Using multiple exit points (returns) in a single function is, IMHO, worse than using GOTO.
It makes you have to execute your clean up code in each exit point you have, which means you have to repeat code. You have to keep the cleanup code always synchronized accross all exit points.
I can't buy music online because no service that I know of works in my country.
By the way, all of the points you mention seem like valid complaints to me. Instead of blaming it on consumers you should analyze how long it's taking them to acknowledge each one of them, and fix them. They're just not listening enough.
You can't play with your music, you can't introduce new elements (or your character) to a movie...
I'm sorry, but that's pretty narrow-minded - if you think music always sounds the same and that therefore you have no reason to listen to it more than once, you either have truly horrific taste in music or you don't pay much attention to it. I've listened to some albums hundreds of times and I keep hearing new things, making new connections, realizing new influences and learning from them. Video games might be more expansive, but they are ultimately finite in scope - a good album breathes and grows depending on the other stuff you listen to, on what you bring to the table. Video games are like stale bubblegum from a supermarket vending machine in comparison.
I could take an axe to my game systems tomorrow and not shed a tear, but the thought of living without music scares the piss outta me.
Music ain't that much these days. I realize your perception of it may change over time, but that's as far as it gets. In a videogame like GTA or many others, you can face a very wide spectrum of situations you don't expect, so there's much more stimulation available to you.
The magic of videogames is the freedom they offer. It's the ultimate form of entertainment.
So SAP is either with the Open Source movement or against it? Reminds me of Bush.
You know, we would do much better if we realized there ARE shades of grey between black and white.
Apple's belief that they should be a hardware company (as they were when they started) is what keeps their share of the market from growing. If they want to grow (maybe they don't really want to, and that's okay too) then they are going to have to change. It seems to ancient idea now when hardware (including their own) has become commodity to such an extent.
Apple's main asset is their image. They would damage it if they didn't control it like they do by carefully selecting all hardware and software.
They are not here to fight Microsoft or Windows... they're here to bring us a new business model based on getting tech gadgets that simply do the job, and do it right. Releasing their OS for all hardware would bring in more gold in the short run, but would probably change their image and turn them into just another software vendor.
The USPTO should start denying patent applications that contain this kind of deliberately obfuscative gobbledegook. This is like describing cup of coffee as a "insulating ceramic material vessel for the transportation of central nervous system-stimulant-laden liquids of temperatures approaching gradual evaporation adapted to both manipulation and imbibation for the purposes of maximum early-hours alertness and/or circadian rhythm modulation." It's like reading Foucault.
So Basically the company was able to present evidence that Microsoft intentionally reviewed, and then disregarded the patent and implemented the same feature as the patent holder tried to sell them. That probably didn't sit very well with the jury. Microsoft should have been a good citizen and tried to strike down the ridiculous patent, rather than just ignore it and hope for the best.
That's a very good point, but what's so wrong about copying the idea? Is the idea THAT good that it needs to be patented and protected as such?
It's not like this particular idea is doing any good for us all... so why grant the patent?
The issue, however, is that SAP made claims based on little to no information, nor people who had any idea on what the outcomes should be. Now, I'm no project management expert, but this seems like a monumentally stupid thing to do.
Whether the demo was rigged or not, SAP went into an agreement without full details and without real confidence that the product they are delivering would actually do what the client wants.
IMHO it's more complex than that. There's guilt in both sides.
Customers are guilty in that they often don't bother trying to check if what they are being sold is feasible at all. The end result is that most of the times they are willing to pay for more features in less time, even when that "more" is clearly an impossible goal. For instance if I asked you to develop an MSN clone with a proprietary protocol from scratch, and you told me it'd be ready in a week for $20, I would look for someone else to get it done.
Problem is when the customer doesn't know better, and is unreasonable.
After upgrading a server, we watched a client verify the server through his daily application. The client entered data and clicked on submit, the next screen appeared instantly. "This is not possible" said the client "it takes about two seconds to submit data to the database"!
"But the new server is much faster!" we said. It didn't matter, the client refused to believe the data was really submitted.
We held a meeting about this 'problem'. One developer suggested to add a two second 'do nothing' loop to the submit button.
So we patched the server and asked the client to verify again. He entered data, clicked 'submit' and was very happy to have his two second delay back! "Now it works..." he said "...now the data is entering the database!".
We admitted our fault (knowing very well that all we added was a two second delay).
cheers
It should have been enough to show him the data was being stored in the DB.
