|
I prefer Lounge to Saloon. Saloon is just too "low-brow" for me. If you really want to change the name, consider Salon. The online The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition defines this as follows:
Quote: salon /sə-lŏn′, săl′ŏn″, să-lôɴ′/
noun- A large room, such as a drawing room, used for receiving and entertaining guests.
- A periodic gathering of people of social or intellectual distinction.
- A hall or gallery for the exhibition of works of art
- ...
The only problem with this is it make salon.com upset.
__________________
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept that there are some things I just can’t keep up with, the determination to keep up with the things I must keep up with, and the wisdom to find a good RSS feed from someone who keeps up with what I’d like to, but just don’t have the damn bandwidth to handle right now.
© 2009, Rex Hammock
|
|
|
|
|
In a "Saloon" you interact with your beer
and can become less inhibited because of no guidelines
other participants will toss you out
In a "Lounge" you interact with other people
and are respectful of the guidelines for that Lounge
lack of respect for the guidelines other participants will
ask you to leave
OLD saying "If the shoe fits wear it"
After 10 years here I know my shoe size
Now if I can just learn how to write a Article
|
|
|
|
|
Well, today is my 90th. What happened to the time?
tl:dr Happy Birthday to me.
I was thinking about what significant developments I have seen. The power of smartphones pales in comparison to some.
Indoor plumbing, yes there were still outhouses back in the day.
I recall WWII, especially the end. Gold stars in the windows. Never be another generation like that.
My father participated in a program named something like bundles for Britain. He made a lifelong snail mail (priceless) friend.
Vaccines (sorry anti-vaxers). My best friend through high school died of Polio.
Medicine: Antibiotics, cancer treatments (my mother died of leukemia, the treatment back then was "eat a lot of red meat"), today's surgery techniques (Wow). Much more. Now AI?
Our first television, 1948, black and white, largest screen available: 10". Weighed a ton. Watched the world series.
Power steering, power brakes and automatic transmissions.
EV's? Won't go there.
My first "computer experience", actually an accounting system, 7 words of core memory, vacuum tubes (valves for you right ponders) could only add, subtract and multiply. People ran payroll on it. Slow? you bet.
My first experience with a computer monitoring open heart surgery patients. 1970.
etc, etc, etc.
Just a Thought:
A Keeper
Their marriage was good, their dreams focused.
Their best friends lived barely a wave away.
I can see them now,
Dad in trousers, tee shirt and a hat and Mom in a house dress,
lawn mower in one hand, and dish-towel in the other.
It was the time for fixing things.
A curtain rod, the kitchen radio, screen door, the oven door, the hem in a dress.
Things we keep.
It was a way of life, and sometimes it made me crazy.
All that re-fixing, eating, renewing,
I wanted just once to be wasteful.
Waste meant affluence.
Throwing things away meant you knew there would always be more.
But then my mother died, and on that clear summer's night,
in the warmth of the hospital room,
I was struck with the pain of learning that sometimes there isn't any more.
Sometimes, what we care about most gets all used up and goes away...
never to return.
So... While we have it... it's best we love it...
And care for it.... And fix it when it's broken.....
And heal it when it's sick.
This is true...
For marriage....
And old cars....
And children with bad report cards.....
Dogs and cats with bad hips....
And aging parents....
And grandparents.
We keep them because they are worth it, because we are worth it.
Some things we keep.
Like a best friend that moved away or a classmate we grew up with.
There are just some things that make life important,
like people we know who are special....
And so, we keep them close!
I received this from someone who thinks I am a 'keeper',
so I've sent it to the people I think of in the same way...
Good friends are like stars....
You don't always see them, but you know they are always there
People are made to be Loved
and Things are made to be Used
There is so much confusion in this World because
People are being Used
and
Things are being Loved.
Be kind... everyone you meet is fighting a terrible battle.
Thanks for being part of MY life!
>64
It’s weird being the same age as old people. Live every day like it is your last; one day, it will be.
|
|
|
|
|
Happy birthday and thanks for sharing your story!
Makes me wonder if there are even older CodeProject members ...
|
|
|
|
|
I'm eleven years behind you, but a lot of what you wrote resonates with me. Happy Birthday ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Happy birthday.
I experienced some but not all, just a whippersnapper 75.
If you can't find time to do it right the first time, how are you going to find time to do it again?
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: EventAggregator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yup. If I had known I would live this long, I would have taken better care of myself 
Started out with Assembler and Fortran (only choices back in the day).
Now, I can't keep up so I cobble together Python scripts.
Fortunately, Chris's GPAI does what I need for our 14 cameras and Blue Iris.
>64
It’s weird being the same age as old people. Live every day like it is your last; one day, it will be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing this and happy birthday.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
 Very inspirational! Thanks for sharing and Happy Birthday! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks all!!
>64
It’s weird being the same age as old people. Live every day like it is your last; one day, it will be.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you should rename yourself to
The 90-year-young-genius
|
|
|
|
|
There's a lot of wisdom condensed in that post, and despite your choice of usernames, nothing foolish about you.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, yes, yes on so may counts.
