If I want to read trap, I can always go to the reg. I like slashdot because they enable me to discuss things with a relatively intelligent base. There are enough sites for me to have a laugh at idiots already, let's kill this stuff.
Actually, even these posts are too intelligent to be marked as truly idiotic. So there is even little fun for over the top antics.
Create clear code, and everything that's still not clear: document it. In code comments (doc++/JavaDoc) is easier to maintain than other documents, so try and keep to that. Use an IDE with automatic code completion and background compiles (Eclipse for Java, Visual Studio is playing catch up for C#/C++), because this is the 21st century.
Once you are through with the basic basics, see if you can install a static code analysis package. With Java, I really like the combination Eclipse + Checkstyle. I think Lint is the one best known for C/C++. Ask a local Guru to setup a nice configuration for you that reflects the company style in use.
A static code analyzer works by looking for semantic (what code *does*) rather than syntax errors. It will also look for abuses or possible problems with your coding style. You can catch hints that even an expert would think of (at least not all the time).
Also learn about Unit frameworks for testing your classes. Personally I think you should use a code coverage tool with that so see how much code you are actually testing. Creating reliable code is about programming defensively and about using the correct tools to go with that. You test human interfaces by giving the code to your local sales dept, there's no way you can come up with Unit tests for that kind of behavior.
All these hints are pretty useless if you don't have a good support structure within the company though. Contacting the right people will probably be the best way to start. But they will be busy, so have clear questions ready or you will be put off.
Well, you can as easily list all classes within a package as classes within another class.
You know, it started off with one or two commands. Then it grew, er, slightly. Yes, I might want to refactor and put the classes in a separate package as top level classes. Fortunately these are my runtime functional debug classes, and the class implementations themselves are deliberately sparse.
Things like this are hardly significant issues, until you spend an hour or two wondering why your code change does not do anything at all, without any warning:(
Yup, just for fun wrote a Java application with a command line. Every command was an inner class (using a CLI library to define the arguments). Then got lazy and instead of adding all classes manually, I wrote a small piece of reflection code to automatically add the classes (by instantiating all classes of a certain type automatically and putting them into a list).
Brilliant coding, just a shame that the debugger does not understand that class instances created this way should also change during live code replace. Never understood why certain classes did accept changes and others did not. Looking back at it and seeing the reflection code made me weep. I was instantly made irreplaceable for an otherwise boring piece of code.
From the first time they were invented there was some people with outspoken criticism on frames. Frames have been one of the worst security problems of the web from the start. Now we will see more and more exploits that take advantage of having content from multiple websites. And I'm not even talking about the privacy problems with frames and other cross site content.
The best and maybe only solution is not to allow multiple servers to deliver content to the same page. If multiple servers are really needed, one could think of only allowing one host (i.e. www.host.com) and hosts ending with the same name (i.e. images1.www.host.com).
As long as we keep seeing cross site content, it will be a nightmare to manage the security, especially since the functionality of the browsers will keep increasing (and therefore the number of attack vectors).
Yeah, unless you are using an old mainbord with USB ports, a USB keyboard and a BIOS that cannot handle USB keyboards well. It's a brilliant error message if you do think you have a keyboard attached but it isn't working for some reason. People keep hitting F1 and getting nothing in return. There were quite a few PC manufacturers that sold old BIOSes with USB keyboards in the Netherlands when USB was just getting introduced. Having to lug keyboards around at all times really was fun.
This is not something of the past: the latest MS 4000 keyboards start up real slow, so many BIOS are already timing out on the keyboard - you have to keep a PS/2 or faster USB keyboard ready to fix anything in the BIOS. They are not perfect, but the 4000 keyboard is so good (if you can lower your desk sufficiently) that they are pretty much worth it though (after you remove the *(^%^^** Fn key, replacing "F2: rename" with "F2: undo" is NOT funny).
