As is normal for lists of this nature, #10 starts the list.

#10 was Rob Enderle… I stopped reading the list at that point.

I saw this on parent trap once...

My friend pointed this out to me after I linked him pix from last weekend’s Roanoke Code Camp.

pictures: susanlennonmct and wkhazzard, specifically this one.

> There is an entire development methodology
(whose name escapes me at the > moment) that
makes use of that very phenomenon.

We called it the Rubber Duck method of debugging.
It goes like this:

1) Beg, borrow, steal, buy, fabricate or otherwise obtain
   a rubber duck (bathtub variety)

2) Place rubber duck on desk and inform it you are just
   going to go over some code with it, if that's all right.

3) Explain to the duck what you code is supposed to do,
   and then go into detail and explain things line by line

4) At some point you will tell the duck what you are
   doing next and then realise that that is not in fact
   what you are actually doing.  The duck will sit there
   serenely, happy in the knowledge that it has helped
   you on your way.

Works every time.  Actually, if you don't have a rubber
duck you could at a pinch ask a fellow programmer or
engineer to sit in.

Andy

via Re: Not an awk question.

It might look like a duck, it might sound like a duck, it might even sqeak like a duck, but can it debug like a duck?

Ok I admit, *horrible* thing to post for my first blog but I had to break the ice somehow.

It gets worse: Cardboard Cutout Dog