Search Results

Search found 4724 results on 189 pages for 's unit'.

Page 74/189 | < Previous Page | 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81  | Next Page >

• Test Driven Development (TDD) in Visual Studio 2010- Microsoft Mondays

  - by Hosam Kamel

  November 14th , I will be presenting at Microsoft Mondays a session about Test Driven Development (TDD) in Visual Studio 2010 . Microsoft Mondays is program consisting of a series of Webcasts showcasing various Microsoft products and technologies. Each Monday we discuss a particular topic pertaining to development, infrastructure, Office tools, ERP, client/server operating systems etc. The webcast will be broadcast via Lync and can viewed from a web client. The idea behind the “Microsoft Mondays” program is to help you become more proficient in the products and technologies that you use and help you utilize their full potential.   Test Driven Development in Visual Studio 2010 Level – 300 (  Intermediate – Advanced ) Test Driven Development (TDD), also frequently referred to as Test Driven Design, is a development methodology where developers create software by first writing a unit test, then writing the actual system code to make the unit test pass.  The unit test can be viewed as a small specification around how the system should behave; writing it first helps the developer to focus on only writing enough code to make the test pass, thereby helping ensure a tight, lightweight system which is specifically focused meeting on the documented requirements. TDD follows a cadence of “Red, Green, Refactor.” Red refers to the visual display of a failing test – the test you write first will not pass because you have not yet written any code for it. Green refers to the step of writing just enough code in your system to make your unit test pass – your test runner’s UI will now show that test passing with a green icon. Refactor refers to the step of refactoring your code so it is tighter, cleaner, and more flexible. This cycle is repeated constantly throughout a TDD developer’s workday. Date:   November 14, 2011 Time:  10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. (GMT+3)  http://www.eventbrite.com/event/2437620990/efbnen?ebtv=F   See you there! Hosam Kamel Originally posted at

  Read the article

• How to implement lockstep model for RTS game?

  - by user11177

  In my effort to learn programming I'm trying to make a small RTS style game. I've googled and read a lot of articles and gamedev q&a's on the topic of lockstep synchronization in multiplayer RTS games, but am still having trouble wrapping my head around how to implement it in my own game. I currently have a simple server/client system. For example if player1 selects a unit and gives the command to move it, the client sends the command [move, unit, coordinates] to the server, the server runs the pathfinding function and sends [move, unit, path] to all clients which then moves the unit and run animations. So far so good, but not synchronized for clients with latency or lower/higher FPS. How can I turn this into a true lockstep system? Is the right methodology supposed to be something like the following, using the example from above: Turn 1 start gather command inputs from player1 send to the server turn number and commands end turn, increment turn number The server receives the commands, runs pathfinding and sends the paths to all clients. Next turn receive paths from server, as well as confirmation that all clients completed previous turn, otherwise pause and wait for that confirmation move units gather new inputs end turn Is that the gist of it? Should perhaps pathfinding and other game logic be done client side instead of on the server, if so why? Is there anything else I'm missing? I hope someone can break down the concept, so I understand it better.

  Read the article

• techniques for an AI for a highly cramped turn-based tactics game

  - by Adam M.

