Eens kijken of dit werkt…

Getver! Kom het tegen! Het is zomertijd! De computer en de tv hadden het juist, en mijn uurwerk niet.

“Initiating preflight check…”

1. Cabal of oldsters who won’t listen to outside advice? Check.
2. No understanding of ethnicities of the many locals? Check.
3. National boundaries drawn in Europe, not by the locals? Check.
4. Unshakable faith in our superior technology? Check.
5. France secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
6. Russia secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
7. China secretly hoping we fall on our asses? Check.
8. SecDef pushing a conflict the JCS never wanted? Check.
9. Fear we’ll look bad if we back down now? Check.
10. Texan in the WH? Check.
11. Land war in Asia? Check.
12. Rightists unhappy with outcome of previous war? Check.
13. Enemy easily moves in/out of neighboring countries? Check.
14. Soldiers about to be dosed with our own chemicals? Check.
15. Friendly fire problem ignored instead of solved? Check.
16. Anti-Americanism up sharply in Europe? Check.
17. B-52 bombers? Check.
18. Helicopters that clog up on the local dust? Check.
19. Infighting among the branches of the military? Check.
20. Locals that cheer us by day, hate us by night? Check.
21. Local experts ignored? Check.
22. Local politicians ignored? Check.
23. Local conflicts since before the USA has been a country? Check.
24. Against advice, Prez won’t raise taxes to pay for war? Check.
25. Blue water navy ships operating in brown water? Check.
26. Use of nukes hinted at if things don’t go our way? Check.
27. Unpopular war? Check.

“Vietnam II, you are cleared to taxi.”

En nog een generaal met commentaar:

“We should have at least three armored divisions there, plus the 1st Cavalry,” Funk said, repeating earlier warnings that not enough heavy forces were in place at the start of the war.

“We need overwhelming combat power,” he said. “But Rumsfeld, he knows everything. He’s run a drug company, so why listen to generals.

[…]

“This isn’t a football game, where if we win 14-13, it’s a victory,” he said. “The score should be a 100-0′ like was under Powell, Cheney and Bush 41.”

“This now is the same crap under Les Aspin in Somalia.”

Funk’s references were to Colin Powell, Dick Cheney and George Bush who were chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, defense secretary and president during the Gulf War. The 41 refers to George Bush being the 41st president. George W. Bush is the 43rd. Aspin was the secretary of defense during the deployment of U.S. troops in Somalia, which were slaughtered in a firefight without armor, which Aspin had refused to send. The incident forced his resignation in December 1993. [Billings Gazette]

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly rejected advice from Pentagon planners that substantially more troops and armor would be needed to fight a war in Iraq, New Yorker Magazine reported.

In an article for its April 7 edition, which goes on sale on Monday, the weekly said Rumsfeld insisted at least six times in the run-up to the conflict that the proposed number of ground troops be sharply reduced and got his way.

“He thought he knew better. He was the decision-maker at every turn,” the article quoted an unidentified senior Pentagon planner as saying. “This is the mess Rummy put himself in because he didn’t want a heavy footprint on the ground.” [Washington Post]

’t Was vanmorgen dus effektief zeven uur. Zelie én Louis. En zeggen dat Louis gisterenmorgen tot kwart voor elf geslapen heeft.

Pfuh, als het dat maar was.

string queryString=”select * from qryBooksSimple where book_id=”+ID.ToString();
OleDbDataAdapter daBook=new OleDbDataAdapter(queryString,cnnBooks);
DataSet dsBook=new DataSet(“book”);
daBook.Fill(dsBook);
richTextBox1.Text=dsBook.GetXmlSchema().ToString();

en dat geeft mij dit in mijn richTextBox:

<?xml version=”1.0″ encoding=”utf-16″?>
<xs:schema id=”book” xmlns=”” xmlns:xs=”http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema” xmlns:msdata=”urn:schemas-microsoft-com:xml-msdata”>
  <xs:element name=”book” msdata:IsDataSet=”true” msdata:Locale=”nl-BE”>
    <xs:complexType>
      <xs:choice maxOccurs=”unbounded”>
        <xs:element name=”Table”>
          <xs:complexType>
            <xs:sequence>
              <xs:element name=”aut_name” type=”xs:string” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_ID” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_year” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_title” type=”xs:string” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_pages” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_genre_id” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”ba_primary” type=”xs:boolean” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_publisher_ID” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_series_id” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
              <xs:element name=”book_series_number” type=”xs:int” minOccurs=”0″ />
            </xs:sequence>
          </xs:complexType>
        </xs:element>
      </xs:choice>
    </xs:complexType>
  </xs:element>
</xs:schema>

Simpel. Proper. Elegant. En vooral: morgen meer, want als het een beetje tegenzit ben ik al van 7u op post.

[o ja: en dat alles in bed zittend, leve draadloos netwerk]

Bon, dat gezegd zijnde. Ik ga eens beginnen kijken naar werken met datasets in C#.

Ik heb die hele treeview/listview min of meer in orde? Ja, ik zou nog een refresh moeten forceren als ik klik op de treeview na een dubbelklik in de listview, en er zou eventueel nog een update from listview naar de treeview moeten zijn, maar dat zijn details. Kriegsnebenschauplatzen op de weg naar een boekformulier dat updatebaar is en –vooral– cancelbaar zonder up te daten.

Het wordt in ieder geval al direkt een vuurdoop: niet één tabel maar zo ongeveer alle tabellen van de hele database, met kruisreferenties en alles, allemaal open te doen, te tonen en up te daten.

Ik denk dat ik maar begin met gewone boekgegevens, tonen. En dan: editeren. En dan: wegschrijven. En dan: koppelen met uitgevers (of zo) tonen. En dan, uitgevers toevoegen én boeken wijzigen, allebei cancelbaar. En dan: koppeling wegschrijven.

Werk aan de winkel dus. Eerst: datasets beginnen gebruiken. En voor alles: een eenvoudig form maken voor de boeken.

Ik wil dringend een goeie versie van Wagner’s Ring kopen. Na wat zoeken op tinternet is mijn oog gevallen op deze dvd-versie. En nu nog de tijd vinden om er naar te luisteren/kijken.

BERLIN (Reuters) – The German architect of one of Saddam Hussein (news – web sites)’s main bunkers in Baghdad said on Friday the Iraqi leader can survive anything short of a direct hit with a nuclear bomb if he stays within its four-feet-thick walls.

“It could withstand the shock wave of a nuclear bomb the size of the Hiroshima one detonating 250 meters away,” said Karl Esser, a security consultant who designed the bunker underneath Saddam’s main presidential palace in Baghdad.

U.S.-led troops will also find it hard to fight their way in through its three-ton Swiss-made doors, Esser told Reuters in an interview.

A retired Yugoslav army officer who helped build other bunkers for Saddam also told Reuters this week that the shelters were impenetrable and could survive an atomic bomb. [Yahoo!]

Weird. Wat is dit nu weer?

It’s funny cause it’s true 🙂

Eerst dit artikel lezen, en dan de reactie hieronder, die op Slashdot stond.

My experiences of programmers (Score:4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 29, @10:12AM (#5622150)

After 8 years of software testing and QA, here are my experiences of programmers. No it’s not flame bait – but mark it down as you wish 1. They do not know the meaning of deadlines! How many times, I’ve been working late because some dim wit of a developer didn’t see the importance of actualy meting the deadline he proposed himself. Working late evenings, working weekends because the programmer didn’t see why he should put the extra time in to catch up. Sounds familiar? 2. They do not know the meaning of quality. How many times have I sat there with a program or package from development that simply will not work / start-up / compile. All this despite development’s assurances that they do actualy unit test. I once had to test a program that did nothing, ie it was called from another program, but all it should do is close itself down – it was a stub. How difficult is that to program and how difficult is that for the programmer to test themselves? It took SEVEN attempts to get it right! 3. Keep it simple stupid! How many times have I had to sit there wondering if I was looking at the correct Buisness Requirements and Functional Spec. Final designes seem to be as complcated as posible rather than simple. Functionality slippage is common – lets put this bit in as well. 4. Yes, but programmers are artists. Bollocks! If you look at almost any system, you will see that the basic number of functions is very limited. Given any average office system, you could probably find public domain code to do 90% of what you need. Yes it will need changing and tweaking, but this idea that you sit there creating is simply rubbish. Perhaps if you stopped creating and started engineering things would be better. 5. The Prima Donna syndrome. Programming used to be a black art. Well it isn’t any more. However, some developers seem to think they should still be treated differently as this article demonstrates. If any other professional argued that they needed a kip durring the day, they would probably be booted out. You want a kip, have it at lunch time! Not having a much time at lunch – welcome to the real world. I know this is going to be marked down as flame bate, but it has to be said it is about time that programmers came back into the real world. With comments like If a programmer’s flow is interrupted it can take a large amount of time for her to regain the state, sometimes up to an hour. do you realy wonder why people question programmers professionalism? Everyone else has to work hard for a living, and creativity comes into most jobs, but most just get on with it.

Federal investigators have arrested an enigmatic Wall Street wiz on insider-trading charges — and incredibly, he claims to be a time-traveler from the year 2256!

Sources at the Security and Exchange Commission confirm that 44-year-old Andrew Carlssin offered the bizarre explanation for his uncanny success in the stock market after being led off in handcuffs on January 28.

“We don’t believe this guy’s story — he’s either a lunatic or a pathological liar,” says an SEC insider.

“But the fact is, with an initial investment of only $800, in two weeks’ time he had a portfolio valued at over $350 million. Every trade he made capitalized on unexpected business developments, which simply can’t be pure luck. [Yahoo!]

Interessant: vijf tot acht man is niet genoeg voor usability testing, er is geen correlatie tussen trage webpagina’s en wegklikkende gebruikers, gebruikers zijn wel bereid meer dan drie keer te klikken om inhoud te zien.