I've run into this problem before and always ended up falling back on crappy work-arounds, but it came up again the other day, so I figured I'd find a suitable solution once and for all. Here's the problem... I have a line chart in Excel... I want to display data going upwards and across the chart (like a typical line chart), but across the top of the chart, I want to display a horizontal line that shows a "target" (a single value in a single cell somewhere) that I'm trying to reach. There are several ways to approach this, but none of them I had found up to this point were elegant and/or sufficient for my needs...

OK... here's the problem. I'm lazy. But aren't all programmers? I mean... if it wasn't for laziness, we wouldn't have jobs. The whole point of programming is to find something that people don't want to have to do, and write code that will do it for them so they can keep being lazy. Am I right?

So when I run into an obstacle while programming, I like to find the simplest way to get around it. If the solutions that are already out there on the internet are cumbersome and complicated, then chances are, I'm not gonna use 'em. And that was the case when I ran into this little problem.

The thing is... most of my applications start new threads. Who wants to wait around staring at a frozen Windows form while something gets processed in the background? But at the same time, you can't just kick off a thread and hope that the user doesn't try to do something else while the thread is running. You have to control the work flow... keep the user in line. So you display some kind of "Please Wait..." dialog and use it to show them the progress of what's going on in the background. But what happens if something goes wrong in the background thread? You can handle the exception in that thread, but how will the main/GUI thread (the one that created the new thread) know that an exception occurred?

....I know how.

I read a review on Wired yesterday about the new crop of TV shows that are centered towards nerds. In typical fashion, the critics gave the best review to the show that I found to be the worst (Chuck), and the worst review to the show that I actually thought was OK (Journeyman). But I had no way of knowing that without actually watching the shows first, so I went ahead and checked out NBC's new Monday night line-up last night. Before I get to trashing "Chuck", I'll start off with a little bit about Heroes and Journeyman. I am deeply saddened to say that I believe Heroes has officially jumped the shark (starting with last season's finale, which was largely a disappointment) and if they don't make a sharp left turn soon, it won't really be a show worth watching anymore. That's a shame, because Heroes was really something to look forward to last year, with its constantly looming plot devices (the Company, Linderman, and Sylar), and now it looks like it has been reduced to sub-plots involving Hiro trying to get a peasant girl to fall in love with an Englishman living in 17th century Japan (riveting, I know), and Claire getting teased by the "mean" kids at school (oh no... not the mean kids!).

But I digress. After Heroes, I saw Journeyman, and found it to be a relatively enjoyable show. The characters seemed a little "forced" in the opening scenes, but I found that they eventually fell into something resembling "chemistry". Yes, the plot is somewhat contrived (it's kind of a Quantum Leap meets Day Break... and oddly enough, the same chick who starred in Day Break stars in Journeyman, so apparently, she is being typecast as "that chick in all the time travel shows"). I didn't really see it as a "nerd" show, though, and seeing how you have to suspend belief in order to watch a show about time travel, I didn't really find much in it worth nit-picking at.

But "Chuck", on the other hand...

So I took a dive (head first, of course) into a new area of programming this week: The wonderful world of uber-large file processing. Now, I've worked with large files before... don't get me wrong... but I'm a database guy. Most of my file experience involves figuring out ways to get data into a database quickly and efficiently (and I've gotten fairly adept at it, if I do say so myself ). Recently, however, I needed to write some code to process a file, and as usual, my first assumption was that I would just load it into a db (using one of the bagillions of methods at my disposal), run a few SQL statements against the table, and be done with it. Then I found out that the file was almost 2GB. The problem with that is twofold: 1) Importing a 2GB file into a database would take a really freaking long time and then you'd still have to run queries on it to do your processing, which would take even longer. And 2) Putting the file in a db would have the net effect of doubling the file size on disk... because now it exists as the original file and as records in your db. And since most db's aren't super efficient at file storage, chances are that it'll take up more than 2GB in the db. So you're looking at turning your 2GB file into 4-6GB (if not more).

So anywhoo... once I realized that a database was not the way to go, I had to figure out how to process this huge monster in an efficient manner...

I put out a new version of TaskRunner today (3.2.1075). There are a crapload of new features.... that I intend to work into the app soon.   And I was working on doing just that when someone emailed me and pointed out a bug. So, as a result, instead of a crapload of new features, you get a couple minor features (that I had already finished) and that one bug fix.

