The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Yup. I believe the latest buzzword today is "full stack" developer. Sorry, I don't buy that designation AT ALL. You could re-brand that "jack of all trades, master of none". I'm sorry, but the designation is pure B.S.
I've been developing code for 40 years and I think I've developed some good proficiency in that time and know a few good technologies to use in my development. My code gets answers and it runs FAST. (I've had more than one employer ask me in an incredulous tone "why does your stuff run so fast"?). Er, maybe it's because I don't haul in a couple of gigs of library code to run my executables...
I don't even apply for positions that are looking for "full stack" developers because, IMHO, they are completely disillusioned as to what software development is really about. I believe that would be ... solving problems? Full stack ... seriously?
If you think hiring a professional is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur! - Red Adair
Back in the day, the progression was:
Sr. Analyst (Or Business Analyst)
<some level="" of="" management="">
I always preferred adding Analyst. First you learn the syntax, and the environment.
As a Jr. Programmer, you often took someones scribbles of code on punch cards, and punched them.
The person reviewed them. One programmer could keep a few Jr. Programmers busy. (things changed).
Usually it was teams of both...
After the language/syntax and environment was learned. You moved up.
The real interplay is in taking business needs and getting to computer solutions.
My favorite job interview was where I was competing with someone with 5 years of Clipper for a Clipper job. I had SEEN clipper code, and did DBase code a little bit. But I had great analytical skills.
The guy interviewing me for a part-time position was convinced he would hire the "Pro", and not me, but already had my interview scheduled.
I simply explained that it is the Analysis where all the failures being. The syntax of the language is easy enough to learn. If you are solving the right problem. I asked him to think about the "fixes" he had to have the previous guy make. What percentage were:
- Did not understand the goal properly
- Logic Error (Did not express the goal properly)
- Lack of testing
- Lack of User Sign off
- User Error/User Confusion
- Bad Syntax/Failure to use the programming language correctly?
I explained to him, that if he hired me, I would drive the first few items to ZERO occurrences, and that my biggest fear was programming myself out of a job, because the current guy was constantly fixing his own mistakes. He laughed. He thought... He Hired...
One year later, he apologized that he ran out of work for me to do. Wrote me a 2 page letter of recommendation, and gave me a minimum number of hours each week to do whatever I wanted.
I want to hire creative problem solvers who know how to solve problems and express them in code.
Then the importance of the language is reduced. The rework is reduced.
Nobody wants to help that person by giving them a little time to learn a technology they may need.
That's crazy. Good problem solvers are hard to find. Great programmer/analysts are hard to find.
So old companies would make them!
Heck, even into the early '90s you could "get by" with just a few good skills. I think retraining hell is companies' revenge for having to pay us so well. I have a Despair Inc coffee mug that says "Just because you're necessary, doesn't mean you're important." That sums it up nicely.
I agree with you that there is a lot more to know now than in the 60s. More importantly, I think, things change a lot faster now.
But to be fair, there's a lot they had to know back then that most of us don't have to think about at all anymore. In particular, we don't usually need to think nearly as carefully about hardware issues (memory constraints, timing issues) or lower-level software issues (how to write a quicksort algorithm or a garbage collector). We don't need to cram 8 different boolean values into a single byte that we xor to read the value from. We don't need to write code that modifies itself or overlays itself to save memory. And we don't have to wait fifteen minutes or more for an edit/compile/run cycle.
First, I readily admit I should have known better.
So I'm populating a jqxTree control with items, and I set the ID to the record's ID. There are multiple parents, and they relate to different tables (therein sort of lies one of my design flaws but I wanted separate tables even though the items are all basically similar, because at some point their similarities will diverge.)
Anyways, so of course, the record ID's can be the same because they are from different tables. Which means of course that a child under one parent can have the same id='19' as a child under a different parent.
Which means that when you click on one of the children, jqxTree's click even gives you the item you clicked on, but because the ID's are the same, it gives you the last item with that ID, which is a node in a different branch of the tree!
OK, I consider that a bug in jqxTree, it should give me the damn element I clicked on, whether they have the same ID or not.
For sake, I wouldn't have to deal with this BS in a WinForm app.
