|
OriginalGriff wrote: selected data broadcast
CEEFAX for the 21st Century. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is why I fitted a condom to both aerials of my router this morning.
And rubbed it with Goose-grease and camphorated oil, then covered it with a piece of flannel just to be sure.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Should we ask why you had all those things handy?
|
|
|
|
|
Sheep like the smell and textures...
|
|
|
|
|
Goose fat makes excellent roast potatoes;
Camphorated oil is good as a rub for chesty coughs;
A flannel is good for washing ones face in the morning.
The condoms I will leave to your imagination!
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is really bugging me.
I'm building a component that is basically a message broker.
The broker has a set of services, which in turn have agents for different messages that are actually dealt with by plug in process components.
I'm happy with the way it sits together, but I am not happy with the names I have:
- Broker = top level component. It was called Server, but that doesn't sit with Service
- Service = logical grouping of message agents that can talk directly to each other [there is a separate protocol for out of server interfacing]
- Agent = handles individual messages including their state
- Process = plug-ins to process different messages; this is where all the business logic lives.
I just think the names could be better. The whole thing is set up with config, so these names become important; well I think they do. Any suggestions?
Go on then, trivialise the whole thing and suggest I just call them John, Paul, George and Ringo.
|
|
|
|
|
What about gin, vodka, rum and beer ?
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't it a great feeling when you find the true name of your graphics processor and it responds when you summon it? 
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
I hold an A-7 computer expert classification, Commodore. I'm well acquainted with Dr. Daystrom's theories and discoveries. The basic design of all our ship's computers are JavaScript.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: John, Paul, George and Ringo
Not very exntensible. I used characters from "The Love Boat" once, and eventually had to add parts of the ship.
This space intentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: I used characters from "The Love Boat"
I used to work with this idiot who named all his routines after Disney characters.
BALR 8,GOOFY Yeah, S/370 Assembler.
Worse yet, the shop I worked at did not believe in comments. "The code tells you what it is doing." Of course it does, but not why.
I didn't stay more than a year there, writing code they couldn't understand nor appreciate because it far more advanced than what they were doing. Even though I wrote it with comments. They thought MACROs were only for libraries instead of your applications. One application I did was 70% MACRO generated and that blew their minds. I used variable named register assignments and that messed with their hardwired brains even more.
BALR RTN,PRINT Sorry of the rant, I believe names for code are too important and agonize over them as well. I'm not criticizing you either, your comment just triggered a bad memory about bad practices.
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
And I thought I'm the only idiot spending half of his development time on making self explanatory names...
I'm glad not to be alone...
But really, Service-Agency-Agent-Process can be good...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Broker -> Prime Minister
Service -> HouseOfLords
Agent -> Mayor
Process -> CivilServants
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously? The PM doesn't control the House of Commons let alone the Lords. But this gives me an idea - Possessor, Dominus, Exactoris & Servus.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: Seriously?
Of course not serious! But it did provide a logical progression that could be understand, even if it was only a metaphor.
|
|
|
|
|
Broker -> Kyle
Service -> PCD
Agent -> Scarden
Process -> Adult Rehabilitation Centre
|
|
|
|
|
Broker - Dispatcher ?
Service - Handler ?
Agent - Dalek ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: Agent - Dalek ?
Are you mad? And leave me open to paying royalties to *him*!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you've already asked this question[^] in the Q&A long back.
|
|
|
|
|
[0] This ain't a question.
[1] Same component, different issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Class1, Class2, Class3 and Class4?
while (!working) {
Reboot();
}
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: Go on then, trivialise the whole thing
Okay...
- Broker = Bar
- Service = Bartender
- Agent = Waiter
- Process = Patron
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