The only "feature" worth pointing out is the new "Translate" option in the Web Search. You can enter a line of text and automatically translate it to whatever language Google offers translation for at the moment.

Here's the full changelist:

Version 3.2.1075:

• Fixed bug in Task form that stopped you from using a limitation between two times of day
• Added "Translate" feature to Web Search.
• Added option in TR Options to prompt before running Shutdown tasks
• Updated backend database version

WATYF

EDITORIAL NOTE (for lazy people): If you don't like to read paragraphs (for fear of hurting your brain) then please skip straight to the uber-funny sketch at the end of this article. If, on the other hand, you can actually handle reading more than four sentences in a group without your mind wandering off to thoughts of what's on TV tonight, then you can start reading here.... and now, on to the article.

Human behavior is intriguing. One such behavior is how the average person approaches the topic of taste in music. We all have tastes. Tastes in food. Tastes in men/women. Tastes in movies. You name it. But for some reason, no taste seems to carry with it the fervent arrogance and xenophobia that a person's taste in music often does. If you meet someone, and you start discussing food, chances are that you won't even notice if they mention liking a food that you dislike. Most people just accept it as normal. "Oh... you like fish, eh... I'm not a big fan it it." But mention a band that they hate, and watch the wonder that is human self-conceit... "What? You like Blink 182?!? Dude. They're, like, the worst band on the planet. Seriously. What's wrong with you? You really need to get a new taste in music". As if acquiring a new taste in anything is even physically possible, and as if there is such a thing as a "better" or "worse" taste in music. Now, for many of you, cognitive dissonance is already kicking in and telling you that, somehow, your taste in music IS indeed "better" or "more refined", but it's not. I know... it's hard to accept that what your ears prefer means absolutely nothing to anyone but you, but it's true. I'm sorry to have crushed your entire worldview.

I just stumbled across this story about how Apple is going to start charging people a $5 entrance fee just to get into their Apple stores. Can you freaking believe that? Seriously... I thought I'd seen it all when it came to the ridiculous lengths of Apple's smug marketing and aloof users, but this one definitely takes the cake. This just cements Apple, and all of the preening tossers who use their products, as the pretentious goobers that I've always known them to be. Now, it's not like I've ever been tempted to go into an Apple store (lest I lose 50% of my IQ and start drooling out of the corners of my mouth), but there's no way on earth it's gonna happen now. Oh yeah... and it gets even better...

But I DID refresh the page... AND restart the browser... AND clear my history... AND delete my cookies..... yet still you torture me!!!

WHY?!?!?! ...WHY, I SAY?!?!

(a thousand pardons for the blog spam, but I had to get that off my chest )

WATYF

As vastly superior to Microsoft as Apple is, they (in their benevolence) will occasionally throw us poor Windows users a bone every once in a while. And it looks like that once in a while is right now (yay for us!!).  Just this week, Apple took a stab at porting their oh-so-popular browser (Safari) over to Windows Vista... unfortunately, they overestimated their ability to write anything other than fluffy apps that don't do anything useful. Apparently, this little bundle of Apple joy came with bugs, exploits, and a complete lack of standard features.

That's right ladies and gentlemen... today I'm going to offer conclusive proof that the new Office 2007 interface has been endowed with copious amounts of suckage...

...but first, I'm going to ramble on for a bit (much like I do at the beginning of all of my articles, before actually getting to any kind of point or useful content).

As many of you may know... I very quickly grew an intense dislike for the new Office 2007 layout (or interface, or GUI, or menu system, or whatever you wanna call it) the minute I was forced to use it at work. You may think it's because I'm a luddite, but that's not the case at all... I rather like new things... just so long as they don't make my life a living hell. You may also think that I just like to bash Microsoft for fun... but that's blatantly untrue... I would never bash Microsoft just for fun.. that's what I have Apple for.

But after ranting about how much Office 2007's new look sucks, and trying to find ways around its idiosyncrasies, and hacking together a (very lousy) way to get it to (kind of) look like Office 2000 (or 2003), I was finally delivered from my turmoil (at least for now).

And I thought that was the end of it... I figured my articles would just fall into oblivion (much like every other article that I write on this site ) and I would move on with my nerdy little life... but it appears I won't be able to forget them so easily...