Search Results

Search found 7541 results on 302 pages for 'team spirit'.

Page 1/302 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is your team is a high-performing team?

    As a child I can remember looking out of the car window as my father drove along the Interstate in Florida while seeing prisoners wearing bright orange jump suits and prison guards keeping a watchful eye on them. The prisoners were taking part in a prison road gang. These road gangs were formed to help the state maintain the state highway infrastructure. The prisoner’s primary responsibilities are to pick up trash and debris from the roadway. This is a prime example of a work group or working group used by most prison systems in the United States. Work groups or working groups can be defined as a collection of individuals or entities working together to achieve a specific goal or accomplish a specific set of tasks. Typically these groups are only established for a short period of time and are dissolved once the desired outcome has been achieved. More often than not group members usually feel as though they are expendable to the group and some even dread that they are even in the group. "A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they are mutually accountable." (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993) So how do you determine that a team is a high-performing team?  This can be determined by three base line criteria that include: consistently high quality output, the promotion of personal growth and well being of all team members, and most importantly the ability to learn and grow as a unit. Initially, a team can successfully create high-performing output without meeting all three criteria, however this will erode over time because team members will feel detached from the group or that they are not growing then the quality of the output will decline. High performing teams are similar to work groups because they both utilize a collection of individuals or entities to accomplish tasks. What distinguish a high-performing team from a work group are its characteristics. High-performing teams contain five core characteristics. These characteristics are what separate a group from a team. The five characteristics of a high-performing team include: Purpose, Performance Measures, People with Tasks and Relationship Skills, Process, and Preparation and Practice. A high-performing team is much more than a work group, and typically has a life cycle that can vary from team to team. The standard team lifecycle consists of five states and is comparable to a human life cycle. The five states of a high-performing team lifecycle include: Formulating, Storming, Normalizing, Performing, and Adjourning. The Formulating State of a team is first realized when the team members are first defined and roles are assigned to all members. This initial stage is very important because it can set the tone for the team and can ultimately determine its success or failure. In addition, this stage requires the team to have a strong leader because team members are normally unclear about specific roles, specific obstacles and goals that my lay ahead of them.  Finally, this stage is where most team members initially meet one another prior to working as a team unless the team members already know each other. The Storming State normally arrives directly after the formulation of a new team because there are still a lot of unknowns amongst the newly formed assembly. As a general rule most of the parties involved in the team are still getting used to the workload, pace of work, deadlines and the validity of various tasks that need to be performed by the group.  In this state everything is questioned because there are so many unknowns. Items commonly questioned include the credentials of others on the team, the actual validity of a project, and the leadership abilities of the team leader.  This can be exemplified by looking at the interactions between animals when they first meet.  If we look at a scenario where two people are walking directly toward each other with their dogs. The dogs will automatically enter the Storming State because they do not know the other dog. Typically in this situation, they attempt to define which is more dominating via play or fighting depending on how the dogs interact with each other. Once dominance has been defined and accepted by both dogs then they will either want to play or leave depending on how the dogs interacted and other environmental variables. Once the Storming State has been realized then the Normalizing State takes over. This state is entered by a team once all the questions of the Storming State have been answered and the team has been tested by a few tasks or projects.  Typically, participants in the team are filled with energy, and comradery, and a strong alliance with team goals and objectives.  A high school football team is a perfect example of the Normalizing State when they start their season.  The player positions have been assigned, the depth chart has been filled and everyone is focused on winning each game. All of the players encourage and expect each other to perform at the best of their abilities and are united by competition from other teams. The Performing State is achieved by a team when its history, working habits, and culture solidify the team as one working unit. In this state team members can anticipate specific behaviors, attitudes, reactions, and challenges are seen as opportunities and not problems. Additionally, each team member knows their role in the team’s success, and the roles of others. This is the most productive state of a group and is where all the time invested working together really pays off. If you look at an Olympic figure skating team skate you can easily see how the time spent working together benefits their performance. They skate as one unit even though it is comprised of two skaters. Each skater has their routine completely memorized as well as their partners. This allows them to anticipate each other’s moves on the ice makes their skating look effortless. The final state of a team is the Adjourning State. This state is where accomplishments by the team and each individual team member are recognized. Additionally, this state also allows for reflection of the interactions between team members, work accomplished and challenges that were faced. Finally, the team celebrates the challenges they have faced and overcome as a unit. Currently in the workplace teams are divided into two different types: Co-located and Distributed Teams. Co-located teams defined as the traditional group of people working together in an office, according to Andy Singleton of Assembla. This traditional type of a team has dominated business in the past due to inadequate technology, which forced workers to primarily interact with one another via face to face meetings.  Team meetings are primarily lead by the person with the highest status in the company. Having personally, participated in meetings of this type, usually a select few of the team members dominate the flow of communication which reduces the input of others in group discussions. Since discussions are dominated by a select few individuals the discussions and group discussion are skewed in favor of the individuals who communicate the most in meetings. In addition, Team members might not give their full opinions on a topic of discussion in part not to offend or create controversy amongst the team and can alter decision made in meetings towards those of the opinions of the dominating team members. Distributed teams are by definition spread across an area or subdivided into separate sections. That is exactly what distributed teams when compared to a more traditional team. It is common place for distributed teams to have team members across town, in the next state, across the country and even with the advances in technology over the last 20 year across the world. These teams allow for more diversity compared to the other type of teams because they allow for more flexibility regarding location. A team could consist of a 30 year old male Italian project manager from New York, a 50 year old female Hispanic from California and a collection of programmers from India because technology allows them to communicate as if they were standing next to one another.  In addition, distributed team members consult with more team members prior to making decisions compared to traditional teams, and take longer to come to decisions due to the changes in time zones and cultural events. However, team members feel more empowered to speak out when they do not agree with the team and to notify others of potential issues regarding the work that the team is doing. Virtual teams which are a subset of the distributed team type is changing organizational strategies due to the fact that a team can now in essence be working 24 hrs a day because of utilizing employees in various time zones and locations.  A primary example of this is with customer services departments, a company can have multiple call centers spread across multiple time zones allowing them to appear to be open 24 hours a day while all a employees work from 9AM to 5 PM every day. Virtual teams also allow human resources departments to go after the best talent for the company regardless of where the potential employee works because they will be a part of a virtual team all that is need is the proper technology to be setup to allow everyone to communicate. In addition to allowing employees to work from home, the company can save space and resources by not having to provide a desk for every team member. In fact, those team members that randomly come into the office can actually share one desk amongst multiple people. This is definitely a cost cutting plus given the current state of the economy. One thing that can turn a team into a high-performing team is leadership. High-performing team leaders need to focus on investing in ongoing personal development, provide team members with direction, structure, and resources needed to accomplish their work, make the right interventions at the right time, and help the team manage boundaries between the team and various external parties involved in the teams work. A team leader needs to invest in ongoing personal development in order to effectively manage their team. People have said that attitude is everything; this is very true about leaders and leadership. A team takes on the attitudes and behaviors of its leaders. This can potentially harm the team and the team’s output. Leaders must concentrate on self-awareness, and understanding their team’s group dynamics to fully understand how to lead them. In addition, always learning new leadership techniques from other effective leaders is also very beneficial. Providing team members with direction, structure, and resources that they need to accomplish their work collectively sounds easy, but it is not.  Leaders need to be able to effectively communicate with their team on how their work helps the company reach for its organizational vision. Conversely, the leader needs to allow his team to work autonomously within specific guidelines to turn the company’s vision into a reality.  This being said the team must be appropriately staffed according to the size of the team’s tasks and their complexity. These tasks should be clear, and be meaningful to the company’s objectives and allow for feedback to be exchanged with the leader and the team member and the leader and upper management. Now if the team is properly staffed, and has a clear and full understanding of what is to be done; the company also must supply the workers with the proper tools to achieve the tasks that they are asked to do. No one should be asked to dig a hole without being given a shovel.  Finally, leaders must reward their team members for accomplishments that they achieve. Awards could range from just a simple congratulatory email, a party to close the completion of a large project, or other monetary rewards. Managing boundaries is very important for team leaders because it can alter attitudes of team members and can add undue stress to the team which will force them to loose focus on the tasks at hand for the group. Team leaders should promote communication between team members so that burdens are shared amongst the team and solutions can be derived from hearing the opinions of multiple sources. This also reinforces team camaraderie and working as a unit. Team leaders must manage the type and timing of interventions as to not create an even bigger mess within the team. Poorly timed interventions can really deflate team members and make them question themselves. This could really increase further and undue interventions by the team leader. Typically, the best time for interventions is when the team is just starting to form so that all unproductive behaviors are removed from the team and that it can retain focus on its agenda. If an intervention is effectively executed the team will feel energized about the work that they are doing, promote communication and interaction amongst the group and improve moral overall. High-performing teams are very import to organizations because they consistently produce high quality output and develop a collective purpose for their work. This drive to succeed allows team members to utilize specific talents allowing for growth in these areas.  In addition, these team members usually take on a sense of ownership with their projects and feel that the other team members are irreplaceable. References: http://blog.assembla.com/assemblablog/tabid/12618/bid/3127/Three-ways-to-organize-your-team-co-located-outsourced-or-global.aspx Katzenbach, J.R. & Smith, D.K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School.

