Versioning Multiple Assemblies

Ever wanted to ensure that all assemblies in your solution have the same version number when you deploy them? Of course. This is a succinct little article about one of the many ways of ensuring you can track those deployed assemblies. I have been using this technique, or a variation of, for a number of years now, and you'd be surprised how handy it can be.
http://weblogs.asp.net/lorenh/archive/2004/09/20/232200.aspx

C# 3.0

C# has been my staple diet of development for a while now. The 1.0 version of C# provided a flexible, yet strongly typed, language that resembled enough of C++ and Java to lure developers into adopting it. Sure, C# 1.0, had its downsides. (Who hasn't wanted different accessibility between a get and set property at some stage?)

C# 2.0 has been released along with the 2.0 .Net framework, and from my experience and anecdotal evidence it seems that take up has been slow. That is understandable though. Many IT departments have only just deployed 1.1 framework into their desktop environment. The costs and benefits of testing and deploying 2.0 framework onto desktops just don't weigh up.

So, hot on the heels of Visual Studio 2005, .Net 2.0 and C# 2.0, Microsoft releases some of the proposed changes for the C# 3.0 language. Some of the new features are nice, but in my opinion, some are just going to bastardise the language.

Top of my hit list is Anonymous Types. They will have their place in a well structured program, but I think that they will become one of the most abused. I am willing to agree that the features of C# 3.0 are syntactic changes that will expediate the development of programming methods that are currently in place, but it will be all to easy to write unmaintainable and unreadable code. Lazy programmers arise!

But only time will tell. By the time C# 3.0 becomes mainstream and .Net framework 3.0 hits the desktops and servers of many enterprises, we all might just be too old to care.

C# 3.0 rundown
C# 3.0 explained

Quirks of the XmlHttp object

As useful as the XmlHttp object is, it also has its quirks. They really only show up though if you don't treat it nicely. Here is a list of some quirks http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2005/09/xmlhttp_notes_r.html

 

One interesting and very useful part of XmlHttp is the responseXml field. This field is an XML DOM object that is automatically populated if the content returned from the Http request is "text/xml". Very cool! I have found it is also faster than creating your own XmlDom object and then loading the Xml.

The XmlHttp object

A while ago I was wanting to find out a bit more about the XmlHttp object for JavaScript. This page provides a nice introduction to using the XmlHttp object to provide rich web interfaces.

 

http://jibbering.com/2002/4/httprequest.html

Testing, testing

Is anybody out there?

Software development is such a fast paced beast that the internet is one of the only ways to stay on top of progress. It is also now such a prolific profession or hobby that if you are trying to do it, then somebody has probably done it before. Who knows, maybe they even posted their experiences to a blog for the benefits of all.

To that end, this blog will be a series of links that I found useful on any particular day.