The response to my submission: "Can't see a need to move the button during this development cycle - agents to be told to stop clicking the wrong button."
The real problem is something I've been seen happen really often, which is unreasonable bosses expecting you to never make mistakes at all.
I agree that people should be careful with what they do in order to avoid mistakes, but we're ultimately humans and always prone to errors, so it's unreasonable to reject a perfectly good suggestion like separating the buttons, and ask instead to be more careful.
I have to make reports the whole day at work, and the data I have to use as the source for these reports is stored in a database I have no access to. So my boss expects me to go everyday through 160+ different pages each day and manually grab the information, and most importantly, make no mistakes at all.
I've tried programming a program to download the data, but it's no easy task, as the web page is dynamically generated using javascript.
Wow, that's one interesting post to reply to. I think you deserve an answer:
1 - I am a MacOS user, but have used Win at work mostly together with Linux and Unix in some instances. I understand the advantages of windows at work, love OS X for pleasure and enjoy linux for server tasks mostly.
2 - Free (as in libre) software is not an end to me, but another mean to an end. I have to say I pretty much prefer the concept of Open Source software, and maybe BSD is the license I would choose for my own work if I had the chance.
3 - You sound to be judging me for my choices in certain parts of your posts. I have tried Ubuntu but have not used it for long mostly because I use other tools for the job. I haven't used any linux distro in GUI mode, but rather work using Red Hat and command line tools developing software for a Bank. So I wouldn't be a great judge of Linux for the desktop. But I haven't rejected it either as soon as I found it didn't have Comics Sans.
4 - I do think my point was clear, and it was that free software is not an end, and it shouldn't be used as an excuse to damper progress. Only that. It has its advantages, but this is not one of them.
I believe he uses the word "must" as in "you must not try to check if your gas tank with a lighter". You are free to do so, but he wants to tell you that it is a bad idea. And in his opinion, it is a ridiculously bad idea. It is certainly worse than proprietary software, and we all know what he thinks of that.
I would have to agree with him. Preferring software as a service vs. software running on your machine is a bad idea. It might be convinient in many cases, but you shouldn't trust a third party with your data and your work, especially when you can avoid it. It might not look that bad, but as you already have the tools on your computer, it's not worth it even if the issues don't look like a big deal to you.
This does not apply in each case you use 'software as a service'. Examples of acceptable use of software running on someone else's server would include using Slashdot for news discussion, using web hosting services and using GNU Savannah for your software project. His point is not to use Google Docs to edit your private documents, and not to use Gmail to send your private mails, or to be more specific - not to let them become a replacement for your office suite and mail client/server.
Of course, avoiding any software services is nuts, it is not needed, and it is not even possible. And running a program on your friend's server doesn't hurt, either. You should, however, be well aware of the risks. Unfortunately, in many cases you have to trust your data to a third party. Read stories about leaked private information here lately? Then I say you shouldn't let your word processing and spreadsheet needs become a part of those cases. Simply don't do it.
I totally disagree. I realize there may be some inconveniences with using online services sometimes, but we should try and face the challenges to solve those issues, instead of simply tagging them as evil.
If there are privacy issues, we should look for ways to avoid them, by using cryptography or legistlation where necessary.
It's all about progress. We wouldn't be doing ourselves a favor by just rejecting it. We should embrace it and fix whatever issues show up in the way.
So, let me get this straight. It's not illegal to break your employer's confidence and send a full dump of sensitive emails automatically to your private email account where you sell them to an interested third party?
That's on of the advantages of the new Geniune Advantage Privacy Act.
So next time I pick up a hooker, it'll be OK if I beat her on top of screwing her, as long as I give her an extra $40 or so? Or If I send an extra $40 to the government as a "sin tax"?
Playing a violent videogame is not violence per-se. It should be regulated in some way sure, but never compared to real violence.
There is an idea that Open source developers are somehow under and obligation to give everyone what they want, for fun and for free.
Well from the perspective of the developer you are right. But then the developer wonders why people still prefer other options, and the reason is the same one: because there are bugs that won't get fixed unless he pays up.
I'm trying to put things in perspective, I believe that the developer should do as he pleases, but one must be reasonable in what to expect from his own work if he doesn't listen to the end-user's requests.
It will certainly not be the program of choice if there are unattended bugs. It's simply a matter of cause and effect.
