Search Results

Search found 2823 results on 113 pages for 'perforce branch spec'.

Page 36/113 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

  • What's the logic flaw in this conditional?

    - by Scott B
    I've created this code branch so that if the permalink settings do no match at least one of the OR conditions, I can execute the "do something" branch. However, I believe there is a flaw in the logic, since I've set permalinks to /%postname%.html and it still tries echo's true; I believe I need to change the ORs to AND, right? if (get_option('permalink_structure') !== "/%postname%/" || get_option('my_permalinks') !== "/%postname%/" || get_option('permalink_structure') !== "/%postname%.html" || get_option('my_permalinks') !== "/%postname%.html")) { //do something echo "true"; }

    Read the article

  • Difference between macros and functions in C in relation to instruction memory and speed

    - by DAHANS
    To my understanding the difference between a macro and a function is, that a macro-call will be replaced by the instruction in the definition, and a function does the whole push, branch and pop -thing. Is this right, or have I understand something wrong? Additionally, if this is right, it would mean, that macros would take more space, but would be faster (because of the lack of the push,branch and pop instructions.), wouldn't it?

    Read the article

  • Can i get RSpec to generate specs with expect syntax?

    - by papirtiger
    When generating specs with : rails g controller Home index A spec is generated with the older object.should syntax require 'spec_helper' describe HomeController do describe "GET 'index'" do it "returns http success" do get 'index' response.should be_success end end end Is it possible to configure the generator to use the expect syntax instead? Desired output: require 'spec_helper' describe HomeController do describe "GET 'index'" do it "returns http success" do get 'index' expect(response).to be_success end end end in config/application.rb: config.generators do |g| g.test_framework :rspec, fixture: true g.fixture_replacement :factory_girl, dir: 'spec/factories' g.view_specs false g.stylesheets = false g.javascripts = false end

    Read the article

  • I get an error in FF (NS_ERROR_MALFORMED_URI)

    - by Ingalls
    Just wondering if there is an easy fix for this problem. The full error is: Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x804b000a (NS_ERROR_MALFORMED_URI) [nsIURL.spec]" nsresult: "0x804b000a (NS_ERROR_MALFORMED_URI)" location: "JS frame :: chrome://fastdial/content/file.js :: anonymous :: line 218" data: no] And line 218 is nsiUrl.spec = url; I give you all of the code from the file if you need it... Thanks Ingalls

    Read the article

  • VS 2012 Code Review &ndash; Before Check In OR After Check In?

