On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 1:29:48 PM UTC-4, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

In other news, I replaced the "transmission assembly" in my
self-propelled lawnmower this week (ugg). I probably earned my $250
back right there.

Cheers


Good for you Bill! A rather trivial job in the scheme of things, but
maybe not so much if it's your first time putting your hand to that
kind of thing. Still - money well saved and a great sense of
accomplishment. Press on brother...

Thanks Mike. It didn't seem trivial at the time. I learned about
the cable connector (had to watch 3 videos until i found one where I
could see how it worked), about Loctite (blue), and I learned that my
memory for putting the pieces (particularly springs and washers in the
gears) back together wasn't as good as I thought it would be.
Fortunately, a long model number permitted me download a more accurate
parts diagram than the one which came with my unit! Also, next time
I'll take things apart Before I order parts so I don't have to deal with
"stripped" or otherwise broken parts--though it seems to be running okay
with a broken spring behind the wheel gear (which still behaves as a
"spacer").

Bill

I should have looked up my snowblower repair instructions before attempting
the repair, but it looked so simple.

The end of the spring that popped out of the slot on the case was right
there, lying against the inside of the case. All I had to do was stretch it
back into the slot.

Hmmm...it doesn't seem to want to reach the slot. Maybe if I remove this bolt
I'll have more play. SPROING! Oh crap, now what do I do? Stretch, pull,
sproing. Stretch, pull, sproing. Wash, rinse, repeat.

2 hours later I took my raw, spring battered knuckles inside to check out
youtube. Hey, look at that...I'm messing with the wrong spring! There was
nothing wrong with that one until I messed with it. Oh, you need a special
tensioning tool to rewind it? Sh*t.

Put it in the trailer, take it to the dealer, and $50 later the "good spring"
was reattached, the actual broken spring was replaced and all cables and
linkages were properly adjusted. The tech told me that I probably would
never have gotten that spring back on without the tool. It didn't make me
feel like less of an idiot for taking it off in the first place.

Had I looked at the video first, it would have been a $5, 10 minute fix to
replace the spring that had really broken.

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 1:45:08 PM UTC-4, wrote:

....snip...

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If there is
a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your insurance agent
about it. They come out and look at it and if they think it is a problem,
they write a letter which explains that they will need to pay out if any
damage is caused by your tree. And they will sue to recover those damages.
That often acts as a good motivator.


The house next to mine is a rental. A few years back a large limb from a tree
on that lot came down on my house. Minimal damage to my property, but a lot of clean-up. Before I called my insurance company, I called the landlord, just
to let him know what had happened and that I was calling my ins co. He said OK
and seemed fine with it at the time.

Well, apparently, my ins co called his ins co and told them that the tree
was a risk. If there was another claim, my ins co was going to go after his
ins co for payment. His ins co then contacted him telling him that he should do
something about the tree because they may not be willing to pay on any future
claim related to damage caused by the tree - either on his property or any
other.

So he comes knocking on *my* door, ****ing and moaning that I blew him
in to his ins co and asking why didn't I handle it "like a man." I calmly
reminded him that he was the first one that I called when it happened, that
I told him that I was going to call my ins co and that he had said OK.
Anything that happened after that was between the ins co's and that I had
not contacted his carrier. "I don't even know who your ins co is." I also
calmly told him that he could be damn sure that I wouldn't be calling him
first if there was another incident with that tree. I'm pretty sure he left
even more ****ed than when he showed up.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 1:29:48 PM UTC-4, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

In other news, I replaced the "transmission assembly" in my
self-propelled lawnmower this week (ugg). I probably earned my $250
back right there.

Cheers

Good for you Bill! A rather trivial job in the scheme of things, but
maybe not so much if it's your first time putting your hand to that
kind of thing. Still - money well saved and a great sense of
accomplishment. Press on brother...

