|
He was accused of plagiarism. And it was clear that was the case.
I'm not aware of what you mean when you say "the author was telling the truth". Where was this discussion?
Randor wrote: I would suggest a more professional approach to vetting the talent that visit the site
We don't select the members who visit this site. This isn't that kind of site.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm not aware of what you mean when you say "the author was telling the truth"
Your moderation team openly questioned his former MVP status. Are we reading the same thing? It's right there in the thread and it was inappropriate.
Would you rather talk about this over a phone call?
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm, you think some mutton would be good? 😉
|
|
|
|
|
Start with steak, or fish.
Take a nice thick piece of rump (UK - in the US it's "sirloin" so it's probably the same in Canadia)
It's a tasty piece of meat, that can be quite chewy because it does a lot of the donkey work of moving the cow around. I normally trim it of the edge fat as that doesn't render in teh sous vide as teh heat doesn't get high enough.
Add butter, garlic, salt, and pepper and seal the bag - I have external, chamber, and handheld sealers and they all work (though the handheld ones are a PITA because you can't reuse the ziplock bags as they don't clean easily at all). If you don't have a sealer, you can just put the meat under the water surface and hold the top shutto let the water pressure evacuate it. It works, but it's a mess if it slips during cooking ... and holding the meat fully immersed can be difficult as well.
Preheat the Sous Vide to 65C / 150F and cook the steak for an hour (can be longer, it won't make much difference) then sear it in a very hot pan on both sides for about 30 or 40 seconds. It needs this as it will come out looking a fairly unappetising grey colour ... but it should be pink and juicy all the way through and tender as heck!
Fish: (sustainably caught) cod is trivial: in the bag, 55C, 30 minutes. Prawns: 60C, 30 mins.
Chicken, joints of beef or lamb, lemon curd, reheating chilli, stew, hotdogs, even vegetables ... there are loads of things you can cook and google will find you heaps of recipes!
I'm on my third machine (and fourth, I have a spare) and wouldn't be without it or the sealer(s) - being able to cook a slow cooker full of chilli, bag it in "double portions" and freeze it for a year or more. Then just grab a bag, throw it in the sous vide and reheat at 80C for an hour while a jacket potato cooks is great for easy meals!
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
(nothing to add except)
me want to get one kit (air sucker machine, circulator)
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
If so, what you use it for? Why (if you would) would you advocate for it?
I'm learning Python and while I find it a nice RAD environment, basically the nearest thing to VB6 in 2022, there are some features that just puzzle me - not for how to use them but for when and why.
GCS d--(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
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I'm learning Python ... basically the nearest thing to VB6 in 2022
That's not a complement.
Accurate though ... 
"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: That's not a complement.
That would be the inverse 
Honestly it is almost a compliment, as VB6 was near unbeatable for writing hard and fast tools. Need to communicate with an alien artifact? VB6 and a C++ DLL then, Python and a C++ DLL now. Need to automate a couple of operations with a bunch of flags and selection? VB6 and a C++ DLL then, Python and a C++ DLL now.
Add that Python is mostly portable, it even has the same limitations (monothread) which are actually a blessing in disguise. Tkinter has even a similar graphical appearance. It allows immediate code execution. Functionally they truly are the same.
GCS d--(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
|
|
|
|
|
Why are so down on VB6? It is just a language, like any other. If used properly, it is good.
If not used properly, like any other language, it is bad.
VB6ers Unite!
|
|
|
|
|
It contains "On Error Resume Next" which is an abomination. 
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I use them quite often, to refactor lists, extract subsets etc. Section 5. Data Structures — Python 3.9.10 documentation[^] in The Python Tutorial gives some nice examples. The more time you spend with Python the more you find them useful.
Oh, and I think you need to reword element 0 of your oath.
|
|
|
|
|
What is the advantage of using its kind of alien notation instead of writing a standard loop that does it? Legitimately asking.
Richard MacCutchan wrote: Oh, and I think you need to reword element 0 of your oath.
I already programmed in PowerShell, bash and VB6 (Variant, anyone?). It's more a suggestion than oath
GCS d--(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
|
|
|
|
|
It is just a neat shorthand, and normal loops are still better in some cases.
