Search Results

Search found 988 results on 40 pages for 'branching and merging'.

Page 3/40 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is Perforce as good at merging as DVCSs?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've heard that Perforce is very good at merging, I'm guessing this has to do with that it tracks changes in the form of changelists where you can add differences across several files in a single blow. I think this implies Perforce gathers more metadata and therefore has more information to do smarter merging (at least smarter than Subversion, being Perforce centralized). Since this is similar to how Mercurial and Git handle changes (I know DVCSs track content rather than files), I was wondering if somebody knew what were the subtle differences that makes Perforce better or worse than a DVCS like Mercurial or Git.

    Read the article

  • What is the standard or best way to deal with database branching with Mercurial or Git branches?

    - by Chad Johnson
    This has been a big question mark on my mind. I'm moving to Mercurial or Git very soon for my web software, and sometimes my branches require significant database changes which other branches should not see. This, I can't always share the same database for my branches. Is there some standard way of dealing with database changes for branching and cloning? What do you all do? I'm using MySQL.

    Read the article

  • TFS: Branching. How to map a branch to IIS for local test

    - by DarkJackO
    Hi, I think there's something I don't understand about Branching How can I run my website from localhost to test my changes made on a Branch Let's say my branch structure is -Dev -UI -App Main -UI -App The project UI and App from the main are map in my IIS, it's all working well Now I want to make some changes in the UI project from Dev branch, and I want to test these changes before I merge them to Main Thanks

    Read the article

  • Which online form builders offer conditional logic/branching?

    - by Hari Sundararajan
    I have a survey with the following form fields: Country Age Male/Female Undergraduate/Graduate Question? Yes No If No, what about this and that? Yes No Google Forms and SurveyMonkey don't seem to allow things like the above. For question one I could ask, "What country are you from?" with a textbox as an answer section and work around it. But how do I go about creating questions five and six? I am not able to figure out how to do it except for having one more question that says "If your answer to the previous question was No, then blah blah (else skip this question)". Any suggestions, apart from creating my own custom website with JavaScript and a backend database?

    Read the article

  • DX11 - Weird shader behavior with and without branching

    - by Martin Perry
    I have found problem in my shader code, which I dont´t know how to solve. I want to rewrite this code without "ifs" tmp = evaluate and result is 0 or 1 (nothing else) if (tmp == 1) val = X1; if (tmp == 0) val = X2; I rewite it this way, but this piece of code doesn ´t word correctly tmp = evaluate and result is 0 or 1 (nothing else) val = tmp * X1 val = !tmp * X2 However if I change it to: tmp = evaluate and result is 0 or 1 (nothing else) val = tmp * X1 if (!tmp) val = !tmp * X2 It works fine... but it is useless because of "if", which need to be eliminated I honestly don´t understand it Posted Image . I tried compilation with NO and FULL optimalization, result is same

    Read the article

  • Useful git commit messages for merged branches

    - by eykanal
    As a follow-up to this question: If I'm working on a team by myself, I can maintain useful commit messages when merging branches by squashing all the commits to a single diff and then merging that diff. That way I can easily see what changes were introduced in the branch, and I have a single summary describing the feature/change/whatever that was accomplished in that branch when browsing the master branch. My question now is, how can I accomplish this when working with a team? In that situation, the branches will be pushed to a remote repository, meaning that I can't squash all the commits in the branch down to a single commit. If the branch is public, can I still have a single useful merge commit in the master branch? (By "useful" I mean that the commit in the master line tells me (1) a useful summary of what was done in the branch and (2) diffs of the same.)

