Search Results

Search found 8185 results on 328 pages for 'technical tests'.

Page 50/328 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Oracle Response to Apache Departure from JCP

    - by Henrik Ståhl
    Last month Oracle renominated Apache to the Java Executive Committee because we valued their active participation and perspective on Java. Earlier this week, by an overwhelming majority, the Java Executive Committee voted to move Java forward by formally initiating work on both Java SE 7 and SE 8 based on their technical merits. Apache voted against initiating technical committee work on both SE 7 and SE 8, effectively voting against moving Java forward. Now, despite supporting the technical direction, Apache have announced that they are quitting the Executive Committee. Oracle has a responsibility to move Java forward and to maintain the uniformity of the Java standard for the millions of Java developers and the majority of Executive Committee members agree. We encourage Apache to reconsider its position and remain a part of the process to move Java forward. ASF and many open source projects within it are an important part of the overall Java ecosystem. Adam Messinger, Vice President of Development

    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

  • CFP for Java Embedded @ JavaOne

    - by Tori Wieldt
    Java Embedded @ JavaOne is designed to provide business and technical decision makers, as well as Java embedded ecosystem partners, a unique occasion to come together and learn about how they can use Java Embedded technologies for new business opportunities. The call-for-papers (CFP) for Java Embedded @ JavaOne is now open. Interested speakers are invited to make business submissions: best practices, case studies and panel discussions on emerging opportunities in the Java embedded space. Submit a paper. Also, due to high interest, event organizers are also asking for technical submissions for the JavaOne conference, for the "Java ME, Java Card, Embedded and Devices" track (this track ONLY). The timeline for the CFP is the same for both business and technical submissions: CFP Open – June 18th Deadline for submissions – July 18th Notifications (Accepts/Declines) – week of July 29th Deadline for speakers to accept speaker invitation – August 10th Presentations due for review – August 31st Attendees of both JavaOne and Oracle Openworld can attend Java Embedded @ JavaOne by purchasing a $100.00 USD upgrade to their full conference pass. Rates for attending Embedded @ JavaOne alone are here.

    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

  • Architecture: Bringing Value to the Table

    - by Bob Rhubart
    A recent TechTarget article features an interview with Business Architecture expert William Ulrich (Take a business-driven approach to application modernization ). In that article Ulrich offers this advice: "Moving from one technical architecture might be perfectly viable on a project by project basis, but when you're looking at the big picture and you want to really understand how to drive business value so that the business is pushing money into IT instead of IT pulling money back, you have to understand the business architecture. When we do that we're going to really be able to start bringing value to the table." In many respects that big picture view is what software architecture is all about. As an architect, your technical skills must be top-notch. But if you don't apply that technical knowledge within the larger context of moving the business forward, what are you accomplishing? If you're interested in more insight from William Ulrich, you can listen to the ArchBeat Podcast interview he did last year, in which he and co-author Neal McWhorter talked about their book, Business Architecture: The Art and Practice of Business Transformation.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between these senior software engineer titles?

    - by stackoverflowuser2010
    I'm currently a senior research software engineer at a large company and am being offered a "senior staff engineer" position somewhere else. I am not sure if the new position's title conveys a sideways move or an advancement. So, all other things being roughly equal (salary, domain of expertise, etc.), what is the external difference between these software engineer titles (in general and regardless of any particular company, if possible): senior engineer senior research engineer senior staff engineer member of technical staff principal engineer Edit: Let me elaborate on "member of technical staff" since it's kind of uncommon. I think it's a high title, commonly associated with research. I know that Oracle, VMWare, and the old Bell Labs have these titles. See: Member of Technical Staff . I know what it means, but I don't know how it stacks up against the other titles, which is why I asked.

    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

  • 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

  • Slalom Consulting San Francisco Custom Dev Challenge is live!

    - by PeterTweed
    The Slalom Consulting San Francisco Custom Dev Challenge is live at www.slalomchallenge.com!!!!! Slalom Consulting employs world-class technical consultants who take on ground breaking projects.  Please take the Slalom Custom Dev Challenge to see how you compare to the level of knowledge we look for in our technical consultants.  The online quiz is focussed on General .NET at this time and will be growing to include other technical topics in the future. This application is written in C#, Silverlight and WCF running deployed in the cloud on Windows Azure and working with SQL Azure and Blob Storage.

    Read the article

  • Seeking advice on system documentation

    - by Shadders
    I have a rating engine (it is basically an algorithm) which when I started had no formal documentation. We have created a functional specification/decomposition which is our business level document but now I need something more technical (a technical specification). What I am struggling to understand is what that document looks like, what format it should be in and to what level of detail we should go into. We are in the process of commenting all of the code. We also have a rough document called a Blueprint which reflects the flow of the model and is written in pseudo code. Is the combination of this blueprint and the model comments sufficient as a Technical Specification?

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between these senior software engineer titles?

    - by stackoverflowuser2010
    I'm currently a senior research software engineer at a large company and am being offered a "senior staff engineer" position somewhere else. I am not sure if the new position's title conveys a sideways move or an advancement. So, all other things being roughly equal (salary, domain of expertise, etc.), what is the external difference between these software engineer titles (in general and regardless of any particular company, if possible): senior engineer senior research engineer senior staff engineer member of technical staff principal engineer Edit: Let me elaborate on "member of technical staff" since it's kind of uncommon. I think it's a high title, commonly associated with research. I know that Oracle, VMWare, and the old Bell Labs have these titles. See: Member of Technical Staff . I know what it means, but I don't know how it stacks up against the other titles, which is why I asked.

    Read the article

  • How do I specify a string to display in the Ubuntu software-center when creating a package with dpkg-deb?

    - by TomMKV
    When I open *.deb packages downloaded from the internet in the Ubuntu software-center, it displays a "nice" name for the package (including upper- and lowercase, spaces, special characters, ...). When I create a *.deb package from binaries only using dpkg-deb -b, Ubuntu Software Center displays the "technical" package name (the one specified at the Package: field in the control file, limited to lowercase only, no spaces, ...). Is there any way to provide a string different from the "technical" package name (including upper- and lowercase, spaces, special characters, ...) for display in the Ubuntu software Center? Unfortunately, this can not be done via the short description (that is displayed below the "technical" name, but not replacing it).

    Read the article

  • Will learning programming be as fundamental as learning reading/writing to the kids of the future?

    - by pythagras
    It seems I encounter more and more economists, scientists, and miscellaneous other professionals that have jobs that involve programming on some level. More and more, the jobs that my peers have in many many technical professions involve at least some simple scripting if not something more involved. It seems it used to be that "software engineer" was a distinct profession, now its becoming just another skill like writing -- something that any serious technical professional should be able to use for their job. I see a future where programming is essential to getting any kind of technical/mathematical job. Extrapolating on my anecdotal view of my colleagues... Will the kids of the future become literate in programming in the same way they become readers/writers? Will it become so fundamental to our economy and society that it will be taught at an early age? Will interacting with computers be as important as interacting with other people?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • How to get out of supporting deadend sales pitches?

    - by JoseK
    As part of being a programmer, you often are asked to provide estimates/ make slideware / do technical demos for Sales teams to present to end-clients. Sometimes we go along for the 'technical' discussions or 'strategic capability planning' or some similar mumbo-jumbo. Sometimes, you kind of know which ones are totally going to fail and are not worth pursuing but the Sales guys present fake optimism and extract 'few more slides' out of you or the 'last conference call'. These don't lead to anywhere and are just a waste of time from other tasks for the week. My question is how do you get out of these situations without coming across as non-cooperative. Updated after Kate Gregory's answer: The problem is related to projects we know are doomed (from the technical feedback we've received) But Sales ain't convinced since they've just had a call higher up the management chain - so it's definitely going ahead !

    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

  • 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

  • It’s the thought that counts…

    - by Tony Davis
    I recently finished editing a book called Tribal SQL, and it was a fantastic experience. It’s a community-sourced book written by first-timers. Fifteen previously unpublished authors contributed one chapter each, with the seemingly simple remit to write about “what makes them passionate about working with SQL Server, something that all SQL Server DBAs and developers really need to know”. Sure, some of the writing skills were a bit rusty as one would expect from busy people, but the ideas and energy were sheer nectar. Any seasoned editor can deal easily with the problem of fixing the output of untrained writers. We can handle with the occasional technical error too, which is why we have technical reviewers. The editor’s real job is to hone the clarity and flow of ideas, making the author’s knowledge and experience accessible to as many others as possible. What the writer needs to bring, on the other hand, is enthusiasm, attention to detail, common sense, and a sense of the person behind the writing. If any of these are missing, no editor can fix it. We can see these essential characteristics in many of the more seasoned and widely-published writers about SQL. To illustrate what I mean by enthusiasm, or passion, take a look at the work of Laerte Junior or Fabiano Amorim. Both authors have English as a second language, but their energy, enthusiasm, sheer immersion in a technology and thirst to know more, drives them, with a little editorial help, to produce articles of far more practical value than one can find in the “manuals”. There’s the attention to detail of the likes of Jonathan Kehayias, or Paul Randal. Read their work and one begins to understand the knowledge coupled with incredible rigor, the willingness to bend and test every piece of advice offered to make sure it’s correct, that marks out the very best technical writing. There’s the common sense of someone like Louis Davidson. All writers, including Louis, like to stretch the grey matter of their readers, but some of the most valuable writing is that which takes a complicated idea, or distils years of experience, and expresses it in a way that sounds like simple common sense. There’s personality and humor. Contrary to what you may have been told, they can and do mix well with technical writing, as long as they don’t become a distraction. Read someone like Rodney Landrum, or Phil Factor, for numerous examples of articles that teach hard technical lessons but also make you smile at least twice along the way. Writing well is not easy and it takes a certain bravery to expose your ideas and knowledge for dissection by others, but it doesn’t mean that writing should be the preserve only of those trained in the art, or best left to the MVPs. I believe that Tribal SQL is testament to the fact that if you have passion for what you do, and really know your topic then, with a little editorial help, you can write, and people will learn from what you have to say. You can read a sample chapter, by Mark Rasmussen, in this issue of Simple-Talk and I hope you’ll consider checking out the book (if you needed any further encouragement, it’s also for a good cause, Computers4Africa). Cheers, Tony  

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >