Search Results

Search found 14074 results on 563 pages for 'programmers'.

Page 178/563 | < Previous Page | 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185  | Next Page >

  • Is there an alternative to javascript for the web that can do multi-threading and synchronous execution?

    - by rambodash
    I would like to program web applications as I do with desktop programming languages, where the code is synchronously executed and browser doesn't freeze when doing loops. Yes I know there are workarounds using callbacks and setTimeout, but they are all workarounds after all and they don't give the same flexibility when programming in the orthodox way I've been looking at Dart as a possibilty, but I can't seem to find where it says it can do either of these. The same with haxe, emscript, and the hundreds of other converters that try to circumvent javascript. In the end it gets converted to Javascript so you ultimately have to be conscious about asynchronous/multi threading.

    Read the article

  • Best way to indicate more results available

    - by Alex Stangl
    We have a service to return messages. We want to limit the number returned, either allowing the caller to specify the max number to return, or else to use an internal hard limit. We also have thought it would be nice to include in the response whether more messages are available. The "best" way to go about this is not clear. Here are some ideas so far: Only set the "more messages" indicator if the user did not specify a max limit, and the internal max limit was hit. Same as #1 except that "more messages" indicator set regardless of whether the internal hard limit is hit, or the user-specified limit is hit. Same as #1 (or #2) except that we internally read limit + 1 records, but only return limit records, so we know "for sure" there is at least one additional message rather than "maybe" there are additional messages. Do away with the "more messages" flag, as it is confusing and unnecessary. Instead force the user to keep calling the API until it returns no messages. Change "more messages" indicator to something more akin to an EOF indicator, only set when the last message is known to have been retrieved and returned. What do you think is the best solution? (Doesn't have to be one of the above choices.) I searched and couldn't find a similar question already asked. Hopefully this is not "too subjective".

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't Haskell have type-level lambda abstractions?

    - by Petr Pudlák
    Are there some theoretical reasons for that (like that the type checking or type inference would become undecidable), or practical reasons (too difficult to implement properly)? Currently, we can wrap things into newtype like newtype Pair a = Pair (a, a) and then have Pair :: * -> * but we cannot do something like ?(a:*). (a,a). (There are some languages that have them, for example, Scala does.)

    Read the article

  • Editing service for blogger with terrible English grammar

    - by Josh Moore
    I would like to write a technical blog. However, the biggest things holding me back is my poor spelling, punctuation, and grammar (I have all these problems even though I am a native English speaker). I am thinking about using a professional editing/proofreading service to fix my blog posts before I post them. However, given the content will be technical in nature (some articles will get into details of programming) and I would like to write them in markdown, I am not sure if the general online services will be a good fit. Can you recommend a editor (or company) that you like that can provide this service?

    Read the article

  • Ruby on Rails background API polling

    - by Matthew Turney
    I need to integrate a free/busy calendar integration with Zimbra. Unlike outlook, it seems, Zimbra requires polling their API. I need to be able to grab the free/busy data in background tasks for 10's of thousands of users on a regular time interval, preferably every few minutes. What would be the best way to implement this in a Rails application without bogging down our current resque tasks? I have considered moving this process to something like node.js or something similar in Ruby. The biggest problem is that we have no control over the IO, as each clients Zimbra instances could be slow and we don't want to create a huge backup in tasks. Thoughts and ideas?

    Read the article

  • Performing user authentication in a CodeIgniter controller constructor?

    - by msanford
    In "The Clean Code Talks -- Unit Testing" (http://youtu.be/wEhu57pih5w), Miško Hevery mentions that "as little work as possible should be done in constructors [to make classes more easily testable]'. It got me thinking about the way I have implemented my user authentication mechanism. Having delved into MVC development through CodeIgniter, I designed my first web application to perform user authentication for protected resources in controllers' constructors in cases where every public function in that controller requires the user to be authenticated. For controllers with public methods having mixed authentication requirements, I would naturally move the authentication from the constructor to each method requiring authentication (though I don't currently have a need for this). I made this choice primarily to keep the controller tight, and to ensure that all resources in the controller are always covered. As for code longevity and maintainability: given the application structure, I can't foresee a situation in which one of the affected controllers would need a public method that didn't require user authentication, but I can see this as a potential drawback in general with this implementation (i.e., requiring future refactoring). Is this a good idea?

