|
Thanks for the feedback Marc. Unfortunately the image is small, and stretching a bitmap is a smelly affair. I am hard at work recreating some images and will update soonest.
|
|
|
|
|
Members can vote any dang way they like. All are valid.
But for missing images or such, I wouldn't downvote, I'd report it.
This space intentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
Downvotes reflect the reader's experience. If it was obvious to the reader that the missing images were because of broken links or other publishing glitch then no, a downvote is out of order.
On the other hand, if it looked as though you just hadn't bothered to publish the images that were needed to understand the article properly, then it's understandable.
The images are there now, so I can' judge what it looked like - but gave you a 5 to compensate 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stumbled upon this[^] news article. All I can say is, respect.
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I must be missing something in the article.
If the Cows were Sacred ,Why did they just sell them at market ?
Something just seems wrong about that.
|
|
|
|
|
In order to get money to send their sympathy. Masai, although not these days, are away from the World we live in. Their folk who came back from abroad would have told them the easier way. Cow has a really big importance in entire African culture. It is extremely different from Hindu (in India) culture though.
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
ok perhaps it was already understood that they would sell them for the money then, because that was the most valueable thing they had to give or donate.
When I read that it seemed like, if you gave Someone your most prized possesion as a blessing and they just went out and sold it on ebay for how ever much they could get.
Not like, Here take this and sell it and use the money for helping.
|
|
|
|
|
The thing is that these guys have little to no idea of what US is. so, someone must have guided them. I am no expert at Masai culture, but they would have preferred to send cows.
It is amazing someone who have no real clue about rest of World did gave away something that is divine to them. These guys are considered to be most violent/dangerous people, predominantly due to their amazing hunting skills. But they are really considerate.
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes
They must have had great concern to give away something so valuable to them.
|
|
|
|
|
I think they are not contaminated like us with this modern World bullshit.
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
From MSDN, where else:
An async method provides a convenient way to do potentially long-running work without blocking the caller's thread. The caller (say, M1) of an async method can resume its work without waiting for the async method to finish. However, M1 typically uses the await keyword so that it returns immediately, allowing M1’s caller to resume work or return to the thread’s synchronization context (or message pump).
Does anyone else read that, in the second sentence, the caller is called "M1", but then in the third and fourth sentences, M1 is the "callee"?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Why did they even used M1? Caller is not really that big of a word.
"Bastards encourage idiots to use Oracle Forms, Web Forms, Access and a number of other dinky web publishing tolls.", Mycroft Holmes[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Did you forget that you were reading MSDN?
|
|
|
|
|
No.
M1 uses await when it calls some other async method, and hence returns "immediately" allowing M1's caller to resume from the call site.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
ahmed zahmed wrote: allowing M1's caller
The caller (say, M1)
OK, you tell me. Is M1 the caller or the callee?
If I bend my mind enough, I think I see what you're saying.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
It's both the caller and the callee. In the first sentence, it's the caller (of the async method). In the next sentence it's the callee.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Ok let's work through this. This is the way I understand what is being said. Note though that I am no "async" expert. In fact, I've never used the construct in C#. So, take it for what it's worth.
An async method provides a convenient way to do potentially long-running work without blocking the caller's thread.
This seems straightfoward.
The caller (say, M1) of an async method can resume its work without waiting for the async method to finish.
"The caller (say, M1)" -->
M1()
{
await asyncMethodName();
}
However, M1 typically uses the await keyword so that it returns immediately, allowing M1’s caller to resume work or return to the thread’s synchronization context (or message pump)
SomeOtherMethod()
{
M1();
M2();
}
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I want to buy a tablet where different people can log in and access individual email accounts. I know Apple is out, what about Android? Or is a surface for me?
Thanks.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Snap!
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Android does support multiple users: I haven't tried it (because Herself is scared stiff to go near my Nexus 7, thankfully) but this explains the procedure: http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-add-another-user-to-your-android-tablet.html[^]
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
I think that Android devices are mainly to surf the web, check social media, check emails and play games. As soon as you want to get more work done (Powerpoint, Word, Excel and so on) a Surface tablet would be the best choice, since it is relatively close to a full-blown Windows OS.
I gots a Surface, and I am really happy with it.
Veni, vidi, caecus | Everything summarizes to Assembly code
|
|
|
|
|
I've really enjoyed my Surface Pro 2.
|
|
|
|
|
Ditto. And my Surface Pro 2 has pretty good battery life, depending on what you're doing, of course.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
