|
When I look back of my old code, I think to myself, "Holy broccoli, Batman! What great code. Did I actually write that? So eloquent and yet so powerful."
To which I hear the reply, "Get away from computer, Granddad. You know it makes you sad."
Nothing succeeds like a budgie without teeth.
To err is human, to arr is pirate.
|
|
|
|
|
Although robust enough for general use, adventures into the esoteric periphery of the C shell may reveal unexpected quirks.
|
|
|
|
|
There are only two categories of code (like computers), prototype and obsolete.
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
Be thankful you have a job 
|
|
|
|
|
All my code is old, I am still using Visual FoxPro  it's tiny (can run it on a pen drive!) and "does what is says on the tin."
|
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: 'What a long strange trip it's been'
I have an in-house debugging tool created in 2000 we use a lot that I'm actively maintaining. It's been getting a couple new features over the last few months. Part of the app is a Windows Shell extension for Explorer, which I'm researching on updating for Windows 11. The current extension is treated as a 2nd-class citizen, relegated to the "old stuff we're ashamed of" sub-menu when you right-click on things.
Software Zen: delete this;
modified 11-Mar-22 16:23pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I am on a similar project, and one of the problems with our code base is that we do not spend enough time ripping out the obsolete code, especially from major transitions.
Customers and management always want to focus on the next enhancement.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, that's why all code should be written 3 times:
1) Write it to prove the concept and LEARN
2) Rewrite it for others and clarity
3) Rewrite it again because we are professionals, and our brains will be shot when we come back.
The most complicated piece of Code I ever wrote was an insurance rating engine that constantly changed.
The "elegant" solution in the end was: (No Goto allowed)
LOOP
// Shared setup code, variable hunting, etc.
If Determination_Condition then
RateXXX;
break;
// There were about 100 of those.
..
DefaultRate;
break;
END LOOP
I was criticized for using the LOOP in a code review, but the challenge to find a cleaner way found nothing.
And I brought the last 10 change requests, which effectively tell you WHERE to place the code to exit early.
Life is sometimes simple... (And for complexity, consider rules like, they have a home policy, a life policy, and are disabled... Uggh... Only insurance companies)
|
|
|
|
|
The most complicated solution I've written was something that allowed you to define a pixel as a series of "channels", each with a name, resolution/bit depth, default value, and min and max value (related to the bit depth but can be overridden)
The pixels could then be accessed by individual channel name, or channel index. In addition, you could set the entire value (all channels) as a unit. A pixel could be as large as the machine's maximum word size.
Furthermore, to convert to other color models, all you have to do is make it convertible to a pixel with R, G, and B channels and it will figure out the rest.
All of this is done at compile time if the information is available at compile time. Even manipulating the individual channels does not yield shift instructions except if the values aren't known at compile time. It simply creates a new constant value.
It's pretty crazy.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
... apart from losing my toolbox boilerplate texts, it coming up in Dark Mode, and with the wrong font it looks OK.
Found a nice touch: If you create a property and then hit ENTER at the end, it offers to create a new one of the same type for you with TAB.
... and now I can't make it do it again. 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft has been trying to minimize the need for ReSharper extension use with VS for a few years now.
A lot of ReSharper's functionality is now baked into VS 2022. It may take some getting used to by developers. I am sure some or all of it is configurable to some degree via Tools --> Options...
Jet Brains who does ReSharper is based out of the Czech Republic, the last I checked. This country is black listed by most banks in America by default. Not sure if this has any bearing on MS not wanting developers to use the ReSharper extension with VS anymore, or not.
I know some MS devs that still use ReSharper to this day, and I find that funny as hell.
|
|
|
|
|
They are also trying to bake in VisualAssist X. Focus on trying.
GCS d--(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--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: Microsoft has been trying to minimize the need for ReSharper extension use with VS for a few years now.
In other words: Microsoft has been working on improving Visual Studio usability for decades. They did this before ReSharper was a thing, and they of course they did not stop simply because ReSharper adds something.
Slacker007 wrote: A lot of ReSharper's functionality is now baked into VS 2022.
As you would expect. If you build an addon that improves usability into a product where usability is developed, expect similar features to be implemented into the base product. They cater to the same audience and have access to similar technology levels - so I would expect similarities.
Slacker007 wrote: Jet Brains who does ReSharper is based out of the Czech Republic, the last I checked. This country is black listed by most banks in America by default. Not sure if this has any bearing on MS not wanting developers to use the ReSharper extension with VS anymore, or not.