    Read the article

  • Creating a layer of abstraction over the ORM layer

    - by Daok
    I believe that if you have your repositories use an ORM that it's already enough abstracted from the database. However, where I am working now, someone believe that we should have a layer that abstract the ORM in case that we would like to change the ORM later. Is it really necessary or it's simply a lot of over head to create a layer that will work on many ORM? Edit Just to give more detail: We have POCO class and Entity Class that are mapped with AutoMapper. Entity class are used by the Repository layer. The repository layer then use the additional layer of abstraction to communicate with Entity Framework. The business layer has in no way a direct access to Entity Framework. Even without the additional layer of abstraction over the ORM, this one need to use the service layer that user the repository layer. In both case, the business layer is totally separated from the ORM. The main argument is to be able to change ORM in the future. Since it's really localized inside the Repository layer, to me, it's already well separated and I do not see why an additional layer of abstraction is required to have a "quality" code.

    Read the article

  • Simple method for reliably detecting code in text?

    - by Jeff Atwood
    GMail has this feature where it will warn you if you try to send an email that it thinks might have an attachment. Because GMail detected the string see the attached in the email, but no actual attachment, it warns me with an OK / Cancel dialog when I click the Send button. We have a related problem on Stack Overflow. That is, when a user enters a post like this one: my problem is I need to change the database but I don't won't to create a new connection. example: DataSet dsMasterInfo = new DataSet(); Database db = DatabaseFactory.CreateDatabase("ConnectionString"); DbCommand dbCommand = db.GetStoredProcCommand("uspGetMasterName"); This user did not format their code as code! That is, they didn't indent by 4 spaces per Markdown, or use the code button (or the keyboard shortcut ctrl+k) which does that for them. Thus, our system is accreting a lot of edits where people have to go in and manually format code for people that are somehow unable to figure this out. This leads to a lot of bellyaching. We've improved the editor help several times, but short of driving over to the user's house and pressing the correct buttons on their keyboard for them, we're at a loss to see what to do next. That's why we are considering a Google GMail style warning: Did you mean to post code? You wrote stuff that we think looks like code, but you didn't format it as code by indenting 4 spaces, using the toolbar code button or the ctrl+k code formatting command. However, presenting this warning requires us to detect the presence of what we think is unformatted code in a question. What is a simple, semi-reliable way of doing this? Per Markdown, code is always indented by 4 spaces or within backticks, so anything correctly formatted can be discarded from the check immediately. This is only a warning and it will only apply to low-reputation users asking their first questions (or providing their first answers), so some false positives are OK, so long as they are about 5% or less. Questions on Stack Overflow can be in any language, though we can realistically limit our check to, say, the "big ten" languages. Per the tags page that would be C#, Java, PHP, JavaScript, Objective-C, C, C++, Python, Ruby. Use the Stack Overflow creative commons data dump to audit your potential solution (or just pick a few questions in the top 10 tags on Stack Overflow) and see how it does. Pseudocode is fine, but we use c# if you want to be extra friendly. The simpler the better (so long as it works). KISS! If your solution requires us to attempt to compile posts in 10 different compilers, or an army of people to manually train a bayesian inference engine, that's ... not exactly what we had in mind.

    Read the article

  • How did you get good practices for your OOP designs?

    - by Darf Zon
    I realized I have a difficulty creating OOP designs. I spent many time deciding if this property is correctly set it to X class. For example, this is a post which has a few days: http://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/8041/how-to-improve-my-factory-design I'm not convinced of my code. So I want to improve my designs, take less time creating it. How did you learn creating good designs? Some books that you can recommend me?

    Read the article

  • Dependency Checker/ Installer With Java/Ant

    - by jsn
    I need some kind of software to easily roll out code on new servers. I use Apache Ant for builds. However, say I want to set-up a new server fast and my Java program depends on GhostScript, if there any software that can automatically check the computer for it (and then maybe the PATH) and add it if is not there? I have already looked at Maven and Apache Ivy, however, I think these are only for .jar files (from what I saw). Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Good Practices for writing large (team/solo) projects (In C)

    - by Moshe Magnes
    Since I started learning C a few years ago, I have never been a part of a team that worked on a project. Im very interested to know what are the best practices for writing large projects in C. One of the things i want to know, is when (not how) do I split my project into different source files. My previous experience is with writing a header-source duo (the functions defined in the header are written in the source). I want to know what are the best practices for splitting a project, and some pointers on important things when writing a project as part of a team.

