|
I used to work for Microsoft, in Exchange CPR (Critical Problem Resolution), writing bug fixes for Exchange from version 5.5 through 2007.
One of the more notable comments from the Exchange source was in the Information Store Code...
// This blows dead goats!
A few years back, they started going through the codebase, cleaning up/removing such flamboyant comments.
|
|
|
|
|
I-16-741018 wrote: A few years back, they started going through the codebase, cleaning up/removing such flamboyant comments.
I'm sure it's not everyone in every department, but I can confirm MS has some automated build systems that have rules that match comments/variable names/strings against a...let's call it a list of "reserved words".
For one, a check-in will get rejected if your code contains something like:
$ass = Load-Assembly [...]
This is built server-side, and as such I haven't been able to find the actual list. But I'm sure it would make for some interesting reading...
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me, especially considering that MSFT has opened up parts of their codebase to specific partners. There were a lot of unusual references to various farm animals back then. LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
I was hyper-focused on my latest article and took not of the wildly low vote-to-view ratio, and decided to look around at my other articles, and then other author's articles, and the story is the same pretty much everywhere. Despite have sometimes hundreds of thousands of views, the vote count is struggle to eclipse higher than 50 or so votes. The percentage is usually in the 0.001 to 0.002 range, even in the most well received articles.
I'm trying an experiment (in my latest article) to see if I can get more people to cast votes without too much effort on their part.
On a semi-related note, I've found that writing really huge articles (or multi-part articles) involving significant development effort really don't generate the interest you'd think they would. For example, my SqlXAgent article series required a couple of years to write the code and then the articles, and it was largely ignored. Admittedly, it was a giant waste of time anyway because Microsoft made the dev edion of SQL Server available for free, making my code totally pointless. I'm not complaining about that really, but you come to realize that, more often than not, the juice just ain't worth the squeeze.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
modified 8-Jan-21 17:15pm.
|
|
|
|
|
How much of those view counts are the result of bots scraping or visiting the site, I wonder.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting point. I don't know if Chris et al can even determine that. You're one of he other authors I checked, BTW. Same story for you.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Very few people upvote articles or vote for them as Article of the Month.
|
|
|
|
|
In 20 years (and 71 articles), I've only won that one time. I'm not optimistic about my chances this time around. 
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they're just too niche? I've had plenty of wins here, and I don't think it's because of my good looks or winning personality. I can't even remember where I left them.
I'm not a particularly great author, but I do write a lot of articles. Prolific doesn't mean good, as you say, but maybe it helps earn some mugs.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Maybe they're just too niche?
Said the author of articles on lexers and parsers 
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: but maybe it helps earn some mugs.
If you have too many, I would accept one or two   
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll remember that. I've got two right now and an additional one got lost in the mail. Of the two that arrived, one came broken and I have repaired it with superglue.
But after two mugs, it gets a bit excessive, like people I serve tea or coffee to might think i work for CP or something.
I'm going to see if I can wrangle a shirt out of them again for my next win. I have one but it's just a little small. After that, I'll send you my mugs.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, it was a joke. I can buy them in an UK online shop.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified 9-Jan-21 11:19am.
|
|
|
|
|
YOU HAVE A CP SHOP?
Aren't you fancy? I am jealous.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
No. I don't have any CP shop.
But Chris did marketize some CP stuff in an UK Online shop.
CodeProject Mug 20 oz Ceramic Mega Mug by Admin_CP6437 - CafePress[^]
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Most people who view are looking for something specific - and if the article is not exactly what they need, they close the page and move on. Even if it is, most of 'em don't vote because they can't see why they should - you have already done your bit by doing their work for 'em. 
I'd guess that I get around one vote (up or down) per thousand views, but I've never sat down to work it out.
Now you mention it, I might actually have to ... I'm just anal enough to have the lack of knowledge irk me.
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I'd guess that I get around one vote (up or down) per thousand views
That's about what it works out to, and with all too few exceptions.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
18 votes for 35k+ views (half of your performance) in 12 years...
But as my signature says... a sincere "Thank you, it helped me" is worthier than 100 votes (at least for me)
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it comes down to why you write the articles, is it in the expectation of getting peer approval by garnering votes?
I also think this may be an issue only for the prolific authors, you guys put in so much effort I guess you want to see some appreciation. The rest of us are just chuffed to see someone downloaded the article.
I think downloads are a more relevant indicator of success.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: I think it comes down to why you write the articles, is it in the expectation of getting peer approval by garnering votes?
I write articles to share ideas and techniques. I code for the sheer fun of it, and I'm lucky enough to get paid for doing it. I was just making an observation, not complaining about not getting votes.
Mycroft Holmes wrote: I also think this may be an issue only for the prolific authors, you guys put in so much effort I guess you want to see some appreciation.
Being "prolific" doesn't necessarily mean "good". 
Articles meet very specific needs. I equate it to building and selling hot rods. The only time you'll get anywhere near your asking price is if you find someone that wants a car built exactly like the one you're selling.
Like I said, I was just making an observation.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
I am more interested in a Votes : Downloads ratio.
For one of my more downloaded articles, it is 99 : 42378, which is roughly 0.002. So, only 2 out of 1000 who downloaded have cared to vote.
|
|
|
|
|
The general mentality is, unless I get something for free, you'll never get a "5.0" or a "10.0".
In the freelance world, they expect "over" 100% for a "top rating"; ignoring the fact that anything over 100% of the contracted work amounts to "free labor".
But they persist: "I never give a top rating".
I think it mirrors what happens as an employee too: "We can only give you x because the others would be jealous". (True story)
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
|
|
|
|
|
I think it needs to be more obvious what rate me means ( something along the lines of the like button in Farcebook would be good ) - until this post I've never voted on articles because I've never noticed the rate me stars before. I will now though
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Giving the vote to an article is a big resposibility, in my opinion: you have to read it carefully, understand it and have the skills to judge the work done.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the vote is often for the code more than for the article.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