7 words of memory - get after it now.
Polio was life crippling.
That lab created crap... well yeah.
I remember all things being fixed too.
And my mom in her house dress with little Ronnie clinging to it.
I was the last out of 5 of us.
It was said that when the oldest of us was small they ate stone soup.
He became an attorney in Pasadena California and ate no more stone soup I can attest to that.
Happy birthday you old coot. 
|
|
|
|
|
Happy birthday and thanks for making me feel young - nearly 3 years after I started getting a State Pension!
|
|
|
|
|
Happy Birthday! or Xronia Polla (Greek) as my mother in law would say.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Happy Birthday!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
I started my software development career using FORTRAN, taught myself C, suffered through Pascal and despise Visual Basic. I'm an EE that just learned how to do this. Back in the beginning, there were no IDEs just text editors, so I naturally developed the habit of putting one function in one file. As I moved on to C++, I continued this style with my class development - one class per file. I suppose I picked up this style from the people I worked with, early source control systems I used (CMS/MMS anyone?) and what not.
Now I admit I am no C++ guru. I have seen people on stack overflow answer a C++ question with so much mind numbing detail that my eyes glaze. I view some or most of the esoteric aspects of c++ (like operator overloading) as dubious at best. Sounds good initially but later on in maintenance, ugh.
So, coding style question - do you embed classes within classes? I suppose if the object is never used outside of it's main file, it sort of makes sense. But it makes it a $itch to track things down. Then, other modules that include the header file for the parent start referencing the embedded classes, and it becomes spaghetti code. I know it's valid C++, but....
Thoughts? I'm probably just being a curmudgeon. Currently doing battle with lifting a VC6 project to VS2022. To say it's "interesting" is putting it lightly but that's for another post.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I never nest classes in any languages - one class one file ( 2 in c++ )
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Nowadays, with IDE editors having multiple tabs and search commands for traversing a large set of files, it is sort of feasible.
In the old days when an editor handled a single file at a time, and you had to use an external, command-line search-files tool, splitting a system on thousands of files was really terrible to work with.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
I've done it, I'm not proud of it.
IMO, there is no real benefits.
On of the problems is that if you have nested classes in a public header, it makes things soooo much more fun (in a bad way), especially if the inner class is public.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
Pascal doesn't have classes, but defining local functions within an outer function is the common practice. If you see PROGRAM as a little more than a PROCEDURE with global initialization, every function/procedure that you write lies inside another function/procedure(/program).
You probably see great advantages of hiding some matters local to a class within that class inside the class definition. In Pascal, you would hide helper functions for a larger function inside that larger function - just like you have local variables and data structures. Also note that in Pascal, a parameterless function was called just by its name, with no empty ()s. So you could change a simple variable to a function calculating the value, without making changes to the code using it. (It took several decades before C# got properties, to do the same!) If I change a local simple variable to a calculated, but still local, value, I see no major reason for why I should have to move the declaration of it out to the global level.
During my student days, we migrated from Pascal to C, requiring all functions to be declared in a flat space. Also, the convention of creating a separate file for each function, even a three-line one, was introduced. What was a nice, closed set of a major function / procedure and its helper functions, was spread out all over the place. You couldn't use a simple editor search function to find definition and all its uses (calls) - you had to use an external 'search files' function, outside the editor. (Our editors at that time did not have a built-in 'search files'.) We did use a lot of hardcopy printouts of source code in those days, and having to print even a 3-line function as a separate file, on separate sheets, increased the amount of paper by a large factor. By Unix/C standards, conventions required a lot of formal blurb (copyleft etc.), as well as inclusion/processing of sometimes huge header files, which in turn lead to number of #ifdefs and stuff like that. In Pascal, a 3-line function was no more than a 3-line function, declared in the scope where it was used, just like the variables. Old Pascal programmers did not see C as any great progress ...
There is no principal difference between classes within classes or functions within functions. The arguments for using or not using it is the same.
One major argument against nested procedures/functions was related to Pascal visibility rules: The tiniest, innermost function doing the simplest helper function had access to all its own local variables, of course, but also everything in the enclosing function, and everything at the next outer level and so on all the way out to the program global variables and functions / routines.
Languages with static nesting was quite common in the 1970s and 80s, and it was used frequently used. (Ask someone learning compilers in those years to explain what a 'static link' is - maybe you'll learn something new!). To handle the issue of the innermost little helper function having the greatest access, to 'everything', some languages required you to export symbols not only to the outside, but also to the inner functions, and the inner functions to import them. (To reduce clutter, some languages let you export/import 'pervasively', so that no further import/export was required for the next levels.)
After shelving Pascal, I have not used much function nesting - for a couple decades, it wasn't possible in C based languages, so I got out of the habit. I cannot recall a single case of nested class definitions. But when I learned of C#, properties and accessors, I became a heavy user of that - which is certainly related.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
I do, but the embedded classes are always marked private - they are only accessible within the containing class.
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
yeah, no private at all listed...
it doesn't help that VS2022 has some of the most ridiculous compiler errors. One error typically generates N other gripes.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