  I'm trying to write an AI for a tactics game in the vein of Final Fantasy Tactics or Vandal Hearts. I can't change the game rules in any way, only upgrade the AI. I have experience programming AI for classic board games (basically minimax and its variants), but I think the branching factor is too great for the approach to be reasonable here. I'll describe the game and some current AI flaws that I'd like to fix. I'd like to hear ideas for applicable techniques. I'm a decent enough programmer, so I only need the ideas, not an implementation (though that's always appreciated). I'd rather not expend effort chasing (too many) dead ends, so although speculation and brainstorming are good and probably helpful, I'd prefer to hear from somebody with actual experience solving this kind of problem. For those who know it, the game is the land battle mini-game in Sid Meier's Pirates! (2004) and you can skim/skip the next two paragraphs. For those who don't, here's briefly how it works. The battle is turn-based and takes place on a 16x16 grid. There are three terrain types: clear (no hindrance), forest (hinders movement, ranged attacks, and sight), and rock (impassible, but does not hinder attacks or sight). The map is randomly generated with roughly equal amounts of each type of terrain. Because there are many rock and forest tiles, movement is typically very cramped. This is tactically important. The terrain is not flat; higher terrain gives minor bonuses. The terrain is known to both sides. The player is always the attacker and the AI is always the defender, so it's perfectly valid for the AI to set up a defensive position and just wait. The player wins by killing all defenders or by getting a unit to the city gates (a tile on the other side of the map). There are very few units on each side, usually 4-8. Because of this, it's crucial not to take damage without gaining some advantage from it. Units can take multiple actions per turn. All units on one side move before any units on the other side. Order of execution is important, and interleaving of actions between units is often useful. Units have melee and ranged attacks. Melee attacks vary widely in strength; ranged attacks have the same strength but vary in range. The main challenges I face are these: Lots of useful move combinations start with a "useless" move that gains no immediate advantage, or even loses advantage, in order to set up a powerful flank attack in the future. And, since the player units are stronger and have longer range, the AI pretty much always has to take some losses before they can start to gain kills. The AI must be able to look ahead to distinguish between sacrificial actions that provide a future benefit and those that don't. Because the terrain is so cramped, most of the tactics come down to achieving good positioning with multiple units that work together to defend an area. For instance, two defenders can often dominate a narrow pass by positioning themselves so an enemy unit attempting to pass must expose itself to a flank attack. But one defender in the same pass would be useless, and three units can defend a slightly larger pass. Etc. The AI should be able to figure out where the player must go to reach the city gates and how to best position its few units to cover the approaches, shifting, splitting, or combining them appropriately as the player moves. Because flank attacks are extremely deadly (and engineering flank attacks is key to the player strategy), the AI should be competent at moving its units so that they cover each other's flanks unless the sacrifice of a unit would give a substantial benefit. They should also be able to force flank attacks on players, for instance by threatening a unit from two different directions such that responding to one threat exposes the flank to the other. The AI should attack if possible, but sometimes there are no good ways to approach the player's position. In that case, the AI should be able to recognize this and set up a defensive position of its own. But the AI shouldn't be vulnerable to a trivial exploit where the player repeatedly opens and closes a hole in his defense and shoots at the AI as it approaches and retreats. That is, the AI should ideally be able to recognize that the player is capable of establishing a solid defense of an area, even if the defense is not currently in place. (I suppose if a good unit allocation algorithm existed, as needed for the second bullet point, the AI could run it on the player units to see where they could defend.) Because it's important to choose a good order of action and interleave actions between units, it's not as simple as just finding the best move for each unit in turn. All of these can be accomplished with a minimax search in theory, but the search space is too large, so specialized techniques are needed. I thought about techniques such as influence mapping, but I don't see how to use the technique to great effect. I thought about assigning goals to the units. This can help them work together in some limited way, and the problem of "how do I accomplish this goal?" is easier to solve than "how do I win this battle?", but assigning good goals is a hard problem in itself, because it requires knowing whether the goal is achievable and whether it's a good use of resources. So, does anyone have specific ideas for techniques that can help cleverize this AI? Update: I found a related question on Stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3133273/ai-for-a-final-fantasy-tactics-like-game The selected answer gives a decent approach to choosing between alternative actions, but it doesn't seem to have much ability to look into the future and discern beneficial sacrifices from wasteful ones. It also focuses on a single unit at a time and it's not clear how it could be extended to support cooperation between units in defending or attacking.

  Read the article

• How TiVo is messing up customer support.