    Read the article

  • build error with boost spirit grammar (boost 1.43 and g++ 4.4.1)

    - by lurscher
    I'm having issues getting a small spirit/qi grammar to compile. The build stack trace is fugly enought to not make any sense to me (despite some assertion_failed i could notice in there but that didn't brought much information) the input grammar header: inputGrammar.h #include <boost/config/warning_disable.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_core.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_operator.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_fusion.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_stl.hpp> #include <boost/fusion/include/adapt_struct.hpp> #include <boost/variant/recursive_variant.hpp> #include <boost/foreach.hpp> #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <string> #include <vector> namespace sp = boost::spirit; namespace qi = boost::spirit::qi; using namespace boost::spirit::ascii; //using namespace boost::spirit::arg_names; namespace fusion = boost::fusion; namespace phoenix = boost::phoenix; using phoenix::at_c; using phoenix::push_back; template< typename Iterator , typename ExpressionAST > struct InputGrammar : qi::grammar<Iterator, ExpressionAST(), space_type> { InputGrammar() : InputGrammar::base_type( block ) { tag = sp::lexeme[+(alpha) [sp::_val += sp::_1]];//[+(char_ - '<') [_val += _1]]; block = sp::lit("block") [ at_c<0>(sp::_val) = sp::_1] >> "(" >> *instruction[ push_back( at_c<1>(sp::_val) , sp::_1 ) ] >> ")"; command = tag [ at_c<0>(sp::_val) = sp::_1] >> "(" >> *instruction [ push_back( at_c<1>(sp::_val) , sp::_1 )] >> ")"; instruction = ( command | tag ) [sp::_val = sp::_1]; } qi::rule< Iterator , std::string() , space_type > tag; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > block; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > function_def; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > command; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > instruction; }; the test build program: i seems the build fails at qi::phrase_parse, i am using boost 1.43 and g++ 4.4.1 #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <vector> using namespace std; //my grammar #include <InputGrammar.h> struct MockExpressionNode { std::string name; std::vector< MockExpressionNode > operands; typedef std::vector< MockExpressionNode >::iterator iterator; typedef std::vector< MockExpressionNode >::const_iterator const_iterator; iterator begin() { return operands.begin(); } const_iterator begin() const { return operands.begin(); } iterator end() { return operands.end(); } const_iterator end() const { return operands.end(); } bool is_leaf() const { return ( operands.begin() == operands.end() ); } }; BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_STRUCT( MockExpressionNode, (std::string, name) (std::vector<MockExpressionNode>, operands) ) int const tabsize = 4; void tab(int indent) { for (int i = 0; i < indent; ++i) std::cout << ' '; } template< typename ExpressionNode > struct ExpressionNodePrinter { ExpressionNodePrinter(int indent = 0) : indent(indent) { } void operator()(ExpressionNode const& node) const { cout << " tag: " << node.name << endl; for (int i=0 ; i < node.operands.size() ; i++ ) { tab( indent ); cout << " arg "<<i<<": "; ExpressionNodePrinter(indent + 2)( node.operands[i]); cout << endl; } } int indent; }; int test() { MockExpressionNode root; InputGrammar< string::const_iterator , MockExpressionNode > g(); std::string litA = "litA"; std::string litB = "litB"; std::string litC = "litC"; std::string litD = "litD"; std::string litE = "litE"; std::string litF = "litF"; std::string source = litA+"( "+litB+" ,"+litC+" , "+ litD+" ( "+litE+", "+litF+" ) "+ " )"; string::const_iterator iter = source.begin(); string::const_iterator end = source.end(); bool r = qi::phrase_parse( iter , end , g , root , space ); ExpressionNodePrinter< MockExpressionNode > np; np( root ); }; int main() { test(); } finally, the build error is the following: /usr/bin/make -f nbproject/Makefile-linux_amd64_devel.mk SUBPROJECTS= .build-conf make[1]: se ingresa al directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' /usr/bin/make -f nbproject/Makefile-linux_amd64_devel.mk dist/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/vpuinputparsertests make[2]: se ingresa al directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' mkdir -p build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86 rm -f build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o.d g++ `llvm-config --cxxflags` `pkg-config --cflags unittest-cpp` `pkg-config --cflags boost-1.43` `pkg-config --cflags boost-coroutines` -c -g -I../InputParser -MMD -MP -MF build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o.d -o build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o tests_main.cpp from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/auto.hpp:16, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi.hpp:15, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp:16, from ../InputParser/InputGrammar.h:12, from tests_main.cpp:14: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp: In function ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]’: In file included from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/detail/parse_auto.hpp:14, /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:125: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::spirit::ascii::space_type]’ tests_main.cpp:206: instantiated from here /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:99: error: no matching function for call to ‘assertion_failed(mpl_::failed************ (boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]::error_invalid_expression::************)(InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode> (*)()))’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:125: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::spirit::ascii::space_type]’ tests_main.cpp:206: instantiated from here /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:100: error: no matching function for call to ‘assertion_failed(mpl_::failed************ (boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]::error_invalid_expression::************)(MockExpressionNode))’ from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/proto/proto.hpp:12, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/support/meta_compiler.hpp:17, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/meta_compiler.hpp:14, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/action/action.hpp:14, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/action.hpp:14, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi.hpp:14, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp:16, from ../InputParser/InputGrammar.h:12, from tests_main.cpp:14: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/proto/detail/expr0.hpp: At global scope: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/proto/proto_fwd.hpp: In instantiation of ‘boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>()>, 0l>’: In file included from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/proto/core.hpp:13, /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/utility/enable_if.hpp:59: instantiated from ‘boost::disable_if<boost::proto::result_of::is_expr<boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>()>, 0l>, void>, void>’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/support/meta_compiler.hpp:200: instantiated from ‘boost::spirit::result_of::compile<boost::spirit::qi::domain, InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), boost::fusion::unused_type, void>’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:107: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:125: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::spirit::ascii::space_type]’ tests_main.cpp:206: instantiated from here /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/proto/detail/expr0.hpp:64: error: field ‘boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>()>, 0l>::child0’ invalidly declared function type from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/auto.hpp:16, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi.hpp:15, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp:16, from ../InputParser/InputGrammar.h:12, from tests_main.cpp:14: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp: In function ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]’: In file included from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/detail/parse_auto.hpp:14, /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:125: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::spirit::ascii::space_type]’ tests_main.cpp:206: instantiated from here /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:107: error: request for member ‘parse’ in ‘boost::spirit::compile [with Domain = boost::spirit::qi::domain, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>()](((InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode> (&)())((InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode> (*)())expr)))’, which is of non-class type ‘InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>()’ from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/auto.hpp:15, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi.hpp:15, from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp:16, from ../InputParser/InputGrammar.h:12, from tests_main.cpp:14: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/skip_over.hpp: In function ‘void boost::spirit::qi::skip_over(Iterator&, const Iterator&, const T&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, T = boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]::skipper_type]’: In file included from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/auto/auto.hpp:19, /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:112: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, boost::spirit::qi::skip_flag::enum_type, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>]’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/parse.hpp:125: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::phrase_parse(Iterator&, Iterator, const Expr&, const Skipper&, Attr&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Expr = InputGrammar<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode>(), Skipper = MockExpressionNode, Attr = const boost::spirit::ascii::space_type]’ tests_main.cpp:206: instantiated from here /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/skip_over.hpp:27: error: ‘const struct MockExpressionNode’ has no member named ‘parse’ make[2]: *** [build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o] Error 1 make[2]: se sale del directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' make[1]: *** [.build-conf] Error 2 make[1]: se sale del directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' make: *** [.build-impl] Error 2 BUILD FAILED (exit value 2, total time: 1m 48s)