    - by Tarun Arora
    “Is Code Review Important and Effective?” There is a consensus across the industry that code review is an effective and practical way to collar code inconsistency and possible defects early in the software development life cycle. Among others some of the advantages of code reviews are, Bugs are found faster Forces developers to write readable code (code that can be read without explanation or introduction!) Optimization methods/tricks/productive programs spread faster Programmers as specialists "evolve" faster It's fun “Code review is systematic examination (often known as peer review) of computer source code. It is intended to find and fix mistakes overlooked in the initial development phase, improving both the overall quality of software and the developers' skills. Reviews are done in various forms such as pair programming, informal walkthroughs, and formal inspections.” Wikipedia No where does the definition mention whether its better to review code before the code has been committed to version control or after the commit has been performed. No matter which side you favour, Visual Studio 2012 allows you to request for a code review both before check in and also request for a review after check in. Let’s weigh the pros and cons of the approaches independently. Code Review Before Check In or Code Review After Check In? Approach 1 – Code Review before Check in Developer completes the code and feels the code quality is appropriate for check in to TFS. The developer raises a code review request to have a second pair of eyes validate if the code abides to the recommended best practices, will not result in any defects due to common coding mistakes and whether any optimizations can be made to improve the code quality.                                             Image 1 – code review before check in Pros Everything that gets committed to source control is reviewed. Minimizes the chances of smelly code making its way into the code base. Decreases the cost of fixing bugs, remember, the earlier you find them, the lesser the pain in fixing them. Cons Development Code Freeze – Since the changes aren’t in the source control yet. Further development can only be done off-line. The changes have not been through a CI build, hard to say whether the code abides to all build quality standards. Inconsistent! Cumbersome to track the actual code review process.  Not every change to the code base is worth reviewing, a lot of effort is invested for very little gain. Approach 2 – Code Review after Check in Developer checks in, random code reviews are performed on the checked in code.                                                      Image 2 – Code review after check in Pros The code has already passed the CI build and run through any code analysis plug ins you may have running on the build server. Instruct the developer to ensure ZERO fx cop, style cop and static code analysis before check in. Code is cleaner and smell free even before the code review. No Offline development, developers can continue to develop against the source control. Cons Bad code can easily make its way into the code base. Since the review take place much later in the cycle, the cost of fixing issues can prove to be much higher. Approach 3 – Hybrid Approach The community advocates a more hybrid approach, a blend of tooling and human accountability quotient.                                                               Image 3 – Hybrid Approach 1. Code review high impact check ins. It is not possible to review everything, by setting up code review check in policies you can end up slowing your team. More over, the code that you are reviewing before check in hasn't even been through a green CI build either. 2. Tooling. Let the tooling work for you. By running static analysis, fx cop, style cop and other plug ins on the build agent, you can identify the real issues that in my opinion can't possibly be identified using human reviews. Configure the tooling to report back top 10 issues every day. Mandate the manual code review of individuals who keep making it to this list of shame more often. 3. During Merge. I would prefer eliminating some of the other code issues during merge from Main branch to the release branch. In a scrum project this is still easier because cheery picking the merges is a possibility and the size of code being reviewed is still limited. Let the tooling work for you, if some one breaks the CI build often, put them on a gated check in build course until you see improvement. If some one appears on the top 10 list of shame generated via the build then ensure that all their code is reviewed till you see improvement. At the end of the day, the goal is to ensure that the code being delivered is top quality. By enforcing a code review before any check in, you force the developer to work offline or stay put till the review is complete. What do the experts say? So I asked a few expects what they thought of “Code Review quality gate before Checking in code?" Terje Sandstrom | Microsoft ALM MVP You mean a review quality gate BEFORE checking in code????? That would mean a lot of code staying either local or in shelvesets, and not even been through a CI build, and a green CI build being the main criteria for going further, f.e. to the review state. I would not like code laying around with no checkin’s. Having a requirement that code is checked in small pieces, 4-8 hours work max, and AT LEAST daily checkins, a manual code review comes second down the lane. I would expect review quality gates to happen before merging back to main, or before merging to release.  But that would all be on checked-in code.  Branching is absolutely one way to ease the pain.   Another way we are using is automatic quality builds, running metrics, coverage, static code analysis.  Unfortunately it takes some time, would be great to be on CI’s – but…., so it’s done scheduled every night. Based on this we get, among other stuff,  top 10 lists of suspicious code, which is then subjected to reviews.  If a person seems to be very popular on these top 10 lists, we subject every check in from that person to a review for a period. That normally helps.   None of the clients I have can afford to have every checkin reviewed, so we need to find ways around it. I don’t disagree with the nicety of having all the code reviewed, but I find it hard to find those resources in today’s enterprises. David V. Corbin | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I tend to agree with both sides. I hate having code that is not checked in, but at the same time hate having “bad” code in the repository. I have found that branching is one approach to solving this dilemma. Code is checked into the private/feature branch before the review, but is not merged over to the “official” branch until after the review. I advocate both, depending on circumstance (especially team dynamics)   - The “pre-checkin” is usually for elements that may impact the project as a whole. Think of it as another “gate” along with passing unit tests. - The “post-checkin” may very well not be at the changeset level, but correlates to a review at the “user story” level.   Again, this depends on team dynamics in play…. Robert MacLean | Microsoft ALM MVP I do not think there is no right answer for the industry as a whole. In short the question is why do you do reviews? Your question implies risk mitigation, so in low risk areas you can get away with it after check in while in high risk you need to do it before check in. An example is those new to a team or juniors need it much earlier (maybe that is before checkin, maybe that is soon after) than seniors who have shipped twenty sprints on the team. Abhimanyu Singhal | Visual Studio ALM Ranger Depends on per scenario basis. We recommend post check-in reviews when: 1. We don't want to block other checks and processes on manual code reviews. Manual reviews take time, and some pieces may not require manual reviews at all. 2. We need to trace all changes and track history. 3. We have a code promotion strategy/process in place. For risk mitigation, post checkin code can be promoted to Accepted branches. Or can be rejected. Pre Checkin Reviews are used when 1. There is a high risk factor associated 2. Reviewers are generally (most of times) have immediate availability. 3. Team does not have strict tracking needs. Simply speaking, no single process fits all scenarios. You need to select what works best for your team/project. Thomas Schissler | Visual Studio ALM Ranger This is an interesting discussion, I’m right now discussing details about executing code reviews with my teams. I see and understand the aspects you brought in, but there is another side as well, I’d like to point out. 1.) If you do reviews per check in this is not very practical as a hard rule because this will disturb the flow of the team very often or it will lead to reduce the checkin frequency of the devs which I would not accept. 2.) If you do later reviews, for example if you review PBIs, it is not easy to find out which code you should review. Either you review all changesets associate with the PBI, but then you might review code which has been changed with a later checkin and the dev maybe has already fixed the issue. Or you review the diff of the latest changeset of the PBI with the first but then you might also review changes of other PBIs. Jakob Leander | Sr. Director, Avanade In my experience, manual code review: 1. Does not get done and at the very least does not get redone after changes (regardless of intentions at start of project) 2. When a project actually do it, they often do not do it right away = errors pile up 3. Requires a lot of time discussing/defining the standard and for the team to learn it However code review is very important since e.g. even small memory leaks in a high volume web solution have big consequences In the last years I have advocated following approach for code review - Architects up front do “at least one best practice example” of each type of component and tell the team. Copy from this one. This should include error handling, logging, security etc. - Dev lead on project continuously browse code to validate that the best practices are used. Especially that patterns etc. are not broken. You can do this formally after each sprint/iteration if you want. Once this is validated it is unlikely to “go bad” even during later code changes Agree with customer to rely on static code analysis from Visual Studio as the one and only coding standard. This has HUUGE benefits - You can easily tweak to reach the level you desire together with customer - It is easy to measure for both developers/management - It is 100% consistent across code base - It gets validated all the time so you never end up getting hammered by a customer review in the end - It is easy to tell the developer that you do not want code back unless it has zero errors = minimize communication You need to track this at least during nightly builds and make sure team sees total # issues. Do not allow #issues it to grow uncontrolled. On the project I run I require code analysis to have run on code before checkin (checkin rule). This means -  You have to have clean compile (or CA wont run) so this is extra benefit = very few broken builds - You can change a few of the rules to compile as errors instead of warnings. I often do this for “missing dispose” issues which you REALLY do not want in your app Tip: Place your custom CA rules files as part of solution. That  way it works when you do branching etc. (path to CA file is relative in VS) Some may argue that CA is not as good as manual inspection. But since manual inspection in reality suffers from the 3 issues in start it is IMO a MUCH better (and much cheaper) approach from helicopter perspective Tirthankar Dutta | Director, Avanade I think code review should be run both before and after check ins. There are some code metrics that are meant to be run on the entire codebase … Also, especially on multi-site projects, one should strive to architect in a way that lets men manage the framework while boys write the repetitive code… scales very well with the need to review less by containment and imposing architectural restrictions to emphasise the design. Bruno Capuano | Microsoft ALM MVP For code reviews (means peer reviews) in distributed team I use http://www.vsanywhere.com/default.aspx  David Jobling | Global Sr. Director, Avanade Peer review is the only way to scale and its a great practice for all in the team to learn to perform and accept. In my experience you soon learn who's code to watch more than others and tune the attention. Mikkel Toudal Kristiansen | Manager, Avanade If you have several branches in your code base, you will need to merge often. This requires manual merging, when a file has been changed in both branches. It offers a good opportunity to actually review to changed code. So my advice is: Merging between branches should be done as often as possible, it should be done by a senior developer, and he/she should perform a full code review of the code being merged. As for detecting architectural smells and code smells creeping into the code base, one really good third party tools exist: Ndepend (http://www.ndepend.com/, for static code analysis of the current state of the code base). You could also consider adding StyleCop to the solution. Jesse Houwing | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I gave a presentation on this subject on the TechDays conference in NL last year. See my presentation and slides here (talk in Dutch, but English presentation): http://blog.jessehouwing.nl/2012/03/did-you-miss-my-techdaysnl-talk-on-code.html  I’d like to add a few more points: - Before/After checking is mostly a trust issue. If you have a team that does diligent peer reviews and regularly talk/sit together or peer review, there’s no need to enforce a before-checkin policy. The peer peer-programming and regular feedback during development can take care of most of the review requirements as long as the team isn’t under stress. - Under stress, enforce pre-checkin reviews, it might sound strange, if you’re already under time or budgetary constraints, but it is under such conditions most real issues start to be created or pile up. - Use tools to catch most common errors, Code Analysis/FxCop was already mentioned. HP Fortify, Resharper, Coderush etc can help you there. There are also a lot of 3rd party rules you can add to Code Analysis. I’ve written a few myself (http://fccopcontrib.codeplex.com) and various teams from Microsoft have added their own rules (MSOCAF for SharePoint, WSSF for WCF). For common errors that keep cropping up, see if you can define a rule. It’s much easier. But more importantly make sure you have a good help page explaining *WHY* it's wrong. If you have small feature or developer branches/shelvesets, you might want to review pre-merge. It’s still better to do peer reviews and peer programming, but the most important thing is that bad quality code doesn’t make it into the important branch. So my philosophy: - Use tooling as much as possible. - Make sure the team understands the tooling and the importance of the things it flags. It’s too easy to just click suppress all to ignore the warnings. - Under stress, tighten process, it’s under stress that the problems of late reviews will really surface - Most importantly if you do reviews do them as early as possible, but never later than needed. In other words, pre-checkin/post checking doesn’t really matter, as long as the review is done before the code is released. It’ll just be much more expensive to fix any review outcomes the later you find them. --- I would love to hear what you think!

