|
Thankfully, no.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
overlook ?
Doesn't feel quite right, though.
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
That's da bunny!
Neglect OVERLOOK
to supervise OVERLOOK
You are up Monday.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Oversee would be better 
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Slightly better for "supervise" but much worse for "neglect"
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
You overlooked oversee, luckily we overseeing overlook. 
|
|
|
|
|
I need to make some changes to web service I wrote two years ago as new business rules are added. Until now it was working OK as messages it was processing was small in size 10 to 50 lines max. Now with new rules message size can get to few thousand lines. Service was slow as dog it took almost 3 minutes to process 1000 line.Noticed there was a custom logging I wrote which was concatenating strings with variable+="New String". Changed it to StringBuilder and now responses are generated in 2 seconds. Users will be happy.
Zen and the art of software maintenance : rm -rf *
Maths is like love : a simple idea but it can get complicated.
|
|
|
|
|
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Well, after having used StringBuilder perhaps 'overzealously', even for simple string concat's of 2 pieces, and not in a loop, I do admit that in those cases, I've gone back to '+='
I can fully understand the argument for your case, and 'more complicated' cases I have, but under 'simple' conditions, I can live with "string1+=string2"
|
|
|
|
|
not to mention that in "simple case" that's exactly the same thing, or even (marginally) better!
1 string.Concat(s1, s2, ...) is the same as 1 statement s1 + s2 + ... and is better than StringBuilder
Multiple concats... well.. Better use StringBuilder! 
|
|
|
|
|
You just helped me solve a problem I have been working on last week, Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
Finally, a noticeable difference when using StringBuilder. I trusted it would happen someday.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anybody else think so?
|
|
|
|
|
I do not as I target both browsers, as well as Chrome. If you develop and then functional test in just one browser, the other browser will most likely display things a bit differently. That is why I test in IE/Edge, FF, and Chrome and even some older IE versions.
ASP.Net is a little vague as there is MVC or Web Forms. HTML is generated in Web Forms, where there could be a difference. I hand code my HTML and CSS and don't rely on any GridView HeaderStyle, FooterStyle, BackColor, ForeColor, eceterra as I use the CSS equivalents and then call my styles.
|
|
|
|
|
jgakenhe wrote: I test in IE/Edge, FF, and Chrome and even some older IE versions
Thank you! I find nothing more annoying than trying to use a website that only works on the Name of preferred browser browser because they don't like Name of hated browser. Especially when a customer has paid money for the use of the technology or service that is accessed through the webpage.
I get that some browsers don't play as nice as others. But nothing says we don't care about our customers then not taking the time or putting in the effort to assure that all their customers can fill in the forms and click the buy button regardless of the page designer's preference.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to disagree with you on this.
Is it the developer's fault that the company behind the worlds most hated browser constantly ignored standards as set by committees so that they could further their proprietary "take on things" in order to further their bottom line in making the internet their own?
The company behind the worlds most hated browser has caused so much hardship for web developers that the kilowatt hours used in electricity to make things work in that thing they call a browser has probably directly attributed to global warming.
*?!k IE.
|
|
|
|
|
23741 wrote: Is it the developer's fault that the company behind the worlds most hated browser...
Yes.
Or at least "Yes if he didn't test against it, knowing full well that it doesn't work the same".
This is the real world: we have to accept that there are good, bad, and indifferent browsers out there and that users will use what they feel comfortable with. Our job is to make the user happy and productive, not to ignore the real world cases and do what is easy for us!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
23741 wrote: Is it the developer's fault that the company behind the worlds most hated browser constantly ignored standards
No, it's not the fault of the website developer, but, I think there are too many examples of well designed sites out there that work in whatever browser I use to make that assessment. Code Project is a good example. There are others like Amazon, Google, Musicians Friend, Heck even Apple works well regardless of the browser I use.
Yes, I agree that it takes more time (expense) to do this. And I agree the M$ needs to improve IE or Edge or whatever they are calling it this week. The the hard fact is, there are many many people who don't use the "better" browsers. Aunt Mabel with her $125.00 laptop just wants to buy the Beanie Baby of the week, not bother with poorly designed websites, she'll go where she can spend her money. Without needing to bother with which browser she needs to use.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
No.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have to start to build your own - fixed - library of extension methods...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Yup.
Phones getting bigger, having to press a button to see the time on your watch, having to write your own extensions...
The seventies are back, for certain.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Ecclesiastes 1, 9: That which hath been is that which shall be, and that which hath been done is that which shall be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a chapter and verse that gives a get-out from wearing flares and an afro?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe...
Deuteronomy 22, 5: A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
