|
|
Nice! 
|
|
|
|
|
Hoping for clear skies to get the telescope out tonight... however, I am in Ireland so the chances are pretty remote.
|
|
|
|
|
Every time I think "You know what, I'm gonna buy a telescope" something more important needs to be bought  ....
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed: every now and again I look here: Celestron[^] or other manufacturers and gaze lovingly and then something comes up, I get distracted and, Boom! Six months later... 
|
|
|
|
|
Look like pretty nice scopes and more reasonable then I thought.
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - mostly it's a really expensive place to hang shirts.
|
|
|
|
|
LOL! Thanks for the laugh!
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone know this new short syntax method of LINQ queries ?
http://bwqs.codeplex.com
|
|
|
|
|
The bloke who wrote the article probably does.
Me? I think there is enough confusion available in LINQ without needing extra compact stuff that looks like a regex - i.e. unreadable without a good long look.
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
First thank you for the comment.
But, you read the summary of the entire project ?
Download the console for training and testing the new concept ?
See it in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLdIS809wBA
Do this!
Then comment again.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Me? I think there is enough confusion available in LINQ without needing extra compact stuff that looks like a regex - i.e. unreadable without a good long look.
It's like the rule 34 of coding:
Within two years of its creation, a programming language that is easily usable will have been turned into a writhing mess of ridiculous complications.
[edit] I typoed "writhing", fer cryin' out loud!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
modified 22-Aug-14 17:44pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That sort of post comes across all spammy-like -- I wouldn't be surprised to find that you are the one who wrote whatever it is at that link. I'm not going to look.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, your first ideia is correct !
I created myself and try to disseminate and get feedback from the community on this new concept.
Your guess is that is not correct.
I never would post spam in such a prestigious community like CodeProject.
Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
OK.
BTW there is an error in your code, a semi-colon is missing on line 35, so the copy&paste does not compile.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Rage,
Tks for your reply.
The Project Portal on CodePlex contains an Test Package functional,
check-it :
http://bwqs.codeplex.com/releases/view/127212
Regards 
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10277067 wrote: I never would post spam in such a prestigious community like CodeProject.
And yet you did. QED.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a discussion in The Lounge, not SPAM.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Spam is in the eye of the beholder. Otherwise there would be no such term.
|
|
|
|
|
Some people do not understand sarcasm[^]. 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
And then you get a sarchasm[^]
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
|
This approach refers to a Bitwise combinations syntax,
precisely the opposite way of Natural Language.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10277067 wrote: This approach refers to a Bitwise combinations syntax,
precisely the opposite way of Natural Language.
I understand that, but the point of a natural language syntax is that it is readable, more or less, without an internal translation layer on the part of the reader. Like any syntax, it probably could become second nature (like how | is a bitwise OR and || is a logical OR), but I completely fail to see the advantage of using the syntax in your short LINQ examples.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
