|
So, if you had a crystal ball, what would be the next trends? Personal robots? AI? Virtual gear?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: what would be the next trends?
Same ol' same ol'.
|
|
|
|
|
The substance of my comment was that I don't see "security" as a trend. It's just something that software needs to do, and has done so since the beginning.
"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
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is Structured Programming? GOTO deemed deprecated: a bedtime story
|
|
|
|
|
You know, that makes we wonder, what would code look like if every a function could only be composed of other functions calls, or an if statement of other function calls, or an iteration statement of other function calls?
If you had to write a non-function call statement (one that doesn't end in () -- after all, even an indexer is a function call of sorts), it would have to be a one line function.
So, for example, this real code (for an upcoming article):
DataGridViewRow dgvr = dgvStudy.SelectedRows[0];
DataRowView drv = (DataRowView)dgvr.DataBoundItem;
DataRow row = drv.Row;
Neuron n = rowNeuronMap[row];
would have to be written as this without violating my above rule:
DataGridViewRow dgvr = GetSelectedRow(dgvStudy);
DataRowView drv = GetBoundItem(dgvr);
DataRow row = GetRow(drv);
Neuron n = GetNeuron(row);
Where each of the functions on the right are the one-liners that return the result of evaluating the expression in the first code example.
Hmmm...you know, that works for me. It would be an interesting discipline to code that way.
(and if anyone wants a sneak peak[^] at the article related to the code example, maybe the word "neuron" spiked (harhar) your interest...)
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
What I don't see mentioned enough is that what really helps eliminate a reliance on GOTO is the statement block. Without statement blocks, nearly everything would have to be in functions/subroutines/procedures/methods/whatever which may have some advantages, but could very easily become a maintenance nightmare. (And it could lead to glogal variables  to eliminate parameters.)
|
|
|
|
|
One of the challenges Microsoft faces is that some people haven't upgraded their Office suite for several years, despite the company's releasing new versions. It's only fair: they keep adding half-a-version's worth of features
|
|
|
|
|
I'd pay full price* if they put the menues back.
* For small values of "full price".
|
|
|
|
|
Ditto.
Office 2003 rocks. 
They will have to pay me to upgrade without beloved menu (and tool bars).
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I never understood what's so great about the menus and so bad about the ribbon. Honestly, I think one major reason why so many people seem to despise the ribbon is that Microsoft fails to communicate how their stuff works when they first introduce it. The Windows 8 UI is another example. They incorporate new UI paradigms into their software without proper explanation, still they wonder why no one else seems to like these changes. I mean, it's really telling when people start complaining that they cannot find the button to shutdown their PC anymore. They become frustrated easily and just don't like to deal with the new stuff any longer. I bet that everyone who seriously spends some time working with the ribbon, figuring out how it works and where to find the things they need, they won't miss the menus at all.
|
|
|
|
|
The issue is that they removed what people were used to, for no reason at all. They could easily have allowed both systems to exist in the software.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure that's another point. Again, Windows 8 is a good example where they removed that Start menu, giving people no choice. The reason might be that it's just easier to remove the old stuff because so they don't have to maintain and support both.
|
|
|
|
|
Menu is a standard access method in any windows software. That is what make windows so successful.
When you encounter a software for first time, the common menu organisation helps you to get started.
With ribbon, you have to learn by heart cryptic icons that you will not encounter is any other software, and in another software, the same function is likely to have another icon.
If ribbon is so genius, why VBA editor (in office) still have menus and tools bars ?
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't say that the ribbon was genius but it indeed has obvious advantages over simple menus if you take a closer look, like they're context-aware, for example. When you select a command on a menu, it's gone. Sure, you can deal with context using toolbars, but at some point the UI gets cluttered unless you're someone who really spends a lot of time arranging and customizing the UI to your likes. And after you managed this, imagine you have to work on the PC of someone else for some hours or a day, with a completely different arrangement... To some extend, the ribbon can be customized too, but generally you'll find the things you're looking for always at the same place, and they're easier to discover than through endless cascades of sub-menus. It's kind of the best of both worlds (menus and toolbars), and it's intelligent enough to hide the stuff that is not important in the current context (for example, table tools are only visible if you're working within a table).
Sure, menu is a standard access method, but at the same time it's kind of dogmatic to insist that every application has to stick with them. That's kind of a road-block for progress, and the ribbon is not only change but progress IMO.
The reason why the VBA editor still has menus and toolbars? I don't know, maybe they choose it's not suitable? Not important enough to upgrade because only a minority of people uses it? I mean, you could also ask why Visual Studio didn't embrace the ribbon as well but I guess one point is that it might turn into a nightmare when extensions start to extend the thing...
|
|
|
|
|
FIorian Schneidereit wrote: they're context-aware
I absolutely positively do not want that. I don't like things moving around.
Even in Office 2003 the default is for the menues to only show the "common" parts and add more as you use them, but I always select Tools|Customize|Option|Always show full menus so they always stay the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, so then the ribbon isn't made for you.  But I've never seen stuff moving around, all the context-sensitive stuff appears (and disapperars) always at the end of the normal tabs (?).
|
|
|
|
|
Related to that is in Visual Studio when editing an SSIS project -- some times the Format menu is there, some times it isn't -- depending on context -- but I'd rather it merely enabled/disabled rather than appearing/disappearing. 
Real-world objects like toasters and microwaves don't do this.
Don't try to save me from myself.
Don't try to show how clever you are.
|
|
|
|
|
ppolymorphe wrote: If ribbon is so genius, why VBA editor (in office) still have menus and tools bars ?
Because they ripped off the VB6 (VB5?) editor 20 years ago, but it was written in VB and is such a cluster elephant that they can't figure out how to change anything and the userbase isn't big enough to justify a rewrite?
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Desperation
See sig ↓
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Safe Harbor agreement doesn't do enough to protect private data of EU residents. "So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. "
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like he has something to hide.
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
The mills of the Courts grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly small...
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone has the mornings to themselves. Better yet: if you call morning meetings, bring pillows for everyone
|
|
|
|
|
The Future of Programmers[^]
I'm not entirely convinced but it makes interesting reading.
"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
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