I'll report it as a bug in jqxWidgets forum though. They tend to be good at either fixing things or responding with "it works as intended."
To speak in code it would be something like this...
with IDs like "table-id" to namespace them in essence.
Exactly. So now I have id: "sx" + st.Id and similar for the different types (sx, rx, hx, etc.) and item.id.substring(2) to strip off the "namespace." My original rant took longer to write than the refactor the code.
Sounds more like a band-aid then a proper solution. I could be wrong...I usually am.
All items in your tree should have separate and unique id's based on your schema. I would double check to make sure this isn't something you did, versus it being the control vendor's fault.
It hasn't been 3 fulls weeks since I've posted a message here in the lounge praising the current state of Linux. The short version of that post is that I have an old machine dedicated for watching media hooked up to a projector, and it's been sluggish with Windows 10, which had also been giving me trouble with updates, so I installed Lubuntu on it (a lightweight version of Ubuntu) and it's performing a lot better--at least in terms of always remaining responsive. Everything "just worked" and the machine served its (single) purpose again beautifully.
Cue to today. Now that I've had a few weeks of "real use" out of it, the review isn't so glowing anymore.
a) Video drivers. Even though the machine is old, it played back 1080p video just fine, so long as I had Nvidia's ION driver installed, which is trivial to install on Windows. Nvidia has a version for Linux, but it looks like it's a few kernel versions behind, so it doesn't install on the current Lubuntu (17.10). I'm no Linux kernel developer, which you apparently have to be in order to figure out how to get things working in this sort of situation. I had to give up on that, which is pretty much a showstopper as, without hardware acceleration, 1080p video stutters all over the place and is basically unwatchable. 720p, with just the basic video driver, "works", but it's definitely glitchy here and there.
b) LAN connections. Again, I'm no Linux expert, but I do know enough so that using "smb://machinename" in the file browser was all that was needed to access shares on other machines on my LAN. It worked well for about a week. Then it simply refused to access anything from the machine hosting my media files (some generic timeout error, even though it's clearly not spending any time waiting for a response, as the error is immediate). However, other machines on my LAN remained accessible to it. The consistent fix was to reboot the machine hosting my media files, even though other (Windows) machines could read everything with no issue. That machine is also hosting other files that are needed elsewhere, and rebooting all the time is going to upset some processes, so that's not a long-term solution.
c) The straw that broke the camel's back: One day the machine booted at 640x480 only, and refused to go back to whatever native resolution my projector is using (it's not a monitor+projector configuration - only the projector is hooked up to it). No amount of rebooting would change it back, and given the other two problems I already had, I knew that even if I managed to solve this by messing around with video configuration files (which I've done exactly once, years ago), this machine was destined anyway to get flattened/rebuilt from scratch.
I just so happened to have a recent version of CentOS on a bootable USB stick. I figured why not try another distribution altogether. The installation went fine, only, after the first reboot, I was looking at a blank screen (not even a blinking cursor). I've used the same image to set up VMs, so I know it works.
Now...I'm the guy who will spend hours, if not days, of his spare time digging into technical problems and keep looking long after others have given up. However, this is a machine I use when I simply want to kick back, turn off my brain, and watch something for an evening--in other words, this is the machine I use when I want to walk away from problems I'm trying to solve. So in this particular case, I simply have no patience for fiddling with OS settings.
So this week, back to Windows 10 I went. It's not without its own problems, but I can at least get it in a state where it's functional, it'll play 1080p flawlessly, and then I can leave it alone. Updates be damned if they start breaking - this machine isn't used to access the internet.
Linux...you're so close, yet still so far from actually being usable.
I have a logitech audio server setup on a Ras Pi 3 which has been on constantly for nearly three years now running ( just upgraded it and didn't even take it down to do it ) Debian Stretch and it performs beautifuly, it also has Postgres and Samba installed. I wouldn't use Linux for the desktop but as a server I think it's fantastic.
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
That's about my position. Every 9 months or so I swap the sata cable on my primary desktop to a linux drive, boot it up, run updates and noodle around with it for a few days before getting furious and going back to windows.
I love developing FOR it and running it as a server OS. But the desktop drives me to drink.