Yes that's what I am using to create an instance of the factory... However there was some problem with creating the http client and sharing it though the BoDi container
What exactly are file-scoped namespaces? I have never used them, but from the docs it looks like they are nothing more than the removal of one pair of { }? I guess I'm stupid because I don't understand why everyone is making such a big deal out of it.
Basing a in-development feature branch off of a another branch that has required features in it instead of the dev branch? How come this isn't normal developer behaviour but seen as some magic invention?
If you want bonds, you can just add them yourself. You would have to add bonds in the future anyway. Also, bonds become riskier over longer time horizons, as evidenced by this
If you really are against using WebApplicationFactory your best bet will be to have a test project built with SpecFlow and use docker compose to spin up the app, its dependencies and finally the test project pointing to the app.
In terms of greenfield projects nowadays, I prefer Vertical Slice Architecture. It reduces some of the layers of abstractions and splits things into more understandable feature grouping
This is something I've been looking into and from what I can tell is you'd populate the traceparent and tracestate on the producer side and on the consumer side read them and parse them. In the Kafka world, this would be in the event headers.
is there any way to use that with Specflow framework? Since we are not using xUnit unit tests directly
You shouldn't be using NUnit nor XUnit lifecycle hooks with SpecFlow. Otherwise, that's a recipe for conflicts.
Yes that's what I am using to create an instance of the factory... However there was some problem with creating the http client and sharing it though the BoDi container
Store it as a static? Or wrap it in a Context class and inject it.
Do large PRs include?
Then refactor in a separate PR. This helps reducing PR size naturally.
I think we just have different definitions of "feature" but yes agreed.
Hold up. Isn't this cancel culture?
To be honest, I'm not a fan.
"setup, and tear down logic is usually not that complicated?"
Happy to be convinced.
Quite often, some I've used recently:
What exactly are file-scoped namespaces? I have never used them, but from the docs it looks like they are nothing more than the removal of one pair of { }? I guess I'm stupid because I don't understand why everyone is making such a big deal out of it.
It's just less boiler plate, which makes things easier to read, in my opinion.
Basing a in-development feature branch off of a another branch that has required features in it instead of the dev branch? How come this isn't normal developer behaviour but seen as some magic invention?
To be honest, I read the article and was surprised it needed an article.
Massive red flag for me:
In my
If you're investing outside super i.e. want to access it before 65, the bonds which lead to less volatility is ideal, no?
If you want bonds, you can just add them yourself. You would have to add bonds in the future anyway. Also, bonds become riskier over longer time horizons, as evidenced by this
Hmm, Vanguards data claims:
If you really are against using WebApplicationFactory your best bet will be to have a test project built with SpecFlow and use docker compose to spin up the app, its dependencies and finally the test project pointing to the app.
Yeah, these people agreeing with the OP is really worrying and probably the reason codebases have so much inherited tech debt.
If you are using EF Core you generally don't need to have specific Save and Delete methods. You can do all that stuff through the DBContext.
How do you test this?
Integration tests against a real database using testcontainers and docker. Worth their weight in gold.
This is fine and dandy for functional tests, but if you want to test a lot of different scenarios through functional tests, it will take forever.
[удалено]
With the example in the article, why not just clone and update? Given that you're taking the performance hit from reflection anyway.
Sublime Merge for staging/discarding hunks and helping resolve conflicts.
I tried for Australia and got:
The first one will get the node and cast it to the type you want at runtime.
Unfortunately, the second hard casts as well.
None
This surprised me, but you're right.
In terms of greenfield projects nowadays, I prefer Vertical Slice Architecture. It reduces some of the layers of abstractions and splits things into more understandable feature grouping
o thankyouu i didnt knew it, do you know why is it called like that?
Ternary means three parts.
VentraIP has been pretty good, reasonably priced, and Australian owned.
Did you try Google?
Or you use those articles as a basis of further research, and you'd find
I read this guys blog in the morning with my coffee:
I've used this helper method before, and this is the first I'm hearing that it's deprecated.
This is something I've been looking into and from what I can tell is you'd populate the traceparent and tracestate on the producer side and on the consumer side read them and parse them. In the Kafka world, this would be in the event headers.
I spoke with Chris who is the lead on MassTransit and he said it is fully OT compliant.
Well there ya go