Search Results

Search found 40 results on 2 pages for 'jcollum'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

• is putting N in front of strings in scripts considered a "best practice"?

  - by jcollum

  Let's say I have a table that has a varchar field. If I do an insert like this: INSERT MyTable SELECT N'the string goes here' Is there any fundamental difference between that and: INSERT MyTable SELECT 'the string goes here' My understanding was that you'd only have a problem if the string contained a Unicode character and the target column wasn't unicode. Other than that, SQL deals with it just fine and converts the string with the N'' into a varchar field (basically ignores the N). I was under the impression that N in front of strings was a good practice, but I'm unable to find any discussion of it that I'd consider definitive. Title may need improvement, feel free.

  Read the article

• what are your biggest complaints about TFS as source-control?

  - by jcollum

  I've used TFS for about 18 months now and I'm really not excited about it. It seems like the worst of the current versions of SCMs on the market. I think this thread will help people decide if TFS is for them vs. other source control systems. While TFS does a lot more than that, I think that source control is so critical to software development that any system (or combination thereof) that you pick needs to consider source control first. So, feel free to sound off. Maybe it'll make us feel better and be informative at the same time.

  Read the article

• databinding to self without code

  - by jcollum

  I'm building a UserControl in WPF. The control has two properties, Title and Description, that I'd like to bind to two textblocks. Seems real straightforward, and I got it working, but I'm curious about something. To get it to work I had to add this code: void CommandBlock_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { this.DataContext = this; } My bindings look like this: <TextBlock Text="{Binding Title}" Width="100" ... /> <TextBlock Text="{Binding Description}" Width="100" ... /> What I'm wondering is how come I couldn't get it to work without the this.DataContext = this; and instead use DataContext="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource Self}}" (in the UserControl element of the markup)? I'm sure I'm missing something about DataContexts but don't know what.

  Read the article

• what's a good way to implement something that looks like Dictionary<string, string, Dictionary<strin

  - by jcollum

  I've got a data structure that is Key, Value, OtherValues(key, Value). So the OtherValues are attached to the first Key and aren't always there. I can do this as Dictionary<Key, ValueAndListOfOptionalValues> where ValueAndListOfOptionalValues is a class with a string and a Dictionary<string, string>. I'm wondering if that's really the best way to do it? Sometimes I think that I'm missing some important classes in the Generics namespace, maybe there are better classes out there that I'm not aware of.

  Read the article

• http handlers and modules: what's a good example of a problem they solve?

  - by jcollum

  I got this in an interview question -- the question was more about what they do, which I didn't know beyond very vague terms. But after reading about them I'm still no closer to an understanding of what problems I would solve with an HttpHandler or HttpModule. I've worked a fair amount in ASP.NET but it's been a few years -- is this a large gap in my knowledge? Something that's been replaced by more current technology?

  Read the article

• do functions in sql server have different permissions rules?

  - by jcollum

  Here's the situation. I'm writing an automated test that walks the list of dependencies for a proc and determines if an acct has rights for all of the dependent objects. My code looks like this: exec sp_depends 'the_proc_name' -- run this query on the results of sp_depends: select case when exists ( select * from sys.database_permissions dp where grantee_principal_id=USER_ID('TheAccount') and major_id=object_id('dbo.theDependentObject') and minor_id=0 and state_desc = 'GRANT') then 'true' else 'false' end; It all seems to be working fine, but there's a hiccup when it encounters a function. I have one case where TheAccount doesn't have rights to a function (the query above returns false). However the proc that calls the function in question runs fine when running under TheAccount. So there's either something wrong with my test code or functions have special permission behavior in SQL-Server that I'm not aware of. Should I change the code to only search for 'DENY' instead of 'GRANT'? Do functions that are called in procs inherit the permissions of the calling proc except when the execute rights are explicitly denied? Does my code suck?

  Read the article

• TFS as source-control: what do you love? what do you hate?

  - by jcollum

  I've used TFS for about 18 months now and I'm really not excited about it. It seems like the worst of the current versions of SCMs on the market. I think this thread will help people decide if TFS is for them vs. other source control systems. While TFS does a lot more than that, I think that source control is so critical to software development that any system (or combination thereof) that you pick needs to consider source control first. What are the good things about TFS vs. other source controls -- what does it do well that no one else does? What are the things that TFS is bad at that everyone else seems to do just fine?

  Read the article

• what's a good technique for building and running many similar unit tests?

  - by jcollum

  I have a test setup where I have many very similar unit tests that I need to run. For example, there are about 40 stored procedures that need to be checked for existence in the target environment. However I'd like all the tests to be grouped by their business unit. So there'd be 40 instances of a very similar TestMethod in 40 separate classes. Kinda lame. One other thing: each group of tests need to be in their own solution. So Business Unit A will have a solution called Tests.BusinessUnitA. I'm thinking that I can set this all up by passing a configuration object (with the name of the stored proc to check, among other things) to a TestRunner class. The problem is that I'm losing the atomicity of my unit tests. I wouldn't be able to run just one of the tests, I'd have to run all the tests in the TestRunner class. This is what the code looks like at this time. Sure, it's nice and compact, but if Test 8 fails, I have no way of running just Test 8. TestRunner runner = new TestRunner(config, this.TestContext); var runnerType = typeof(TestRunner); var methods = runnerType.GetMethods() .Where(x => x.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(TestMethodAttribute), false) .Count() > 0).ToArray(); foreach (var method in methods) { method.Invoke(runner, null); } So I'm looking for suggestions for making a group of unit tests that take in a configuration object but won't require me to generate many many TestMethods. This looks like it might require code-generation, but I'd like to solve it without that.

  Read the article

• is there a good reason to fear closed-source code *inside* of open-source libraries?

  - by jcollum

  Here's the situation. At work here, I hear there is resistance to using open source code (Nant in particular) because there might be copyrighted code in there. Meaning somewhere in that open source tool or library there might be a chunk of code that was directly lifted from copyrighted code. In theory, this means our company (which is quite large) get sued for big money because they used an open source library. We don't ship any software, so how this theoretical plaintiff would find this out is a mystery. I have also heard that some group of people came through a year or two ago and actually found instances of this in our codebase. That's hearsay of course, so who knows. Is this simple paranoia? Didn't something similar to this happen with Linux a while ago? Wouldn't the burden of checking for copyrighted code lie with the people who made the code, not the people who use it?

  Read the article

• is it a good idea to write tests for environments other than development?

  - by jcollum

  Let's say I have a (fairly typical) set of environments: PROD, UAT, QA, DEV. Is it a good idea to run your tests across all environments? Here's what I'm thinking of. I have a proc in SQL that my code depends on, I'll call it proc_getActiveCustomers. If that proc isn't present my app will go south real fast. So I write a test that checks for the existence of this proc in the database. Nothing new here. But when I then deploy my app to the QA environment, would I also want to have a test that checks that environment for the existence of proc_getActiveCustomers? I think this is a good idea but I've never heard much about testing in environments outside of development. Makes me wonder if there's some downside I'm not aware of. The direction that I'm going is to have a list of environments in code and then passing that environment into my unit test.

  Read the article

• how can I make a "downstream only" copy of a file in TFS

  - by jcollum

  I've got this SQL script that needs to exist in two places in source control. I want to have only one real copy of this file and keep a virtual copy of the file in the other solution. One is needed for a unit test and the other for a development tool. The files, should, by definition, always be the same. If they have differences then there's a problem with our process. In Sourcegear I could make a virtual copy of a specific version of a file and keep it somewhere else in the source tree. That doesn't seem to be possible in TFS. Is it possible in SVN? So what are my options here? Branching/merging -- which is what the TFS team says I should be doing here -- means just another step that I have to remember to do. Plus it isn't automatic and I would prefer that this be automated. Is there some way to run an exe on checkin of a specific file? I'm thinking if I could do that then I could do a checkout-edit-checkin of the downstream copy of the file.

  Read the article

• is it possible to select EXISTS directly as a bit?

  - by jcollum

  I was wondering if it's possible to do something like this (which doesn't work): select cast( (exists(select * from theTable where theColumn like 'theValue%') as bit) Seems like it should be doable, but lots of things that should work in SQL don't ;) I've seen workarounds for this (SELECT 1 where... Exists...) but it seems like I should be able to just cast the result of the exists function as a bit and be done with it.

  Read the article

• is it possible to create a multi-project template that references n number of existing projects and

  - by jcollum

  The situation: I need to create about 40+ solutions that all reference 3 projects and have one project that is unique to each one. I'd like to create a multi-project template that does this, but from what I've read it looks like it's very difficult or impossible (related SO question, but doesn't answer). I want my solution to look like this (names changed of course): These three are used by all solutions created under this "family": MyCompany.Extensions MyCompany.MyProject.Tests.Shared MyCompany.MyProject.Scripts This one is the one that makes the solution unique, 123, 124, 125 etc: MyCompany.MyProject.Tests.Unit123 Is it possible to set up a multi-project template that will generate this structure? References: MSDN Create Multi Project Templates

  Read the article

• does TFS easily allow you to share testresults with people who don't have TFS?

  - by jcollum

  I'd like to publish a set of test results to a place where team members who don't have TFS can see the results. Does TFS do anything like this easily? I see that that test results do get published, but without a TFS license I don't see any way for people to view them. I think I can do this easily by pulling the XML from the test results and then pushing that out to a central location, but I was wondering if there's anything like an "official" way to do this. TFS is hard to work with when you have some people who have access to it and others who don't... I really wish there was some sort of read-only access to the server (let people get files but not check them out for instance).

  Read the article

• Using MS Moles with datacontext and stored procedures without using a Connection string.

  - by Brian

  I have just begun to work with MS Moles for testing and I have followed the idea/pattern in which jcollum(thanks) uses a Mole for a table in this stackoverflow question here. But I am having a problem as I do not want to have to pass a connection string when I use the datasource as such: using (TheDataContext dataContext = new TheDataContext(myConnectionString)) { dataContext.ExecuteStoredprocedure(value, ref ValueExists); } I really like the fact that I just need to mole the table and everything else is done for me. I realize I could just mole the ExecuteStoredProcedure method, but I am wondering if I could just somehow avoid the sql exception I am getting here when I do not pass in the connection string. Or, if I there is a better way to do this? Therefore, does anyone have a solution so that I can avoid placing in the connection string? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2