    Read the article

  • build error with boost spirit grammar (boost 1.43 and g++ 4.4.1) part II

    - by lurscher
    I'm having issues getting a small spirit/qi grammar to compile. i am using boost 1.43 and g++ 4.4.1. the input grammar header: inputGrammar.h #include <boost/config/warning_disable.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_core.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_operator.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_fusion.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_stl.hpp> #include <boost/fusion/include/adapt_struct.hpp> #include <boost/variant/recursive_variant.hpp> #include <boost/foreach.hpp> #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <string> #include <vector> namespace sp = boost::spirit; namespace qi = boost::spirit::qi; using namespace boost::spirit::ascii; //using namespace boost::spirit::arg_names; namespace fusion = boost::fusion; namespace phoenix = boost::phoenix; using phoenix::at_c; using phoenix::push_back; template< typename Iterator , typename ExpressionAST > struct InputGrammar : qi::grammar<Iterator, ExpressionAST(), space_type> { InputGrammar() : InputGrammar::base_type( block ) { tag = sp::lexeme[+(alpha) [sp::_val += sp::_1]];//[+(char_ - '<') [_val += _1]]; block = sp::lit("block") [ at_c<0>(sp::_val) = sp::_1] >> "(" >> *instruction[ push_back( at_c<1>(sp::_val) , sp::_1 ) ] >> ")"; command = tag [ at_c<0>(sp::_val) = sp::_1] >> "(" >> *instruction [ push_back( at_c<1>(sp::_val) , sp::_1 )] >> ")"; instruction = ( command | tag ) [sp::_val = sp::_1]; } qi::rule< Iterator , std::string() , space_type > tag; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > block; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > function_def; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > command; qi::rule< Iterator , ExpressionAST() , space_type > instruction; }; the test build program: #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <vector> using namespace std; //my grammar #include <InputGrammar.h> struct MockExpressionNode { std::string name; std::vector< MockExpressionNode > operands; typedef std::vector< MockExpressionNode >::iterator iterator; typedef std::vector< MockExpressionNode >::const_iterator const_iterator; iterator begin() { return operands.begin(); } const_iterator begin() const { return operands.begin(); } iterator end() { return operands.end(); } const_iterator end() const { return operands.end(); } bool is_leaf() const { return ( operands.begin() == operands.end() ); } }; BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_STRUCT( MockExpressionNode, (std::string, name) (std::vector<MockExpressionNode>, operands) ) int const tabsize = 4; void tab(int indent) { for (int i = 0; i < indent; ++i) std::cout << ' '; } template< typename ExpressionNode > struct ExpressionNodePrinter { ExpressionNodePrinter(int indent = 0) : indent(indent) { } void operator()(ExpressionNode const& node) const { cout << " tag: " << node.name << endl; for (int i=0 ; i < node.operands.size() ; i++ ) { tab( indent ); cout << " arg "<<i<<": "; ExpressionNodePrinter(indent + 2)( node.operands[i]); cout << endl; } } int indent; }; int test() { MockExpressionNode root; InputGrammar< string::const_iterator , MockExpressionNode > g; std::string litA = "litA"; std::string litB = "litB"; std::string litC = "litC"; std::string litD = "litD"; std::string litE = "litE"; std::string litF = "litF"; std::string source = litA+"( "+litB+" ,"+litC+" , "+ litD+" ( "+litE+", "+litF+" ) "+ " )"; string::const_iterator iter = source.begin(); string::const_iterator end = source.end(); bool r = qi::phrase_parse( iter , end , g , space , root ); ExpressionNodePrinter< MockExpressionNode > np; np( root ); }; int main() { test(); } finally, the build error is the following: (the full error trace is 20 times bigger than the allowed size for a stackoverflow question, so i posted the full version of it at http://codepad.org/Q74IVCUc) /usr/bin/make -f nbproject/Makefile-linux_amd64_devel.mk SUBPROJECTS= .build-conf make[1]: se ingresa al directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' /usr/bin/make -f nbproject/Makefile-linux_amd64_devel.mk dist/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/vpuinputparsertests make[2]: se ingresa al directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' mkdir -p build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86 rm -f build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o.d g++ `llvm-config --cxxflags` `pkg-config --cflags unittest-cpp` `pkg-config --cflags boost-1.43` `pkg-config --cflags boost-coroutines` -c -g -I../InputParser -MMD -MP -MF build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o.d -o build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o tests_main.cpp from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/include/phoenix_operator.hpp:11, from ../InputParser/InputGrammar.h:14, from tests_main.cpp:14: /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/operator/self.hpp: In instantiation of ‘const int boost::phoenix::result_of_assign<MockExpressionNode&, boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>::size’: In file included from /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/operator.hpp:16, /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/operator/self.hpp:27: instantiated from ‘const int boost::phoenix::result_of_assign<MockExpressionNode&, boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>::index’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/operator/self.hpp:27: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::result_of_assign<MockExpressionNode&, boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/mpl/eval_if.hpp:38: instantiated from ‘boost::mpl::eval_if<boost::mpl::or_<boost::phoenix::is_actor<MockExpressionNode&>, boost::phoenix::is_actor<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>, mpl_::bool_<false>, mpl_::bool_<false>, mpl_::bool_<false> >, boost::phoenix::re_curry<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, MockExpressionNode&, boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_>, boost::phoenix::result_of_assign<MockExpressionNode&, boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&> >’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/operator/self.hpp:69: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::assign_eval::result<boost::phoenix::basic_environment<boost::fusion::vector1<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>, boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, bool, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_>, boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0> >’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/core/detail/composite_eval.hpp:89: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::detail::composite_eval<2>::result<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >, boost::phoenix::basic_environment<boost::fusion::vector1<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>, boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, bool, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/core/composite.hpp:61: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >::result<boost::phoenix::basic_environment<boost::fusion::vector1<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>, boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, bool, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/core/actor.hpp:56: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::eval_result<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >, boost::phoenix::basic_environment<boost::fusion::vector1<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>, boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, bool, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/phoenix/core/actor.hpp:65: instantiated from ‘boost::phoenix::actor<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> > >::result<boost::phoenix::actor<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> > >(boost::fusion::vector1<boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>&>&, boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >&, bool&)>’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/support/action_dispatch.hpp:44: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::traits::action_dispatch<Component>::operator()(const boost::phoenix::actor<Eval>&, Attribute&, Context&) [with Eval = boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> >, Attribute = boost::variant<MockExpressionNode, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_, boost::detail::variant::void_>, Context = boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, Component = boost::spirit::qi::alternative<boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::string(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::nil> > >]’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/action/action.hpp:62: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::action<Subject, Action>::parse(Iterator&, const Iterator&, Context&, const Skipper&, Attribute&) const [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Context = boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, Skipper = boost::spirit::qi::char_class<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, Attribute = const boost::fusion::unused_type, Subject = boost::spirit::qi::alternative<boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::string(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::nil> > >, Action = boost::phoenix::actor<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> > >]’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/nonterminal/detail/parser_binder.hpp:33: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::detail::parser_binder<Parser, Auto>::call(Iterator&, const Iterator&, Context&, const Skipper&, mpl_::true_) const [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Skipper = boost::spirit::qi::char_class<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, Context = boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, Parser = boost::spirit::qi::action<boost::spirit::qi::alternative<boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::string(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::nil> > >, boost::phoenix::actor<boost::phoenix::composite<boost::phoenix::assign_eval, boost::fusion::vector<boost::spirit::attribute<0>, boost::spirit::argument<0>, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_, boost::fusion::void_> > > >, Auto = mpl_::bool_<false>]’ /home/mineq/third_party/boost_1_43_0/boost/spirit/home/qi/nonterminal/detail/parser_binder.hpp:53: instantiated from ‘bool boost::spirit::qi::detail::parser_binder<Parser, Auto>::operator()(Iterator&, const Iterator&, Context&, const Skipper&) const [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Skipper = boost::spirit::qi::char_class<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, Context = boost::spirit::context<boost::fusion::cons<MockExpressionNode&, boost::fusion::nil>, boost::fusion::vector0<void> >, Parser = boost::spirit::qi::action<boost::spirit::qi::alternative<boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, MockExpressionNode(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::cons<boost::spirit::qi::reference<const boost::spirit::qi::rule<__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::string(), boost::proto::exprns_::expr<boost::proto::tag::terminal, boost::proto::argsns_::term<boost::spirit::tag::char_code<boost::spirit::tag::space, boost::spirit::char_encoding::ascii> >, 0l>, boost::fusion::unused_type, boost::fusion::unused_type> >, boost::fusion::nil> > >, ... ... more errors but i had to truncate to fit the 30k limit make[2]: *** [build/linux_amd64_devel/GNU-Linux-x86/tests_main.o] Error 1 make[2]: se sale del directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' make[1]: *** [.build-conf] Error 2 make[1]: se sale del directorio `/home/mineq/NetBeansProjects/InputParserTests' make: *** [.build-impl] Error 2 BUILD FAILED (exit value 2, total time: 2m 13s)

