|
Marc Clifton wrote: "oh wow, this is so cool, 4 levels of parens!"
And your geeky friends would have mocked you because there are 5 levels... 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
If he were counting parens, 4 would be the average between the left and right side. 
edit: sorry, didn't see the post below which mentions this. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
qlik example DATE(NUM(DATE(FLOOR($(vTEST)) 'YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS.FFF')
This is the necessary stage of declarative programming* that occurs right before AI takes over and writes all the code for us. 
Yes, it's like SQL and yes I hate SQL also*.
<bumpersticker>Real Devs Hate SQL</bumpersticker>
|
|
|
|
|
I'm somewhere between my teens and 50's and two parens would've been fine for me 
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder that any of these expressions returns something, since none of them has balanced parentheses.
On the other hand, I have never heard of "Qlikview" (fortunately), and perhaps this "language" can't cope with balanced parentheses
|
|
|
|
|
Does this work for you?
SET DateFormat='YYYY-MM-DD';
LET vTEST = '2018-09-05 13:27:14.5';
dayname(vTEST)
|
|
|
|
|
This will give you the date portion of the string:
LET vTEST = '2018-09-05 13:27:14.5';
LET vResult = Date(vTEST, 'YYYY-MM-DD'); <-- vResult = 2018-09-05
Also, 'MM' for months, 'mm' for minutes.
Sincerely,
-Mark
|
|
|
|
|
I'm - among other things - making a software for the ATMs (for Bitcoins they're called BTMs). Yesterday we've found out that one of our machines has probably a defective touch screen. It was randomly pressing all over the screen. On closer inspection (on site) it turned out to be a branch of a tree randomly waving in the wind and occasionally touching the screen. This branch also managed in this short time to uncover two bugs that two testing teams were unable to find during two years of product lifetime. One was even as simply as touching the screen in a certain time. One was more complex, the branch managed to 'touch' through random screens and created very weird scenarios. One of them was a really obscure bug. The branch became a honorary member of our testing team.
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to fuzzing[^]
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
That means the Branch is probably the most experienced member of our testing team. I reckon it will lead the team within few months.
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
there is great potential he could become the next branch manager! 
|
|
|
|
|
First day in office in my previous work... I come in the room and I see a guy looking at the roof randomly touching a screen on the table with both hands.
When I asked... "what are you doing?"
He answered... "playing the bored operator"
4 Years later, a line programed by me that had been working for months stable and smooth got an error... I could not get out of the status without direct access to the PLC to change some values using my laptop. A new guy had been assigned to the line, he had discovered a deadlock in his 3rd day and the worst is... I could not find out, how he did it.
In that moment, I remembered my first day crystal clear and thought "man... was he right"
You story has called the same flash back again.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I understand now as well. I'll include such random trial in my debug version and will let one copy run endlessly.
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
Smart K8 wrote: I'll include such random trial in my debug version and will let one copy run endlessly.
And you won't be so accurated as a bored / stupid human
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.
|
|
|
|
|
True. We need an algorithm for 'stupid'. Then just run DoStupid() on your application to cause mayhem.
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
I recall (many years) ago a unix tool that output text to the screen. It included options to simulate a lazy/drunk human (you could specify how drunk with some numerical argument). It introduced delays, mistakes and corrections into the typing and looked convincingly human. I can't remember it being useful, but it was funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Go green!
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
People are afraid A.I. will replace them, but slowly the nature is overtaking our jobs. Dey took err jerbs!
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
that tree must get pay hike.. probably more fertilizers and water
|
|
|
|
|
We're thinking about replacing some testers with branches. It's cheaper and green. But seriously, it probably will be cut, if/when our client gets a permission to do so (it's a public place). 
In order to understand stack overflow, you must first understand stack overflow.
|
|
|
|
|
S**t mixed in water? It's a fitting description for our coffee machine byproducts waste leaks coffee ...
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Smart K8 wrote: The branch became a honorary member of our testing team.
Great story. Thanks for sharing. Made me laugh and think about the old days.
Back when I worked in QA, I once entered a 10,000 character URL into IE (it is no longer possible) to test a product.
The URL not only crashed the program but took down the instance of the Oracle db.
I was absolutely psyched. This was so long ago that the term sql injection hadn't reached popularity and I didn't know that my "extensive testing" had a name. It was fun.
Later the developer asked me, "What do you want me to do with that bug? It's ridiculous. No one would ever do that."
Me: (smiling) "Doesn't matter to me what you do with it. But, at least you know it's there."
I like to break stuff. Especially software. Software is soooo breakable. And most software deserves to be broken.
And, yes, I'm a full-time dev and have been for years. But I still love breaking software.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: But I still love breaking software.
That's the best attitude a developer can have: because now you think of methods which could break your software and then make it better, then think of more sophisticated approaches to break your software, and so on.
Most developers check their code in when a very simple "happy path scenario" seems to work, and that's their definition of "DONE".
Oh sanctissimi Wilhelmus, Theodorus, et Fredericus!
|
|
|
|
|
Bernhard Hiller wrote: That's the best attitude a developer can have
I think so too. Instead of thinking, "it just works" developers need to _worry_ about all the cases where it does not work. It is kind of a pain because there are so many scenarios to think about when you're writing your own software, but the mindset of breaking things keeps you on the right path.
|
|
|
|
|
IMO if you're not doing behavioral or regression testing on your modules throughout development you're doing it wrong. Leaning on code coverage unit tests in place of this is one of my biggest kvetches about the TDD culture.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
