|
|
Here[^]
The sidebar does not expand like it does on the other pages. It simply links to another page.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
IT works fine for me. Which browser?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I think it was a Firefox goof, as it works fine now.  I will take a screenshot if it happens again.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
And one more for the Maunder Dictionary[^]!
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all, I have been thinking about posting this during a time.
First of all I want to congratulate the CP-Staff for their work. I know that you already have plenty of work with the site as it is, but I would like to suggest the creation of a new section, because I see that CP is one of the best sites in the net and it involves more and more technologies with the time.
The section I want to suggest is about industry automation. That could involve PLC-Programming, Robot-Programming, Scripting in HMI-Scadas, Bus-Hardware and things like that.
Many people will consider that those subjects are not worth enough to be considered here, but I can tell that industry programming can be tricky and difficult enough to deserve a place in CP where people can ask and learn about these themes.
I know that PLCs and HMIs have a huge graphical / object programming part and that they are very machine related, that can make difficult to understand the problem in some situations, but there are a lot of general situations and different ways to program things.
There are languages that could be comparable to others already covered in CP. For instance: AWL and SCL in Siemens PLCs, Scripts for WinCC Flex (based in VB), Database for the communication and protocolling, Interaction between PLCs and PCs, Ethernet and Socket Protocols, Robot scripting, Visual recognition and image processing… And on the side of Hardware: Configuration of Bus-Slaves, Servomotors, interaction between peripheral elements. Communication Protocols as CAN Bus, Profibus, Profinet, Ethernet…
I have been talking to some members of CP that already have a bit background in this technologies, one of the most known is Sascha Barber (I asked for permission to use his name) and they are agree that could be a good idea and that these technologies are worth to be considered a part of our community. That’s the reason why I have decided to post this suggestion to see if there are more members that could be interested and if the CP-Staff would think about the possibility of adding the section.
Thank you very much and sorry for the long post.
Regards.
--------
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 helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a great idea. We have a hardware section, but I'm always looking for one. Typically what we do is we'll have a generic section, with specific subsections, and then as the subsections expand we may break out the subsections into their own sections.
I can't actually think of any software related article topics we wouldn't want.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
modified 11-Nov-12 20:59pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Congrats on the new entry into the Maunder Dictionary[^]!
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
Did I mention I'm hungover? I actually think I'm still in bed with a pillow over my head. Or at least I should be.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Who doesn't want to be in bed with a pillow over their head? I know I would (and I am in bed. No pillow though)
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
Stephen Hawking
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for your feedback Chris. I was a bit afraid about it. If you need more details or examples about what I was meaning, so you can make the section, sub-section structure... don't hesitate to contact me. I will be glad on helping you as good as I can.
Regards.
--------
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 helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Two thoughts on this
1. Would this fit into the "Internet of Things" chapter? I'm not sure it would but wanted to clarify your thoughts. Automation of hardware doesn't necessarily mean "connected" hardware in an IoT theme.
2. Again, we need articles before we have a section or subsection. Any lying around you feel would fit in a potential section or subsection?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
thanks for answering.
1) I am not really sure what you mean about "Internet of Things". The connections of this hardware are not necessarily with internet (it can). Usually is more intranet or just TCP/IP connection to send data to a server. The rest of the communication buses are not ethernet related and just local nets.
2) I didn't understand you correctly last time. I was waiting to know more before spending time writing. I will start with some things and come back to you in the future, so you can have a look and decide.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Because of a possibly unique "black swan" event involving being unable to un-install Visual Studio 2012 RC1, and then RTM, and then being unable to re-install, and use, my licensed version of VS Studio 2010 Pro, a month of time was lost for me in terms of being able to use VS. Hats off to one MS tech support person (and not paid support) who really stuck with me all the way through some hairy experiments that finally got me VS 2010 Studio Pro working again !
During this time, I didn't participate in Q&A, because I like, when I give responses with code, which I do frequently, to verify the code has actually compiled, and runs properly.
So tonight I dived in.
Came across the usual long posts by the same person giving boastful, off-topic replies (often turning into mini-lectures), complete with pasted-in links to many of his own previous QA answers, many of which are totally off-topic in terms of the OP's question.
Then I spent at least twenty minutes of my time, researching, thinking about, the following QA question: [^], and refining my answer to it. I tried to expand my answer in a section titled ("Speculation that may not be relevant to you") to raise additional issues I thought would be of interest to others, and might evoke some interesting responses from other CP members.
The link I gave in the first paragraph of my answer contains code the user could immediately use to solve his stated problem (if he were to give up his idea that he must use "parallel," which he only loosely defines in his question). I had previously asked the OP, in a comment, to clarify what he meant by "parallel."
Now, I find this answer has been quickly 1-voted (-16 points). I don't care about my "rep" that much, but this sudden down-vote gives me a very creepy feeling, and this event coupled with the fact nothing has been done, after so many discussions of the off-topic, combatively toned, responses given by one "dominant" (meaning posting with astounding frequency) Q&A poster:
Uh, this gives me a very creepy feeling, and perhaps I will, like Pete O'Hanlon said he was doing, several months ago, stop participating in Q&A.
It's time something was done in terms of the structure of Q&A; there have been many discussions about this here over the last 18 months, many proposals, by several people, including myself, and, for example, this post, recently, by Richard MacCutchan [^].
I accept, in posting this, that I may be describing an "intractable" problem, in that any change in QA may, either, involve a lot of work by CP staff, or involve the "metaphysical" issue of "who will put the bell on the cat."
And, I do believe that "the more freedom the better," which I also believe (to the extent I can infer Chris' principles) is a strong principle in Chris' guiding our community.
So, if you respond to this with: "just get over it"  That's cool, and I will try !
thanks, Bill
~
Confused by Windows 8 ? This may help: [ ^] !
|
|
|
|
|
You have my sympathies. I have added a +5 to your answer but it seems the 1-vote was from some big hitter; I will not speculate as to the identity of the miscreant. As to "the person of the long posts", I went through the same agonising a while back, but decided that I could either leave Q&A altogether, or just live with it. I decided on the latter, as I would rather continue to contribute to Q&A, not least because I actually learn quite a lot from it.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm. Univote countered.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Pete. Probably just one of my many fans who can't tell the difference between 1 and 5.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps it's time to think of that really clever signature; win them over.
|
|
|
|
|
I concur with Richard, and added my +5 as well.
Don't give up - do just try to ignore the downvotes - we need all the intelligent people we can get over there to counteract the idiots! And as Richard says, I also learn a lot by answering questions (even if it is quite often that I could use an anger management course  )
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm starting to think that voting for answers on Quick answers is the one place where having only a "good answer" button makes sense. An answer is either a good answer, an answer, or inappropriate / off-topic. Maybe it's worth an experiment.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure about that. I have seen some pretty bad answers in Q&A, and have probably been guilty of one or two myself.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
What happened about voting on comments - that seemed like a good idea, it would discourage some of what is hacking those of us who have been hacked off in Q&A.
|
|
|
|
|
I gave you my 5, too.
I also experienced the same thing, fast 1 star only vote, in the last weeks.
If there were an explaining comment, why the answer is downvoted, someone could better understand.
|
|
|
|
|
You are not alone in this, I too have pretty much curtailed my Q&A activities. Pity because I (as others have said) also learn from the process, and I get to put back into the community I found so helpful when I was starting out.
After a big gap in Q&A I was shocked by the number of people who were emulating the bad behaviour, especially the number of *snippy* "You haven't put any effort in" type comments to questions coming from new members. This behaviour has obviously been learned.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
