|
It's not easy, and I think STEM is oversold to a great degree. When you hear them saying "we need way more of x people", run away from x as quickly as possible. What that statement translates to is "we don't want to pay x workers anything, so we need an oversupply." It's odd that they never say there's a need for upper management or CEO, despite the stratospheric wages.
Balancing that, nothing is worse than working retail/foodservice, so if that's your only other choice stick with IT. The company I work for hires 200+ skilled welders or mechanics for every IT job, so if you have an aptitude for those skills that's another option.
If you want to go further with self-education, you might look into volunteering on an open-source project. That would get you past the "project without a real problem behind it," and you could point to your ability to work with others. Also, concentrate on your debugging and testing skills. Those are gold.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
I think I'm starting to gain some steam on a MCV project I started. I've never had such a hard time learning something new.
I've decided that Entity Framework is both good, and terrible. However, it's not good until you've figured out how to address all the terrible stuff, and even then it's not so much "good" as it is a horrific series of compromises and workarounds that you've learned to live with.
I've decided that MVC is the evil twin of EF. My view that web development sucks big hairy donkey testicles has not changed. At all.
If it wasn't for the possibility that I could make a butt-load of cash from this, I'd stop working on it.
I think I'm getting to be too old to code.
".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
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: it's not good until you've figured out how to address all the terrible stuff, and even then it's not so much "good" as it is a horrific series of compromises and workarounds that you've learned to live with.
That is the best description I've ever read! And even better, it can be applied to so many things, like all those Javascript MVVM frameworks out there (there are a few exceptions.)
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I think I'm getting to be too old to code.
I so get that, though I've come to realize that I've gotten too old to code the way everyone thinks coding should be done. 
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: I've come to realize that I've gotten too old to code the way everyone thinks coding should be done.
This!
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
I dipped my toes in it a few years ago and they came to the same conclusion, thankfully it looks like I will be able to push WPF to retirement. Even when I had a looked at the web stack I rejected EF, I rolled my own in the 90's and see no benefit to moving to a crappy black box tool like EF.
I may decide to learn it next year but maybe I'll just learn to play golf instead.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with EF is getting it to do what you want it to do instead of what it wants to do.
It's a love hate relationship at best.
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I've decided that MVC is the evil twin of EF. My view that web development sucks big hairy donkey testicles has not changed. At all.
For once we totally agree. The Model View Controller pattern by itself is a great thing. It's wise to separate the views from the presentation logic and the data model and this way keep things orderly. Still, web development is a pain, even when it's done in a disciplined way.
And let's not begin with that sad apology for a programming language, known as JavaScript.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
|
|
|
|
|
The pros out weigh the cons for EF and our shop (and myself). Once you learn what EF can do and what it can't do and what it shouldn't do, then you should be fine.
I can do more with EF in a shorter amount of time then any other method. I can even import stored procs with complex types and use them in EF in a POCO type fashion, if needed.
What you are feeling right now about EF is lack of experience, IMHO, and I have seen this before. Once you get your experience up with it, then you should be fine, as I said before.
Good luck. 
BTW: EF is not the only solution for data integration. Some people think this, and then they get frustrated that EF is not putting them on the moon, and making kick ass fresh salsa and chips. Just saying...
|
|
|
|
|
I generally abhor black-box frameworks. I have a set of classes that have served me very well for the last 10 years and switching over to EF is not what I really wanted to do. You're most likely right about why I feel the way I do, but that's no excuse for the piecemeal learning curve I've had to endure.
".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
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: but that's no excuse for the piecemeal learning curve I've had to endure.
It has been no bed of roses for me learning Entity Framework, and I do understand your frustration completely. You are completely justified to feel frustrated and angry about this. I guess you just have to do what you have to do to get over this hurdle.
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't mean you have to throw out "your" classes.
Once you get more familiar with EF, you will find simpler ways to integrate than what is in the "samples"; particularly if you're using "repository patterns" already.
My "old" MODBUS serial classes are now MODBUS over TCP/IP classes.
