|
I discovered that ages ago, and assumed everyone used it on a regular basis.
|
|
|
|
|
You're right!
I regularly undo File Explorer action at the frenetic pace of easily at least 1 per year!  
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know it was enabled for the explorer but ctr+z has become such an ingrained muscle memory for me that whenever I do a mistake, regardless of the software I'm using, I reflexively attempt to undo.
While not always it does work more often than one might expect 
|
|
|
|
|
^Z in fedora emacs minimizes the window. Then the following keystrokes go into whatever window gets focus. Hahaha.
Dang! My '58 Renault Dauphine has another flat tire.
|
|
|
|
|
Similar experience from years ago in my college days --- in one editor, ^Y would "yank back" things I'd deleted. In another, ^Y would delete things I'd highlighted. Kept me on my toes...
|
|
|
|
|
Now if only they could work with the person who implemented the copydown feature in excel and use his brains to figure out how to make it so if I select Cute Puppy.jpg and Cute Kitten.jpg and rename the first to Cutest Puppy.jpg that it should rename the second to Cutest Kitten.jpg not Cutest Puppy (2).jpg.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like that'd work. Will I remember about it 6 or 12 months from now when I next need it? 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
It appears in the Windows Explorer folder context menu - even the horrible new Windows 11 one - so it's not too hard to find. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Once upon a time in a galaxy far, far away… When I was a new (less than 1 year) programmer and working on an IBM 1401 with no math co-processor, I noticed a program that took a long time to do percent calculations (divide). In those days a divide was a software subroutine (a.k.a. function) provided by the vendor to achieve desired results. I had the bright idea improving on it and figured that if you multiplied the numerator by 100 and then looped through a routine that subtracted the denominator you could get there faster. And it worked. Spectacularly. Until… When a numerator came through that was much larger than the denominator the machine virtually locked up. Lessons to new programmers, always test all use cases and never assume your data will be good – always assume the worst where data is concerned. Or as I heard somewhere: no matter how good the validation, some idiot will find a way to get bad data past it.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, a denominator of 0 would be quite amusing! Or a negative one.
|
|
|
|
|
You might remember that several years Intel had a problem with division with a Pentium processor. The same thing had happened - some edge cases were overlooked. That prompted them to enact a rule that the guy who writes the microcode can not write the test vectors.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Rick York wrote: the guy who writes the microcode can not write the test vectors
THAT is fundamental to all testing, certainly not limited to microcode!
|
|
|
|
|
No, is not fundamental. It is highly recommended but not fundamental. Prior to this error Intel had not required it to be done by different people and I am certain they were not alone in that.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
A Row may be a record, but a (logical) Record may comprise several Rows across several tables. It's like atoms (rows) and molecules (records).
So, DataTables use DataRows, excellent.
System.Data.DataRow
System.Data.DataRowView
System.Data.DataTable.Rows
System.Data.DataTable.NewRow
System.Data.DataView.RowFilter
But why, then, is a System.Data.IDataReader a System.Data.IDataRecord ? Which is illogical. Why not System.Data.IDataRow ?
|
|
|
|
|
It has been a long time since I've touched that corner of .NET but I seem to remember that the IDataRow exists somewhere and has things like events on it or otherwise at least things that IDataRecord can't do, and maybe, if memory serves, IDataRecord accesses things closer to the metal (using raw DB types and such) than IDataRow.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
imho such "genomic duplication" reflects the bumpy evolution of so-called "computer languages," as language implementers seek to broaden usage by incorporating familiar semantics ... at the cost of semantic consistency.
imho, "Where" in Linq is a good example: what it actually does is select; while Linq "Select" really means transform. But, those semantic choices were consistent with what SQL users were familiar with.
If you disagree, please enlighten me: I never had any depth experience with SQL.
cheers, Bill
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
Don't ask MS "why you give this name?"  MS always fail here (like naming responsibility were given to mexican hobo). Add here that .NET itself is a "renamed Java" with appropriate legacy. And only years later MS made .NET "as it should be", but legacy classes still here. That's why we have Array completely incompatible with simple List<>. Don't ask, just ignore.
|
|
|
|
|
This could have been answer without naming any nationality.
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? Or you SCARED to say anything w/o government approval? Sorry, but I don't play this "tolerant games".
|
|
|
|
|
I'm lucky to live in a country where I can say pretty much what I want without the government coming after me. I'm also lucky enough to be in a position where I don't need to diminish anyone to feel that I'm better.
|
|
|
|
|
Very right now you try to diminish me to feel higher than me. Because by some reason you think I offended somebody. Elaborate HOW, please??
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody needs to try to diminish you. Your ability to write in English (or, really, the lack thereof) does that quite happily, all by itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Your reply is just proof you're dumb young sh.... who tries to diminish people just to feel better (because in reality you're nothing).
English is my SECONDARY language and as a secondary it's more than good. But main point is you're so miserable that knowing nothing about me all you could say is "your english is bad". Yep, I know! When pathetic people try to offend me, they use my English level. Enough said, dumb! You're not interesting anymore, get lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh well.
Thanks for calling me young, though. At 56, having been programming for 43 years, I find it quite invigorating when idiots make assumptions. But at least you've got proof.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