  - by James Fleming

  Ok,  So I've gotten a TiVo and overall, I'm happy, but there have been issues and I suspect I've a defective unit. - Now the nice folks after many service calls were happy to swap it out, and to ensure continuity of service, they sent me a new unit (after a $109 deposit).  That was yesterday. Today, when we go to watch a little TV, and wait for our replacement unit to arrive we find our TiVo service has been suspended. WTF? They have an exchange program, but your unit your waiting to exchange is as dead as a doornail until the replacement arrives. How hard is it to keep the old unit active for an extra week? Here is the exchange w/Tivo below... You are currently number 1 in the queue. We apologize for the delay. We will assign you to an agent as soon as one is available.The average amount of time a customer has to wait is 00:13.  Kaylene (Listening)  Kaylene: Thank you for contacting TiVo! My name is Kaylene. So that I may better assist you, are you an existing customer?  james Fleming: yes I am, but I'm now having second thoughts about being one    Kaylene: Thank you for verifying your information. How may I assist you today James?  james Fleming: I've been having issues w/a tivo box & I'm getting a replacement sent out to me (after paying an additional deposit) and now my current unit is no longer activated  Kaylene: I can help you today!  Kaylene: When we process an exchange we do transfer over the service to the replacement box so it is active and ready to go when you receive it.  james Fleming: which is to say you also make my current box worthless until such time I receive a new box?!?!?  Kaylene: I apologize that your original box was deactivated so we could activate your replacement box.  james Fleming: Why on Earth would I bother to pay in advance for a new box if you were going to kill my existing box.  Kaylene: What features are you needing to use on your current box?  james Fleming: I need to be able to access my netflix subscription (if I'm lucky enough to have it work without rebooting)  Kaylene: Can I have you verify the TiVo Service Number of your TiVo box please?  james Fleming: 7460011906979b4  Kaylene: We have your current box temporary service but not all features are available with temporary service as it is not paid for service.  Kaylene: If you like I can transfer your service back to your current box for now. Then once you receive the new box you will have to call in and have the service transferred back to the new box.  james Fleming: Not paid for? Let's see> one tivo box + 3 year service plan + monthly service + $109 deposit on a second box = what?  Kaylene: Would you like me to transfer your service back to your current box?  james Fleming: Yes - that would be helpful  Kaylene: All you will need to do is contact us again once you receive the new box so we can transfer it back.  Kaylene: I have put your service back on TiVo box 7460011906979b4.  james Fleming: What would also be helpful is your firm informing me to how you'd be cutting service in the interim.  james Fleming: Again - I opted to pay to have a second box delivered BEFORE returning the box I have - thus trying to have a continuity of service..  Kaylene: This is not something we normally do so it is important when you contact us to transfer the service back to the new box when you receive it that you reference this case number: 110622-006089.  Kaylene: I apologize about the inconvenience. You may need  force a few connections for the box to recognize the service again.  james Fleming: If it's not something you normally do than WHY would you have a $109 fee and a term for the service.  james Fleming: I am not mad at you, but your company is not impressing me and I'm blogging about this experience  Kaylene: Again I apologize about the inconvenience but you should be good to go now. Is there anything else I can help you with today?  james Fleming: so I need to go through the re-actviate process or is that somethign you do  Kaylene: When you receive the new TiVo box you need to contact us so we can transfer the service to the new box for you.  james Fleming: sure  Kaylene: Is there anything else I can help you with today James?  james Fleming: Nope - please email this transcript to me  Kaylene: I apologize but we do not have the ability to e-mail you a copy of this transcript. You can view it online at  http://www.tivo.com when you sign into your account or you can copy and paste it now to save it.  Kaylene: Thank you for contacting TiVo today. Your reference number for our conversation is 110622-006089. You can save this for your records, and if necessary, provide this to a later agent to pull up what we discussed. There will be a brief satisfaction survey emailed to you. We would appreciate any feedback on your TiVo Chat Support experience today.  Kaylene: Thank you for using TiVo Chat and have a great day James! Good-bye.  Kaylene has disconnected.

  Read the article

• TDD - A question about the approach

  - by k25

  I have a question about TDD. I have always seen the recommendation that we should first write unit tests and then start writing code. But I feel that going the other way is much more comfortable (for me) - write code and then the unit tests, because I feel we have much more clarity after we have written the actual code. If I write the code and then the tests, I may have to change my code a little bit to make it testable, even if I concentrate much on creating a testable design. On the other hand, if I write the tests and then the code, the tests will change pretty frequently as and when the code shapes up. My questions are: 1) As I see a lot of recommendations to start writing tests and then move on to coding, what are the disadvantages if I do it the other way - write code and then the unit tests? 2) Could you please point me to some links that discuss about this or recommend some books (TDD)?

  Read the article

• A Quantity class with units

  - by Ryan Ohs

  Goals Create a class that associates a numeric quantity with a unit of measurement. Provide support for simple arithmetic and comparison operations. Implementation An immutable class (Could have been struct but I may try inheritance later) Unit is stored in an enumeration Supported operations: Addition w/ like units Subtraction w/ like units Multiplication by scalar Division by scalar Modulus by scalar Equals() >, >=, <, <=, == IComparable ToString() Implicit cast to Decimal The Source The souce can be downloaded from Github. Notes This class does not support any arithmetic that would modify the unit. This class is not suitable for manipulating currencies. Future Ideas Have a CompositeQuantity class that would allow quantities with unlike units to be combined. Similar currency class with support for allocations/distributions. Provide conversion between units. (Actually I think this would be best placed in an external service. Many situations I deal with require some sort of dynamic conversion ratio.)

  Read the article

• Should tests be in the same ruby file or in separeted ruby files?

  - by Junior Mayhé

  While using Selenium and Ruby to do some functional tests, I am worried with the performance. So is it better to add all test methods in the same ruby file, or I should put each one in separated code files? Below a sample with all tests in the same file: # encoding: utf-8 require "selenium-webdriver" require "test/unit" class Tests < Test::Unit::TestCase def setup @driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for :firefox @base_url = "http://mysite" @driver.manage.timeouts.implicit_wait = 30 @verification_errors = [] @wait = Selenium::WebDriver::Wait.new :timeout => 10 end def teardown @driver.quit assert_equal [], @verification_errors end def element_present?(how, what) @driver.find_element(how, what) true rescue Selenium::WebDriver::Error::NoSuchElementError false end def verify(&blk) yield rescue Test::Unit::AssertionFailedError => ex @verification_errors << ex end def test_1 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_2 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_3 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_4 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_5 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end end

  Read the article

• Are too many assertions code smell?

  - by Florents

  I've really fallen in love with unit testing and TDD - I am test infected. However, unit testing is used for public methods. Sometimes though I do have to test some assumptions-assertions in private methods too, because some of them are "dangerous" and refactoring can't help further. (I know, testing frameworks allo testing private methods). So, It became a habit of mine that (almost always) the first and the last line of a private method are both assertions. I guess this couldn't be bad (right ??). However, I've noticed that I also tend to use assertions in public methods too (as in the private) just "to be sure". Could this be "testing duplication" since the public method assumpotions are tested from the unit testng framework? Could someone think of too many assertions as a code smell?

  Read the article

• Should tests be in the same Ruby file or in separated Ruby files?

  - by Junior Mayhé

  While using Selenium and Ruby to do some functional tests, I am worried with the performance. So is it better to add all test methods in the same Ruby file, or I should put each one in separated code files? Below a sample with all tests in the same file: # encoding: utf-8 require "selenium-webdriver" require "test/unit" class Tests < Test::Unit::TestCase def setup @driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for :firefox @base_url = "http://mysite" @driver.manage.timeouts.implicit_wait = 30 @verification_errors = [] @wait = Selenium::WebDriver::Wait.new :timeout => 10 end def teardown @driver.quit assert_equal [], @verification_errors end def element_present?(how, what) @driver.find_element(how, what) true rescue Selenium::WebDriver::Error::NoSuchElementError false end def verify(&blk) yield rescue Test::Unit::AssertionFailedError => ex @verification_errors << ex end def test_1 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_2 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_3 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_4 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_5 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end end

  Read the article

• Is there an effective way to test XSL transforms/BizTalk maps?

  - by nlawalker

  Creating repeatable tests for BizTalk maps is frustrating. I can't find a way to handle testing them like I'd do unit testing, because I can't find ways to break them into logical chunks. They tend to be one big monolithic unit, and any change has the potential to ripple through the map and break a lot of unit tests. Even if I could break it up, creating XML test inputs is painful and error prone. Is there any effective way of testing these? I'd settle for recommendations for testing XSL transforms in general, but I specifically mention BizTalk maps primarily for the reason that when using the mapper, there really isn't any way to break your XSLT into templates (which I'd imagine you could use to break up your logic into testable chunks, but I've honestly never gotten that far with XSLT).

  Read the article

• Unable to stop TOSHIBA TransMemory

  - by user66498

  I have a USB,when I choose safety remove, occur this error message.How to solve the problem? Unable to stop TOSHIBA TransMemory Error detaching: helper exited with exit code 1: Detaching device /dev/sdb USB device: /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1a.0/usb1/1-1/1-1.2) SYNCHRONIZE CACHE: synchronize cache(10): Fixed format, current; Sense key: Key=9 Additional sense: Logical unit not ready, cause not reportable Info fld=0x0 [0] FAILED: No such file or directory (Continuing despite SYNCHRONIZE CACHE failure.) STOP UNIT: start stop unit: transport: Host_status=0x07 [DID_ERROR] Driver_status=0x00 [DRIVER_OK, SUGGEST_OK] FAILED: No such file or directory

  Read the article

• dUnit Testing in Delphi (how to test private methods)

  - by Charles Faiga

  I have a class that I am unit testing into with dUnit It has a number of methods some public Methods & Private Methods type TAuth = class(TDataModule) private procedure PrivateMethod; public procedure PublicMethod; end; In order to write a unit test for this class I have to make all the methods public. Is there a differt way to declare the PrivateMethods so that I can still unit test them but they are not Public ?

  Read the article

• Java Builder pattern with Generic type bounds

  - by I82Much

  Hi all, I'm attempting to create a class with many parameters, using a Builder pattern rather than telescoping constructors. I'm doing this in the way described by Joshua Bloch's Effective Java, having private constructor on the enclosing class, and a public static Builder class. The Builder class ensures the object is in a consistent state before calling build(), at which point it delegates the construction of the enclosing object to the private constructor. Thus public class Foo { // Many variables private Foo(Builder b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder { public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder var1(Var var) { // set it return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo(this); } } } I then want to add type bounds to some of the variables, and thus need to parametrize the class definition. I want the bounds of the Foo class to be the same as that of the Builder class. public class Foo<Q extends Quantity> { private final Unit<Q> units; // Many variables private Foo(Builder<Q> b) { // Use all of b's variables to initialize self } public static final class Builder<Q extends Quantity> { private Unit<Q> units; public Builder(/* required variables */) { } public Builder units(Unit<Q> units) { this.units = units; return this; } public Foo build() { return new Foo<Q>(this); } } } This compiles fine, but the compiler is allowing me to do things I feel should be compiler errors. E.g. public static final Foo.Builder<Acceleration> x_Body_AccelField = new Foo.Builder<Acceleration>() .units(SI.METER) .build(); Here the units argument is not Unit<Acceleration> but Unit<Length>, but it is still accepted by the compiler. What am I doing wrong here? I want to ensure at compile time that the unit types match up correctly.

  Read the article

• How do you run PartCover with spaces in the path?

  - by nportelli

  I have a msbuild file that I'm trying to run from Hudson CI. It outputs like this "C:\Program Files\Gubka Bob\PartCover .NET 2\PartCover.exe" --target "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\Common7\IDE\MSTest.exe" --target-args "/noisolation" "/testcontainer:C:\CI\Hudson\jobs\Video Raffle\workspace\Source\VideoRaffleCaller\Source\VideoRaffleCaller.Test.Unit\bin\Debug\VideoRaffleCaller.Test.Unit.dll" --include "[VideoRaffleCaller*]*" --output "Coverage\partcover.xml" I get this error Invalid switch "raffle\workspace\source\videorafflecaller\source\videorafflecall er.test.unit\bin\debug\videorafflecaller.test.unit.dll". For switch syntax, type "MSTest /help" WTF? Looks like PartCover doesn't handle spaces in the --target-args well. Or am I missing some quotes somewhere? Has anyone gotten something like to to work?

  Read the article

• Debug using MbUnit/Gallio 3.1

  - by user314096

  When I use the [Debug] button in Gallio, the breakpoints in my unit tests are not hitting. The unit tests are written with MbUnit/Gallio. I am using MbUnit/Gallio version 3.1 build 397 with Visual Studio 2010 Beta 2. The unit tests run to completion in Gallio Icarus, but they run past the breakpoints. I see the symbol tables loading in VS, but it does not stop at the expected breakpoint, so I am unable to debug it.

  Read the article

• How to make automake less ugly?

  - by Brendan Long

  I recently learned how to use automake, and I'm somewhat annoyed that my compile commands went from a bunch of: g++ -O2 -Wall -c fileName.cpp To a bunch of: depbase=`echo src/Unit.o | sed 's|[^/]*$|.deps/&|;s|\.o$||'`;\ g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I./src -g -O2 -MT src/Unit.o -MD -MP -MF $depbase.Tpo -c -o src/Unit.o src/Unit.cpp &&\ mv -f $depbase.Tpo $depbase.Po Is there any way to clean this up? I can usually easily pick out warning messages, but now the wall of text to read though is 3x bigger and much weirder. I know what my flags are, so making it just says "Compiling xxx.cpp" for each file would be perfect.

