The Wiert Corner – irregular stream of stuff

Jeroen W. Pluimers on .NET, C#, Delphi, databases, and personal interests

  • My badges

  • Twitter Updates

  • My Flickr Stream

  • Pages

  • All categories

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,730 other followers

Archive for August, 2019

BPM Database

Posted by jpluimers on 2019/08/30

Cool way of finding BPM for (or submitting) a song or artist: [WayBack] Source: BPM Database.

Found when I was curious how close these were:

–jeroen

 

Posted in LifeHacker, Power User | Leave a Comment »

PSA: If your Google Opinions app stopped sending you… • r/Android

Posted by jpluimers on 2019/08/30

In case it still doesn’t work when I’ve been in the USA (or/and back), then I need to try the things below.

It used to work both in the USA and in The Netherlands.

What I’ve tried so far is this:

  • uninstall the app
  • clear all application data
  • install the app
  • run it again

So far still very few surveys.

–jeroen

Posted in Android Devices, OnePlus Five, OnePlus One, OnePlus Two, Power User | Leave a Comment »

Getting Things Done with Google – Macadamian

Posted by jpluimers on 2019/08/30

Following the template of Getting Things Done, Macadamian project manager Andrea Carbert details how she makes sure no commitment slips through the cracks.

Source: [WayBackGetting Things Done with Google – Macadamian

Via: [WayBack] Andrea wrote a great piece on ##gtd Getting Things Done with Google Products – Marjan Venema – Google+

–jeroen

 

 

Posted in GTD - Getting Things Done, LifeHacker, Power User | Leave a Comment »

Links for another crazy idea: superimpose lane availability indicators on Google Maps

Posted by jpluimers on 2019/08/29

ANWB can superimpose the lane availability indicators on their internap maps software.

Some links so I won’t forget:

–jeroen

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Development, Google, GoogleMaps, Power User, Software Development, Web Development | Leave a Comment »

Writing solid code the NASA way. – Lars Fosdal – Google+

Posted by jpluimers on 2019/08/29

via [WayBack] Writing solid code the NASA way. – Lars Fosdal – Google+, I bumped into  [WayBackHow To Code Like The Top Programmers At NASA — 10 Critical Rules:

Do you know how top programmers write mission-critical code at NASA? To make such code clearer, safer, and easier to understand, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory has laid 10 rules for developing software.

The rules:

  1. Restrict all code to very simple control flow constructs – do not use goto statements, setjmp or longjmp constructs, and direct or indirect recursion.
  2. All loops must have a fixed upper-bound. It must be trivially possible for a checking tool to prove statically that a preset upper-bound on the number of iterations of a loop cannot be exceeded. If the loop-bound cannot be proven statically, the rule is considered violated.
  3. Do not use dynamic memory allocation after initialization.
  4. No function should be longer than what can be printed on a single sheet of paper in a standard reference format with one line per statement and one line per declaration. Typically, this means no more than about 60 lines of code per function.
  5. The assertion density of the code should average to a minimum of two assertions per function. Assertions are used to check for anomalous conditions that should never happen in real-life executions. Assertions must always be side-effect free and should be defined as Boolean tests. When an assertion fails, an explicit recovery action must be taken, e.g., by returning an error condition to the caller of the function that executes the failing assertion. Any assertion for which a static checking tool can prove that it can never fail or never hold violates this rule (I.e., it is not possible to satisfy the rule by adding unhelpful “assert(true)” statements).
  6. Data objects must be declared at the smallest possible level of scope.
  7. The return value of non-void functions must be checked by each calling function, and the validity of parameters must be checked inside each function.
  8. The use of the preprocessor must be limited to the inclusion of header files and simple macro definitions. Token pasting, variable argument lists (ellipses), and recursive macro calls are not allowed. All macros must expand into complete syntactic units. The use of conditional compilation directives is often also dubious, but cannot always be avoided. This means that there should rarely be justification for more than one or two conditional compilation directives even in large software development efforts, beyond the standard boilerplate that avoids multiple inclusion of the same header file. Each such use should be flagged by a tool-based checker and justified in the code.
  9. The use of pointers should be restricted. Specifically, no more than one level of dereferencing is allowed. Pointer dereference operations may not be hidden in macro definitions or inside typedef declarations. Function pointers are not permitted.
  10. All code must be compiled, from the first day of development, with all compiler warnings enabled at the compiler’s most pedantic setting. All code must compile with these setting without any warnings. All code must be checked daily with at least one, but preferably more than one, state-of-the-art static source code analyzer and should pass the analyses with zero warnings.

–jeroen

 

 

Posted in Agile, Code Quality, Development, Software Development | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: