Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:I've posted this 1312 times (Score 1) 146

I confirm that: I use Windows with 2Gb RAM and Firefox is barely usable, thus I switched to Palemoon, but I'm not very satisfied either.
Chrome is even worse, and IE is out of question.
I tried Opera, Seamonkey and K-Meleon, but prefer Palemoon.

On my wife's computer, it's even worse: she has a 1GB computer with nothing installed, and Firefox is absolutely unusable !
I switched her to Qupzilla.
She doesn't browse heavy flash sites, so why should we need 4 Gb+ to use gmail and do basic browsing ?

Comment: Re:Unit tests (Score 0) 233

by eulernet (#48991681) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Tools To Clean Up a Large C/C++ Project?

unit tests have VERY limited utility in terms of understanding a mess of code you inherited

Totally agree with that !

In fact, most legacy code cannot be unit-tested, since the code has never been designed to be tested.
Adding unit tests requires that the routines are cleanly cut.
Since it's rarely the case, refactoring code could be extremely difficult.

Writing tests for new parts of code is good practice, especially if you have to maintain your code in the future, but it's useless if the code already runs since a long time.

I have a way to attack legacy projects: I try to simplify/optimize the code in order to own it.
Perhaps in your case, should you try to split the routines in smaller sources.

Comment: Re:Nope... Nailed It (Score 1) 186

by eulernet (#48435235) Attached to: It's Not Developers Slowing Things Down, It's the Process

For example if the manager is very hands-on, goes into the details, produces proper mock-ups, flow diagrams, and everything is properly documented: This type of manager can actually accelerate the development process significantly since developers now know exactly what to do.

With this type of manager, as a programmer, you have to write exactly what he wants, and it's completely demotivating: the programmers cannot take any initiative.

A manager must be available.
Instead of mock-ups, diagrams, etc..., he/she must be available when the devs need him/her when some "obvious" feature is not written in the specs, or when to validate this or that feature.
If the manager is never available, because he/she spends his time detailing the process or spending time in meetings, his/her team will stop producing.

But again, this manager has to really know what he's doing, and have some serious programming experience in his past.

Absolutely no !
Programming and managing require quite different skills.
Managing requires to understand human nature while programming requires to understand computer's logic.
How could these be compatible ?

Let me guess: you are a managers' manager.
You prefer to work with people who make you believe that everything is predictable.
Am I right ?

Comment: Re:Amusing this should show up today (Score 1) 132

by eulernet (#48306467) Attached to: Mozilla Teases First Browser Dedicated To Devs

Another annoying behavior of Firefox is that the Javascript included in the browser is pretty buggy.

I wrote a small tool to detect Javascript errors, but the errors in my code are flooded by Firefox' errors, like this one:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

And they want to help me fix my Javascript ?
Start with yourself !

Comment: Re:You have control of you. (Score 1) 158

by eulernet (#48233325) Attached to: The Problem With Positive Thinking

Sure, we agree about controlling the external reality (which leads to frustration), but what about controlling your internal reality ?

The only thing that can truely be said as your own is your thoughts and actions.

I'm still searching the "I" that you mention !
Sure, thoughts and actions appear, but what is their source ?

Also, it's easy to say that we should not expect something or judge others, but are you able to apply this for yourself ?
That is: to not expect anything from yourself and to not judge yourself ?
Are you able to surrender ?

Comment: Re:Stockdale Paradox (Score 3, Informative) 158

by eulernet (#48232051) Attached to: The Problem With Positive Thinking

Stockdale was impressed by stoicism, but he was a positive thinker.

His premises are wrong: "I never doubted not only that I would get out, but also that I would prevail in the end and turn the experience into the defining event of my life,"

"I never doubted that I would get out " is positive thinking, especially when reality shows that this will be probably wrong.
"turn the experience into the defining event of my life" is also positive thinking, it's called "peak performance" in positive thinking.

Comment: Re:You have control of you. (Score 2) 158

by eulernet (#48231911) Attached to: The Problem With Positive Thinking

While I agree with most of your post, you are wrong about the "control" over you.
Control over yourself is a dangerous belief !
For example, if I'm fat and I want to lose some weight, I can diet, because after all, it's just a matter of will.
I'll completely focus on my weight and if I notice that this doesn't work, I'll become depressed.

In fact, the real solution is to act without expecting anything (this is called selfless action).
If I have a positive return, it's unexpected so it's a nice surprise.
If I have a negative return, it's unexpected but I cannot be disappointed.
This approach is not positive thinking, because there is no expectation.

Comment: Re:grow your own (Score 1) 236

by eulernet (#48106461) Attached to: Outsourced Tech Jobs Are Increasingly Being Automated

I believe that you are too focused on money. Money in itself has very little importance.
I'm quite worried by your way of thinking, because what is important is happiness, not money.
Money and happiness are completely unrelated.

As long as money flows, the capitalist system will keep surviving.
When money will stop flowing, the whole system will badly crash.
Frankly, this is something that I hope because this will force companies (not governments !) to rethink their role.

Now, we are in an era where everybody tries to reduce the costs, but there is a limit to that.
Who will buy the latest expensive gadgets if money is not redistributed ?
Also, do you really need these gadgets ?
Should you always be available to others at any given moment of your day ?

The devil finds work for idle circuits to do.

Working...