|
Sure. If I will be somewhere near Australia today I'll try trying to sabotage your TL with you. 
BTW, I don't have anything against my lead. She's good. 
Don't mind those people who say you're not HOT. At least you know you're COOL.
I'm not afraid of falling, I'm afraid of the sudden stop at the end of the fall! - Richard Andrew x64
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, way to go Karen!
|
|
|
|
|
What happened in 1371 anyway?
Bruce Baker
|
|
|
|
|
On that humble year, I was born...
Or so goes the legend! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ho! What a coincidence!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: It's because 10 developers are not 10 times more productive than 1.
The other one I hear a lot is that 9 mothers can't make a baby in 1 month.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That really depends sir. What kind of 'mothers' are we talking about in here? IIRC, some animal mothers can have and deliver their babies in just one month.
BTW sir, it only takes a day* to make a baby, it's just the mother(human) will only carry it for nine months. 
*depends on how determined the couple are.
Don't mind those people who say you're not HOT. At least you know you're COOL.
I'm not afraid of falling, I'm afraid of the sudden stop at the end of the fall! - Richard Andrew x64
|
|
|
|
|
Common Karen, you should share the work, can't wait 9 month for that baby!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: can't wait 9 month for that baby!
Do like my former Bitch Supervisor From HellTM did, she went off to Brazil to get a mail order baby. Too bad for her that when she did, the Brazilian tabloids were full of stories about Americans adopting Brazilian babies to be cut up for organ transplants. Took her 2 1/2 months to get back, accidentally leaving me in charge. We kicked ass and took names because we didn't have to deal with her insecure, control freak ways.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that's the one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dead or Alive? 
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: 2. ... And his way is better, there is no need to talk about it!
Just remind him from one of those egoless programming commandments[^].
Code horror wrote: No matter how much "karate" you know, someone else will always know more.
Wonde Tadesse
|
|
|
|
|
|
4!!
He does that often. Not consult. break other people's code once they are done.
Half of the data is then missing but he replace it by a nice "not implemented" string! To show it's the newer better version!  
|
|
|
|
|
I thinks he need all commandments. May be it's better to email him the whole points. He might get a relief.
Wonde Tadesse
|
|
|
|
|
I must give him credit for his enthusiasm over patterns. He strikes very much the same characteristics of my brother. (who is classified as a super developer) I've also heard someone give the exact same criticism about his work. (sometimes implement complex solutions to non existent problems... to refractor this I'd say complex solutions to problems to which a simple solution can suffice). He admitted to this flaw (seen by other as one), but also added that in order to better himself/his skills, he had to practice them. Today he uses patterns by nature... You tell him about a certain design problem you have, he responds with aaah, use the X pattern to solve it. What he has become as a result of this attitude is a master problem solver, no really... I work in the same company as him although in a different province, our company is an international company. He's is well known throughout the company, both locally and internationally as the best c++ developer we have, and more specifically the best problem solver... to the point where if any major software/system problems arises, in whatever project, he is the one that gets called up to find the solution.
90% of c++ developers when trying doesn't understand his code, unfortunately. And in understanding, I don't mean that it is ugly... Its just, his knowledge of the language is miles ahead of 90% of c++ developers. And it is the first time in my life that I've seen that too much knowledge of something can be a disadvantage to some degree... He recently join another company where he has no name and is working for a new boss and with a new team... He had to downgrade his style of programming before they would accept any of his code he written for them... They didn't understand his code, and because of that didn't want it in there source base. He says to me that his new challenge is to write code as he's done in the past but, to make it a bit more simple/understandable to the regular c++ developer.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry that not the case here!
At least I must give you he is very good at reducing the productivity and increasing ignorance. Now no one has any clues about what they should do, we rely on our old spec to do the screens...
|
|
|
|
|
lol, ok.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
|
|
|
|
|
R. Erasmus wrote: 90% of c++ developers when trying doesn't understand his code, unfortunately.
Sounds like he uses crappy naming conventions. Even complicated C++, if well named, should not give 90% of developers difficulties.
|
|
|
|
|
If you read and took in anything what I said, you would realise that the comment you made was not well thought out. Directly after above sentence you've quoted I specify "in understanding, I don't mean that it is ugly". To answer your speculation, his naming conventions is not crappy at all. It's is better than most. I have to admit, I have not gone into the effort to calculate the statistics of developers that doesn't understand/or have difficulty in understanding his code. I merely took an rough estimate from feedback or talks I have had with people that has worked with him.
P.S. Go troll somewhere else.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
modified 30-Jun-14 7:39am.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry you think that's trolling, but it is a fact: if 90% of all programmer's can't (or 'won't') read it, it must be ugly in some way. And that way isn't imposed by C++ itself.
Happy coding!
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly:
In my books if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Secondly:
You're changing the word I've used, 'understand', to the word, 'read'. These words have completely different meanings.
I repeat: if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
|
|
|
|
|
R. Erasmus wrote: 90% of c++ developers when trying doesn't understand his code, unfortunately
Obfuscated code isn't anything to be proud of -- its unmaintainable by others. He can't be that much of a super developer if he doesn't explain what he's done to others.
R. Erasmus wrote: He says to me that his new challenge is to write code as he's done in the past but, to make it a bit more simple/understandable to the regular c++ developer
Kudos to him.. when he masters this aspect, then he will truly be a super developer.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
