probably the only answer i hear in this thread from someone who understands the difference between 'law' and 'justice'

Woow .. the buzz at codeproject seems to have taken a u-turn ... a similar topic only 3 months back had mixed feelings .... And suddenly, surprisingly, it has taken a side ... Its good, and I wonder if say-bye-bye-to-flexi-timing-policy would soon be prevalent again... The world would be a great place then when people will come-together to work 14 hours a day and all will somehow be highly productive exactly in those predefined 14 hours... and all will have have equal times to travel (or probably sleep just below their workstations)

Why are they taking the industry 20 years backwards (if not more) as if internet was never invented AND its a clerical job to be software developers... I refer to the say-bye-bye-to-work-from-home-policy[^] that is being brandished

Really appreciate your comments ... And also envy :)

Some people have all the bad luck with hard disks ... I have had my turn of bad luck which taught me to be redundant. always. A humble question as to where to go? multiple hdd?

Even in recent times, we hit people who behave as if internet was never invented. They continue to use heavy and stupid corporate policies like working hours, NO work from home and Dress Code. Just wanted views, about do these things actually apply to the process of software development? or its just an HR/Management ego that they want to boost but enforcing such historical mode of office going?

Personally I feel jealous of all those have the privilege of working from home .. And I am nuts that it takes you 5min to office ... And once it took 50minutes .. so what ?

So finally, free internet in cross-country flights seems a possibility :)

naming a few (renowned ones) would help :)

Does anyone know about which products, developed in ASP.Net WebAPI, are already live ?

:)) good eyes

Found this in a would be production code today ...

public bool InitializeApp()
{
// Log

bool bStatus = false;
try
{
    // step 2 :
    try
    {
        DoStep2();
    }
    catch (Exception ex)
    {
        // Log ex
    }

    // step 3 :
    try
    {
        DoStep3();
    }
    catch (Exception ex)
    {
        // Log ex
    }

    // step 4 :
    try
    {
        DoStep4();
    }
    catch (Exception ex)
    {
        // Log ex
    }

    // step 5 :
    try
    {
        DoStep5();
    }
    catch (Exception ex)
    {
        // Log ex
    }

    // step 6 :
    try
    {
        DoStep6();
    }
    catch (Exception ex)
    {
        // Log ex
    }
}
catch (Exception eError)
{
    // Log -- God knows how can some code get in here -- unless a Log exception throws
}

return bStatus;

}

Goes without saying that every DoStep method has a try-catchEverything block with log If I am still missing the point .. its the nested try-catch I am pointing to :laugh:

Yeah ... I wanted to start the real boxing (the sports one)

FROM MSDN: Boxing is the process of converting a value type to the type object or to any interface type implemented by this value type. When the CLR boxes a value type, it wraps the value inside a System.Object and stores it on the managed heap. Unboxing extracts the value type from the object. Boxing is implicit; unboxing is explicit. The concept of boxing and unboxing underlies the C# unified view of the type system, in which a value of any type can be treated as an object. --- "interface type implemented by this value type" ... I guess the only way to make this work is write an explicit implementation extension (not sure if it would be legal, without trying) ... But again .. if you say UnBoxing it would still be closer :) My core frustration though, is not being able to understand from what language/programming practice can such a thought originate...

Oh .. I basically followed the type-tag ... But if it was a joke, then you wouldnt have interviewed :)

:)) So you mean to say that in today's C# compiler, the code will compile? I actually tried compiling the code above (since you said) .. and I got this compilation error. "Error 1 Cannot convert type 'string' to 'int' " Any special comments?

So I met this guy during an interview today who called himself a DOT-NET developer He kept on arguing that following code is called "boxing" string s = "3"; int i = (int)s; I mean, forget boxing .. this code doesnt even compile. I contemplated showing him on a quick online browser but did not have such resources in hand ... He had a bunch of such questions (all of them equally unjustifiable) ... after which I was thankfully rejected ... Gawd I just dont understand how such people get into mainstream interviewing in super large MNCs.

Super liked and agreed ... I posted something similar somewhere else on similar lines and found similar echos

Agreed ... and why not, if machines can read brain signals and draw pictures of what the brain interprets. Its more than a belief that machine-armageddon is a possibility

Apples get rotten if not kept in the fridge