|
...using the link at the bottom on this page, and I am now using the whole width of my screen for displaying the Lounge drivel.
For those wondering, yes, it took me 12 years to notice that link.
I am still unsure whether I find it good or not : reading in narrow columns implies more scrolling, but is probably easier to the eye (that is why newspaper articles are justified columns), so I may switch back.
What's your setup ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Profile popups ☑
Spacing Compact
Noise Medium
Layout Normal
Per page 50
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Same here.
OriginalGriff wrote: Profile popups ☑
What is that, actually ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
When ticked (and "Update" pressed, natch.) it allows the avatar picture and basic info on a user to "Popup" when you hover the mouse over a username.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
These get displayed independently from the checkbox being set or not.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
No, the change is only effective when you press the "Update" button - just changing the checkbox doesn't alter the behaviour.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I know (fell in that trap before), but still, it does not change anything. Is it working for you ? Got FF 31.2.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Works fine in Chrome [Version 41.0.2237.0 canary (64-bit)]
Works fine in FF 33.1 as well - I just checked.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so clicking on "Update" toggles that feature, independently from the checkbox state  Interesting
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Not for me: "Update" actives the current state of the checkbox and the DDLs - nothing changes until it's pressed.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
After further checking, it is acting plain ... randomly. Bah, no really an issue, I think... 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I have as well. I have yet to figure out what the "Noise" setting does  .
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Redundant for the lounge - it removes low voted messages, in theory.
Insufficient caffeine error: Brain function compromised.
It sets the "Grey point for messages": Medium means that posts with a "three" or below are Grey, Low is "two" or below, and so forth. It doesn't hide rubbish (mind you, you'd need some serious filters to hide rubbish in the lounge anyway!  )
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
  Thank you. Now it makes sense.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: you'd need some serious filters to hide rubbish in the lounge
Do not be so sure, the one they have activated to block DD's posts is working like a charm ! 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
A businessman waiting at the airport finds sitting next to him, an elegant woman wearing the largest, most stunning diamond ring he had ever seen. He asks her about it.
"This is the Klopman diamond," she said. "It is beautiful, but there is a terrible curse that goes with it."
"What's the curse?" the man asked.
"Mr. Klopman."
|
|
|
|
|
Abhinav S wrote: He asks her about it.
You can imagine this in real life..
Man: Can I take a closer look at your jewel?
Woman: Security!!
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Developers think QA team should be in charge of this. QA team says developers should write it by themselves. Test case has now become a political issue in my friend's company.
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't developers write unit test cases and rest to be done by QA, business analyst or whatever?
|
|
|
|
|
Unit tests are NOT "test cases". Writing those is the domain of QA, and they are developed based on requirements.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming that you mean something like a UAT test case, it is really easy to argue development shouldn't write them: The original spec always contains ambiguity or needs a interpretation - if this wasn't the case we wouldn't need developers. The developers need to interpret the specs and no matter how good will get the interpretation wrong or make an incorrect assumption. Getting the dev to write the test case has the effect of transferring the errors into the test case rather tha n picking them up, which is the point of the test. Also a dev has worked on the UI and thinks it is usable, he will write tests with ease, which will be followed as scripts. It is better for someone else to write them as they'll report stuff they find difficult to use.
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: The developers need to interpret the specs and no matter how good will get the interpretation wrong or make an incorrect assumption.
Call me maybe thick but... wouldn't it be better if the developers clarified any ambiguity with their clients before basing their work on an interpretation?
I know I may live in cloud cuckoo land, but it's the way I tend to go about things - I do also meet people who do have a tendency to jump into coding when the spec is full of ambiguous requirements.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Test cases should should come from both BA & Developers as business Analyst know what is the change require for and developers know the implication of their changes.
Mark the answer as accepted if that worked for you .
And for down-voters please specify the reason to improve the solution .
|
|
|
|
|
In my case - I'm a business analyst, project manager, developer and mentor all rolled into one - with a client base of around 130 people - it's the way I like to work, not having to interpret an interpretation of a user request.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: wouldn't it be better if the developers clarified any ambiguity with their clients before basing their work on an interpretation?
Where you realise there is ambiguity obviously, yes. Really the problem is that natural language is imprecise to which everyone brings their own set of assumptions about the ambiguity. I suppose "misunderstanding" is better than "assumption". I think this problem is intractable, otherwise natural language would rapidly become source-code directly.
There are other reasons devs should not formally (obviously only a total fool would not test their own UI as they are developing it) test their own stuff in the end-user capacity (as oppposed to unit/integration etc) but those reasons are less concrete and harder to sell to managerial staff.e.g. a [decent] developer is attached to their work and therefore biased, also developers tends to start from the standpoint "is it working" rather than a better foe testing standpoint of "how do I break it?"
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