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to what Richard said, they're useful for side-effect-less list creation for simple lists.
list = []
for x in range(20):
list.append(x * 2)
vs
list = [x * 2 for x in range(20)]
That's my understanding at least. I don't really use Python.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - basically whenever I need to populate a list.
|
|
|
|
|
Why a list comprehension and not a typical loop? Doesn't it make it harder to maintain?
GCS d--(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
|
|
|
|
|
More concise.
Cheers,
Vikram.
|
|
|
|
|
Easier, more readable, less prone to bugs...
|
|
|
|
|
I assume everyone has played with let me google that for you. If not google it. HAHAHA
But anyway. I was looking thru the questions in the programming areas and let me just say 2 things.
1. WOW - people are stupid and want others to do their work.
2. WOW - people here on CP are amazingly patient.
I am making a suggestion that everyone should just respond with a 'let me google that for you' link.
for example a question in one forum about room size calculations. respond with this link.
LMGTFY - Let Me Google That For You[^]
This teaches them to use the Googlies the way they were meant to be used.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
People knock it, but as much as half of my coding is googling sometimes.
Using google well is an acquired skill.
Being able to code from example is as well.
Contrary to popular belief, you can create good code by using google to find examples. You just have to evaluate whatever it comes up with, which requires actual programming skills.
Maybe it would benefit these people to brush up on their search-fu.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I can't agree enough on this. Anyone can go to Google, but not everyone can figure out what keywords to use, or how to filter through the good results from the krappy ones. From there, you still need to figure out how to apply what you found to your own situation. Not everyone is able to do that. Even after Google, they will still need help.
To this day, the best compliment I have ever received in my career came back when I was in my twenties, and trying to break out of the low level job market. I sat next to another applicant waiting for my interview, and got a peek at his resume. This guy had the education and the experience to outdo me 10x over, but I was the one offered the job. When I asked my new manager how I got picked over the other guy, he gave me the perfect answer. "He knows everything we need him to know, and can do everything we need him to be able to do ... now. In the future, if there are any new changes, he will be stuck. You, on the other hand, only know half of what we need. But if something is needed, you'll know how to find out." Thirty years later in my career, and I still consider that the best thing anyone has said to me professionally.
I've been the guy struggling to figure something out, without having anyone there to help me out. I didn't like it.
I've seen people struggling to figure something out. If I am able to give a clue or a hint, I'm not going to leave them hanging.
In my opinion, (please note that this statement is not directed at anyone in particular) "just Google it" or "RTFM" are answers given by people who should not have bothered to post an answer to begin with, since as answers go, they are less helpful than not answering at all.
Money makes the world go round ... but documentation moves the money.
|
|
|
|
|
willichan wrote: In my opinion, (please note that this statement is not directed at anyone in particular) "just Google it" or "RTFM" are answers given by people who should not have bothered to post an answer to begin with, since as answers go, they are less helpful than not answering at all.
I completely agree with this statement! All that that type of response does is clutter the landscape for future users with the same question.
If a Google search reveals to you a solution that is more clear than you could be to answer the question, then give a link to the article preferably with a quick synapsis. Just because your "search-fu" can find the article doesn't mean the questioner would be able to do the same.
A few years back I had googled unsuccessfully for quite some time on how to do some DB operation. I finally asked a colleague if she knew and she said she didn't but let's google it. She typed in a search phrase much like many I had made but used a couple synonyms I hadn't thought to try. The exact answer I was looking for was the 2nd or 3rd link in the results. I not only learned the answer but also gained a better understanding in searching. In this case this was a personal interaction but the same info as a post would have been just as welcome. Whereas sending me back to more incessant googling on my own would have been the epitome of frustrating.
|
|
|
|
|
If you do, be prepared for Chris to punch you[^].
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I think it would be a bad reputation for the CP website if 50% of the answers were "use Google or Bing for a websearch" ...
And who is stupid - the persons who let others to do the work for them or those who really do that work?
|
|
|
|
|
Jo_vb.net wrote: I think it would be a bad reputation for the CP website if 50% of the answers were "use Google or Bing for a websearch" ...
I mean, why reinventing SO?
GCS d--(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
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
