|
Quote: By default, Windows 10 quietly reconfigures your default printer every time you print.
[Link]
Why am I telling you this? Because I just spent 4 hours trying to track down a devilish bug in a well known hated reporting library due to this setting being enabled on a test rig running the latest version of Winten.
Most reports worked fine. Others threw an access violation exception and crashed the program...all work fine in development.  I spent hours looking through code and comparing working reports to non-working reports. I was getting nowhere until I moved on to something else for awhile. The thought finally occurred to me to change the default printer. I noticed going into the control panel for printer/devices that no default printer was marked??? Previously, it had been set (under 8.1) to a pdf printer/driver. I set the default back to it's original setting and was informed that manually setting a default would disable 'Automatic Default Printer Management'. OK, no problem...didn't even know what it was or how it got switched on. With a default printer manually configured, all reports now work like they should! I'm back on schedule for Monday!
Maybe this will save someone else from pulling their hair out! Now, if I can just figure out why the SQL Service refuses to start automatically since the takeover! Not asking...not that important!
Have a great weekend! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: Why am I telling you this?
More to the point, why are you telling us this on a Saturday?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I got interrupted yesterday and posted without re-reading this morning. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to say! I had the Friday rant 
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it was comforting knowing I wasn't the only poor bastard cursing on Friday!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
That's a feature of winio's Automatic Default Calendar Management.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
... it's better than just a box, but...[^]
I assume the architect was smoking something, and the client was drunk?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Griff,
Thanks to you, I may have found the right designers for my creative writing website; I sense these people will understand me: Krzywy Domek ("Crazy House") web-site: [^].
cheers, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Depends when you catch them, I guess: the Ballmer Peak[^] is a pretty fine balance!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
They might understand you, but I can't understand a bluddy word they say.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so ha have to (note that that's not "want to") install Java on one of my machines, so I go to their site and click the download button:
You don't have permission to access "http://sdlc-esd-stage.oracle.com/ESD6/JSCDL/jdk/8u101-b13/JavaSetup8u101.exe?" on this server.
Fine, so the button's broken. Go to manual download:
You don't have permission to access "http://sdlc-esd-stage.oracle.com/ESD6/JSCDL/jdk/8u101-b13/jre-8u101-windows-i586.exe?" on this server.
Right. Last option: manual download-as-you-go:
You don't have permission to access "http://sdlc-esd-stage.oracle.com/ESD6/JSCDL/jdk/8u101-b13/jre-8u101-windows-i586-iftw.exe?" on this server.
Bluddy morons! They don't even mention that the "other links" are to the JRE, not the JDK.
I eventually had to settle for a copy of the JRE from here:
http://download.oracle.com/otn-pub/java/jdk/8u101-b13/jre-8u101-windows-x64.exe"
But you can't do a Hell of a lot with a bluddy JRE! Looky but no touchy.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I had a link in my favourites that led me there. But when I typed "java development kit" into Google just now, that was the top link. I don't know where you got your link, which someone in QA also got.
|
|
|
|
|
Yours was probably routed through a different part of India.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I tried to download jre last week to my 2008 server only to see tar.jz files for windows. Really? Are we lazy or just mad at the world?
I also found that link to the .exe installer the OP specified but when I double click it it after downloading does nothing so -- no Jira for my server, Fogbugz still.
I'll try harder next week.
modified 24-Sep-16 14:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
So one thing I'd love to do more of is reading/studying clean code/software. I've been reading material by Steve McConnell and Uncle Bob, which are fantastic... But I'd like to see more examples of the principles actually in code. I tried searching for Uncle Bob' GitHub and found it, but it's rather limited.. And haven't even been able to find any code by Steve McConnell online.
Are there any other folks who are known for writing good code that you'd recommend I check out? I'm looking for actual source code... Because just roaming around the web everywhere, I've found all kinds of nasty stuff! Bonus points for C# but really, C++, and Java would be understandable as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Just my $0.02 but I think you can only get so far by looking at other people's code. Just like writing a book, the only way to do it well is by actually writing a lot. Do look at good code, but don't spend too long on it.
Another thing is there is no objectively "well written" software. When you go out into the industry (I'm assuming you still haven't or are new to it), you will come across all kinds of a-holes who find fault with every f-ing thing no matter how well it's written. I think there was someone who posted here about how the boss rejected his code because the others were too incompetent to understand it.
