This guy is spot on in regard to HR job descriptions.

Our philosophy is to build top digital products that will leverage possibilities of the client’s business.

This is PR BS. It basically means: We have nothing to offer but charge you a lot for something that never will function.

More SPAM

What on Earth has this to do with programming?

Modern web sites suck big. It sucks down your data limit, it sucks down your processor time and it sucks down you battery. And worst of all, they are more an annoyance to users than pure static pages.

On top of that the modern web sites design are an increased security risk because more and more javascript gets introduced that contains vulnerabilities. We are heading the Flash direction where hackers can bypass security.

Also ergonomics these modern web sites suck. I get RSI from swiping and scrolling too much.

I used to surf on the Internet looking at web sites but nowedays I hate them so much that I avoid them. I only go to sites that I have links to it and are known to not use these modern design. When I encounter a modern design web site I immediately click away not even bothering to see what it contains.

SD card would be best but you better save data BEFORE there is a risk of losing data. Your design must take that into account. One way could be having a second controller that has the only purpose to store data after the main controller loses power. That one can be battery backed up.

Then explain it to us so we do understand.

There is nothing to understand it is just a bunch of words mixed together pretending to be something intelligent.

So you might be asking, 'what motivated this strange document to talk about software abstraction at the highest level in the context of a low-level language like C?

Well, 2 reasons, 1 practical, and 1 pedagogical.

This whole text sounds like some Indian Guru talking about love and live entangled with quantum mechanics because the universe is a sound. It only impresses the people that don't understand a thing.

This is actually a very good post.

One thing I want to add is that developers that have many decades of experience will probably fail simple tests because they never heard about a LRU cache. The same for the parser, I never written a parser so give me some simple clues what you want me to develop.

The reason why I would probably fail the first test is because I have multiple solutions for your question and I don't have the experience of your company to know which one you want or need.

Back in the very beginning of when I started to learn developing I worked for a guy for free. I had the knowledge so why not? I pretty soon discovered that by working for free this guy could ask me anything and I just did it. Things got out of hand because he found a bug in my code and demanded that I came right now and fix it. I told this guy f*ck yourself and I refused.

The interesting thing was that after a day or so asked me to fix it and he would pay for it. Because he was now forced to pay me for my time, he thought more about what he wanted me to do and he started to respect me.

Doing something for free oddly seems to make people believe that they can own you.

In the beginning I wanted to contribute to Open Source project, but very soon I discovered that any contribution would be a struggle to get my code get accepted. I am there to code and help not to debate endlessly. I already have these issues at my work every day.

So what I do is I use Open Source code, improve it and give the results as feed back to developers that wants it. If they want to implement it they can, but I am not going to do it. I am going to focus on my projects. I work at my time and pace, when I want.

It is losing being profitable because since they went to services and now micro-services way the cost of developing the software, the cost of keeping the hardware running, the cost of the number of IT people needed to operate, the electricity bills, the number of developers they need has exploded. No one can afford the micro-service architecture it is too expensive and contributes nothing to the original product.

It can't last long, they run out of developers very quickly then the pyramid scheme collapses.

I also noticed that those new features, they don't matter for your code. All they are is sugar syntax that do not contribute to anything.

The most important metric is time-to-market. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter how fast your product/web app is. It doesn’t matter what language its written in. It doesn't even matter how much money it takes to run. At the end of the day, the one thing that will make your company survive or die is time-to-market.

I disagree. Look at all the modern day apps and software. They really suck at ergonomics and productivity.

I have personally seen how very responsive user interfaces have turned into user interfaces that are slooooooowwwwww because of usages of micro services architecture.

I see an explosion of hardware needed to run that same application that is 5 years old. I see an explosion of number of developers that need to support that same application. I see an explosion of complexity making way of more and more bugs. I see an explosion risk that something will break and bring down the complete micro services architecture by an cascading failure.

In the real world there is enormous productivity loss for users because users are forced to work on slow user interfaces that needs way too many mouse click and scrolls to preform their daily routine.

This means unfit for the enterprise environment. I still have to support 12 year old technologies where I develop for.

This also means that Enterprises will be forced on the rapid release cycle and therefor will waste enormous amounts of money on developers to keep up with the pace.

I like this overview.

People are going to shoot me down but I don't care. As a developer you should always be honest of what you think.

