|
I'm already dreading setting up Monday's puzzle and a new theme.
|
|
|
|
|
Abbas A. Ali wrote: and would've made the hint far too easy.
As opposed to "far too hard" then?
Good luck monday - remember you are starting a new theme, so the winner will run with it in whatever way they chose.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: As opposed to "far too hard" then?
Like I said, I tried to look for the guy who did make the reflexive property known, but couldn't find him/her.
OriginalGriff wrote: Good luck monday - remember you are starting a new theme
Thanks!
OriginalGriff wrote: so the winner will run with it in whatever way they chose
I'm gonna be the winner then too. (Evil Laugh).
|
|
|
|
|
I take it you are a maths fan
"We can't stop here - this is bat country" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
I don't fan!
To answer your question, no. I just wanted to find a different approach to the theme to make it a bit more interesting: I knew from elementary Math classes there are relations in sets so I googled for it. Probably ended up making it a tad more difficult, so I added the hint.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Does anyone else use the JD Edwards E1 Timesheet system? I ask as it a constant pain in in the rear end. The user interface appears to Java, programmed by either an intern or someone who was a programmer by reading 'Java For Dummies' or similar. The worst thing was I googled it and found a web site for them? claiming awards, the Dilbert of the Day calendar for today (8-17-16) seems appropriate!
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork wrote: the Dilbert of the Day calendar for today (8-17-16) seems appropriate!
No idea what that is - the DotD strip is Wally being lazy with a presentation ...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
So he is up to his old tricks again: Edwards[^]
|
|
|
|
|
We use deltek, which sucks hairy donkey testicles.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010 ----- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010 ----- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
deltek sounds like a class of railway locomotive we used to have in the uk Deltec or Diesel Electric.
|
|
|
|
|
Witty Title - Album on Imgur[^]
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you post that? I'm cringing at the thought
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Found this:
CSS Reference[^]
and this:
HTML attribute reference - HTML: Hypertext Markup Language | MDN[^]
But what I'd really like is reference where each element has a description of permitted attributes and styles. I mean, really, if I were writing a rendering engine (which I'm not) where is the gospel of what's permissible as an element's styles and how all these styles behave?
Actually, W3Schools has done a great job of making an interactive UI -- click on one of the style definitions, like "display", and you can see all the options and even how they behave. Still, I don't want to be clicking everywhere. Isn't there an actual document somewhere?
In my insufficient google-fu, I stumbled across something interesting but unrelated:
Custom Elements: defining new elements in HTML - HTML5 Rocks[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Start here: HTML 5.2: 3. Semantics, structure, and APIs of HTML documents[^]
The current spec has anchors to elements that an element inherits from so it's easier to search and browse in the page rather than in a search engine. It's not really authoritative though because browser and web developers do whatever they want, and that eventually gets reflected in the spec.
I don't know if there's anything quite as helpful for CSS rules, as far as I understand it there's some basic rules about defaults (block vs inline elements for example), but mostly that's decided by browsers.
CSS is much bigger, but I think you'd start here: CSS Snapshot 2018[^] (Links to all of the pages that I think you actually want)
Just remember:
Yoda: Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hah, I posted that earlier in the Insider News. (OK, maybe I'm looking for some hugs right now, otherwise there's not much point to saying that, haha.)
|
|
|
|
|
:hugs:
(I had actually posted this in Tuesday’s newsletter, so I guess I need hugs too. No one reads it anymore )
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: (I had actually posted this in Tuesday’s newsletter, so I guess I need hugs too. No one reads it anymore
Ah! I read it! I did a cursory scan but didn't go back to Tuesday.
:hug back:
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe he should have used NOTNULL.
Not sure whether seven characters are allowed in a license plate.
|
|
|
|
|
In some states, yes. California and Arizona definitely.
California also allows some symbols.
|
|
|
|
|
Any states give you enough characters to have 'DROP TABLE'?
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
|
Probably not long enough for this one:
Speed camera SQL Injection : geek[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
GitHub - codewitch-honey-crisis/pck: The Parser Construction Kit ("Puck")[^]
Syntax highlighting for XBNF, PCK, C# and VB files.
Generates code and pcks.
still alpha, but stable enough anyway, for the most part.
it works as is, but is unfinished, yet cool
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|