|
Save enough to pay your taxes, and to tide you over for a few months if the contract ends suddenly.
If you don't ... you're screwed!
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!
|
|
|
|
|
Seconded, it's very easy to get carried away with your new found mega bucks, if you do your sums and calculate how much you need to set aside for tax,sickness, holidays , pensions etc.. you will be on a par with PAYE workers at best , but YOU ARE FREE - I've been contracting for thirty plus years ( still at it ) and wouldn't work any other way BUT !!! you have to do it properly, Get yourself a GOOD accountant, set up a business account to seperate your expenditure and keep receipts for everything . Good luck 
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
|
|
|
|
|
pkfox wrote: Get yourself a GOOD accountant
Once we had an accountant here, but he ran off.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
CodeWraith wrote: Once we had an accountant here, but he ran off.
take it you missed the GOOD part.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think I would ever have let him near my books? 
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't I know it too!  
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: Pays a lot more in Australia!
Everything pays better in Australia.
Danger money is included in your salary 
|
|
|
|
|
OMG! makes total sense!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely! 
|
|
|
|
|
hey, what about koalas?
so cute, they don't want to kill you,
they'll only give you tetanus, rabies and/or chlamydia.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: At any rate, I am now 6 months into my 3 months contract, going well, yeeha! 
Tomorrow completes week 69 in to my 2 - 4 week contract.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I found my freedom
a paradise meant for me
I found my freedom, I found my freedom
Da dada 'n dee dee dee
Hold my head up and look to the sun
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: Pays a lot more in Australia!
Good on you ! I'm sure you shear them sheep tenderly.
I'll probably need that loan pretty soon.
cheers, Bill
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
I am already slave to an home loan in a bust town 
The contract money is helping!
|
|
|
|
|
I thought DLR let you truly interpret .NET code?
Instead it's just more fancy wrappers around the compiler it looks like?
This means I can't support syntactic predicates or code behinds in my grammars at run time.
Code in the grammars would be limited to generated code.
Which *would* be acceptable except for the fact that the code makes the grammars work in the first place.
Meaning any code in any grammars renders the grammar unusable to the runtime parsers.
That's not okay to me. Why doesn't .NET let you interpret code finally?
I don't need a lot of it. Just a few lines here and there.
But now, because of this, if i were to support it, I'd need to make an elaborate caching system so as not to overrun the app with temporary assemblies, just like before the DLR came along.
Am I wrong?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not clear what you mean here...
the
"dynamic" object (which is a keyword for anything implementing..err.. some interface I forgot and has a powerful default implementation) can already call most method and property at runtime. You can also provide your own implementatino.
There is also Emit to generate code at runtime.
It's unclear here what is your beef, but I suspect you are wrong....
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not worried about how to generate code. I'm worried about the architecture of Win32 loading a zillion tiny DLLs into the process space over the course of my application in order to enable dynamic compilation
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.
|
|
|
|
|
i wanted a way to run small amounts of code without any compilation going on. that's all. interpreted. like JS is.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Well.. What about reflection then?
You can call any method and any property. It doesn't emit any code / create DLL. It's "slow" as well. Perfect!
An example.
Under the hood XAML and Razor access random object's properties with that.
|
|
|
|
|
i'd still need to write my own interpreter.
Hey, you'll understand this because you've used TinyPG.
You know how tinyPG lets you put code in the grammars?
That's what this is about.
TinyPG does not do runtime parsing, only generated parsers.
Mine does both. For mine to also do the code in the grammars, and do it at runtime, i'd need to solve this problem.
The only solution i can think of is one that relies on an elaborate caching mechanism for these compiled code bits.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I see....
Gonna think on that....
But what do you have against Emit?
It's no big deal to load of those generated code, is it now? Why does that concerns you?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have anything against Emit. In fact, I love it.
What I do not love is win32's inability to unload a DLL once it has been mapped to a process' address space.
It's an understandable limitation but one that causes problems if you just start generating code willy nilly under .NET.
What you need to do is ensure you basically never generate the same code twice.
That requires caching. That complicates the code considerably.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I see....
I can understand that could be a problem for very long running processes...
How about running them as Scheduled Task instead of non stop services? Just an idea...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