    Read the article

  • How I do VCS

    - by Wes McClure
    After years of dabbling with different version control systems and techniques, I wanted to share some of what I like and dislike in a few blog posts.  To start this out, I want to talk about how I use VCS in a team environment.  These come in a series of tips or best practices that I try to follow.  Note: This list is subject to change in the future. Always use some form of version control for all aspects of software development. Development is an evolution.  Looking back at where we were is an invaluable asset in that process.  This includes data schemas and documentation. Reverting / reapplying changes is absolutely critical for efficient development. The tools I use: Code: Hg (preferred), SVN Database: TSqlMigrations Documents: Sometimes in code repository, also SharePoint with versioning Always tag a commit (changeset) with comments This is a quick way to describe to someone else (or your future self) what the changeset entails. Be brief but courteous. One or two sentences about the task, not the actual changes. Use precommit hooks or setup the central repository to reject changes without comments. Link changesets to documentation If your project management system integrates with version control, or has a way to externally reference stories, tasks etc then leave a reference in the commit.  This helps locate more information about the commit and/or related changesets. It’s best to have a precommit hook or system that requires this information, otherwise it’s easy to forget. Ability to work offline is required, including commits and history Yes this requires a DVCS locally but doesn’t require the central repository to be a DVCS.  I prefer to use either Git or Hg but if it isn’t possible to migrate the central repository, it’s still possible for a developer to push / pull changes to that repository from a local Hg or Git repository. Never lock resources (files) in a central repository… Rude! We have merge tools for a reason, merging sucked a long time ago, it doesn’t anymore… stop locking files! This is unproductive, rude and annoying to other team members. Always review everything in your commit. Never ever commit a set of files without reviewing the changes in each. Never add a file without asking yourself, deep down inside, does this belong? If you leave to make changes during a review, start the review over when you come back.  Never assume you didn’t touch a file, double check. This is another reason why you want to avoid large, infrequent commits. Requirements for tools Quickly show pending changes for the entire repository. Default action for a resource with pending changes is a diff. Pluggable diff & merge tool Produce a unified diff or a diff of all changes.  This is helpful to bulk review changes instead of opening each file. The central repository is not your own personal dump yard.  Breaking this rule is a sure fire way to get the F bomb dropped in front of your name, multiple times. If you turn on Visual Studio’s commit on closing studio option, I will personally break your fingers. By the way, the person(s) in charge of this feature should be fired and never be allowed near programming, ever again. Commit (integrate) to the central repository / branch frequently I try to do this before leaving each day, especially without a DVCS.  One never knows when they might need to work from remote the following day. Never commit commented out code If it isn’t needed anymore, delete it! If you aren’t sure if it might be useful in the future, delete it! This is why we have history. If you don’t know why it’s commented out, figure it out and then either uncomment it or delete it. Don’t commit build artifacts, user preferences and temporary files. Build artifacts do not belong in VCS, everything in them is present in the code. (ie: bin\*, obj\*, *.dll, *.exe) User preferences are your settings, stop overriding my preferences files! (ie: *.suo and *.user files) Most tools allow you to ignore certain files and Hg/Git allow you to version this as an ignore file.  Set this up as a first step when creating a new repository! Be polite when merging unresolved conflicts. Count to 10, cuss, grab a stress ball and realize it’s not a big deal.  Actually, it’s an opportunity to let you know that someone else is working in the same area and you might want to communicate with them. Following the other rules, especially committing frequently, will reduce the likelihood of this. Suck it up, we all have to deal with this unintended consequence at times.  Just be careful and GET FAMILIAR with your merge tool.  It’s really not as scary as you think.  I personally prefer KDiff3 as its merging capabilities rock. Don’t blindly merge and then blindly commit your changes, this is rude and unprofessional.  Make sure you understand why the conflict occurred and which parts of the code you want to keep.  Apply scrutiny when you commit a manual merge: review the diff! Make sure you test the changes (build and run automated tests) Become intimate with your version control system and the tools you use with it. Avoid trial and error as much as is possible, sit down and test the tool out, read some tutorials etc.  Create test repositories and walk through common scenarios. Find the most efficient way to do your work.  These tools will be used repetitively, so inefficiencies will add up. Sometimes this involves a mix of tools, both GUI and CLI. I like a combination of both Tortoise Hg and hg cli to get the job efficiently. Always tag releases Create a way to find a given release, whether this be in comments or an explicit tag / branch.  This should be readily discoverable. Create release branches to patch bugs and then merge the changes back to other development branch(es). If using feature branches, strive for periodic integrations. Feature branches often cause forked code that becomes irreconcilable.  Strive to re-integrate somewhat frequently with the branch this code will ultimately be merged into.  This will avoid merge conflicts in the future. Feature branches are best when they are mutually exclusive of active development in other branches. Use and abuse local commits , at least one per task in a story. This builds a trail of changes in your local repository that can be pushed to a central repository when the story is complete. Never commit a broken build or failing tests to the central repository. It’s ok for a local commit to break the build and/or tests.  In fact, I encourage this if it helps group the changes more logically.  This is one of the main reasons I got excited about DVCS, when I wanted more than one changeset for a set of pending changes but some files could be grouped into both changesets (like solution file / project file changes). If you have more than a dozen outstanding changed resources, there should probably be more than one commit involved. Exceptions when maintaining code bases that require shotgun surgery, in this case, it’s a design smell :) Don’t version sensitive information Especially usernames / passwords   There is one area I haven’t found a solution I like yet: versioning 3rd party libraries and/or code.  I really dislike keeping any assemblies in the repository, but seems to be a common practice for external libraries.  Please feel free to share your ideas about this below.    -Wes

    Read the article

  • Oracle Expands Sun Blade Portfolio for Cloud and Highly Virtualized Environments

    - by Ferhat Hatay
    Oracle announced the expansion of Sun Blade Portfolio for cloud and highly virtualized environments that deliver powerful performance and simplified management as tightly integrated systems.  Along with the SPARC T3-1B blade server, Oracle VM blade cluster reference configuration and Oracle's optimized solution for Oracle WebLogic Suite, Oracle introduced the dual-node Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module with some impressive benchmark results.   Benchmarks on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrate the outstanding performance characteristics critical for running varied commercial applications used in cloud and highly virtualized environments.  These include best-in-class SPEC CPU2006 results with the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, six Fluent world records and 1.8 times the price-performance of the IBM Power 755 running NAMD, a prominent bio-informatics workload.   Benchmarks for Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module  SPEC CPU2006  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrated best in class SPECint_rate2006 results for all published results using the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, with a result of 679.  This result is 97% better than the HP BL460c G7 blade, 80% better than the IBM HS22V blade, and 79% better than the Dell M710 blade.  This result demonstrates the density advantage of the new Oracle's server module for space-constrained data centers.     Sun Blade X6275M2 (2 Nodes, Intel Xeon X5670 2.93GHz) - 679 SPECint_rate2006; HP ProLiant BL460c G7 (2.93 GHz, Intel Xeon X5670) - 347 SPECint_rate2006; IBM BladeCenter HS22V (Intel Xeon X5680)  - 377 SPECint_rate2006; Dell PowerEdge M710 (Intel Xeon X5680, 3.33 GHz) - 380 SPECint_rate2006.  SPEC, SPECint, SPECfp reg tm of Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 11/24/2010 and this report.    For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Fluent The Sun Fire X6275 M2 server module produced world-record results on each of the six standard cases in the current "FLUENT 12" benchmark test suite at 8-, 12-, 24-, 32-, 64- and 96-core configurations. These results beat the most recent QLogic score with IBM DX 360 M series platforms and QLogic "Truescale" interconnects.  Results on sedan_4m test case on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module are 23% better than the HP C7000 system, and 20% better than the IBM DX 360 M2; Dell has not posted a result for this test case.  Results can be found at the FLUENT website.   ANSYS's FLUENT software solves fluid flow problems, and is based on a numerical technique called computational fluid dynamics (CFD), which is used in the automotive, aerospace, and consumer products industries. The FLUENT 12 benchmark test suite consists of seven models that are well suited for multi-node clustered environments and representative of modern engineering CFD clusters. Vendors benchmark their systems with the principal objective of providing comparative performance information for FLUENT software that, among other things, depends on compilers, optimization, interconnect, and the performance characteristics of the hardware.   FLUENT application performance is representative of other commercial applications that require memory and CPU resources to be available in a scalable cluster-ready format.  FLUENT benchmark has six conventional test cases (eddy_417k, turbo_500k, aircraft_2m, sedan_4m, truck_14m, truck_poly_14m) at various core counts.   All information on the FLUENT website (http://www.fluent.com) is Copyrighted1995-2010 by ANSYS Inc. Results as of November 24, 2010. For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   NAMD Results on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module running NAMD (a parallel molecular dynamics code designed for high-performance simulation of large biomolecular systems) show up to a 1.8X better price/performance than IBM's Power 7-based system.  For space-constrained environments, the ultra-dense Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module provides a 1.7X better price/performance per rack unit than IBM's system.     IBM Power 755 4-way Cluster (16U). Total price for cluster: $324,212. See IBM United States Hardware Announcement 110-008, dated February 9, 2010, pp. 4, 21 and 39-46.  Sun Blade X6275 M2 8-Blade Cluster (10U). Total price for cluster:  $193,939. Price/performance and performance/RU comparisons based on f1ATPase molecule test results. Sun Blade X6275 M2 cluster: $3,568/step/sec, 5.435 step/sec/RU. IBM Power 755 cluster: $6,355/step/sec, 3.189 step/sec/U. See http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/hardware/reports/system_perf.html. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/performance.html for more information, results as of 11/24/10.   For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Reverse Time Migration The Reverse Time Migration is heavily used in geophysical imaging and modeling for Oil & Gas Exploration.  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module showed up to a 40% performance improvement over the previous generation server module with super-linear scalability to 16 nodes for the 9-Point Stencil used in this Reverse Time Migration computational kernel.  The balanced combination of Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system with the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module cluster showed linear scalability for the total application throughput, including the I/O and MPI communication, to produce a final 3-D seismic depth imaged cube for interpretation. The final image write time from the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes to Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system achieved 10GbE line speed of 1.25 GBytes/second or better performance. Between subsequent runs, the effects of I/O buffer caching on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes and write optimized caching on the Sun Storage 7410 system gave up to 1.8 GBytes/second effective write performance. The performance results and characterization of this Reverse Time Migration benchmark could serve as a useful measure for many other I/O intensive commercial applications. 3D VTI Reverse Time Migration Seismic Depth Imaging, see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/3d_vti_reverse_time_migration for more information, results as of 11/14/2010.                            

    Read the article

  • Why do I get a null pointer exception from TabWidget?

    - by rushinge
    I'm writing an android program in which I have an activity that uses tabs. The Activity public class UnitActivity extends TabActivity { @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); TabHost tabHost = getTabHost(); TabSpec spec; Resources res = getResources(); LayoutInflater.from(this).inflate(R.layout.unit_view, tabHost.getTabContentView(), true); spec = tabHost.newTabSpec("controls"); spec.setIndicator("Control", res.getDrawable(R.drawable.ic_tab_equalizer)); spec.setContent(R.id.txtview); tabHost.addTab(spec); } } The XML referenced by R.layout.unit_view <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <TabHost xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android" android:id="@android:id/tabhost" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent"> <LinearLayout android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent" android:padding="5dp"> <TabWidget android:id="@android:id/tabs" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="wrap_content"/> <FrameLayout android:id="@android:id/tabcontent" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent" android:padding="5dp"> <TextView android:id="@+id/txtview" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent" android:gravity="bottom" android:text="nullpointer this!" /> </FrameLayout> </LinearLayout> </TabHost> As far as I can see I'm doing the same thing I see in the tabs1 api sample from the android sdk. I've tried "getLayoutInflator()" instead of "LayoutInflator.from(this)" with the same result. If I replace the LayoutInflater line with "setContentView(R.layout.unit_view)" my program doesn't crash with a null pointer exception but my content is completely blank and empty. I get the tab and that's it. I've checked to make sure R.layout.unit_view and tabHost are not null when it runs the LayoutInflater line and they seem to be fine. They're defenitely not null. I've also checked to make sure LayoutInflater.from(this) returns a valid layout inflater object and it does. The logcat indicating the error says E/AndroidRuntime( 541): java.lang.NullPointerException E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.widget.TabWidget.dispatchDraw(TabWidget.java:206) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.View.draw(View.java:6538) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.widget.FrameLayout.draw(FrameLayout.java:352) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1531) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.drawChild(ViewGroup.java:1529) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewGroup.dispatchDraw(ViewGroup.java:1258) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.View.draw(View.java:6538) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.widget.FrameLayout.draw(FrameLayout.java:352) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at com.android.internal.policy.impl.PhoneWindow$DecorView.draw(PhoneWindow.java:1830) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewRoot.draw(ViewRoot.java:1349) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewRoot.performTraversals(ViewRoot.java:1114) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.view.ViewRoot.handleMessage(ViewRoot.java:1633) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.os.Handler.dispatchMessage(Handler.java:99) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.os.Looper.loop(Looper.java:123) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at android.app.ActivityThread.main(ActivityThread.java:4363) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invokeNative(Native Method) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:521) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run(ZygoteInit.java:860) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(ZygoteInit.java:618) E/AndroidRuntime( 541): at dalvik.system.NativeStart.main(Native Method) I/Process ( 61): Sending signal. PID: 541 SIG: 3 I/dalvikvm( 541): threadid=7: reacting to signal 3 I/dalvikvm( 541): Wrote stack trace to '/data/anr/traces.txt' Anybody have any idea how I can get this content into a tab without crashing my application? My actual program is more complex and has more than one tab but I simplified it down to this in an attempt to find out why it's crashing but it still crashes and I don't know why. If I don't use LayoutInflator my program doesn't crash but I don't get any content either, just tabs.

    Read the article

  • Why isn't pyinstaller making me an .exe file?

    - by Matt Miller
    I am attempting to follow this guide to make a simple Hello World script into an .exe file. I have Windows Vista with an AMD 64-bit processor I have installed Python 2.6.5 (Windows AMD64 version) I have set the PATH (if that's the right word) so that the command line recognizes Python I have installed UPX (there only seems to be a 32-bit version for Windows) and pasted a copy of upx.exe into the Python26 folder as instructed. I have installed Pywin (Windows AMD 64 Python 2.6 version) I have run Pyinstaller's Configure.py. It gives some error messages but seems to complete. I don't know if this is what's causing the problem, so the following is what it says when I run it: C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26winConfigure.py I: read old config from C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\config.dat I: computing EXE_dependencies I: Finding TCL/TK... I: Analyzing C:\Python26\DLLs_tkinter.pyd W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\DLLs_tkinter.pyd W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Python26\DLLs_ctypes.pyd W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\DLLs_ctypes.pyd W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Python26\DLLs\select.pyd W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\DLLs\select.pyd W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Python26\DLLs\unicodedata.pyd W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\DLLs\unicodedata.pyd W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Python26\DLLs\bz2.pyd W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\DLLs\bz2.pyd W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Python26\python.exe I: Dependent assemblies of C:\Python26\python.exe: I: amd64_Microsoft.VC90.CRT_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none I: Searching for assembly amd64_Microsoft.VC90.CRT_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_ none... I: Found manifest C:\Windows\WinSxS\Manifests\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a 1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b.manifest I: Searching for file msvcr90.dll I: Found file C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21 022.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcr90.dll I: Searching for file msvcp90.dll I: Found file C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21 022.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcp90.dll I: Searching for file msvcm90.dll I: Found file C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21 022.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcm90.dll I: Adding Microsoft.VC90.CRT\Microsoft.VC90.CRT.manifest I: Adding Microsoft.VC90.CRT\msvcr90.dll I: Adding Microsoft.VC90.CRT\msvcp90.dll I: Adding Microsoft.VC90.CRT\msvcm90.dll W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Python26\python.exe W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Windows\WinSxS\Manifests\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e 3b_9.0.21022.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b.manifest I: Analyzing C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.210 22.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcr90.dll W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none_ 750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcr90.dll W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.210 22.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcp90.dll W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none_ 750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcp90.dll W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: Analyzing C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.210 22.8_none_750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcm90.dll W: Cannot get binary dependencies for file: W: C:\Windows\WinSxS\amd64_microsoft.vc90.crt_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none_ 750b37ff97f4f68b\msvcm90.dll W: Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 608, in get Imports return _getImports_pe(pth) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\bindepend.py", line 275, in _ge tImports_pe importva, importsz = datadirs[1] IndexError: list index out of range I: could not find TCL/TK I: testing for Zlib... I: ... Zlib available I: Testing for ability to set icons, version resources... I: ... resource update available I: Testing for Unicode support... I: ... Unicode available I: testing for UPX... I: ...UPX available I: computing PYZ dependencies... I: done generating C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\config.dat My Python script (named Hello.py) is the same as the example: #!/usr/bin/env python for i in xrange(10000): print "Hello, World!" This is my BAT file, in the same directory: set PIP=C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\ python %PIP%Makespec.py --onefile --console --upx --tk Hello.py python %PIP%Build.py Hello.spec When I run Hello.bat in the command prompt several files are made, none of which are an .exe file, and the following is displayed: C:\My Filesset PIP=C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\ C:\My Filespython C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Makespec.py --onefil e --console --upx --tk Hello.py wrote C:\My Files\Hello.spec now run Build.py to build the executable C:\My Filespython C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Build.py Hello.spec I: Dependent assemblies of C:\Python26\python.exe: I: amd64_Microsoft.VC90.CRT_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_9.0.21022.8_none Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Build.py", line 1359, in main(args[0], configfilename=opts.configfile) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Build.py", line 1337, in main build(specfile) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Build.py", line 1297, in build execfile(spec) File "Hello.spec", line 3, in pathex=['C:\My Files']) File "C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\Build.py", line 292, in _init _ raise ValueError, "script '%s' not found" % script ValueError: script 'C:\Python26\Pyinstaller\branches\py26win\support\useTK.py' n ot found I have limited knowledge with the command prompt, so please take baby steps with me if I need to do something there.

    Read the article

  • The Next Wave of PeopleSoft Capabilities for the Staffing Industry Is Here

    - by Mark Rosenberg
    With the release of PeopleSoft Financials and Supply Chain Management 9.1 Feature Pack 2 in January this year, we introduced substantial new capabilities for our Staffing Industry customers. Through a co-development project with Infosys Limited, we have enriched Oracle's PeopleSoft Staffing Solution with new tools aimed at accelerating and improving the quality of job order fulfillment, increasing branch recruiter productivity, and driving profitable growth. Staffing industry firms succeed based on their ability to rapidly, cost-effectively, and continually fill their pipelines with new clients and job orders, recruit the best talent, and match orders with talent. Pressure to execute in each of these functional areas is even more acute on staffing firms as contingent labor becomes a more substantial and permanent part of the workforce mix. In an industry that creates value through speedy execution, there is little room for manual, inefficient processes and brittle, custom integrations, which throttle profitability and growth. The latest wave of investment in the PeopleSoft Staffing Solution focuses on generating efficiency and flexibility for our customers. Simplicity To operate profitably and continue growing, a Staffing enterprise needs its client management, recruiting, order fulfillment, and other processes to function in harmony. Most importantly, they need to be simple for recruiters, branch managers, and applicants to access and understand. The latest PeopleSoft Staffing Solution set of enhancements includes numerous automated defaulting mechanisms and information-rich dashboard pagelets that even a new employee can learn quickly. Pending Applicant, Agenda management, Search, and other pagelets are just a few of the newest, easy-to-use tools that not only aggregate and summarize information, but also provide instant access to applicants, tasks, and key reports for branch staff. Productivity The leading firms in the Staffing industry are those that can more efficiently orchestrate large numbers of candidates, clients, and orders than their competitors can. PeopleSoft Financials and Supply Chain Management 9.1 Feature Pack 2 delivers productivity boosters that Staffing firms can leverage to streamline tasks and processes for competitive advantage. For example, we enhanced the Recruiting Funnel, which manages the candidate on-boarding process, with a highly interactive user interface. It integrates disparate Staffing business processes and exploits new PeopleTools technologies to offer a superior on-boarding user experience. Automated creation of agenda items and assignment tasks for each candidate minimizes setup and organizes assignment steps for the on-boarding process. Mass updates of tasks and instant access to the candidate overview page (which we also expanded), candidate event status, event counts, and other key data enable recruiters to better serve clients and candidates. Lower TCO Constructing and maintaining an efficient yet flexible labor supply chain can be complicated, let alone expensive. Traditionally, Staffing firms have been challenged in controlling their technology cost of ownership because connecting candidate and client-facing tools involved building and integrating custom applications and technologies and managing staff turnover, placing heavy demands on IT and support staff. With PeopleSoft Financials and Supply Chain Management 9.1 Feature Pack 2, there are two major enhancements that aggressively tackle these challenges. First, we added another integration framework to enable cost-effective linking of the Staffing firm’s PeopleSoft applications and its job board distributors. (The first PeopleSoft 9.1 Feature Pack released in March 2011 delivered an integration framework to connect to resume parsing providers.) Second, we introduced the teaming concept to enable work to be partitioned to groups, as well as individuals. These two capabilities, combined with a host of others, position Staffing firms to configure and grow their businesses without growing their IT and overhead expenditures. For our Staffing Industry customers, PeopleSoft Financials and Supply Chain Management 9.1 Feature Pack 2 is loaded with high-value tools aimed at enabling and sustaining a flexible labor supply chain. For more information, contact [email protected] or [email protected].

    Read the article

  • Rails Tutorial Error with gemspec for "rspec" "annotate" "spork" "ansicolor" [closed]

    - by Chris H
    I'm following the Rails Tutorial by Michael Hartl and I'm getting this error when I run. bundle exec rspec spec/requests/static_pages_spec.rb Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/annotate-2.4.1.beta1.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-09-02 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-rspec-0.5.5.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-20 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-spork-0.3.2.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-18 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/spork-0.9.0.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2012-01-22 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/term-ansicolor-1.0.7.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-10-13 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/annotate-2.4.1.beta1.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-09-02 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-rspec-0.5.5.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-20 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-spork-0.3.2.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-18 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/spork-0.9.0.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2012-01-22 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/term-ansicolor-1.0.7.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-10-13 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/annotate-2.4.1.beta1.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-09-02 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-rspec-0.5.5.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-20 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-spork-0.3.2.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-18 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/spork-0.9.0.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2012-01-22 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/term-ansicolor-1.0.7.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-10-13 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/annotate-2.4.1.beta1.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-09-02 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-rspec-0.5.5.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-20 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/guard-spork-0.3.2.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-11-18 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/spork-0.9.0.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2012-01-22 00:00:00.000000000Z" Invalid gemspec in [/Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/specifications/term-ansicolor-1.0.7.gemspec]: invalid date format in specification: "2011-10-13 00:00:00.000000000Z" /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:746:in `load': cannot load such file -- /Users/chrishuang02/Desktop/rails_projects/first_app/spec/requests/spec/requests/static_pages_spec.rb (LoadError) from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:746:in `block in load_spec_files' from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:746:in `map' from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:746:in `load_spec_files' from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/command_line.rb:22:in `run' from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:69:in `run' from /Users/chrishuang02/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p125@rails3tutorial2ndEd/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:10:in `block in autorun'

    Read the article

  • Mirroring git and mercurial repos the lazy way

    - by Greg Malcolm
    I maintain Python Koans on mirrored on both Github using git and Bitbucket using mercurial. I get pull requests from both repos but it turns out keeping the two repos in sync is pretty easy. Here is how it's done... Assuming I’m starting again on a clean laptop, first I clone both repos ~/git $ hg clone https://bitbucket.org/gregmalcolm/python_koans ~/git $ git clone [email protected]:gregmalcolm/python_koans.git python_koans2 The only thing that makes a folder a git or mercurial repository is the .hg folder in the root of python_koans and the .git folder in the root of python_koans2. So I just need to move the .git folder over into the python_koans folder I'm using for mercurial: ~/git $ rm -rf python_koans/.git ~/git $ mv python_koans2/.git python_koans ~/git $ ls -la python_koans total 48 drwxr-xr-x 11 greg staff 374 Mar 17 15:10 . drwxr-xr-x 62 greg staff 2108 Mar 17 14:58 .. drwxr-xr-x 12 greg staff 408 Mar 17 14:58 .git -rw-r--r-- 1 greg staff 34 Mar 17 14:54 .gitignore drwxr-xr-x 13 greg staff 442 Mar 17 14:54 .hg -rw-r--r-- 1 greg staff 48 Mar 17 14:54 .hgignore -rw-r--r-- 1 greg staff 365 Mar 17 14:54 Contributor Notes.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 greg staff 1082 Mar 17 14:54 MIT-LICENSE -rw-r--r-- 1 greg staff 5765 Mar 17 14:54 README.txt drwxr-xr-x 10 greg staff 340 Mar 17 14:54 python 2 drwxr-xr-x 10 greg staff 340 Mar 17 14:54 python 3 That’s about it! Now git and mercurial are tracking files in the same folder. Of course you will still need to set up your .gitignore to ignore mercurial’s dotfiles and .hgignore to ignore git’s dotfiles or there will be squabbling in the backseat. ~/git $ cd python_koans/ ~/git/python_koans $ cat .gitignore *.pyc *.swp .DS_Store answers .hg <-- Ignore mercurial ~/git/python_koans $ cat .hgignore syntax: glob *.pyc *.swp .DS_Store answers .git <-- Ignore git Because both my mirrors are both identical as far as tracked files are concerned I won’t yet see anything if I check statuses at this point: ~/git/python_koans $ git status # On branch master nothing to commit (working directory clean) ~/git/python_koans $ hg status ~/git/python_koans But how about if I accept a pull request from the bitbucket (mercuial) site? ~/git/python_koans $ hg status ~/git/python_koans $ git status # On branch master # Your branch is behind 'origin/master' by 1 commit, and can be fast-forwarded. # # Changed but not updated: # (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) # (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) # # modified: python 2/koans/about_decorating_with_classes.py # modified: python 2/koans/about_iteration.py # modified: python 2/koans/about_with_statements.py # modified: python 3/koans/about_decorating_with_classes.py # modified: python 3/koans/about_iteration.py # modified: python 3/koans/about_with_statements.py Mercurial doesn’t have any changes to track right now, but git has changes. Commit and push them up to github and balance is restored to the force: ~/git/python_koans $ git commit -am "Merge from bitbucket mirror: 'gpiancastelli - Fix for issue #21 and some other tweaks'" [master 79ca184] Merge from bitbucket mirror: 'gpiancastelli - Fix for issue #21 and some other tweaks' 6 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-) ~/git/python_koans $ git push origin master Or just use hg-git? The github developers have actually published a plugin for automatic mirroring: http://hg-git.github.com I haven’t used it because at the time I tried it a couple of years ago I was having problems getting all the parts to play nice with each other. Probably works fine now though..

    Read the article

  • New JavaScript Editor

    - by Petr
    I did not write a blog post here for a few weeks. I think the last my post was  about releasing NetBeans 7.1 in the beginning of January. The reason is not that I would change the job:), but that I have concentrated on new JavaScript support/editor. The new JavaScript editor is written basically from scratch. The answer for the question "Why from beginning again, why do you just improve the old one?" is not easy and the decision has more aspects. One of the main reasons is that the old support was written 4 years ago and the architecture is limited. Also during the time, the APIs were changed and it was very hard to keep the editor up to date. Also there is a license issue etc. In short, it is time to rewrite the old JS editor.  We build up strong community about the PHP support in NetBeans and because many PHP developers also write JavaScript code I would like to ask you for a help. There is a continual PHP build with the new JavaScript support. You can download the result of the builds here. It's a zip file. You can unzip the file anywhere, where you want. I recommend to run the build with the new userdir, to avoid damaging your current userdir. It shouldn't happened, but just to be sure:). You can achieve this through the switch --userdir. So start the unzipped file from command line from the folder, where you unzipped it, can be done with this command on unix: bin/netbeans.sh --userdir /path/to/new/userdir and on windows: bin\netbeans.exe --userdir D:\path\to\new\userdir For the developers who use continual php build already, it's well known. There is also full IDE build with the new JavaScript support for people, who need more than only PHP support.  Because the builds with the new JavaScript editor is created from a branch, there are not nightly builds available. They will be, when we merge the branch to the trunk, but so far we have to work only with the mentioned continual build. We will merge our branch after branching NetBeans 7.2 from trunk. This is also answer for the question, what release of NetBeans will contain the new JS support. It should be the release after NetBeans 7.2. I'm asking you whether you could play with the builds or better, could work in the builds with new JavaScript support and tell us every issue that you run in. It can be everything what doesn't fit you, something doesn't work as you expected, something is slow, you want change the behaviour of a feature etc. Your input / comments are very important for us and it will help us to achieve the new JavaScript support that you need.  The best way how to communicate issues is through our Bugzilla, because it is simple to track them. Sure you can write comment here:), but still I prefer Bugzilla for any issue. You can click here (you should be already log in Bugzilla), a form for the new JavaScript issue is opened, with pre-filled component Editor and NO72 keyword. I will write about the single features later, but now I will mentioned a few features that should work in better way than in the old support.  Syntactic and semantic colouring Navigator Mark Occurrences and GoTo Declaration  Code Completion Code Completion is invoked through keyboard shortcut CTRL+SPACE. The first invocation offers items that are found through a source model. Almost all editor features are based on the model, that is build from source code. There is a lot of work on the model yet, but it should offer better results. When the pop up window with code completion items is open and you press CTRL+SPACE again, then the code completion offers all elements that are in the project. In the pictures all elements that starts with letter 't'. Formatter with many options and more :) A few features are not still implemented that are supported in the old JavaScript support (for example jQuery support), but we are adding this features ASAP.

    Read the article

  • Package Version Numbers, why are they so important

    - by Chris W Beal
    One of the design goals of IPS has been to allow people to easily move forward to a supported "Surface" of component. That is to say, when you  # pkg update your system, you get the latest set of components which all work together, based on the packages you already have installed. During development, this has meant simply you update to the latest "build" of the components. (During development, we build everything and publish everything every two weeks). Now we've released Solaris 11 using the IPS technologies, things are a bit more complicated. We need to be able to reflect all the types of Solaris release we are doing. For example Solaris Development builds, Solaris Update builds and "Support Repository Updates" (the replacement for patches) in the version scheme. So simply saying "151" as the build number isn't sufficient to articulate what you are running, or indeed what is available to update to In my previous blog post I talked about creating your own package, and gave an example FMRI of pkg://tools/[email protected],0.5.11-0.0.0 But it's probably more instructive to look at the FMRI of a Solaris package. The package "core-os" contains all the common utilities and daemons you need to use Solaris.  $ pkg info core-os Name: system/core-os Summary: Core Solaris Description: Operating system core utilities, daemons, and configuration files. Category: System/Core State: Installed Publisher: solaris Version: 0.5.11 Build Release: 5.11 Branch: 0.175.0.0.0.2.1 Packaging Date: Wed Oct 19 07:04:57 2011 Size: 25.14 MB FMRI: pkg://solaris/system/[email protected],5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.1:20111019T070457Z The FMRI is what we will concentrate on here. In this package "solaris" is the publisher. You can use the pkg publisher command to see where the solaris publisher gets it's bits from $ pkg publisher PUBLISHER TYPE STATUS URI solaris origin online http://pkg.oracle.com/solaris/release/ So we can see we get solaris packages from pkg.oracle.com.  The package name is system/core-os. These can be arbitrary length, just to allow you to group similar packages together. Now on the the interesting? bit, the versions, everything after the @ is part of the version. IPS will only upgrade to a "higher" version. [email protected],5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.1:20111019T070457Z core-os = Package Name0.5.11 = Component - in this case we're saying it's a SunOS 5.11 package, = separator5.11 = Built on version - to indicate what OS version you built the package on- = another separator0.175.0.0.0.2.1 = Branch Version : = yet another separator20111019T070457Z = Time stamp when the package was published So from that we can see the Branch Version seems rather complex. It is necessarily so, to allow us to describe the hierachy of releases we do In this example we see the following 0.175: is known as the trunkid, and is incremented each build of a new release of Solaris. During Solaris 11 this should not change  0: is the Update release for Solaris. 0 for FCS, 1 for update 1 etc 0: is the SRU for Solaris. 0 for FCS, 1 for SRU 1 etc 0: is reserved for future use 2: Build number of the SRU 1: Nightly ID - only important for Solaris developersTake a hypothetical example [email protected],5.11-0.175.1.5.0.4.1:<something> This would be build 4 of SRU 5 of Update 1 of Solaris 11 This is actually documented in a MOS article 1378134.1 Which you can read if you have a support contract.

    Read the article

  • Subterranean IL: Exception handling 2

    - by Simon Cooper
    Control flow in and around exception handlers is tightly controlled, due to the various ways the handler blocks can be executed. To start off with, I'll describe what SEH does when an exception is thrown. Handling exceptions When an exception is thrown, the CLR stops program execution at the throw statement and searches up the call stack looking for an appropriate handler; catch clauses are analyzed, and filter blocks are executed (I'll be looking at filter blocks in a later post). Then, when an appropriate catch or filter handler is found, the stack is unwound to that handler, executing successive finally and fault handlers in their own stack contexts along the way, and program execution continues at the start of the catch handler. Because catch, fault, finally and filter blocks can be executed essentially out of the blue by the SEH mechanism, without any reference to preceding instructions, you can't use arbitary branches in and out of exception handler blocks. Instead, you need to use specific instructions for control flow out of handler blocks: leave, endfinally/endfault, and endfilter. Exception handler control flow try blocks You cannot branch into or out of a try block or its handler using normal control flow instructions. The only way of entering a try block is by either falling through from preceding instructions, or by branching to the first instruction in the block. Once you are inside a try block, you can only leave it by throwing an exception or using the leave <label> instruction to jump to somewhere outside the block and its handler. The leave instructions signals the CLR to execute any finally handlers around the block. Most importantly, you cannot fall out of the block, and you cannot use a ret to return from the containing method (unlike in C#); you have to use leave to branch to a ret elsewhere in the method. As a side effect, leave empties the stack. catch blocks The only way of entering a catch block is if it is run by the SEH. At the start of the block execution, the thrown exception will be the only thing on the stack. The only way of leaving a catch block is to use throw, rethrow, or leave, in a similar way to try blocks. However, one thing you can do is use a leave to branch back to an arbitary place in the handler's try block! In other words, you can do this: .try { // ... newobj instance void [mscorlib]System.Exception::.ctor() throw MidTry: // ... leave.s RestOfMethod } catch [mscorlib]System.Exception { // ... leave.s MidTry } RestOfMethod: // ... As far as I know, this mechanism is not exposed in C# or VB. finally/fault blocks The only way of entering a finally or fault block is via the SEH, either as the result of a leave instruction in the corresponding try block, or as part of handling an exception. The only way to leave a finally or fault block is to use endfinally or endfault (both compile to the same binary representation), which continues execution after the finally/fault block, or, if the block was executed as part of handling an exception, signals that the SEH can continue walking the stack. filter blocks I'll be covering filters in a separate blog posts. They're quite different to the others, and have their own special semantics. Phew! Complicated stuff, but it's important to know if you're writing or outputting exception handlers in IL. Dealing with the C# compiler is probably best saved for the next post.

    Read the article

  • Does *every* project benefit from written specifications?

    - by nikie
    I know this is holy war territory, so please read the question to the end before answering. There are many cases where written specifications make a lot of sense. For example, if you're a contractor and you want to get paid, you need written specs. If you're working in a team with 20 persons, you need written specs. If you're writing a programming language compiler or interpreter (and it's not perl), you'll usually write a formal specification. I don't doubt that there are many more cases where written specifications are a really good idea. I just think that there are cases where there's so little benefit in written specs, that it doesn't outweigh the costs of writing and maintaining them. EDIT: The close votes say that "it is difficult to say what is asked here", so let me clarify: The usefulness of written, detailed specifications is often claimed like a dogma. (If you want examples, look at the comments.) But I don't see the use of them for the kind of development I'm doing. So what is asked here is: How would written specifications help me? Background information: I work for a small company that's developing vertical market software. If our product is easier to use and has better performance than the competition, it sells. If it's harder to use, even if it behaves 100% as the specification says, it doesn't sell. So there are no "external forces" for having written specs. The advantage would have to be somewhere in the development process. Now, I can see how frozen specifications would make a developer's life easier. But we'll never have frozen specs. If we see in the middle of development that feature X is not intuitive to use the way it's specified, then we can only choose between changing the specification or developing a product that won't sell. You'll probably ask by now: How do you know when you're done? Well, we're continually improving our product. The competition does the same. So (hopefully) we're never done. We keep improving the software, and when we reach a point when the benefits of the improvements we've added since the last release outweigh the costs of an update, we create a new release that is then tested, localized, documented and deployed. This also means that there's rarely any schedule pressure. Nobody has to do overtime to make a deadline. If the feature isn't done by the time we want to release the next version, it'll simply go into the next version. The next question might be: How do your developers know what they're supposed to implement? The answer is: They have a lot of domain knowledge. They know the customers business well enough, so a high-level description of the feature (or even just the problem that the customer needs solved) is enough to implement it. If it's not clear, the developer creates a few fake screens to get feedback from marketing/management or customers, but this is nowhere near the level of detail of actual specifications. This might be inefficient for larger teams, but for a small team with low turnover it works quite well. It has the additional benefit that the developer in question often comes up with a better solution than the person writing the specs might have. This question is already getting very long, but let me address one last point: Testing. Like I said in the beginning, if our software behaves 100% like the spec says, it still can be crap. In fact, if it's so unintuitive that you need a spec to know how to test it, it probably is crap. It makes sense to have fixed, written tests for some core functionality and for regression bugs, but again, this is nowhere near a full written spec of how the software should behave when. The main test is: hand the software to a user who doesn't know it yet and tell him to use the new feature X. If she can figure out how to use it and it works, it works.

    Read the article

  • Remove file from git repository (history)

    - by Devenv
    (solved, see bottom of the question body) Looking for this for a long time now, what I have till now is: http://dound.com/2009/04/git-forever-remove-files-or-folders-from-history/ and http://progit.org/book/ch9-7.html Pretty much the same method, but both of them leave objects in pack files... Stuck. What I tried: git filter-branch --index-filter 'git rm --cached --ignore-unmatch file_name' rm -Rf .git/refs/original rm -Rf .git/logs/ git gc Still have files in the pack, and this is how I know it: git verify-pack -v .git/objects/pack/pack-3f8c0...bb.idx | sort -k 3 -n | tail -3 And this: git filter-branch --index-filter "git rm -rf --cached --ignore-unmatch file_name" HEAD rm -rf .git/refs/original/ && git reflog expire --all && git gc --aggressive --prune The same... Tried git clone trick, it removed some of the files (~3000 of them) but the largest files are still there... I have some large legacy files in the repository, ~200M, and I really don't want them there... And I don't want to reset the repository to 0 :( SOLUTION: This is the shortest way to get rid of the files: check .git/packed-refs - my problem was that I had there a refs/remotes/origin/master line for a remote repository, delete it, otherwise git won't remove those files (optional) git verify-pack -v .git/objects/pack/#{pack-name}.idx | sort -k 3 -n | tail -5 - to check for the largest files (optional) git rev-list --objects --all | grep a0d770a97ff0fac0be1d777b32cc67fe69eb9a98 - to check what files those are git filter-branch --index-filter 'git rm --cached --ignore-unmatch file_names' - to remove the file from all revisions rm -rf .git/refs/original/ - to remove git's backup git reflog expire --all --expire='0 days' - to expire all the loose objects (optional) git fsck --full --unreachable - to check if there are any loose objects git repack -A -d - repacking the pack git prune - to finally remove those objects

    Read the article

  • Tools for Maintaining Branches in SVN

    - by Chris Conway
    My team uses SVN for source control. Recently, I've been working on a branch with occasional merges from the trunk and it's been a fairly annoying experience (cf. Joel Spolsky's "Subversion Story #1"), so I've been looking alternative ways to manage branches and merging. Given that a centralized SVN repository is non-negotiable, what I'd like is a set of tools that satisfy the following conditions. Complete revision history should be stored in SVN for both trunk and branches. Merging in either direction (and potentially criss-crossing) should be relatively painless. Merging history should be stored in SVN to the greatest extent possible. I've looked at both git-svn and bzr-svn and neither seems to be up to the job—basically, given the revision history they can export from the SVN repository, they can't seem to do any better a job handling merges than SVN can. For example, after cloning the repository with git, the revision history for my branch shows the original branch off of trunk, but git doesn't "see" any of the interim SVN merges as "native" merges—the revision history is one long line. As a result, any attempts to merge from trunk in git yield just as many conflicts as an SVN merge would. (Besides, the git-svn documentation explicitly warns against using git to merge between branches.) Is there a way to adjust my workflow to make git satisfy the above requirements? Maybe I just need tips or tricks (or a separate merging tool?) to help SVN be better at merging into branches?

    Read the article

  • RSpec and stubbing parameters for a named scope

    - by Andy Waite
    I'm try to write a spec for a named scope which is date dependent. The spec: it "should return 6 months of documents" do Date.stub!(:today).and_return(Date.new(2005, 03, 03)) doc_1 = Factory.create(:document, :date => '2005-01-01') Document.past_six_months.should == [doc_1] end The named scope in the Document model: named_scope :past_six_months, :conditions => ['date > ? AND date < ?', Date.today - 6.months, Date.today] The spec fails with an empty array, and the query in test.log shows why: SELECT * FROM "documents" WHERE (date > '2009-11-11' AND date < '2010-05-11') i.e. it appears to be ignoring my stubbed Date method. However, if I use a class method instead of a named scope then it passes: def self.past_six_months find(:all, :conditions => ['date > ? AND date < ?', Date.today - 6.months, Date.today]) end I would rather use the named scope approach but I don't understand why it isn't working.

    Read the article

  • How to permanently remove xcuserdata under the project.xcworkspace and resolve uncommitted changes

    - by JeffB6688
    I am struggling with a problem with a merge conflict (see Cannot Merge due to conflict with UserInterfaceState.xcuserstate). Based on feedback, I needed to remove the UserInterfaceState.xcuserstate using git rm. After considerable experimentation, I was able to remove the file with "git rm -rf project.xcworkspace/xcuserdata". So while I was on the branch I was working on, it almost immediately came back as a file that needed to be committed. So I did the git rm on the file again and just switched back to the master. Then I performed a git rm on the file again. The operation again removed the file. But I am still stuck. If I try to merge the branch into the master branch, it again says that I have uncommitted changes. So I go to commit the change. But this time, it shows UserInterfaceState.xcuserstate as the file to commit, but the box is unchecked and it can't be checked. So I can't move forward. Is there a way to use 'git rm' to permanently remove xcuserdata under the project.xcworkspace? Help!! Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Rails, RSpec and Webrat: Expected output matches rendered output but still getting error in view spe

    - by Anthony Burns
    Hello all, I've just gotten started using BDD with RSpec/Cucumber/Webrat and Rails and I've run into some frustration trying to get my view spec to pass. First of all, I am running Ruby 1.9.1p129 with Rails 2.3.2, RSpec and RSpec-Rails 1.2.6, Cucumber 0.3.11, and Webrat 0.4.4. Here is the code relevant to my question config/routes.rb: map.b_posts 'backend/posts', :controller => 'backend/posts', :action => 'backend_index', :conditions => { :method => :get } map.connect 'backend/posts', :controller => 'backend/posts', :action => 'create', :conditions => { :method => :post } views/backend/posts/create.html.erb: <% form_tag do %> <% end %> *spec/views/backend/posts/create.html.erb_spec.rb:* describe "backend/posts/create.html.erb" do it "should render a form to create a post" do render "backend/posts/create.html.erb" response.should have_selector("form", :method => 'post', :action => b_posts_path) do |form| # Nothing here yet. end end end Here is the relevant part of the output when I run script/spec: 'backend/posts/create.html.erb should render a form to create a post' FAILED expected following output to contain a <form method='post' action='/backend/posts'/> tag: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd"> <html><body><form action="/backend/posts" method="post"> </form></body></html> It would appear to me that what have_selector is looking for is exactly what the template generates, yet the example still fails. I am very much looking forward to seeing my error (because I have a feeling it is my error). Any help is much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Surprising results with .NET multi-theading algorithm

    - by Myles J
    Hi, I've recently wrote a C# console time tabling algorithm that is based on a combination of a genetic algorithm with a few brute force routines thrown in. The initial results were promising but I figured I could improve the performance by splitting the brute force routines up to run in parallel on multi processor architectures. To do this I used the well documented Producer/Consumer model (as documented in this fantastic article http://www.albahari.com/threading/part2.aspx#_ProducerConsumerQWaitHandle). I changed my code to create one thread per logical processor during the brute force routines. The performance gains on my work station were very pleasing. I am running Windows XP on the following hardware: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU 2.33 GHz 3.49 GB RAM Initial tests indicated average performance gains of approx 40% when using 4 threads. The next step was to deploy the new multi-threading version of the algorithm to our higher spec UAT server. Here is the spec of our UAT server: Windows 2003 Server R2 Enterprise x64 8 cpu (Quad-Core) AMD Opteron 2.70 GHz 255 GB RAM After running the first round of tests we were all extremely surprised to find that the algorithm actually runs slower on the high spec W2003 server than on my local XP work station! In fact the tests seem to indicate that it doesn't matter how many threads are generated (tests were ran with the app spawning between 2 to 32 threads). The algorithm always runs significantly slower on the UAT W2003 server? How could this be? Surely the app should run faster on a 8 cpu (Quad-Core) than my 2 Quad work station? Why are we seeing no performance gains with the multi-threading on the W2003 server whilst the XP workstation tests show gains of up to 40%? Any help or pointers would be appreciated. Regards Myles

    Read the article

  • Hg: How to do a rebase like git's rebase

    - by jpswain09
    Hey guys, In Git I can do this: 1. Start working on new feature: $ git co -b newfeature-123 # (a local feature development branch) do a few commits (M, N, O) master A---B---C \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 2. Pull new changes from upstream master: $ git pull (master updated with ff-commits) master A---B---C---D---E---F \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 3. Rebase off master so that my new feature can be developed against the latest upstream changes: (from newfeature-123) $ git rebase master master A---B---C---D---E---F \ newfeature-123 M---N---O I want to know how to do the same thing in Mercurial, and I've scoured the web for an answer, but the best I could find was this: http://www.selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2007-June/013393.html That link provides 2 examples: 1. I'll admit that this: (replacing the revisions from the example with those from my own example) hg up -C F hg branch -f newfeature-123 hg transplant -a -b newfeature-123 is not too bad, except that it leaves behind the pre-rebase M-N-O as an unmerged head and creates 3 new commits M',N',O' that represent them branching off the updated mainline. Basically the problem is that I end up with this: master A---B---C---D---E---F \ \ newfeature-123 \ M'---N'---O' \ newfeature-123 M---N---O this is not good because it leaves behind local, unwanted commits that should be dropped. The other option from the same link is hg qimport -r M:O hg qpop -a hg up F hg branch newfeature-123 hg qpush -a hg qdel -r qbase:qtip and this does result in the desired graph: master A---B---C---D---E---F \ newfeature-123 M---N---O but these commands (all 6 of them!) seem so much more complicated than $ git rebase master I want to know if this is the only equivalent in Hg or if there is some other way available that is simple like Git. Thanks!! Jamie

    Read the article

  • Backing up my locally hosted rails apps in preparation for OS upgrade

    - by stephen murdoch
    I have some apps running on Heroku. I will be upgrading my OS in two weeks. The last time I upgraded though (6 months ago) I ran into some problems. Here's what I did: copied all my rails apps onto DVD upgraded OS transferred rails apps from DVD to new OS Then, after setting up new SSH-keys I tried to push to some of my heroku apps and, whilst I can't remember the exact error message off-hand, it more or less amounted to "fatal exception the remote end hung up" So I know that I'm doing something wrong here. First of all, is there any need for me to be putting my heroku hosted rails apps onto DVD? Would I be better just pulling all my apps from their heroku repos once I've done the upgrade? What do others do here? The reason I stuck them on DVD is because I tend to push a specific production branch to Heroku and sometimes omit large development files from it... Secondly, was this problem caused by SSH keys? Should I have backed up the old keys and transferred them from my old OS to my new one too, or is Heroku perfectly happy to let you change OS's like that? My solution in the end was to just create new heroku apps and reassign the custom domain names in heroku add-ons menu... I never actually though of pulling from the heroku repos as I tend to push a specific branch to heroku and that branch doesn't always have all the development files in it... I realise that the error message I mentioned doesn't particularly help anyone but I didn't think to remember it 6 months ago. Any advice would be appreciated PS - when I say upgrade, I mean full install of the new version with full format of the HDD.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >