Search Results

Search found 7245 results on 290 pages for 'meta tests'.

Page 49/290 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

• The Challenge with HTML5 – In Pictures

  - by dwahlin

  I love working with Web technologies and am looking forward to the new functionality that HTML5 will ultimately bring to the table (some of which can be used today). Having been through the div versus layer battle back in the IE4 and Netscape 4 days I think we’re headed down that road again as a result of browsers implementing features differently. I’ve been spending a lot of time researching and playing around with HTML5 samples and features (mainly because we’re already seeing demand for training on HTML5) and there’s a lot of great stuff there that will truly revolutionize web applications as we know them. However, browsers just aren’t there yet and many people outside of the development world don’t really feel a need to upgrade their browser if it’s working reasonably well (Mom and Dad come to mind) so it’s going to be awhile. There’s a nice test site at http://www.HTML5Test.com that runs through different HTML5 features and scores how well they’re supported. They don’t test for everything and are very clear about that on the site: “The HTML5 test score is only an indication of how well your browser supports the upcoming HTML5 standard and related specifications. It does not try to test all of the new features offered by HTML5, nor does it try to test the functionality of each feature it does detect. Despite these shortcomings we hope that by quantifying the level of support users and web developers will get an idea of how hard the browser manufacturers work on improving their browsers and the web as a development platform. The score is calculated by testing for the many new features of HTML5. Each feature is worth one or more points. Apart from the main HTML5 specification and other specifications created the W3C HTML Working Group, this test also awards points for supporting related drafts and specifications. Some of these specifications were initially part of HTML5, but are now further developed by other W3C working groups. WebGL is also part of this test despite not being developed by the W3C, because it extends the HTML5 canvas element with a 3d context. The test also awards bonus points for supporting audio and video codecs and supporting SVG or MathML embedding in a plain HTML document. These test do not count towards the total score because HTML5 does not specify any required audio or video codec. Also SVG and MathML are not required by HTML5, the specification only specifies rules for how such content should be embedded inside a plain HTML file. Please be aware that the specifications that are being tested are still in development and could change before receiving an official status. In the future new tests will be added for the pieces of the specification that are currently still missing. The maximum number of points that can be scored is 300 at this moment, but this is a moving goalpost.” It looks like their tests haven’t been updated since June, but the numbers are pretty scary as a developer because it means I’m going to have to do a lot of browser sniffing before assuming a particular feature is available to use. Not that much different from what we do today as far as browser sniffing you say? I’d have to disagree since HTML5 takes it to a whole new level. In today’s world we have script libraries such as jQuery (my personal favorite), Prototype, script.aculo.us, YUI Library, MooTools, etc. that handle the heavy lifting for us. Until those libraries handle all of the key HTML5 features available it’s going to be a challenge. Certain features such as Canvas are supported fairly well across most of the major browsers while other features such as audio and video are hit or miss depending upon what codec you want to use. Run the tests yourself to see what passes and what fails for different browsers. You can also view the HTML5 Test Suite Conformance Results at http://test.w3.org/html/tests/reporting/report.htm (a work in progress). The table below lists the scores that the HTML5Test site returned for different browsers I have installed on my desktop PC and laptop. A specific list of tests run and features supported are given when you go to the site. Note that I went ahead and tested the IE9 beta and it didn’t do nearly as good as I expected it would, but it’s not officially out yet so I expect that number will change a lot. Am I opposed to HTML5 as a result of these tests? Of course not - I’m actually really excited about what it offers.  However, I’m trying to be realistic and feel it'll definitely add a new level of headache to the Web application development process having been through something like this many years ago. On the flipside, developers that are able to target a specific browser (typically Intranet apps) or master the cross-browser issues are going to release some pretty sweet applications. Check out http://html5gallery.com/ for a look at some of the more cutting-edge sites out there that use HTML5. Also check out the http://www.beautyoftheweb.com site that Microsoft put together to showcase IE9. Chrome 8 Safari 5 for Windows     Opera 10 Firefox 3.6     Internet Explorer 9 Beta (Note that it’s still beta) Internet Explorer 8

  Read the article

• What should be tested in Javascript?