    Read the article

  • Development-led security vs administration-led security in a software product?

    - by haylem
    There are cases where you have the opportunity, as a developer, to enforce stricter security features and protections on a software, though they could very well be managed at an environmental level (ie, the operating system would take care of it). Where would you say you draw the line, and what elements do you factor in your decision? Concrete Examples User Management is the OS's responsibility Not exactly meant as a security feature, but in a similar case Google Chrome used to not allow separate profiles. The invoked reason (though it now supports multiple profiles for a same OS user) used to be that user management was the operating system's responsibility. Disabling Web-Form Fields A recurrent request I see addressed online is to have auto-completion be disabled on form fields. Auto-completion didn't exist in old browsers, and was a welcome feature at the time it was introduced for people who needed to fill in forms often. But it also brought in some security concerns, and so some browsers started to implement, on top of the (obviously needed) setting in their own preference/customization panel, an autocomplete attribute for form or input fields. And this has now been introduced into the upcoming HTML5 standard. For browsers that do not listen to this attribute, strange hacks* are offered, like generating unique IDs and names for fields to avoid them from being suggested in future forms (which comes with another herd of issues, like polluting your local auto-fill cache and not preventing a password from being stored in it, but instead probably duplicating its occurences). In this particular case, and others, I'd argue that this is a user setting and that it's the user's desire and the user's responsibility to enable or disable auto-fill (by disabling the feature altogether). And if it is based on an internal policy and security requirement in a corporate environment, then substitute the user for the administrator in the above. I assume it could be counter-argued that the user may want to access non-critical applications (or sites) with this handy feature enabled, and critical applications with this feature disabled. But then I'd think that's what security zones are for (in some browsers), or the sign that you need a more secure (and dedicated) environment / account to use these applications. * I obviously don't deny the ingeniosity of the people who were forced to find workarounds, just the necessity of said workarounds. Questions That was a tad long-winded, so I guess my questions are: Would you in general consider it to be the application's (hence, the developer's) responsiblity? Where do you draw the line, if not in the "general" case?

    Read the article

  • What is the supposed productivity gain of dynamic typing?

    - by hstoerr
    I often heard the claim that dynamically typed languages are more productive than statically typed languages. What are the reasons for this claim? Isn't it just tooling with modern concepts like convention over configuration, the use of functional programming, advanced programming models and use of consistent abstractions? Admittedly there is less clutter because the (for instance in Java) often redundant type declarations are not needed, but you can also omit most type declarations in statically typed languages that usw type inference, without loosing the other advantages of static typing. And all of this is available for modern statically typed languages like Scala as well. So: what is there to say for productivity with dynamic typing that really is an advantage of the type model itself?

    Read the article

  • BDD/TDD vs JAD?

    - by Jonathan Conway
    I've been proposing that my workplace implement Behavior-Driven-Development, by writing high-level specifications in a scenario format, and in such a way that one could imagine writing a test for it. I do know that working against testable specifications tends to increase developer productivity. And I can already think of several examples where this would be the case on our own project. However it's difficult to demonstrate the value of this to the business. This is because we already have a Joint Application Development (JAD) process in place, in which developers, management, user-experience and testers all get together to agree on a common set of requirements. So, they ask, why should developers work against the test-cases created by testers? These are for verification and are based on the higher-level specs created by the UX team, which the developers currently work off. This, they say, is sufficient for developers and there's no need to change how the specs are written. They seem to have a point. What is the actual benefit of BDD/TDD, if you already have a test-team who's test cases are fully compatible with the higher-level specs currently given to the developers?

    Read the article

  • C library build system dependencies

    - by Ninefingers
    Hello all, This debate has cropped up on a mailing list for a project I'm involved in. Unfortunately we're quite a small bunch at the moment, so I want to ask a wider audience. We're writing a C library (for arbitrary precision arithmetic) and are investigating build systems. Currently we have a bash script in desperate need of work. I believe we can't use autotools etc due to licensing (bsd vs gpl). So I suggested we use a modern scripting language like python or perl. The question is: is having something like perl or python around at build time an unrealistic dependency on Unix-like platforms these days?

