Puzzling program

[Malcolm McLean]

MMcL> However they are an excellent employer. Anyone who thinks
MMcL> that a spell at Microsoft won't do wonders for the bank
MMcL> balance and CV is an idiot.

This is not what people I know who have actually interviewed for
Microsoft and worked for Microsoft have told me; if you don't mind,
given your track record, I'll believe them rather than you, thanks.

Yup, those Microsoft grapes.

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

But there are an infinite number of DS9K implementations. (They're not
required to exist physically, are they?)

The perversity of the DS9K is such that a non-physical implementation of
it will spontaneously form as a physical manifestation, in the presence
of undefined behaviour, but only long enough to explode and thus maim or
kill the user. Later models incorporate a safety feature which only
allows this to occur when the user is also the developer, thus preserving
the user base but eliminating inattentive coders, thus improving the
computing world for all concerned.

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

MMcL> However they
MMcL> are an excellent employer. Anyone who thinks that a spell at
MMcL> Microsoft won't do wonders for the bank balance and CV is an
MMcL> idiot.

MMcL> Yup, those Microsoft grapes.

Hardly: on the one hand, I have you, who have never worked for
Microsoft, assuring me that it will do wonders for the bank balance
and resume.

On the other hand, I personally know three people who have worked for
Microsoft, one of whom is still there; they report that the pay is
roughly commensurate with what they could be making elsewhere, but
tends to have a lot of downward pressure because of Microsoft's habit
of hiring people directly from college; the internal politics range
from annoying to toxic, and have a considerable reputation outside the
company; and, in part because of the reputation Microsoft has earned,
the Microsoft name on the resume does not magically open any doors.

This is not including the half-dozen or so people I know who have
interviewed at Microsoft, some of whom got an offer and declined it.

Should I believe you, a person whose judgment is highly suspect in
technical matters and who has no direct experience of employment with
Microsoft except in his apparently quite rich fantasy life, or should
I believe people I know personally, whose credibility I have had the
chance to evaluate over several years, and who are describing
experiences they have actually had, actually working for Microsoft?

Charlton

 

[Kenneth Brody]

I used to think that the anti-Microsoft campaign was a bit
silly.

[...]

If you know this is off-topic, why did you post it here?

OT tags are allowed for loosely C-related topics, of which Bill Gates'
billions is one. I do mention the evils of their compiler and OS versioning
strategy, again not topical but C-related.

After all, Bill's own unsigned longs can't hold his net worth, and
his C compiler that I use doesn't support long long:

error C2632: 'long' followed by 'long' is illegal

--
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | #include |
| kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | <std_disclaimer.h> |
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
Don't e-mail me at: <mailto:[email protected]>

 

[SM Ryan]

# Malcolm McLean wrote:
# >
# > # > > [...]
# > >> I used to think that the anti-Microsoft campaign was a bit
# > >> silly.
# > > [...]
# > >
# > > If you know this is off-topic, why did you post it here?
# > >
# > OT tags are allowed for loosely C-related topics, of which Bill Gates'
# > billions is one. I do mention the evils of their compiler and OS versioning
# > strategy, again not topical but C-related.
#
# After all, Bill's own unsigned longs can't hold his net worth, and
# his C compiler that I use doesn't support long long:

$640K is enough money for anyone.

 

[user923005]

After all, Bill's own unsigned longs can't hold his net worth, and
his C compiler that I use doesn't support long long:

error C2632: 'long' followed by 'long' is illegal

Support for long long has been available since the release of VC++.NET
2003 in 2002 (5 years ago).
Maybe it's time to upgrade.
[snip]

 

[Malcolm McLean]

After all, Bill's own unsigned longs can't hold his net worth, and
his C compiler that I use doesn't support long long:

error C2632: 'long' followed by 'long' is illegal

Support for long long has been available since the release of VC++.NET
2003 in 2002 (5 years ago).
Maybe it's time to upgrade.
[snip]

That's what Bill's minions told me.
Why should I have to pay lots of money and then trawl through my programs
looking for incompatibiliites, when I've already bought a perfectly good
compiler?

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Why should I have to pay lots of money and then trawl through my programs
looking for incompatibiliites, when I've already bought a perfectly good
compiler?

No reason, if you don't want long long.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

 

[Kenneth Brody]

[snip]
error C2632: 'long' followed by 'long' is illegal

Maybe it's time to upgrade.

Why should I have to pay lots of money and then trawl through my programs
looking for incompatibiliites, when I've already bought a perfectly good
compiler?

No reason, if you don't want long long.

I have very little need for long long, and the incompatibilities
far outweigh the one use I have for them. And for that, I simply
use my own typedef which is set to "__int64" for MSVC.

--
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | #include |
| kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | <std_disclaimer.h> |
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
Don't e-mail me at: <mailto:[email protected]>