|
Yes, and you going to love it. I guarantee that!
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and two planes make an air show.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
Statement attributed to Australia's Minister for Immigration in the 1920s when questioned about Australia's policy that restricted immigration to whites only: "Because two Wongs don't make a white". 
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, three Points make a plane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice!
I now feel the urge to go listen to a certain Rush album.
"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
|
|
|
|
|
I am currently working on my first Prism 6 MVVM project and ran into a sticky situation yesterday: To navigate between views, I use a tab control across the main window. As the user clicks on the tabs, different UserControl views are loaded. All went well, until I started clicking on certain controls in a particular view. At times the framework decided I was on the wrong view and would click a different tab for me, causing an unwanted change in the current view.
It drove me nuts for hours. Nothing I did seemed to make any difference. 
After several hours I decided to try every available parameter option in the tab binding statement. Eventually I stumbled on a parameter that is new since .NET 4.5: The "Delay=xxx" parameter that causes a delay of xxx mS in the binding action. It worked! Even setting the delay to 1 mS works, but not if you set it to zero.
The frustrating part is that I don't understand why it works. However, I not complaining too much as long as it works. But as Thomas Carlyle said: "There is nothing more terrible than activity without insight." 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I may be wrong, but a delay property to correct timing errors sounds like a very sinister hack. If it's intended for another purpose and you just jused it to such an end, then you are the sinister hacker.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
modified 16-Feb-17 10:06am.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: then you are the sinister hacker
Should I wear a white hat or a black one - I wonder!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
What, you've never resorted to using a NOP loop to fine tune your firmware? 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Not really. More like bit banging RS232, but that required carefully calculating the number of bus cycles spent in the loop. The calculations actually were very easy on the CDP1802. Most instructions needed only two bus cycles, some branches and NOP needed three. I would have used NOP only if I needed an odd number of bus cycles. Back then we used to run our terminals at conservative 300 baud, but recently we have rewritten that code to go to 1200 baud without changing the traditional clock frequency of 1.76 MHz and if you can run your computer at 5 MHz or even 6.4 MHz, 9600 baud or even more should be possible.
I have decided to leave my old computer at 1.76 MHz, but I have a CDP1802 BCE here, which runs at 5 MHz at 5V. Fast enough memory is no question anymore and if I forget about the old graphics chip (it limited the clock to 1.76 MHz) I can easily build a new one. I want to start with the processor board, which will have no I/O of its own, so bit banged RS232 will be really helpful to get this tpo work.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like fun! I just got that $5 computer from Onion - Omega 2+ - and I'm trying to come up with a project for it. 
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Old tech is a little more forgiving when you really want to make your own boards and solder them by hand. At higher frequencies the equipment you need gets very expensive and the tolerances for errors get smaller and smaller. With modern parts you even have to take the speed of light and the length of the traces on your board into account, not to speak of noise.
The tiny computers and microcontroller boards are the modern alternative. You don't have to solder. Instead you can plug in all kinds of expansions and get just the right configuration for whatever you want to do. They are really good at controlling something.
This[^] is an open source project based on the Arduino. Or you could build a robot, but I would use a network of controllers for different purposes, like AI, sensor input or motion control.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Expect it to return in the field when you least expect and or want.
|
|
|
|
|
You may be right!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I might be, and then I might not.
That's the thing about beating a race condition - today. 
|
|
|
|
|
never tried MVVM but my best guess is similar thing is happening to winforms when adjusting controls within a control's event handler (i.e. esp. set focus),
introducing the delay may have a side effect similar to queuing changes by way of begininvoke. (i.e. lets the current event complete before controls' changes happen).
Sin tack ear lol
Pressing the any key may be continuate
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: lets the current event complete before controls' changes happen
You may have something there! Microsoft must have had a reason to introduce delay as new binding parameter!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
modified 16-Feb-17 10:48am.
|
|
|
|
|
Cornelius Henning wrote: Microsoft must have had a reason to introduce delay as new binding parameter!
Yeah, it's called taking the lazy way out and not fixing the core async / initialization problem.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I bind in a tab inside the VisibilityChanged event handler.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. It's worth a try!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
EDI can be daunting sometimes. I want to find out what frustrates EDI developers on a daily basis?
Relativity
|
|
|
|
|
Reading cross postings for example.
|
|
|
|
|
Or people who want to have a chat about EDI, especially after having banned and almost forgotten EDI.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
What frustrates me the most is that I don't know what "EDI" stands for. There are too many TLAs in computing.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