    Read the article

  • TFS 2010 Build Custom Activity for Merging Assemblies

    - by Jakob Ehn
    *** The sample build process template discussed in this post is available for download from here: http://cid-ee034c9f620cd58d.office.live.com/self.aspx/BlogSamples/ILMerge.xaml ***   In my previous post I talked about library builds that we use to build and replicate dependencies between applications in TFS. This is typically used for common libraries and tools that several other application need to reference. When the libraries grow in size over time, so does the number of assemblies. So all solutions that uses the common library must reference all the necessary assemblies that they need, and if we for example do a refactoring and extract some code into a new assembly, all the clients must update their references to reflect these changes, otherwise it won’t compile. To improve on this, we use a tool from Microsoft Research called ILMerge (Download from here). It can be used to merge several assemblies into one assembly that contains all types. If you haven’t used this tool before, you should check it out. Previously I have implemented this in builds using a simple batch file that contains the full command, something like this: "%ProgramFiles(x86)%\microsoft\ilmerge\ilmerge.exe" /target:library /attr:ClassLibrary1.bl.dll /out:MyNewLibrary.dll ClassLibrary1.dll ClassLibrar2.dll ClassLibrary3.dll This merges 3 assemblies (ClassLibrary1, 2 and 3) into a new assembly called MyNewLibrary.dll. It will copy the attributes (file version, product version etc..) from ClassLibrary1.dll, using the /attr switch. For more info on ILMerge command line tool, see the above link. This approach works, but requires a little bit too much knowledge for the developers creating builds, therefor I have implemented a custom activity that wraps the use of ILMerge. This makes it much simpler to setup a new build definition and have the build automatically do the merging. The usage of the activity is then implemented as part of the Library Build process template mentioned in the previous post. For this article I have just created a simple build process template that only performs the ILMerge operation.   Below is the code for the custom activity. To make it compile, you need to reference the ILMerge.exe assembly. /// <summary> /// Activity for merging a list of assembies into one, using ILMerge /// </summary> public sealed class ILMergeActivity : BaseCodeActivity { /// <summary> /// A list of file paths to the assemblies that should be merged /// </summary> [RequiredArgument] public InArgument<IEnumerable<string>> InputAssemblies { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Full path to the generated assembly /// </summary> [RequiredArgument] public InArgument<string> OutputFile { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Which input assembly that the attibutes for the generated assembly should be copied from. /// Optional. If not specified, the first input assembly will be used /// </summary> public InArgument<string> AttributeFile { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Kind of assembly to generate, dll or exe /// </summary> public InArgument<TargetKindEnum> TargetKind { get; set; } // If your activity returns a value, derive from CodeActivity<TResult> // and return the value from the Execute method. protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context) { string message = InputAssemblies.Get(context).Aggregate("", (current, assembly) => current + (assembly + " ")); TrackMessage(context, "Merging " + message + " into " + OutputFile.Get(context)); ILMerge m = new ILMerge(); m.SetInputAssemblies(InputAssemblies.Get(context).ToArray()); m.TargetKind = TargetKind.Get(context) == TargetKindEnum.Dll ? ILMerge.Kind.Dll : ILMerge.Kind.Exe; m.OutputFile = OutputFile.Get(context); m.AttributeFile = !String.IsNullOrEmpty(AttributeFile.Get(context)) ? AttributeFile.Get(context) : InputAssemblies.Get(context).First(); m.SetTargetPlatform(RuntimeEnvironment.GetSystemVersion().Substring(0,2), RuntimeEnvironment.GetRuntimeDirectory()); m.Merge(); TrackMessage(context, "Generated " + m.OutputFile); } } [Browsable(true)] public enum TargetKindEnum { Dll, Exe } NB: The activity inherits from a BaseCodeActivity class which is an internal helper class which contains some methods and properties useful for moste custom activities. In this case, it uses the TrackeMessage method for writing to the build log. You either need to remove the TrackMessage method calls, or implement this yourself (which is not very hard… ) The custom activity has the following input arguments: InputAssemblies A list with the (full) paths to the assemblies to merge OutputFile The name of the resulting merged assembly AttributeFile Which assembly to use as the template for the attribute of the merged assembly. This argument is optional and if left blank, the first assembly in the input list is used TargetKind Decides what type of assembly to create, can be either a dll or an exe Of course, there are more switches to the ILMerge.exe, and these can be exposed as input arguments as well if you need it. To show how the custom activity can be used, I have attached a build process template (see link at the top of this post) that merges the output of the projects being built (CommonLibrary.dll and CommonLibrary2.dll) into a merged assembly (NewLibrary.dll). The build process template has the following custom process parameters:   The Assemblies To Merge argument is passed into a FindMatchingFiles activity to located all assemblies that are located in the BinariesDirectory folder after the compilation has been performed by Team Build. Here is the complete sequence of activities that performs the merge operation. It is located at the end of the Try, Compile, Test and Associate… sequence: It splits the AssembliesToMerge parameter and appends the full path (using the BinariesDirectory variable) and then enumerates the matching files using the FindMatchingFiles activity. When running the build, you can see that it merges two assemblies into a new one:     And the merged assembly (and associated pdb file) is copied to the drop location together with the rest of the assemblies:

    Read the article

  • Does Dreamweaver subversion support branching?

