|
"Nip rollers" :snicker:
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Festoon: a chain or garland of flowers, leaves, or ribbons, hung in a curve as a decoration. 
Quote: What silly words do you folks have to use in your industry?
Manager
Deadline
Requirements
Testing
Expertise
Framework
Agile
Refactor
[x] Driven Development
Secure
High Priority
Shall we go on?
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: What silly words do you folks have to use in your industry?
agnostic - as in, our server app doesn't have apriori knowledge about what gets plugged in into it (as long as its API conforms to a standard) or who communicates with it (as long as are properly oauth'd in).
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had to use atheist API's before - the server wouldn't allow your connection, no matter what you tried.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: the server wouldn't allow your connection, no matter what you tried.
Hmmm. That waitress in the bar last night was an atheist. I had no idea!
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it was your feet of clay. Next time, wear better shoes .
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Certainly, the most common use of "agnostic" is in the religious sense ("If god exists, he must be defeated!")
Linguistically speaking, "a-gnostic" simply means "not-knowing". It doesn't have to be related to religious concepts at all.
|
|
|
|
|
out of a codeproject mug
thanks Chris and team. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulations once again
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
i don't know what voodoo you used to make this mug work so well, but thank you.
i got it this morning right in time for a cup, and it was magic ever since.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
when brewed by someone you love....
__________________
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept that there are some things I just can’t keep up with, the determination to keep up with the things I must keep up with, and the wisdom to find a good RSS feed from someone who keeps up with what I’d like to, but just don’t have the damn bandwidth to handle right now.
© 2009, Rex Hammock
|
|
|
|
|
I always make my own coffee. 
|
|
|
|
|
So doesn't that qualify? 
|
|
|
|
|
Awww, you love yourself.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Jalapeno Bob wrote: When brewed by someone you love.
Jörgen Andersson wrote: I always make my own coffee.
Those who fall in love with themselves will have no rivals.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Those who fall in love with themselves will have no rivals.
...and they'll always have a partner...
|
|
|
|
|
Did you ever read the story of Onan in the black book?
Sidetracking:
Now that I have brought up Onan... He it the most misunderstood character in the entire bible. His sin was that he refused to copulate with his sister-in-law after his older brother was dead before generating offspring.
The "official" argument he gave against it that he wanted his kids to be counted as his own, not as kids of his dead brother. (The tradition said that Tamar's first child should be counted as the child of Er, the dead brother, no matter who was the biological father.) Between the lines, we can read that Tamar was an immature child bride - years later she ended up as the wife of Shelah, the younger brother of Onan and Er, still a boy when Onan was "sinning" by not going to bed with his sister-in-law. In those days, a husband was always older than the wife, so it it obvious that Tamar was even younger than the immature Shelah. That explains why the oldest brother, Er, didn't succeed in having a child with Tamar before he died, and it gives a believable explanation why Onan refused to deposit his seed in her.
So, Onan should be praised as a hero, fighting against the use of child brides, rather than as the epitome of the sin of wasting your seed on activities that cannot contribute to making girls pregnant.
|
|
|
|
|
All of this went over my head, except perhaps for:
Member 7989122 wrote: the epitome of the sin of wasting your seed on activities that cannot contribute to making girls pregnant.
...and now I have Monty Python's Every Sperm is Sacred stuck in my head. How far am I from the point to all this...?
|
|
|
|
|
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
I can't make up my mind.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is, and it's not re-entrant.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting, I didn't know/have forgotten about the re-entrancy.
Seems you can do it in C#, but that's with a capital 'M'ain, and is a language for wimps.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
The non-re-entrancy part comes about because you can't call it yourself. It's not a callback in the strict sense of the term but in effect it is if you think of it as the designated function for the OS to call to run the program. It is not specified in code (this is why it fails the strict definition) but it is implicitly known to the linker and can be overridden. In the case of programs for Windows, it IS overridden to be WinMain.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Rick York wrote: you can't call it yourself.
Indeed you can, but you need to know what you are doing.
Rick York wrote: but it is implicitly known to the linker
Not quite, there is a reference to it in the run time libraries which must be satisfied at link time.
Rick York wrote: in the case of programs for Windows, it IS overridden to be WinMain.
But there is a main() inside the Windows libraries, which again gets called by the run time (unless it has changed in the last 20+ years). And that then calls in to WinMain.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
