|
|
|
|
|
When this is what you get from sitcoms...it's time to turn off the TV.
What show was that?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. She hates it when I ask her what she is watching.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all. I'm kinda ranting with Microsoft and I wanted to ask CPian community about it, because I may be overreacting.
For a new project I'm using unit testing, with vanilla unit tests. Many of these tests include throwing exceptions, such as ArgumentNullException, etc. Then I use VS 2017 Live Coverage to track how many code blocks are being tested and how many remain untested. I think this is a really useful tool, but I'm having this issue: when you run a test method with ExpectedExceptionAttribute, the Live Coverage marks the closing brace as not covered. Weird. This adds a small percentage of non-covered code blocks. So, as the project grows in size, and so do the unit tests, the % of non-covered blocks increase. In my project, I get a 8% of non-covered blocks just because of this scenario!
I filed a bug report[^] with Microsoft, and they replied that this was by design and thus they won't fix it.
So, what do you think, am I overreacting? I don't see the usefulness of a test coverage tool that will nevr yield a 100% coverage score unless I stop throwing exceptions altogether. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
On my behalf of understanding i think you overreact and misunderstood the purpose of Expected exceptions!
Your Test is expecting that an exception is thrown at some place because (probably test data is, input parameters are forcing this).
So you can only test until the exception is thrown, which results in non full coverage of the method, but the test is correct!
If you want to do it completely right you might test a method way more than 10 times. Then you get 100% coverage on that method and yeah, obviously are running fully through it multiple times
SO microsoft is completly right on this behaviour because you broke your method somewhere (Exception).
I for my self write minimum 1 happy path, 1 total failure, and for each input param one test, plus if there is more than one input param several more where 1 param is good the other bad and vice versa.
I learned this thinking at DWX on a Software Testing session and this guy was totally right. 16 Tests for one method? Wow, overload, but no, you find the bugs, kill them and your method is 100% unbreakable
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
You're unlikely to get 100% coverage on all methods from a single unit test, you generally need a unit test per path through your code, and probably more on top. As well as the test that tests null arguments and exceptions you need tests that exercise the "happy path" and all other paths until you get 100% coverage. That's just what unit testing is.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
