Xyon (xyon) wrote,
Xyon
xyon

  • Mood:

Update: Now with enhanced entrification.

Clearly we've been making up words at work too much. We were trying to discuss whether a field or method was a static or instance member; so the question became "What is its membéritùde?" (Yes, that's an acute and a grave). And abstracts/virtuals have overridificationability. It was late.


Okay, meine eyeballs.

When I went in for surgery I was (IIRC) -6.75 in my right eye and -7.25 in my left eye, which is severe myopia.

At +1 week I was told that the left eye was at 0.50 and the right eye was at 2.00.

At +1 month (this past Tuesday) I was told that the left eye was closer to 2.00 now, pretty much matching the right eye. I was greatly confused how it got less corrected, and then I realized that her lack of sign was significant. I went from -7.00 (ish) to +2.00. I'm now hyperopic. She thinks that I've been overcorrected enough that I fall back outside the guarantee range, so I should qualify for enhancement (which is I guess good), but the bad news is I'll need it (which is, of course, bad). I didn't really think about overcorrection sending me to the other way, I entirely envisioned it putting me into 20/15, 20/10, or even 20/8... not sending me back up the chart.



Timezones.

In some environments we're given information to discern the user's timezone; I had a bug to make that data available. So I write TimeZoneInfo.FindSystemTimeZoneById(data["timezone"]). Sweet, all done. Except that didn't work. The debugger tells me that my timezone is 987, or something silly like that. They have a table that maps their 16-bit ID into the Olson identifier (e.g. "America/Los_Angeles"). Okay, great, I'll just deal with the stupid mapping. Guess what? .NET doesn't support Olson; because .NET just does a pass-through to Windows, and Windows can't do anything that anyone else does. Oh, heavens no.

So I start down the road of figuring out what Olson zones maps to what Windows zones. After doing 3 or 4 by hand with the aid of http://www.timeanddate.com (with an occasional double-check at http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com) I happen to note the term "Olson", do a followup, and find that Unicode.org maintains the Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR) which -has- this mapping! Sweet. So I grep around until I find which file in the CLDR I want (core/supplemental/supplementalData.xml); look at the structure, and write up a program that will take the number, map it to the Olson name, and find the Windows zone for it. Sounds like I'm done here, right? With a mere 3 hours working on what should have been a 30 minute tops problem.

The first Olson entry is Africa/Abidjan (alphabetical order); which TimeAndDate says is GMT/No DST; which I'll call "Greenwich Standard Time" (because that's what Windows calls it. No, it doesn't call it GMT. No, it doesn't call it UTC, or any permutation thereof.). Eventually you get to Europe/London which is BMT (GMT with DST under a specific set of transition rules). You may have already guessed the problem...
Africa/Abidjan is a member of the metaclass "GMT", of which Europe/London is the representative entry! This means my program calls it "GMT Standard Time" (no joke, Windows is -that- dumb); which is wrong for half the year. Unfortunately for me, I notice this.

So we start talking with one of our peer teams (well, we started talking in the past) and looked at how they did it. This might make mge sad, but they extended TimeZone and essentially wrote their own TimeZoneInfo, but in a complicated and convoluted manner. But, they did this through a series of obscure steps that actually helped me. They did number to name (okay) AND other number. Then this second number (grr) they then mapped to a TimeZone object. But I could at least use their mapping as the start of the collapsing function. Now ~350 is down to ~150 (which I need to cut down to 87).

Along the way I found some fun issues, like they think Brazil is GMT+0300 (it's GMT-0300); that Windows has 2 different GMT+0900 (with no DST) timezones (Tokyo, Korea); and that Lord Howe Island, Australia is the most messed up island on the planet. (Normal is GMT+1030, during DST they jump to GMT+1100 (that's not a typo, it's a 30-minute jump); and their jump days are #defined to be the same as Canberra, Australia. At least the rules were straightforward to build; but it'd be easier if it was like Kamchatka where I just needed to change the base offset from Moscow.)

At the end of this 12 hour ordeal (midnightish, 12 hours is working hours, not lunch or dinner) I have it all working; and then see that the structure I have to normalize to isn't System.TimeZoneInfo; it's a made up TimeZoneInformation. So now I get to figure out what to do for that (their TimeZoneInformation is more like TimeZone; it only supports a single change algorithm). Grr.



A shocking personal experience! (da-duh-dum)

I found out I have feet.

Oh, not personal enough? Or shocking? Fine.

So, as you may or may not know, I didn't really have anything that would count as a "date" between 2002 and 2008 (inclusive). I mean, feel free to object, but that's my current statement. Since I'm not so good at this whole talking to people I don't know thing, and everyone I know is male or unavailable (to me) or I guess there might technically be some people that I talk to that are available but I'm unaware or uninterested; but a quick scan puts most females in bucket 2 (distance, in a relationship, explicitly not in a relationship, whatever); I made some endeavors on OkCupid. After all, if you get bored you can just take the purity test, or whatever :).

So most of my experiences were (in order of commonality):
* OKC serves up someone I'm not really at all interested in, possibly because they don't have a profile.
* I send a message to someone interesting. They don't ever respond to my hello
* I send a message to someone interesting, the thread ends quickly.
* I get a "hello" from an uninteresting person (if you don't talk you're not interesting).
* Someone vaguely interesting says hi, but they live more than 1000 miles away (not really had anyone in the 50-1000 range; I guess it's either "close" or "super far away")
* Someone vaguely interesting says hi, is eloquent, and really is only becoming more interesting as the thread expands. (once!)

So we met last Friday for coffee at 6pm. Really I'm expecting that she'll run off at 6:30; or maybe I'd get up to 8pm out of courtesy. At 9pm we went to see a Bollywood flick, Luck by Chance. It was... interesting. Since I had no idea what I was getting into it really just got treated like some weird specimen of insect; and so I didn't unenjoy it (the movie was kind of funny; but I don't think that's what they were going for). Got back to the coffee shop/my car at 12:30. So, yay, I've had a date :) (And that's why I wasn't at the Dollhouse premier with everyone).

Have continued talking to her, even unloading a fair amount of crazy (nope, not going into it), and we're going out again this Friday.

Last week I really hadn't envisioned success (see also, no dating in the past 6 years), and so I didn't eat (since we were meeting before my normal dinner-time). So this time food is part of the arrangement :)

So if anyone thinks that it's inconsistent with my past that I'd meet a girl from the internet and happens to know the details of stardrop and I (especially if that anyone -is- stardrop), I'll point out that we didn't meet via the internet. In fact, Wikipedia agrees: "... in many ways a precursor to the modern form of the World Wide Web and other aspects of the Internet.". See, totally not the internet.

Answers to anticipated questions:
* Yes, she does have a name. No, I'm not posting it.
* Yes, she has a pseudonym/handle/whatever, I'm also not posting that :)
* In the city. Almost a dealbreaker, but I'll survive.
* I was going to say where we're going, but decided that I don't want people deciding to also go there to see the novelty of me on a date :P We were supposed to go to Sky City, but after challenging me to get a reservation (at which I succeeded) she said she'd rather (a specific) somewhere else.
* Older. Collegiately speaking, 1 year ahead of me.


And now that I've taken an hour to write this down I guess I should get back to work.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 3 comments