    - by John Isaacks
    Adobe Dreamweaver added support for subversion in CS4. I have CS5, I am able to update and commit, they even have a very easy rollback option where you can promote any revision number to "head" but I cannot figure out anyway to branch using it. According to Adobe their subversion support is not full featured. But I cannot find any resource that stats what all is supported. So is branching one of the things not supported? (I kind of feel like whats the point without branching?) If you can do it, how?

    Read the article

  • Merging Social Accounts: What We Learned This Weekend

    - by Mike Stiles
    Guest Post by Erika BrookesWe learned that it’s not always as easy as you think it’s going to be. While it’s widely accepted that merging multiple owned Facebook Pages that are duplicating communities and putting out the same type of content is a best practice, actually pulling it off without rattling fans is a trickier proposition. Facebook is nice and clear about how to merge Facebook Pages. Although content is not carried over, Likes from the pages you’re merging are. So you can imagine the surprise when such fans start seeing posts in their News Feed from a page they don’t believe they ever Liked. One community member accurately likened it to having your bank come under another bank’s brand name. The Facebook Page changes to the new brand, just like your debit card, emails, signs and other communication. This weekend we did our merge. The Facebook communities of Vitrue, Involver and Collective Intellect were pulled into one community, Oracle Social. Could we have handled it better? Oh yeah. Our intent was to make sure, to the fullest extent possible, that the fans of the Vitrue, Involver, and Collective Intellect brand pages were well-informed about the pending page merges in ADVANCE of the merge. While many were aware that Oracle acquired the three companies, many were not. We learned from fan feedback that we should have sent notifications MUCH earlier to make the brand Page merge crystal clear and to answer any questions. That was our bad, our responsibility and we apologize for Oracle Social showing up in your News Feed if you were not aware that it was a result of your fandom of Vitrue, Involver or Collective Intellect. It was our job to make you aware well in advance. Some felt they had never Liked the fan Pages of Vitrue, Involver or Collective Intellect, so they were understandably upset (some cultures may call it “fit to be tied”) when they found themselves fans of Oracle Social. One thing to consider is that since 2009, brands and developers have used and enjoyed free Involver tab apps like Twitter, RSS and YouTube (1.2 million of which are currently active), which included an opt-in Liking the Involver Page. Often, when Liking happens in a manner outside of the traditional clicking of a Like button on a brand Page, it’s easy to forget a Page was indeed Liked. Lastly, a few felt that their Like of the Page had been “bought.” It was not. No fans or Likes were separately purchased. Yes, the companies and the social properties of Vitrue, Involver and Collective Intellect were acquired by Oracle. Those brands are now being coordinated into the larger Oracle brand. In social media, that means those brands are being integrated into the Oracle Social community. So what now? We apologize and apply lessons learned. We learned that you not only have to communicate thoroughly and clearly, but you have to communicate well in advance of any actionable items that will affect fans. We’re more than willing to walk straight to the woodshed when we deserve it. Going forward, the social team here is dedicated to facilitating content, discussion and sharing around social for marketers, agencies, IT stakeholders and social staffs, including community managers. We anticipate Oracle Social being the premier gathering place for true social innovators as we move into social’s exciting next phase of development. Inevitably, some will still feel they are fans of the Page in error. While we hate to see you go, you may unlike the Page if it’s not relevant or useful to you. Let’s continue to contribute, participate, foster our desire to learn, and move forward together positively and constructively - both for current fans of the community and the many fans to come.

    Read the article

  • Best graphical source code diff viewer/editor for code comparison and merging?