Of course this is no reason to write shoddy software, but it is better to adopt your style to the situation at hand, and to develop your own style irrespective of what others are doing. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel, but even less reason to not innovate just because something good enough is already available. From personal experience, I am less and less inclined to actually create anything because it is so easy to string together other people's code (employers seem to expect it too, given the tight deadlines and ridiculous budgets), and it has had a detrimental effect on my work quality.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting, yet what you said makes sense about deadlines and stuff... Unfortunately the real world doesn't always allow for nicely-put-together stuff... In any profession really.
Well, I've been reading several good software engineering books lately and was just looking for more real-world examples besides the simplified stuff in the book. Surely someone must be able to write what they call "clean code", no?
If not, what exactly are most employers judging you on? If they don't really care about the code quality, then what are they looking for in the interview?
I've done a few small projects/freelance jobs but I have not yet formally worked for an employer.
|
|
|
|
|
TheOnlyRealTodd wrote: If not, what exactly are most employers judging you on? If they don't really care about the code quality, then what are they looking for in the interview?
Often enough the interviews have little to nothing to do with the actual work. Some were so creative when it came to avoiding standards that you ended up doing the opposite of what all experience or common sense would command.
In such a place it's very important to claim every (rare) success for yourself while pushing the blame for the (frequent) failures on somebody else, independently of what you worked on or not. Such places are like sinking ships, only that everybody will fight for the best positions, not for a seat in a lifeboat. If you end up in such a madhose, do yourself a favor and get out of there as fast as you can.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
What employers look for is varied, depending on a lot of things like the size of the organization or the management style
The other day I was talking to one of the HR guys (a most un-catbert like individual) and he said that what they mainly want to know in interviews is whether the candidate can use prior knowledge and experience to do his job
So say they want someone to maintain their ASP.NET website. The ideal candidate would already have several years experience in doing just that, but failing that (which is usually the case), they would try to get someone with at least some experience in some .NET technology. Hiring a Linux kernel developer is not going to be a good idea here.
Another thing is whether they will fit in with the team. Some rock star programmer is not going to cut it in a large corporate environment, they would rather go for someone with less ability who works well with the team than a super coder who is socially inept and pisses everyone off.
This would probably be less of an issue in startups, where they do want people who are super performers at the expense of social skills.
Code quality is something that they won't find out in interviews. Maybe they look at your github repo or something, but there aren't nearly enough people who even have one in the first place. Or maybe they throw out the duds during the first few weeks at work, not that I have seen it happen very often.
The cynic in me says that employers want people who work long hours for peanuts and not raise a stink about it, but I guess that would be a shortsighted policy.
|
|
|
|
|
California 90025 wrote: there is no objectively "well written" software
It's often easier to spot badly written software and there seems to be some consensus on what that is. Just last week I had to work with some SQL code that was written like SELECT somefields FROM table1, table2 WHERE table1.id = table2.table1_id. Now that's fine code... If you live in the 80's before proper joins were invented. I even found a where ... ( +) (it was Oracle) that I couldn't even read. Apparently the ( +) is an outer join from before outer joins were invented.
You may be thinking it was an old project and people didn't know better at the time, but actually that code was written two weeks ago 
Ask a million serious SQL developers what they think of this code and I think (hope) at least 99% would agree that it was actually bad code.
Now replace it with proper joins, ask those same developers again and now your developers will be squabbling about casing, indentation and even the order in which you write your where-clause
|
|
|
|
|
California 90025 wrote: Another thing is there is no objectively "well written" software. When you go out into the industry (I'm assuming you still haven't or are new to it), you will come across all kinds of a-holes who find fault with every f-ing thing no matter how well it's written. I think there was someone who posted here about how the boss rejected his code because the others were too incompetent to understand it.
I've wondered about this, as someone who has not yet worked at a shop. I hear a lot about how there really isn't any ideal code and "as long as it works, it's fine" but at the same time, there are highly acclaimed books and articles that suggest that there is in fact a "right way" to write code, such as Code Complete by Steve McConnell, and that Clean Code book by Uncle Bob.
Ultimately, of course this is just their suggestions, but nonetheless, they seem to be well-accepted suggestions. Though, I believe every word you say about people picking apart your code no matter what, I may not have worked at a shop yet, but I've been working with people for a long time, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
California 90025 wrote: California 90025
I assume this means you're around WeHo? I'm in Studio City.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