1. The Open source way is not the way to go too. Look at Linux, 20 years in the making millions of people all working on the project and only now starts Linux to get at the desktop level of Windows. This suggest that the Open source community is fighting each other more than they produce good code. Or it put it this way: A good developer creates a good functionality and then some 2 idiots undo your hard work.

2. Windows is a l large scale project, every new iteration will increase complexity exponentially. Too many things to stay backwards compatible.

3. This new way of AGILE and rapid release cycle is also no solution. You get faster results, however it comes at a huge cost that will only be visible 3 years into the development cycle. Since the AGILE idea is sold as "anyone can do anything from anyone" managers are now busy to fire very experienced developers because hell everyone can do it. There is a code deterioration happening that only experienced developers realize. A threshold will get crossed to a point of no return. That threshold will be when old hardware suddenly do not get supported anymore and no one in the AGILE team is prepared since they lost good developers. No one is left to fix that thing. No one is even capable to fix it.

My point in all this, is that in software there is no one single good solution for every type of project. They all suck, some more some less.

No, it is a money scam.

Good developers are self educating, they do not need bootcamps. Bootcamps will cripple your creativity because they will show how all the other code monkeys are doing it. Without realizing it you have become yet another code monkey that can be easily replaced.

The best way is to get a compiler and try it yourself, figure everything out and especially create stuff that no one else have thought about. Use that money to buy computer stuff, books, software,.... This is the hard way, incredibly hard and frustrating way, but it forces your brain to find solutions that no one knows.

Bootcamps are like drugs, you become depended on them to keep your job. You need to educate every year to keep your knowledge.

Companies that likes bootcamp developers will use you as some throw-aways object a few years later on. You became too expensive so they get a new kid just from bootcamp that has the same knowledge as you have.

"Since this experiment used targeted findability tasks, more time and effort spent looking around the page are not good. These findings don't mean that users were more 'engaged' with the pages. Instead, they suggest that participants struggled to locate the element they wanted, or weren't confident when they first saw it."

People don't stay on it because they love it but they can't find the exit button of this ergonomic disaster.

Every time I enter this type of page I use the words fuck, fuck fuck, and then finally find the close button. In a lot of cases I even shut down Firefox completely to get rid of that flashy and useless thing when I run out of fuck words.

And what makes it even worse, there is nothing on that page you can click on to report back how fucked up that web page is. You always end up into maze preventing you to tell them what you think of their site so they never get negative reviews.

This test will only find average developers.

Average developer will follow "logical order" and will find design patterns great and develop like (Polish Notation) in calculators. It works but it is slow and you are focused on the syntax instead of the solution. HR loves these people because they can quantize them in their power point presentation. It is a bingo game when that developer use the bingo word like "observable" and "factory" .....

Good developers focus on the solution and they don't care about the syntax or design patterns. This is similar like in the calculator world RPN. The way they enter the values into the calculator is like good developers building the code in a different order that reflects how they solve the issue. It reflects how they think. The syntax will be cleaned up after the solution works. The end result will always be very easy to maintain code, fast, compact, easy deployable, easy to read, very stable, near zero bugs and fail proof deployment.

This Skype test will freak the HR out and convince them that you have a mad lunatic developer at the other side and terminate the session before he has a chance to complete. The only way to test a good developer is hire him and throw him at your worst code and ask him to refactor this. If your project that failed suddenly starts to work then you have a good developer.

What is Reverse Polish Notation? http://www.calculator.org/rpn.aspx

The Joys of RPN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPKg_JtI-Ys

Someone has to tell HR that this is not the way to find good developers!

Good developers can think in multiple dimension and won't shine in this small sample test. They shine in complicated, hard to code solutions that can bring down the civilization and yet they master this beast it like a gentle breeze.

The only thing this test will do is to find the average developer that will cripple your project.

They told me that the developers from the 90's are the best.

But in this case conventional winforms would do the work way more efficiently. Nowadays these in browser apps are ergonomic disaster, hurts the eye and worst of all very buggy and slow in response.

Maybe people have forgotten how good software actually works and feels like and don't realize that software 7 years old works more efficiently than modern day code.

You don't need bootcamps, Everything is found online:

Python Beginner Tutorial 1 (For Absolute Beginners) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpPG0bKHYKc

Calling other people elitists assholes or saying that you didn't want a work anyway just a hobby is not a very good mindset for becoming a developer even a hobbyist. The problem with coding is that you will slam into walls every second of your time. Examples you see online won't work in your project and you can fail for hours even days not understanding what you did wrong.

Software development is not very rewarding because you really work very hard in the code but at the surface you don't see any change. Then you see something visually change but it does not do what you had in mind and you have to dig into the deeper layers to discover why and how to fix it. You only succeed if you push true, develop a mindset of a winner and take no prisoners.

Bootcamps will initially give you fast results but as the teaching goes further they also induce a fixed uncreative thinking that will lock you in the only course you have followed. Your mind will be fixed to that only solution and all your projects will fail in the next few years. They fail because the technology world will have changed and you are still stuck in that ancient bootcamp mindset. Unlearning what you learned in a bootcamp takes minimal 2 years.

Even if you only want to take up developing as a hobby, you need a mindset that shows off that you are the boss over this code you just written. If you don't then that code is destined to fail even on your own small projects

No.

The hallmark of a good developer is that they figuring it out all themselves. Use that money that you would waste on bootcamps on books, software and hardware that you purchase.

These bootcamps are money sucking scams and are even dangerous. Because they force you in a fixed mindset and bad coding practices that will take years to unlearn.

We are setting up the world for massive worm attack through client side javascript. As the javascript becomes bigger and bigger on the client side the browsers must handle more and more complex javascript. This can only lead to security breeches and malware attacks. Especially from advertisement that wants to push through.

Interestingly we are back at square one: 1990's code that run software stored on a network server (Novell). Back to the end of thin clients and the birth of fat clients.

On Tuesday, the thirteen-member steering committee came together to vote on whether to remove Rod Vagg, a TSC member and Node.js contributor, over his controversial statements on Twitter and GitHub that prompted complaints. They also voted on whether to ask Vagg to resign.

What will happen now is one fork that is PC and contains the worst developers and the other fork that will trive because they have no interest in politics only code.

The question is now, do you choose the losers end? Or the winners end?

AGILE means 90% of your precious time wasting on SCRUM bureaucracy can keeping the unit tests active. You crippled the system in such a way that you need 10 developers for the same project that you used to do with one good developer.

Also if you have one good developer in your team, you bring down his work by adding code-monkey code that causes more problems than fixing.

You give no reason what your project is and why people should even consider to PM you? Are you searching for some throwaway cheap labor?

Good developers will find their way to coding naturally. It is their curiosity that makes them find coding. If you need to teach kids then the wrong type of people enter the developers world and they will be very unhappy in the end.

IN the developers world, the bad ones gets replaced... or become project managers.

Coding for kids is wildly popular with educators, politicians, parents, the tech industry, and people who run coding camps. But not everyone is sold. "Coding is a valuable skill – for maybe 2 per cent of the labour force," writes Alex Usher, who runs Higher Education Strategy Associates, a consulting firm. "What the rest of us need is digital literacy and proficiency. Being able to write software is not the issue: Rather, it is the ability to apply and use software productively that is the issue."

Exceptions are like GOTO's. They only work when you code is at the level of "hello world"

Exceptions are first of all misused in software engineering. They assume that it is either good or bad (= trigger exception). The hard reality in software you have "good", "bad" and "exception"

"False" should never be used to trigger an exception. A False may be recoverable and therefore becomes true in the whole process.

"Exceptions" should only be used on the very extreme unlikely event that your software cannot handle it. It is a situation that should actually never ever happen. If you throw exceptions then you basic design is deeply flawed. And now I have upset probably 90% of the Millennials. But I don't care. It is time to bring back good coding.

Why do exceptions "appear" to be helpful: Simple hello world applications and enterprise code that what I cal only live in a flat 2D space. You can't create complex code when you use exceptions. You can't test your code when you use exceptions. You can't recover in a simple way when you use exceptions. Exceptions will jump at some random location in your code you cannot predict.

Exceptions cause more problems then what they try to solve. get rid of using exceptions in your code and learn to develop without exceptions and I guarantee you that your code will become near zero bug free, stable, predictable and rock solid.

For a very long time now, I have learned that there just aren’t that many advanced courses out there that cover from the basic application through deploying it to production.

The biggest reason why this is is because it is impossible to educate good coding to other people that simple lack the brainpower to learn it. I give an example to this AGILE/SCRUM madness. They try to convert code monkeys into big coding masters by giving all these rules and guides and design patterns. And they wondering why their sprint fails yet again. Good developer are good because they say f*ck you to guidelines and invent their own out of pure creativity.

If you want to educate people then educate them to trigger their developer creativity in finding solutions where none have gone before. Don,'t teach them how it is done nowadays because I have never seen so bad programming in my career what I see in the last few years. People have forgotten how to create good code, all they do is copy code monkeys and useless crap without asking if there is no other way.

Where I live they promote them as managers or project managers.

Ban IP? anyone that uses a proxy or VPN would be banned. That would be hundreds of thousands of people that use that VPN.

[M]any of us feel the autocomplete-python package is being overtaken by the Kite team, and the popularity of this plugin is being used to promote their service," said Sebastian.

Those big ego developers need a big ego to compensate for the lack of knowledge. In C/C++, create a test code and look at the generated assembler code. The dissembled code will be more correct than any debate on any forum.

We live in AGILE/SCRUM now. Being a good developer is a big no-no. Good developer gets fired because they don't match the team culture. No one in the team understands what they are doing. Also good developers get fired by managers because the AGILE/SCRUM claims that you can do the exact same thing with low wage developers.

Code bootcamp are worthless. You spend time and money that you could have used for better results. Good developers will automatic search for solutions even invent their own solutions from scratch if none are found.

Bootcamps only are propaganda channels to brainwash you as a new developer that their solutions are the only way. But the only way to survive as a developer is by becoming very very good. And coding bootcamps and certificates will limit your creative process and trap you into their workflow.

Natural selection, all these people that follows these certificates and bootcamps are unfit to survive long enough in the field. After a couple of years you are burned up and replaced by someone cheaper. You never learned to find solutions all you learned ways to record a play back a certain solution the big vendors wants you to use.

If you clone the competition then you become just average. As a developer you don't want to become "average" you want to become better.

My skill as a programmer is measured as the sum of these abilities. While I may specialize on specific projects, I always contribute to the entire spectrum of programming activities. I need to keep up with this fast-moving field. Remaining static would relegate me to becoming a relic of the past.

That is not the hallmark of a good programmer.

A good programmer makes good programs, and don't follow hypes unless these hypes actually solve problems instead of causing them. Good programmers will actually avoid learning some hype stuff just to prevent pollution and brainwashing of that hype.

Good programmers will also avoid people skills. People skills means that they will turn you into something you don't want, like a coach, a manager or even worse a SCRUM coach. Having people skills means that in a year or so you have lost all your programming skills because your were more in meetings than actually developing code.

Good programmers work more efficient what they work alone but can pair when needed for short times like hours.Work alone, less communication, less discussions, less emails, less meetings and 100% pure productivity.

Good programmers don't need to code review each others code. That is pure waste of productivity. Good programmers trust other good programmers to do their job and they will do theirs. Only when an issue appears will they dig into the other code to see where it goes wrong.

I need to keep up with this fast-moving field.

It is not a fast moving field. It is fast but not that fast. It only appears to move fast because failing programmers jump to the next programming hype to hide their failure yet again. Last methodology was bad but we have this new methodology that this time will guarantee success (NOT).

Web development skills and app development skill both ends into coding monkeys. That is not the path you want to take as ethical hacker.

Also ethical hacker means that sooner or later you will end up into a lawsuit. So focus on understanding the law is you want to pursuit that. Not only the law in your country but also the law in other countries.

I am happy to see a coding blog that is full of content and not an epileptic inducing one paragraph sentence per screen blog.

I have known a time where con,tent looked great on a smart phone, looked great on a desktop, looked great on a 5 year old PC.

It is shocking to discover that developers have become so bad at their job that they can't even put up some text on a browser that does not look ugly and ergonomics complete useless web site.

I predict that in the next years to come a sharp prise of RSI because you can't read a silly text without scrolling your mouse.

I do not recognize anything useful in these tips.

When you are blocked, you need focus. Go to 200% of you capacity until you nail it down. Giving up too early is why projects fail. You take the easy way and the easy way always end up into failure.

200% focus will burn you up so you need rest your mind. So what I tend to do is when I have bad days I do boring stuff when I have good days I go for the hard stuff improve the existing code to make it look more professional. Renaming variables, reordering instructions, adding comments....

When you are stuck at something then massage your code, try to invert the if-else, try to use a switch instead of an if then else if then else.... Reordering the code sometimes gives you the inspiration to find a solution.

Think outside the box. Kick all these design patterns you ever learned out of your program and create a design pattern that is specific for your application. Good software is always custom made specially for your product, company project. The hole purpose is to beat the competition, and you can't beat the competition if your program looks exactly like the competition: CRAPPY

Ergonomics. Something people seem to have lost in the last 5 years. If you are stuck with your application then try to improve the ergonomics. It will force you to rewrite your code allowing you to discover new ways to make the code more elegant and optimized.

We are at a point where custom neural networks are becoming hardwired hardware. You can't get any faster than that, so learning to program AI will be over by the time you have learned it. It all will boil down in training it.

But you have to realize that AI is actually very energy and time consuming to do the same simple job as none AI. It is slower because you need more electronic and more power. Also you need longer lines to connect the AI cores so that also slows down. And AI that is self learning also tends to deviate from the standard. You don't want industrial processes controlled by Ai's that have different personalties if you replace them.

I think the most interesting thing to learn is to learn how to manipulate AI's. Manipulate so you can hide in the data or manipulate so you pop up in the data. And the other thing is create technology to verify if an AI has lost its mind, got manipulated by governments and advertisement agencies.

Great article!

You don't become a good developer when you copy others. You become a good developer when you trigger your creativity and find solutions others cannot find. You go into the realms of the unexplored and find it by yourself.

One of the interesting things is that team work actually prevents you from becoming a good developer. You never get exposed for the hard problems, someone else is always saving you, so you never learn to get the energy to focus to complete the program to the very end.

For the last months I have been forced the SCRUM methodology. It is one of the most mind numbing experience you can find. You literally get taught that failure is the new norm. You have to accept it as inevitable. But I refuse to do so. I do not adept failure of my projects and code as normal. So I am using my creative mindset to bypass any imposed restrictions by SCRUM.

However the hard reality is that being a good developer most probably will prevent you from finding a job. It is hard to pass the HR bullshit that only selects on hyped keywords. And with the SCRUM madness, they will probably not want you because you will singlehanded outperform the SCRUM team. There is a mass money industry behind the SCRUM madness, and you would prove that they wasted all their money to create this crappy software that never seems to work.

What do you mean language? AI does not use language, it uses neurons. You don't program it, you feed training data.

The future of front web development? Starting to go back to sanity and lose all these crappy flashy irritating useless web sites that has been deployed in the last few years.

Also the web site this link is pointing to, it is one of the best examples how crappy sites looks like. Voat on the other hand, is way superior in ergonomics and usability.

This is the first good advice that I have seen in ages.

I see content now :-)

OK I take my word back.

This link points to a possible SPAM site or is broken.

This link points to a possible SPAM site

This is yet another code generator that will end up creating thousands of apps that are basically near clones of each other and end up being useless.

The whole purpose to have good developers is not to clone what others have but to create something that the others do not have!

1. Don’t do work in object constructors, which are hard to test and surprising.

Good advice. I would even say that constructors should only contain code that is fast and will not fail. If you have additional code that needs to be executed that could fail or will take time then use a separate method that may be named "Initialize()"

When your constructor only contains code that cannot fail, you always end up into a "known" state. Not a partially initialized state that take sup too much code to free up resources and detect what has initialized and what failed.

1. Make code correct first and fast second. When working on performance issues, always profile before making fixes.

This is good advice. First make sure your code works. Code in such a way that the code is readable. It is the only way to have a baseline to compare to to see if the speed increase is actually increased.

However improving speed is normally done by redesigning the work-flow and code flow. Optimizing one method means nothing, you have to do it for the complete library. e.g. it is pointless to have too many parallel threads if you bottleneck is that single hard disk. Your other threads stalls waiting for that single thread to complete.

I recently saw a guy modify my code in what he thought would be faster. He used this giant linq statement. I asked other developers what this code is doing. They saw nothing wrong. I told them that no one knows what this code will do. It "appears" correct but you are at the mercy of the compiler, the library that will execute that Linq statement and worse it could create massive parallel network requests that will bring down the network.

Fail fast. Check input and fail on nonsensical input or invalid state as early as possible, preferably with an exception or error response that will make the exact problem clear to your caller. Permit "innovative" use cases of your code though (i.e., don't do type checking for input validation unless you really need to).

This is is BS.

Fail fast with a exception most likely ends up into a giant trace track no one even understand what is happening. It most likely will confuse the guys that uses it and waste their times endlessly. I know this from experience when services goes down yet again and no one understand what the hell did it this time.

I have developed tens of millions of lines of code the last decades and this is the single source of problems that completely cripples your production environment. It most likely causes cascading failures because you create a system that is unstable and unpredictable.

Yes yes I know someone will probably say: "but but, the error should be clear". I have news for you: The code that makes this fault clear is probably going to be bigger than the function that it is supposed to do. And worse of it, the error reporting most likely is going to be a new source of faulty behavior.

Fail fast is NOT a best practice. It could be useful under certain condition but not a rule of thumb.

Also from security point of view, fail fast also means that you expose coding towards hackers. It gives them clues to find out what ticks under the hood.

how compile c program to run

Press the compile button and pray!

A more interesting question would be: "How can I develop C code fast?" Answer: Modify something, Compile, Test. Works? then continue: Modify something, Compile, Test. Works? then continue: Modify something, Compile, Test.

The issue with C is that it gives useless errors. If you modify too much, then it becomes impossible to find that typo you just created in your code. I actually use the CTRL-Z a lot to find the cause. Reading the error lines takes too long and most likely will confuse you.

This article makes no sense to real world developers. It sounds like a "made up" article from some shrink pretending to have been a developer. It has no basis in reality.

The reason why in the world coding has stopped to be fun is because companies all started to jump on the AGILE/SCRUM bandwagon killing any creativity process and taking out the fun and replace it with mindless and boring wasteful meetings. You became just another easy to replaceable number. And you are prevented to create good code. All you are allowed to do is this crappy user story. The job of programming has become exactly like a burger flipping job.

But real developers will always search for an escape route, to do something challenging. They probably start home projects to keep their brain challenged. The day job as a developer is only there to get in money to get your more exciting project running.

Don't teach kids to code. Tech them how to be kids instead. Coding is not for everyone, it is only for those that have a natural tendency to want to code. And you know that your kid want to code because he is going to ask for computer books and a computer himself.

I prefer paper books, easier to read and they last a lifetime. But because computer books are so fast outdated, I prefer to buy them on ePaper, I don't like to kill trees for it.

A competitor obtains this source to attempt to use it to their advantage in some way. The many Mac developers we’ve met over the years are fine, upstanding people. I can’t imagine any of them being this unethical, or even being willing to take the risk of us finding fingerprints of our code in theirs. And let’s not forget that — you guessed it — there’s a good chance any stolen source could have malware slipped into it.

One has to think of that IF a competitor needs to steal source code from another company then it means that they lack skilled developers and that competition will not even be able to understand the code it stole. That company will fail in 6 months after they copied the code because they will pile up so many bugs.

In software development you can't cheat. You can copy someones code but you must always integrated and adapt it to your needs. I regularly inherit other peoples projects and I am amazed how many frameworks they piled on top if each other making the code near impossible to fix. And then you discover why it took a complete team years to keep that code running. The frameworks slowed them down.

Luck, that is how I started.

I call it a hobby that grew out of proportion.

To be honest I always copy code I find from the Internet. However I improve it and remove all bugs. And I convert it to match my current framework I am building.

Great Microsoft is now also infecting Mac with telemetry.

Without coders your application we be an exact same clone as the competition and you will not have an advantage. They all suck equally.

I have learned that a project has multiple different solutions that all will end up having issues. There is no magical bullet that will make your project go easy.

When I develop, I start with something a sketchy. Then I create different possible solutions I want to head to. So my code will try to encompass all these different solutions. I somehow create a framework that makes it easy to swap components and discover by experimenting what works best. The solution that fails I delete them until I end up having a final version.

Sometimes you can't find a good solution. When I am stuck then I will focus to cheat the system and rewrite core components and tools to make it work. This is the moment where most developer freak out when I do that. But if they stay with it, then they will see very quickly that I invented a new design pattern that works perfect for this solution. The end result is always incredibly easy to use.