• (cs)

    Whoah, Jeff. Click post only once! Got a little click happy there, didn't ya?



    Was the prospect of posting to the board so exciting that you just couldn't wait?? [:P]

  • (cs)

    sorry!  it might be firefox, but when I click QUOTE to reply, with a quote, it doesn't seem to work. [:(]

    What I TRIED to say was something in response to that quote that was really witty, like:

    Yeah, VB is stupid with their "functions".  you'd never see a real language like C++ with "functions"!  I always use "methods" in C++ ! stupid VB!

    (something like that ... it was really great ...funny, insightful ...  you had to be there ... too bad it didn't post right)

  • (unregistered) in reply to Jeff S

    Ah, were you trying to add something?

  • (cs) in reply to

    yeah, it let me click QUOTE and it all looked good, I added some stuff to the bottom, but the post never seemed to work -- it just showed the original quote ..

    again, it might be firefox, it might be me  ....

  • (cs) in reply to Jeff S
    Jeff S:
    yeah, it let me click QUOTE and it all looked good, I added some stuff to the bottom, but the post never seemed to work -- it just showed the original quote ..

    again, it might be firefox, it might be me  ....


    I think it's this $#&*# text box. If only there was an emoticon to express my frusteration with it. This is the best I can come up with: [li]

    Posting is worse ... the Lousy box seems to replace line breaks and spacing in a PRE block, which makes post code incredibly painful. I'm gonna look at it over the weekend and see what can be done.
  • (cs)

    I am programmer yet I am here in the mountain dew halfway house.

    I promise not to mainline dew anymore!

    Can I go home now?

    bool goHome;


    <snip>
    Java and C# are a wonderful halfway house, in that they are fairly simple to pick up, and code is actually human readable (unlike a lot of C++), but they are also not overly-simplified like VB so that there are less 'novices' (for want of a better word) using them to program things beyond their abilities, such as the guy who was using the WebClient class and clearly didn't have the first idea about HTML or HTTP (see one of my posts on a thread from a couple of days ago for the reference).
    <snip>

  • (unregistered)

    I know of someone who designed a language with four valued boolean logic - "True", "False", "Maybe" and "Undefined", so a function testing "is this point inside this curve" can have suitable return values for "yes", "no", "it's on the curve, as near as I can tell", and "that isn't a closed curve". The usual boolean operators were extended, so, for example "True OR Maybe" is True, "True AND Maybe" is Maybe.
    I'm not sure whether it made it into the implemenation though.

  • (unregistered)

    So to summarise this dickhead has done the following:
    Invented some new quad-value boolean type (which I have named super-boolean): +10 points
    Created something that defaults to the highest level of authority if you don't have a role: +20 points
    Created a branch for each role he has: +5 points
    Appeared on thedailywtf.com: +100points
    ---
    135 points, status achieved: god-like fucktard!
    ---

    To whoever wrote this code: please go play in traffic, you'll be doing the IT community and quite possibly mankind a favour.

  • (cs) in reply to DJDanny

    DJDanny:

    ok, fair enough, then. true, false and unassigned. I make that a tristate!

    <font size="2">Not true. "unassigned" is not in itself a value, it's a state of a variable. If I say "bool x;" x has a value, it's just that (theoretically) I don't know what it is and so it would be pointless to use x's value until it is set. Point is, at the time a bool is created it has a value, either true or false. The compiler may yell at you for using an "unassigned" bool, but it's not saying that "the value of the bool is unassigned", it's just telling you it would be worthless to use the variable because there's no way of guaranteeing it has any relevant value.
    In short, a bool is always true or false. Whether or not the compiler lets you get to the value is an issue of the language and the compiler, not the bool itself.
    </font>

  • (cs) in reply to
    :
    So to summarise this *** has done the following:
    Invented some new quad-value boolean type (which I have named super-boolean): +10 points
    Created something that defaults to the highest level of authority if you don't have a role: +20 points
    Created a branch for each role he has: +5 points
    Appeared on thedailywtf.com: +100points
    ---
    135 points, status achieved: god-like ****!
    ---

    To whoever wrote this code: please go play in traffic, you'll be doing the IT community and quite possibly mankind a favour.



    Wow. Watch the language. You'll ruin it for the other anonymous posters.

    And now for something completely different:

    Re: Firefox... what do you mean? I use firefox and have not encountered any problems.
  • (cs) in reply to Mike R

    Mike: If you hit "quote" next to a post, it displays the textarea and you can type and format to your heart's content, but when you hit preview or post it doesn't actually save the text you typed in.. just the original quote.

    It works fine when you do regular posts.

  • (unregistered) in reply to alexb

    [pi][pi][sn][sn][Z][Z][Z][}][}][}][}][^][^][^][U][U][N][N][au][au][au]

    alexb:
    Mike: If you hit "quote" next to a post, it displays the textarea and you can type and format to your heart's content, but when you hit preview or post it doesn't actually save the text you typed in.. just the original quote.

    It works fine when you do regular posts.

  • (unregistered) in reply to Jeff S

    Option explicit should have been a default option rather thatn explicitly mentioning it.

  • (unregistered)

    Finally, a boolean type that can capture all the states of a checkbox as exposed to VB:

    1. Checked
    2. Unchecked
    3. Grey

  • (cs) in reply to

    If it was a default, it would be "Option Implicit".   Explicit, by definition, means that it must be specifically mentioned. [:D]




  • (cs) in reply to Blue

    And that's why I like Lotus's version of it, "Option Declare", which can be made default without running into explicit/implicit semantics.

  • (unregistered)

    That looks like a big "F".

    Where's the "U.", "C." and "K." ?

  • ELIZA (unregistered)

    Three things:

    1. the boolean "value" of uninitialised is "whatever garbage was in the memory before the variable was declared" and always reduces to true or false, for those who don't get it
    2. The four-valued boolean (true, false, maybe, undefined) could be so useful for geometry, modelling, etcetera, mostly because a tangent (maybe) is quite distinct from a secant or (for open curves like y=sin(x) or y=xx) crossing line (true) and also distinct from neither (false)
    3. Topic.OffTopic == True I use a combination of browsers: Firefox to load my basic sites on startup (wikipedia, sabrina-online, thedailywtf.com, etcetera) and IE to load, for example, http://thedailywtf.com/Comments/Stand_Back,_I_0x27_ve_got_Hexidecimal.aspx?pg=2 so that if I shut down without closing all of the tabs holding particular URLs they don't come back on startup, though I do use FF to store progress in things like clicking forward through the entire list of DailyWTF articles.
    • Thus for y=x*x, y=0 is a tangent, y=1 is a secant, x=0 (or x=n, for any real n) is a crossing line, and y=-1 is an uncrossing line

Leave a comment on “Thank Goodness there's &quot;Option Strict Off&quot;”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article