Unlikely. They are working on improving usability of the product to the developer base using their tools and eco-system. Of course that means making it as usable as possible without users having to buy addon products.
Slacker007 wrote: I know some MS devs that still use ReSharper to this day, and I find that funny as hell.
Why? I am quite sure Microsoft's product owners will be the first to admit there are a lot of improvements possible (they probably call that list "the backlog") - and of course ReSharper will fill some of these gabs as they are adding features on top of what MS already put into Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using VS 2022 at work full time and exclusively for about 30 days now. No real issues to comment on, so far.
It did act a little funky with my Git repos at first, but now that it has worked with my repos for a while, the weirdness for that has gone a way...for now.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been using VS2022 for a few months now and for the most part the auto-complete "AI" is freaking awesome. And sometimes it seems to take a nap. There are times when I start a line and the rest of the code is tab-tab-tab-tab.
Otherwise, no issues except that I really hate the nullable type thing in the latest C#. For every new project, I find myself going in to the .csproj file and editing the Nullable tag to disable it.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: I've been using VS2022 for a few months now and for the most part the auto-complete "AI" is freaking awesome. And sometimes it seems to take a nap. There are times when I start a line and the rest of the code is tab-tab-tab-tab.
I found it coming up with suggestions that were wrong ~30-50% of the time; and while most were facepalmingly and obviously wrong after about the 4th or 5th time it came up with something that looked right at first glance but wasn't I turned it off. Even without those errors I probably would've pulled the plug within a few days because evaluating if it's suggestions were valid was taking almost as long as typing just enough to autocomplete the code without using them would take.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
One of the preview versions (I assume, could have been a beta or even release) used to surprise me by showing just the text I wanted... and when I then hit tab, it would insert something else . That was certainly entertaining, but I can't say I miss that behavior.
I am happy with not having to enable nullable each time I create a project (in my book one of the top two improvements in .NET since version 1.0 - the other being Generics) but the top level statements in the templates of .NET 6 requires me to copy paste some boilerplate code each time I create a new project.
"Here we have the 10 files of the project. The 9 of them looks like this, and then there is program.cs looking completely different. Why you ask? Oh, so it looks cool when we demo simple things on conferences. Everyone we talked to said it was great. And they must be representing all our users, because we talked to them in speaker rooms at conferences all over the world."
At least that decision is being hammered at Should the console project template use top-level statements · Issue #27420 · dotnet/docs · GitHub[^] for console applications, while the idiots responsible for ASP.NET says "Just run the 5.0 template".
An easy way to set defaults for new projects without having to create and maintain your own template would be nice.
|
|
|
|
|
I never had that happen unless I'd typed an additional letter and the auto-complete changed in the fraction of a second between the letter and tab. My most common failure was when I'd tupe
blahFoo = DoStuff(blehFoo);
blahBar =
And it would suggest completing
blahFoo = DoStuff(blehFoo);
blahBar = DoSomethingElse(ughBaz);
or I was doing
Foo myFoo = new Foo
{
prop1 = bar.prop1,
prop2 = bar.prop2,
prop3 =
}
and be suggested:
Foo myFoo = new Foo
{
prop1 = bar.prop1,
prop2 = bar.prop2,
prop3 = baz.prop46,
}
basically the sort of highly repetitive code that I could've generated via regex on a list of stubs but wasn't large enough to be worth the overhead.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on how hard you hit ENTER
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
Or try the RETURN key instead.
|
|
|
|
|
I kinda like the new font, in how it displays some of the combination of characters.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't notice they changed it out from what I had in 2019 (consolas); which puts it one up on some of the other new fonts MS has commissioned over the years.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
having looked at the new font, Cascadia Mono, I'm even more surprised I didn't notice. Its lowercase l is similar to the italic lowercase l in Consolas. And that l is just far enough off normal styling that my brain tries to reject it as an l each time it sees it bringing my reading to an abrupt halt until I mentally override.
A year or two ago when I was doing stuff in Android Studio, after replacing the default font (don't recall what it was but I didn't care for it) with Consolas I found myself waging a long war with the settings hunting down and changing every case where it would apply italics to style something. The next time I do something with Android I think I'll have to try this font on for size there and see how it works.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
I like it...an ode to old code! 
My company's flagship product is 22 years old, and I was there from the start. 