    - by Assaf Lavie
    The options for source code diff viewing/editing/merging seem to be: Free: Tortoise Merge Meld * WinDiff WinMerge * DiffMerge * KDiff AJC Diff Commercial: Total Commander's Diff viewer * Beyond Compare * Delta Walker * Araxis Merge * Are there any other options? (Wikipedia suggests a few) What's your favorite tools for source code diff? And how does it differ from the ones in the list? * Supports directory diffs

    Read the article

  • What git branching models actually work - the final question

    - by UncleCJ
    In our company we have successfully deployed git and we are currently using a simple trunk/release/hotfixes branching model. However, this has it's problems, I have some key issues of confusion in the community which would be awesome to have answered here. Maybe my hopes for an Alexander stroke are too great, quite possibly I'll decompose this question into more manageable issues, but here's my first shot. Workflows / branching models - below are the three main descriptions of this I have seen, but they are partially contradicting each other or don't go far enough to sort out the subsequent issues we've run into (as described below). Thus our team so far defaults to not so great solutions. Are you doing something better? gitworkflows(7) Manual Page (nvie) A successful Git branching model (reinh) A Git Workflow for Agile Teams Merging vs rebasing (tangled vs sequential history) - the bids on this are as confusing as it gets. Should one pull --rebase or wait with merging back to the mainline until your task is finished? Personally I lean towards merging since this preserves a visual illustration of on which base a task was started and finished, and I even prefer merge --no-ff for this purpose. It has other drawbacks however. Also many haven't realized the useful property of merging - that it isn't commutative (merging a topic branch into master does not mean merging master into the topic branch). I am looking for a natural workflow - sometimes mistakes happen because our procedures don't capture a specific situation with simple rules. For example a fix needed for earlier releases should of course be based sufficiently downstream to be possible to merge upstream into all branches necessary (is the usage of these terms clear enough?). However it happens that a fix makes it into the master before the developer realizes it should have been placed further downstream, and if that is already pushed (even worse, merged or something based on it) then the option remaining is cherry-picking, with it's associated perils... What simple rules like such do you use? Also in this is included the awkwardness of one topic branch necessarily excluding other topic branches (assuming they are branched from a common baseline). Developers don't want to finish a feature to start another one feeling like the code they just wrote is not there anymore How to avoid creating merge conflicts (due to cherry-pick)? What seems like a sure way to create a merge conflict is to cherry-pick between branches, they can never be merged again? Would applying the same commit in revert (how to do this?) in either branch possibly solve this situation? This is one reason I do not dare to push for a largely merge-based workflow. How to decompose into topical branches? - We realize that it would be awesome to assemble a finished integration from topic branches, but often work by our developers is not clearly defined (sometimes as simple as "poking around") and if some code has already gone into a "misc" topic, it can not be taken out of there again, according to the question above? How do you work with defining/approving/graduating/releasing your topic branches? Proper procedures like code review and graduating would of course be lovely, but we simply cannot keep things untangled enough to manage this - any suggestions? integration branches, illustration please? Vote and comment as much as you'd like, I'll try to keep the issue page clear and informative enough. Thanks! Below is a list of related topics on stackoverflow I have checked out: What are some good strategies to allow deployed applications to be hotfixable? Workflow description for git usage for in-house development Git workflow for corporate Linux kernel development How do you maintain development code and production code? (thanks for this PDF!) git releases management Git Cherry-pick vs Merge Workflow How to cherry-pick multiple commits How do you merge selective files with git-merge? How to cherry pick a range of commits and merge into another branch ReinH Git Workflow git workflow for making modifications you’ll never push back to origin Cherry-pick a merge Proper Git workflow for combined OS and Private code? Maintaining Project with Git Why cant Git merge file changes with a modified parent/master. Git branching / rebasing good practices When will "git pull --rebase" get me in to trouble?

    Read the article

  • Merging Waterfall and Agile – Getting the Worst of Both Worlds

    - by Nick Harrison
    Many people have seen and appreciate the elegance and practicality of agile methodologies.   Sadly there is still not widespread adoption.   There is still push back from many directions and from many different sources.   Some people don't understand how it is supposed to work. Some people don't believe that it could possibly work. Some people mistakenly believe that it is just code for a lazy project team trying to wiggle out of structure Some people mistakenly believe that it can work only with a very small highly trained team Some people are afraid of the control that they feel they will be losing. I have seen some people try to merge agile and water fall hoping to achieve the best of both worlds.   Unfortunately, the reality is that you end up with the worst of both worlds.   And they both can get pretty bad. Another Sad Reality Some people in an effort to get buy in for following an Agile Methodology have attempted to merge these two practices.   Sometimes this may stem from trying to assuage individual fears that they are not losing relevance.   Sometimes it may be to meet contractual obligations or to fulfill regulatory requirements.   Sometimes may not know better. These two approaches to software development cannot coexist on the same project. Let's review the main tenants of the Agile Manifesto: Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more. Meanwhile the main tenants of the Waterfall Approach could be summarized as: Processes and procedures over individuals Comprehensive documentation proves that the software works Well defined contracts and negotiations protects the customer relationship If the plan is made right, there should be no change  Merging these two approaches will always end badly.

