|
One high-level takeaway is that over half of QA engineers and software developers in test are responsible for testing on both the front-end and back-end of their applications. Can I see the tests for that survey?
|
|
|
|
|
The mania for "flat" user interfaces is costing publishers and ecommerce sites billions in lost revenue. Back in my day, we had buttony buttons!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes!!!
We (CPers) knew it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: buttony buttons!
That we wanted to lick!
Oh, ummm... while I agree, I mainly feel it's primarily a matter of change always causing interruptions. What the particuilar change is doesn't matter; once people get used to doing something one way, don't change it. UI designers are the worst at violating this simple rule.
I've had a Win 10 system at work for a couple of weeks now and I just can't tell where one window ends and the one beheath it begins. It's horrible.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: just can't tell where one window ends and the one beheath it begins
I've had the damned thing for months and I still have the same issue.
I hate having to hunt for a button amongst a bunch of flat boxes, make the bloody things stand out so they are instantly identifiable.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: UI designers are the worst at violating this simple rule.
The common controls have hardly changed; well-designed, consistent, recognizable and the reason we do not longer need any manual to operate software. All of the UI designers will say that consistency is one of the most important parts.
And your manager will say that he will not buy any new MS product, since the UI has not changed. That is the reason why Office had to introduce a new set of controls on each iteration, most of the time without adding any value whatsoever.
PIEBALDconsult wrote: I've had a Win 10 system at work for a couple of weeks now and I just can't tell where one window ends and the one beheath it begins. It's horrible.
I am finally upgrading my Windows 7 machine today.
To WINE, the only reasonable and decent version of Windows 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I want one too 
|
|
|
|
|
That's what happens when you do a lobuttony.
|
|
|
|
|
This study addresses the misunderstandings in source code and tries to untangle the knots in order to prove that “being able to reliably identify and remove code that can cause misunderstandings will also enhance productivity and reduce maintenance costs.” "I'm in a state. State of confusion"
|
|
|
|
|
After actually looking at around 70 of the questions in that study, I'm more confused on what the study was trying to show. If they took code from professional production environments and did the same experiment on anti-patterns within those I'd get it. But they even admit a lot of the code is from the IOCCC (International Obfuscated C Code Contest). That's like me saying 0xD0<<3|5&0xE>>1<<5&2 is confusing. No duh 
EDIT: Edited for better clarity.
modified 5-Sep-17 15:07pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Jon McKee wrote: Edited for better clarity.
LMAO!
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Hehe. Glad you enjoyed that 
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone who has ever tried to read Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus will be getting a massive sense of deja-vu.
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Confusing code can (and will!) lead to bugs in code.
Might want to start with confusing requirements. Or lack of well defined requirements because the existing problem domain isn't actually fully understood due to years of undocumented tweaks to the code base your starting with, that are slowly discovered and the new code is patched.
I've had to deal with that recently. There are apparently these "indicators", labeled 1 through 10, that mean things that determine whether an insurance policy should be reported to the motor vehicle department.
And what really blows me away is that the UI simply has checkboxes labeled "1", "2", etc.., through "10." Apparently the agents filling out the forms know what these "indicators" mean. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's where Unit Tests come in really handy - being able to refactor code as you go with the confidence of not breaking other parts of the project.
Refactoring is one of the most important skills on long-term projects, as it allows the project to avoid slipping into chaos over time.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: That's where Unit Tests come in really handy - being able to refactor code as you go with the confidence of not breaking other parts of the project.
Unfortunately, there are very few unit tests. In fact, I did an introductory presentation on unit testing because most people haven't written them. And then the issue that there are dozens of little processes that fire in the middle of the night to "move the data along", and more being added every day, makes the "if I change this, what will it break?" question pretty much a black hole.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a nightmare. I've refactored a few legacy systems over the years, requirement capture is often hard (what should this be doing). A good starting point is to do small safe refactorings, such as extracting chunks to well named methods, replacing magic numbers with enums, etc. Until the code begins to become more readable.
Good luck, you have my sympathy.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: Good luck, you have my sympathy.
Well, I've vented some of my frustration on the Weird and Wonderful. Thank goodness for an outlet!
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a single very clear original requirement in the 1.0 version to me.
"APPEARANCE 1: To minimize retraining, the application shall exactly mirror the labeling of the existing paper form."
 
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
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
The new C++ standard brings many useful additions to the Standard Library. "Raise your standards to create change."
|
|
|
|
|
Researchers at Facebook’s AI lab have developed an expressive bot, an animation controlled by an artificially intelligent algorithm. The algorithm was trained on hundreds of videos of Skype conversations, so that it could learn and then mimic how humans adjust their expressions in response to each other. Forcing an AI to spend hours on Skype? We're lucky they haven't killed us off.
But it is really good at saying, "Can you hear me now?" and, "Could you go on mute, please?"
|
|
|
|
|
Where'd they get the Skype videos?
They asked users for permission to snoop?
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: Where'd they get the Skype videos?
They asked users for permission to snoop?
I was wondering the same. I thought Skype is a M$ product. If they had used WhatsApp it would not surprise me that much.
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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
