|
Hi Dave,
Soap UI tool generates log file after each execution. To know the reason for the failure, we go through log file. Log file does not have a proper stack trace with filename, methodname, line number etc for the failed test rather the generic reason for the failure of the test step. So, we have to debug the application for the failed method and this process takes a good amount of time to debug and find the bug. Hope it clarifies the question.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
In this case, I agree with Pete. You're not going to be able to write code to automatically find which check in caused the problem. You could even have multiple problems.
You have two possible paths here. The first is to debug the code and do what you've been doing. This is, obviously, time consuming and reactionary.
The other is to implement a check in process where the code is tested before you allow it to be checked in. It sounds like you've got people "breaking the build" on just about every check in. That's not tolerable and must be prevented. Yeah, it sounds like it's more time to do this. It is but instead of spending that time on finding and fixing the bug you're spending it on preventing the bugs and improving the quality of the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Dave.
Yes, I too thinking about implementing Unit Test part for resolving such problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 1263842 wrote: find the change-set which caused the failure.
Since you check in code every day and run this every night then the change-set that caused the error is one of the ones from that day. I guess I don't quite follow what you are asking.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
If I were in your team, I would suggest that you would be better off with a comprehensive CI process with decent unit tests and pre-flight check ins to ensure that you don't regularly commit broken code.It's better to prevent problems than look to apportion blame.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Pete for your suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that you could tackle this in one of two ways: (1) Finer granularity on your build process. Somebody else already suggested a full-blown CI solution, but you could (I suppose) build say 4 times per day, which would dice-up the problem and presumably help; (2) Semi-automate the debug process by correlating changed modules with locations where errors are arising.
Option 1 requires that you can get those merges done more often and turn the build handle. Option 2 strikes me as a good thing to do anyway, but whether it adds much value will obviously depend on how "orthogonal" the changes are that people are making to the code: if many are making changes in the same few files then it's not really going to work.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Nick for sharing your thought.
Which part of build process, I should focus?
Yes, there is possibility of multiple check-ins on a file.
|
|
|
|
|
By "finer granularity" I meant only that you could build more frequently. For example if currently you build at (say) midnight each day after everybody has finished work, then if Module "X" was changed 3 times and now fails to compile you've got to figure out which change caused it to fail. If, however, you'd done several builds during the day (e.g. every 2 hours) then you have more chance of discovering a broken build for which only one checkin has been done.
Taking this to an extreme you end up with CI = Continuous Integration in which typically there'll be a gate on the checkin process with some mandatory regression tests needing to be passed before checkin can be done. There are lots of ways to implement this in practice: you could allow checkin but advance a stable label only as each checkin is built and validated. In the ideal world CI should ensure that your code always builds. However this is a big topic which is why I suggested only a small change to your existing process rather than a fundamental change of strategy.
Do you know Jenkins? If not, it's worth reading about, including Jenkins CI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
how to disable VS 2017 autocorrect? i'm designing unity3d and when i try create new function, the autocorrect is very disturbing.
can anybody tell me how to disabling it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
there's tons of options in there. which kinda option i should choose? i tried to configure it many times, but still haven't find the way out
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, no idea. You just need to go through and find a section relevant to your issue.
|
|
|
|
|
You're first going to have to describe what you mean by "autocorrect". If you're talking about a spell check (which is what I think of when I hear "autocorrect") there's no such thing in Visual Studio.
Visual Studio has Intellisense, which will suggest names of existing objects in your code to make things easier and faster to type.
|
|
|
|
|
yes, what i mean is intellisense... it always auto correcting my typing
e.g. if i wanna create new function named "Move", when i wanna type:
public void Move
it replacing "Move" with the existed function
this is very annoying in case you wanna create, say, 20 functions
please help. i tried to configure it out but i got nothing in result.
|
|
|
|
|
I never have a problem with it because I would type "Move" and then hit Esc to get Intellisense to go away. I'm not one for disabling Intellisense because it makes typing code so much faster.
But, a simple Google would have told you exactly what you wanted to know. "Visual Studio disable intellisense[^]"
|
|
|
|
|
it's not what i want. what i want is like VS 2015; as far as i remember, it does suggest things as you type, but it didn't force you to use it
in this case, when i type:
public void Move <and then="" i="" hit="" the="" <b="">( button or space button>
it will gives this as the result:
public void OnAnimatorMove()
in fact, i just wanna type:
public void Move() { //blablabla
the point is, the intellisense can suggest me, but if i don't wanna use its suggestions, don't replace what i typed with something i didn't choose
|
|
|
|
|
It's STILL not forcing you to use it. Type "Move" hit Esc, hit "(". Done.
YOU are going to have to play with the Intellisense options under Tools/Options/Text Editor to find a setup that works for YOU.
|
|
|
|
|
you don't get it. as far as i remember, in VS 2008 / 2015 when i type, for example, "Move" and the suggestion will pop up (like Moveblablabla, etc) BUT if i continuing type "(" (WITHOUT have to press Esc) it will become:
Move(
and not
Moveblablabla() //this is when i say, it force you use its suggestion
do you get it now?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I get it. I've understood for a while now. Every version of VS with Intellisense has behaved the way you're describing, though, each language editor has it's options set differently from the others by default.
I already told you what you're going to have to do. Tools/Options/Text Editor/... and start exploring the options.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I already told you what you're going to have to do. Tools/Options/Text Editor/... and start exploring the options.
i did that on the first place. but looks like there's no option for that.
[screenshot]
the option is either turn off the intellisense or using it (with the conditions i'vementioned), afaik.
i really have to get rid of this intellisense b*llsh*t!! it really p*sses me off!!
|
|
|
|
|
In your screenshot, what does it say under "statement completion"? 
There's also a heading called "advanced", for those who dare venture there, and a heading that says "code style" - the latter would let you specify how you want it to behave in detail.
If it still bothers you, then use the "txt" file extension for your source-code; it will still compile perfectly, you'll just miss al modern support of having an intelligent IDE.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Took me seven mouse clicks to find it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
