|
OriginalGriff wrote: Does that mean I get a pay rise?
You already did.
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing I see wrong with that UPDATE statement is the naming convention of the textboxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok I wanna know just exactly how you broken into our TFS and downloaded the code from one of our files!? 
|
|
|
|
|
Just stumbled across this:
int page = 1;
while (true) {
if (page > pageCount) {
break;
}
page++;
}
Considering how common it is to use an index in a loop, you'd think the language designers would have a better way of dealing with this... 
EDIT: even better, in 2 of the 3 places using page, it uses page - 1 :facepalm:
|
|
|
|
|
If I use ILASM to disassemble .NET coe, it frequently decodes for-loops like this.
Maybe the original developer appropriated (ie. stole) some code using similar techniques without checking the output carefully.
(Personally, I use it to check correct usage of poorly documented APIs, but I'm sure many are less scrupulous).
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: it frequently decodes for-loops like this
Of course, the simplest way to write a loop in an assembly-like language is something like:
[assignment]
start_loop:
if ![condition] goto end_loop
[body]
[increment]
goto start_loop
end_loop:
That doesn't mean it should be written that way in a high-level language though, even if you technically can.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob's suggesting the duhveloper just stole recompiled code out of reflector without thinking; and building in logic to detect all 90 bazillion high level constructs and correctly promote the result of reflection to them instead of the simplest valid code is 99.9999% of the work involved in writing a reflection tool. The length of the long tail means that it's a job that will probably never be done.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging 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
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for saving me the effort, exactly my point.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
while(true) {
thingie.Open();
if (thingie.Stale() && YesUserReallyWantsToUpgrade())
{
thingie.Close();
continue;
}
break;
}
On the plus side, I've had secret santa's that were worse. On the down side, that would look better with a goto, which doesn't sound exactly good.
|
|
|
|
|
We can hide goto[^] even better:
bread.Open();
try
{
if (bread.Stale() && Banana())
{
throw DamnUserSeeksDooom();
}
}
catch (DamnUserSeeksDooom DUST)
{
dust.Sweep();
}
finally
{
bread.close();
}
Teez javaOOP style. The more blue words the more proffesional code looks, you know. 
Greetings - Jacek
|
|
|
|
|
Jacek Gajek wrote: catch (DamnUserSeeksDooom DUST)
{
dust.Sweep();
}
i guess you swept your DUST before the actual call and it became smaler dust 
P.S sleeping only 5 hours isn't working well with my spelling skills.
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
So the thingie refuses to upgrade, because it does nothing as long as the user wants it to upgrade? What does it do if the user doesn't want it to upgrade? Does it upgrade in this case?
The good thing about pessimism is, that you are always either right or pleasently surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a bit mroe complex than this simplified example of course (surprisingly, I don't have variales named "thingie" in there) - depending on the forma,t it's read only access or no access at all, indeed.
Since the conversion runs in a separate process, I'm in the middle of a transaction, and I have to be careful to throw more milliseconds into that piece of code, tat "close, convert and retry" seems to be the best approach.
Alternatively, I thought of an inner function that returns either the newly initialized session, or information about how to upgrade, but that code doesn#t look much better either.
|
|
|
|
|
Inheriting the maintenance of some 3rd party code today!
Mused over it, looking at the compilation warningS....
I did find this piece of code, aw... I should say, while I know it's valid C#, it displays a creativity beyond my own!!!
public class DesignRegistrationSearchCriteria
{
public string Manufacturer { get; set; }
public string manufacturer { get; set; }
}
|
|
|
|
|
After all there are at least 2 types of manufacturers and one of them is with large M for the really iMportant ones
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
True! 
|
|
|
|
|
Makes sense. You wouldn't want people getting a compiler error because they mis-capitalized something. That said, there's 212 ways to capitalize "manufacturer". You have some work to do...
What is this talk of release? I do not release software. My software escapes leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake.
|
|
|
|
|
You forgot the most important test case. I mean the empty string, but because you cant have empty string for variable name you have to take all the symbols available for variable name and make variables with them for names 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
We have some of that going on in this project too. We have a class something like:
public partial class Location
{
Location Location { get; set; }
Location location { get; set; }
}
But what really killed me is your signature line:
What is this talk of release? I do not release software. My software escapes leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake.
|
|
|
|
|
As I sat here working I thought about your signature again:
What is this talk of release? I do not release software. My software escapes leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake.
What struck me is that most of my career has been in high-resolution measurement and robotic control. And I specifically remember two projects where this signature almost became truth.
First was a big Sieko SCARA robotic disk sorter. This robot measured almost 4 feet at its longest extension and it could retract and move 180 degrees and extend out 4 feet in the other direction in just about 1/10 of a second. The thing was bloody fast! We of course built a plexiglass sensor tripped cage around the thing so no idiot would get it it's way. Well one did. He removed the plexiglass portion where he needed to work, jumped the sensor and leaned in slightly to look at an issue with a printer. He spent about a week in the hospital after the bump on the head.
The next was an instrument down the line from the disk sorter. It was a combiner. It had a big chuck on it to pick up about 25 disks and it would move laterally left/right to combine disks into caddies for shipment. Of course it needed to be fast so we used the biggest NEMA steppers and drivers we could find. This thing could traverse about 4 feet in 1/10 of a second. It too had a plexiglass cage. But one day I was working underneath it looking at some issues with the conveyor, I was well clear but then I heard this scream and instinctively I hit one of the gazillion estop buttons we'd wired in. A young assemply worker had her hand caught between the side of the machine and the moving carriage. Crushed quite a few bones. Why she had her hand in there was beyond me. But of course it was the software's fault for not "knowing" that a hand was in the way and gracefully stopping. Sigh...
Third was an instrument that spun silicon wafers to coat them for prep. It used a big servo motor for the spinner. They had to spin pretty fast. They would come in, a mechanical centering device would center them on the vacuum chuck, retract then they would lower into a bowl and the big servo motor would spin them up to a fairly high speed. Well those of you familiar with servos know they need to be tuned. Kd, Ki, Kp, etc. Usually you have to do it under load. So stupid me put a 300mm wafer on the chuck, centered it, lowered it in to the bowl, opened the protective lid, jumped the protection sensor and hit go on the tuning algorithm. That thing went crazy as it tried to compensate for that 300mm wafer and its wait. Within about 5 seconds that wafer shot off down the hall travelling at about 50 mph, impacted the cheap office partition and exploded. Not 10 seconds later did the gorgeous blonde secretary walk around the corner carrying her lunch. I turned white when I realized the wafer was just about at her neck level where it went into the partition.
I've been stupid and I've been lucky and thats why our signature is so... well appropriate!
|
|
|
|
|
Difference between big and small M/manufacturers
Still another thing puzzles me... being that name in plural and it's type a String... what value goes in there? Some kind of CSV?
I think you have much more to worry about there mate... 
|
|
|
|
|
Its not in plural. I guess this is part of some filter functionality.
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
Ah...  I put it in plural...
I guess you have to be careful with me then...
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