Thanks Mike. It didn't seem trivial at the time. I learned about
the cable connector (had to watch 3 videos until i found one where I
could see how it worked), about Loctite (blue), and I learned that my
memory for putting the pieces (particularly springs and washers in the
gears) back together wasn't as good as I thought it would be.
Fortunately, a long model number permitted me download a more accurate
parts diagram than the one which came with my unit! Also, next time
I'll take things apart Before I order parts so I don't have to deal with
"stripped" or otherwise broken parts--though it seems to be running okay
with a broken spring behind the wheel gear (which still behaves as a
"spacer").

Bill
I should have looked up my snowblower repair instructions before attempting
the repair, but it looked so simple.

The end of the spring that popped out of the slot on the case was right
there, lying against the inside of the case. All I had to do was stretch it
back into the slot.

Hmmm...it doesn't seem to want to reach the slot. Maybe if I remove this bolt
I'll have more play. SPROING! Oh crap, now what do I do? Stretch, pull,
sproing. Stretch, pull, sproing. Wash, rinse, repeat.

2 hours later I took my raw, spring battered knuckles inside to check out
youtube. Hey, look at that...I'm messing with the wrong spring! There was
nothing wrong with that one until I messed with it. Oh, you need a special
tensioning tool to rewind it? Sh*t.

Put it in the trailer, take it to the dealer, and $50 later the "good spring"
was reattached, the actual broken spring was replaced and all cables and
linkages were properly adjusted. The tech told me that I probably would
never have gotten that spring back on without the tool. It didn't make me
feel like less of an idiot for taking it off in the first place.

Had I looked at the video first, it would have been a $5, 10 minute fix to
replace the spring that had really broken.

I think those experiences help us better appreciate the times when
nothing is broken! : )

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 3:10:05 PM UTC-4, Bill wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 1:29:48 PM UTC-4, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

In other news, I replaced the "transmission assembly" in my
self-propelled lawnmower this week (ugg). I probably earned my $250
back right there.

Cheers

Good for you Bill! A rather trivial job in the scheme of things, but
maybe not so much if it's your first time putting your hand to that
kind of thing. Still - money well saved and a great sense of
accomplishment. Press on brother...

Thanks Mike. It didn't seem trivial at the time. I learned about
the cable connector (had to watch 3 videos until i found one where I
could see how it worked), about Loctite (blue), and I learned that my
memory for putting the pieces (particularly springs and washers in the
gears) back together wasn't as good as I thought it would be.
Fortunately, a long model number permitted me download a more accurate
parts diagram than the one which came with my unit! Also, next time
I'll take things apart Before I order parts so I don't have to deal with
"stripped" or otherwise broken parts--though it seems to be running okay
with a broken spring behind the wheel gear (which still behaves as a
"spacer").

Bill
I should have looked up my snowblower repair instructions before attempting
the repair, but it looked so simple.

The end of the spring that popped out of the slot on the case was right
there, lying against the inside of the case. All I had to do was stretch it
back into the slot.

Hmmm...it doesn't seem to want to reach the slot. Maybe if I remove this bolt
I'll have more play. SPROING! Oh crap, now what do I do? Stretch, pull,
sproing. Stretch, pull, sproing. Wash, rinse, repeat.

2 hours later I took my raw, spring battered knuckles inside to check out
youtube. Hey, look at that...I'm messing with the wrong spring! There was
nothing wrong with that one until I messed with it. Oh, you need a special
tensioning tool to rewind it? Sh*t.

Put it in the trailer, take it to the dealer, and $50 later the "good spring"
was reattached, the actual broken spring was replaced and all cables and
linkages were properly adjusted. The tech told me that I probably would
never have gotten that spring back on without the tool. It didn't make me
feel like less of an idiot for taking it off in the first place.

Had I looked at the video first, it would have been a $5, 10 minute fix to
replace the spring that had really broken.

I think those experiences help us better appreciate the times when
nothing is broken! : )

Nah...

My motto is: If it ain't broken, modify it.

On 5/12/2016 1:47 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 1:45:08 PM UTC-4, wrote:

...snip...

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If there is
a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your insurance agent
about it. They come out and look at it and if they think it is a problem,
they write a letter which explains that they will need to pay out if any
damage is caused by your tree. And they will sue to recover those damages.
That often acts as a good motivator.


