I don't typically pore over any manual for months; but with that qualification removed it sounds like something people in general do (i.e. erring on the side figuring things out yourself and not letting the manual confuse you).
I don't typically pore over any manual for months; but with that qualification removed it sounds like something people in general do (i.e. erring on the side figuring things out yourself and not letting the manual confuse you).
If it goes wrong once for ever five times it goes right, you've probably already made the favorable time investment.This had ended badly several times.
C++ is potentially something you'll be using lots of times throughout a lifetime, so it's something I'd be more likely to read up on the details of than, say, a video recorder.
When configuring another person's "stuff", tiny differences in habits turn into major obstacles and undermine the assumptions that enable you to configure things quickly in your own domain. I think it's pretty common for people to underestimate the difficulty of the task, regardless what type they are.unfortunately it generally happens when it's my stuff he's meddling with.
I'm personally reluctant to ask people for help on such things for this reason. They always end up being confused by something I do "different".
LIIs are reading manuals.
truthOriginally Posted by Timeless
LIIs are reading manuals.
I would be so good at writing manuals, omg.
Who needs manuals, when we have google.
The mode of goodness conditions one to happiness, passion conditions him to the fruits of action, and ignorance to madness.
Chapter 14, Verse 9.
The Bhagavad Gita
C++ itself isn't really a well design language that you could figure out using 'common sense'. It has so many gotchas that it's justifiable to read it while trying to program. The question is: why isn't he using .NET/Java?If it helps, they were more like C++ textbooks.
Something that has deep, interesting logic to it - yes.
Something that is as dry and voluminous as a telephone book I leave to someone else...
Last edited by jason_m; 06-06-2019 at 09:00 PM.
I won't outright ignore a manual, but I like to figure out how to do things on my own. If I am really really not familiar, then I will turn to a manual or look up a how to article. I want to do it right, but I'm not one to get caught up on little details. Though I have language processing issues and I may end up misunderstanding and screwing something up unintentionally
xII se PoLR, 9w1-5w4-2w3 sp/so
Phlegmatic-Melancholic |RCoAI| Fascinator| Newtype-secondary| LEFVl|
#JusticeforJeb_, Water Sheep did nothing wrong, High Inquisitor Of Council of Water Sheep and Water Sheep's protector
Make things right? Who are we to decide when things are right and when they need to be fixed?
I read manuals either for fun or if I have to. In most cases I don't need a manual to understand how a technical device works and how to handle it.
There are two exceptions of course.
The device is counter-intuitive to use or is very complicated.
And for things like programming-languages... you simply need to to know the syntax first... which you can't guess for sure.
I can write 4 step manual for dealing with manuals:
1. Find it online
2. CTRL+F
3. Insert keyword
4. Press Enter
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Or 6 steps... depends on the functional state of your device you use for information retrieval.
-1. Start computer
0. Open web-browser
I use manuals when I don't know how to do something, and don't when I do. That's about as complicated as it gets.
Men don't read manuals.
Don’t use .NET, but isn’t it difficult to use on any platform that’s not Windows? And Java can’t do all C++ can. Too abstracted. Can’t manage memory directly, no pointers, and there’s the syntax which is annoyingly verbose. But I started with C, so I’m biased.C++ itself isn't really a well design language that you could figure out using 'common sense'. It has so many gotchas that it's justifiable to read it while trying to program. The question is: why isn't he using .NET/Java?
Java and C# suck.
I agree with one of the earlier responses. It tends to be the Te egos who spend hours reading manuals for all their technical details. Te ignoring types tend not to be bothered with such details unless they have to.
----- FarDraft, 2020
I, being a Te-ego type, tend to have one of two approaches to manuals. If they are short and the subject matter is simple, I will quickly flip through the pages, scanning for major warnings, and then will discard the manual.
If the manual covers a topic which I know nothing about, I will once again skim the table of contents, look for warnings, and will thoroughly read any sections that pertain to whatever it is I'm trying to do. Then I keep the manual around.
In cases where I really know nothing about the topic and I don't want to devote any brain space to learning it, I will call the help desk and ask a human for specific instructions. Immediate problem solved, move on to the next problem.
The very best manual I've ever read was the Jaguar XKE Service manual. It was a nearly perfect blend of facts, procedures, operation, and reasons for why things are the way they are. It even had a section on tuning the car for racing. Second best but much farther on down the comprehensible line are the Mercedes Service manuals. They are divided into sometimes arbitrary sections of the car and describe only the assembly/disassembly procedures. Nothing on design intent, nothing on operation. "We know best for you. Just follow directions." A more LSE manual I have never seen.
Worst by far are the Honda User Manuals. "Here is a picture of the instrument panel with labels." Detailed descriptions of functions and operation are scattered about the manual under the Name of the Day. Odometer Reset button is called Maintenance Minder, and the reset operation is in some obscure other section, like the one describing the oil change intervals. The organization of the information is a perfect example of ADD.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 06-03-2019 at 05:18 AM.
Most Ijs don't like following someone else's rationalization; they prefer to research subjects and come up with their own processes. Therefore, instruction manuals aren't usually their first choice unless they're really inept and have accepted that fact. If competent, the exploded-view drawing is likely the only thing ever pondered, if even that. The same thing for Eps but to a lesser extent.......
a.k.a. I/O
They can make exploded view diagrams in their heads. Or something that serves a similar purpose.Most Ijs don't like following someone else's rationalization; they prefer to research subjects and come up with their own processes. Therefore, instruction manuals aren't usually their first choice unless they're really inept and have accepted that fact. If competent, the exploded-view drawing is likely the only thing ever pondered, if even that. The same thing for Eps but to a lesser extent.......
a.k.a. I/O
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