    Read the article

  • Opensource showcase for MVC in Java Swing

    - by Regular John
    I've allready created small desktop CRUD applications using Java/Swing. In hindsight I'm not quite sure if the overall design of these applications is good. I've also done some reading on MVC and looked at different Swing-tutorials. My problem is, that I've got a very theroatical knowledge of MVC and on the other hand, most Swing-resources don't implement the MVC-pattern. Now I would like to get my hands dirty and see how MVC is implemented in Swing in a real-world-application. Are there any opensource project you could recommend? It would be also interesting to have more than one project, to see different approaches. Best fit would be a software, that uses a relational database in the backend, to see an overall design, that I can compare to my former applications.

    Read the article

  • Cross platform mobile development VS Native Mobile Development: Present And Future.

    - by MobileDev123
    I just completed one year in Smart phone development, working on BlackBerry and Android and also developed one application exclusively targeted to nokia feature phones. And just a month ago I come to know about Titanium Appcelerator tool that enables cross platform development, but there are some developers who complain about it's sub-par functionalities. Even a little bit experience of mine says that developing in native environment rather than these cross platform tools will give you more advantages by giving a developer a chance to add more features with better performance. Do you have same experience? Or you find such cross development tools really useful regarding to advance functionality and performance? As porting (or co developing) same application to different mobile platform is common thing nowadays, what do you think will these cross platform tools evolve and force developers to get a hands on approach on them or majority will stick to the native development environment?

    Read the article

  • Algorithm to use for shop floor layout?

    - by jkohlhepp
    I ran into a classroom problem yesterday (business oriented class, not computer science) and I found it interesting from an algorithmic perspective. The problem goes something like this: Assume there is a shop floor with N different rooms, and you have N different departments that need to go in those rooms. The departments and the rooms are all the same size, so any department could go in any room. There is a known travel distance from each room to each other room. There is also a known amount of trips necessary from one department to another (trips are counted the same regardless which room they originate from, so a trip from A to B is equivalent to a trip from B to A). Given those inputs, determine a layout of departments into rooms which minimizes travel time. What is the best way to approach this problem algorithmically? Is there already a particular algorithm or class of algorithms designed to solve this type of problem? Does this type of problem have a name in computer science? I am not looking for you to design an algorithm to solve this, although feel free to do so if you would like. I'm wondering if this is a problem space that has already been well defined and studied algorithmically and if so get some links to research further. I can see a lot of different data structures and algorithms that might apply to this and I'm curious which approach would be "best". And don't worry, you are not doing my homework for me. This is not a homework problem per se, as this is a business course and we were simply discussing the concepts and not trying to solve the problem algorithmically.

    Read the article

  • What is a recent programming language of choice for the AI?

    - by Eduard Florinescu
    For a few decades the programming language of choice for AI was either Prolog or LISP, and a few more others that are not so well known. Most of them were designed before the 70's. Changes happens a lot on many other domains specific languages, but in the AI domain it hadn't surfaced so much as in the web specific languages or scripting etc. Are there recent programming languages that were intended to change the game in the AI and learn from the insufficiencies of former languages?

    Read the article

  • managing information/functionality on shared common project classes

    - by ilansch
    In my company, we have a common solution the contains common projects (2 projects so far, one for .net 3.5 and one for .net 4.5). My main problem is that during time, a lot of code is added, for example hosting a process as windows service is a class called ServiceManagement, But no one but the developer knows it, and if someone wants to use this shared class, he does not know it exist. So i am looking for a way to document and manage all the classes with tags, a 3rd party util/web util, that i can search for tags and maybe find common classes that i can use (if we keep all our code well-documented). Does anyone familiar with sort of tools ?

    Read the article

  • Is extensive documentation a code smell?

    - by Griffin
    Every library, open-source project, and SDK/API I've ever come across has come packaged with a (usually large) documentation file, and this seems contradictory to the wide-spread belief that good code needs little to no comments. What separates documentation from this programming methodology? a one to two page overview of a package seems reasonable, but elegant code combined with standard intelisense should have theoretically deprecated the practice of documentation by now IMO. I feel like companies only create detailed documentation and tutorials because its what they've always done. Why should developers have to constantly be searching through online documentation in order to learn how to do things when such information should be intrinsic to the classes, methods and namespaces?

    Read the article

  • Developing for Windows CE platform?

