|
What should I do about my Apple's rotten core?
(Actually not a pun only, my MacBook Pro is core-dumping all the time with "GpuPanic")
... such stuff as dreams are made on
|
|
|
|
|
Don't Panic!
(He said, in large, friendly letters)
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OT: I seem to remember something about Douglas Adams and Steven Fry having the first Apple II's in the UK...
|
|
|
|
|
To panic or not to panic
That is the question
Whether 'tis nobler at the screen to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous firmware troubles
Or to take arms against a sea of reconfigurations
... such stuff as dreams are made on
|
|
|
|
|
megaadam wrote: What should I do about my Apple's rotten core?
Replace it with Windows. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Throw it out the window 
|
|
|
|
|
The brute force approach always works, but it also consumes excessive resources...
... such stuff as dreams are made on
|
|
|
|
|
Dont worry - it is only the GPU. til you get CpuPanic everything isnt so bad 
PS: maybe the GPU chip has a defect?
Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, and that's an easy thing for a DIYer to repl... oh, wait.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
bite me !
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
I find it amazing that with building software that unlike building a house, you can start yo construct the 2nd, 3rd, N floor way before any foundations are put in (like security and database schemas).
but normal building requires, wait, oh
Modular building - Wikipedia[^]
 Well, before you can start to FULLY assemble a building, you need good solid foundations.
So maybe software programs should take a step back and get some solid foundations in place before allowing people into live.
|
|
|
|
|
maze3 wrote: So maybe software programs should take a step back and get some solid foundations in place before allowing people into live.
What do you think the Mickeysoft Foundation Classes are for?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
It's true, as far as it goes, but...
Good developers consider the foundations and get them right first, and install at least a temporary placeholder framework for the 1st floor before starting the 2nd - in the same way that a good builder looks at the foundations first and gets them right before he starts laying bricks.
But there are as many "bad developers" as there are "bad builders" who rush things, scrimp and save (money or time, they are frequently interchangeable).
If you've ever watched cheap builders work, you'll know that they do the minimum possible and bugger off never to be seen again when they have been paid. Huge numbers of developers are like that as well - go look at QA and you'll see what I mean...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I will have to use that in my next argument on why I start building the database before I build the application UI.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Well it's just the way you look at it right?
Some build top down, other bottum up, some even both directions!
I for my self get a solid base, but not finished, i only have the cornerstones in place so i can get a level higher.
This works basically until you reach toplevel, when toplevel is build you go downwards again but you should never need to move your keystones.
I tried all ways and i found that it makes sense to get a solid base but since you are not the only one deciding or being able to see the whole big big big picture you should also provide toplevels to show and talk about.
If you have a perfect base but it does not fit your toplevels you can start over again which is actually worse than putting in a new keystone on your base and enlarging it.
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
HobbyProggy wrote: you are not the only one deciding or being able to see the whole big big big picture you should also provide toplevels to show and talk about.
ah another analogy. I think they have architecture drawings (i'm not a builder, and am poor developer).
See before they start Building anything, a designer and architect get together to plan.
But in losts of software projects, developers are asked to go and in a day come back with some mocks or concepts. Then use that code to build production code frome. Because business thinks it is easy to put those security and databases code in later once they have agreed what the product looks like.
Make me a chair that looks like that.
Q: What type of material would you like?
A: I don't know. Make me something then i will decide.
2 days later you show them a chair made of plastic.
A: Oh no no, i dont want plastic.
Q: Im just showing you a concept until you are happy with the design.
A: well show me it in wood.
Q: So you good with the design?
A: I need to see it in wood!
Q: but before that, it is easier to do it in plastic because its quicker and we can get the design finalized.
A: Wood!
1 week later
Q: here its in wood.
A: Why it take you so long! you did it in 2 days before!
A: and i want it with 5 legs not 4.
A: And i want to see it in metal.
|
|
|
|
|
It's exactly like that most times 
That's why i went for the get some keystones done and then show them what they'll see later.
For sure you should have a big black box covering your whole building but, i think of a house again...
You are laying foundations, plan where they go what they look like. You put on cornerstones and fill the floors between every level. Finally, when there is no extension needed and you are at the point where things can be filled up you can wrap a wall around everything and put in walls between rooms. In the end you fill up the rooms and design intererior and their full functionality or purpose. Voilà.
Also, it's always good to have a Basic Framework for DB connections and security stuff already done and that is reusable.
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the thing is that when you build prefab houses, if the drawing isn't done in beforehand and all the measures are correct, the prefab parts won't fit and have to be thrown away and redone.
And that's the thing, if you don't have a properly planned architecture, the parts won't fit. And it won't matter how agile you are.
But if you build the house the old fashioned style from the bottom and up with less planning but still with proper craftsmen, it might not look like you envisioned it in the end, but it will still keep you warm and dry.
|
|
|
|
|
maze3 wrote: database schemas
That's really just an implementation detail.
The latest trend is even no database schema at all 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: The latest trend is even no database schema at all
Well, a mud hut with earth floor is at least fast to build.
|
|
|
|
|
It has pros and cons
At least it's not Oracle
|
|
|
|
|
branch topic:
Back in the 90's read a comment along the lines of "imagine if microsoft started building planes, how many would need to crash before an update came out?"
- now airplane safety matters for actual peoples lives then and now, but back then computers not so much
Today though, how much are lives being put at risk of automation, not so much say power grid/traffic light/banking glitches but was thinking about programming errors causing significant (instantaneous/mass) deaths equivalent or worse than a plane falling down (because it forgot how to fly?)
Win 10 supposedly more secure than , but let's all hope airlines still don't and never use windows in any significant flight control system.
Should we be more worried than 20/30 years ago.
Alternatively significant risk of deatch by hacking: for example the rush to IOT everything including the kitchen sink has led to it being as secure as a wet blanket in a tornado (no wonder ms likes it so much) - is there a risk of every smart toaster being programmed to halt and catch fire at 3AM?
Sin tack ear lol
Pressing the "Any" key may be continuate
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimately, when one is building software, it gets into the hands of the users.
At that point, your nothing but a slumlord.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't set one in a while so be kind  ( not part of the clue )
Allude to goal and hesitation will possibly help you decide on something (10)
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Just so you know we aren't ignoring you:
UNDERSCORE?
Allude to
goal and UND? No idea why
hesitation ER
will possibly help you decide on something SCORE
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