Sorry but I disagree. I do agree that being polite is important, and if I was speaking with the person that was in charge of the work I'm criticizing I would not be talking that way. Diminishing other people's effort was not the message I wanted to get across and I think you are misreading into my intentions, and maybe I chose my words poorly! Nothing a good clarification can't fix.
In any case what I wrote was absolutely hypothetical as if someone else was speaking. I am a developer and I know that sometimes people just get mad at programs. Good decisions should be defended, and bad ones should be acknowledged... but never taking things too personally, especially if the person is not really trying to be rude at you, but instead is trying to get his/her point across.
I understand hobbyists may not be interested in hearing complaints about their work (especially rude ones), but anyone seriously interested in making Linux the best option should be.
5GB is the download cap, not upload, so those words would be spread across several contacts writing them. On top of that emails use up on average 59 Kb, so one would have to factor that in.
But the overall conclusion seems right to me, and it is that for most eMail and IM purposes the cap is enough.
The only problem is when you surf a lot, since web pages can eat up MBs rather quickly. This is not something the average Joe would have trouble with though IMO.
And there's your problem. If you would just ask the question in a civilized tone, you'll get a better answer, and perhaps a result. Don't start out with a blanket generalization and the implied accusation of incompetence.
You took what I said out of context, the whole phrase was:
If I were to say Linux sucks because it doesn't have X or Y, most Linux users/developers would just reply that I should code it myself or shut up.
This is not an attack on someone, it's not an attack on a person, no matter how you feel about it. It's criticism on Linux because it lacks some feature I am specifically commenting on ("...because it doesn't have X or Y..."). X or Y could have nothing to do with the programming part of it. It could be just about anything.
In any case I wouldn't feel offended if someone said that one of my program sucks because it lacks some important feature. I would take the chance and see for my self if doing something about it would improve the overall experience for my users.
In any case, being aggressive about it was not the purpose: the word "sucks" was used to synthesize my point.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you, GOTO for cleaning up code is much better than multiple exit points in the same function and cleaning up a gazillon times.
Using multiple exit points (returns) in a single function is, IMHO, worse than using GOTO.
It makes you have to execute your clean up code in each exit point you have, which means you have to repeat code. You have to keep the cleanup code always synchronized accross all exit points.
Does anybody know if this woman is accepting contributions?
Maybe the proper way to fight this BS could be to put our money where our mouth is. I would certainly send some money to support her.
You read the parent? I have no clue if you did since I didn't even read your post...
I can't buy music online because no service that I know of works in my country.
By the way, all of the points you mention seem like valid complaints to me. Instead of blaming it on consumers you should analyze how long it's taking them to acknowledge each one of them, and fix them. They're just not listening enough.
You can't play with your music, you can't introduce new elements (or your character) to a movie...
I'm sorry, but that's pretty narrow-minded - if you think music always sounds the same and that therefore you have no reason to listen to it more than once, you either have truly horrific taste in music or you don't pay much attention to it. I've listened to some albums hundreds of times and I keep hearing new things, making new connections, realizing new influences and learning from them. Video games might be more expansive, but they are ultimately finite in scope - a good album breathes and grows depending on the other stuff you listen to, on what you bring to the table. Video games are like stale bubblegum from a supermarket vending machine in comparison.
I could take an axe to my game systems tomorrow and not shed a tear, but the thought of living without music scares the piss outta me.
Music ain't that much these days. I realize your perception of it may change over time, but that's as far as it gets. In a videogame like GTA or many others, you can face a very wide spectrum of situations you don't expect, so there's much more stimulation available to you.
The magic of videogames is the freedom they offer. It's the ultimate form of entertainment.
So SAP is either with the Open Source movement or against it? Reminds me of Bush. You know, we would do much better if we realized there ARE shades of grey between black and white.
Apple's belief that they should be a hardware company (as they were when they started) is what keeps their share of the market from growing. If they want to grow (maybe they don't really want to, and that's okay too) then they are going to have to change. It seems to ancient idea now when hardware (including their own) has become commodity to such an extent.
Apple's main asset is their image. They would damage it if they didn't control it like they do by carefully selecting all hardware and software.
They are not here to fight Microsoft or Windows... they're here to bring us a new business model based on getting tech gadgets that simply do the job, and do it right. Releasing their OS for all hardware would bring in more gold in the short run, but would probably change their image and turn them into just another software vendor.
That's a good point too. Lazy customers are a PITA!