(Easy conversion since they were "my" classes to start with).
Take the "code first" approach starting out; let EF generate your database as you go along.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Web development is like "crack": the next tool, framework, hit, etc, will be "better".
MS still cannot develop a stable browser.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
EF was designed to crush your soul. Not to mention, make us DBA's go WTF (I've seen issues with double calls, and more).
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Oy
My 9 year old wants to learn how to and then make a computer/video game.
So. Unity or Unreal? Other?
I know zip about games. No interest whatsoever, but my kid...
This is what he sent me:
Trying to go in a jungle in a haunted house and In a temple of dreams
With enemies like ground trolls and fire bats
And crystal spiders
For the jungle
The haunted house has pumpkin spirits and candycorn cowboys
As for the temple of dreams there are crystals to dream for anything of the players choice
All of that adventure to save mom
From being possessed by a demon
Which game engine would be best for that sort of game? An adventure with candycorn cowboys and fire bats.
'Cause we gotta rescue Mom.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems the kid has a nice story for the game, but what about graphics? music? and most of all - programming knowledge? All those nice engines do not have them for him...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Unity has 3 languages, C# the most common (UnityScript/Javascript, and Boo), and has many tutorials online + documentation and how tos, etc., and comes with VS 2017, but I think you could get it with out 2017.
I would use this.
You mention nothing of his programming skills, so I am going to assume we are putting the cart in front of the horse here. Still, if he is willing to take baby steps and learn, then Unity is the way to go.
FYI - Blizzard Games Hearthstone was done in Unity and a handful of popular games on Steam were done in Unity as well.
Many epic 3A games do not use Unity, but rather use the Unreal Engine, etc., and/or roll their own 3D engines.
Unity is getting better with every release. It has a good asset library (free, $$) so you don't need to be a graphic artist to get going with game design/implementation.
Edit: There are some nice articles and tech blogs on this site having to do with Unity game dev.
UNITY 3D – Game Programming – Part 2[^]
This one is almost 5 years old but has a lot of links to info, etc.: So you want to be a Unity3D game developer?[^]
and the obligatory MSDN article: Unity - Developing Your First Game with Unity and C#[^]
modified 5-Nov-17 7:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah...he has no programming skills whatsoever. Says he wants to learn...but only in the context of making a game.
I downloaded Unity, opened it up and said No Way.  Maybe. MAYbe, I will look at it again, but it's doubtful.
I think he'll have to start off with Scratch or GameMaker. We don't live in the same country, so teaching him something too complicated is unlikely.
But I may send him to Code.org for a start.
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: I think he'll have to start off with Scratch or GameMaker.
I have been told you can't go wrong with GameMaker. I have not used it myself, but I have heard and read nothing but good things about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Check out Playmaker for unity, that might be more the speed you need to start with.
|
|
|
|
|
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly I have the same problem. My 8 year old invents levels upon levels of his super complicated game thinking in details how different monsters will kill you. I tried to bring him to think of something simple which we can do together but seems that's not that interesting after all. I don't know anything about game making either so I tried to sell him Kodu[^] - with partial success.
|
|
|
|
|
For that age, isn't RPG Maker (wikipedia) better suited than an actual game engine? I guess Kodu fills the same role?
|
|
|
|
|
I would definitely not advise to use a real game engine. Kodu is aimed at teaching programming and is free.
|
|
|
|
|
Now that you mention it, RPG Maker is paid, I never knew that. I got it in a game making magazine ages ago and had a blast. there's no actual programing required (you can use the scripting language, but it isn't necessary) you just draw maps by selecting squares with pieces from the toolbox, create npc and dialogs via a mini editor, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Another platform worth considering is Scratch.
I helped my niece create a game in scratch and I was fairly impressed by both what it could do and the tutorials and support around it.
Scratch is nice because it feels like programming with Lego blocks - it's very visually while being faithful to programming concepts.
If I had more time I would probably use scratch myself just for fun.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