Likewise, "ERROR: Error lookup table not found" is pretty common, especially if the installation of an application is only halfway finished before running the program. It's also as helpful as - well - it's just not helpful at all.
Both errors are only telling you one thing, that the application or application programmer is not to be trusted.
Interesting, I'll give them a try. I might want to use another mailer than my ISP's, I don't know if I can get ADSL everywhere, and cable modems are starting to show clear advantages. Fiber to the curb is still a bit far off.
Interesting service, but with all the WiFi nowadays, I would really have liked an option to have SSL. Do they do that as well? It isn't on their pages (and it is probably rather expensive to buy the CPU power / SSL off-loader + certificates for them to handle it.
My ISP (XS4ALL.nl) has 500 MB mailboxes with IMAP, webmail, SSL POP3 & SMTP, authenticated SMTP, very reliable servers with high uptime (BSD), shell scripts, batched SMTP, 20 MB limit etc. I would recommend them, but for just mail their service fee is somewhat too high I suppose (you can only get it if you have an account).
On the other hand, you now have a nice graphical unit. For just typing text, this may be a bit much, but even then I do like proportional fonts when reading stuff. Furthermore, you are connected to the rest of the world, you can edit multiple documents and even document types at the same time etc.
I've switched back to DOS (in VMWare) for a while, and I must say that except for the WarlordsII game that I was playing, it was not a pleasant experience. Then again, the startup times of the good old MSX was something else. If you wanted to play games you just put in 8, 16 or 32K of ROM. Current Smart Cards are more capable than the core of the MSX back then:)
*If* it works. It still beats me that there are so many relatively new computers that don't want to hibernate. I think selling a computer that does not hibernate or suspends to RAM out of the box is criminal.
"The decision was made after discussions by members of the International Astronomical Union's Committee on Small Body Nomenclature (CSBN) and the IAU Working Group for Planetary System Nomenclature (WGPSN)"
Surprisingly interesting names, but should bodies that name themselves CSBN and WGPSN really be in charge of naming other bodies?
"He left a wife and daughter and I presume he would have wanted them to be ok; why shouldn't his wife do this? "
I presume they are already ok. And as for the daughter, let her make it on her own, with a little help of a stash of cash. Unfortunately though they will probably get spoiled until the 7th generation.
Or maybe not. Sony has a brilliant track record playing with standards as it is. Basically, the standard (memory cards, mini-disk, blue ray, etc.) has got to be theirs or they won't support it.
I'm curious if they will succeed with such a scheme, with many people both in the industry and of course us geeks being violently against it.
Don't think so, they might as well design a new HTML protocol and try to get that standardized.
Yes, because it would mean one EULA per application. Ever installed a distribution? Counted the number of applications installed by default? Counted the number of applications that you might want to use?
Ridiculous is indeed the right word. The EULA does not state anything that is not enabled by default, by law. And if it's not, it's probably not enforceable anyway. And one big advantage of Open Source is that you do without activation. Bollocks to them if they will get me in that minefield.
Ever tried to install a few Windows machines from scratch without direct internet connection? Right. Now use a Linux distribution and see the difference.
I've never ever spoken to a lawyer and I won't unless I don't have to. Lawyers cost money, which in this case you won't get back. Even if I had the money, I would not want to have to use lawyers for each and every thing that might be on or slightly over the line. If only because it would widen the division between rich and poor.
Slashdot Mirror
If I want to read trap, I can always go to the reg. I like slashdot because they enable me to discuss things with a relatively intelligent base. There are enough sites for me to have a laugh at idiots already, let's kill this stuff.
Actually, even these posts are too intelligent to be marked as truly idiotic. So there is even little fun for over the top antics.
Create clear code, and everything that's still not clear: document it. In code comments (doc++/JavaDoc) is easier to maintain than other documents, so try and keep to that. Use an IDE with automatic code completion and background compiles (Eclipse for Java, Visual Studio is playing catch up for C#/C++), because this is the 21st century.