    Read the article

  • Merging multiple top-level domains into a single domain

    - by user23089
    My client had multiple top-level-domains. Each one represented an insurance program within a specific vertical. For all the sites at these alternate domains, there was a 30/70 mix of duplicate vs. original content. Some of the alternate domains ranked very well for their target keyphrase groups, where others were absent in results pages. We advised the client to merge multiple domains into their existing main domain, for usability and SEO reasons. We recently ran the merger. Here was our process: On the main domain, transfer the content such that it matches 1-for-1 content on the various alternate domains Setup Google Webmaster Tools on the main domain Push the new content on the main domain live and submit a corresponding sitemap to Google Establish 301 redirects on the alternate domains, such that each alternate domain URL points to its respective page on the main domain We did this 12 days ago, and pages (previously on the alternate domains) that had ranked well on Google have now plummeted or are entirely non-existent. Did we do the right thing by merging multiple top-level domains into a single domain? Is this initial dip in rankings normal? How soon should we expect to see it return to its normal rankings?

    Read the article

  • O the Agony - Merging Scrum and Waterfall

    - by John K. Hines
    If there's nothing else to know about Scrum (and Agile in general), it's this: You can't force a team to adopt Agile methods.  In all cases, the team must want to change. Well, sure, you could force a team.  But it's going to be a horrible, painful process with a huge learning curve made even steeper by the lack of training and motivation on behalf of the team.  On a completely unrelated note, I've spent the past three months working on a team that was formed by merging three separate teams.  One of these teams has been adopting and using Agile practices like Scrum since 2007, the other was in continuous bug fix mode, releasing on average one new piece of software per year using semi-Waterfall methods.  In particular, one senior developer on the Waterfall team didn't see anything in Agile but overhead. Fast forward through three months of tension, passive resistance, process pushback, and you have seven people who want to change and one who explicitly doesn't.  It took two things to make Scrum happen: The team manager took a class called "Agile Software Development using Scrum". The team lead explained the point of Agile was to reduce the workload of the senior developer, with another senior developer and the manager present. It's incredible to me how a single person can strongly influence the direction of an entire team.  Let alone if Scrum comes down as some managerial decree onto a functioning team who have no idea what it is.  Pity the fool. On the bright side, I am now an expert at drawing Visio process flows.  And I have some gentle advice for any first-level managers: If you preside over a team process change, it's beneficial to start the discussion on how the team will work as early as possible.  You should have a vision for this and guide the discussion, even if decisions are weeks away.  Don't always root for the underdog.  It's been my experience that managers who see themselves as compassionate and caring spend a great deal of time understanding and advocating for the one person on the team who feels left out.  Remember that by focusing on this one person you risk alienating the rest of the team, allow tension to build, and delay the resolution of the problem. My way would have been to decree Scrum, force all of my processes on everyone else, and use the past three months ironing out the kinks.  Which takes us all the way back to point number one. Technorati tags: Scrum Scrum Process Scrum and Waterfall

    Read the article

  • GitHub OS project how to have a good version and a work in progress version

    - by Para
    I have started my own OS application, I am hosting it on GitHub. My problem is that I push changes to the repository from more than one location so sometimes I want to work on it and sometimes I can't always finish something in time but I would still like to push it anyway so I can fetch it later from my other location. I'd like to be able to somehow have a stable version and have the master branch be a 'work in progress'. How do I do this? Is there some button I can push that will take the code from my master branch and make it into a zip file in my downloads tab and call it a version or should I do this by hand? Would it be better to have the master branch be nice and neat and have a separate branch to play with and then merge the two when the time is right? Would this not cause more problems in the merging phase?

