Chad Myers' Blog - All Comments

re: Getting Started With jQuery QUnit for Client-Side Javascript Testing

Paul Cowan — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:06:48 GMT

I've been thinking about writing a nant task to parse the results using regular expressions.

I'll be very interested to see your approach to hooking it into CruiseControl

Getting Started With jQuery QUnit for Client-Side Javascript Testing

DotNetKicks.com — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:52:34 GMT

You've been kicked (a good thing) - Trackback from DotNetKicks.com

QUnit for jQuery | Fragmented Code

QUnit for jQuery | Fragmented Code — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:43:39 GMT

Pingback from QUnit for jQuery | Fragmented Code

jQuery releases Javascript pain « maonet technotes

jQuery releases Javascript pain « maonet technotes — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:31:05 GMT

Pingback from jQuery releases Javascript pain « maonet technotes

re: Getting Started With jQuery QUnit for Client-Side Javascript Testing

Tom Opgenorth — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:16:49 GMT

Very timely for me. Thanks Chad.

Dew Drop - August 29, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew

Dew Drop - August 29, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:03:58 GMT

Pingback from Dew Drop - August 29, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew

re: Query Objects with Repository Pattern Part 2

flipdoubt — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:54:24 GMT

Any chance you could make the repository implementation and the tests available in a download so Community Server doesn't get its mitts all over it?

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #168

Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #168 — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:19:40 GMT

Pingback from Reflective Perspective - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #168

You Want IT When? | Good Design is Important

You Want IT When? | Good Design is Important — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 05:27:18 GMT

Pingback from You Want IT When? | Good Design is Important

re: Good Design is not Subjective

Bill Miller — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:54:27 GMT

Great post. It's nice to know some programmers still care about good design and know it when they see it. I thought it was a lost art. A good design with all the characteristics that you identify is the essence of agility.

re: Good Design is not Subjective

Philip Schwarz — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:10:56 GMT

The URL I included in my post got mangled...here it is again: martinfowler.com/.../DesignStaminaHypothesis.html

re: Good Design is not Subjective

Philip Schwarz — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:05:26 GMT

Chad,

Nice post.

Like you I value greatly uncle Bob's approach of applying OCP, DIP, LSP, SRP and ISP to remove design smells, but we mustn't forget that Bob advocates a 'take the first bullet' strategy: the principles are only to be used to remove existing smells, not to future-proof your application based on speculation about the changes it is likely to face, because doing that leads to the design smell of Needless Complexity.

Martin fowler also has some great thoughts on when it makes sense not to bother with a good design...see his <a href="martinfowler.com/.../DesignStaminaHypothesis.html">design stamina hypothesis</a> (if you haven't already).

ASP.NET Stuff « QuantuMatrix’s Weblog

ASP.NET Stuff « QuantuMatrix’s Weblog — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:01:26 GMT

Pingback from ASP.NET Stuff « QuantuMatrix’s Weblog

re: Project anti-pattern: Many projects in a Visual Studio Solution File

Thomas Eyde — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:26:24 GMT

@Kevin: A solution to the versioning problem I often promote, is, if the code belongs to someone else, then they should build and deploy the assemblies to a wellknown location. Then each project should aquire their own local copy of needed assemblies and reference those. GAC is forbidden, as is reference to custom assembly outside of the local pool.

Do you believe something like this will work for you?

re: Design and Testability

Jacob — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:35:30 GMT

@Chad: Again, I'm not the one belittling or questioning the professionalism of others. You are. And you continue to lie about me when you say I've admitted that I don't understand DI, IoC, SoC or any other STUPID principle. And you'd better be very careful about claims of experience and competency because I have at least five years experience on you (and competency is inherently unprovable--though you can go through my, admittedly limited but far from non-existent, contributions to Subtext if you want examples of actual code I've written).

And if I really thought "DI is stupid" would I be posting about cases where I'm using it?

theruntime.com/.../putting-dependency-injection-in-its-place.aspx