|
Member 9082365 wrote: I'm frankly amazed that so few people seem to have experienced this kind of additional selling as it's done by everybody and his dog in the UK these days
yeah, Mr. Balotelli sounded exactly like the weasels that run car rental desks here in the USA. Here though, there's a good chance that if you managed to heroically resist all the upsell attempts you'd discover that they were all out of small cheap cars, and would have to give you the expensive one they were trying to upsell you to for the cheap car price.
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
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: ou'd discover that they were all out of small cheap cars, and would have to give you the expensive one they were trying to upsell you to for the cheap car price
I suspect Mr. Balotelly acted in a very similar scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome - simply awesome!
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
I like it!
Ravi, we should just get the band back together.
|
|
|
|
|
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting affect the frame rate has on the string vibration. Nice standing waves.
|
|
|
|
|
Great one
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Is that guitar in standard tuning ?
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
Er ... how could you possibly know? The three harmonics sounded right for a standard tuning but that doesn't mean a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hate how they're implemented in WinForms, I hate how their implemented in HTML. The whole issue of parsing out which radio button was selected and, on the flip side, selecting the correct radio button given "something", is such a PITA. And the "something" of course never matches what is typically persisted -- a FK ID. No, instead of having a sane list for radio buttons where you can correlate ID's from a lookup table to the data sources's FK's, no, you have to set the damn checked state. Grrr.
Well, regardless, I now have a decent wrapper (probably not the best, but WTF, it works) in Javascript for dealing with this nightmare, just like I implemented in WinForms ages ago.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Knockout (and I suspect other's of that ilk) do take some of the pain out of radio buttons.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Am I the only one who finds JavaScript a ugly and complicated mess? Even with Knockout you still get endless hard to read spaghetti bowls.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
No, you are not the only one!
Even I just escaped from 2 years of Web development!
That said TypeScript was quite nice!
|
|
|
|
|
I really dislike functional languages ever sice I was tortured with Lisp in some course while studying. Boxing everything in parantheses a thousand layers deep is not exactly my idea of readable code. How many parantheses do I need to close now? But granted, thats matter of personal preferences.
I also dislike interpreters. They only notice an error when they hit the line at runtime. That, together with JavaScript's awful 'keep going without complaining until you have no other choice' philosophy makes testing and quality assurance a hell. A single typo can make the entire following code unparsable and you must do a complete test even after small changes.
And what do you see when debugging? Variables that contain functions which contain other variables, which may contain even more functions... IF (a very big if!) the crappy debugger got its context right and allows you to hit breakpoints and examine anything at all.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! This got off-topic in a hurry.
To move back, yes coding radio buttons is a pain, but it is the right mechanism for certain kinds of selections. There may be tools out there to ease the pain, but I haven't found them yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Well UI code always tend to get messy...
Since I embraced MVVM long time ago I found that it reduced UI spaghettiness greatly!
Even with JavaScript and HTML. MMV with Knockout was "relatively" cleaner!
|
|
|
|
|
The horror of horror application known as 'Microsoft Access' used to (I don't know if it still does as I shun it for the rabid cur it is) allow you to group radio buttons and consult their status and subscribe to their events at the group level - which is what I guess you have created.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Heck, I don't even care about events. I just want the FK ID for the selected item, or null if nothing was selected in the group. That's what I created, though I still need to see how Knockout does it, but since I prefer "model-less" web development (one day I'll write an article on that) I'd have to add a pseudo-model so Knockout has something to bind to.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
So don't use them then. They're not supposed to be set programatically anyway. It's meant as a user selection device which means that you can pretty much do everything from the click event as any click automatically sets to checked.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 9082365 wrote: They're not supposed to be set programatically anyway
If I load existing selections, I damn well need to set the programmatically.
Marc
|
|
|
|