|
den2k88 wrote: IMHO there are 'Seniors' who heard of SOLID and Design Patterns but implement them all wrong I've worked with a self-proclaimed senior who thought Single Responsibility Principle was equal to a class with just a single method. And if you have just a single method you don't need state either, so everything can be static...
After a vacation I once found he had 'refactored' my code into something like this:
static class SomeClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
}
static class AnotherClass
{
static Something DoSomething(params)
{
}
} Also, because all those classes had a method called DoSomething that always returned the same type and had the same parameters (that weren't always used) these classes (or rather methods) became interchangeable, making it good OO practice
|
|
|
|
|
did you work in Arkham?
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: who write functions with 100's of lines of code, who rely on copy/paste, who don't really know how types work, who put their business and data logic in their forms/controllers and who use hidden textboxes to store variables
Sounds like my gig at the moment.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
A few more:
6) Make sure both "actual" and "expected" are initialised to non default values different to each other before the test runs*
* (Obviously this can't be the case if they are bools - in that case make sure actual is always initialised to the non-default case so it has to undergo a change in order for the test to pass)
7) Write negative tests too.
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily ISOs are available for users of Windows 7, Windows 8/8.1 and Windows 10 to download and use to get the plain vanilla install of their OS without all those OEM extras. *License not included
|
|
|
|
|
As comments on the site point out, doesn't work very well with OEM versions. Sadly.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
The password, the chief means of securing access to our most valuable data, has become almost completely useless, no longer even presenting a speed bump for hackers and mischief makers. Which one? I have a few of them here.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a fingerprint scanner sitting on my desk, can't wait to see how easy it is to spoof it. I rather suspect that cyber-crime will escalate to new levels, beyond the more brutish "cut his thumb off" -- we will soon be seeing all sorts of new mischief in pulling your fingerprint off that wine glass or beer bottle and creating artificial thumbs.
And then there's that new Intel processor that will log you in based on a two camera view of your face. Now, why is that something only the "new" Intel processor can do? Anyways, sounds like it'll be fun to try an spoof too -- take a couple pictures of me at two different angles and hold them up to the cameras, I suppose. I wonder what would happen if I shave my beard.
At the end of the day, whatever you use to authenticate is just data, whether it's "Bob" or a K or so of thumbprint, eye scan or facial data.
There simply must be a better way.
Nope, not until we get brain implants and we can enter in a continually shifting randomized time limited sequence. We already have external versions of that like this[^], but even (can't remember the company name now) those are hackable. Oh well.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: pulling your fingerprint off that wine glass or beer bottle and creating artificial thumbs.
Nah, it's far more easier to substitute one fingerprint reader with an "improved" version and record the data, then print it (whoo-hoo 3d printers!).
It is the standard method used to clone debt cards at ATMs.
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
C is everywhere and in everything. "This is not a love song"
OK, it pretty much is.
|
|
|
|
|
I feel it in my fingers
I feel it in my toes
C is all around me
Come on and let it build
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but a lot of that stuff is actually written in a combination of c and c++. Chrome for instance is mostly c++. Oracle JVM is c++, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
According to Stroustrup (C++ Apps[^]), the Mars Rover uses C++ too.
Quite funny that in a world where so much really does run C, he manages to compile a list in which over half actually used C++. Major fail.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Twitter is alit today, it seems, with news of Google neutralising AdBlock Plus. Don't be irksome
|
|
|
|
|
That is why we created the Uninstall function.
Good-bye Chrome.
|
|
|
|
|
Control Panel -> Programs and Feature -> Chrome -> Uninstall
|
|
|
|
|
Why let reality (and this update came out sometime over the weekend) get in the way of a good clickbait:
Quote: Update: We have been contacted by Rob Wu, a developer on the Chromium project - the open-source foundation for the Chrome browser - who has informed us that this change was not intentional but, rather, an unintended result of fixing a previous security issue (CVE-2015-1297). He confirmed that the issue will only be seen if the YouTube app is installed and that, at the moment, apart from disabling AdBlock or whitelisting YouTube, the only solution, as described above, is to uninstall the app. The problem is expected to be patched in the upcoming weeks or, at least, when Chrome 46 is released.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Chrome cannot change the hostfile.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
In simple terms, DevOps brings the development and operations teams within an organisation closer together. Increase your buzzword compliance by over 1337%?
|
|
|
|
|
Making 1-button data breaches an achievable objective.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: 1337%
It took me a while to get that reference
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
At least someone did!
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Problem is I don't usually read numbers if they are not precisely what I'm looking for - in that case I don't read the surrounding text
Also, it is a truth universally acknowledged that 93% of percentages are made up on the spot
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
When did software development become a buzzword bingo process that sounds more like a military strategy than working with people?
The intent is simple: accelerate quality software development. Catch and fix bugs early. Minimise last minute surprises. Release products timely.
Personally, after more than 30 years in this industry, hearing the the same chant over and over again (and even contributing to that chant myself) does it not occur to anyone that the entire process is broken if we're "all" still talking about this?
I answered my own question: people. Software development is unique combination of mostly unqualified introverts working with incompetent extrovert managers to produce a product that doesn't work and where those same people are then asked to fix the "process". And anywhere you have that combination (government is another good example) the results are almost always bad, and the chanting will continue.
So, that's the new litmus test -- look at what people are ranting about and for how long, and you'll find a process that is broken because there are people in all the facets of the process that don't know what they're doing.
Marc
|
|
|
|