Once you are through with the basic basics, see if you can install a static code analysis package. With Java, I really like the combination Eclipse + Checkstyle. I think Lint is the one best known for C/C++. Ask a local Guru to setup a nice configuration for you that reflects the company style in use.
A static code analyzer works by looking for semantic (what code *does*) rather than syntax errors. It will also look for abuses or possible problems with your coding style. You can catch hints that even an expert would think of (at least not all the time).
Also learn about Unit frameworks for testing your classes. Personally I think you should use a code coverage tool with that so see how much code you are actually testing. Creating reliable code is about programming defensively and about using the correct tools to go with that. You test human interfaces by giving the code to your local sales dept, there's no way you can come up with Unit tests for that kind of behavior.
All these hints are pretty useless if you don't have a good support structure within the company though. Contacting the right people will probably be the best way to start. But they will be busy, so have clear questions ready or you will be put off.
Well, you can as easily list all classes within a package as classes within another class.
You know, it started off with one or two commands. Then it grew, er, slightly. Yes, I might want to refactor and put the classes in a separate package as top level classes. Fortunately these are my runtime functional debug classes, and the class implementations themselves are deliberately sparse.
Things like this are hardly significant issues, until you spend an hour or two wondering why your code change does not do anything at all, without any warning :(
Yup, just for fun wrote a Java application with a command line. Every command was an inner class (using a CLI library to define the arguments). Then got lazy and instead of adding all classes manually, I wrote a small piece of reflection code to automatically add the classes (by instantiating all classes of a certain type automatically and putting them into a list).
Brilliant coding, just a shame that the debugger does not understand that class instances created this way should also change during live code replace. Never understood why certain classes did accept changes and others did not. Looking back at it and seeing the reflection code made me weep. I was instantly made irreplaceable for an otherwise boring piece of code.
From the first time they were invented there was some people with outspoken criticism on frames. Frames have been one of the worst security problems of the web from the start. Now we will see more and more exploits that take advantage of having content from multiple websites. And I'm not even talking about the privacy problems with frames and other cross site content.
The best and maybe only solution is not to allow multiple servers to deliver content to the same page. If multiple servers are really needed, one could think of only allowing one host (i.e. www.host.com) and hosts ending with the same name (i.e. images1.www.host.com).
As long as we keep seeing cross site content, it will be a nightmare to manage the security, especially since the functionality of the browsers will keep increasing (and therefore the number of attack vectors).
Hey, they could call it GMail Bravo and move it to Charley state later on.
Yeah, unless you are using an old mainbord with USB ports, a USB keyboard and a BIOS that cannot handle USB keyboards well. It's a brilliant error message if you do think you have a keyboard attached but it isn't working for some reason. People keep hitting F1 and getting nothing in return. There were quite a few PC manufacturers that sold old BIOSes with USB keyboards in the Netherlands when USB was just getting introduced. Having to lug keyboards around at all times really was fun.
This is not something of the past: the latest MS 4000 keyboards start up real slow, so many BIOS are already timing out on the keyboard - you have to keep a PS/2 or faster USB keyboard ready to fix anything in the BIOS. They are not perfect, but the 4000 keyboard is so good (if you can lower your desk sufficiently) that they are pretty much worth it though (after you remove the *(^%^^** Fn key, replacing "F2: rename" with "F2: undo" is NOT funny).
Likewise, "ERROR: Error lookup table not found" is pretty common, especially if the installation of an application is only halfway finished before running the program. It's also as helpful as - well - it's just not helpful at all.
Both errors are only telling you one thing, that the application or application programmer is not to be trusted.
And google (+firefox search) is your friend, somebody seemed to like it:
The Tyrannosaurus Rat was an unbelieveable blend of hefe and Belgian Ale. One of the most delicious beers in the world.
http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/c1c37/b7cfa/2/
Seems like it is also called "Tyrannosaurus-Rat beer" or "T-Rat beer" for short. Somehow that was also lost to marketing I suppose:
http://calpolynews.calpoly.edu/magazine/Spring-08/ancient-ale.html
(from the link of their front page at the right bottom).
