1.21 Gigawatts wrote:

You can't just waltz into a country and 'install' democracy, this isn't Windows 7 here, it's Vista.

I really wish I could +5 that. One of the best comments I have read in ages.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but two Wrights make a plane?

Meh, nothing that new for us Saffers. We've certainly be ranting about it for ages. [RANT] By the looks of it the metro cops were just hanging around (read: speed trapping), rather than doing something useful, like directing traffic during our frequent power outages / broken traffic light situations. [/RANT] Still, good thing they caught him. The other funny story was the one where the metro cops pulled over a taxi that had outstanding speeding fine violations, the passengers made a lot of noise, distracting the cop and the driver ran away. Then the passengers got all indignant when the cop chose to drive the taxi to the impound, rather than taking them all home.

Ilíon wrote:

I know quite a bit (and far more than you do).

Ummm, I know I am kind of sticking my head out here, but how can you possibly quantify knowledge? Or compare the quantities known by two different people? The fields of knowledge and experience are (in my limited understanding) too broad to find a simple quantification for them. So, with that long introduction, how can you possibly say that you know more (in general terms) than someone else. Your knowledge of a particular field may be more complete, but it is arrogance to say simply "I know more".

Mike Mullikin wrote:

force them to speak American English

How I wish there weren't such a thing. You keep leaving out the letters of words, and treat the letter 'Z' with far more respect than it actually deserves. It was relegated to the end of the alphabet for a reason :laugh:

In our offices we have two books for WCF, (the general feeling is that these two cover everything you need to know). In order they are: 1) Learning WCF - Michele Leroux Bustamante (O'Reilly publishing). 2) Programming WCF Services, 2nd Edition - Juval Lowy (O'Reilly publishing). Yes, Juval Lowy's book is detailed, and possibly a bit verbose for starting with, but in addition to the detailed WCF information, it does come with his Service Model Extensions utilities which simplify a lot of the process of WCF development.

Hi, It looks like you've run across exactly the same problem (although the objects are different) that I encountered earlier this week. Hopefully I can help you out, or point you in the right direction at least. As the error shows, the problem happens when DataContractSerializer tries to serialize the Dictionary object. It does also point you in the right direction as to how to fix this. There are two ways (that I know of to fix this issue). The one is to apply the KnownTypeAttribute to the DataContract with the type you want the DataContractSerializer to know about, in normally it would look something like this: [KnownType(typeof(MyType))]. Sadly, in your case as you are working with generic types, you will probably have a bit more work than that by the looks of the documentation (See the MSDN page for the KnownTypeAttribute). The other way around it (the method I used), is to put the known type in your application config file. Basically what you will do is something like this (haven't tried it with your generic types, but this should point you in the right direction):

<system.runtime.serialization>
<dataContractSerializer>
<declaredTypes>
<add type = "Reporting.Contracts.Data.ReportData, Reporting.Contracts, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=312e149fdc68a08f">
<knownType type = "Reporting.Contracts.Data.NewTest,Reporting.Contracts, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=312e149fdc68a08f"/>
</add>
</declaredTypes>
</dataContractSerializer>
</system.runtime.serialization>

Your dictionary would go in the line <knownType type = "Reporting.Contracts.Data.NewTest,Reporting.Contracts, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=312e149fdc68a08f"/> I think (not 100% sure on this though), that your List'1 would go on the line that looks like: <add type = "Reporting.Contracts.Data.ReportData, Reporting.Contracts, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=312e149fdc68a08f">

Sorry, I might not have been 100% clear here, but what I mean to say is that we should be using the most appropriate tool to get the job done (to acceptable quality) in the shortest amount of time. If the job is an embedded application, by all means stick to C / C++. If it is a desktop application, the overhead added by using a managed language is not human noticeable (a couple of milliseconds won't perturb the average user). For me the real benefit of using one of the .NET languages (particularly C#) is the productivity it provides me with, both in terms of the language itself, and now the tools supporting it. This is in turn then handed on to the customer, as they get their software sooner, and to a higher standard than if I had to write all the plumbing myself (I can guarantee, that microsoft has far more test engineers at their disposal than I ever will, and will most likely have developers smarter than me, no matter how much we love to hate MS when things go wrong).

The other (and possibly more important) question to ask is: Which is more important to the client, speed of application development (Developer productivity) versus speed of execution? Developers are expensive resources. C# provides developers with a lot of useful tools to do the same things faster (yes, it isn't the ideal for every task, but it does make many that much easier).

Remove the warnings from everything and let the problems of humanity sort themselves out. If they can't figure out that drugs in extreme quantities are bad for them, let them find out the hard way. Oh, and don't sponsor the health care for those that continue to abuse drugs either. (Sorry, the cynic in me gets a little rampant when it comes to wasting tax money on people who continually do stupid things).

I think they are valid, but I don't think they detract from the fact that Zuma has technically be found guilty by association (the whole Schabir Shaik thing, it takes two for bribery, the briber and the bribee, if the briber is guilty, then surely by default the bribee should be to). I think that rather than dropping the charges, they should proceed with them, and extend the case to include those other elements that are guilty of political interference. But I am not a lawyer, so I may be way off key.

And the smart money was on the button. :(( All charges have been dropped. So our next leader will always have the cloud of suspicion hanging over his head. Weeee :((

Tough one. I am in a similar boat (getting my degree through UNISA) and working full time. Fortunately where I work is happy for me to study, and will give me time off when necessary. Although I was originally skeptical about getting a degree as well, I have seen with some of my friends that for a lot of positions it will help you get your foot in the door, at least for the initial interview. Then it's up to you to prove you actually know what you are doing. The thing with a degree is that it shows prospective employers that you are willing to continue your learning, which in our industry counts as a major plus. I would say keep up with it, but thats just my 2c. Who knows what other oppurtunities might show up in future.

Sadly, I think that is where the smart money goes. :(( I am still hoping that they pull a suprise out of the hat, but that is honestly just foolish optimism.

They don't have Science of the Discworld in Jordan? Do they have any Pratchet books at all? Science of the Discworld 1 & 2 are excellent, as interesting for the science content as for the discworld filler content. Another good read if you get the chance is the Tao of Physics[^]. I read it a while back, and highly recommend it to anyone that is interested in both philosophy and science (fields I believe shouldn't be too deeply separated).

This may be preempting the decision of the South African NPA (National Prosecuting Authority), but I would like to hear the views of the rest of the world as far as this sitatuon goes. Basically what we have is our popular presidential candidate, Jacob Zuma (not exactly the most savory of characters at the best of times), currently has charges of bribery & corruption leveled against him. Now, he and his legal reps have been fighting tooth and nail to keep him out of court (despite his assurances that he would have his day in court to prove his innocence), and have recently made representations to the NPA to get the charges against him dropped because they apparently have evidence of political interference in the case, and some form of bigger conspiracy. At the moment, it seems like the NPA are leaning towards dropping the charges, but the decision has yet to be made public. Some of the reasons that have come out are that the conspiracy is too big to act against????!?! So it seems they feel they should drop the charges against Jacob Zuma, not because he is innocent, but because to charge everyone involved would cause too much political instability? Am I the only one who feels this is a bit farcical? Or does the rest of the world not think that if there are more guilty parties they should all be charged? What does the rest of CP think? Anyone else following this case? Well, when the official announcement is made on whether they will drop the charges later today (11:00 CAT), I'll let you all know. I am hoping the NPA will suprise me and won't bow to the political pressure.

Science of the Discworld? :-D

Eventum. It works well enough and it's free. :)

I can't resist. "Standards are slipping!"

LOL, SABS = SA Bureau of Standards???