I used to be indecisive. But now I'm not so sure...
We are experiencing an outage that is impacting all data access interactions. These include but not limited to Open, Save, Upload, Export and Viewing. We are working actively to correct the problem and will update this pa6e$#ž!~>?{4=d3823#>%03*=3\>/@3$wharrrgarrble …
A steak pun is a rare medium well done.
< .. >
... we had a long run of exercises where we were supposed to turn a flowchart in along with our applications. The whole class quickly discovered that we got marks deducted if the final version of our code didn't match our flowchart -- so we got our code working and then we wrote the flowchart to match the code.
< .. >
Since I left school, I've had several code design tools proposed to me, many of them visual in nature (class design tools seem to be especially popular). Of all the tools that I've been introduced to, the one that has made the least sense to me is pseudo-code. In Visual Studio, I have a perfectly wonderful code editor that will work in any language … except, of course, for the language called "pseudo." It's never been clear to me why I would design my programs in some language that wouldn't compile when I can use a language that will compile.
< .. >
As a technical writer who has focused as much on the “technical” as on the “writing,” I came up with a phrase that describes my reaction when a programmer tells me something “can’t” be done: “Its just software.”
<..>
“Can’t” is shorthand. What it’s shorthand for depends. It could mean there’s no time to do the work. It could mean there are no resources to do the work. It could mean that the work does not provide enough value. (A reason that’s especially tough to hear when you’re trying to make a product better.) Heck, it could mean that the underlying system was designed so badly that there’s no way anyone wants to touch any of it because one light breath will make it all fall over like a Jenga tower.
What “can’t” almost never means is its literal meaning. A programmer almost always can, so when one says “can’t,” it becomes incumbent on us to translate.
Making a game is more fun than making accounting software.
"Give someone a program, you frustrate them for a day;
teach them how to program, you frustrate them for a lifetime." - David Leinweber
If you’re able to make a bit of software that enables a zombie to wander through a town searching for fresh brains, then you should be able to make a toaster oven do the same and reuse the same code for both.
I think every company needs to make the decision to either invest significantly more in tools, or just not bother.
That applies to everything. It's not only for the 3d editor used to build your levels, but it's your build system, and it's your programming language, it's your production pipeline, it's the DCC tools you use, all of that.
Tools are supposed to have a multiplying impact on productivity, and when you find that they have a dividing impact on productivity, get the hell out.
I saw a great quote the other day:
If it doesn't work,
it doesn't matter
how fast it doesn't work
and this is kind of my coding philosophy.
This is one of those descriptions that you just know you'll be disapointed if you click it.
I s'pose I could read it while I wait for the jug to boil for a cup of tea . . . what else could I do in 3 minutes ??
. . . but, exhaustive ? really ?
using just regular variables won't get us to the moon and back
I really like the idea of sunny day scenarios when designing exception handling.
“When the terrain disagrees with
the map, trust the terrain.”
Bjarne, Stroustrup. Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ (p. 1 of 1274).
We try not to exaggerate the importance of a programming technique or a language feature, but please don’t underestimate a simple statement like “This is often useful.” If we quietly emphasize that something is important, we mean that you’ll sooner or later waste days if you don’t master it. Our use of humor is more limited than we would have preferred, but experience shows that people’s ideas of what is funny differ dramatically and that a failed attempt at humor can be confusing.
Bjarne, Stroustrup. Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ (p. 4).
• A type defines a set of possible values and a set of operations (for an object).
• An object is some memory that holds a value of a given type.
• A value is a set of bits in memory interpreted according to a type.
• A variable is a named object.
• A declaration is a statement that gives a name to an object.
• A definition is a declaration that sets aside memory for an object.
The only thing left to do to make this piece of code perfect is to entirely delete it.
In the words of Samuel Johnson, author of the English dictionary in 1755, I have committed “a few wild blunders, and risible absurdities, from which no work of such multiplicity is free.”
Programming languages have many similarities to human languages, except that in programming languages, you can make up your own words, just like Dr. Seuss!
In a book written by Dr. Seuss in 1950, If I Ran the Zoo, he states this:Quote from: Dr. Seuss“And then, just to show them, I’ll sail to Ka-Troo And Bring Back an It-Kutch, a Preep, and a Proo, A Nerkle, a Nerd, and a Seersucker, too!”
The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know. — Albert Einstein
If we’re going to get anywhere in our careers, we must seek out challenge and, along with it, failure. Failure is growth, growth is learning.
Embrace it.
You don't have to use a shoebox for Spaced Repetition, but it's funnier if you do.
:mrgreen: