I’ve used the Kinesis Advantage2 for years. It’s pricey, but high quality. [Kinesis Keyboards, Mice, Foot Pedals, Keypads and Accessories](https://kinesis-ergo.com/products/#advantage2)

Alternate removing eggs from each end, moving towards the middle: Constant location of the center of gravity no matter how many eggs have been removed, no matter how the carton is oriented.

I (almost) only use var for non-production code, when I'm writing from whole cloth and doing initial diagnostics. As the code matures, I replace (almost) all instances of var with the actual types. Great way to force you to review and refactor before release. For very long types, I'll use var, but only when the type is already included in the same location, like a declaration and instantiation.

Fantastic film! Classic farce isn't an appreciated genre anymore. "Maybe someday, we can do you."

Frazzle. ICollection.

You work for the government, don't you? :)

And for dates, either DAY MON YEAR, where MON is a three letter abbreviation (25 MAY 2016), or YEARMONTHDAY(20160526), sometimes with time appended, which sorts numerically very nicely. And always add the leading zero in either case.

As an engineer, I get to be fluent in both systems. Conversions between the two can get you into a lot of trouble - NASA lost a Mars probe because of it. I MUCH prefer metric/SI units, even though I still use English/Imperial in everyday usage and for some professional terms; altitude in feet, speed in knots, weight (NOT mass) in pounds. And don't even get me started on Fahrenheit vs. Kelvin and affine spaces ... The nicest thing about SI from my point of view is that when you make a mistake, you're off by one or more orders of magnitude, and it's easy to notice. With English/Imperial, errors are often not so apparent. More than once I've tried to explain to a fellow (but not computer savvy) engineer that 0.4 (decimal) is a repeating fraction in binary. Base-10 floating representation in binary causes all sorts of issues for numerical methods which are not unlike unit conversions.

Base 12 would indeed be better than base 10 for "normal" usage, but you forgot to mention that it's also more directly related to cyclic or sinusoidal measurements. Why? The most common angle measurement factor is 15 degrees e.g. one twenty-fourth of a circle. All of the common fractions of cyclic measurement are multiples of 15 degrees, or twenty-fourths of a circle (or twelfths of a half-circle). But regardless, the metric family of measurement systems is superior not because it uses base 10, but because it uses a COMMON base for all measurements. If that base were 12, and our numbering system were also base 12, it would remain superior to the clapboard mosaic that is the English/Imperial/American "system" of measurement.

Working for the Navy for 20+ years, I always refer to dates as DAY-MONTH-YEAR, but I write out (or speak) the month to avoid ambiguity. So 26 May 2016, not 26/5/2016 or 5/26/2015. Or in true Naval Message Traffic style, 26MAY16. Be the change you want to see.

I have two 19" 1440x900 LCDs, both landscape, and would like to add a third. Bigger monitors can be nice, but I'd rather have the physically segregated visual space. As to whether that third monitor would be landscape or portrait, I'm agnostic. But if I had a FOURTH, I'd probably put portraits on the left and right (browser, Outlook, and Acrobat/Word) and two landscapes in the center.

I made use of it in the WATFOR 77/87 compiler in grad school, but I don't know how far back the capabilty goes before that. I don't know about f77, as I didn't need to use that feature in the code I was writing for it. I'm afraid the NORD minicomp is a bit before my time :) But then, integer math is always easier than floating point. I've tried to write a continued fraction integer based representation of floating point arithmetic in C++, but set it aside when I realized that taking the reciprocal was introducing floating point roundoff into the caluclations, and didn't have the patience to figure out how to fix it. I wasn't doing it for size or speed, but to try to eliminate roundoff error, so my efforts had come full circle at that point. Maybe I should have written it in Fortran instead?

Fortran 2003 is a mess. It has a few good ideas, but in trying to be everything for everyone, I think it stopped being what it was. The ability to specify array bounds was present in the WATFOR 77/87 compiler, but I don't know how far back it goes before that. I didn't use it when I was writing code for NASA with f77, so I don't know if that suppored it or not. And since then, I've tried to avoid it. I can write Fortran in any language, and I choose not to.

Fortran as well.

Fortran can define both lower and upper bounds for arrays. Useful in matrix or tensor math.

Just blame it on the NSA; its more believable.

Rather, I'm disappointed in the writing. It's an interesting premise: all electrical power is rendered non-functional, resulting in the collapse of our technological society. Great. Leave it at that. Don't evern TRY to explain it. Don't make it a "meddling in powers wew don't understand" meme; it works as a post-apocalyptic show just as well. Mixing the two and making it into a morality play is just ... lazy. Take the re-imaged BSG. There were any number of incongruities in the science in that show, but it was okay, because they didn't even try to justify them. Rather, the sci-fi settng was so much window dressing for the story, which was an exodus story set in space, combined with the "we brought it in our oursleves" message. The "science" was there to help the story along, not to define it. The list goes on: "Defiance", "Serenity", "Heroes", even "Lost". "Star Trek" and to a lesser extent "Doctor Who" always played fast-n-loose with this concept, but then, they were episodic shows, not serials, so each individual writer had much more freedom to remake the setting to suit his story. But they were all at there best when the sci-fi part of the story was in the background, rather than the forground. Maybe "Revolution" started out that way, and is otherwise worthy of viewing, but as soon as they have to try to EXPLAIN it, they miss the point. Good sci-fi is hard to find.

So THAT'S the rationale behind the show. Meh. It's like the old anecdote of the acid that will eat through anything: if it eat's through anything, how do you contain it? So these nanites absorb all electricity ... but what about from each other? What about the bioelectric currents that exist in ALL organisms? And then there's the Second Law - no matter how efficiently it's absorbed, what do those nanites do with all the waste heat? They have to dissapate it somehow, and that's gonna make them hot. So if there is a volt/ampere threshold below which the nanites don't operate, then lots of common everyday stuff might still be able to function. But then, absorbing all the high volt/amp stuff would drive the heat dissapation problem up exponentialy - do they only operate in the water or the high altitudes, or high latitudes during winter? Because without cooling, they wouldn't last long. And if you reverse it, if the nanites ONLY function at low volt/amp levels, then the first thing to go would be living organisms, not electric powerplants. Something has to give. Either way, I'm not buying the premise. Nice to know I can strike that off of my list of shows to Netflix.

C/C++ is the foundation upon which almost everything else is built. If you can "master" C++ (it's in quotes because I'm not sure anyone can truly master something so immense and powerful), anything else should be a breeze - a matter of learning the libraries and tool kits for a given language. So it doesn't matter if it's Java or C# or Python or even Objective-C, knowledge of C++ will give you an advantage. The same goes for Assembly, too. And as for the applications of C++ - hey, I'm not going to lie to you. Building a GUI in C++ is its own special corner of one of the nine levels of Hell. And it isn't nescesarily the best choice for direct, front-end code that will reside in a browser. But if you want to do anything ELSE with the fastest possible speed, with lowest possible memory footprint, and the most portable and maintainable code base, C++ is your answer.

Agreed. I came to VS 10 from VS 6 as well, and while I love the features in VS 10 (solution specific directories are definitely my favorite), the way it siezes my processors and won't let go, not to mention the repeated crashes when using class wizard or trying to do simple things like add a new or existing class or project is monumentaly frustrating. I was hoping VS 11 would fix all that without mucking up the rest. Now it lools like I'll just have to wait for VS 12.