public class var { }
That is all.
public string Name { get { return this._Name; } set { if ((this._Name!= value)) { this._Name= value; } } }
public string Name { get { return this._Name; } set { if ((this._Name!= value)) { this.OnNameChanging(value); this.SendPropertyChanging(); this._Name = value; this.SendPropertyChanged("Name"); this.OnNameChanged(); } } }
public string Name { get { return this._Name; } }
public string Name { get { return this._Name; } set { throw new SomeKindOfException("Can not update values on a read-only entity collection."); } }
////// Gets or sets the Name property. /// NOTE: Entity collection is read-only, so updated property values /// will NOT be saved to the underlying data source. /// public string Name { get { return this._Name; } set { if ((this._Name!= value)) { this._Name= value; } } }
public byte[] GetExcelApplication(Guid sessionKey) { var workbook = new XLWorkbook(_excelFile); var worksheet = workbook.Worksheets.Where(w => w.Name == "Session Key").Single(); var cell = worksheet.Cell("A1").Value = sessionKey.ToString(); using (var ms = new MemoryStream()) { workbook.SaveAs(ms); return ms.ToArray(); } }
"I’d make the case that it’s better to hire the 27-year-old because he is still at the stage of his career where he enjoys the stuff and is therefore more motivated to learn and work harder, while the 60-year-old is surely bitter about the fact that he’s getting paid less than the younger programmers."What the author basically just said was that old people are stupid and angry and shouldn't be hired. No wonder he sees the career as a dead end. He assumes that, as he gets older, he's not going to want to learn or do anything anymore. Hopefully nobody makes the mistake of hiring this guy, because apparently his plan is to stop developing his career. And here's a clue as to why this is his plan:
"Because of the temporary nature of the knowledge capital, computer programmers quickly reach a stage in their career when their old knowledge capital becomes worthless at the same rate as they acquire knew knowledge capital. Their total knowledge capital is no longer increasing, so neither does their salary increase. They have reached the dead end plateau of their career, and it happens after less than ten years in the field."Apparently he thinks that, after being in the field for ten years, he's learned everything he'll ever need to know. And apparently he thinks that the tools he uses are the only things he can learn. Forget things like design patterns or language constructs in general, he seems to only know or care about a tool. And he plans to forget how to effectively use his tools as he learns new ones.
"Computer programming is a low prestige profession. This is evidenced by the fact that people from affluent families rarely go into computer programming but instead will seek out the more prestigious professions such as law, finance, and medicine. Of course there are some exceptions. There was a programmer who worked for me whose father was a doctor. But more typical was another programmer who never finished college and whose favorite hobby was hunting."This isn't low prestige. This is low self-esteem. So... the guy whose father was a doctor has some kind of different educational and/or social status than the guy who liked to hunt? I'm sorry, I don't see it. Maybe by coincidence these two people did come from very different rungs on the social ladder, but the author seems to think it has something to do with doctors and hunting. Sounds to me like he came from a less affluent family and he's just mad about it. You're an adult now, buddy. Get over it and move on.
"There is a prestigious school, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, devoted to science and engineering, and while I’m sure that there are some students there who are majoring in 'computer science,' the science that’s taught isn’t related to the dirty low-prestige job of creating e-commerce websites using ASP.NET. On the other hand, practical computer programming is a popular major at bogus for-profit schools like Devry 'University' and the 'University' of Phoenix."Wow. Just... Wow. He's right about one thing... Universities often don't teach courses in grunt work application development. This seems to go back to his earlier implication that there's nothing else to learn in software development other than how to use a tool. (Or, to put it more bluntly, how to drag a little picture onto a design surface, set some properties, and pretend you just did something difficult or interesting.) No, I'd much rather see universities spend time on something a little more... academic. Theory, design, software life cycle, core concepts, all those lovely things.
"As a Chinese immigrant at the University of Virginia wrote, 'whatever your position is, as a CS person, you are socially classified as a geek. At my school, University of Virginia, being a rich frat boy and having a future in investment banking or law gets you a lot further status-wise even though you may not necessarily be paid more.'"Allow me to translate... "I'm a college student who studies some kind of science. People call me a geek. Jocks are more popular. That's not fair." Note that, in his argument about how a career in computer programming sucks, he is supporting his views by quoting a student, someone who hasn't had a career in computer programming.
"Computer programming (along with nursing) has been specially targeted by our government for foreignization."Citation, please? I didn't think so. Granted, this was written a few years ago and off-shoring was big at the time. My observations in recent years tell me that it's been dying down a bit because the total cost of ownership from always going with the lowest bidder is starting to make its way onto people's spreadsheets, and perhaps software quality will start to become a more important factor as a result. (Uncle Bob just smiled when I typed that, I'm sure of it.) So, as I mentioned at the beginning, there was a faint glimmer of a point to be made in this ramblings. But he failed to effectively make it.
"In order to escape a job where the future is bleak for older programmers due to the rapid depreciation of computer programming knowledge capital, computer programmers face the need to move up to management or likely wind up as underemployed fifty-year-olds, only suitable for lower paying IT jobs like 'QA' because they no longer know how to use the latest and supposedly greatest programming tools."So he bases the entire argument upon an earlier flawed premise whereby he assumes that there is no further upward mobility for a programmer once he's been writing code for ten years. I assure you that there is. (Not to mention that he demonstrates a complete and utter disrespect for QA professionals, which just further solidifies my observation that he doesn't actually know much about software development and is nothing more than a code monkey who picked up a book on .NET, dragged controls onto forms for a few years, and never learned anything of substance.)
"This trend, in which people without computer programming experience manage computer programming projects, is a result of the low prestige of computer programming. People with high prestige jobs, like surgeons, would never allow themselves to be managed by non-surgeons. In a complicated medical procedure there will be a head surgeon overseeing the surgery, and not a project manager without any medical training. Lawyers have Model Rule 5.4 which makes it unethical for non-lawyers to manage lawyers."This reminds me of Robert Martin's ongoing point (or perhaps even crusade) about how, as an industry, we need to become better at self-regulating. (Yes, I mentioned his name twice in one blog post. It's not fanboyism, it's just that his writings have brought forth a lot of good points about the industry in general.) Indeed, it always bothers me when technical decisions about the software are being made by non-technical personnel. (Or, even worse, by former technical personnel who failed to advance their technical careers and just went into management by default as a result of seniority... which I feel is the author's path, unfortunately.) We do need more crossover between skilled developers and skilled management, because the reality is that non-technical personnel (the people who created and continue to run the majority of businesses which employ us) call the shots. Many of them are even very good at calling the shots, and have successful businesses to prove it. But in their calling of said shots, they need someone who speaks their language. They are under no obligation to learn anything about software development, and it's our job as professionals to communicate our recommendations and requirements effectively.
"If you walk over to the graphic arts department, you will see really big monitors. The graphics people could surely make do with smaller monitors, but even though they make less money than computer programmers, they have been able to convince higher level management that their work requires better hardware. When computer programmers request better hardware, they are often seen as whining geeks who just want to waste the company’s money on unnecessary high-tech toys."Writing is a text-only medium, so tone can be difficult to convey. Was he being sarcastic, or did he genuinely just say that "the graphics people could surely make do with smaller monitors"? In his plight for better working conditions, he just did the exact same thing that he claims other departments are doing. He claimed that "those guys don't need it, I need it." I would think a better point would be that everybody needs it. That's part of being a professional... respecting other people's jobs.