« first day (97 days earlier)      last day (3593 days later) » 

02:41
2015-04-27T02:41:00.556Z Warning: Retrieved 100 comments. Might have missed some.
03:03
Certainty level 0.4
This is more a question for the Programmers Stack Exchange, here is about specific coding problems — meneldal 33 secs ago
04:00
The time is 2015-04-27T04:00:00Z and @Duga is alive
04:37
Certainty level 0.47000003
Is this a joke? The problem is this doesn't build. Would you like me to show you how my droid cat walks backwards instead of forwards because of the code? The error messages are clearly laid out in pretty SO colors to please all the "mods" and "elite" cough-cough down-voting programmers. I spent a half an hour creating this question. You've got to be Fn kidding me. This place is a joke. — Edward II 54 secs ago
Certainty level 0.4
Don't try to run source code until it compiles cleanly! BTW - Why code an applet? If it is due to the teacher specifying it, please refer them to Why CS teachers should stop teaching Java applets. — Andrew Thompson 1 min ago
Certainty level 0.4
1) Why code an applet? If it is due to the teacher specifying it, please refer them to Why CS teachers should stop teaching Java applets. 2) Why use AWT? See this answer for many good reasons to abandon AWT using components in favor of Swing. — Andrew Thompson 20 secs ago
Certainty level 0.47000003
Is this a joke? The problem is this doesn't build. Would you like me to show you how my droid cat walks backwards instead of forwards because of the code? The error messages are clearly laid out in pretty SO colors to please all the "mods" and "elite" cough-cough down-voting programmers. I spent a half an hour creating this question. You've got to be Fn kidding me. This place is a joke. I even spelled out the issues! George is gettin' angry!!! Serenity now!!!! — Edward II 47 secs ago
05:17
Certainty level 0.4
Well that's only your opinion which doesn't mean anything except in your little SO overlord-world. SO is actually making things worse for the programming industry and budding noobs because of its system. I think you and SO need to Google "alternatives to Stack Overflow" and you'll see that SO has big problems. New programmers are coming here because we have to not because we want to. No one actually enjoys coming here. Maybe you guys should try to make it so we actually enjoy coming here. — Edward II 42 secs ago
06:09
Certainty level 0.4
Stack Overflow is not a coding service. Please show us what you've attempted and ask a specific question. — PakkuDon 37 secs ago
Certainty level 0.4
I think you're confusing new SO users with new programmers. lol Man, get a clue. (YOU) are exactly an example of why so many people are begging for alternatives to SO. — Edward II 41 secs ago
Certainty level 0.4
Just being helpful :) You might find some interesting discussions here and here. — jtbandes 45 secs ago
06:36
Certainty level 0.43
Exactly. Your sub-query returns the value of the field you selected, its not the condition value you were actually wanted. SQL is scary at first to programmers who are not too familiar with , but as long as you put a little time to it with few simple tables, and you'll find it relatively easier than other languages. Good luck ,Mark. — driveyounuts 36 secs ago
07:00
The time is 2015-04-27T07:00:00.001Z and @Duga is alive
07:59
Certainty level 0.4
Welcome to Stackoverflow. Would you mind extending your answer little bit more to explain fellow programmers how it helps to solve the problem. — Daenarys 17 secs ago
Certainty level 0.4
At the time, there was some intent to get rid of programmers. Actually, it was nearly a success, if you consider what the typical programmer was at the time : a very well paid person writing everyday a few pages of cryptic lines like "tad" or "isz" that nobody else could understand. So the "we wont need programmers anymore" was sort of a mantra in the 60's. — Michel Billaud 34 secs ago
twest
Monking!
hello
2015-04-27T08:02:00.707Z Warning: Retrieved 100 comments. Might have missed some.
Certainty level 0.4
At the time, there was some intent to get rid of programmers. Actually, it was nearly a success, if you consider what the typical programmer was at the time : a very well paid person writing everyday a few pages of cryptic lines like "tad" or "isz" that nobody else could understand. So the "we wont need programmers anymore" was sort of a mantra in the 60's. — Michel Billaud 2 mins ago
2015-04-27T08:05:00.420Z Warning: Retrieved 100 comments. Might have missed some.
08:31
Certainty level 0.4
If you want help with your homework, you have to show what you have tried. Please read Open letter to students with homework problemsDalija Prasnikar 15 secs ago
08:55
Certainty level 1.4
@MohammedNoureldin Try Programmers. — enb081 1 min ago
Certainty level 0.4
@enb081: Programmers doesn't provide educational advice, nor do they provide recommendations on what technology to take up next. — Robert Harvey ♦ 21 secs ago
Certainty level 0.43
@alexroussos I didn't say anywhere that programmers need to start young. I just said most who do it you'll find started at a fairly early age, ergo, I started when I started high school aged 12, just building basic web pages with HTML, learning a bit about CSS. Two years later I was delving into Javascript and PHP, looking at the wide variety of OOP because I loved my Valve games so much. It wasn't until I was 24 that I started looking at database management, and the real advantages to having knowledge of the back end. I agree, you can learn at any age. — JohnnyBell 39 secs ago
09:10
Certainty level 0.4
There are still a lot of folks out there who would be over the moon if they didn't have to deal with programmers. The trope features prominently in the pitch of just about every enterprise software application on the planet. — ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells 21 secs ago
09:25
Certainty level 0.43
It's just a matter or readability, which BTW is important to Python programmers. from math import sin would be the preferred over from math import * since it allows to trace back an import in the code. — Klaus D. 49 secs ago
09:53
Certainty level 0.4
I believe this problem will help alot of Programmers out there who might be facing the same challenge — Patrick Ndukwe 55 secs ago
The time is 2015-04-27T10:00:00.002Z and @Duga is alive
10:43
Certainty level 0.73
The question better fits to Programmers.stackexchange, please consider asking it there. — CsBalazsHungary 1 min ago
 
2 hours later…
12:48
Certainty level 0.4
BTW take a note of the other two answers, and how invaluable their employment in picking a name for your macro would be ;) There are many incredibly experience programmers here, with 6 digit rep, who can cite standards by heart, yet somehow your meaningful question is still absent a meaningful answer. My logic is the question is not a good one, but hey, it may just be your question is too good for SO, but either way, too bad or too good, it is obviously not in its rightful place ;) — ddriver 49 secs ago
Certainty level 0.4
The time is 2015-04-27T13:00:00.003Z and @Duga is alive
Certainty level 0.4
True that @MSalters. As pointed out I wasn't sure if this should be asked here yet I always prefer to work with fellow programmers. My apologies. — user4738580 45 secs ago
Certainty level 0.61
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it probably belongs on either programmers or computer science — Kristoffer Sall-Storgaard 1 min ago
13:48
Certainty level 0.42000002
My point is that any beginner and also a lot of experienced programmers would write it like you did in your code. It is just the "natural" way. But if you don't know if String s is null then it will give this ugly check s != null && s.equals("something"), but you just could write "something".equals(s)... anyway, no right or wrong here, just a matter of preference. And it would be slightly more efficient to have text = null instead of text = "" (no object needs to be created, although probably optimized by the compiler). — maraca 31 secs ago
Certainty level 0.63
14:19
Certainty level 0.79
For anyone wanting to vote to close this question with mod capabilities: would it be possible to move this question to programmers.stackexchange.com? I believe the question is still valid, but that community might be a better place for it. — David 54 secs ago
Certainty level 0.69
@David Sorry tool requests are also off topic on programmers.SE, this question would get closed there quickly as well. — ratchet freak 1 min ago
15:03
Certainty level 0.48000002
This questions doesn't really fit here since it's primarily opinion-based. You should probably try to post this over on programmers.stackexchange.com as it's a bit more conceptual. — imjared 40 secs ago
Certainty level 0.43
I think this may be one of the rare SO questions that would actually benefit from a migration to Programmers. Maybe it's not quite clear enough yet, but I think it could get there pretty easily. — apsillers 26 secs ago
15:17
Certainty level 0.45000002
Shouldn't this be posted on programmers.stackexchange.com instead of here? — rmaddy 17 secs ago
15:45
Certainty level 0.65999997
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it belongs on programmers.stackexchange.com instead of SO. — rmaddy 1 min ago
16:00
The time is 2015-04-27T16:00:00Z and @Duga is alive
Certainty level 0.4
@MickyDuncan are you joking me, ask site programmers to question edition feature and then we'll talk. — E-Bat 37 secs ago
Certainty level 0.43
Certainty level 0.63
@David see above ^^. Recommended reading: What goes on Programmers.SE? A guide for Stack Overflowgnat 1 min ago
Certainty level 0.71999997
@CsBalazsHungary this question is a poor fit for Programmers - it would be quickly voted down and closed over there, see meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/6483/… Recommended reading: What goes on Programmers.SE? A guide for Stack Overflowgnat 1 min ago
16:30
Certainty level 1.98
SO is intended for much more specific and low-level questions than this. It might be a better fit for Programmers.SE, where high-level design questions are on-topic. A question is a good fit for SO if you can imagine yourself asking it while looking at an open IDE or terminal; a question is a good fit for Programmers if you can imagine yourself asking it while looking at a diagram drawn on a board (like yours). — Leushenko 35 secs ago
Certainty level 0.62
Ahh, was not aware of the Programmers.SE site. Thank you Leushenko; I'll try asking there, instead. — DGolberg 27 secs ago
Certainty level 0.68
@DGolberg This question would also be too broad at Programmers.SE. It would also need to lose the resource request (tutorial). Also see Where to start?Snowman 35 secs ago
16:50
Certainty level 0.63
@Leushenko see above ^^^. Recommended reading: What goes on Programmers.SE? A guide for Stack Overflowgnat 27 secs ago
17:31
Certainty level 0.4
Actually, tags are clear enough I think. Both mathematicians and programmers can look at it. — erol yeniaras 1 min ago
17:43
2015-04-27T17:43:00.515Z Quota has been reset. Was 8841 is now 9999
18:30
Certainty level 0.4
@Dherik WF is a framework that has to be coded against. It does in fact contain a business rules engine. It is not a BRE or BPM tool. You would have to build your own tooling for non-programmers. You'd have to interpret your own metadata structure in actual coded business rules. — Michael Perrenoud 49 secs ago
2015-04-27T18:37:21.129Z Exception in comment task java.net.SocketException: Broken pipe
2015-04-27T18:38:00.642Z Warning: Retrieved 100 comments. Might have missed some.
Certainty level 0.45000002
The heading on this question is "How can I execute a command line command from a C++ program"? The link I posted could be extremely helpful for many programmers! — BuvinJ 33 secs ago
19:00
The time is 2015-04-27T19:00:00.002Z and @Duga is alive
19:40
Certainty level 0.4
20:06
Certainty level 0.73
This is not really a question for Stack Overflow, as I'm sure you know. Why not try programmers.stackexchange.com, which is better suited for broad based subjective questions like this. — Nick Bailey 56 secs ago
Certainty level 0.43
This is probably too subjective even for Programmers. — Juhana 21 secs ago
Certainty level 0.76
@NickBailey Programmers.SE is not well-suited for broad, subjective questions like this: it would be closed as either "too broad" or "primarily opinion based" if migrated. — Snowman 1 min ago
Certainty level 0.4
and ty. now I have found it (programmers.stackexchange.com). but think about what I commented. If you just are use to stackoverflow it is NOT easy at all to find a place to make this type of comments just "searching" around. — Alvaro Menéndez 28 secs ago
Certainty level 0.48000002
Please don't post to Programmers; this is off-topic there as well. Almost any other programming forum on the Internet is suitable for open-ended discussions. Try for example Reddit. — Juhana 56 secs ago
20:48
Certainty level 1.4
Stack Overflow doesn't seem to be a good fit for your question. Maybe Programmers is more appropriate. — honk 1 min ago
Certainty level 0.63
 
1 hour later…
22:00
The time is 2015-04-27T22:00:00.003Z and @Duga is alive
 
1 hour later…
23:24
Certainty level 0.4
@Andy The first sentence of the Tour is "Stack Overflow is a question and answer site for professional and enthusiast programmers." That may not be what you would like it to be and you are of course welcome to try to get that changed or start your own that is what you would like it to be, but meanwhile you should respect what this one is. — pnuts 16 secs ago
23:34
Certainty level 0.5
@JonW I'd argue that UX designers are the ones to define ARIA labels, and not programmers. Inclusive design modules are far more common in HCID degrees than in computer science. This question is about the user experience of users using AT - that's more UX than programming in my view. — Izhaki 53 secs ago
23:50
Certainty level 0.4
Quicksort is inherently in-place. No extra arrays needed. But it depends heavily on choice of pivot. For example, if the array is already sorted and you just choose element 1 every time, it degenerates into n**2 like a bubble sort. It's best to pick a pivot randomly, or what real programmers do--throw it away and use a heap sort. — Lee Daniel Crocker 41 secs ago

« first day (97 days earlier)      last day (3593 days later) »