  - by Nathan Hoad

  At work, we've just started on a heavily Javascript based application (actually using Coffeescript, but still), of which I've been implementing an automated test system using JsTestDriver and fabric. We've never written something with this much Javascript, so up until now we've never done any Javascript testing. I'm unsure what exactly we should be testing in our unit tests. We've written JQuery plugins for various things, so it's quite obvious that they should be verified for correctness as much as possible with JsTestDriver, but everyone else in my team seems to think that we should be testing the page level Javascript as well. I don't think we should be testing page level Javascript as unit tests, but instead using a system like Selenium to verify everything works as expected. My main reasoning for this is that at the moment, page level Javascript tests are guaranteed to fail through JsTestDriver, because they're trying to access elements on the DOM that can't possibly exist. So, what should be unit tested in Javascript?

  Read the article

• Unit test and Code Coverage of Ant build scripts

  - by pablaasmo

  In our development environment We have more and more build scripts for ant to perform the build tasks for several different build jobs. These build scripts sometimes become large and do a lot of things and basically is source code in and of itself. So in a "TDD-world" we should have unit tests and coverage reports for the source code. I found AntUnit and BuildFileTest.java for doing unit tests. But it would also be interesting to know the code coverage of those unit tests. I have been searching google, but have not found anything. Does anyone know of a code coverage tool for Ant build scripts?

  Read the article

• shortest digest of a string

  - by meta

  [Description] Given a string of char type, find a shortest digest, which is defined as: a shortest sub-string which contains all the characters in the original string. [Example] A = "aaabedacd" B = "bedac" is the answer. [My solution] Define an integer table with 256 elements, which is used to record the occurring times for each kind of character in the current sub-string. Scan the whole string, statistic the total kinds of character in the given string by using the above table. Use two pointers, start, end, which are initially pointing to the start and (start + 1) of the given string. The current kinds of character is 1. Expand sub-string[start, end) at the end until it contains all kinds of character. Update the shortest digest if possible. Contract sub-string[start, end] at the start by one character each time, try to restore its digest property if necessary by step 4. The time cost is O(n), and the extra space cost is constant. Any better solution without extra space?

  Read the article

• Error installing RedCloth

  - by meta

  I'm getting this erron when trying to install RedCloth on openSuse: sudo gem install RedCloth Building native extensions. This could take a while... ERROR: Error installing RedCloth: ERROR: Failed to build gem native extension. /usr/bin/ruby extconf.rb creating Makefile make sh: make: nie znaleziono polecenia Gem files will remain installed in /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RedCloth-4.2.3 for inspection. Results logged to /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RedCloth-4.2.3/ext/redcloth_scan/gem_make.out I tried to google this out and triend everything. So I need help with that.

  Read the article

• Assign multiple test categories using TestCategoryAttribute

  - by Michael Freidgeim

  I am using TestCategoryAttribute to filter which tests to run during builds and wandered, how to -how to assign multiple test categories.According to constructor documentation only single category can be specified.  However TestCategories Property (plural!)can return multiple categories.Grouping Tests into Test Categories: You can add an automated test to one or multiple test categories using a test attribute. Each test can belong to multiple test categories.The recommended approach from MSDN How to: Group and Run Automated Tests Using Test Categories is to specify multiple TestCategory attributes like the following[TestCategory("Nightly"), TestCategory("Weekly"), TestCategory("ShoppingCart"), TestMethod()]public Void DebitTest() { }Article http://toddmeinershagen.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/create-custom-test-category-attributes.htmlshows how enums can be used instead of strings.It also explains, that TestCategories Property can be used in derived custom attributes.v

  Read the article

• How does TDD address interaction between objects?

  - by Gigi

  TDD proponents claim that it results in better design and decoupled objects. I can understand that writing tests first enforces the use of things like dependency injection, resulting in loosely coupled objects. However, TDD is based on unit tests - which test individual methods and not the integration between objects. And yet, TDD expects design to evolve from the tests themselves. So how can TDD possibly result in a better design at the integration (i.e. inter-object) level when the granularity it addresses is finer than that (individual methods)?

  Read the article

• How abstract should you get with BDD

  - by Newton

  I was writing some tests in Gherkin (using Cucumber/Specflow). I was wondering how abstract should I get with my tests. In order to not make this open-ended, which of the following statements is better for BDD: Given I am logged in with email [email protected] and password 12345 When I do something Then something happens as opposed to Given I am logged in as the Administrator When I do something Then something happens The reason I am confused is because 1 is more based on the behaviour (filing in email and password) and 2 is easier to process and write the tests.

  Read the article

• Online Launch of 3 new Telerik products JustMock, TeamPulse and WebUI Test Studio

  As you probably already know we have introduced 3 new products in the last 10 days, two of them at DevConnections in Las Vegas alone. If you didnt get a chance to attend DevConnections, we have organized an online launch so you get to see our new products first hand. Here is the schedule: Introduction to Telerik JustMock Tuesday, April 20 @11am ET Join the online launch of JustMock - a new developer productivity tool from Telerik designed to make it easy to create unit tests. In this webinar you will find out what is in the current release and learn about JustMocks future. JustMock cuts your development time and helps you create better unit tests without requiring you to change your code. It allows you to perform fast and controlled tests that are independent of external dependencies like databases, web services, or proprietary code. With JustMock, there are ...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

  Read the article

• How do you handle measuring Code Coverage in JavaScript

  - by Dancrumb

  In order to measure Code Coverage for JavaScript unit tests, one needs to instrument the code, run the tests and then perform post-processing. My concern is that, as a result, you are unit testing code that will never be run in production. Since JavaScript isn't compiled, what you test should be precisely what you execute. So here's my question, how do you handle this? One thought I had was to run Unit Testing on the production code and use that for my pass fail. I would then create a shadow of my production code, with instrumentation and run my unit tests again; this would give me my code coverage stats. Has anyone come across a method that is a little more graceful than this?

  Read the article

• SQLIO Writes

  - by Grant Fritchey

  SQLIO is a fantastic utility for testing the abilities of the disks in your system. It has a very unfortunate name though, since it's not really a SQL Server testing utility at all. It really is a disk utility. They ought to call it DiskIO because they'd get more people using I think. Anyway, branding is not the point of this blog post. Writes are the point of this blog post. SQLIO works by slamming your disk. It performs as mean reads as it can or it performs as many writes as it can depending on how you've configured your tests. There are much smarter people than me who will get into all the various types of tests you should run. I'd suggest reading a bit of what Jonathan Kehayias (blog|twitter) has to say or wade into Denny Cherry's (blog|twitter) work. They're going to do a better job than I can describing all the benefits and mechanisms around using this excellent piece of software. My concerns are very focused. I needed to set up a series of tests to see how well our product SQL Storage Compress worked. I wanted to know the effects it would have on a system, the disk for sure, but also memory and CPU. How to stress the system? SQLIO of course. But when I set it up and ran it, following the documentation that comes with it, I was seeing better than 99% compression on the files. Don't get me wrong. Our product is magnificent, wonderful, all things great and beautiful, gets you coffee in the morning and is made mostly from bacon. But 99% compression. No, it's not that good. So what's up? Well, it's the configuration. The default mechanism is to load up a file, something large that will overwhelm your disk cache. You're instructed to load the file with a character 0x0. I never got a computer science degree. I went to film school. Because of this, I didn't memorize ASCII tables so when I saw this, I thought it was zero's or something. Nope. It's NULL. That's right, you're making a very large file, but you're filling it with NULL values. That's actually ok when all you're testing is the disk sub-system. But, when you want to test a compression and decompression, that can be an issue. I got around this fairly quickly. Instead of generating a file filled with NULL values, I just copied a database file for my tests. And to test it with SQL Storage Compress, I used a database file that had already been run through compression (about 40% compression on that file if you're interested). Now the reads were taken care of. I am seeing very realistic performance from decompressing the information for reads through SQLIO. But what about writes? Well, the issue is, what does SQLIO write? I don't have access to the code. But I do have access to the results. I did two different tests, just to be sure of what I was seeing. First test, use the .DAT file as described in the documentation. I opened the .DAT file after I was done with SQLIO, using WordPad. Guess what? It's a giant file full of air. SQLIO writes NULL values. What does that do to compression? I did the test again on a copy of an uncompressed database file. Then I ran the original and the SQLIO modified copy through ZIP to see what happened. I got better than 99% compression out of the SQLIO modified file (original file of 624,896kb went to 275,871kb compressed, after SQLIO it went to 608kb compressed). So, what does SQLIO write? It writes air. If you're trying to test it with compression or maybe some other type of file storage mechanism like dedupe, you need to know this because your tests really won't be valid. Should I find some other mechanism for testing? Yeah, if all I'm interested in is establishing performance to my own satisfaction, yes. But, I want to be able to compare my results with other people's results and we all need to be using the same tool in order for that to happen. SQLIO is the common mechanism that most people I know use to establish disk performance behavior. It'd be better if we could get SQLIO to do writes in some other fashion. Oh, and before I go, I get to brag a bit. Measuring IOPS, SQL Storage Compress outperforms my disk alone by about 30%.

  Read the article

• What's with bad function call in view generated via scaffold?

  - by meta

  I've scaffolded Things element: script/generate scaffold wip/thing name:string and got some invalid function call in views, like: <td><%= link_to 'Edit', edit_thing_path(thing) %></td> Which raise this error: ActionView::TemplateError (undefined method `edit_thing_path' for #<ActionView::Base:0xb5c00944>) on line #11 of app/views/wip/things/index.html.erb: 8: <tr> 9: <td><%=h thing.name %></td> 10: <td><%= link_to 'Show', thing %></td> 11: <td><%= link_to 'Edit', edit_thing_path(thing) %></td> 12: <td><%= link_to 'Destroy', thing, :confirm => 'Are you sure?', :method => :delete %></td> 13: </tr> 14: <% end %> What's with that function? Where is it? Is it some kind of automagic stuff or do I need to implement it (if so - where should it go?) I have resource defined in routes with namespace: map.namespace :wip do |wip| wip.resources :things end rake routes gives me this: wip_things GET /wip/things(.:format) {:action=>"index", :controller=>"wip/things"} POST /wip/things(.:format) {:action=>"create", :controller=>"wip/things"} new_wip_thing GET /wip/things/new(.:format) {:action=>"new", :controller=>"wip/things"} edit_wip_thing GET /wip/things/:id/edit(.:format) {:action=>"edit", :controller=>"wip/things"} wip_thing GET /wip/things/:id(.:format) I assumed that those names (wip_thing, new_wip_thing) are the correct names, but it's still gives me that error Thanks.

  Read the article

• Sending files using Winsock - optimal send() data length?

  - by Meta

  I am using Winsock with non-blocking sockets to send a file to a client. The way I'm doing it right now is that I read a chunk of 8192 bytes from the file, and then loop until all of it successfully goes through send() (obviously handling WSAEWOULDBLOCK as it occurs). I then move on and read the next 8192 bytes, and so on... Although I can use any other number than 8192 when I test the transfer on my local machine, once I try it over a network, it seems like 8191 is the largest number I can use. When I try to use any number higher than 8191 (starting with 8192), the file transfer becomes extremely slow (about 5 times slower). Is there any reason why 8191 is so special? I've done some more testing and it turns out that using 8000 is slightly faster (by 0.5%). If you understand why 8191 is so special, can you tell me if there is a number better than the others (better than 8000)? I have a feeling that it has something to do with the fact that the default send buffer allocated to the socket by Winsock is 8KB, but I don't understand why. It might also have something to do with the Nagle algorithm, but again, I'm not sure how. Note that I have not modified the SO_SNDBUF option nor the TCP_NODELAY option. Or am I doing this all wrong? What's the best way of sending a file over a non-blocking socket?

  Read the article

• TCP sequence number question

  - by Meta

  This is more of a theoretical question than an actual problem I have. If I understand correctly, the sequence number in the TCP header of a packet is the index of the first byte in the packet in the whole stream, correct? If that is the case, since the sequence number is an unsigned 32-bit integer, then what happens after more than FFFFFFFF = 4294967295 bytes are transferred? Will the sequence number wrap around, or will the sender send a SYN packet to restart at 0?

  Read the article

• Should SpecFlow be used with BDD as a solo developer?

  - by baens

  I am a long time fan of TDD and after reading the RSpec book, would like to transistion to a BDD process. I like the idea of driving from the outside in, as it is presented in the book. What I am having a hard time getting a handle on is how to structure the tests. I have tried SpecFlow, but it seems cumbersome to use when I am the only one really ever going to be looking at the tests. I like the idea of just using straight NUnit, rather then adding another framework, like it is presented here. Is this a good way to try and structure BDD tests? Is there more information out there on comparing the two ways (that may even be more recent)?

  Read the article

• How to organize unit/integration test in BDD

  - by whatf

  So finally after reading a lot, I have understood that the difference between BDD and TDD is between T & B. But coming from basic TDD background, what I used to was, first write unittest for database models write test for views (at this point start with integration test as well, along with unittests) write more integration tests for testing UI stuff. What would be a correct way to approach BDD. Say I have a simple blog application. Given : When a user logs in. He should be shown list of all his posts. But for this, I need a model with a row user, another row blog posts. So how do we go about writing tests? when do we create fixtures? When do we write integration (selenium) tests?

  Read the article

• Where should I store and verify files manipulated by an app

  - by Alan W. Smith

  I'm working on a little Ruby script to move screenshots while renaming them based on a specific convention. I'll be writing tests to confirm the behavior. Ruby has lots of conventions for where to store files (e.g. the "spec" and "features" directories for RSpec and Cucumber, respectively), but I'm not finding best practices for storing files that will be acted upon by the tests. The same goes for a destination for the final copies of the files. So, the question in two parts is: Where should I store files that the test cases will use for a source input. Where should tests that need to write output files send them to.

  Read the article

• What would one call this architecture?

  - by Chris

  I have developed a distributed test automation system which consists of two different entities. One entity is responsible for triggering tests runs and monitoring/displaying their progress. The other is responsible for carrying out tests on that host. Both of these entities retrieve data from a central DB. Now, my first thought is that this is clearly a server-client architecture. After all, you have exactly one organizing entity and many entities that communicate with said entity. However, while the supposed clients to communicate to the server via RPC, they are not actually requesting services or information, rather they are simply reporting back test progress, in fact, once the test run has been triggered they can complete their tasks without connection to the server. The request for a service is actually made by the supposed server which triggers the clients to carry out tests. So would this still be considered a server-client architecture or is this something different?

  Read the article

• DRY, string, and unit testing

  - by Rodrigue

  I have a recurring question when writing unit tests for code that involves constant string values. Let's take an example of a method/function that does some processing and returns a string containing a pre-defined constant. In python, that would be something like: STRING_TEMPLATE = "/some/constant/string/with/%s/that/needs/interpolation/" def process(some_param): # We do some meaningful work that gives us a value result = _some_meaningful_action() return STRING_TEMPLATE % result If I want to unit test process, one of my tests will check the return value. This is where I wonder what the best solution is. In my unit test, I can: apply DRY and use the already defined constant repeat myself and rewrite the entire string def test_foo_should_return_correct_url(): string_result = process() # Applying DRY and using the already defined constant assert STRING_TEMPLATE % "1234" == string_result # Repeating myself, repeating myself assert "/some/constant/string/with/1234/that/needs/interpolation/" == url The advantage I see in the former is that my test will break if I put the wrong string value in my constant. The inconvenient is that I may be rewriting the same string over and over again across different unit tests.

  Read the article

• What are some concise and comprehensive introductory guide to unit testing for a self-taught programmer [closed]

  - by Superbest

  I don't have much formal training in programming and I have learned most things by looking up solutions on the internet to practical problems I have. There are some areas which I think would be valuable to learn, but which ended up both being difficult to learn and easy to avoid learning for a self-taught programmer. Unit testing is one of them. Specifically, I am interested in tests in and for C#/.NET applications using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools in Visual Studio 2010 and/or 2012, but I really want a good introduction to the principles so language and IDE shouldn't matter much. At this time I'm interested in relatively trivial tests for small or medium sized programs (development time of weeks or months and mostly just myself developing). I don't necessarily intend to do test-driven development (I am aware that some say unit testing alone is supposed to be for developing features in TDD, and not an assurance that there are no bugs in the software, but unit testing is often the only kind of testing for which I have resources). I have found this tutorial which I feel gave me a decent idea of what unit tests and TDD looks like, but in trying to apply these ideas to my own projects, I often get confused by questions I can't answer and don't know how to answer, such as: What parts of my application and what sorts of things aren't necessarily worth testing? How fine grained should my tests be? Should they test every method and property separately, or work with a larger scope? What is a good naming convention for test methods? (since apparently the name of the method is the only way I will be able to tell from a glance at the test results table what works in my program and what doesn't) Is it bad to have many asserts in one test method? Since apparently VS2012 reports only that "an Assert.IsTrue failed within method MyTestMethod", and if MyTestMethod has 10 Assert.IsTrue statements, it will be irritating to figure out why a test is failing. If a lot of the functionality deals with writing and reading data to/from the disk in a not-exactly trivial fashion, how do I test that? If I provide a bunch of files as input by placing them in the program's directory, do I have to copy those files to the test project's bin/Debug folder now? If my program works with a large body of data and execution takes minutes or more, should my tests have it do the whole use all of the real data, a subset of it, or simulated data? If latter, how do I decide on the subset or how to simulate? Closely related to the previous point, if a class is such that its main operation happens in a state that is arrived to by the program after some involved operations (say, a class makes calculations on data derived from a few thousands of lines of code analyzing some raw data) how do I test just that class without inevitably ending up testing that class and all the other code that brings it to that state along with it? In general, what kind of approach should I use for test initialization? (hopefully that is the correct term, I mean preparing classes for testing by filling them in with appropriate data) How do I deal with private members? Do I just suck it up and assume that "not public = shouldn't be tested"? I have seen people suggest using private accessors and reflection, but these feel like clumsy and unsuited for regular use. Are these even good ideas? Is there anything like design patterns concerning testing specifically? I guess the main themes in what I'd like to learn more about are, (1) what are the overarching principles that should be followed (or at least considered) in every testing effort and (2) what are popular rules of thumb for writing tests. For example, at one point I recall hearing from someone that if a method is longer than 200 lines, it should be refactored - not a universally correct rule, but it has been quite helpful since I'd otherwise happily put hundreds of lines in single methods and then wonder why my code is so hard to read. Similarly I've found ReSharpers suggestions on member naming style and other things to be quite helpful in keeping my codebases sane. I see many resources both online and in print that talk about testing in the context of large applications (years of work, 10s of people or more). However, because I've never worked on such large projects, this context is very unfamiliar to me and makes the material difficult to follow and relate to my real world problems. Speaking of software development in general, advice given with the assumptions of large projects isn't always straightforward to apply to my own, smaller endeavors. Summary So my question is: What are some resources to learn about unit testing, for a hobbyist, self-taught programmer without much formal training? Ideally, I'm looking for a short and simple "bible of unit testing" which I can commit to memory, and then apply systematically by repeatedly asking myself "is this test following the bible of testing closely enough?" and then amending discrepancies if it doesn't.

  Read the article

• Understanding a #define directive

  - by Meta

  Looking at the Windows SDK, I found this #define directive for MAKEINTRESOURCEW: #define MAKEINTRESOURCEW(i) ((LPWSTR)((ULONG_PTR)((WORD)(i)))) Can someone explain to me what the heck that means? For example, what would be the value of MAKEINTRESOURCEW(0)? (1)? (-1)?

  Read the article

• Moving from mock to real objects?

  - by jjchiw

  I'm like doing TDD so I started everything mocking objects, creating interface, stubbing, great. The design seems to work, now I'll implement the stuff, a lot of the code used in the stubs are going to be reused in my real implementation yay! Now should I duplicate the tests to use the real object implementation (but keeping the mocks object of the sensitive stuff like Database and "services" that are out of my context (http calls, etc...)) Or just change the mocks and stubs of the actual tests to use the real objects....... So the question is that, keep two tests or replace the stubs, mocks? And after that, I should keep designing with the mocks, stubs or just go with real objects? (Just making myself clear I'll keep the mock object of the sensitive stuff like database and services that are out of my context, in both situations.)

  Read the article

• What would one call this architecture?

  - by Chris

  I have developed a distributed test automation system which consists of two different entities. One entity is responsible for triggering tests runs and monitoring/displaying their progress. The other is responsible for carrying out tests on that host. Both of these entities retrieve data from a central DB. Now, my first thought is that this is clearly a server-client architecture. After all, you have exactly one organizing entity and many entities that communicate with said entity. However, while the supposed clients to communicate to the server via RPC, they are not actually requesting services or information, rather they are simply reporting back test progress, in fact, once the test run has been triggered they can complete their tasks without connection to the server. The request for a service is actually made by the supposed server which triggers the clients to carry out tests. So would this still be considered a server-client architecture or is this something different?

  Read the article

• Using Message Boxes in Windows 7 style

  - by Meta

  After reading the MSDN article about proper user interface here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa974176.aspx I want to modify the message boxes I use in my applications to reflect those guidelines (for example, have the Main Instructions in a larger font, better named Buttons, etc...). My question is, is there an API that allows you to easily build those kind of message boxes (a la user32\MessageBox()), or do you actually have to build your own message boxes which follow the guidelines?

  Read the article

• assembly.GetTypes() does not return all types

  - by meta

  I try to lead the types from an .dll (which is also referenced in the executing project). I call: public static void LoadPlugin(string pluginFile) { Assembly assembly = Assembly.LoadFrom(pluginFile); foreach (Type type in assembly.GetTypes()) { // play with it } } It loads just a few of them: public partial class Mathematics : UserControl, IMathematics, IPortable and public partial class Welcome : UserControl but the next one, and some others, are ignored: public partial class Test : UserControl, ITest, IPortable They all stand in the same assembly, under the same namespace. The public static void LoadPlugin(string pluginFile) method is located in other assembly that is also referenced in the executing project. No exceptions are thrown. What could be the issues for not loading all the types? Any ideas?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >