|
i'd say a pock-marked human face is liable to get an instinctive disgust-fear-loathing-aversion response. not too long ago, in history, that was a distinct marker for smallpox ,,, or even leprosy.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
modified 13-Sep-19 12:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
There are more phobias than you might be aware of. And some of them seem truly weird, such as Arachibutyrophobia- Fear of peanut butter sticking to the roof of the mouth.
Then again, others are rather easy to understand, e. g. Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia- Fear of long words. I think there was someone being overcreative ...
Both can be found at ThePhobia List[^] . However, that list doesn't include my favorite, Anatidaephobia (Urban Dictionary)[^], the fear of being watched by a duck . I think *that* one was a hoax though. 
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Is Mississippi a hippie's wife?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, it's what they say about an exceptional poor shot who couldn't hit the broad side of a hippopotamus.
That being said, I'll begin my Maine reply: Is Maryland the original "happy place"?
Is Illinois when someone bothers you so much it makes you sick?
| 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 seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Only if she is called Magnolia and does not have MS
In Word you can only store 2 bytes. That is why I use Writer.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, I was Delaware of that fact, Utah thunk everyone was.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Was California Caesar's wife?
(No, her name was Calpurnia)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure, Alaska round to see if anyone knows.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Can Ada help?
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
She's not here, she's either sick Oregon on vacation.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
O. Hi! O.
(I live in Xenia, Ohio[^])
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Someone here, I believe it was honey the codewitch, mentioned they "develop very iteratively". It made me think about styles of coding vs. debugging. Where I work, some people tend to code much more than others before compiling. I like to err on the side of caution- compiling much more often to see that what I think I did, actually worked the way I think it did.
Maybe some of it is confidence in your code skills? You can certainly code more if you don't check your work every two seconds, but if you embedded a bunch of bugs, they may be hard to find if you wait too long.
...Just curious what you guys think? Is it a matter of style, or is there a right or wrong way? How often do you like to compile?
|
|
|
|
|
Sander,
I'm talking about coding vs. not coding, whether it be compiling or testing.
Regards,
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
Then my original answer still stands, depends on what I'm doing.
Writing a new feature requires less testing than the testing of that feature and fixing bugs
The writing to testing ratio depends on the feature.
If it's a front-end thing I like to add a line of HTML/CSS and then check how bad I messed up in the browser (but this doesn't require recompiles).
When doing back-end code I can better predict what my code will do and I can test the entire thing in one go when I'm done.
|
|
|
|
|
why was your original thread with same title closed? interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
I actually compile when I run my code before sending to patch (to QA)... Save every second but compile as less as possible...
I see no need for that...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
You're not concerned about dealing with a pile of bugs at once?
|
|
|
|
|
What bugs are? 
Seriously, no. What I'm writing is always connected to a single issue (new feature or bug fix), which makes it somehow monolithic, and for that easy to fix (because a single bug may open a chain effect, but also closes it)...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years (decades) ago, we had a new guy on the team learning to program. One day he turned to everyone in the room and complained that no matter how many times he compiled his program, it still wouldnt work.
|
|
|
|
|
Did he try clicking the mouse harder?  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back when I started, the answer would be 'every fortnight'. It took that long for your coding sheets to be sent away, mispunched, and a program listing with error messages to be sent back. So, you'd rewrite the mispunched rows, sent it off, wait a fortnight to see if it had been repunched correctly. Sometimes it would take a couple of months before you got a program that was what you had written. Then you can move on to the next stage. Needless to say, desk dry running was a lot more rigorous - a potential bug found at that stage could save weeks of waiting. The problem with this is that you tended to put too much code into each iteration, so when you got anything usable back, there were too many places to check (and it was so long ago when you wrote it that even the copious comments weren't helpful.
That habit has been hard to break. Even when we punched our own cards and submission / turnround times were only a few days, compiling was seen as a milestone (or a millstone).
I had to train myself to write small blocks of code, test, write the next bit, test, repeat ad nauseum.
|
|
|
|
|
jsc42 wrote: 'every fortnight'
Reminded me of the timepromptwait parameter --> it was measured in microfortnights
But I never wave bye bye
|
|
|
|
|
Fortnight? goo! In school it was drop the deck off ( we punched our own ) ( and drew lines on top as "hex marks" ), and pick up the printout next day or so. ( Of course, waiting a fortnight would have made class _difficult_. )
When I started work, we had ( Bruce and I ) the machine to ourselves. I atemped to compile about 3 times - about 10 lines of Fortran. Failed in the library. Found that no-one else had any luck with the compiler yet either. ( PDP11, 16K WITH the integer multiply / divide unit ).
Still punching cards, but no compile, assemble, test, ( CPU switches and lights ) sometimes patch at the CPU.
dave of eves
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
