It definitely returns a string with all lowercase characters.

Back in the late 90's a DOT COM start up named TixToGo.com (they sold tickets online for other people's events) was giving away a Porsche Boxter (worth about $60,000 at the time) to someone who picked a new company domain name for them. I wrote a program to take a list of names and search each one on Network Solutions (to see if it was available), the USPTO (to see if it was trademarked) and the five top search engines at the time to see how and how much the name was used. I submitted 248 names that met all the constraints of my software. Then I emailed the CEO about why all my names were clean. They were doing all the searching manually and wanted my software desperately. Anyway, they had received over 55,000 names and were able to sift through them in short order and just pick a good one. By the way, they changed the name to acteva.com. activa.com was one of my names, but as a temporary sub-contractor of the company, my names were invalid.

Joe has the best answer on this one.

It seems to me, the GOTO statement goes back to the original Basic Programming of the early seventies, where it had really valid uses. Because resources, especially memory, was so scarce, you used less precious bytes when you used a GOTO instead of a FOR loop. Nowadays, it's more used for getting out of some sticky situations such as multiple nested loops or to get around such things. It's much more elegant and sound to set a boolean flag and just check it at every step out of the structure. What do you guys think?

EVERYTHING is scripted! Probably the only REAL shows are like "COPS" and then they probably have to film 40 hours to get five minutes of what they think is "Good TV".

In 1974 when I first got out of the army, I convinced the management at a huge manufacturing plant that I could learn the assembly language on a Quantel minicomputer, with NO documentation. I was given four dollars an hour, but not too bad then, especially for someone with no experience and little education. But, it was horrible for programming. Even then, programmers generally started at $15-25 hour. I was having an extremely difficult time until one day I discovered for some reason, the stack worked backwards. Then everything became crystal clear and I ended up working there for two years, never getting a raise. I was able to go to school full time during the day and work full time at night. I got a good invoicing and a very rudimentary inventory program done. I even started writing an RPG compiler. Imagine having to write your own data entry, database and reporting programs in ASM!

Ahhhh, "Another Day In Paradise"! It takes "A Groovy Kind of Love" to accomplish what you're doing or (maybe this is rhetorical), but you do realize you're working, "Against All Odds"?

Does an open plan office really increase communication? Or, does it increase distraction? Does it promote lack of personal control? To tell you the truth, I don't think those Operational Researchers ever worked in an open plan office themselves! Individual offices naturally promote email and phone contact, which allows the recipient much more personal control of their time. The more a person feels they're in control of what happens to them in their life, the more productive they are. (By orders of magnitude !!!!!!!!!!! )

I think dopamine is just as important as serotonin. Make sure everyone gets enough natural light (hopefully, full-spectrum) !!!

This is the greatest example of "paper" MBAs. These idiots can't engineer or program worth a darn, so they take online or weekend MBA programs and become "Management". The MAIN function of a manager and what the MBA is SUPPOSED to teach (which it really does, but sadly, is almost always ignored by these "Executives") is crunching the darn numbers. The potential quality of a software product decreases DRAMATICALLY as the number of techies assigned to the project increases. Based upon my direct experience and educated, anecdotal conjecture only, I honestly believe two good coders, each working in their own office is MORE productive (with much BETTER quality) than four working in the same cubicle. MBA's are taught to crunch the numbers -- SO WHY DON'T THEY? They're more concerned with the cost of two offices vs. one cubicle, than the actual results of the work produced. Annual costs (total costed expense, based in a major metropolitan area, including benefits): One good cubicle: $60,000 Four good coders: $500,000 Obvious additional costs involved in the management, motivation, latency, time, support and communication of four coders: $100,000 Two good offices: $100,000 Two good coders: $250,000 Obvious additional costs involved in the management, motivation, latency, time, support and communication of two coders: $20,000 $660,000: Total for one cubicle with four coders $370,000: Total for two offices with two coders It's a darn shame so many so-called "decision makers" think a more flaky, lesser-quality, longer-to-produce product by relatively unmotivated, unappreciated personnel is worth that additional stress, anxiety and $290,000 !!!!! Robert Townsend in his classic 70's book "Up The Organization", spelled it out perfectly when he said the successful executive: 1. Hires the BEST possible people. 2. Hires ONLY enough people to get the job done as rapidly, effectively and efficiently as possible. 3. Pays them the BEST possible salary. 4. Provides the BEST possible environment AND 5. Stays the "heck" outta their way !!!!!!!!!!!!! 6. The DYSFUNCTIONAL executive thinks the more people under their thumb makes them more important! [By the way, if for some reason, you don't know what a costed expense is or you don't think a person is much more motivated in an office than a cubicle and it costs five times the support amount for only two more people are realistic, you really NEED to go back to a better MBA school!)]

"Don't bother to buckle up -- you may not want to survive this..." John Lithgow in Sylvester Stallone's 1993 Movie, "Cliffhanger"

I'm so surprised you people didn't recognize the new: Adophos Munawshack 740SE The FULL technical name of the aircraft is an: Adobe Photo-shopped Mash-up Non-Airworthy Website-Hacked Boeing Seven-Forty-Something Else -- Modified Thursday, April 22, 2010 10:16 AM

My list of demands is unusual, somewhat different and would make your average boss ill, but it is REALLY productive! Here's a nice, long sentence: After some 38+ years of programming everything from desktop calculators (that's a large WOODEN or Laminate Plastic over Metal, desktop AND the calculator actually COVERED the desktop, using maybe a whopping 2K of available memory!), to current mega-core GPU parallel processors -- and programming them with everything from paper tape and 30 pound boxes of cards with holes in them (that's up to 30+ pounds for ONE program {please DON'T drop the box!}}), to multiple-monitor touch screen drag-and-drop, copy-and-paste [NOTE HERE: I only use copy and paste when I do not want to duplicate any typing -- I abhor "copy-and-paste" programmers (some idiots think of it as another term for 'open source')] -- but if you don't use it when you could save 5-10 minutes of typing, you're DEFINITELY NOT being productive, but I digress...), IN ORDER!: this is what I've found to be unbelievably productive for me (that's me, possibly not you OR your employees!): 1. An individual OFFICE (not something that others [higher-ups?] may call an office, but EVERYONE knows it's not) 2. It MUST have a window with daytime access to full-spectrum, natural light (for me, a view is really not that big of a deal) 3. A full-spectrum light box would be wonderful, but at least one or two sources of artificial, full-spectrum light for evening work 4. It MUST have a CLOSABLE DOOR and maybe a LOCK, if you work with people who don't understand what a closed door means! You CANNOT keep the door closed most of the time. That almost REQUIRES others to invade your world. [NOTE: I have found a sock on the door is actually distracting and counter-productive, believe it or not (true, but lol?)] 5. TWO monitors. I have worked with four and even six, but for me, more than two can affect my focus, which is the worse thing 6. A KVM to TWO hard-core boxes with one "big as you can afford" SSD on top of at least two raided HDs, for each 7. The best office chair you can find, regardless of the cost! 8. A couch allowing a comfortable 15-90 minute power nap, as needed [NOTE: I feel managers groaning with this one and the next, but if you want your best to get there early and leave late...] 9. This one is certainly optional, but it's actually crucial for me to work for indefinite pe

Also, heaven help anyone that dropped that box!

Back in those days, one program could easily weigh 20-30 pounds! (not including job control)

> Colour was the next big thing when I started programming although a lot of people couldn't really see the point in it I remember that was the big deal about the Apple II. It was the first relatively affordable personal system that had built-in color. Remember, games back then were text-only, like "Adventure". Why would you need color for a computer game? Also, remember that the first Macintosh was black-and-white. Steve Jobs was known for once saying, "There will never be a color Macintosh".

Boy! You ARE old! (lol?)

You got a shoebox? How lucky is that? We got a potato sack!

In the mid to late 80's and early 90's a lot of people made a lot of money consulting with dBase and Lotus 1-2-3. Knowing Wordstar and especially WordPerfect was icing on the cake!

My first computer (an Imsai) had a whopping 4K! I had to wait and save another $400 so I could get another 4K and use Bill Gates 8K Basic. Try progamming where every character matters. You only use one or two character variable names and can't afford to document your source code!