|
Hi,
as it happen that this question comes back on a regular basis, I have added my solution to my file of caned solutions.
It was more or less:
Quote: In order to estimate the time you need, you need to analyze the statement.
For this task, I use a nice tool named ToDoList ToDoList 7.0.13 - An effective and flexible way to keep on top of your tasks[^].
It is a ToDoList for programmers: any Task can be split into as many SubTasks as you need and on as many levels as you need.
Take the statement and split it in as many logical part as it need. If a logical part is clear enough, estimate the time you need, otherwise, refine the Task by splitting into SubTasks until each SubTask is clear enough.
Then estimate the time needed for each SubTask, the grand total is your estimate.
Even if you don't give it estimations, Take a task to describe the database you need to glue anything.
Advice: Until you are skilled on estimations and detecting hidden difficulties, multiply the estimate by 2. The statement is never easier than expected.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
This old chestnut has been raised, and rejected many times. As Chris has been at pains to point out, it will just lead to flame wars and more rubbish being posted in QA.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: it will just lead to flame wars
Unless the username was withheld and only the comment was displayed. That could be a compromise.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, so we could start posting anonymous insults and abuse etc. No thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
We've been there, done that, and unfortunately it was a failed experiment.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I agreed, at least provide a justification of the down vote to help other improve.
|
|
|
|
|
Just noticed that my submission to the latest coding challenge got mangled a bit (here[^])
After some fiddling, I found it's related to the "Best Guess" option available while pasting. Best guess seems to avoid encoding HTML characters (for reasons unbeknownst to me,) which obviously leads to quirkiness when pasting C# code using generics. Unfortunately, the post preview doesn't actually match what ends up being posted in these cases.
Pasted with "Encode HTML" option:
private List<Tuple<string, string>> testStrings = new List<Tuple<string,string>>()
Pasted with "Best Guess" option:
private List<Tuple<string, string>> testStrings = new List<Tuple<string,string>>()
Both of those code blocks look the same in the preview, but as you can see, the end result is definitely not.
Well, make a liar out of me... I don't know how it got the way it is. What you see in my submission is not what my code looks like in Visual Studio, but I can't reproduce the outcome...
|
|
|
|
|
Loading mixed (insecure) display content "http://www.codeproject.com/images/flag16.png" on a secure page
Blocked loading mixed active content "http://cdn.mathjax.org/mathjax/latest/MathJax.js?config=TeX-AMS-MML_HTMLorMML"
Logged in the browser console when viewing this article[^].
Looks like you missed a few resources when you switched to HTTPS. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks mate - all fixed.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I was searching for some beginners articles in android, but it won't let me search beyond last one year. I think there must be an option to filter "Since the beginning" or something.
---
With regards...
The nk.
|
|
|
|
|
Meanwhile: Learn Android[^]
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
There are only four articles in the Beginners section of Android articles and they are all from 2016: Click me[^].
The above link shows all articles by update date (newest first) and jumps to the Beginners section. If you have a look at other sections you will see older articles listed too.
|
|
|
|
|
There are plenty of older android beginner articles
Search[^]
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Use the "Any Date" option in the date filter.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Greetings.
Is there a way for me to share an unpublished article with another CodeProject member?
It would be a Preview-like link, so they could read, but not edit or change the article.
Would be useful for proofreading, etc.
Thanks,
Graham
modified 4-Dec-16 21:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That's an interesting question! Currently, no, but I can't think it would be that hard to provide an invite email with a link to view it.
I'm going to move this thread to the Suggestions forum.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
It is something I asked for too in an other discussion with Sean...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
It appears that mathematical expressions formatted using MathJax are not being displayed properly. Instead, they are being displayed as written.
For the following in an article, I should see a nice r = A + B in italics:
$\begin{aligned} r = A + B \theta \end{aligned}$
Instead I see exactly the line above.
Having CodeProject support MathJax was discussed in the Article FAQ discussion forum, in a posting entitled "What is he preferred way to format mathematical expressions?" posted 17-Dec-13.
I use MathJax in my article "The Spiral TrackBar Control" and just noticed that the nice mathematical formatting was all gone.
Thanks,
Graham
|
|
|
|
|
Mathjax was only included for articles and Quick Answers.
I'll add support to the discussion boards.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
Thanks for the prompt reply - but I was referring to an article "The Spiral TrackBar Control". I viewed the article in both IE (version 11) and Firefox (version 50), and in both there was no formatting.
I'm not sure if it is site issue, or an issue with the browsers on my PC.
But anyways, having it enabled in the discussion forums would be great!
Thanks
Graham
|
|
|
|
|
All fixed.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're trying to load the Mathjax script from an HTTP URL. That won't work on an HTTPS site.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - all fixed.
You know that bit of code that should absolutely, positively, can't help it but work? Yeah - the exact code that fails in production. Even though It Worked On My Machine.
Yeah - I had one of those moments.
All...fixed. Possibly.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