    Read the article

  • Parsing "true" and "false" using Boost.Spirit.Lex and Boost.Spirit.Qi

    - by Andrew Ross
    As the first stage of a larger grammar using Boost.Spirit I'm trying to parse "true" and "false" to produce the corresponding bool values, true and false. I'm using Spirit.Lex to tokenize the input and have a working implementation for integer and floating point literals (including those expressed in a relaxed scientific notation), exposing int and float attributes. Token definitions #include <boost/spirit/include/lex_lexertl.hpp> namespace lex = boost::spirit::lex; typedef boost::mpl::vector<int, float, bool> token_value_type; template <typename Lexer> struct basic_literal_tokens : lex::lexer<Lexer> { basic_literal_tokens() { this->self.add_pattern("INT", "[-+]?[0-9]+"); int_literal = "{INT}"; // To be lexed as a float a numeric literal must have a decimal point // or include an exponent, otherwise it will be considered an integer. float_literal = "{INT}(((\\.[0-9]+)([eE]{INT})?)|([eE]{INT}))"; literal_true = "true"; literal_false = "false"; this->self = literal_true | literal_false | float_literal | int_literal; } lex::token_def<int> int_literal; lex::token_def<float> float_literal; lex::token_def<bool> literal_true, literal_false; }; Testing parsing of float literals My real implementation uses Boost.Test, but this is a self-contained example. #include <string> #include <iostream> #include <cmath> #include <cstdlib> #include <limits> bool parse_and_check_float(std::string const & input, float expected) { typedef std::string::const_iterator base_iterator_type; typedef lex::lexertl::token<base_iterator_type, token_value_type > token_type; typedef lex::lexertl::lexer<token_type> lexer_type; basic_literal_tokens<lexer_type> basic_literal_lexer; base_iterator_type input_iter(input.begin()); float actual; bool result = lex::tokenize_and_parse(input_iter, input.end(), basic_literal_lexer, basic_literal_lexer.float_literal, actual); return result && std::abs(expected - actual) < std::numeric_limits<float>::epsilon(); } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { if (parse_and_check_float("+31.4e-1", 3.14)) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; } else { return EXIT_FAILURE; } } Parsing "true" and "false" My problem is when trying to parse "true" and "false". This is the test code I'm using (after removing the Boost.Test parts): bool parse_and_check_bool(std::string const & input, bool expected) { typedef std::string::const_iterator base_iterator_type; typedef lex::lexertl::token<base_iterator_type, token_value_type > token_type; typedef lex::lexertl::lexer<token_type> lexer_type; basic_literal_tokens<lexer_type> basic_literal_lexer; base_iterator_type input_iter(input.begin()); bool actual; lex::token_def<bool> parser = expected ? basic_literal_lexer.literal_true : basic_literal_lexer.literal_false; bool result = lex::tokenize_and_parse(input_iter, input.end(), basic_literal_lexer, parser, actual); return result && actual == expected; } but compilation fails with: boost/spirit/home/qi/detail/assign_to.hpp: In function ‘void boost::spirit::traits::assign_to(const Iterator&, const Iterator&, Attribute&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, Attribute = bool]’: boost/spirit/home/lex/lexer/lexertl/token.hpp:434: instantiated from ‘static void boost::spirit::traits::assign_to_attribute_from_value<Attribute, boost::spirit::lex::lexertl::token<Iterator, AttributeTypes, HasState>, void>::call(const boost::spirit::lex::lexertl::token<Iterator, AttributeTypes, HasState>&, Attribute&) [with Attribute = bool, Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, AttributeTypes = boost::mpl::vector<int, float, bool, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na, mpl_::na>, HasState = mpl_::bool_<true>]’ ... backtrace of instantiation points .... boost/spirit/home/qi/detail/assign_to.hpp:79: error: no matching function for call to ‘boost::spirit::traits::assign_to_attribute_from_iterators<bool, __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, void>::call(const __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >&, const __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >&, bool&)’ boost/spirit/home/qi/detail/construct.hpp:64: note: candidates are: static void boost::spirit::traits::assign_to_attribute_from_iterators<bool, Iterator, void>::call(const Iterator&, const Iterator&, char&) [with Iterator = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const char*, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >] My interpretation of this is that Spirit.Qi doesn't know how to convert a string to a bool - surely that's not the case? Has anyone else done this before? If so, how?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with selfish team member(s)

    - by thegreendroid
    My team is facing a difficult quandary, a couple of team members are essentially selfish (not to be confused with dominant!) and are cherry-picking stories/tasks that will give them the most recognition within the company (at sprint reviews etc. when all the stakeholders are present). These team members are very good at what they do and are fully aware of what they are doing. When we first started using agile about a year ago, I can say I was quite selfish too (coming from a very individual-focused past). I took ownership of certain stories and didn't involve anyone else in it, which in hindsight wasn't the right thing to do and I learnt from that experience almost immediately. We are a young team of very ambitious twenty somethings so I can understand the selfishness to some extent (after all everyone should be ambitious!). But the level to which this selfishness has reached of late has started to bother me and a few others within my team. The way I see it, agile/scrum is all about the team and not individuals. We should be looking out for each other and helping each other improve. I made this quite clear during our last retrospective, that we should be fair and give everyone a chance. I'll wait and see what comes out of it in the next few sprints. In the meantime, what are some of the troubles that you have faced with selfish members and how did you overcome them?

    Read the article

  • Deleting Team Project in Team Foundation Server 2010

    - by Hosam Kamel
    I’m seeing a lot of people still using some old ways ported from TFS 2008 to delete a team project like TFSDeleteProject utility.   In TFS 2010 the administration tasks are made very easy to help you in a lot of administration stuff, for the deletion point specially you can navigate to the Administration Console then Select Team Project Collection Select the project collection contains the project you want to delete then navigate to Team Projects. Select the project then click Delete, you will have the option to delete any external artifacts and workspace too.   Hope it helps. Originally posted at "Hosam Kamel| Developer & Platform Evangelist"

    Read the article

  • Does a team of developers need a manager?

    - by Amadiere
    Background: I'm currently part of a team of four: 1 manager, 1 senior developer and 2 developers. We do a range of bespoke in-house systems / projects (e.g. 6-8 weeks) for an organisation of around 3500 staff, as well as all the maintenance and support required from the systems that have been created before. There is not enough of us to do all the work that is potentially coming our way - we're understaffed. Management acknowledge this, but budget restraints limit our ability to recruit additional members to the team (even if we make the salary back in savings). The Change This leaves us where we are now. Our manager is due to leave his role for pastures new, leaving a vacancy in the team. Management are using this opportunity to restructure our team which would see the team manager role replaced by another developer and another senior developer. Their logic being that we need more developers, so here's a way of funding it (one of the roles is partially funded from another vacant post). The team would have no direct line manager and the roles and responsibilities would be divided up between the seniors and the (relatively new to post) service manager (a non-technical role with little-to-no development knowledge/experience whose focus is shared amongst a number of other teams and individuals) - who would be our next actual manager up the food chain. I guess the final question is: Is it possible to run a development team without an manager? Have you had experience of this? And what things could go wrong / could be of benefit to us? I'd ideally like to "see the light" and the benefits of doing things this way, or come up with some points for argument against it.

    Read the article

  • good/full Boot Spirit examples using version 2 syntax

    - by bpw1621
    Almost all of the examples I've gone and looked at so far from: http://boost-spirit.com/repository/applications/show_contents.php use the old syntax. I've read and re-read the actual documentation at http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_42_0/libs/spirit/doc/html/index.html and the examples therein. I know Joel is starting a compiler series on the blog http://boost-spirit.com/home/ but that hasn't gotten in full swing yet. Any other resources to see worked examples using some more sophisticated/involved aspects in the context of fully working applications?

    Read the article

  • why does this boost::spirit::qi rule not work?

    - by Tobias Langner
    I have a grammar that defines the following rules: constantValue = qi::token(ID_FLOAT) | qi::token(ID_INTEGER); postfixExpression = primaryExpression | (postfixExpression >> qi::token(ID_OPENBRACKET) >> qi::token(ID_INTEGER) >> qi::token(ID_CLOSEBRACKET)) | (postfixExpression >> qi::token(ID_DOT) >> qi::token(ID_IDENTIFIER)); primaryExpression = qi::token(ID_IDENTIFIER) | constantValue | (qi::token(ID_OPENPAREN) >> primaryExpression >> qi::token(ID_CLOSEPAREN)); ges = postfixExpression >> qi::eoi; and I want it to match the following strings: test[1] testident.ident and it should not match test[1.2] testident.5 but it fails to match the first 2 strings. The lexer constructor is as follows: custom_lexer() : identifier("[a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*") , white_space("[ \\t\\n]+") , integer_value("[1-9][0-9]*") , hex_value("0[xX][0-9a-fA-F]+") , float_value("[0-9]*\\.[0-9]+([eE][+-]?[0-9]+)?") , float_value2("[0-9]+\\.([eE][+-]?[0-9]+)?") , punctuator("&>|\\*\\*|\\*|\\+|-|~|!|\\/|%|<<|>>|<|>|<=|>=|==|!=|\\^|&|\\||\\^\\^|&&|\\|\\||\\?|:|,")// [ ] ( ) . &> ** * + - ~ ! / % << >> < > <= >= == != ^ & | ^^ && || ? : , { using boost::spirit::lex::_start; using boost::spirit::lex::_end; this->self.add (identifier, ID_IDENTIFIER) /*(white_space, ID_WHITESPACE)*/ (integer_value, ID_INTEGER) (hex_value, ID_INTEGER) (float_value, ID_FLOAT) (float_value2, ID_FLOAT) ("\\(", ID_OPENPAREN) ("\\)", ID_CLOSEPAREN) ("\\[", ID_OPENBRACKET) ("\\]", ID_CLOSEBRACKET) ("\\.", ID_DOT) (punctuator, ID_PUNCTUATOR) ; this->self("WS") = white_space; } Why don't I get a match for the mentioned strings? Thank you Tobias

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Team Foundation Server 2010 Service Pack 1

    - by javarg
    Last week Microsoft has released the first Service Pack for Team Foundation Server. Several issues have been fixed and included in this patch. Check out the list of fixes here. Cool stuff has been shipped with this new released, such as the expected Project Service Integration. PS: note that these annoying bugs has been fixed: Team Explorer: When you use a Visual Studio 2005 or a Visual Studio 2008 client, you encounter a red "X" on the reporting node of the team explorer. Source Control: You receive the error "System.IO.IOException: Unable to read data from the transport connection: The connection was closed." when you try to download a source

    Read the article

  • Boost Spirit and Lex parser problem

    - by bpw1621
    I've been struggling to try and (incrementally) modify example code from the documentation but with not much different I am not getting the behavior I expect. Specifically, the "if" statement fails when (my intent is that) it should be passing (there was an "else" but that part of the parser was removed during debugging). The assignment statement works fine. I had a "while" statement as well which had the same problem as the "if" statement so I am sure if I can get help to figure out why one is not working it should be easy to get the other going. It must be kind of subtle because this is almost verbatim what is in one of the examples. #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <string> #define BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG #include <boost/config/warning_disable.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/qi.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/lex_lexertl.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_operator.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_statement.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_container.hpp> namespace qi = boost::spirit::qi; namespace lex = boost::spirit::lex; inline std::string read_from_file( const char* infile ) { std::ifstream instream( infile ); if( !instream.is_open() ) { std::cerr << "Could not open file: \"" << infile << "\"" << std::endl; exit( -1 ); } instream.unsetf( std::ios::skipws ); return( std::string( std::istreambuf_iterator< char >( instream.rdbuf() ), std::istreambuf_iterator< char >() ) ); } template< typename Lexer > struct LangLexer : lex::lexer< Lexer > { LangLexer() { identifier = "[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9_]*"; number = "[-+]?(\\d*\\.)?\\d+([eE][-+]?\\d+)?"; if_ = "if"; else_ = "else"; this->self = lex::token_def<> ( '(' ) | ')' | '{' | '}' | '=' | ';'; this->self += identifier | number | if_ | else_; this->self( "WS" ) = lex::token_def<>( "[ \\t\\n]+" ); } lex::token_def<> if_, else_; lex::token_def< std::string > identifier; lex::token_def< double > number; }; template< typename Iterator, typename Lexer > struct LangGrammar : qi::grammar< Iterator, qi::in_state_skipper< Lexer > > { template< typename TokenDef > LangGrammar( const TokenDef& tok ) : LangGrammar::base_type( program ) { using boost::phoenix::val; using boost::phoenix::ref; using boost::phoenix::size; program = +block; block = '{' >> *statement >> '}'; statement = assignment | if_stmt; assignment = ( tok.identifier >> '=' >> expression >> ';' ); if_stmt = ( tok.if_ >> '(' >> expression >> ')' >> block ); expression = ( tok.identifier[ qi::_val = qi::_1 ] | tok.number[ qi::_val = qi::_1 ] ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( program ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( block ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( statement ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( assignment ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( if_stmt ); BOOST_SPIRIT_DEBUG_NODE( expression ); } qi::rule< Iterator, qi::in_state_skipper< Lexer > > program, block, statement; qi::rule< Iterator, qi::in_state_skipper< Lexer > > assignment, if_stmt; typedef boost::variant< double, std::string > expression_type; qi::rule< Iterator, expression_type(), qi::in_state_skipper< Lexer > > expression; }; int main( int argc, char** argv ) { typedef std::string::iterator base_iterator_type; typedef lex::lexertl::token< base_iterator_type, boost::mpl::vector< double, std::string > > token_type; typedef lex::lexertl::lexer< token_type > lexer_type; typedef LangLexer< lexer_type > LangLexer; typedef LangLexer::iterator_type iterator_type; typedef LangGrammar< iterator_type, LangLexer::lexer_def > LangGrammar; LangLexer lexer; LangGrammar grammar( lexer ); std::string str( read_from_file( 1 == argc ? "boostLexTest.dat" : argv[1] ) ); base_iterator_type strBegin = str.begin(); iterator_type tokenItor = lexer.begin( strBegin, str.end() ); iterator_type tokenItorEnd = lexer.end(); std::cout << std::setfill( '*' ) << std::setw(20) << '*' << std::endl << str << std::endl << std::setfill( '*' ) << std::setw(20) << '*' << std::endl; bool result = qi::phrase_parse( tokenItor, tokenItorEnd, grammar, qi::in_state( "WS" )[ lexer.self ] ); if( result ) { std::cout << "Parsing successful" << std::endl; } else { std::cout << "Parsing error" << std::endl; } return( 0 ); } Here is the output of running this (the file read into the string is dumped out first in main) ******************** { a = 5; if( a ){ b = 2; } } ******************** <program> <try>{</try> <block> <try>{</try> <statement> <try></try> <assignment> <try></try> <expression> <try></try> <success>;</success> <attributes>(5)</attributes> </expression> <success></success> <attributes>()</attributes> </assignment> <success></success> <attributes>()</attributes> </statement> <statement> <try></try> <assignment> <try></try> <fail/> </assignment> <if_stmt> <try> if(</try> <fail/> </if_stmt> <fail/> </statement> <fail/> </block> <fail/> </program> Parsing error

