|
I've just tried a project that targets 4.0, and one that targets 4.6; the XAML designer works fine in both VS2015 and VS2017.
Is your project targeting .NET 3.5?
Kevin Marois wrote: At this point I'm dead in the water
Presumably the raw XAML view still works?
Or, if you really need the designer, Blend for VS2015?
Or VS2017?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed. The men in military, police or civilian services train hard for all kinds of emergencies and then spend days and nights standing by and waiting for something to happen. An emergency may be nothing to be happy about, but for those men it's an honor and a privilege when they can do something that makes a difference.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Not long after I joined the Rural Fire Service, I was advised that our unofficial motto is "Hurry Up and Wait". Over the years I have come to appreciate the thought.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Good if you can see it that way. Waiting and standing by day and night can lead to serious problems. Some people completely lost their normal sleep rythm and had trouble sleeping when they were off duty. Depressions were not uncommon, others turned to alcohol and drank themselves to sleep. I still wonder what exactly helped me to avoid those traps.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
That is basically a standard command in the US Army.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent.
I live in Chennai, India. A hospital near my home does heart transplants when a donor heart is available for patients.
Someone died in a road accident and the heart was flown to Chennai. Alerted ahead of time, the police created a corridor through the city for the heart to reach the hospital. If you have seen the major arterial roads leading to the hospital -- 2 lanes each way, but jammed with 3 lanes of 4-wheeled vehicles such as cars and buses and innumerable motorcycles and scooters -- you will appreciate how the police got the heart to the hospital in 18 minutes. This despite the notoriously discourteous drivers who refuse to give way even to emergency vehicles. I think the police essentially had to make one lane free for the ambulance to rush to the hospital. It made the news here too.
It is heartening to see humanitarian actions like these from a police department usually known more for brutality against political dissenters.
|
|
|
|
|
What does this have to do with Visual Studio 2017? 
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
It was probably the shock of upgrading to VS2017 that caused the infant to need surgery in the first place. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I knew there had to be a connection. Thanks. 
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
BEST CHANCE
A man has $300 to take home. A friend offers him a bet to double the money. He has to roll dices...
Rolling one to get a 4 or better, rolling two and get 5 or better on one of them at least or rolling 3 and getting 6 on one of them at least... Wont't get the result he looses the $300...
Which one our man should choose?
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Take the dice and go home.
Upon reconsideration... offer the "friend" the same wager. 
I may be way off here, but if my probability-fu hasn't entirely failed me...
One die for a 4 or 5 or 6 == 3:6 , 50% , to win even money == "fair game"
Two dice for at least one 5 or 6 == 8:36 , 22% , to win even money == about a 55% house edge?
Three dice for at least one 6 == 7:216 , 3% , to win even money == about a 94% house edge?
One die for a 4 or 5 or 6 == 3:6 , 50% , to win even money == "fair game"
Two dice for at least one 5 or 6 == 20:36 , 55% , to win even money == -11% house edge?
Three dice for at least one 6 == 91:216 , 42% , to win even money == about a 16% house edge?
Not playing is still the best option.
modified 15-Mar-17 17:59pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Bash his friend over the head and take the money.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought of that myself immediately, but decided I like my friends ... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) 1 dice, 4, 5, or 6 wins: 3/6 = 50%
2) 2 dice, 5 or 6 wins: (1 - (4/6)^2) = 55.6%
3) 3 dice, 6 wins: (1 - (5/6)^3) = 42.1%
So the best options in order are 2, 1, then 3 
EDIT: Including just leaving with $300 (option #4), the option order is 2 > 1 = 4 > 3.
modified 15-Mar-17 16:40pm.
|
|
|
|
|
These are the chances to go home with $600, but there is the option - of 100% - to take home $300!
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
You asked for the best option which would be option #2 statistically speaking - 55.6% to double your money. This can easily be shown with a sample set:
100 rolls, double or nothing @ 55.6% = $333.6
100 rolls, $300 @ 100% = $300
|
|
|
|
|
Double or nothing means you can not have $333.6... It is either $600 or $0!
So 55.6% of $600 is much worst than 100% of $300...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
That's to show general value per roll. Each value is 0 or 600 (double or nothing). (55.6 x 600)/100 = 333.6. Since it's all or nothing, you could also do (600 x .556). Both calculate the same thing - the average value per roll. The point is that the per-roll evaluation of $333.6 is greater than the $300 evaluation (300 x 1.0). This isn't to show the money you earn but to weight and compare the options.
If you'd like to include personality, monetary situation, and other per-person variables then even though you will statistically get more value out of the 55.6% option the guaranteed $300 may seem more appealing depending on the relative value of $300 to that individual.
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken...
There are 36 outcomes from rolling 2 standard dice, and only 8 of them are winners. -- 20 winning outcomes
There are 216 outcomes from rolling 3 standard dice, and only 7 of them are winners. -- 91 winning outcomes
What did I miss?
Edit: I was mistaken. I missed a whole bunch of winning outcomes.
modified 15-Mar-17 23:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: What did I miss?
That the outcome of each dice is independent, as there is no meaning of the order or on which dice you got the winner number...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I understand that, but I see where I went wrong -- I have since decided to graph it out...
modified 15-Mar-17 19:18pm.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: There are 36 outcomes from rolling 2 standard dice, and only 8 of them are winners.
How did you get 8 winning combinations? If the first die already wins (in twqo out of six cases), the second one is irrelevant in any case. These already are twelve winning combinations. And then those cases where the first die 'misses', but the second one wins are added.
Chance that the first one wins: 2/6.
Chance that the first one mises, bt the second one wins: 4/6 * 2/6 = 8/36 (probably what you thought)
Total chance 2/6 + 8/36 = 12/36 + 8 /36 = 20/36 = 0,56 (rounded).
PIEBALDconsult wrote: There are 216 outcomes from rolling 3 standard dice, and only 7 of them are winners.
Similar calculation:
Chance that the first one already wins: 1/6
Chance that the second one wins if the first fails: 5/6 * 1/6 = 5/36
Chance that the third one winds when the first two fail: 5/6 * 5/6 * 1/6 = 25/216
Adding it all up: 1/6 + 5/36 + 25/216 = (36 + 30 + 25) / 216 = 71/216 = 0,33 (rounded).
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I already found and corrected my error.
CDP1802 wrote: Chance that the first one mises, bt the second one wins: 4/6 * 2/6 = 8/36 (probably what you thought)
Nope.
CDP1802 wrote: Adding it all up: 1/6 + 5/36 + 25/216 = (36 + 30 + 25) / 216 = 71/216 = 0,33 (rounded).
Recheck your math.
modified 15-Mar-17 18:06pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