The house next to mine is a rental. A few years back a large limb from a tree
on that lot came down on my house. Minimal damage to my property, but a lot of clean-up. Before I called my insurance company, I called the landlord, just
to let him know what had happened and that I was calling my ins co. He said OK
and seemed fine with it at the time.

Well, apparently, my ins co called his ins co and told them that the tree
was a risk. If there was another claim, my ins co was going to go after his
ins co for payment. His ins co then contacted him telling him that he should do
something about the tree because they may not be willing to pay on any future
claim related to damage caused by the tree - either on his property or any
other.

So he comes knocking on *my* door, ****ing and moaning that I blew him
in to his ins co and asking why didn't I handle it "like a man." I calmly
reminded him that he was the first one that I called when it happened, that
I told him that I was going to call my ins co and that he had said OK.
Anything that happened after that was between the ins co's and that I had
not contacted his carrier. "I don't even know who your ins co is." I also
calmly told him that he could be damn sure that I wouldn't be calling him
first if there was another incident with that tree. I'm pretty sure he left
even more ****ed than when he showed up.

Good on'Ya!

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)


I see you don't believe in "intelligent design"??

wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)


I see you don't believe in "intelligent design"??


Could you imagine the Universe if it was designed by "trial and error"?
It'd probably be like a lot of software...

Puckdropper

On 13 May 2016 05:55:41 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)


I see you don't believe in "intelligent design"??


Could you imagine the Universe if it was designed by "trial and error"?
It'd probably be like a lot of software...

Priceless!

On 13 May 2016 05:55:41 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)


I see you don't believe in "intelligent design"??


Could you imagine the Universe if it was designed by "trial and error"?
It'd probably be like a lot of software...

Puckdropper
Most atheists insist there was no "intelligent design" and no "as
built" documentation. Their "onboard software" would serve to support
their thesis.

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 5:22:37 PM UTC-5, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.


LOL.

Been away, just catching up on threads...

Another situation: Around here, a leaning rotten/dead tree (proven threat) can be mandated to be taken down... the owner has no say so. If the owner doesn't comply, the city will do it and charge the owner. Not sure how one proves it to be a threat, but I suppose there are parameters (and multiple pro opinions) for determining.

Sonny

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.

-BR

On 5/12/16 11:55 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
wrote in
:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)


I see you don't believe in "intelligent design"??


Could you imagine the Universe if it was designed by "trial and error"?
It'd probably be like a lot of software...

Puckdropper


Kind of like if civil engineers (bridge builders) worked like software
writers...


-BR

On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:07:48 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.

Sounds about right (speaking as a hardware designer). The real
problem is that no one had a complete specification in the first
place. When I worked for IBM, a *complete* specification was a
requirement. The specification was half the work and drove all of the
rest of the above "people".

From another job... Inverting a signal isn't so much of an "iffy
bit". I was once told by our software engineer that flipping a bit
was too difficult because he'd have to release all his code.
Management bought it, so I had to spin a board (several thousand
dollars - and a couple of month hit to the schedule), re-test,
re-release all of the documentation. All *real* money. He had to
re-release his code (something that happened fairly regularly anyway)
because the all of hardware part numbers changed.

Brewster wrote in :

On 5/12/16 11:55 PM, Puckdropper wrote:

Could you imagine the Universe if it was designed by "trial and
error"? It'd probably be like a lot of software...

Puckdropper


Kind of like if civil engineers (bridge builders) worked like software
writers...


-BR



[Build a Bridge] - Is Bridge still Standing? --Yes-- [Good Job!]
^ V------------------ No ^-----------------------
| [Oops!] -- [Add another layer of abstraction and try again]
-------------[Perhaps Regular Expressions would help?] ---

On Saturday, May 14, 2016 at 11:08:58 AM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:07:48 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.

Sounds about right (speaking as a hardware designer). The real
problem is that no one had a complete specification in the first
place. When I worked for IBM, a *complete* specification was a
requirement. The specification was half the work and drove all of the
rest of the above "people".


