Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Assumtion is the mother of all fuckups

Assumtion is the mother of all fuckups

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
htmlcom
33 Posts 17 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R Rick York

    I had a customer say to me once, "I won't know what I want until I see it." Yes, that is a direct quote. He was definitely the worst customer I have ever had but there are some serious contenders. The top two are both quite large companies and I do everything I possibly can to avoid buying their products.

    M Offline
    M Offline
    Mycroft Holmes
    wrote on last edited by
    #14

    We have this as SOP, users come to us with an idea, partial spec is proposed and accepted, prototype developed and then the real requirements begin to emerge. Been doing it that way for 30+ years, I have never worked from a complete spec in my entire career.

    Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • R Rick York

      I had a customer say to me once, "I won't know what I want until I see it." Yes, that is a direct quote. He was definitely the worst customer I have ever had but there are some serious contenders. The top two are both quite large companies and I do everything I possibly can to avoid buying their products.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #15

      Rick York wrote:

      had a customer say to me once, "I won't know what I want until I see it."

      Handled properly these are way better than clients that give you a whole mess of specs... specs: often in a small co: written by a boss who doesn't really know what the underlings need nor appreciate how it's done now and even less how it could be done better. often in a large co: written by a bunch of idio "consultants" who get led around by a boss and never really ask the users as all they do is listen to the boss who . For mine, the less specs the better, talk to the users, don't ask them "what they do," but rather "what do they need to get done and what's the best way to get it done (with respect to, if any SOP)" End result is a combination of application and business improvement, the staff will be happy, the boss will be happier as he gets happy staff and improved productivity. Put simply: Show me someone that asks for specs and I'll show you a junior programmer.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Rick York

        I had a customer say to me once, "I won't know what I want until I see it." Yes, that is a direct quote. He was definitely the worst customer I have ever had but there are some serious contenders. The top two are both quite large companies and I do everything I possibly can to avoid buying their products.

        R Offline
        R Offline
        RickZeeland
        wrote on last edited by
        #16

        The problem with those large companies is that nobody takes responsibility and just points to someone else exclaiming "He's the responsible guy !", in Dutch we name this sort of thing "Zwarte Pieten" :-\

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • J Jorgen Andersson

          Also known as the story of the natural key that wasn't.

          Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

          Z Offline
          Z Offline
          ZerqTheMad
          wrote on last edited by
          #17

          assume makes a ass out u and me

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J Jorgen Andersson

            raddevus wrote:

            I'm assuming you are talking about poorly gathered requirements.

            Yes, but not just. I've inherited a database and has been given the task of making it work according to new intentions. And while it's actually quite fun most of the time, I would at other times find it even funnier to meet the original designer and teach him the virtues of normalization using a bundle of nettles.

            Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

            K Offline
            K Offline
            KBZX5000
            wrote on last edited by
            #18

            Ha! I'm in the same boat. I need to scrap an "obsolete" database-listener service. And they also want to retain all the functionality, like performing manual edits in the database should still trigger various workloads. *sigh*

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • J Jorgen Andersson

              Mostly. The biggest problem is that he didn't have the domain knowledge to use the correct keys. Then again, he's been using a surrogate key (identity) for a year table. Yes, it has two columns (YearID, Year) :sigh: .

              Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

              N Offline
              N Offline
              Nathan Minier
              wrote on last edited by
              #19

              Jörgen Andersson wrote:

              Yes, it has two columns (YearID, Year)

              That'd be hysterical if it wasn't so tragic.

              "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • J Jorgen Andersson

                Also known as the story of the natural key that wasn't.

                Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #20

                More to the point, why do we insist on using f*** to represent what we all know it actually means? Same as c***; 99% of English speaking readers, I’d wager, know exactly what word this represents. What’s wrong with using cock up if we want to supposedly sanitise the written word? Asking for a friend! 😂

                L J 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • J Jorgen Andersson

                  raddevus wrote:

                  I'm assuming you are talking about poorly gathered requirements.

                  Yes, but not just. I've inherited a database and has been given the task of making it work according to new intentions. And while it's actually quite fun most of the time, I would at other times find it even funnier to meet the original designer and teach him the virtues of normalization using a bundle of nettles.