    Read the article

  • Simple Merging Of PDF Documents with iTextSharp 5.4.5.0

    - by Mladen Prajdic
    As we were working on our first SQL Saturday in Slovenia, we came to a point when we had to print out the so-called SpeedPASS's for attendees. This SpeedPASS file is a PDF and contains thier raffle, lunch and admission tickets. The problem is we have to download one PDF per attendee and print that out. And printing more than 10 docs at once is a pain. So I decided to make a little console app that would merge multiple PDF files into a single file that would be much easier to print. I used an open source PDF manipulation library called iTextSharp version 5.4.5.0 This is a console program I used. It’s brilliantly named MergeSpeedPASS. It only has two methods and is really short. Don't let the name fool you It can be used to merge any PDF files. The first parameter is the name of the target PDF file that will be created. The second parameter is the directory containing PDF files to be merged into a single file. using iTextSharp.text; using iTextSharp.text.pdf; using System; using System.IO; namespace MergeSpeedPASS { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { if (args.Length == 0 || args[0] == "-h" || args[0] == "/h") { Console.WriteLine("Welcome to MergeSpeedPASS. Created by Mladen Prajdic. Uses iTextSharp 5.4.5.0."); Console.WriteLine("Tool to create a single SpeedPASS PDF from all downloaded generated PDFs."); Console.WriteLine(""); Console.WriteLine("Example: MergeSpeedPASS.exe targetFileName sourceDir"); Console.WriteLine(" targetFileName = name of the new merged PDF file. Must include .pdf extension."); Console.WriteLine(" sourceDir = path to the dir containing downloaded attendee SpeedPASS PDFs"); Console.WriteLine(""); Console.WriteLine(@"Example: MergeSpeedPASS.exe MergedSpeedPASS.pdf d:\Downloads\SQLSaturdaySpeedPASSFiles"); } else if (args.Length == 2) CreateMergedPDF(args[0], args[1]); Console.WriteLine(""); Console.WriteLine("Press any key to exit..."); Console.Read(); } static void CreateMergedPDF(string targetPDF, string sourceDir) { using (FileStream stream = new FileStream(targetPDF, FileMode.Create)) { Document pdfDoc = new Document(PageSize.A4); PdfCopy pdf = new PdfCopy(pdfDoc, stream); pdfDoc.Open(); var files = Directory.GetFiles(sourceDir); Console.WriteLine("Merging files count: " + files.Length); int i = 1; foreach (string file in files) { Console.WriteLine(i + ". Adding: " + file); pdf.AddDocument(new PdfReader(file)); i++; } if (pdfDoc != null) pdfDoc.Close(); Console.WriteLine("SpeedPASS PDF merge complete."); } } } } Hope it helps you and have fun.

    Read the article

  • Branching Strategies

    - by Craig H
    The company I work for is starting to have issues with their current branching model, and I was wondering what different kinds of branching strategies the community has been exposed to? Are there any good ones for different situations? What does your company use? What are the advantages and disadvantages of them?

    Read the article

  • Issues with ILMerge, Lambda Expressions and VS2010 merging?

    - by John Blumenauer
    A little Background For quite some time now, it’s been possible to merge multiple .NET assemblies into a single assembly using ILMerge in Visual Studio 2008.  This is especially helpful when writing wrapper assemblies for 3rd-party libraries where it’s desirable to minimize the number of assemblies for distribution.  During the merge process, ILMerge will take a set of assemblies and merge them into a single assembly.  The resulting assembly can be either an executable or a DLL and is identified as the primary assembly. Issue During a recent project, I discovered using ILMerge to merge assemblies containing lambda expressions in Visual Studio 2010 is resulting in invalid primary assemblies.  The code below is not where the initial issue was identified, I will merely use it to illustrate the problem at hand. In order to describe the issue, I created a console application and a class library for calculating a few math functions utilizing lambda expressions.  The code is available for download at the bottom of this blog entry. MathLib.cs using System; namespace MathLib { public static class MathHelpers { public static Func<double, double, double> Hypotenuse = (x, y) => Math.Sqrt(x * x + y * y); static readonly Func<int, int, bool> divisibleBy = (int a, int b) => a % b == 0; public static bool IsPrimeNumber(int x) { { for (int i = 2; i <= x / 2; i++) if (divisibleBy(x, i)) return false; return true; }; } } } Program.cs using System; using MathLib; namespace ILMergeLambdasConsole { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { int n = 19; if (MathHelpers.IsPrimeNumber(n)) { Console.WriteLine(n + " is prime"); } else { Console.WriteLine(n + " is not prime"); } Console.ReadLine(); } } } Not surprisingly, the preceding code compiles, builds and executes without error prior to running the ILMerge tool.   ILMerge Setup In order to utilize ILMerge, the following changes were made to the project. The MathLib.dll assembly was built in release configuration and copied to the MathLib folder.  The following folder hierarchy was used for this example:   The project file for ILMergeLambdasConsole project file was edited to add the ILMerge post-build configuration.  The following lines were added near the bottom of the project file:  <Target Name="AfterBuild" Condition="'$(Configuration)' == 'Release'"> <Exec Command="&quot;..\..\lib\ILMerge\Ilmerge.exe&quot; /ndebug /out:@(MainAssembly) &quot;@(IntermediateAssembly)&quot; @(ReferenceCopyLocalPaths->'&quot;%(FullPath)&quot;', ' ')" /> <Delete Files="@(ReferenceCopyLocalPaths->'$(OutDir)%(DestinationSubDirectory)%(Filename)%(Extension)')" /> </Target> The ILMergeLambdasConsole project was modified to reference the MathLib.dll located in the MathLib folder above. ILMerge and ILMerge.exe.config was copied into the ILMerge folder shown above.  The contents of ILMerge.exe.config are: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <configuration> <startup useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy="true"> <requiredRuntime safemode="true" imageVersion="v4.0.30319" version="v4.0.30319"/> </startup> </configuration> Post-ILMerge After compiling and building, the MathLib.dll assembly will be merged into the ILMergeLambdasConsole executable.  Unfortunately, executing ILMergeLambdasConsole.exe now results in a crash.  The ILMerge documentation recommends using PEVerify.exe to validate assemblies after merging.  Executing PEVerify.exe against the ILMergeLambdasConsole.exe assembly results in the following error:    Further investigation by using Reflector reveals the divisibleBy method in the MathHelpers class looks a bit questionable after the merge.     Prior to using ILMerge, the same divisibleBy method appeared as the following in Reflector: It’s pretty obvious something has gone awry during the merge process.  However, this is only occurring when building within the Visual Studio 2010 environment.  The same code and configuration built within Visual Studio 2008 executes fine.  I’m still investigating the issue.  If anyone has already experienced this situation and solved it, I would love to hear from you.  However, as of right now, it looks like something has gone terribly wrong when executing ILMerge against assemblies containing Lambdas in Visual Studio 2010. Solution Files ILMergeLambdaExpression

    Read the article

  • SVN: Working with branches using the same working copy

    - by uXuf
    We've just moved to SVN from CVS. We have a small team and everyone checks in code on the trunk and we have never ever used branches for development. We each have directories on a remote dev server with the codebase checked out. Each developer works on their own sandbox with an associated URL to pull up the app in a browser (something like the setup here: Trade-offs of local vs remote development workflows for a web development team). I've decided that for my current project, I'll use a branch because it would span multiple releases. I've already cut a branch out, but I am using the same directory as the one originally checked out (i.e. for the trunk). Since it's the same directory (or working copy) for both the branch and the trunk, if for e.g. a bug pops up in the app I switch to the trunk and commit the change there, and then switch back to my branch for my project development. My questions are: Is this a sane way to work with branches? Are there any pitfalls that I need to be aware of? What would be the optimal way to work with branches if separate working copies are out of the question? I haven't had issues yet as I have just started doing this way but all the tutorials/books/blog posts I have seen about branching with SVN imply working with different working copies (or perhaps I haven't come across an explanation of mixed working copies in plain English). I just don't want to be sorry three months down the road when its time to integrate the branch back to the trunk.

    Read the article

  • Git repo: Unravelling my mess into tidy branches

    - by Martin
    I wanted to play with a project, so git cloned it and, following its instructions, created a local branch for my configuration (I guess so that users can merge updates back). At first I was just tweaking to suit my preferences, so I didn't bother with any further branching, but now I have some code that might be useful to someone else, but with my passwords, etc in the same branch. Effectively, I have one big branch from which I'd like to have: Postgres backend (default) but with some new code I've added MySQL backend (the biggest change I've made) with that same new code My settings: I can't git ignore the settings file because I occasionally have to add sections for new functionality, but I need to keep my personal settings out of the public branches! I guess this would work best as a local-only branch. Dev branches, which I would branch from the MySQL. Starting from scratch, I think I could figure out how to branch/merge the various updates, but is there an easy way to walk through the existing repo and choose which commits to apply to which branch? Or possibly create a branch from a point upstream then merge back, excluding certain commits?