    Read the article

  • Messing with the Team

    - by Robert May
    Good Product Owners will help the team be the best that they can be.  Bad product owners will mess with the team and won’t care about the team.  If you’re a product owner, seek to do good and avoid bad behavior at all costs.  Remember, this is for YOUR benefit and you have much power given to you.  Use that power wisely. Scope Creep The product owner has several tools at his disposal to inject scope into an iteration.  First, the product owner can use defects to inject scope.  To do this, they’ll tell the team what functionality that they want to see in a feature.  Then, after the feature is developed, the Product Owner will decide that they don’t really like how the functionality behaves.  To change it, rather than creating a new story, they’ll add a defect.  The functionality is correct, as designed, but the Product Owner doesn’t like it.  By creating the defect, the Product Owner destroys the trust that the team has of the product owner.  They may not be able to count the story, because the Product Owner changed the story in the iteration, and the team then ends up looking like they have low velocity for something over which they have no control.  This is bad.  One way to deal with this is to add “Product Owner Time” to the iteration.  This will slow the velocity, but then the ScrumMaster can tell stake holders that this time is strictly in place to deal with bad behavior of the Product Owner. Another mechanism often used to inject Scope is the concept of directed development.  Outside of planning, stand-ups, or any other meeting, the Product Owner will take a developer aside and ask them to complete a task for them.  This is bad!  The team should be allocating all of their time to development.  If the Product Owner asks for a favor, then time that would normally be used for development will be used for a pet project of the Product Owner and the team will not get credit for this work.  Selfish product owners do this, and I typically see people who were “managers” do this behavior.  Authoritarian command and control development environments also see this happen.  The best thing that can happen is for the team member to report the issue to the ScrumMaster and the ScrumMaster to get very aggressive with management and the Product Owner to try and stop the behavior.  This may result in the ScrumMaster being fired, but if the behavior continues, Scrum is doomed.  This problem is especially bad in cases where the team member’s direct supervisor is the Product Owner.  I don’t recommend that the Product Owner or ScrumMaster have a direct report relationship with team members, since team members need the ability to say no.  To work around this issue, team members need to say no.  If that fails, team members need to add extra time to the iteration to deal with the scope creep injection and accept the lower velocity. As discussed above, another mechanism for injecting scope is by changing acceptance tests after the work is complete.  This is similar to adding defects to change scope and is bad.  To get around, add time for Product Owner uncertainty to the iteration and make sure that stakeholders are aware of the need to add this time because of the Product Owner. Refusing to Prioritize Refusing to prioritize causes chaos for the team.  From the team’s perspective, things that are not important will be worked on while things that the team knows are vital will be ignored.  A poor Product Owner will often pick the stories for the iteration on a whim.  This leads to the team working on many different aspects of the product and results in a lower velocity, since each iteration the team must switch context to the new area of development. The team will also experience confusion about priorities.  In one iteration, Feature X was the highest priority and had to be done.  Then, the following iteration, even though parts of Feature X still need to be completed, no stories to address them will be in the iteration.  However, three iterations later, Feature X will again become high priority. This will cause the team to not trust the Product Owner, and eventually, they’ll stop caring about the features they implement.  They won’t know what is important, so to insulate themselves from the ever changing chaos, they’ll become apathetic to all features.  Team members are some of the most creative people in a company.  By losing their engagement, the company is going to have a substandard product because the passion for the product won’t be in the team. Other signs that the Product Owner refuses to prioritize is that no one outside of the product owner will be consulted on priorities.  Additionally, the product, release, and iteration backlogs will be weak or non-existent. Dealing with this issue is not easy.  This really isn’t something the team can fix, short of taking over the role of Product Owner themselves.  An appeal to the stake holders might work, but only if the Product Owner isn’t a “manager” themselves.  The ScrumMaster needs to protect the team and do what they can to either get the Product Owner to prioritize or have the Product Owner replaced. Managing the Team A Product Owner that is also the “boss” of team members is a Scrum team that is waiting to fail.  If your boss tells you to do something, failing to do that something can cause you to be fired.  The team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner NO.  If the product owner introduces scope creep, the team has a responsibility to tell the Product Owner no.  If the Product Owner tries to get the team to commit to more than they can accomplish in an iteration, the team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner no. If the Product Owner is your boss and determines your pay increases, you’re probably not going to ever tell them no, and Scrum will likely fail.  The team can’t do much in this situation. Another aspect of “managing the team” that often happens is the Product Owner tries to tell the team how to develop the stories that are in the iteration.  This is one reason why I recommend that Product Owners are NOT technical people.  That way, the team can come up with the tasks that are needed to accomplish the stories and the Product Owner won’t know better.  If the Product Owner is technical, the ScrumMaster will need to take great care to protect the team from the ScrumMaster changing how the team thinks they need to implement the stories. Product Owners can also try to manage the team by their body language.  If the team says a task is going to take 6 hours to complete, and the Product Owner disagrees, they will use some kind of sour body language to indicate this disagreement.  In weak teams, this may cause the team to revise their estimate down, which will result in them taking longer than estimated and may result in them missing the iteration.  The ScrumMaster will need to make sure that the Product Owner doesn’t send such messages and that the team ignores them and estimates what they REALLY think it will take to complete the tasks.  Forcing the team to deal with such items in the retrospective can be helpful. Absenteeism The team is completely dependent upon the Product Owner to develop features for the customer.  The Product Owner IS the voice of the customer and without them, the team will lack direction.  Being the Product Owner is a full time job!  If the Product Owner cannot dedicate daily time with the team, a different product owner should be found. The Product Owner needs to attend every stand-up, planning meeting, showcase, and retrospective that the team has.  The team also must be able to have instant communication with the product owner.  They must not be required to schedule meetings to speak with their product owner.  The team must be the highest priority task that the Product Owner has. The best way to work around an absent Product Owner is to appoint a new Product Owner in the team.  This person will be responsible for making the decisions that the Product Owner should be making and to act as the liaison to the absent Product Owner.  If the delegate Product Owner doesn’t have authority to make decisions for the team, Scrum will fail.  If the Product Owner is absent, the ScrumMaster should seek to have that Product Owner replaced by someone who has the time and ability to be a real Product Owner. Making it Personal Too often Product Owners will become convinced that their ideas are the ones that matter and that anyone who disagrees is making a personal attack on them.  Remember that Product Owners will inherently be at odds with many people, simply because they have the need to prioritize.  Others will frequently question prioritization because they only see part of the picture that Product Owners face. Product Owners must have a thick skin and think egos.  If they don’t, they tend to make things personal, which causes them to become emotional and causes them to take actions that can destroy the trust that team members have in the Product Owner. If a Product Owner is making things person, the best thing that team members can do is reassure them that its not personal, but be firm about doing what is best for the Company and for the users.  The ScrumMaster should also spend significant time coaching the Product Owner on how to not react emotionally and how to accept criticism without becoming defensive. Conclusion I’m sure there are other ways that a Product Owner can mess with the team, but these are the most common that I’ve seen.  I would encourage all Product Owners to seek to be a good Product Owner.  If you find yourself behaving in any of the bad product owner ways, change your behavior today!  Your team will thank you. Remember, being Product Owner is very difficult!  Product Owner is one of the most difficult roles in Scrum.  However, it can also be one of the most rewarding roles in Scrum, since Product Owners literally see their ideas brought to life on the computer screen.  Product Owners need to be very patient, even in the face of criticism and need to be willing to make tough decisions on priority, but then not become offended when others disagree with those decisions.  Companies should spend the time needed to find the right product owners for their teams.  Doing so will only help the company to write better software. Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

    Read the article

  • Who should determine team size?

    - by TaylorOtwell
    Developers, managers, or customers? I was recently involved in a situation where I felt like the customers were arbitrarily demanding for more developers on a team which already had too many developers. They were scared the project was going to be late (and it probably will be). Personally, I was scared we were going to fulfill Brook's Law. The group of programmers already lacked in-depth business knowledge, and some were even new to the technology (.NET), yet the customer wanted to add more developers who had even less business knowledge. The impression was that this would make the project get done quicker. I started wondering if the customer, who is extremely bright, but presumably knows little about IT project management, should really be the one determining team size.

    Read the article

  • Parsing string, with Boost Spirit 2, to fill data in user defined struct

    - by Surya
    I'm using Boost.Spirit which was distributed with Boost-1.42.0 with VS2005. My problem is like this. I've this string which was delimted with commas. The first 3 fields of it are strings and rest are numbers. like this. String1,String2,String3,12.0,12.1,13.0,13.1,12.4 My rule is like this qi::rule<string::iterator, qi::skip_type> stringrule = *(char_ - ',') qi::rule<string::iterator, qi::skip_type> myrule= repeat(3)[*(char_ - ',') >> ','] >> (double_ % ',') ; I'm trying to store the data in a structure like this. struct MyStruct { vector<string> stringVector ; vector<double> doubleVector ; } ; MyStruct var ; I've wrapped it in BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_STRUCTURE to use it with spirit. BOOST_FUSION_ADAPT_STRUCT (MyStruct, (vector<string>, stringVector) (vector<double>, doubleVector)) My parse function parses the line and returns true and after qi::phrase_parse (iterBegin, iterEnd, myrule, boost::spirit::ascii::space, var) ; I'm expecting var.stringVector and var.doubleVector are properly filled. but it is not the case. What is going wrong ? Thanks in advance, Surya

    Read the article

  • Essential roles for web application team

    - by jromero
    Some friends of mine came up with an idea for a web application which we (so far) think could be great. I made the analysis and all the early stages of the development process and I'm about to start the coding. I'm talking about something that is barely a mid-level project, so I consider one developer (myself) should be enough. The thing is that we are trying to assign roles to each one of us so we can be focused on our duties and have clear our responsibilities within the team. We are a crew of four people, three of us (my friends) are business people who would do the marketing, customer relationship, management and accounting stuff and I'm basically the developer. I have in mind to get them involved into the development process by giving them documentation to write and use them as testers, all of that besides the management duties they have. Perhaps someone out there have been in the same situation, so I would appreciate if the experience is shared so we can effectively give ourselves positions in the project based on what I explained above. Which are the essential roles or the optimal team layout so the idea can be developed successfully? The question is not strictly about programming, but it's related to build a software entrepreneurship beyond the code, that is something that I'm sure plenty of us are looking. Any help is really appreciated! Regards.

    Read the article

  • boost::spirit (qi) decision between float and double

    - by ChrisInked
    I have a parser which parses different data types from an input file. I already figured out, that spirit can decide between short and int, for example: value %= (shortIntNode | longIntNode); with shortIntNode %= (qi::short_ >> !qi::double_) [qi::_val = phoenix::bind(&CreateShortIntNode, qi::_1)]; longIntNode %= (qi::int_ >> !qi::double_) [qi::_val = phoenix::bind(&CreateLongIntNode, qi::_1)]; I used this type of rules to detect doubles as well (from the answers here and here). The parser was able to decide between int for numbers 65535 and short for numbers <= 65535. But, for float_ and double_ it does not work as expected. It just rounds these values to parse it into a float value, if there is a rule like this: value %= (floatNode | doubleFloatNode); with floatNode %= (qi::float_) [qi::_val = phoenix::bind(&CreateFloatNode, qi::_1)]; doubleFloatNode %= (qi::double_) [qi::_val = phoenix::bind(&CreateDoubleFloatNode, qi::_1)]; Do you know if there is something like an option or some other trick to decide between float_ and double_ depending on the data type range? Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • boost::spirit::karma using the alternatives operator (|) with conditions

    - by Ingemar
    I'm trying to generate a string from my own class called Value using boost::spirit::karma, but i got stuck with this. I've tried to extract my problem into a simple example. I want to generate a String with karma from instances of the following class: class Value { public: enum ValueType { BoolType, NumericType }; Value(bool b) : type_(BoolType), value_(b) {} Value(const double d) : type_(NumericType), value_(d) {}; ValueType type() { return type_; } operator bool() { return boost::get<bool>(value_); } operator double() { return boost::get<double>(value_); } private: ValueType type_; boost::variant<bool, double> value_; }; Here you can see what I'm tying to do: int main() { using karma::bool_; using karma::double_; using karma::rule; using karma::eps; std::string generated; std::back_insert_iterator<std::string> sink(generated); rule<std::back_insert_iterator<std::string>, Value()> value_rule = bool_ | double_; Value bool_value = Value(true); Value double_value = Value(5.0); karma::generate(sink, value_rule, bool_value); std::cout << generated << "\n"; generated.clear(); karma::generate(sink, value_rule, double_value); std::cout << generated << "\n"; return 0; } The first call to karma::generate() works fine because the value is a bool and the first generator in my rule also "consumes" a bool. But the second karma::generate() fails with boost::bad_get because karma tries to eat a bool and calls therefore Value::operator bool(). My next thought was to modify my generator rule and use the eps() generator together with a condition but here i got stuck: value_rule = (eps( ... ) << bool_) | (eps( ... ) << double_); I'm unable to fill the brackets of the eps generator with sth. like this (of course not working): eps(value.type() == BoolType) I've tried to get into boost::phoenix, but my brain seems not to be ready for things like this. Please help me! here is my full example (compiling but not working): main.cpp

    Read the article

  • New A-Team Web Site Launched

    - by .raja
    The A-Team has launched a new web site – the A-Team Chronicles which aggregates and organizes content produced by The A-Team members (including your humble blogger). The A-Team is a central, outbound, highly technical team comprised of Enterprise Architects, Solution Specialists and Software Engineers within the Fusion Middleware Product Development Organization that works with customers and partners, world wide, providing guidance on implementation best practices, architecture, troubleshooting and how best to use Oracle products to solve customer business needs. This content captures best practices, tips and tricks and guidance that the A-Team members gain from real-world experiences, working with customers and partners on implementation projects, through Architecture reviews, issue resolution and more. A-Team Chronicles makes this content available, through short and to the point articles to all our customers and partners in a consistent, easy to find and organized way. If you like the articles we post here, you might find even more interesting articles at the new A-Team Chronicles site, covering a wider range of Fusion Middleware topics. We will be decommissioning this site shortly in favor of A-Team Chronicles site and all new contents will be posted there.

    Read the article

  • What would you do to improve the working of a small Development team?

    - by Omar Kooheji
    My company is having a reshuffle and I'm applying for my boss' job as he's moved up the ladder. The new role would give me a chance to move our development team into the 21st century and I'd like to make sure that: I can provide sensible suggestions in the interview to get the job so I can fix the team If I get the job I can actually enact some changes to actually improve the lives of the developers and their output. I want to know what I can suggest to improve the way we work, because I think it's a mess but every time I've suggested a change it's been shot down because any time spend implementing the change would be time that isn't spent developing software. Here is the state of play at the moment: My team consists of 3-4 developers (Mainly Java but I do some .Net work) Each member of the team is usually works on 2-3 projects at a time We are each responsible for the entire life cycle of the project from design to testing. Usually only one person works on a project (Although we have the odd project that will have more than one person working on it.) Projects tend to be bespoke to single customer, or are really heavilly reliant on a particular customer environment. We have 2-3 "Products" which we evolve to meet customer requirements. We use SVN for source control We don't do continuous integration (I'd like to start) We use a really basic bug tracker for internal issue tracking (I'd like to move to an issue/task management system) Any changes that bring a sudden dip in revenue generation will probably be rejected, the company isn't structured for development most of the rest of the technical team's jobs can be broken down to install this piece of hardware, configure that piece of hardware and once a job is done it's done and you never have to look at it again. This mentality has crept into development team because it's part of the company culture.

    Read the article

  • How to interview my future team leader?

    - by Stormenet
    Our current team leader is quitting his job (starting his own company) and thus we are searching for a new team leader. It's a small team of 4 people (Team leader included). Since it's a small team we expect the team leader not to only manage us but also do some coding. Because of this I convinced the R&D manager to let me have a say in this so that I can evaluate his technical skills and managing skills. I have little experience interviewing people let alone my future Team leader. What I search in a team leader is someone who isn't running a dictatorship but someone that when there are issues there is a discussion about it and we take everyone on the same line. What are the things I should not forget to ask and what are the skills I should find in that person?

    Read the article

  • TF30004: The New Team Project Wizard encountered an unexpected error while initializing the Microsof

    - by Frozzare
    Hello, i get this error when i trying to create a new project in team project. The server is right, i check all ports. I don't now what i should do now, can't find any good information 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Internal | Team Foundation Server proxy retrieved | Completion time: 0.338 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Internal | The template information for Team Foundation Server "TFSServer01" was retrieved from the Team Foundation Server. | Completion time: 0.099 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Wizard | Retrieved IAuthorizationService proxy | Completion time: 0.404 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Wizard | TF30227: Project creation permissions retrieved | Completion time: 0.015 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | Thread: 5 | New project will be created with the "MSF for Agile Software Development - v4.2" methodology 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | Retrieved IAuthorizationService proxy | Completion time: 0 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | TF30227: Project creation permissions retrieved | Completion time: 0.01 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:45Z | Module: Engine | Wrote compressed process template file | Completion time: 0.001 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | Extracted process template file | Completion time: 1.428 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | Thread: 5 | Starting Project Creation for project "TestProject" in domain "TFSServer01" 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | The user identity information was retrieved from the Group Security Service | Completion time: 0.045 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard is starting to initialize the plug-ins. 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: CssStructureUploader | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in CssStructureUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: CssStructureUploader | Thread: 5 | Initialize for CssStructureUploader complete 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard successfully Initialized the plug-in Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Classification. 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Rosetta | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in RosettaReportUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: Rosetta | Thread: 5 | Exiting Initialize for RosettaReportUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard successfully Initialized the plug-in Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Reporting. 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in WssSiteCreator 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Site information: Title = "TestProject" Description = "This team project was created based on the 'MSF for Agile Software Development - v4.2' process template." 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Base site url: http://TFSServer01:14143/webbplatser 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Admin site url: http://TFSServer01:16183/_vti_adm/admin.asmx ---begin Exception entry--- Time: 2009-09-19 01:46:27 Z Module: Initialize Event Description: TF30207: Initialization for plugin "Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Portal 'failed Exception Type: Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.PcwException Exception Message: The client discovered that content-type of request is text / html; charset = utf-8, but the text / xml expected. The request failed with error message: -- Unable to connect to the configuration database. --. Stack Trace: vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.CheckPermissions(ProjectCreationContext ctxt) vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.Initialize(ProjectCreationContext context) vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.EngineStarter.InitializePlugins(MsfTemplate template, PcwPluginCollection pluginCollection) -- Inner Exception -- Exception Type: System.InvalidOperationException Exception Message: The client discovered that content-type of request is text / html; charset = utf-8, but the text / xml expected. The request failed with error message: -- Unable to connect to the configuration database. --. Stack Trace: vid System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.ReadResponse(SoapClientMessage message, WebResponse response, Stream responseStream, Boolean asyncCall) vid System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.Invoke(String methodName, Object[] parameters) vid Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Proxy.Portal.Admin.GetLanguages() vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.CheckPermissions(ProjectCreationContext ctxt) -- end Inner Exception -- --- end Exception entry --- Thanks for you help

    Read the article

  • Error with Phoenix placeholder _val in Boost.Spirit.Lex :(

    - by GooRoo
    Hello, everybody. I'm newbie in Boost.Spirit.Lex. Some strange error appears every time I try to use lex::_val in semantics actions in my simple lexer: #ifndef _TOKENS_H_ #define _TOKENS_H_ #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <boost/spirit/include/lex_lexertl.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_operator.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_statement.hpp> #include <boost/spirit/include/phoenix_container.hpp> namespace lex = boost::spirit::lex; namespace phx = boost::phoenix; enum tokenids { ID_IDENTIFICATOR = 1, ID_CONSTANT, ID_OPERATION, ID_BRACKET, ID_WHITESPACES }; template <typename Lexer> struct mega_tokens : lex::lexer<Lexer> { mega_tokens() : identifier(L"[a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*", ID_IDENTIFICATOR) , constant (L"[0-9]+(\\.[0-9]+)?", ID_CONSTANT ) , operation (L"[\\+\\-\\*/]", ID_OPERATION ) , bracket (L"[\\(\\)\\[\\]]", ID_BRACKET ) { using lex::_tokenid; using lex::_val; using phx::val; this->self = operation [ std::wcout << val(L'<') << _tokenid // << val(L':') << lex::_val << val(L'>') ] | identifier [ std::wcout << val(L'<') << _tokenid << val(L':') << _val << val(L'>') ] | constant [ std::wcout << val(L'<') << _tokenid // << val(L':') << _val << val(L'>') ] | bracket [ std::wcout << phx::val(lex::_val) << val(L'<') << _tokenid // << val(L':') << lex::_val << val(L'>') ] ; } lex::token_def<wchar_t, wchar_t> operation; lex::token_def<std::wstring, wchar_t> identifier; lex::token_def<double, wchar_t> constant; lex::token_def<wchar_t, wchar_t> bracket; }; #endif // _TOKENS_H_ and #include <cstdlib> #include <iostream> #include <locale> #include <boost/spirit/include/lex_lexertl.hpp> #include "tokens.h" int main() { setlocale(LC_ALL, "Russian"); namespace lex = boost::spirit::lex; typedef std::wstring::iterator base_iterator; typedef lex::lexertl::token < base_iterator, boost::mpl::vector<wchar_t, std::wstring, double, wchar_t>, boost::mpl::true_ > token_type; typedef lex::lexertl::actor_lexer<token_type> lexer_type; typedef mega_tokens<lexer_type>::iterator_type iterator_type; mega_tokens<lexer_type> mega_lexer; std::wstring str = L"alfa+x1*(2.836-x2[i])"; base_iterator first = str.begin(); bool r = lex::tokenize(first, str.end(), mega_lexer); if (r) { std::wcout << L"Success" << std::endl; } else { std::wstring rest(first, str.end()); std::wcerr << L"Lexical analysis failed\n" << L"stopped at: \"" << rest << L"\"\n"; } return EXIT_SUCCESS; } This code causes an error in Boost header 'boost/spirit/home/lex/argument.hpp' on line 167 while compiling: return: can't convert 'const boost::variant' to 'boost::variant &' When I don't use lex::_val program compiles with no errors. Obviously, I use _val in wrong way, but I do not know how to do this correctly. Help, please! :) P.S. And sorry for my terrible English…

    Read the article

  • Week 24: Karate Kid Chops, The A-Team Runs, and the OPN Team Delivers

    - by sandra.haan
    The 80's called and they want their movies back. With the summer line-up of movies reminding us to wax on and wax off one can start to wonder if there is anything new to look forward to this summer. The OPN Team is happy to report that - yes - there is. As Hannibal would say "I love it when a plan comes together"! And a plan we have; for the past 2 months we've been working to pull together the FY11 Oracle PartnerNetwork Kickoff. Listen in as Judson tells you more. While we can't offer you Bradley Cooper or Jackie Chan we can promise you an exciting line-up of guests including Safra Catz and Charles Phillips. With no lines to wait in or the annoyingly tall guy sitting in front of you this might just be the best thing you see all summer. Register now & Happy New Year, The OPN Communications Team

    Read the article

  • Topics for development team cross training sessions

    - by BBlake
    Our team of developers are going to start holding monthly meetings for the purposes of cross training and knowledge improvement. We're looking for ideas for topics to discuss. We've already made a list of some obvious ones, such as discussions/training on specific applications, proper usage of TFS for source control, bug tracking and code reviews, coding standards, and corporate architecture. The problem we're having is that we are a cross-platform development team so we don't want to look at topics that only apply to certain members of the team (Sql, .NET, reporting, third party apps, etc). We'll use sub-team meetings for those. So what other topics that would apply across a broad development team would be good for these training sessions?

    Read the article

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