|
Running all the test on the farm is rather difficult.. one has to use special tools and argument which still confuses me and easily take half an hour each.. I guess spending a few days (weeks?) just running through each and all test manually, and then warn their associated team, daunts me... And apparently it's what's needed to be the Cassandra of undo units..
It is a work I came up with all by myself. I realized, looking at some of our team's test that undo unit were badly written in a subtle way. I found a way to detect such mistake.. and now I am trying to commit this bad code detector that affect everyone on our 10,000 man year codebase...
|
|
|
|
|
all I can offer is: Good luck
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: so I have to fix "my bugs" first, by delving in tons of code I have clue about to fix them
Are you saying your programming skills are poor for that particular task? maybe you should make a post in the 'seeking help' forums.
|
|
|
|
|
you clearly never had to fix tons of bug in a 10,000 man years codebase you have no clue about...
|
|
|
|
|
No I didn`t. A question does come up though, how did the software get in such a bad shape? I suspect the code was in a working state (the software was being used by the users) at the moment when you took over (one would think the software would not function at all with the source plagued by tons of bugs)
|
|
|
|
|
The bug I make very clear with my code is when one undo a couple of times then redo once, they cant redo no more.... Kind of easy to overlook...
In fact it seems since I am here this kind of bug comes up every now and then in a never ending episodic fashion... Each of them being hard to track. My code make it easier to uncover them.
|
|
|
|
|
What you are probably saying is that the path to failure to keep over patching an old codebase to keep it 'alive'. But that`s a guess, you`re using impossible English for me so I`m not 100% sure about the meaning of your expression of thoughts.
modified 20-Aug-22 16:30pm.
|
|
|
|
|
So you create a redo2 with the correction. Port all of your dependent code to redo2.
Deprecate redo.
They will have to fix their own code as it creates new warnings.
|
|
|
|
|
Have a really great day @Marc-Clifton
![Beer | [beer]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif) ![Jig | [Dance]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/jig.gif) ![Badger | [badger,badger,badger,badger...]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/badger.gif)
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Happy birthday.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(chiming in) Happy birthday Marc!! Have plenty more, they are good for you.
>64
Some days the dragon wins. Suck it up.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, and yes they are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Happy birthday young man!
The most expensive tool is a cheap tool. Gareth Branwyn
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you! 60 years young!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sound like you have a good day! 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Should WaitOne have been named WaitOn?
Gus Gustafson
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm,
I think the One in the name is referring to the number of objects you are waiting on. The Windows API equivalent would probably be WaitForSingleObject[^].
|
|
|
|
|
+5 Good thought.
Gus Gustafson
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, I'm assuming that you were referring to WaitOne[^]. 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
whichever you prefer 