    Read the article

  • Advice Needed: Developers blocked by waiting on code to merge from another branch using GitFlow

    - by fogwolf
    Our team just made the switch from FogBugz & Kiln/Mercurial to Jira & Stash/Git. We are using the Git Flow model for branching, adding subtask branches off of feature branches (relating to Jira subtasks of Jira features). We are using Stash to assign a reviewer when we create a pull request to merge back into the parent branch (usually develop but for subtasks back into the feature branch). The problem we're finding is that even with the best planning and breakdown of feature cases, when multiple developers are working together on the same feature, say on the front-end and back-end, if they are working on interdependent code that is in separate branches one developer ends up blocking the other. We've tried pulling between each others' branches as we develop. We've also tried creating local integration branches each developer can pull from multiple branches to test the integration as they develop. Finally, and this seems to work possibly the best for us so far, though with a bit more overhead, we have tried creating an integration branch off of the feature branch right off the bat. When a subtask branch (off of the feature branch) is ready for a pull request and code review, we also manually merge those change sets into this feature integration branch. Then all interested developers are able to pull from that integration branch into other dependent subtask branches. This prevents anyone from waiting for any branch they are dependent upon to pass code review. I know this isn't necessarily a Git issue - it has to do with working on interdependent code in multiple branches, mixed with our own work process and culture. If we didn't have the strict code-review policy for develop (true integration branch) then developer 1 could merge to develop for developer 2 to pull from. Another complication is that we are also required to do some preliminary testing as part of the code review process before handing the feature off to QA.This means that even if front-end developer 1 is pulling directly from back-end developer 2's branch as they go, if back-end developer 2 finishes and his/her pull request is sitting in code review for a week, then front-end developer 2 technically can't create his pull request/code review because his/her code reviewer can't test because back-end developer 2's code hasn't been merged into develop yet. Bottom line is we're finding ourselves in a much more serial rather than parallel approach in these instance, depending on which route we go, and would like to find a process to use to avoid this. Last thing I'll mention is we realize by sharing code across branches that haven't been code reviewed and finalized yet we are in essence using the beta code of others. To a certain extent I don't think we can avoid that and are willing to accept that to a degree. Anyway, any ideas, input, etc... greatly appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to catch-up named mercurial branch from default branch without merging the two into one?

    - by Dynite
    I have two branches in mercurial.. default named |r1 |r2 |r3 -------- named branch created here. | |r4 | |r5 | r6 | | |r7 | | -----------> | r8 How do I achieve this catch-up? | | I want to update the named branch from default, but I'm not ready to merge the branches yet. How do I achieve this? Edit: Additionally, what would the operation be using the GUI? Is it.. right-click r6, merge with..., r8,... then what? commit to named branch?

    Read the article

  • Fastest method in merging of the two: dicts vs lists

    - by tipu
    I'm doing some indexing and memory is sufficient but CPU isn't. So I have one huge dictionary and then a smaller dictionary I'm merging into the bigger one: big_dict = {"the" : {"1" : 1, "2" : 1, "3" : 1, "4" : 1, "5" : 1}} smaller_dict = {"the" : {"6" : 1, "7" : 1}} #after merging resulting_dict = {"the" : {"1" : 1, "2" : 1, "3" : 1, "4" : 1, "5" : 1, "6" : 1, "7" : 1}} My question is for the values in both dicts, should I use a dict (as displayed above) or list (as displayed below) when my priority is to use as much memory as possible to gain the most out of my CPU? For clarification, using a list would look like: big_dict = {"the" : [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} smaller_dict = {"the" : [6,7]} #after merging resulting_dict = {"the" : [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]} Side note: The reason I'm using a dict nested into a dict rather than a set nested in a dict is because JSON won't let me do json.dumps because a set isn't key/value pairs, it's (as far as the JSON library is concerned) {"a", "series", "of", "keys"} Also, after choosing between using dict to a list, how would I go about implementing the most efficient, in terms of CPU, method of merging them? I appreciate the help.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >