Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> The paperclip at least can be disabled. The other unecessary 
>>> helpy-helper features seem to be unavoidable.
>>
>> I don't know what version of Word you're running, but... I dunno, 
>> maybe the "Tools->Auto Correct" options is what you're looking for?
>>
>> It looks pretty straightforward to me.
> 
> Do you know where I can turn off the option that tries to automatically 
> format the current bullet point the same way as the last one?

Well, I go over to the help list and type in "turn off bullet list 
formatting" and it returns a help page that says

"""
  Turn on or off automatic bulleted or numbered lists
On the Tools menu, click AutoCorrect Options, and then click the AutoFormat 
As You Type tab.
Under Apply as you type, select or clear the Automatic bulleted lists or 
Automatic numbered lists check box.
"""

That dialog looks as attached.  (Ooo. Never knew there was a way to define 
styles based on formatting.)  There's also options to just underline in blue 
formatting that is inconsistent with the rest of the document, in case 
you're not turning on styles.

I guess it's that "format beginning of list item" that impressed me last 
time it kicked in automatically.


> (Your screenshot looks suspiciously like it's running on Vista...)

Yes? And?

> Maybe because I'm trying to type stuff that features program source code 
> that has weird grammer and punctuation?

Yeah, that would probably confuse it. You probably want to turn off all the 
auto formatting and correcting stuff.  Or use notepad. :-)

> Or, more likely, they've made the IDE more flexible in the 10 years 
> since I last used it.

Possibly.

> Well, when I tried it, it did. I had a working Java project that 
> compiled perfectly, but I couldn't do anything with it in VS until I let 
> the program rearrange all the files the way it wanted. (This included 
> manually importing all the classes, one at a time, by hand.)

Well, if you create a blank project, sure, you have to add the files into 
the project. That's like complaining the paragraph in that other document 
has to be pasted into this one for it to print.

>>> It insists on autogenerating buckets of code that you then have to 
>>> manually delete. 
>>
>> Only when you ask it to.
> 
> I couldn't find a way to avoid it. Maybe they've redesigned this part now.

Maybe. Depends what kind of project you started and so on. If you just open 
a "blank" solution, you don't get any files that aren't needed for the 
language you're using.

> Presumably this only works for one specific version control system though?

I don't know. It certainly works with Microsoft's version control system. 
:-)  You can probably go through 50 times the effort and get it to work with 
someone else's, if it's worth that much to you.

> Maybe this was my mistake - expecting to be able to make sense of the 
> file layout from outside the IDE. Maybe they just assume you'll never 
> want to do that? (I mean, it's not like you'd ever want to put just the 
> source code into a Zip file so you can send it to somebody else or 
> something like that...)

It does make sense. You just have to know what the files are.

For example, in one test windows forms project (i.e., with a non-templated 
GUI), I have the source files I typed, the one resource file holding all the 
resources, app.config (which is a .NET thing that lets you store the 
configuration of the application, like POV's .INI files, and which also 
holds stuff like which version of the runtime system it needs and so on, all 
thoroughly documented), a directory called "Properties" which holds the 
auto-generated code, a "Program.cs" which is the auto-generated "main" 
program (about 3 lines of code long), and a "csproj" file, which holds the 
configuration of the specific project (basically, the tree view of the files 
and settings and stuff for the project, that you would otherwise be passing 
on the command line to the compiler in a makefile).

It has a bin and an obj file, each with a Debug and a Release directory.

I'm not sure what junk you had in your IDE, but nowadays they seem to do a 
fine job.

> Which is all the more amusing given that last time I looked, I couldn't 
> even figure out what C# *is* from the information M$ provided. (It seems 
> they have improved this now.)

Um.... OK.

>>> It seems that if you want to know anything remotely "technical" about 
>>> M$ products, the only way to find out is to go on a course. I find 
>>> this very objectionable. I've paid money for this product, why can't 
>>> you just tell me how to operate it? Why must I now pay even more money?
>>
>> Because if it came with an 800-page manual, fewer people would buy it.
> 
> More likely it would cost a lot of money to print an 800-page manual. 
> But they could supply it electronically, surely?

They do. It's online. I've been giving you pointers to it all day.

> What does MSDN actually contain anyway? I've never looked at it.

Damn, dude. No wonder.

Microsoft Developers Network.

It's all the documentation and code and etc for people who work with 
microsoft code to develop or configure software.

> usually just search the Microsoft support website - or, if that fails to 
> turn up any information, there's always Google. (Finding suitable search 
> terms is highly nontrivial though.)

Well, yeah. I wouldn't be surprised of most of MSDN doesn't get indexed by 
google. The MS support site is for "my computer is broken, how do I fix it?" 
  MSDN is for "I need to use Windows to do my job, what do I need to know?"

>> FSF doesn't like man pages for some reason I never figured out.
> 
> Er, yeah, I've noticed how 98% of all manpages say "please concult the 
> infopage". Why?

Because the InfoPage runs in emacs, which is RSM's baby. They're emacs 
scripts pretending to be a web browser. Annoying as hell.

> Indeed, *everything* seems to be VB.NET. AFAIK, this is a different 
> language to the VBA used in Office 2003.

I don't understand. I put in "vba office 2003" in the search engine, and I get.

http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Search/en-US/?query=vba%20office%202003&ac=2

The first four links are for Excel VBA language reference, Access VBA 
language referene, Word VBA language reference, and VBA language reference 
for the Office 2003 data model. Later links are for outlook, powerpoint, 
graph, frontpage, compiled as a help page, etc.

Why do you think Microsoft isn't documenting this?

> The top link appears to be a reference document. Which is nice, but not 
> for learning how to use something for the first time. 

Suck it up, dude. Not every product comes with a free tutorial.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=vba+for+dummies&x=0&y=0

First try gives me 17 books about VBA for the office suite as tutorials. If 
the reference is too complicated, get the boss to shell out $20 for a 
textbook. If the boss won't do that, you need a new job. :-) But you knew 
that already.

You know, my car didn't come with a book teaching me how to drive, either. :-)

 > (Also, is there a
> reason why none of these M$ documents allow you to nagivate properly 
> whichout lots of trickery with tabs and trying to defeat the JS links?)

Because there's a giant TOC on the left side for most of MSDN? I dunno. 
Works for me.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message