I hang out in an Excel forum and often write VBA macros for people that
submit their "requirements". They'll post what they want the code to do
and I'll respond with a macro that fulfills their stated requirements.

Their next response will often be: "Hey thanks! That works great. Now
can you make it do "this"?" I'll chastise them a bit about incomplete
requirements, rework the code and then post it.

"Hey thanks again! Sorry about leaving out those extra requirements. BTW,
can you also make it do "this"?"

It's at that point that I'll usually ask them what they think would happen
if they were actually paying for the code and kept adding requirements after
the contracted-for specifications had been met. Do they think that they can
just expect re-work after re-work with no implications - either additional
costs or bloated code with all sorts of bolt-ons that impact the efficiency
and maintainability?

I can only hope that it plants a seed for the next time they need help -
even if it's free help.

....snip...

DerbyDad03 wrote:
"Hey thanks again! Sorry about leaving out those extra requirements.
BTW, can you also make it do "this"?" It's at that point that I'll
usually ask them what they think would happen if they were actually
paying for the code and kept adding requirements after the
contracted-for specifications had been met. Do they think that they
can just expect re-work after re-work with no implications - either
additional costs or bloated code with all sorts of bolt-ons that
impact the efficiency and maintainability?

I can only hope that it plants a seed for the next time they need help
- even if it's free help. ...snip...

Good luck with that!

Bill

BTW, my wife came to me the other day asking me how to get rid of the
annoying message that kept appearing on her screen. It said "Out of
file space". It's beside the point that there is a second drive on the
machine that has 50GB of free space. It might as well not even be there.
I think I'll go find her a few more GB to work with...

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...

I can only hope that it plants a seed for the next time they need help -
even if it's free help.

I've been watching for decades for things to be different... hasn't happened
and I doubt it ever will. I see a lot of what I refer to as "western movie
set" applications done with tools like MS Access... fancy interface with
barely anything behind it or things that don't work correctly. IT hasn't
supported the Excel or Access apps in any company where I've worked... nor
on the college campuses. Those apps are the business's problem and very few
"in the business" have formal training. IT also hides behind the phrase "out
of scope" as a dynamic business environment moves forward IT checks off
their "in scope" boxes... the finished product doesn't meet the business
needs. It's been like this for decades... Agile is the latest thing to raise
it's head in my business circles... at least it looks like something is
getting done. ;~)

On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:07:48 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.

-BR
The source of most of that problem is a combination of lack of a
clear mission statement for the project, combined with terminal
feature creep. When the programmer starts programming he has no idea
of what the actual requirements are for the program, and before he
gets that (whatever it is) figured out, there are a dozen or more
features thrown in - whether requirements, or just "gee whiz, I didn't
know I could do THAT!!!"

If the requirements were properly laid out, and the processes properly
flow charted, a programmer today could still do the equivalent of
running a full featured spread sheet on a 4K machine with a 4.3Mhz 8
bit processor. And the documentation would be adequate and accurate
enough to allow a programmer 20 years from now to modify it as
necessary - and even understand what the program was doing and how.

In todays (custom software in particular) world, fixing one problem or
adding one feature invariably causes numerous other problems - due in
Large part to totally inadequate program documentation..

On Saturday, May 14, 2016 at 4:47:57 PM UTC-4, John Grossbohlin wrote:
"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...

I can only hope that it plants a seed for the next time they need help -
even if it's free help.

I've been watching for decades for things to be different... hasn't happened
and I doubt it ever will. I see a lot of what I refer to as "western movie
set" applications done with tools like MS Access... fancy interface with
barely anything behind it or things that don't work correctly. IT hasn't
supported the Excel or Access apps in any company where I've worked... nor
on the college campuses. Those apps are the business's problem and very few
"in the business" have formal training. IT also hides behind the phrase "out
of scope" as a dynamic business environment moves forward IT checks off
their "in scope" boxes... the finished product doesn't meet the business
needs. It's been like this for decades... Agile is the latest thing to raise
it's head in my business circles... at least it looks like something is
getting done. ;~)

What's even scarier is that I know for a fact that some businesses are being
run on programs that came from a free-help forum. I know that because I've written
Excel macros to create invoices, track inventory, tracks projects, etc.

