|
If you're anxious to wake up in time, then you may not sleep at all indeed. Put away your telephone and turn the alarm-clock so you can't see the time - when waking in the middle of the night, don't look at the time. If it is dark it means you should sleep.
Also, "stress" is not just when you're doing a lot of stuff under pressure. If you put something heavy on a piece of wood, that piece of wood will be "stressed". Waking up every day while even the birds outside are sleeping is a form of stress, since it is not part of the natural state.
Lastly, you should not drive indeed. You may become sleep-drunk in a few hours, which starts out with slower reactions and drifting of concentration.
Good luck today 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the start of "getting old".  Unbroken sleep is one of the first casualties.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
Heard that before, but I still can't believe it.
I usually sleep like a log, like my neighbors seriously complained about them waking up by someone's alarm every morning at 7.
They said it couldn't be mine because I never got up at 7...
It was mine and they were right, I never got up at 7 because I'd sleep through my alarm 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Went to sleep at about 22:30 last night, little on the late side considering my alarm goes off at 05:00.
Forget about that, I woke up at friggin 01:00 for no reason at all and haven't been able to sleep after that
Ah the heartbreaking travails of those who still still sleep through the night!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot give you advice regarding HP machines. I only buy Dell.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
VISWESWARAN1998 wrote: are these pre-installed keyloggers accidental?? Is buying HP safe, cause I planned to buy one?
Blow the OS away. Reinstall from a clean MSDN ISO (as a developer, you do have an MSDN subscription, right?)
Then go to hp.com for the one or two drivers for the hardware that Device Manager doesn't recognize out of the box.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: as a developer, you do have an MSDN subscription, right?
In the case of Windows 10, once your new machine reports that Windows is activated, you can download a Windows 10 Install Tool to replace the OS. No need to have a MSDN subscription. I have done this several times.
Once the new OS is up and running, it should report that it is activated.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
True - my point was that getting an ISO from Microsoft, rather than an OEM's, is about the most reliable way of ensuring you're not getting unexpected third-party crapware.
As an MSDN subscriber, I'll go to those images first, when this is for my own machines. For anyone else--yeah, I've used their general download page...it's about time that Windows can re-fetch the key from MS, once it's been registered on a given machine.
|
|
|
|
|
Probably jus some lazy programmer included it in his standard library.
|
|
|
|
|
Or maybe a side effect of "Made In China" ? ? ?
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
When I buy a pre-built machine or laptop, I ALWAYS install a different copy of Windows on it as opposed to leaving their crapware-filled OS on the box. Then I let Windows update take care of the drivers.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I ALWAYS install a different copy of Windows
Ditto for me! 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
So, I'm testing some ftp s/w on Windows. Standard code, details deliberately dropped:
handle myHandle = FtpFindFirstFile();
if (NULL != myHandle)
{
do
{
} while (InternetFindNextFile());
}
I'm in the debugger, I just want to see the values in some data structures. Code keeps dropping right out of the do loop. Code steps in, loop exits, I know there are more files matching than just the first... wth is going on?
duh, compiler be too smart - nothing in the do loop, why bother? Add a variable increment in the loop, all works.   so much time lost
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to optimization. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have never seen the compiler "optimize" code away in debug mode. That is very curious.
-edit-
That's because optimization is usually disabled in debug builds. I would verify that it is, in fact, disabled.
modified 11-Dec-17 17:54pm.
|
|
|
|
|
optimization is off....
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: Add a variable increment in the loop, all works.
Sooo, why shouldn't the compiler optimize it out? You're not doing anything with the next file, and the compiler shouldn't have to know that there is some side-effect effect. To be honest, I'd look at that code and go WTF? myself.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Sooo, why shouldn't the compiler optimize it out? You're not doing anything with the next file, and the compiler shouldn't have to know that there is some side-effect effect.
Optimising compilers must be aware of side effects; it's one of the factors that makes optimising REALLY difficult (NP-complete or worse). Optimisation involve producing a semantically equivalent program while minimising or maximising some aspect - run time, memory size, power usage, ...
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I don't really have an argument with the compiler - with the exception that optimizations are not enabled for the debug target. Since I'm sitting in the debugger, I would have expected the do nothing loop to loop as expected.
I'm making a function call ffs in the control statement. If an optimized build, sure. But I was just knocking around some proof of concept code to understand how all things worked.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen that many many times. Be sure optimizations are turned off.
|
|
|
|
|
see above. it's a non-optimized debug target.
I'm sure there is some esoteric reason why the C++ compiler is not in error.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Then your assumption that InternetFindNextFile() works as expected must be wrong. Step into it and see what it does.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
