|
When I read could of instead of could've, I relegate the writer to moron status, which is then hard for them to overcome.
|
|
|
|
|
I turn the grammar checker off in Word. Its recommendations are worthless, especially since they are inappropriate for most of the technical documentation I write.
I also tend to disable the spell check, since most of the time I'm correct and it's not. It also tends to false-positive far too many things - filenames, proper names of all kinds, program symbols, and so on.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Have you checked which version of English is driving the spelling/grammar checkers? If you're right to be blaming it on a US vs UK difference I'm wondering if you ended up with the American rules turned on by mistake. If so:
Options - Language - Office authoring languages and proofing. Change from English (United States) to English (United Kingdom).
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
There are other considerations whereby, aside for nuance of source (internal vs. external) they are just not interchangeable.
- I do not have to go to work vs. I do not must go to work ?
- What about a context such as "Must I?" vs. "Do I have to?", both of which are suggesting an external source.
Other breakage of these rules could be constructed but I prefer, if at all possible, writing as I speak (excessive commas and all).
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
I admit that I haven't read through all of the replies so if someone else has made the same comment as I am about to make, then I apologise.
Look at almost any of the RFC for the Internet standards (sorry, memory has gone it's something like IETF). They start with a section about the use of words like SHOULD, CAN and MUST. It is a good staring point.
Re your samples
"I have to use the Azure cloud at work" , I agree; but for
"I must work out more often" I'd have suggested
"I ought to work out more often" or
"I should work out more often" to indicate that it is something that the general consensus is that there is pressure on you to do it but you can refuse.
|
|
|
|
|
There is a reason why these terms are explicitly defined (in its own RFC, if my memory is right): The terms can be understood in different ways, but in this context, this RFC, they have this meaning: ...
Sort of a "YMMV" declaration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have Word Professional Plus 2016. I don't know if these instructions will be similar or not for your version.
To use English (United Kingdom) instead of English (United States)
1) Open Word.
2) Click on File tab.
3) Select Options (bottom option on left menu bar).
4) Select Language (left menu bar).
5) Use drop-down list to "add additional editing language" and select "English (United Kingdom)".
6) Click Add.
7) In the Choose Editing Languages group, select English (United States).
8) Click Remove.
9) Click OK to exit.
To stop having only this particular rule checked:
1) I can't find it.
2) Just turn off grammar checking instead 
Bond
Keep all things a simple as possible, but no simpler. -said someone, somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
So I was complaining a while back that VS2019 didn't automatically open the "Output" window when I start a build, even with the "Show Output When Build Starts" option checked.
Well, they finally fixed that.
[^]
Of course, the update was 1.27GB or something like that, hahaha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Of course, the update was 1.27GB or something like that, hahaha.
Microsoft fixed an issue you were experiencing, perhaps you should be a little less critical and enjoy this once in a lifetime moment 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: perhaps you should be a little less critical and enjoy this once in a lifetime moment
The thought did cross my mind. 
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Sander Rossel wrote: perhaps you should be a little less critical and enjoy this once in a lifetime moment
The thought did cross my mind.
Yeah 'fixed' something, but can see their heart isn't in it: no new icons!
after many otherwise intelligent sounding suggestions that achieved nothing the nice folks at Technet said the only solution was to low level format my hard disk then reinstall my signature. Sadly, this still didn't fix the issue!
|
|
|
|
|
I just downloaded it on Monday so already have the fix. I waited because I knew the initial release would be buggy.
|
|
|
|
|
ugh.
What I don't like is it switches to the error panel whenever anything important happens, but that doesn't show you output from pre-build steps very well so i find myself constantly clicking back to output after compile.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I hate the error panel. Problems are listed in more-or-less random order. At least with the Output window I have a chance of identifying the real problem.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
But the output in the Error List view is sortable. Just click on one of the column headers and it will sort into the order of data in the specified column. I've only goy VS2015 and VS2017; so it might be something that is no longer available in VS2019. If they have dropped it, remember the MS design philosophy "Redmond knows best".
Of course, my coding is always perfect, so the Error List is always empty 
|
|
|
|
|
So at my job, I have 2 business analysts (BA's) that write up all the stories for us to work on. One of them is a power user with industry knowledge and has worked in Support on the program for years, but no computer classes. The other has a degree in Computer Science, but no industry knowledge. The rules of my office are that the BA's call the shots for anything UI related.
I have more problems with the second BA (the one with the degree) designing bad UI's. So bad that my boss's boss told us to fix one part because it was so bad. This BA constantly ignores industry standard UI design principles and doesn't follow our program's look and feel when new parts are developed. They also always want to do things in a "new and better" way. This, I believe, breaks the UI contract we have developed over 20 years with our customers. It makes the program a hodge-podge of styles/designs, so the customer never knows how it's going to work from one area to the next.
As for the first BA, I get along great with. She gets it 100%.
Any advice?
Bond
Keep all things a simple as possible, but no simpler. -said someone, somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Bond said: The rules of my office are that the BA's call the shots for anything UI related.
and: so bad that my boss's boss told us to fix one part because it was so bad
Easy … get your boss's boss to change the rules of the office!
Seriously though - either break the rules yourself or make it your boss's boss's problem.
|
|
|
|
|
First, try to talk to the BA.
If he doesn't listen you may want to escalate things with your boss.
Whatever you do, make very sure people know who does the UI design.
If your boss's boss tells you to fix something and your boss knows who did the initial design, chances are he's going to talk to the BA for you.
|
|
|
|
|
If the boss and boss's boss don't realize the problem or are unwilling to fix it, there's really not much you can do except tediously document each issue and present your documentation at some point to the boss or boss's boss.
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Bond wrote: constantly ignores industry standard UI design principles
Are the design principles specific to your industry or design in general? I ask because if your program's UI is 20 years old, maybe updating things to be easier to use isn't a bad thing.
I agree with Sander that you should try talking with the BA. Explain why the design needs to be consistent and if there are industry specific standards to follow, those as well. At the same time, be open to suggestions that might improve usage. Maybe some of the "new and better" ideas might improve things for the end users... would it be an improvement to get rid of wasted clicks even if they are 'standard'?
That said, a lot of the CompSci people I've worked with (myself included) are terrible at UI. We don't always think about how things should work the same as 'normal' people do. It wasn't until I spent a few years with actual trained usability experts that I started to change my approach to something akin to 'If you have to think about it then it probably isn't a good UI.'
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have much advice other than don't hire people without industry experience - something I learned in the .com boom days.
Academia doesn't teach proper software development, and because academia is sort of antithetical in nature to putting practice over theory it probably never will.
People get lost in the Right Way(TM) to design things that often isn't the right way at all when the real world collides with it, but they get stuck in this idea of "it must fit the model" and i've found that the higher the degree in Compsci the more likely this sort of thing comes from them.
I'm sorry to say but uni as much as it educates, puts blinders on people, and those blinders only get undone through actual experience.
If you want to save this hire, be patient with them, correct them, and hope to hell they are responsive to criticism and can update their work accordingly.
Otherwise, it's time to look for a different UI person. Just my $0.02
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more. Just yesterday I was looking at some code by our newest hire and I had to correct several things they did because that was the way they were taught in school. I had to tell them that was fine for small, assignment projects but for larger scale, real world projects those are definitely not the right ways to things.
"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?"
|
|
|
|
|
A company BA you're likely stuck with. A contractor (you didn't hire) you can shuffle aside.
The whole MVVM mentality totally divorces the (BA's) view from the physical and logical data models and any performance considerations.
Share your models. If you don't have any, start making them (Visio). Then design and code.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
modified 23-Jan-20 11:00am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
