|
I navigate to the target directory, and double click on the executable.
Sometimes, I will execute the application from a command prompt, to shake things up a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: Other ?
Trebuchet.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
For those I use regularly: make a folder of shortcuts to them and link that folder to a toolbar on the taskbar.
Works well since at least XP and works just as well on windows 10 and anything in between. Order them alphabetically and off you go.
Very practical, no desktop clutter.
|
|
|
|
|
I still use the Quick Launch toolbar. There is n faster way to launch an app than a single click
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
I got a new computer yesterday that came with Windows 7. As soon as I activated it I downloaded the media creation tool and upgraded to Windows 10. Very easy, no problems. Windows 10 looks great so far.
Windows 7 comes with IE8 and the page to download the upgrade tool does not load in IE8 so I actually had to install chrome first. That does seem weird. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't obtaining Chrome what IE8 was designed for?
|
|
|
|
|
Wastedtalent wrote: Isn't obtaining Chrome what IE8 was designed for?
Could be. Because it was successful at that job.  
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Using WIN 10 from past 2 weeks, Good experience so far. But not using Edge , it is consuming more memory than Chrome and mozilla...
|
|
|
|
|
I agree,
Been using it since early august and it does a lot better than the windows 8.1 my PC was delivered with. It resembles windows 7, which I have been used too since 2010, quite well so yes: for now it looks like a job well done.
Mind you: for now it is probably just a question of time until disaster hits.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had Win10 on a laptop for about 3 weeks now, but have used it very little, still preferring to work in the familiar environment of Win7 with a full-sized keyboard. Eventually though, I plan on retiring or re-purposing my 6 y/o main development machine and using the laptop full time.
I really only have one issue with IE/Edge where it wants to change the file extension for a file I'm downloading (for instance, a .bacpac file) to .zip because there is no file association. As for a .bacpac file at least, changing the file extension back after download corrupts the file. I switched to Chrome a few months ago and haven't really missed IE. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all, Thanks in advance..
Has anyone tried Visual Studio's new feature "Intellitest".
I was trying it out, and it dose not look mature enough.
Please let me know if anyone of you guys have any better insight.
|
|
|
|
|
If your tests can be automated then they have no value.
|
|
|
|
|
That is a bold statement.
One can easily test all DBConnection classes over their interface; input, behaviour and result can be verified, doesn't require a human. The corrected statement here is that you do not see the value yet.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Two issues with that
1) If your database access is done through the likes of EF then all you're doing is testing Microsoft's code, not your own.
2) Testing database activities has no place in unit tests so the whole argument is moot.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: 1) If your database access is done through the likes of EF then all you're doing is testing Microsoft's code, not your own.
Then you are doing it wrong. You don't test whether Microsofts code works, you test whether you get the result you expected.
F-ES Sitecore wrote: 2) Testing database activities has no place in unit tests so the whole argument is moot.
Automated testing should be all in the same place; and yes, one can test the database-activities by code.
You rather test by hand?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You clearly don't understand unit testing. Making statements like "you do not see the value" and "you are doing it wrong" should really be reserved for when you understand the subject matter. Saying those things doesn't make you right.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: You clearly don't understand unit testing.
Ah, that must be it. Well, that was a short discussion
For what it is worth; any code can be tested in an automated way. You can choose to, or not to
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Don't feed the @+O== ! 
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Abso-bloody-lute tosh and drivel!
Automated testing is great, even outside TDD environments. I like to have regression tests built-in so that whenever code is checked in, it is automagically built and tested. You know straight away if your new code has negatively impacted the existing code base.
Given the right tools, you can even auto-test front ends.
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
We're talking about automated generation, not execution. Unit tests by their very nature are executed automatically.
|
|
|
|
|
For legacy apps I'd love to be able to click an easy button and generate a full regression test suite before starting to elephant with stuff.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Then all you're testing is that the code you have does what it currently does....but you know it does, that's a tautology.
public int Add(int x, int y)
{
return x + x;
}
The above code has a typo, it should be x + y, but my auto-generated tests are going to test;
public void TestAdd()
{
int addResult = Instance.Add(5, 8);
Assert.AreEqual(10, addResult);
}
I see no value in this at all, it takes a human being who understands the *intent* of the code to write valid tests.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: Then all you're testing is that the code you have does what it currently does
Exactly. I called them regression tests for a reason. Knowing I didn't change any other behavior unintentionally is the entire point. The application is very well covered via a manual pound on the keyboard test procedure. It also takes 1-2 weeks for a person to run through because it's so exhaustive. With the application currently only getting a trickle of keep alive funding, not having to spend a third or more on testing would be a major cost efficiency boost; but we can't cut the test procedure down without something to replace it. And we don't have anything approaching the amount of money that would be needed to do the massive refactor that would be needed to change the code into something that would place nicely with unit tests and then find all the regression bugs we created in the process.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't suppose you know anything decent for WinForm UI testing?
By decent, I mean something that I can click and type on the UI to generate the initial script (elephant you TestStack.White) and stable enough that I don't spend half my time reinstalling it because it suddenly stopped working (elephant you too irRatonal dysFunctional Tester of patience).
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