Interesting, I'll give them a try. I might want to use another mailer than my ISP's, I don't know if I can get ADSL everywhere, and cable modems are starting to show clear advantages. Fiber to the curb is still a bit far off.
Interesting service, but with all the WiFi nowadays, I would really have liked an option to have SSL. Do they do that as well? It isn't on their pages (and it is probably rather expensive to buy the CPU power / SSL off-loader + certificates for them to handle it.
My ISP (XS4ALL.nl) has 500 MB mailboxes with IMAP, webmail, SSL POP3 & SMTP, authenticated SMTP, very reliable servers with high uptime (BSD), shell scripts, batched SMTP, 20 MB limit etc. I would recommend them, but for just mail their service fee is somewhat too high I suppose (you can only get it if you have an account).
On the other hand, you now have a nice graphical unit. For just typing text, this may be a bit much, but even then I do like proportional fonts when reading stuff. Furthermore, you are connected to the rest of the world, you can edit multiple documents and even document types at the same time etc.
I've switched back to DOS (in VMWare) for a while, and I must say that except for the WarlordsII game that I was playing, it was not a pleasant experience. Then again, the startup times of the good old MSX was something else. If you wanted to play games you just put in 8, 16 or 32K of ROM. Current Smart Cards are more capable than the core of the MSX back then :)
*If* it works. It still beats me that there are so many relatively new computers that don't want to hibernate. I think selling a computer that does not hibernate or suspends to RAM out of the box is criminal.
"Strewth! It's a long time since i saw one of those. I wonder if there's people around here who've never seen one..."
I don't. It's a fair guess that blind people and/or babies would never have seen one, with a small percentage of exceptions.
"Pink enemy tank at 11, pink enemy tank at 11.
For the last time soldier, switch off your helmet before sleeping or drinking!
"I don't think adults can easily learn to use their brains in an entirely new way like this"
So the army is in the clear here.
RRR RRRrrr!!!
"The decision was made after discussions by members of the International Astronomical Union's Committee on Small Body Nomenclature (CSBN) and the IAU Working Group for Planetary System Nomenclature (WGPSN)"
Surprisingly interesting names, but should bodies that name themselves CSBN and WGPSN really be in charge of naming other bodies?
"He left a wife and daughter and I presume he would have wanted them to be ok; why shouldn't his wife do this? "
I presume they are already ok. And as for the daughter, let her make it on her own, with a little help of a stash of cash. Unfortunately though they will probably get spoiled until the 7th generation.
"(legally owned and transcoded, naturally)"
I'll bet you were circumventing DRM though?
Or maybe not. Sony has a brilliant track record playing with standards as it is. Basically, the standard (memory cards, mini-disk, blue ray, etc.) has got to be theirs or they won't support it.
I'm curious if they will succeed with such a scheme, with many people both in the industry and of course us geeks being violently against it.
Don't think so, they might as well design a new HTML protocol and try to get that standardized.
"Have you even read the EULA?"
NO. That's the general idea. I don't want to read the EULA of any open source application, especially if there are hundreds pre-installed already.
Yes, because it would mean one EULA per application. Ever installed a distribution? Counted the number of applications installed by default? Counted the number of applications that you might want to use?
Ridiculous is indeed the right word. The EULA does not state anything that is not enabled by default, by law. And if it's not, it's probably not enforceable anyway. And one big advantage of Open Source is that you do without activation. Bollocks to them if they will get me in that minefield.
Ever tried to install a few Windows machines from scratch without direct internet connection? Right. Now use a Linux distribution and see the difference.
I've never ever spoken to a lawyer and I won't unless I don't have to. Lawyers cost money, which in this case you won't get back. Even if I had the money, I would not want to have to use lawyers for each and every thing that might be on or slightly over the line. If only because it would widen the division between rich and poor.