I love that someone took the time to rant about the right way to do unit testing and created a detailed 7 step process which fails to encapsulate "red, green, refactor". Luckily, the first comment by anonymous cleared it up--and shaved some steps in the process ;)

You got an "Internal Server Error" from an apache web server? Weird, that's what I got when I clicked your link ;)

Further proof: no mention of the released-with-3.5 LINQ to SQL in the prep guide for the upcoming ADO.NET 3.5 certification exam, but there's a full section on the released-post-3.5 entity framework: http://www.microsoft.com/learning/en/us/exams/70-561.mspx

!smart

With the 8 trillion ASP.NET MVC posts we've had to this site, NOBODY has commented yet??

@PeterRitchie, you managed to misspell Bouma twice, despite the fact that it's part of the URL and clearly printed in the title of the blog.

@aquinas: Frans doesn't stray from controversy (see the legendary post "Stored Procedures are bad, mkay?" http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma/archive/2003/11/18/38178.aspx ), but most of the blogs kicked to the front page so far haven't been that harsh. They're pretty well-reasoned and rational objections to the EF, mostly from people who have written their own ORM and don't agree with what Microsoft has done. Reading these objections is good, but as you pointed out, there's a lot of academic theory being discussed, and very little talk about real world factors like maintainability and implementation effort. If someone can smack those shovels in the face of EF effectively to the implementors on sites like DNK, EF is in trouble. Until then, enjoy the warmth of the flames ;)

Apparently I guess I missed the "rips it a new one" part. Newsflash: NHibernate team member liked advanced concept a lot more when it was a bunch of powerpoint slides in March 2007! Now that he's played with the final product, declares "Meh. I'm still using NHibernate." LET THE MSFT STOCK TUMBLE BEGIN!!

With all the other crap MS went through to harmonize WebForms with WinForms, I'm surprised that the ASP.NET team didn't notice this was on the WinForms list controls.

This is absolutely what he should have written instead of that nonsense from the other day...but it still doesn't mean much until upcoming browser support reaches > 50% of the market.

Totally weak. He basically compared UIs and concluded that they both win. Even though the author specifically mentioned it as a negative, the fact that R# crashes constantly was apparently not a factor. How about comparing something a developer might are about...like do the tools offer different refactorings and how smooth are they to use?

Great example, but should be titled "Quick and dirty *charting* with the Google Chart API". Pie chart != report, at least not in my line of work.

Two thumbs down! This is the "Scared Straight" guide to raising awareness about the semantic web and microformats. Unfortunately, it has absolutely *nothing* to do with ASP.NET or ASP.NET developers, and he forgot to define 'semantic web' and 'microformats' for any interested readers. In other words, just a screed by one developer on how nobody cares about something in which he's deeply interested.

Mads, your writeup on implementing microformats (linked at the very bottom of the post: http://blog.madskristensen.dk/post/Implement-micro-formats-on-your-website.aspx ) pretty much sums up why nobody except some fringe perl/python/ruby devs care about any of this:

"Both Firefox 3 and Internet Explorer 8 will support micro formats natively. If you cannot wait for the next version of Firefox or IE, then you can download the Operator micro format extension for Firefox and start testing your site." You wrote that 6 months ago. FF3 and IE8 still aren't out. WTF dude? It would be way more effective for you to write about what the semantic web looks like from the IE8 and FF3 betas. Save your whining for the 30% of the web-browsing world that still runs IE6--and the 50% who will still be running IE7 when you complain in another year about how I'm holding back the semantic interwebs revolution.

Just one developer/listener opinion: I've suffered through a few of their podcasts for topics I really wanted to hear about, but I just find it obnoxious when Carl interrupts smart guests with his wrongheaded guesses about the way things work, and I mostly find his banter inane. It has just become too hard to listen to him wheeze through show after show. Richard also seems underutilized...between the two of them, I assume he's the only one who does any day-to-day programming. Carl seems like an architecture astronaut.

Does anyone know the technical reason for why you need to provide a ton of metadata for systems like jquery before intellisense will function? Did the VS2008 team just write too basic an implementation? There have been about four articles on DNK so far that explain different workarounds for intellisense and documentation strings, but I don't think anyone has pinpointed the problem. I understand the challenges with documentation strings, just not why intellisense needs so much additional help.

Path.DirectorySeparatorChar is taken care of by IOMap in 1.1.8 or later, for the most part. Still a good idea to use it (or Path.Combine()) whenever you can. I haven't needed to use Path.PathSeparator, but between DirectorySeparatorChar and Environment.NewLine you can go a long way to making a mono port easier.

There's a lot more to worry about than just the first developer. Unfortunately, the kind of organizations who build software that they can afford to literally burn to a CD and leave in a box for the next dev won't pay that first dev to spend time on most of the items described here. They usually don't understand QA--you can leave them with all the docs, source control, and automation you want, but the VBA programmer they accidentally mis-hire, or the departmental power-user who thinks he can program are going to mess it all up before the Chad Myers of the world arrive. These people spend days or weeks rolling in the source code breaking 100 things because they don't know how to fix 1; in any case QA is out the window and the source is left in a trashed state. If any developer in the chain doesn't appreciate the tenets you describe, they'll just break or remove any infrastructure you give them.

Let's run this EVERY week! We can call it HUMP DAY REPOST: NEW EVENT DECLARATION PATTERN! I'll even repost my same lame comment to it: "Very nice sugar unless you rely on checking for null events to verify whether or not you have any subscribers for other behavior in your classes. The performance scenarios suggested in the comments are ridiculously unlikely. Anyone designing a framework where events with no subscribers still invoke 10k+ times in quick succession doesn't care about performance anyway, and probably won't understand the benefit of this technique in the first place ;)" <GIANT SMILEY>