Mycroft Holmes wrote:

Does your company have a one size (minimalist) fits all hardware policy? Yes What is the standard configuration of your dev machines? Win XP, 2.66Ghz, 1GB ram, 100GB HD How many monitors do you allow your devs? One, 17" Do your devs have local admin rights? Yes Do you block EVERY blog/forum site on the interweb? No, only some Do you have an open plan (bench) style office layout? Yes, but jumbled

Also we develop in Visual C++ 6.00. Yes, you read that right.

if(SomeThing == SomeOtherThing); { DoSomeThing; } This one has been sitting in the codebase for a couple of years... :(( At least it did SomeThing...

Today my esteemed coworker invented a brand new programming paradigm: Redundant Coding (tm). This buggy old legacy code we are working with has a least three almost identical and insanely complicated instances of a special form of coordinate transformation. We want to simplify, but which one to keep? My coworker suggested that we compare the results of the three code blocks too see which one, if any, would give diviant results. This immideately lead to the idea of letting the three instances "vote" on the right result. And BAM the Redundant Coding programming paradigm was born. Just as a jumbo jet has three of everything just in case, our code has three almost identical code blocks, just in case one of them is buggy! If one code block produces deviant results, the other two will take over! I am, of course, kidding. We will clean this mess up eventually.

Win Xp to the bitter end!

It can be done much simpler: Just don't document anything ever. Claim it is a waste of time. When the junior programmers come to ask about something, rant endlessly about the CPU flags or just say that you are buisy. "The documentation is the code". X| Yes, I am bitter!

Spagetti code. "Budding" code. "Moulded" code (large sections commented out). Quick fix X|

Amen, brother!

That was a very good article, I recommend it. I zoned out on the math, but it seems to explain the double slit experiment quite nicely without all the usual philisophical nonsense.

Maxxx_ wrote:

My understanding is that yes, that's exactly what it means - in the 'slit' experiment with a single photon going through the slit, its state does not exist until it is measured.

It's state must surely exist all the time. How else can it interact with everything else in a meaningful manner? Regardless of whether anyone is looking or not... This thing about canging models (wave or particle) and behavior depending on who (if any) is looking is just pure nonsence to me.

I'm with your friend here, everything is predetermined. "Random" and "probability" is just mathematical methods used when you are unable to calculate the outcome due to lack of understanding or lack of data.

Go for the glue, but a strong kind. You can rough up the metal surface with sandpaper.

Quit and start your own company, free of idiot bosses.

I feel your pain...Espesially about the not documentaion. Not a single page. 1000s of source files, but no documents. Not. Even. One.

YES

I'm sure it's "common practice", but why have unused parameters in the first place? It's aint right, I tells ya! :confused:

Not very horrific, but I think it is kind of cute: #define UNUSED1(a) a=a #define UNUSED2(a,b) a=a,b=b #define UNUSED3(a,b,c) a=a,b=b,c=c #define UNUSED4(a,b,c,d) a=a,b=b,c=c,d=d What use could these UNUSED functions possibly have? Well, I had to ask one of the other programmers. If you have unused parameters in a functions parameter list, a warning occurs "unused parameters in the parameter list" or something like that. How to get rid of those pesky unused parameters? Call the UNUSED function with those unused parameters. The UNUSED function will use the unused parameters, making them used parameters instead. Now no warning for unused parameters will occur! Problem solved! :-D

28! W00t!

Charge. Always charge. Pull as much money out of that sucker as you can. There is no such thing as a fair price. There is only how much money the costumers is willing to pay. Just make sure the terms (price, time to be spent) is clear from the start. Then the costumer can accept or reject. So to answer your question: Charge if you think you can get away with it.

In the first programming course I had, the textbook described GOTO as "evil"! EEEEeeeEEEviiiil! :mad: If you used GOTO, GOSUB or global variables, you flunked. That was made clear from the beginning. If you used the three "G"'s, you had not understod functions and you failed the course. I have never used the three "G" ever since. I think it makes the code hard to read. I so hate spagetti code. A function has some input and generate some output. Very simple. No globals comming down from heaven above. Put them in the function parameters. If there are many parameters, just organize them in a struct. If there are lots of data (like a picture) make a pointer and call-by-reference. The only exeption is const Pi=3.14. That may be global, but only in the math module.

We got a 8" floppy drive lying around in a dank room at the back of the building. It's a double dekker, one drive on top of another. No disks though, only drives.