The USPTO should start denying patent applications that contain this kind of deliberately obfuscative gobbledegook. This is like describing cup of coffee as a "insulating ceramic material vessel for the transportation of central nervous system-stimulant-laden liquids of temperatures approaching gradual evaporation adapted to both manipulation and imbibation for the purposes of maximum early-hours alertness and/or circadian rhythm modulation." It's like reading Foucault.
You sir, have made me laugh.
So Basically the company was able to present evidence that Microsoft intentionally reviewed, and then disregarded the patent and implemented the same feature as the patent holder tried to sell them. That probably didn't sit very well with the jury. Microsoft should have been a good citizen and tried to strike down the ridiculous patent, rather than just ignore it and hope for the best.
That's a very good point, but what's so wrong about copying the idea? Is the idea THAT good that it needs to be patented and protected as such?
It's not like this particular idea is doing any good for us all... so why grant the patent?
Sounds like most projects I've worked on.
The issue, however, is that SAP made claims based on little to no information, nor people who had any idea on what the outcomes should be. Now, I'm no project management expert, but this seems like a monumentally stupid thing to do.
Whether the demo was rigged or not, SAP went into an agreement without full details and without real confidence that the product they are delivering would actually do what the client wants.
IMHO it's more complex than that. There's guilt in both sides.
Customers are guilty in that they often don't bother trying to check if what they are being sold is feasible at all. The end result is that most of the times they are willing to pay for more features in less time, even when that "more" is clearly an impossible goal. For instance if I asked you to develop an MSN clone with a proprietary protocol from scratch, and you told me it'd be ready in a week for $20, I would look for someone else to get it done.
Problem is when the customer doesn't know better, and is unreasonable.
After upgrading a server, we watched a client verify the server through his daily application. The client entered data and clicked on submit, the next screen appeared instantly. "This is not possible" said the client "it takes about two seconds to submit data to the database"!
"But the new server is much faster!" we said. It didn't matter, the client refused to believe the data was really submitted.
We held a meeting about this 'problem'. One developer suggested to add a two second 'do nothing' loop to the submit button.
So we patched the server and asked the client to verify again. He entered data, clicked 'submit' and was very happy to have his two second delay back! "Now it works..." he said "...now the data is entering the database!".
We admitted our fault (knowing very well that all we added was a two second delay).
cheers
It should have been enough to show him the data was being stored in the DB.
The real problem is something I've been seen happen really often, which is unreasonable bosses expecting you to never make mistakes at all.
I agree that people should be careful with what they do in order to avoid mistakes, but we're ultimately humans and always prone to errors, so it's unreasonable to reject a perfectly good suggestion like separating the buttons, and ask instead to be more careful.
I have to make reports the whole day at work, and the data I have to use as the source for these reports is stored in a database I have no access to. So my boss expects me to go everyday through 160+ different pages each day and manually grab the information, and most importantly, make no mistakes at all.
I've tried programming a program to download the data, but it's no easy task, as the web page is dynamically generated using javascript.
Wow, that's one interesting post to reply to. I think you deserve an answer:
1 - I am a MacOS user, but have used Win at work mostly together with Linux and Unix in some instances. I understand the advantages of windows at work, love OS X for pleasure and enjoy linux for server tasks mostly.
2 - Free (as in libre) software is not an end to me, but another mean to an end. I have to say I pretty much prefer the concept of Open Source software, and maybe BSD is the license I would choose for my own work if I had the chance.
3 - You sound to be judging me for my choices in certain parts of your posts. I have tried Ubuntu but have not used it for long mostly because I use other tools for the job. I haven't used any linux distro in GUI mode, but rather work using Red Hat and command line tools developing software for a Bank. So I wouldn't be a great judge of Linux for the desktop. But I haven't rejected it either as soon as I found it didn't have Comics Sans.
4 - I do think my point was clear, and it was that free software is not an end, and it shouldn't be used as an excuse to damper progress. Only that. It has its advantages, but this is not one of them.
Salut.
I believe he uses the word "must" as in "you must not try to check if your gas tank with a lighter". You are free to do so, but he wants to tell you that it is a bad idea. And in his opinion, it is a ridiculously bad idea. It is certainly worse than proprietary software, and we all know what he thinks of that.
I would have to agree with him. Preferring software as a service vs. software running on your machine is a bad idea. It might be convinient in many cases, but you shouldn't trust a third party with your data and your work, especially when you can avoid it. It might not look that bad, but as you already have the tools on your computer, it's not worth it even if the issues don't look like a big deal to you.
This does not apply in each case you use 'software as a service'. Examples of acceptable use of software running on someone else's server would include using Slashdot for news discussion, using web hosting services and using GNU Savannah for your software project. His point is not to use Google Docs to edit your private documents, and not to use Gmail to send your private mails, or to be more specific - not to let them become a replacement for your office suite and mail client/server.
Of course, avoiding any software services is nuts, it is not needed, and it is not even possible. And running a program on your friend's server doesn't hurt, either. You should, however, be well aware of the risks. Unfortunately, in many cases you have to trust your data to a third party. Read stories about leaked private information here lately? Then I say you shouldn't let your word processing and spreadsheet needs become a part of those cases. Simply don't do it.
I totally disagree. I realize there may be some inconveniences with using online services sometimes, but we should try and face the challenges to solve those issues, instead of simply tagging them as evil.
If there are privacy issues, we should look for ways to avoid them, by using cryptography or legistlation where necessary.
It's all about progress. We wouldn't be doing ourselves a favor by just rejecting it. We should embrace it and fix whatever issues show up in the way.
At those distances, I'd have gone wireless. Wait to string ethernet to the space station until we're done with the space elevator.
I wonder what the support guys think about the wire.
heheh, nice definition :-)
Oh, yeah, that's right. "Theft of intellectual property" isn't a legal charge.
"intellectual property" as in stealing books and paintings?
So, let me get this straight. It's not illegal to break your employer's confidence and send a full dump of sensitive emails automatically to your private email account where you sell them to an interested third party?
That's on of the advantages of the new Geniune Advantage Privacy Act.
So next time I pick up a hooker, it'll be OK if I beat her on top of screwing her, as long as I give her an extra $40 or so? Or If I send an extra $40 to the government as a "sin tax"?
Playing a violent videogame is not violence per-se. It should be regulated in some way sure, but never compared to real violence.
There is an idea that Open source developers are somehow under and obligation to give everyone what they want, for fun and for free.
Well from the perspective of the developer you are right. But then the developer wonders why people still prefer other options, and the reason is the same one: because there are bugs that won't get fixed unless he pays up.
I'm trying to put things in perspective, I believe that the developer should do as he pleases, but one must be reasonable in what to expect from his own work if he doesn't listen to the end-user's requests.
It will certainly not be the program of choice if there are unattended bugs. It's simply a matter of cause and effect.
Sorry but I disagree. I do agree that being polite is important, and if I was speaking with the person that was in charge of the work I'm criticizing I would not be talking that way. Diminishing other people's effort was not the message I wanted to get across and I think you are misreading into my intentions, and maybe I chose my words poorly! Nothing a good clarification can't fix.
In any case what I wrote was absolutely hypothetical as if someone else was speaking. I am a developer and I know that sometimes people just get mad at programs. Good decisions should be defended, and bad ones should be acknowledged... but never taking things too personally, especially if the person is not really trying to be rude at you, but instead is trying to get his/her point across.
I understand hobbyists may not be interested in hearing complaints about their work (especially rude ones), but anyone seriously interested in making Linux the best option should be.
5GB is the download cap, not upload, so those words would be spread across several contacts writing them. On top of that emails use up on average 59 Kb, so one would have to factor that in.
But the overall conclusion seems right to me, and it is that for most eMail and IM purposes the cap is enough.
The only problem is when you surf a lot, since web pages can eat up MBs rather quickly. This is not something the average Joe would have trouble with though IMO.
If I were to say Linux sucks
And there's your problem. If you would just ask the question in a civilized tone, you'll get a better answer, and perhaps a result. Don't start out with a blanket generalization and the implied accusation of incompetence.
You took what I said out of context, the whole phrase was:
If I were to say Linux sucks because it doesn't have X or Y, most Linux users/developers would just reply that I should code it myself or shut up.
This is not an attack on someone, it's not an attack on a person, no matter how you feel about it. It's criticism on Linux because it lacks some feature I am specifically commenting on ("...because it doesn't have X or Y..."). X or Y could have nothing to do with the programming part of it. It could be just about anything.
In any case I wouldn't feel offended if someone said that one of my program sucks because it lacks some important feature. I would take the chance and see for my self if doing something about it would improve the overall experience for my users.
In any case, being aggressive about it was not the purpose: the word "sucks" was used to synthesize my point.