|
Sounds like most shops. Really, "agile" to most managers is buzz word for think less and work harder.
|
|
|
|
|
You forgot:
6) You develop software.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
A distillery that sent unmatured malt whisky into space to study the effect of near-zero gravity on flavour has described its findings as "groundbreaking". A wee dram ... in SPAAAAAAACE!
"hints of antiseptic smoke, rubber and smoked fish, along with a curious, perfumed note"
Mmm-mm-mm-mmmmmmm!
|
|
|
|
|
That happens to be my favourite whisky. I love the peaty tones of the Islay whiskys and Ardbeg is the king of them all 
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare
Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft is already shaking up the Windows ecosystem with its new delivery model for Windows 10. Is it time for Microsoft to take another step and do the once unthinkable -- make Windows open source? We look at the perks, pitfalls and complications that would be involved if Windows were to go open source. A better question: would you want to *see* the source code of Windows?
if (CPU==AMD && ver==5.2.0.1234 && patch_level == SP123098 && PHASE_OF_MOON > 0.5) { break; }
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, they made their money off it and clearly they are out of ideas. Windows distros would be fun.
They should open source Office while they're at it, so we can get rid of VBA and put in .Net.
|
|
|
|
|
DaveX86 wrote: They should open source Office while they're at it, so we can get rid of VBA and put in .Net.
Yeah, community will bring back my beloved menu 
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: They should open source Office while they're at it, so we can get rid of VBA and put in .Net.
And reintroduce the Office assistant aka the helpful Office dog
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare
Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
The paper clip character was way ahead of its time 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also known as "I cannot be bothered to actually be a journalist today, I've got a hangover. I know, I'll write an opinion piece about open sourcing Windows, that'll attract a few clicks."
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Things have changed a lot in 30 years. Back in 1985 the FSF was primarily focused on building free pieces of software that were primarily useful to nerdy computer people. These days we have software, services, social networks, and more to consider. And now 30 years later, all software is free. Mission accomplished!
|
|
|
|
|
IT infrastructure is increasingly giving way to the cloud. Here's how to remain relevant in the years ahead. "We've got five years, my brain hurts a lot"
|
|
|
|
|
We didn't get the future that was predicted. We got a much better one. "It's really gonna be a better world, So many people try again and again and again to change"
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just so tired from new futures arriving so frequently, each of them expecting special treatment and a big reception; but, I'm equally worn out by the never-ending demands of the past: all those memories clamoring to be re-lived ... exhausting !
And, I'm bored as hell in the present, except when I'm programming ... which is when I am depressed because I realize how much I don't understand about what I'm doing.
cheers, Bill
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
A much better one?
Instead of the Jetsons, we are seeing a global economic downturn, extreme pollution and science calls it the sixth great extinction.
Yes, the future is awesome. No need to turn out the light after the party.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
We got a much better one.
Yeah, tell that to the waves of refugees fleeing Syria and, I could go on, but this isn't the SB.
I often wonder, as I'm listening to the news on the radio driving down a beautiful road in idyllic countryside on my way to buy high priced organic food that may actually be worse for the environment than conventional, picking up homeopathic remedies that supposedly don't do anything, and scheduling an appointment with the chiropractor on a phone that costs me more per month than many people make in a year, well, I wonder, how the heck did I get so lucky, and WTF is wrong with the people who can't just let other people live in peace. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Researchers from the two tech giants claim new headsets and more powerful phones are paving the way for brain-controlled smartphone apps. I'm thinking of a number between 1121111 and 9989999
Area codes give me a headache
|
|
|
|
|
Work fast and die young. That seems to be the motto of professional world. "You load sixteen tons what do you get?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most developers don’t know how to test Bonus #0: Does the code work?
|
|
|
|
|
with absolutely no description whatsoever of the test’s purpose
I inherited a bunch of Ruby code where the only clue was the name of the test.  And to make matters more complicated, while there are 100's of unit tests, there are also 100's of integration tests, and when it fails, you basically get an "oops, something broke" error on the web page, or the test blows up because the next step (a button, a control, whatever) can't be found on the page.
And since the tests are written in a separate script language (cucumber, capybara, whatever, I can't remember the idiotic names the open source community likes to use and I don't want to) the stack trace (if you can call that abortion of class::method mess a stack) into the Ruby code is blown. I had to write a top-level exception handler to force a debug breakpoint that was monkey-patched (gawd, I hate Ruby) into the script runner (thank you SO for finding that gem, no pun intended.)
Oh, how I loathe Ruby. And pretty much any non-statically typed language.
Good article, it's rather quite surprising (or not, see my other rant below somewhere) that devs writing unit tests actually have to be taught these 5 basic questions. You shouldn't be writing unit tests (or code for that matter) if you don't know that already.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: You shouldn't be writing unit tests (or code for that matter) if you don't know that already.
I know many people that shouldn't write code...
'Seniors' that haven't heard of SOLID or Design Patterns, who write functions with 100's of lines of code, who rely on copy/paste, who don't really know how types work, who put their business and data logic in their forms/controllers and who use hidden textboxes to store variables (yes, really). Some of these people have been writing code for 20 to 30 years at different companies.
Unfortunately they do write code, I get to fix their sh*t, and somehow they usually make more money too
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO there are 'Seniors' who heard of SOLID and Design Patterns but implement them all wrong - with idiotic constraints in the first case and "trying to fit a square in a circle" in the second.
I have to integrate code like that and it is hell.
As stated below, incompetent people generate bad products, anyway and every way that is possible.
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: IMHO there are 'Seniors' who heard of SOLID and Design Patterns but implement them all wrong
I've worked with a self-proclaimed senior who thought Single Responsibility Principle was equal to a class with just a single method. And if you have just a single method you don't need state either, so everything can be static...
After a vacation I once found he had 'refactored' my code into something like this:
static class SomeClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
}
static class AnotherClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
}Also, because all those classes had a method called DoSomething that always returned the same type and had the same parameters (that weren't always used) these classes (or rather methods) became interchangeable, making it good OO practice 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
