Notepad :laugh:

Personally, I don't want any more mail. 9 years sounds JUST FINE, however. :-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:mad::-O:-O:mad::-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:mad::-O:-O :-O:mad::mad::-O:-O:-O:mad::-O:mad::-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:mad::-O:mad::-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:mad::-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O :-O:mad::-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O

Roger Wright wrote: I even managed to craft a loving and accepting email to her and send it Ahhhrrrggg - doing that while drinking borders on the suicidal.

Christian Graus wrote: Yeah, I always recall a similar story in a C++ book I read, where a guy spent ages optimising code, to get a small improvement, then he rethought the algorithm and without optimisations, blew the old code out of the water. I've done exactly this myself. Worked on a project with a C++ server application taking in excess of 26 hours for a single run - which was a tad too much as the application had to run once a day (yes, it processed an awful lot of data). By applying all kinds of tricks - a few of them rendering parts of the code almost impossible to maintain for future developers, I might add, I shaved away 2 hours of the running time. Hm, not good enough. Time to rethink - I started from scratch, and instead of trying to optimize the existing application, I though about what the application was expected to do instead - not thinking of how to solve details. Redoing the complete structure from scratch, completely changing the process, I was of course very exited when it came to the first test run... 20 minutes. The rewrite took a fraction of the time I had spent on optimization.

Been there for a while, but I'm sure you'll enjoy the Interface Hall of Shame on Notes: http://digilander.libero.it/chiediloapippo/Engineering/iarchitect/mfame.htm[^] It's a great read, anyway.

You're also allowed to construct crosswords.

I found that extremely amusing.

David Wulff wrote: Except I know I can't be imagining it because I have hard copies in front of me Are you sure? Are you really, really sure?

You have most likely gone mad, and they never existed to begin with.

Yeah, Symbian UIQ for me :-)

:((:((:((:((:((:((:((:((

It's an Amish checker as well. A paper where I go through a list of dangerous operations. If one of them checks, I stop my self and warn that it might be a virus. This one got trapped on point 3, "Will all files be deleted from the disk?" :laugh::laugh::laugh:

BrianOlej wrote: Amish virus Fortunately, my virus checker caught it. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: When I've become a bit more experienced in martial arts, I would like to continue and explore other martial arts. Don't forget our age-old Swedish arts, such as Clog-kicking and Schnapps-bottle fighting! Personally, I'm more into full-contact Bridge, but I sure was a mean International Karate-player on the C-64!

Flogging a dead horse :-)

AAAHHHHRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!! Throw out the Maxwell and use the microwave for what it was designed for - making bizarre experiments on cats.

The universe would be a much more interesting place if division by zero was allowed :-)

I also want to join in on the sneers! :sneer: :sneer: :sneer:

Antony M Kancidrowski wrote: 2 = 1 [divide both sides by a-x] a = x a - x = 0 division by zero...

Aditya_Palanki wrote: Does this mean that the extra memory that is being allocated is normal? Yes, it allocates in blocks. If your allocation size is not an exact multiple of the block, you'll get extra padding. Aditya_Palanki wrote: Can you suggest any other way of creating an HGLOBAL? GlobalAlloc is the way of doing it. If the receiver needs to know the size actually allocated, just add this value to the beginning of the block, for example.