  Read the article

• How to test UI interaction of Silverlight dialogs?

  - by Bernard Vander Beken

  I am using Silverlight 3.0 Unit Testing, version Silverlight Toolkit November 2009. Apart from unit tests, it allows to do UI interaction tests, typically using AutomationPeer subclasses (eg ButtonAutomationPeer to interact with a Button). Are there AutomationPeer classes to test the interaction with the following: OpenFileDialog SaveFileDialog MessageBox In unit tests it would be possible to stub these, but for integration and browser testing it would be great to have this testable.

  Read the article

• How do I get my ActivityUnitTestCases to sync with the MessageQueue thread and call my Handler?

  - by Ricardo Gladwell

  I'm writing unit tests for a ListActivity in Android that uses a handler to update a ListAdapter. While my activity works in the Android emulator, running the same code in a unit test doesn't update my adapter: calls to sendEmptyMessage do not call handleMessage in my activity's Handler. How do I get my ActivityUnitTestCase to sync with the MessageQueue thread and call my Handler? The code for the Activity is somewhat like this: public class SampleActivity extends ListActivity implements SampleListener { List samples = new ArrayList(); public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.sample_list); listView.setEmptyView(findViewById(R.id.empty)); } private final Handler handler = new Handler() { @Override public void handleMessage(Message msg) { // unit test never reaches here sharesAdapter = new SampleAdapter(SampleActivity.this, samples); setListAdapter(sharesAdapter); } }; public void handleSampleUpdate(SampleEvent event) { samples.add(event.getSample()); handler.sendEmptyMessage(0); } } The code for my unit test is somewhat like this: public class SampleActivityTest extends ActivityUnitTestCase<SampleActivity> { public SampleActivityTest() { super(SampleActivity.class); } @MediumTest public void test() throws Exception { final SampleActivity activity = startActivity(new Intent(Intent.ACTION_MAIN), null, null); final ListView listView = (ListView) activity.findViewById(android.R.id.list); activity.handleSampleUpdate(new SampleEvent(this)); // unit test assert fails on this line: assertTrue(listView.getCount() == 1); } }

  Read the article

• Measurement conversion on the fly

  - by ikadewi

  Hi All I'd like to ask re: measurement conversion on the fly, here's the detail : Requirement: To display unit measurement with consider setting. Concerns: - Only basic (neutral) unit measurement is going to be stored in database, and it is decided one time. The grid control has direct binding to our business object therefore it has complexity to do conversion value. Problem: How to display different unit measurement (follow a setting), consider that controls are bind to business object? Your kind assistance will be appreciated. Thank you ikadewi

  Read the article

• How to distinguish a NY "queens-style" street address from a ranged address, and an address with a u

  - by feroze

  I need to distinguish between a Queens style address, from a valid ranged address, and an address with a unit#. For eg: Queens style: 123-125 Some Street, NY Ranged Address: 6414-6418 37th Ln SE, Olympia, WA 98503 Address with unit#: 1990-A Gildersleeve Ave, Bronx, NY. In the case of #3, A is a unit# at street address 1990. THe unit# might be a number as well, for eg: 1990-12. A ranged address identifies a range of addresses on a street, and not a unique deliverable address. So, the question is, is there an easy way to identify the Queens style address from the other cases?

  Read the article

• How do I construct a more complex single LINQ to XML query?

  - by Cyberherbalist

  I'm a LINQ newbie, so the following might turn out to be very simple and obvious once it's answered, but I have to admit that the question is kicking my arse. Given this XML: <measuresystems> <measuresystem name="SI" attitude="proud"> <dimension name="mass" dim="M" degree="1"> <unit name="kilogram" symbol="kg"> <factor name="hundredweight" foreignsystem="US" value="45.359237" /> <factor name="hundredweight" foreignsystem="Imperial" value="50.80234544" /> </unit> </dimension> </measuresystem> </measuresystems> I can query for the value of the conversion factor between kilogram and US hundredweight using the following LINQ to XML, but surely there is a way to condense the four successive queries into a single complex query? XElement mss = XElement.Load(fileName); IEnumerable<XElement> ms = from el in mss.Elements("measuresystem") where (string)el.Attribute("name") == "SI" select el; IEnumerable<XElement> dim = from e2 in ms.Elements("dimension") where (string)e2.Attribute("name") == "mass" select e2; IEnumerable<XElement> unit = from e3 in dim.Elements("unit") where (string)e3.Attribute("name") == "kilogram" select e3; IEnumerable<XElement> factor = from e4 in unit.Elements("factor") where (string)e4.Attribute("name") == "pound" && (string)e4.Attribute("foreignsystem") == "US" select e4; foreach (XElement ex in factor) { Console.WriteLine ((string)ex.Attribute("value")); }

  Read the article

• Is there an easy way in C# to have conditional compilation symbols based on OS version

  - by John Simons

  I have a bunch of unit tests that need to be conditional compiled based on Windows OS version. This unit tests are testing TxF that is only available in Windows Vista and above. #if WIN_OS_VERSION >= 6.0 // Run unit tests #endif

  Read the article

• fortran error I/O

  - by jpcgandre

  I get this error when compiling: forrtl: severe (256): unformatted I/O to unit open for formatted transfers, unit 27, file C:\Abaqus_JOBS\w.txt The error occurs in the beginning of the analysis. At the start, the file w.txt is created but is empty. The error may be related to the fact that I want to read from an empty file. My code is: OPEN(27, FILE = "C:/Abaqus_JOBS/w.txt", status = "UNKNOWN") READ(27, *, iostat=stat) w IF (stat .NE. 0) CALL del_file(27, stat) SUBROUTINE del_file(uFile, stat) IMPLICIT NONE INTEGER uFile, stat C If the unit is not open, stat will be non-zero CLOSE(unit=uFile, status='delete', iostat=stat) END SUBROUTINE Ref: Close multiple files If you agree with my opion about the cause of the error, is there a way to solve it? Thanks

  Read the article

• Recommendations for Continuous integration for Mercurial/Kiln + MSBuild + MSTest

  - by TDD

  We have our source code stored in Kiln/Mercurial repositories; we use MSBuild to build our product and we have Unit Tests that utilize MSTest (Visual Studio Unit Tests). What solutions exist to implement a continuous integration machine (i.e. Build machine). The requirements for this are: A build should be kicked of when necessary (i.e. code has changed in the Repositories we care about) Before the actual build, the latest version of the source code must be acquired from the repository we are building from The build must build the entire product The build must build all Unit Tests The build must execute all unit tests A summary of success/failure must be sent out after the build has finished; this must include information about the build itself but also about which Unit Tests failed and which ones succeeded. The summary must contain which changesets were in this build that were not yet in the previous successful (!) build The system must be configurable so that it can build from multiple branches(/Repositories). Ideally, this system would run on a single box (our product isn't that big) without any server components. What solutions are currently available? What are their pros/cons? From the list above, what can be done and what cannot be done? Thanks

  Read the article

• convert an int to list of individual digitals more faster?

  - by user478514

  All, I want define an int(987654321) <= [9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1] convertor, if the length of int number < 9, for example 10 the list will be [0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0] , and if the length 9, for example 9987654321 , the list will be [9, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1] >>> i 987654321 >>> l [9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1] >>> z = [0]*(len(unit) - len(str(l))) >>> z.extend(l) >>> l = z >>> unit [100000000, 10000000, 1000000, 100000, 10000, 1000, 100, 10, 1] >>> sum([x*y for x,y in zip(l, unit)]) 987654321 >>> int("".join([str(x) for x in l])) 987654321 >>> l1 = [int(x) for x in str(i)] >>> z = [0]*(len(unit) - len(str(l1))) >>> z.extend(l1) >>> l1 = z >>> l1 [9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1] >>> a = [i//x for x in unit] >>> b = [a[x] - a[x-1]*10 for x in range(9)] >>> if len(b) = len(a): b[0] = a[0] # fix the a[-1] issue >>> b [9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1] I tested above solutions but found those may not faster/simple enough than I want and may have a length related bug inside, anyone may share me a better solution for this kinds convertion? Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81  | Next Page >