                  Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                  G Offline
                  G Offline
                  Gary Wheeler
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #21

                  Jörgen Andersson wrote:

                  teach him the virtues of normalization using a bundle of nettles

                  That's so environmentally unfriendly of you. A few strokes, the nettles wear out, and you have to harvest more. I prefer a bundle of rusted barbed-wire scraps. They last forever, and the extra weight adds emphasis to the stroke.

                  Software Zen: delete this;

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    More to the point, why do we insist on using f*** to represent what we all know it actually means? Same as c***; 99% of English speaking readers, I’d wager, know exactly what word this represents. What’s wrong with using cock up if we want to supposedly sanitise the written word? Asking for a friend! 😂

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Lost User
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #22

                    Damn! Even the shortened version of a male hen is obscured. I’m living in a world of censorship

                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Lost User

                      Damn! Even the shortened version of a male hen is obscured. I’m living in a world of censorship

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      Jorgen Andersson
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #23

                      How about the long version, cockerel?

                      Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                      L 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • J Jorgen Andersson

                        How about the long version, cockerel?

                        Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #24

                        Sounds much better; the mother of all cockerel ups! 😂

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          More to the point, why do we insist on using f*** to represent what we all know it actually means? Same as c***; 99% of English speaking readers, I’d wager, know exactly what word this represents. What’s wrong with using cock up if we want to supposedly sanitise the written word? Asking for a friend! 😂

                          J Offline
                          J Offline
                          Jorgen Andersson
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #25

                          To answer your question, it's all about keeping the site white-listed in various filters employed by companies.

                          Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • R Rick York

                            I had a customer say to me once, "I won't know what I want until I see it." Yes, that is a direct quote. He was definitely the worst customer I have ever had but there are some serious contenders. The top two are both quite large companies and I do everything I possibly can to avoid buying their products.

                            J Offline
                            J Offline
                            Jim_Snyder
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #26

                            ...working with one of them right now...

                            R 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • J Jim_Snyder

                              ...working with one of them right now...

                              R Offline
                              R Offline
                              Rick York
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #27

                              You have my condolences.

                              J 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • R Rick York

                                You have my condolences.

                                J Offline
                                J Offline
                                Jim_Snyder
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #28

                                Thank you!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • K kmoorevs

                                  Hmmm, never had that problem using identities. :laugh:

                                  "Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

                                  J Offline
                                  J Offline
                                  Jorgen Andersson
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #29

                                  But did you ever use an identity for a year table?

                                  Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                                  K 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • J Jorgen Andersson

                                    But did you ever use an identity for a year table?

                                    Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                                    K Offline
                                    K Offline
                                    kmoorevs
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #30

                                    Jörgen Andersson wrote:

                                    But did you ever use an identity for a year table?

                                    Yes, but only to define fiscal/business years. The situation described where the only other column is an int (assuming :laugh: ) containing the year is ridiculous. :)

                                    "Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

                                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • K kmoorevs

                                      Jörgen Andersson wrote:

                                      But did you ever use an identity for a year table?

                                      Yes, but only to define fiscal/business years. The situation described where the only other column is an int (assuming :laugh: ) containing the year is ridiculous. :)

                                      "Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

                                      J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      Jorgen Andersson
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #31

                                      You're gonna love this. It's a lookup table for fiscal years! :laugh:

                                      Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                                      K 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • J Jorgen Andersson

                                        You're gonna love this. It's a lookup table for fiscal years! :laugh:

                                        Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                                        K Offline
                                        K Offline
                                        kmoorevs
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #32

                                        Jörgen Andersson wrote:

                                        It's a lookup table for fiscal years

                                        In a previous response, you mentioned that the year table only has two columns. Am I to assume that a fiscal year is the same as a calendar year in your situation? Mine are not...customers either start their year June 1 or September 1.

                                        "Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

                                        J 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • K kmoorevs

                                          Jörgen Andersson wrote:

                                          It's a lookup table for fiscal years

                                          In a previous response, you mentioned that the year table only has two columns. Am I to assume that a fiscal year is the same as a calendar year in your situation? Mine are not...customers either start their year June 1 or September 1.

                                          "Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse

                                          J Offline
                                          J Offline
                                          Jorgen Andersson
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #33

                                          No it isn't. It's from september to August. Mind, I never claimed the database is well designed. Everything, and I really mean everything except one table, is done using surrogate keys. Including many that doesn't need it. Just one table is done using a natural key, that isn't. Surrogate keys are a safe bet though. They're never plain wrong even if they're not necessarily the best choice. But it can get ridiculous.

                                          Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups