If you want something slightly more advanced I strongly recommend "PComm Lite" from MOXA. It's free and can do much more, including TCP/IP. :) It's currently available here: https://cdn-cms.azureedge.net/getmedia/188a99a0-fff8-4c18-ae0c-90768d10a90f/moxa-pcomm-lite-utility-v1.6.zip[^]

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I've always been a fan of saying "no" when it's needed. As long as it's done the proper way, I find it only helps with planning and actually improves your professional image in the eye of your counterpart. Well, managers are often an exception to that rule, alas! :laugh: A few years ago I had a particularly funny (though it was NOT funny for me at the time!) eexperience: a big client's PM called me to discuss the schedule of a rather big project. She sent me the whole planning and we went through all the deadlines and discussed in detail all activities. In the end, it was a demanding schedule, but not impossible. I was positively surprised, and agreed that it was doable. That's when I commented on a date for a meeting: I was not available on that specific day. She told me to ignore the dates on the schedule... I said "what?". She said yeah of course the schedule was about the time it would take to complete the project, but the date on the schedule were all off: the project would start the next day instead of the next month... Let's just say that I answered with something more... articulate than a simple "no" :laugh:

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

That's a tough one! I've been to quite a few great gigs, but I'd say the most rewarding was Nightwish in 2005. They kicked butt and it turned out to be the one and only chance to see them with Tarja Turunen in my country. The very first Stratovarius gig I saw in 1997 and the Gods of Metal festival in 1998 in Milan were also great. Latest but not least, in 2018 I saw Epica during the Unicorn Festival in Vinci, and the location was simply awesome! Just out of the medieval city centre, on a clearing with small hills on the sides. We went there by motorbike and both the whole experience and the concert were super!!! Awesome metal trip you had btw!!! I always skipped Wacken cause camping is not really my thing, but I kinda regret it (I'm also 50 and won't probably go, like ever)! :-D

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

Hey Voracy I am Italian too and I had the same impression about Scratch and similar environments when some friends asked me to help their young sons experiment some coding. I would be very interested if you could share yours and your wife's experience and some suggestions - next Monday a friend will visit with his young son to chat a bit since the boy seems interested in programming. Thanks in advance. :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I was gifted a DVD set of ORION for my birthday in the late 2000's and I'm pretty sure it was dubbed in Italian, but I have a doubt that some episodes were actually in English and with Italian subtitles. I'll have to dig it out and check! :-D

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

If I remember correctly, it was Einstein who said that impossible things remain such only until someone comes up with a trick to make them possible. :) That's often the case with new discoveries and advances in science. While things may technically remain impossible, there can be "tricks" to bypass the impossibility. As in your example, FTL travel could be made possible not by travelling faster than light (which *may* remain impossible), but by warping the space around you etc. etc.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

Underlying IT Infrastructure ? :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

Sure, that happens to us guys in tech a lot! But it's not limited to tech: I witnessed a situation where a lady walked in a shop and told the poor guy something like "I have an old black-and-white copy of a magazine page, could you please make a colored copy for me ?"... :omg: Just like with your phone issue, it's not technically impossible - only VERY expensive. You can hire a boat and a diver to recover the phone, and the shop guy could use Photoshop to color the copy! :-D

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

jschell wrote:

write a tool that merges them in the build process as a pre-build step

You kind of put the finger on exactly what I was thinking of. :thumbsup: However, it's most likely not worth it to develop a specific tool for that, since it would still be easier to manage the localized resources semi-manually instead of having to keep the tool up to date and so on. :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

Of course you can andd a .res file to a project and name it as you like. What I'm asking is a whole different thing. I'll try to be more specific. :) In a Visual Studio solution, the standard way to add localization is by creating a set of resource files named "Localization" plus the culture ID. So for example you will have "localization.resx", "Localization.it.resx", "Localization.de.resx" for your default language, Italian and German, and so on. Then, you can use a ResourceManager to get your localized strings:

ResourceManager LocalizationResourceManager = new ResourceManager(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetName().Name + ".Localization", Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
...
string LocalizedString = LocalizationResourceManager.GetString(ResourceName, Culture);

Now this is perfectly fine and of course does not stop me from doing what I need to, even if I share code by copying over source files. But as you see clearly in the ResourceManager constructor, it's tied to the assembly name, simply because the resource file is compiled together with the project's main assembly. I was simply wondering if there was a way to somehow change this so that the DLLs compiled from the resource files will be tied to a different namespace. What I'm asking basically is: can I have VS compile a resource file in a project and not automatically assign the resources to the project's main namespace ? Hope it's more clear now. :) EDIT: Just to be even more clear - nothing stops me from naming my resource files "Localization_MYNAMESPACE" or something similar, that's actually what I would most likely do (haven't actually tried this but I'm pretty sure there is no reason why it should not work). I'm just wondering if there are different approaches, and found it quite interesting to investigate how one can configure the way the compiler acts on resource files.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I'm not discussing the way to re-use code here. As I said, I'm perfectly aware the "right" way to do this is by using DLLs to share code. I'll take your answer as "I don't think what you propose can/should be done". :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

Hey guys recently I've been wondering about which would be the best way to implement a localization system based on namespaces. Let's say that for some reason I wanted to use a few source code files in many different projects, and for some other reason I don't want or cannot build a DLL out of them (which of course would be the "right" way to do this). Let's also say I need to localize that code in a few different languages. Also, the files I'll be sharing all use the same namespace. Now, the standard localization technique in Visual Studio works real fine and is very easy to maintain and update within the IDE, but it's all tied to the project's main assembly name. So, while I could just copy and paste over all the necessary localization strings for my shared files each time, and prefix all the relevant localized string names with my namespace ID, that would be clumsy and error prone. I was wondering if there was a way to build up some DLL or resource files and just bundle them up with the source code to be shared. I've been considering for example building up a few resource files within the IDE, using file names that include the namespace and the different culture IDs, and then implementing a custom resource manager using ResXResourceReader or something similar. Any other ideas ? :) P.S.: we are talking C# here.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

My first coding experiences were back in 1980 when I was 10, and after that I never stopped. I've been working as a software engineer since 1989, and in 1994 I founded my small software house, which is still doing great. So, I've been coding for 34 years overall, 25 as a professional. Not bad. :) I still have tons of fun and keep getting those blissfull experiences where you are stuck to your keyboard, immersed in the wonderful universe where you are The Creator, and hours go by while the outside world is just a faint echo from far away. In my case, the frustration comes more from the managerial part of my job, which unluckily cannot be put aside, especially since I'm the owner of the software house... I am and will always be a technician and a geek, and although I am not that bad as a manager (but only cause my company is so small! ;)), I still feel like all the time I spend in meetings, presentations and such is just wasted. I feel the same about the time I spend driving when I have to visit a customer (this is a very small amount of my time, luckily - thanks God for teleservice and global communications! :cool:). I realize this is just a very subjective point of view, and that's not wasted time all. It's actually time spent in order to allow my company to prosper and let me do what I like best: coding. Still, that's how I feel. If I ever had to be forced to a managerial-only role, I think I would slowly wither and die!!! :sigh: Having said all that, I can understand your frustration, since by what you say what's wearing you out is not your job as a coder itself, but rather the fact you are forced to work in a very stressful environment. I wish you a very good luck and hope your situation gets better. I sure know it would wear me out too! :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I had exactly the same issue a few years ago when I built a ring buffer class to calculate a moving average. Indeed, it would be nice to be able to have something like an INumeric interface or a way to filter generics which can support arithmetic! In the end I just used doubles, which was more than OK for my specific needs and allowed me to use the same class with ints and such. :)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I think you put the finger on a subject on which from time to time I find myself wondering. I'm lucky enough to seldom draw criticism, but I often see the kind of behaviour you describe, in many different aspects of everyday life. It seems to me that aggressive people, who therefore will heavily complain for a bad article for example, are simply following the same behavioural pattern as children. We all know children can often be rather nasty to each other, and that the nastier children are those with some real family problem or similar. But getting down to the root, isn't it all just lack of self esteem? People who are sure of themselves, REALLY sure sown deep inside, and live a happy life don't feel the need to rain shame on others! On the other hand, if you're not happy with your life or have low self esteem, you may end up being aggressive as a kind of subconscious form of preemptive defense. Just my 2 (Euro)cents. :-)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I'm halfway from a G1 and a G2 and yep, I did start programming on systems where you just had KBs of memory and very small resources overall. I think the answer to your question/rant is actually quite simple: it's absolutely ok to (at least partially) forget optimiziation and resource usage concerns when they are negligible, and this actually happens with some kind of projects and with today's pumped-up hardware. BUT what's important is that developers DO know and care about these concerns, just as you say. If they don't, then you'll just end up with youngsters building the latest flashy app for your darn smartphone and using a linear search to find the answer to your questions from a million-entries remote DB. ;P

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but not in practice. - Anonymous A computer is a stupid machine with the ability to do incredibly smart things, while computer programmers are smart people with the ability to do incredibly stupid things. They are, in short, a perfect match. - B. Bryson

I agree: COBOL is another good example of a language which, in good and bad, survived its own usability because it kept being used in a context where all in all it did its job. Of course from the point of view of code maintenance and systems integration I guess many developers would be happier if banks & governments switched to some other programming language long ago. :)

I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code! -- Unknown PROGRAM - n. A magic spell cast over a computer allowing it to turn one's input into error messages. v. tr.- To engage in a pastime similar to banging one's head against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward. -- Uknown

Well yeah I agree that sometimes people just talk crap about BASIC because it's hip to do that. Still, plain old BASIC is a language engineered in different times and for different needs from today. You wouldn't want to use it for any "serious" task just as much as you most likely wouldn't want to use any other language you used in the 70s or 80s. :) Of course, modern and richer implementations of such languages do exist and it may make good sense to use them. Think of the new reinassance for functional languages for example, or just how C itself evolved in C++ and so on. So, basically what holds for old time BASIC should not hold for VB.NET, for example... even if I can't avoid asking do we really need a VB.NET ? Maybe. Still, going though the (in)famous VB era in the 90s did leave a sour taste in many mouths, mine included! ;P VB was a great tool for some kind of jobs (for example, think "modern" UI development made easy and straightforward COM/ActiveX integration, which were a winner back then), but it still was a programming enviromnent built on what IMHO is a VERY wrong assumption: you don't have to be a developer to write code. WRONG! We all know what happens when you start doing that! While I respect self-taught developers (we all were at some point or another I guess), just like you cannot be an architect and design houses without a proper background and education, you cannot be a developer without at least some knowledge of computer science. Think about a guy who's trying to develop even the simplest commercial software and doesn't know about any algorithms or data structures. He's going to re-invent the wheel each single time, and even if he's the smartest guy on the block, he's going to do many things wrong, while he would greatly benefit from a deeper knowledge, which besides would allow him to concentate more on the specific functionalities of his software, and in turn do a better job there too. So, that's why, at least IMHO, we all talk crap about BASIC. :-D You'll never hear many people go "Pascal is just crap", cause in the 90's Delphi would allow you to do much of what VB did with roughly the same ease (except maybe COM/ActiveX stuff), but with a solid language, real OOP and a rich library.

I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code! -- Unknown PROGRAM - n. A magic spell cast over a computer allowing it to turn one's input into error messages. v. tr.- To engage in a pastime similar to banging one's head against a wal

I was beginning to think I was the only one! :-D It was a C64 for me as well after that. I really wish I still had some of the programs I wrote on paper for the cartridge, guess I could hang them on my office walls or sell them to some museum! :laugh:

I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code! -- Unknown PROGRAM - n. A magic spell cast over a computer allowing it to turn one's input into error messages. v. tr.- To engage in a pastime similar to banging one's head against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward. -- Uknown

Yeah most programmers from our generation share a very similar background story: it was the 80's and it was the golden age of 8 bit micro computing, so more or less all of us went through the whole "learn BASIC on some 8 bit machine" thing. Fond memories indeed! :) Guess I should start another thread about the best 8 bit machine, just to get some flame war on... ;P But it seems noone else used "Computer Intro!". Feeling lonely! :sigh:

I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code! -- Unknown PROGRAM - n. A magic spell cast over a computer allowing it to turn one's input into error messages. v. tr.- To engage in a pastime similar to banging one's head against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward. -- Uknown