    - by grmbl
    I'm looking in creating some applications for workers to use on the workfloor. They'll be using Psion NEO devices running Windows CE 5.0. My skillset allows for C#, PHP, ASP.Net (+ webservices). Application requirements: should connect to our ERP system running on IBM iSeries (AS400). should be run in fullscreen (effectively hiding the OS). usability touch functionality. I have tried the following: Full winform application ran through RDP session: [+] easy deployment using .rdp file. [+] application can be run on desktop environment too. [+] rdp host can easily access DB2 using IBM drivers. [+] GUI works ok on small screen. [-] environment = terminal server. (which is already under heavy use) Full winform application running on device OS: [+] environment = local. [+] responsive. [-] must use a webservice to access DB2. [-] deployment... [-] fixed platform (no desktop) Console application running on device OS: [+] environment = local. [+] very responsive. [-] must use a webservice to access DB2. [-] no fullscreen or other window options? [-] deployment... [-] fixed platform (no desktop) I'm considering creating a web application but it seems the OS comes with IE 5? I don't want to alter the OS in any way! (install other browsers etc.) I would like to have an application that's responsive, easy to deploy, fullscreen and optionally multiplatform. I have seen handheld devices using terminal (emulation?) with a console like interface. This seems to be native to the device but I'm afraid this requires modest knowledge of C++? It seems that using RDP is the way to go but, I came here for advice and look for people that have been in the same situation willing to share their experience. There does not seem to be many "best practices" on the web that could help me decide the best way of working. Greetings

    Read the article

  • Workflow versioning

    - by Nitra
    I believe I have a fundamental misunderstanding when it comes to workflow engines which I would appreciate if you could help me sort out. I'm not sure if my misunderstanding is specific to the workflow engine I'm using, or if it's a general misunderstanding. I happen to use Windows Workflow Foundation (WWF). TLDR-version WWF allows you to implement business processes in long-running workflows (think months or even years). When started, the workflows can't be changed. But what business process can't change at any time? And if a business process changes, wouldn't you want your software to reflect this change for already started 'instances' of the business process? What am I missing? Background In WWF you define a workflow by combining a set of activites. There are different types of activities - some of them are for flow control, such as the IfElseActivity and the WhileActivty while others allows you to perform actual tasks, such as the CodeActivity wich allows you to run .NET code and the InvokeWebServiceActivity which allows you to call web services. The activites are combined to a workflow using a visual designer. You pretty much drag-and-drop activities from a toolbox to a designer area and connect the activites to each other. The workflow and activities have input paramters, output parameters and variables. We have a single workflow which sometimes runs in a matter of a few days, but it may run for 5-6 months. WWF takes care of persisting the workflow state (what activity are we currently executing, what are the variable values and so on). So far I think WWF makes sense. Some people will prefer to implement a software representation of a business process using a visual designer over writing all of it in code. So what's the issue then? What I don't really get is the following: WWF is designed to take care of long-running workflows. But at the same time, WWF has no built-in functionality which allows you to modify the running workflows. So if you model a business process using a workflow and run that for 6 months, you better hope that the business process does not change. Because if it do, you'll have to have multiple versions of the workflow executing at the same time. This seems like a fundamental design mistake to me, but at the same time it seems more likely that I've misunderstood something. For us, this has had some real-world effects: We release new versions every month, but some workflows may run for a year. This means that we have several versions of the workflow running in parallell, in other words several versions of the business logics. This is the same as having many differnt versions of your code running in production in the same system at the same time, which becomes a bit hard to understand for users. (depending on on whether they clicked a 'Start' button 9 or 10 months ago, the software will behave differently) Our workflow refers to different types of entities and since WWF now has persisted and serialized these we can't really refactor the entities since then existing workflows can't be resumed (deserialization will fail We've received some suggestions on how to handle this When we create a new version of the workflow, cancel all running workflows and create new ones. But in our workflows there's a lot of manual work involved and if we start from scratch a lot of people has to re-do their work. Track what has been done in the workflow and when you create a new one skip activites which have already been executed. I feel that this alternative may work for simple workflows, but it becomes hairy to automatically figure out what activities to skip if there's major refactoring done to a workflow. When we create a new version of the workflow, upgrade old versions using the new WWF 4.5 functionality for upgrading workflows. But then we would have to skip using the visual designer and write code to inject activities in the right places in the workflow. According to MSDN, this upgrade functionality is only intended for minor bug fixes and not larger changes. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • How can I justify software testing to management?

    - by Nate
    I work for a small company (less than 200 employees) whose software group only makes up a small part of our staff (4 employees, occasionally with a few contractors). The four of us have been making strides in transitioning to better practices, and one of the next logical steps is to improve our testing. As anyone who has done any meaningful tests knows, testing takes a lot of time - and at my company, it takes too much time to justify to management, so we generally do what little we do on the sly. I don't think this is serving us well, as we keep coming up against otherwise avoidable problems when we ship under-tested software. I would like to be able to come to management with a justification for hiring a dedicated software test engineer (someone who can both write automated tests and perform manual ones). Are there any good published studies that show the benefits of adding such a position to a small company? Where can I find information about costs associated with the position? I plan on doing a little number crunching on our own history, but having some external sources to point to would help bolster my case.

    Read the article

  • Odd company release cycle: Go Distributed Source Control?

    - by MrLane
    sorry about this long post, but I think it is worth it! I have just started with a small .NET shop that operates quite a bit differently to other places that I have worked. Unlike any of my previous positions, the software written here is targetted at multiple customers and not every customer gets the latest release of the software at the same time. As such, there is no "current production version." When a customer does get an update, they also get all of the features added to he software since their last update, which could be a long time ago. The software is highly configurable and features can be turned on and off: so called "feature toggles." Release cycles are very tight here, in fact they are not on a shedule: when a feature is complete the software is deployed to the relevant customer. The team only last year moved from Visual Source Safe to Team Foundation Server. The problem is they still use TFS as if it were VSS and enforce Checkout locks on a single code branch. Whenever a bug fix gets put out into the field (even for a single customer) they simply build whatever is in TFS, test the bug was fixed and deploy to the customer! (Myself coming from a pharma and medical devices software background this is unbeliveable!). The result is that half baked dev code gets put into production without being even tested. Bugs are always slipping into release builds, but often a customer who just got a build will not see these bugs if they don't use the feature the bug is in. The director knows this is a problem as the company is starting to grow all of a sudden with some big clients coming on board and more smaller ones. I have been asked to look at source control options in order to eliminate deploying of buggy or unfinished code but to not sacrifice the somewhat asyncronous nature of the teams releases. I have used VSS, TFS, SVN and Bazaar in my career, but TFS is where most of my experience has been. Previously most teams I have worked with use a two or three branch solution of Dev-Test-Prod, where for a month developers work directly in Dev and then changes are merged to Test then Prod, or promoted "when its done" rather than on a fixed cycle. Automated builds were used, using either Cruise Control or Team Build. In my previous job Bazaar was used sitting on top of SVN: devs worked in their own small feature branches then pushed their changes to SVN (which was tied into TeamCity). This was nice in that it was easy to isolate changes and share them with other peoples branches. With both of these models there was a central dev and prod (and sometimes test) branch through which code was pushed (and labels were used to mark builds in prod from which releases were made...and these were made into branches for bug fixes to releases and merged back to dev). This doesn't really suit the way of working here, however: there is no order to when various features will be released, they get pushed when they are complete. With this requirement the "continuous integration" approach as I see it breaks down. To get a new feature out with continuous integration it has to be pushed via dev-test-prod and that will capture any unfinished work in dev. I am thinking that to overcome this we should go down a heavily feature branched model with NO dev-test-prod branches, rather the source should exist as a series of feature branches which when development work is complete are locked, tested, fixed, locked, tested and then released. Other feature branches can grab changes from other branches when they need/want, so eventually all changes get absorbed into everyone elses. This fits very much down a pure Bazaar model from what I experienced at my last job. As flexible as this sounds it just seems odd to not have a dev trunk or prod branch somewhere, and I am worried about branches forking never to re-integrate, or small late changes made that never get pulled across to other branches and developers complaining about merge disasters... What are peoples thoughts on this? A second final question: I am somewhat confused about the exact definition of distributed source control: some people seem to suggest it is about just not having a central repository like TFS or SVN, some say it is about being disconnected (SVN is 90% disconnected and TFS has a perfectly functional offline mode) and others say it is about Feature Branching and ease of merging between branches with no parent-child relationship (TFS also has baseless merging!). Perhaps this is a second question!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185  | Next Page >