Search Results

Search found 4 results on 1 pages for 'smartbear'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Mysql SELECT nested query, very complicated?

    - by smartbear
    Okay, first following are my tables: Table house: id | items_id | 1 | 1,5,10,20 | Table items: id | room_name | refer 1 | kitchen | 3 5 | room1 | 10 Table kitchen: id | detail_name | refer 3 | spoon | 4 5 | fork | 10 Table spoon: id | name | color | price | quantity_available | 4 | spoon_a | white | 50 | 100 | 5 | spoon_b | black | 30 | 200 | How to do a nested select statement, where I want to select id, name, color, price and quantity_available column, from the each value inside the 'items_id' column in 'house' table? This is very challenging!! EDIT: after read robin's answer Table house: id | items_id | house1 | 1 | house1 | 5 | house1 | 10 | house2 | 20 | If this it the house table, how to do the nested, join, or whatever select statement??

    Read the article

  • Diff annotation tool

    - by l0b0
    Among the 11 proven practices for more effective, efficient peer code review, diff annotation seems to be the one particularly well suited to tool assistance. The article is written by the architect of SmartBear's CodeCollaborator, so he of course recommends using that. Does anyone know of any alternatives? I can't think of anything that would be even close to paper+pen+marker in pure developer efficiency when it comes to explaining a piece of code.

    Read the article

  • Comparison of Code Review Tools/Systems

    - by SytS
    There are a number of tools/systems available aimed at streamlining and enhancing the code review process, including: CodeStriker Review Board, code review system in use at VMWare Code Collaborator, commercial product by SmartBear Rietveld, based on Modrian, the code review system in use at Google Crucible, commercial product by Atlassian These systems all have varying feature sets, and differ in degrees of maturity and polish; the selection is a little bewildering for someone who is evaluating code review systems for the frist time. Some of these tools have already been mentioned in other questions/answers on StackOverflow, but I would like to see a more comprehensive comparison of the more popular systems, especially with respect to: integration with source control systems integration with bug tracking systems supported workflow (reviews pre/post commit, review or contiguous/non-contigous revision ranges, etc) deployment/maintenance requirements

    Read the article

  • Is One Tool or a Suite of Tools Better for Scrum?

    - by Rob Wells
    G'day, Edit: We've been using Scrum very successfully for several years on several projects of varying sizes. In fact, our team developed the successful iPlayer project for the BBC using a classical Scrum approach. After using various combinations of tools, some high-tech, some low-tech, across these projects we now wish to try adopting a suitable tool suite. Our manager is to some extent attempting to force the adoption of a single suite of tools for Scrum. I've looked at the SO question "Best Scrum tools" and most people seem to recommend either: a suite of low-tech solutions, e.g. whiteboards, post-its, index cards, etc., or a monolithic tool that tries to satisfy as much as possible of the process, e.g. Agilo, Mingle, ScrumWorks, Target Process, etc. Our team is currently evaluating several different Scrum tools. However, we are looking at selecting a single, monolithic tool, e.g. Agilo. All of the "one-stop" solutions have their strengths and weaknesses with the serious enterprise type solutions being the best sort of fit. But all have some short comings. After reading the paper "Peer Code Review: An Agile Process" over at SmartBear I started wondering if we were trying to force adoption of a tool on a "best fit" basis. I think you can take a couple of reference artefacts of the Scrum development process, say user stories, epics and themes, and the code base which must use a well-known SCM, e.g. SVN, Hg, etc. Then if we take that as the common reference points for the tools employed then we would be able to use a group of tools to handle the different aspects of the Scrum process rather than try forcing a fit of a single tool would is a bit like forcing a square peg into the round hole. In this way, providing you've agreed your common reference points, you can use several tools, each performing their role better than a could be done by a single component in a monolithic tool suite. Is this a more sensible approach? Are the two reference points I mentioned above suitable, or is their a better choice of points where the tools would meet? cheers,

    Read the article

1