|
Yes - they are hiding behind the milk.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Did Erwin Schrödinger eat lobster?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
It did - but it was removed when the offsite backup was made as it was clearly redundant.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Perfect!
|
|
|
|
|
Movie Quote Of The Day
Quote: Pandora's given a box by a God, told not to open it - she does and unleashes pain into the world
Which movie?
|
|
|
|
|
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
All the Women I've Loved
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Trump / Clinton jack in the box (take your pick)
|
|
|
|
|
What Women Want[^]???
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous
- The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine Winston Churchill, 1944
- I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy. Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Gods Must Be Crazy[^]
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Girls Just Want To Have Fun
Mongo: Mongo only pawn... in game of life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why not post this on the C# language forum for discussion ?
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Never got that feeling of "Hey, I have just achieved something that only a programmer can understand", sitting alone at your desk ?
That's why.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not really a question at all...
Just some meta.. programatical musing...
|
|
|
|
|
If it looks like code, smells like code, and walks like code, I think it's code, and having this kind of discussion here means that in the long run CodeProject will not benefit as much as if the discussion were in the language forum ... because this kind of content gets "drowned" in the flood of Lounge posts.
It's an interesting topic, and becoming a compelling conversation.
cheers, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
It would seem to me that this would be more appropriate as a Task continuation, rather than as a blocking call inside a task. By the way, language proposals are now made on the Roslyn[^] site.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand your message Pete, what blocking call are you talking about?
My method effectively turn waiting for that particular next event into a task, which one can await or .Wait() , up to you!
(though I do suggest await )
|
|
|
|
|
The blocking call I'm talking about is you waiting for the event. You're waiting for that to happen before you continue. If you are dependent on this, it just feels more natural that this would be a task continuation.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
well... this is exactly the same thing, just different syntax (i.e. nice C# syntactic sugar), no?!
when I write:
await WaitForThatEvent()<br />
DoSomethingAfterward()
The compiler generate (roughly.. there is cancellation to consider)
WaitForThatEvent().ContinueWith(t => DoSomethingAfterward());
Isn't that nice?!
modified 27-Sep-16 3:31am.
|
|
|
|
|
How is different to subscribing to an Event and do your stuffs in Event Handlers.
method()
{
WhatEver.MyEvent += (myArgs) => {
}
}
Please help me understand if you are looking for something different which cannot be handled by Events and Delegates (Lambda expressions also simplifies your syntax).
I might have different thought process and not able to understand what exactly you are looking for.
Life is a computer program and everyone is the programmer of his own life.
|
|
|
|
|
How is that different? It is better looking!
turning that basic version
EventHandler ev = null;
ev = (o, e) => {
source.Event -= eh;
DoSomething();
};
source.Event += eh;
into that elegant version
await source.Event.WaitForEvent()
DoSomething();
Can't you appreciate the beautiful simplicity and easier code flow of the second version?!
Added bonus: DoSomething() will try to be in the same thread as the start of the method!!
modified 27-Sep-16 3:22am.
|
|
|
|