|
I've managed to find time to start working on the article (series?) for my Entity Factory tool.
Step 0 - De-workify it (refactor some of the "common" code to remove work-related considerations and architecture).
Step 1 - Run through the code to make sure everything works as intended, remove deprecated functionality, and validate the UI.
Step 2 - Make sure the comments are adequate, yet copious.
Step 3 - Write the article, making sure to denigrate and disparage anyone that would dare to suggest I use .Net Core. Some may consider that to be "provocative", or even downright abusive, but I consider it to be more of a fair warning to those that venture past the gate and into the land of JSOP.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds good!
May I suggest you use .NET Core for portability if you don't do so already? 
|
|
|
|
|
I would run and duck under something hard enough to stop big caliber ammo  
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Psssst, I got your language independent CodeDOM free code generation functionality over here --->
Cool thing man. I love code generation tools. +1
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Looking forward to read it / them
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, convert it to .NET Standard then 
|
|
|
|
|
Element of leaderless lingo (5)
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm,
lingo = Jargon
leaderless = remove letter J
Element = Argon, a byproduct of the decay of Potassium-40[^].
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
modified 7-Dec-19 4:17am.
|
|
|
|
|
Quite right  - and sorry for the slow reply - didn't get the email for that one.
|
|
|
|
|
A reply to me elsewhere on the Internet
"You'll get there, I've noticed you don't just do coding...you try to torture it into telling you why...with as few expressions as is feasible."
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'm basically slowly posting a very large codebase article by article, section by section.
I'm not even tying them together as a series because some of the code is more general, like my IndexedQueue class, or my CodeDomUtility or CodeDomVisitor code.
I do it so i can link to them from my more meaty articles that use them, but they don't get votes.
Still, I think I'd rather have them posted than not. I just think it's a little funny how these little code bits go so unnoticed by themselves, but working together they make magic happen. 
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.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: I do it so i can link to them from my more meaty articles that use them, but they don't get votes.
Votes are not given for quality of the article but popularity and complex stuff is often not very popular. If you'd write something they can download and sell, then you'll be popular (and get lots of requests to change bits to suit their particular needs).
Having the articles online has more advantages; I often refer to them when looking for work, and sometimes you get a mail from someone who got stuck on the subject and whom the article helped. Makes you smile for a week 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I code for love, not money. 
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: and sometimes you get a mail from someone who got stuck on the subject and whom the article helped. Makes you smile for a week
See the 3rd sentence in my signature
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Many moons ago, before I retired, for many decades, I programmed embedded devices (8 / 16 bit) in both plain C and Assembler. In the early 1980s I even programmed my first PC in Assembler. This was one of the first genuine IBM PCs that they produced in Scotland. It's processor was an Intel 8080 running at the stunning clock speed of 4.7 MHz! At the time that was considered revolutionary!
Since my retirement a decade ago, I have been dabbling with C# just to keep the grey cells busy. Lord knows I have lost too many of them due to the stoopid aging process! 
But lately I have been looking around for another challenge. Learning 64 bit Assembler sounds interesting. Checked Amazon for not-too-expensive books on the subject, but some of the better books are for the Linux operating system. I just don't have the energy left to learn both Assembler and Linux. 
Can any of you recommend any good resources covering 64 bit Assembler programming on Windows, preferably using Visual Studio?
Please understand that I have done a Google search. Got plenty possibilities from Google. But I would like options that come with your personal recommendations, please. It is so much easier to pick options that your trusted friends recommend.
|
|
|
|
|
Everything I've found on windows programming in 64 bit assembler leads me to the windows DDK.
That's both expensive and hard to work with.
Offhand - and this is just one witch's opinion - using the basics of linux is easy. Enough to run an assembler. And OS level programming in asm is going to be far less arduous in linux even if you're not familiar with the driver model and such, just because they don't have all the info on it paywalled like MS does.
I'd recommend familiarizing yourself with linux. you only need a little bit, and i think it will pay for itself for you in terms of effort invested if you want to code 64 bit asm code that actually does stuff.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for responding!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Cp-Coder wrote: Can any of you recommend any good resources covering 64 bit Assembler programming on Windows, preferably using Visual Studio?
64 bit inline assembler isn't supported in Visual Studio. But you should have no problem compiling ASM files. I would recommend The MASM Forum[^] as a great resource.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your response! I will check the forum out. 
|
|
|
|
|
Intel itself has an introduction. I wouldn't recommend this to people who have never touched assembly before, but for you it should be good.
This table (and the linked SIB table) is also useful, even if you don't really care about the exact encoding of the operands, just to remind you of what forms the memory operand can have (a lot more flexible than the 8080). The ISDM has tables like that as well but this way it's more convenient IMO.
Of course get the Intel® 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software Developer Manuals (ISDM) as a reference. And you can use x86 and amd64 instruction reference, but that's only the instructions not the other details.
Once you know the basics you will probably find this interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Good advice! Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
There is nothing very difficult to understand with Linux. Get a copy of Ubuntu and if you don't have a spare PC, you can install it on a spare raw partition and do dual booting. I have it on my home system.
BTW, like you I retired (almost) a decade ago.
|
|
|
|
|
I dabbled with Ubuntu many years ago (I think it was their version 11) but at that time it did not have a driver for the Soundblaster card I had in my machine, so I dumped it. Anyway, thanks for the advice!
Quote: do dual booting
Yes, or run it in a virtual engine?
modified 7-Dec-19 7:20am.
|
|
|
|
|
The drivers have gotten far better.
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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