Scary indeed!

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...

What's even scarier is that I know for a fact that some businesses are
being
run on programs that came from a free-help forum. I know that because I've
written
Excel macros to create invoices, track inventory, tracks projects, etc.

Scary indeed!

My father's theory is that the only reason any business survives is because
they are all screwed up... ;~)

On 5/14/16 2:56 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:07:48 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.


The source of most of that problem is a combination of lack of a
clear mission statement for the project, combined with terminal
feature creep. When the programmer starts programming he has no idea
of what the actual requirements are for the program, and before he
gets that (whatever it is) figured out, there are a dozen or more
features thrown in - whether requirements, or just "gee whiz, I didn't
know I could do THAT!!!"

If the requirements were properly laid out, and the processes properly
flow charted, a programmer today could still do the equivalent of
running a full featured spread sheet on a 4K machine with a 4.3Mhz 8
bit processor. And the documentation would be adequate and accurate
enough to allow a programmer 20 years from now to modify it as
necessary - and even understand what the program was doing and how.

In todays (custom software in particular) world, fixing one problem or
adding one feature invariably causes numerous other problems - due in
Large part to totally inadequate program documentation..



Amen!

My current project is first defined by the end users (scientists)
dreaming up a set of features that 'would be great' and others that are
needed. Nothing wrong with that, but still rather vague. The hardware
people make the 'mechanics' possible. All the while management wants a
complete middleware design before any work begins. I get a good laugh
when rereading those docs and comparing with what we had to do to get
there.
Some projects are simple enough to do the fully engineered program,
others are just too cutting edge or completely beyond anything done
before you always end up doing the 'spiral' where you get the thing
working, re-design, re-work, etc.

I had an embedded processor that I had managed to get all the code into
a few MBs of memory. At one point someone wanted a web server built in
so they added not one, but two tomcat servers, full blown features,
written in Java. Needed to up the memory from 64M to 1 GB.

On Sun, 15 May 2016 09:23:45 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/14/16 2:56 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 08:07:48 -0600, Brewster wrote:

On 5/12/16 5:25 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:23:41 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 6:22:37 PM UTC-4, krw wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:45:06 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:55:06 -0400
knuttle wrote:

Cleaning up has ruined a lot of project that were a lot of fun doing.

a lot like writing documentation

I'm sure you hate documentation. Punctuation and shift keys take a
lot of effort.

Writing documentation first makes both the documentation and the
product better.

Yeah, but you always draw the flow-chart *after* you write the code.

At least that's the way it was done in college. ;-)

Ayup! ...and that's why software is so buggy. ;-)


Being a software engineer, I can relate to this!

The typical design process is:

Hardware people make a design and any missing/iffy parts are left to the
software people to deal with.

The software people write the code and any missing/iffy parts are left
to the document/manual writers to work out.

Tech writers type up the manuals and any missing/iffy parts are left for
the end user to figure out.


The source of most of that problem is a combination of lack of a
clear mission statement for the project, combined with terminal
feature creep. When the programmer starts programming he has no idea
of what the actual requirements are for the program, and before he
gets that (whatever it is) figured out, there are a dozen or more
features thrown in - whether requirements, or just "gee whiz, I didn't
know I could do THAT!!!"

If the requirements were properly laid out, and the processes properly
flow charted, a programmer today could still do the equivalent of
running a full featured spread sheet on a 4K machine with a 4.3Mhz 8
bit processor. And the documentation would be adequate and accurate
enough to allow a programmer 20 years from now to modify it as
necessary - and even understand what the program was doing and how.

In todays (custom software in particular) world, fixing one problem or
adding one feature invariably causes numerous other problems - due in
Large part to totally inadequate program documentation..



Amen!

