sfeldman.NET

Coming from the ASP.NET development, I am quit used to the fact that a page has a tree of controls and by traversing the tree you can navigate to the elements.

This is old news, but Google apparently has release a browser to speed things up (according to Google most of the current browsers are not performing well with CSS, JavaScript, and whole rendering). From a scratch approach worked not bad at all. Though there are several things that are working against this new browser:

Recently I started to work on a new project in our company that is using WPF technology. As a web developer with almost no experience with desktop applications I find it interesting and challenging at the same time (statefull environment,  no need in intermediate DTO objects, rich UI support, XAML abilities that are beyond regular markup capabilities, etc). Yet there are many questions that have an answer, but feel very weird. A few of those for example

Ok, so I was really upset and spilled a bit more than probably should have to. ScottGu has picked my desperate yell from the blog and suggested a help (2nd time I believe - 1st one occurred when .NET 2.0 SP1 has broken our production web sites, wow, he's good). Apparently there was an issue with SP1 Beta and R# 4.0. I already went through refresh on installs (including removal of addins and components). Plan vanilla .NET FW with Service Packs with no addins installed works fine (well, not crushing, working without R# is impossible).

As you probably know, the all new and shiny SP1 for both .NET framework and VS.NET 2008 are out. So I waited a bit, saw that other developers are accepting it and installed it. Great, worked smooth. Till I dared to restart. After that VS.NET 2008 designer "empowered by new abilities deployed with SP1" has showed own of it's hidden jams - complete crash of the IDE with no traces to what has just happened.

It doesn't matter how much we try to avoid it, it is unavoidable. Re-inventing wheel phenomena is always going to take place here and there. Doing a little BDD tests made it clear that I need to mark and specification with the type of the the system under tests I am testing, or the Concern of the test. One way I was showed to do it was to introduce a custom ConcernAttribute and mark with it the TestFixute - specification. Code looks like this:

I wanted to put a simple test in place to document the behaviour of a value converter WPF application I am working on is using. First I did it the standard TDD way (sort of spiking multicultural support of MbUnit framework). The result worked great.