|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: If there only was a tool that would give you the information you need instead of what you search for...
You mean common sense? 
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard that expression before, what's common about it?
|
|
|
|
|
It's more of an uncommon sense nowadays.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't think they have a Sitar player. That'd have been a nice touch.
|
|
|
|
|
A true master would have a cool signature. Also, you need to add a link to your website if you wish to attract other customers, especially of the fair variety. 
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea, although everyone involved in this already know me. That said I've been bitten in the past where people happily use my photos (of them, taken for free) without acknowledging credit and in most cases not even thanking me. Recently I've started watermarking my photos. It's more due to lack of etiquette on their side than any attempt at being intentionally rude I would guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Highly Skilled Technicians
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
That's the 11 month old daughter of the guy who's directing the band 
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Sivakumar wrote: Looking forward to some feedback
OK
Nish Sivakumar wrote: lie through your teeth if you think it's bad
Oh! OK
Using many different fades doesn't make it look amateurish at all!
Having the soundtrack completely unsynchronised with the visuals was a pleasant novelty, especially ths scenes where video of a singer was accompanied by, for example, an electric guitar!
The clips of a singer apparently tweeting as he sang was interesting!
The editor must have spent a long time making the whole thing look like a hastily-prepared PowerPoint rather than the polished, professional product it most certainly is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
> due to family commitments he's decided to offer it up to the highest bidder
"Family commitments". Yeah.
He's not fooling anyone, the wife made him get rid of it.
|
|
|
|
|
So it goes like this: you decide to put significant effort into creating some technical information. You double check the facts, you pay attention to formatting etc. All of it after work. For free - just because you think you owe something to programming community... Then you share it... Sometimes someone says “thanks!” – and it’s enough!
...But from time to time there is this special person, he/she is either unable to comprehend written word or doesn't care to actually read the article before judging it. Don’t you just love such people? 
Here’s what I’m talking about: article comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members are allowed to vote any darn way they like. Walk it off.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
No worries, I'm not gonna cry because of it 
I just think that expressing opinions about something without checking it first is fundamentally stupid. And I hope that some people share my view.
|
|
|
|
|
I learned a long time ago;
1) Not everyone is going to like you
2) Some people criticize everything
3) You could give some people something for nothing and they will still bitch
4) At times I'm an a**hole
etc..
In other words if you put your hook in the water there's no telling what you'll catch.
If first you don't succeed, hide all evidence you ever tried!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, I'm not 100% sure "amen" actually works in English as it works in Polish. I meant: "You are damn right"
|
|
|
|
|
morzel wrote: But from time to time there is this special person,
I feel your pain. Unfortunately, there's not much that can be done about it, though personally I wish that Chris would come up with a way to remove the outliers from the full rating.
BTW, your work looks really great and I'm definitely very interested in seeing what happens when you benchmark the performance with a large array of objects. That'll be interesting!
(Oh, and you got my 5 -- great effort!)
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
It happens. Jealousy, I suspect, some times.
Now, look at the profile for the author of the comment: 6 years, three messages and one comment. No articles, no tips, no answers - nothing shared with the community at all. So his opinion is pretty much worthless, especially given he didn't justify it much. Probably, it wasn't what he was specifically looking for! But he does have a point: create and release of one huge object doesn't test the "real world" behavior of the GC, since the single object will be on the Large Object Heap rather than the "normal" heap, which is handled differently anyway. Not a good reason for a univote though!
Ignore him - but perhaps the next version could try some other stress factors?
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
There will be part 2 (as promised in part 1). I've did some test and I can tell that GC is pretty quick even for large trees of small objects which survive GC cycle (worst case scenario for GC)... Friday though, time for a reset 
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes the real world is even worse, but things tend to even out in the end.
I once was asked to write the justification for a complete engineering computing system to the tune of many millions of US$. Looking at the specs, I realized it could all be done on a PC (actually a 80286 machine back then). My boss went ballistic when I told him I couldn't justify the expenditure, got someone else to write the justification, called me a non-team player, etc.
After a week or two, I thought, maybe I was wrong, so there's only one way to know - write the software and if I can do it, I was right. So I spent about 3 or 4 weeks working on it at home, in the evenings and weekends on my own time, on my own PC and I got it working. So, naive me, I took it to work and proudly showed it off. Big mistake. My boss made me take it off of the company computer, forbid me from using it for my job, and later wrote in my performance evaluation that I worked on worthless projects that the company had no interest in that were outside my job responsibilities.
Well, that just plain pissed me off, so I asked for and got a release of copyright and letters from the company renouncing all rights to the software.
Later, when I left that company, I ended up selling the software commercially and the company bought about 30 licenses to the software and paid full retail price for the software they could have had for free.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
morzel wrote: Don’t you just love such people?
It means they were dissapointed that your cut/copy solution did not work. It means that some fool saw "shiny" and posted an emotional response when confronted with reality.
Post an insult and post a link to it in the Lounge.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I think you should be grateful, he was interested enough to enter into a discussion (I have a down vote with a single . from one cretin), and I suggest he did read your article but missed the bit about the follow up. Probably so excited about identifying a flaw in your testing. So bitching about his response in the Lounge is completely uncalled for IMHO.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
My MenuRibbon (and its companion class MenuRibbonItem) has reached the v0.1 stage!!!
By that I mean you can use it and it has drop menu or drop ribbon and dropping, mouse tracking, highlight works fine!
Now I have to make it look more polished, and I might put in CodePlex[^]
I know, I know, why not CodeProject[^]?
Mmm.. what if I can't be bothered writing an article? Takes time too and... this control is only a rain drop in my secret project to take over the world in my spare time!!  
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