My current project is first defined by the end users (scientists)
dreaming up a set of features that 'would be great' and others that are
needed. Nothing wrong with that, but still rather vague. The hardware
people make the 'mechanics' possible. All the while management wants a
complete middleware design before any work begins. I get a good laugh
when rereading those docs and comparing with what we had to do to get
there.
Some projects are simple enough to do the fully engineered program,
others are just too cutting edge or completely beyond anything done
before you always end up doing the 'spiral' where you get the thing
working, re-design, re-work, etc.

The old addage needs to be remembered - first you make it work - THEN
you make it pretty!!. Doesn't matter how glitsy the interface is if it
doesn't do the job.

Or the other one - It doesn't matter if you've got your **** together
- if it's **** - it's still ****..

I had an embedded processor that I had managed to get all the code into
a few MBs of memory. At one point someone wanted a web server built in
so they added not one, but two tomcat servers, full blown features,
written in Java. Needed to up the memory from 64M to 1 GB.

wrote in message ...


The old addage needs to be remembered - first you make it work - THEN
you make it pretty!!. Doesn't matter how glitsy the interface is if it
doesn't do the job.

I seem to run into more glitzy front ends than I do things that work...
Management buys into the pretty front end and assumes it actually does what
the front end suggests it does. I've had to fix three of those types of
apps in recent months. The same developer built all three... and changed
roles leaving the dysfunctional mess behind.

Or the other one - It doesn't matter if you've got your **** together
- if it's **** - it's still ****..

Garbage in... Gospel out...

On 5/11/2016 1:45 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If
there is a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your
insurance agent about it. They come out and look at it and if they
think it is a problem, they write a letter which explains that they
will need to pay out if any damage is caused by your tree. And they
will sue to recover those damages. That often acts as a good
motivator.

I'd tell them to contact my insurance provider. Hopefully the same
guys:-) Perhaps they could agree to pay a few bucks to have the thing
trimmed or removed, rather than a lot of bucks later to replace a roof
or more.

I had a friend killed by a branch falling out of his tree as he walked
up the sidewalk. Another friends daughter has a metal plate in her head
as a branch fell on her head when she was around 2 years old.

As for government, I was watching This Old House once, and in Boston,
they were not permitted to remove a dead/almost dead tree without
government permission, and they had to plant an equivalent tree some
where before they could get the permit.

Wow, talk about control freaks...

--
Jack
Got Change: Individual Freedom ======= Government Control!
http://jbstein.com

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 4:07:39 PM UTC-4, Jack wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:45 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If
there is a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your
insurance agent about it. They come out and look at it and if they
think it is a problem, they write a letter which explains that they
will need to pay out if any damage is caused by your tree. And they
will sue to recover those damages. That often acts as a good
motivator.

I'd tell them to contact my insurance provider. Hopefully the same
guys:-) Perhaps they could agree to pay a few bucks to have the thing
trimmed or removed, rather than a lot of bucks later to replace a roof
or more.

I had a friend killed by a branch falling out of his tree as he walked
up the sidewalk. Another friends daughter has a metal plate in her head
as a branch fell on her head when she was around 2 years old.

As for government, I was watching This Old House once, and in Boston,
they were not permitted to remove a dead/almost dead tree without
government permission, and they had to plant an equivalent tree some
where before they could get the permit.

Wow, talk about control freaks...

--
Jack
Got Change: Individual Freedom ======= Government Control!
http://jbstein.com

Jack,
Our experience is that insurance companies used to be pro-active, and with foresight. Now, if you make them aware of a potential problem, and don't take care of it, they may choose to ignore your claim...

On Mon, 23 May 2016 16:07:30 -0400, Jack wrote:

On 5/11/2016 1:45 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If
there is a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your
insurance agent about it. They come out and look at it and if they
think it is a problem, they write a letter which explains that they
will need to pay out if any damage is caused by your tree. And they
will sue to recover those damages. That often acts as a good
motivator.

I'd tell them to contact my insurance provider. Hopefully the same
guys:-) Perhaps they could agree to pay a few bucks to have the thing
trimmed or removed, rather than a lot of bucks later to replace a roof
or more.

I had a friend killed by a branch falling out of his tree as he walked
up the sidewalk. Another friends daughter has a metal plate in her head
as a branch fell on her head when she was around 2 years old.

As for government, I was watching This Old House once, and in Boston,
they were not permitted to remove a dead/almost dead tree without
government permission, and they had to plant an equivalent tree some
where before they could get the permit.

Wow, talk about control freaks...

That's not unusual. Atlanta has the same restrictions. You can't
remove a tree from your property without an arborist's sign-off and
city permit. Of course the arborist will want to try to save the
tree, if at all possible. That's what they do.

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 4:07:39 PM UTC-4, Jack wrote:


I'd tell them to contact my insurance provider. Hopefully the same
guys:-) Perhaps they could agree to pay a few bucks to have the thing
trimmed or removed, rather than a lot of bucks later to replace a roof
or more.

Even after a large limb from the very old tree on the rental property next door fell on my house
and my Ins Co had to pay for clean up (and some very minor damage) they would not be
pro-active and pay to remove any of the weak-looking branches still hanging over my house. I
asked, they said no.

The only thing they did was write a letter to the landlord and his ins co warning them that if
the tree caused any more damage to my property, they would go after his ins co for the
cost of claim. They would rather hope that nothing happens and if it does, hope that the
other ins co pays, than spent a few hundred bucks to prevent the possibility of a claim in
the first place.


I had a friend killed by a branch falling out of his tree as he walked
up the sidewalk. Another friends daughter has a metal plate in her head
as a branch fell on her head when she was around 2 years old.

I was in a neighbor's yard with my 2(?) year old a long time ago (he's 28 now).
He was on the neighbor's swing set in one of those bucket swings, the kind
that it is difficult to get a young child out off. My neighbor's kid was in the raised fort
attached to the swing set. It was a beautiful sunny summer day.

Lunchtime came around, so I wrestled my kid out of the swing while my neighbor climbed up
into the fort and retrieved his kid. We were in the house for less than 5 minutes when
a huge limb from a tree in the next yard let go with a loud crack and landed on the swing
set. It landed "lengthwise", completely crushing the swing section and the fort. The
swing my son was in was barely visible as it lay on the ground under the main part
of the branch.

There is no way we would have gotten either kid out of the swing/fort before the branch
came down. There was no warning. It was crack...crush.

The wive's were crying and hugging the kids. I gotta admit, both my friend and I got
teary eyed too. That was close.

....snip...

On 5/23/2016 4:45 PM, wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 4:07:39 PM UTC-4, Jack wrote:
On 5/11/2016 1:45 PM, Lee Michaels wrote:

In my neighborhood, the insurance companies are very proactive. If
there is a tree that is leaning towards your house, you tell your
insurance agent about it. They come out and look at it and if they
think it is a problem, they write a letter which explains that they
will need to pay out if any damage is caused by your tree. And they
will sue to recover those damages. That often acts as a good
motivator.

I'd tell them to contact my insurance provider. Hopefully the same
guys:-) Perhaps they could agree to pay a few bucks to have the thing
trimmed or removed, rather than a lot of bucks later to replace a roof
or more.

Jack,
Our experience is that insurance companies used to be pro-active, and with foresight. Now, if you make them aware of a potential problem, and don't take care of it, they may choose to ignore your claim...

Last year my daughter's sewer backed up in her basement. They called a
plumber and he said they have a "flat spot" in the basement pipe and to
fix it right, they would need to dig up the cement floor. Would cost
around $5G's. The plumber told her there was an excellent chance her
insurance company would cover most, if not all of it. I told her
plumbers are notorious liars and I've heard the flat spot garbage
several time before, and, I'd doubt the insurance company (Erie) would
cover it unless she had some kind of special coverage. Well, not only
did Erie cover most of it, they covered all of it less deductible, and I
think it was $7G's. They told her it was cheaper than paying for
repeated sewerage damage.

I was of course shocked and amazed.

--
Jack
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
http://jbstein.com