|
It would certainly be an improvement if they felt more like a social moment...  
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: it goes on for an hour, or more
Super Lloyd wrote: it's everyday
Why would anyone have that and why would anyone think that's a good idea?
Your manager must be the anti-productivity.
A daily stand-up shouldn't take more than 15 minutes and I already think that's too long.
Have you tried just flat-out say it?
"Guys, I don't know what I'm doing here so I'm getting back to actually getting things done."
I've done it in the past with mixed results (although the meetings always got shorter) 
|
|
|
|
|
I exaggerated, they are more like 45 minutes nowadays... 
And they have about 12 people... some of these can easily speak for 5~10 minute everyday with fresh new or repeating questions...
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't exaggerate.
Chances are, more people are annoyed by this, but no one wants to speak up.
Monday, before the meeting, say something like "can we keep this REALLY short because I think our regular 45 minutes are WAY too long."
Also, 12 people sounds like a lot, are you sure they all need to be there?
If not, you can say so, "I think it doesn't make sense I'm here with x and y because I don't even work with them" or something like that.
45 minutes is still too long, and with everyone getting coffee before and after, the productivity loss is still an hour.
|
|
|
|
|
2 or 3 meetings a day for me, Corona has been a godsend, I can sit at home mic and camera off and do some real work while everyone else rattles on.
|
|
|
|
|
viva corona! 
|
|
|
|
|
Caslen wrote: I can sit at home mic and camera off and do some real work while everyone else rattles on.
Exactly!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: it goes on for an hour, or morethere is nothing remotely relevant or interesting for me in itit's everyday
Wait, do you work for the same company I work for?
|
|
|
|
|
Get some meeting bingo cards and distribute them to other folks on the meeting. I did this once and called out Bingo in a meeting. The look on the VPs face was priceless when I explained that I had a buzzword bingo card and he just hit not one, but two rows.
|
|
|
|
|
It least we both now realize we're not alone in this experience - except I not only don't have them every day, but on the off chance I do get invited I'm generally "overlooked" for subsequent meetings on the subject. The "penalty" for asking questions.
Oh ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) - you reminded me I have a telephone in meeting today. So much for benevolent forgetfulness. I'll get even with them (at least), shortly.
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
Try to get another meeting scheduled for the same time slot. Then you can go to neither, and everyone will think it's because you're in the other one.
|
|
|
|
|
I have produced an article on a difficult topic - creating a Socket that can be awaited
I haven't used the task framework enough to explain all of it - just the things I've done before, but some of them have a lot of moving parts, and so are more difficult to explain.
What I'd like is if someone who has some experience with Socket and Task could review it. It's kind of cool code, so I'm not relying purely on your altruism here. Anyway, what I'm after is some feedback about how digestible it is.
If you're interested let me know and I'll link to it.
I really appreciate feedback, but I know most of you are busy with work.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Are you talking about this article How to Implement and Use Awaitable Sockets in C# using TAP ?
If so, at first glance, it's certainly not intended for beginners, and I'm still getting up to speed with 'Tasks' myself.
I'd say two main things -
1) use of acronyms .. even for non beginners, EAP/TAP/APM etc should be expanded once on their first use in the article, just to make sure that your EAP equals my EAP
2) your paragraphs are 'meaty', but I think thats the nature of the advanced material you're presenting
Other than that, its mighty fine
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks so much!
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I like this article. I haven't seen someone use awaitables like this before.
My thoughts:
How the Completed event and OnCompleted callback interact is really not obvious, even from your description of what each individually does. I think the purpose of this setup is so that the continuation passed to OnCompleted will only be executed once the event completes. If Completed fires first, _continuation == _sentinel which triggers the Task.Run(continuation) in OnCompleted. If OnCompleted fires first, _continuation = continuation, so prev = continuation when prev() is executed.
I believe that this entire thing falls apart though if Reset() isn't called after each Completed/OnCompleted trip. If _continuation == continuation from an earlier call, OnCompleted falls through and the current continuation is lost, while Completed executes the previous continuation.
I really want to dive into this when it isn't 2am. I suspect OnCompleted is for completion of pre-await code which is why some of these hoops are needed. Otherwise the ordering of Completed and OnCompleted would be known.
I found two more articles if you wanted to check them out. I only did a cursory overview. It seems like they dive into things in a little more detail but it still wasn't obvious to me how the awaiter methods interact with the overall task architecture.
C# Under the Hood: async/await
Dissecting the async methods in C#
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my thank you! It was murder trying to find information about this. My google-fu just wasn't giving me back much. I was probably asking it the wrong questions. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Found another good one. Also I couldn't sleep because I had to know the answer to this. Kinda funny how OnCompleted is only called if IsCompleted is false It blew my mind when I realized all of the SocketAwaitable code is just for Reset() so you avoid allocating a TaskCompletionSource on each Receive/Send call
Assuming it wasn't a joke, GetResult() isn't called CheckResult() because other awaiters may return a value like a Task<T>'s awaiter. This awaiter implementation doesn't have a return value since that value is returned via the SocketAsyncEventArgs instead.
Thanks for sparking a fun night of learning but now I'm actually off to bed 
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks so much for your time and the links. I've been pouring over them/
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Just quickly scrolling through it (I actually have to leave for work some five minutes ago  ) and came across this:
if (EventArgs.SocketError != SocketError.Success)
throw new SocketException((int)EventArgs.SocketError);Not sure what to think about your try-catch blocks yet.
They are compact, but still have curly braces.
I'll have to meditate on that
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: They are compact, but still have curly braces.
#CurlyBracesMatter!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
That wasn't even my code! That was Stephen Toub's code!
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I am curious as to who is still writing software after turning 65?
Any bits of wisdom you want to share about being a developer over 65, or you younger folks having to work with us older developers? 🙂
|
|
|
|
|
71 and still going strong!
I'm not sure how many cookies it makes to be happy, but so far it's not 27.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
57, having big problem converting conventinal apps to browser apps.
Anyway still relaxed:
Smiles at the new technologies (browser apps). Something fails every week then and when because 'something' in the depths of the web frameworks (be it vue, stencil, react, whatever) has changed.
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Trying to learn RUST but no motivation becuase don't have a use for it yet.
Relearning WPF, doing a huge app...taking forever.
Up keeping web site with .NET MVC.
Doing several embedded projects.
Just ain't enough time in the day.
I'm not sure how many cookies it makes to be happy, but so far it's not 27.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
