Recent Posts

1876

Developer's Corner / Re: C# & Visual Studio Problem

« Last post by f0dder on January 16, 2011, 08:17 AM »

Your example there doesn't use any local variables declared in the else clause. While it "works", you can't debug it properly as the values aren't available.

-Renegade (January 16, 2011, 07:51 AM)

Yeah, that's what this whole thread is about, right?

I thought your "In short, in C++ or C# (and possibly all other .NET languages or in VS 2010 or something like that), you CANNOT use" mean that the compiler forbids it, like Java forbids unreachable code (C# just warns about it).

1877

Developer's Corner / Re: C# & Visual Studio Problem

« Last post by f0dder on January 16, 2011, 07:32 AM »

In short, in C++ or C# (and possibly all other .NET languages or in VS 2010 or something like that), you CANNOT use (literally, and not pseudo-coded-ly ):

-Renegade (January 16, 2011, 01:14 AM)

You can't?

Code: C# [Select]

1. namespace Flaf {
2.         using System;
3.         class Program {
4.                 static void Main(string[] args) {
5.                         if(false)
6.                                 Console.WriteLine("The universe implodes");
7.                         else
8.                                 Console.WriteLine("Everything's normal");
9.                 }
10.         }
11. }

E:\temp>csc test.cs
Microsoft (R) Visual C# 2010 Compiler version 4.0.30319.1
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

test.cs(6,5): warning CS0162: Unreachable code detected

For the C++ version, I don't even get a warning until I crank up the warning level to /W4... and the warning I get is "test.cpp(5) : warning C4127: conditional expression is constant", not unreachable code

Btw, C# allows you to use #if/#else/#endif pragmas (iirc it was included in C# 2), might want to use that instead?

1878

Developer's Corner / Re: C# & Visual Studio Problem

« Last post by f0dder on January 15, 2011, 10:07 PM »

Could you try flipping it around so the new code goes in an "if(true)" and see if it affects things? Seems pretty queer to me.

1879

Developer's Corner / Re: C# & Visual Studio Problem

« Last post by f0dder on January 15, 2011, 10:05 PM »

what was the condition in the if statement?

-wraith808 (January 15, 2011, 10:04 PM)

false?

1880

Developer's Corner / Re: C# & Visual Studio Problem

« Last post by f0dder on January 15, 2011, 09:58 AM »

What's the context of the code?
Are you using the variables at a later point?
Are stuff like PhotoInfo value or reference types?

.NET can do some pretty funky stuff - objects can get garbage collected as soon as it's deemed their lifetime is over, and said lifetime has nothing to do with C/C++ style scope. Stack slots for value types can be reused as soon an object lifetime is over.

1881

Developer's Corner / Re: Open a File by dropping it onto Form (C# example)

« Last post by f0dder on January 13, 2011, 06:55 PM »

In case you're going to semi-regularly post code snippets, you should check out SyntaxHighlighter - it's nice

1882

Activation/License/Language Help / Re: A piece of Sh**

« Last post by f0dder on January 13, 2011, 06:14 PM »

Wow, that was harsh O_o

1883

General Software Discussion / Re: Skwire's DC member site marked as suspicious

« Last post by f0dder on January 13, 2011, 05:06 PM »

skwire, are any of them UPX-compressed? (The AHK default) - compression seems to make the false positives much more likely.

1884

General Software Discussion / Re: Skwire's DC member site marked as suspicious

« Last post by f0dder on January 13, 2011, 04:44 PM »

The site has software written with AutoHotKey, 'nuff said. IT MUST BE EV0L HAXxx0r OMG!11!!1! one one.

Lame overzealous heuristics

1885

General Software Discussion / Re: Let's try to create our own suite for internet security.

« Last post by f0dder on January 13, 2011, 07:08 AM »

I'm under the impression that the Windows firewall was extensively improved for Windows 7 (or perhaps Vista, I'm not sure), but that it's not so good for Windows XP.  Am I mistaken?

-cyberdiva (January 12, 2011, 12:08 PM)

It was introduced with XP SP2, and it was just fine back then - what you really need is incoming stuff blocked, and the XP firewall does that just fine.

-f0dder (January 12, 2011, 01:12 PM)

Since I rarely have any malware, perhaps I shouldn't be so concerned, but I don't like the idea that a malware program that managed to get on my computer could send out information without my knowing it.  Thus, a firewall that works in both directions seems to me a good idea.

-cyberdiva (January 12, 2011, 03:49 PM)

Once you have malware on your system, it's pretty much game over - if it's been able to run, it's very likely able to circumvent the firewall.

1886

General Software Discussion / Re: Let's try to create our own suite for internet security.

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 01:12 PM »

Well, maybe we have our answer for the antivirus/firewall categories.

-superboyac (January 12, 2011, 11:30 AM)

I'm under the impression that the Windows firewall was extensively improved for Windows 7 (or perhaps Vista, I'm not sure), but that it's not so good for Windows XP.  Am I mistaken?

-cyberdiva (January 12, 2011, 12:08 PM)

It was introduced with XP SP2, and it was just fine back then - what you really need is incoming stuff blocked, and the XP firewall does that just fine.

1887

General Software Discussion / Re: Another reason to drop Kaspersky?

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 11:29 AM »

I'll try it again, but can someone confirm the opt thing?

-superboyac (January 12, 2011, 11:13 AM)

Yup, it's there for the current version of MSE - my version numbers:

Security Essentials Version: 2.0.657.0
Antimalware Client Version: 3.0.8107.0
Engine Version: 1.1.6402.0
Antivirus definition: 1.95.3750.0
Antispyware definition: 1.95.3750.0
Network Inspection System Engine Version: 2.0.5854.0
Network Inspection System Definition Version: 9.1.0.0

Still, any rational reasons for wanting to opt-out?

1888

General Software Discussion / Re: Another reason to drop Kaspersky?

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 11:06 AM »

I tried MSE.  They have that part where they say they will send your results back to microsoft.  And you can't disable it at all.  I'd even pay for it if I could get rid of it.  But I can't.

I'd rather pay for F-Secure, than to have my data being sent around.

-superboyac (January 12, 2011, 10:38 AM)

Cut down on the paranoia.

This is Microsoft - if anything dubious was being sent back to them, the whole internet would be in uproar with pitchforks and torches. And the bits and pieces sent back to them helps a lot in discovering new pieces of malware as well as keeping false positives low.

I'm not a fan of sending back data, but this is one of the things I haven't opted out of.

1889

General Software Discussion / Re: Let's try to create our own suite for internet security.

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 10:37 AM »

MSE for antivirus, windows' built-in firewall, and nothing else (well, AdBlockPlus or AdMuncher - but those aren't really part of "internet security" per se). Stop wasting time, money and CPU + RAM on useless crap.

1890

General Software Discussion / Re: Another reason to drop Kaspersky?

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 10:05 AM »

Maybe I'll go try F-Secure.

-superboyac (January 12, 2011, 09:24 AM)

MSE, man... MSE.

1891

Living Room / Re: Aspartame: Sweet Misery - A Poisoned World (Wikipedia Abuse)

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 10:04 AM »

There is a good reason why a lot of schools won't allow students to cite Wikipedia as a source, and this is it.

-app103 (January 12, 2011, 09:33 AM)

IMHO flat out banning wikipedia as a source is a bit silly, since a lot of articles (especially those about tech) are decent enough. But there's definitely a lot of articles for which WP shouldn't be used as an authoritative source

Still, for most stuff it does serve as a good starting point for research.

1892

Living Room / Re: R.I.P. MySpace

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 08:25 AM »

But then again, considering how they let the kiddies run riot over there, it probably serves them right.

-40hz (January 12, 2011, 08:23 AM)

Yeah, they allowed people to use arbitrary HTML in their profiles, didn't they? That, or they had massive security vulnerabilities, but with the same end result: drive-by exploit heaven.

1893

Living Room / Re: Aspartame: Sweet Misery - A Poisoned World (Wikipedia Abuse)

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 07:31 AM »

But it all got me to thinking about Wikipedia... It really looks like Wikipedia is suffering some pretty serious abuse there. Like, if there's a controversy, shouldn't there be something about the controversy there, and not something that entirely dismisses the controversy?

-Renegade (January 12, 2011, 05:02 AM)

Nothing new, unfortunately - articles with enough monetary, political or religious importance (<cynicism>which all boils down to monetary interests</cynicism>) aren't going to have super reliable information on wikipedia.

1894

Living Room / Re: R.I.P. MySpace

« Last post by f0dder on January 12, 2011, 03:25 AM »

Their own fault, MySpace always sucked majorly - horrible, horrible horrible design, for one.

1895

General Software Discussion / Re: Anyone else here have an unhealthy fascination with progress bars?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 02:48 PM »

Waaayyyy back, computers used lights to let people know that they were working. It's just comforting to know that something is going on and that you are getting closer to your goal.

-Renegade (January 11, 2011, 02:36 PM)

Mmmmh, blinkenlights! - it definitely has it's charm.



The term is explained over at wikipedia

1896

Living Room / Re: What books are you reading?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 02:44 PM »

Enough fiction, let's get some tech books! :p

Currently digging through Jon Skeet's C# in Depth, 2nd edition, which I'm quite liking so far - getting to page 201 (the section about C# 2 iterator blocks) has taken two days. His writing style and tastefully applied humor works pretty well for me. It hasn't provided me with much new knowledge yet, but there's been some good "oooh, I see" moments, and Jon provides some nice insights along the way.

And I expect a fair amount of new knowledge when reaching the C# 3 and 4 parts; I've used a decent bit of LINQ here and there, but mostly regarded it as a black box of magic. Jon is the kind of guy who really likes playing with language features, and he's even done a blog series on Reimplementing LINQ to Objects.

PS: for those unfamiliar with Amazon's URL structure, the 10-digit number in the URL is the book's ISBN-10, not a referral link.

1897

General Software Discussion / Re: Anyone else here have an unhealthy fascination with progress bars?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 02:35 PM »

And I hate those bars that are just an animated thing that doesn't really go to 100%, or starts over when it gets to 100%. They just indicate that your system hasn't frozen up entirely, but give you no idea how much progress has actually been made on the task or that anything is actually really happening at all.

-Deozaan (January 11, 2011, 02:25 PM)

Amen!

Those kind of "progress bars" should be banished, and replaced with some other form of animation indicating that the program is still responsive. The exception to this is if the program needs to do a very short (a few seconds max) of precalculation in order to determine the final result... which also means that a file copy dialog should start with one animation while calculating transfer time, and then switch to a progress bar.

1898

General Software Discussion / Re: Anyone else here have an unhealthy fascination with progress bars?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 12:29 PM »

That's actually nice!  It makes me a little uncomfortable when it goes by instantly, i always think something went wrong.  (that's what she said)

-superboyac (January 11, 2011, 12:22 PM)

I wouldn't do that today, though. I've had to install some oldish software not too long ago, and noticed that the installation process should have completed in a couple of seconds... but because the developers decided to show X screenshots/whatever during installation, crossfaded between those sceenshots, and delayed the installation process while doing the crossfade, the install took around a minute. Darn annoying.

1899

General Software Discussion / Re: Anyone else here have an unhealthy fascination with progress bars?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 12:00 PM »

I prefer progress bars that convey the intended information without a lot of fuzz - so I'm not a fan of too much animation or going nuts with gradients and the like. That's how I generally like UI elements: simple and stylish.

I did like WinRAR's compression progress bar that indicated compression ratio, but that seems to have gone with recent(ish) versions? It wasn't über-fancy, and it conveyed useful information.

Oh, and I've been guilty of inserting delay timers in two installers I've made, because installation was too damn fast... even on the old machines those several years back when I did the software

1900

Developer's Corner / Re: "competitive upgrade" - is it ethical?

« Last post by f0dder on January 11, 2011, 09:29 AM »

I've seen these kinds of competitive offers from time to time and have never been tempted by them because I was already happy with the program I owned.

-cyberdiva (January 11, 2011, 09:27 AM)

I frown a bit when I see them - the developer part of me is slightly disgusted, and even the consumer part doesn't entirely like it.

Doesn't mean I wouldn't jump ship if the other product was substantially better than what I'm currently using, though