http://www.bpk.ccumbracoGeneric Collection Of .NET Stuffenhttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/8/14/compactrss-15-is-now-available-on-windows-marketplace-for-mobile.aspx#comment-6Tue, 14 Sep 2010 01:53:39 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/8/14/compactrss-15-is-now-available-on-windows-marketplace-for-mobile.aspx#comment-6
sorry to hear that. I will contact you by E-Mail with furhter details.

Thanks!]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2010/8/14/compactrss-15-is-now-available-on-windows-marketplace-for-mobile.aspx#comment-5Sat, 11 Sep 2010 22:36:13 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/8/14/compactrss-15-is-now-available-on-windows-marketplace-for-mobile.aspx#comment-5http://www.bpk.cc/2011/2/13/an-update-to-feed7’s-live-tile-push-service-…-and-feed7-20.aspx#comment-13Thu, 04 Aug 2011 04:08:18 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2011/2/13/an-update-to-feed7’s-live-tile-push-service-…-and-feed7-20.aspx#comment-13
thanks for your feedback and sorry for the late response. Please prefer contacting support@feed7app.com for feedback, it's faster and easier to discuss topics than over blog comments.

It would be ideal if the live tile could work like you explained, but with the current multithreading limitations in WP7, it's impossible that feed7 can sync feeds in the background. The count on the live tile comes from a server that syncs all your subscribed feeds and pushes the number of new items frequently to your live tile. See it as an information about new available items for sync. Auto-sync on startup will be available with the next update, but even with that you will have to wait until feed7 has synced the feeds, it won't be possible that new items are visible immediately after app start.

Setting the counter to 0 after the trial expires should work but it could be a bug. I will look into this.

Feeds that require authentication are not supported currently, that's correct. This is a very seldom request and as of this has no priority, but i will put it on the list for a future update.

If you're intrested in being notified when this feature will be available, and possible even want to beta-test a pre-release version, please contact support@feed7app.com

Again, thanks for the feedback, it's greatly appreciated.
]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2011/2/13/an-update-to-feed7’s-live-tile-push-service-…-and-feed7-20.aspx#comment-12Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:21:00 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2011/2/13/an-update-to-feed7’s-live-tile-push-service-…-and-feed7-20.aspx#comment-12
first: critique for your live-tile. it does not work like expected.
if it notifies me about unread messages and i open feed7 by tapping the live-tile, i have to refresh my feeds manually. i would expect the app to already have the new content available.
just like the live-tile works for the emailing (i.e. outlook/exchange or even hotmail).

and, the most annoying thing it does: if the trial-license expires, it does not revert the counter to zero, but keeps the last count. by now, i own two wp7-phones with feed7 and both show unread messages, even if this is not true and outdated.

second: i would like to suggest a feature for version 2!
I am subscribed to my very own feeds, generated by my website, which are protected by http basic authentication.
so far, i tried almost every feed-reader for wp7, but every single one failed to read the protected feeds.
for now, i developed an workaround to be able to pass username/password by get-parameters in the url.
it would be nice if your app could response properly and ask for username/password, like the internet explorer on wp7 does.

this one is not that easy, because of limitations in silverlight for wp7, but anyway it can be done without much hassle.


regards,
Patrick]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-4Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:45:40 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-4
great to hear that this works well for others too!

This problem is a nightmare, isn't it ;)

cheers,
b.]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-3Sun, 20 Jun 2010 00:16:10 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-3http://www.bpk.cc/2010/6/29/wcf-error-an-error-occurred-while-loading-attribute-'xmlserializerformatattribute'-on-method-x-in-type-y.aspx#comment-22Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:34:31 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/6/29/wcf-error-an-error-occurred-while-loading-attribute-'xmlserializerformatattribute'-on-method-x-in-type-y.aspx#comment-22http://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-11Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:44:00 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/16/a-very-ugly-(but-working)-alternative-to-scripterrorssuppressed-in-wpf-browser-control.aspx#comment-11 thanks again]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-16Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:18:07 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-16
Thanks for your detailed feedback. Just would like to follow up on a couple of topics:

- Resource not found: I'd like to be able to reproduce this so if you could please submit an issue to http://youtrack.jetbrains.net/issues/RSRP that would be great.

- Redundant check: Could you please tell me in which cases you feel there is an error. I've not been able to encounter one despite covering all potential cases.

- Naming guidelines. Naming in ReSharper is completely configurable and is a one-off thing. In fact you can now even configure it once across multiple projects, teams and entire organization. Obviously people have different styles when it comes to naming. We provide a default which is very easily configurable. I wouldn't go as far as to say that is evil.

- Usage of var. Again, this is a matter of personal preference that can easily be switched off. I've already commented sufficiently on var in the past to repeat myself here, but you can find some of my thoughts at: http://devlicio.us/blogs/hadi_hariri/archive/2009/11/20/var-improves-readability.aspx

- Readonly. This is a suggestion which actually falls in line with good practices such as somehow forcing Dependency Injection and favouring loosely coupled code. Again, sufficient has been written about this on the Internet for me to add anything else. Please Google for topics such as SOLID and Dependency Injection. And again, this is optional. You can turn it off easily much like many of the other things you point out as evil.

Regarding last example per Twitter could you send me a code snippet of what you mention it converts it to?

Thanks.


- ]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-17Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:50:10 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-17
thanks for your response.

- Resource not used: I try to extract the code to a small sample project to send it to you asap.

- Redundant: what I'm doing is just to check if the value has changed before assigning a (new) value to the UI element. I really don't see how this could be a redundant check. I could have written the comparsion a bit easier (.IsEnabled == syncState) but it doesn't change ReSharpers opinion that this is a redundant check.

- All other points:

I don't think ReSharper should not offer this refactoring possibilities. Sure it is often a matter of taste ... and to have ReSharper help you adapting your code to your personal taste in a fast and automatic way is great. My problem, as explained above, is that this is propagated to offensive and often with the not ideal default settings (IMHO), the var topic for example is really too controversial IMHO to make it default. I fully understand your argument there, but I don't think it's good that ReSharper is that offensive with these change recommendations.

My experience is that developers tend to blindly follow ReSharpers default suggestions without really thinking about it. Yes, that's also a fault by the developers, but when ReSharper does curly underlining everywhere and make changes look more important than they are, I can't blame it only to them. If many of those suggestions would not be that offensive, I won't have a problem with it. But the way ReSharper "promotes" these features, I indeet think it's evil, even if I know I intentionally exaggerate with this word ;)]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-21Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:50:21 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-21
yes I understand that the result for the value of IsEnabled is always the same. But IsEnabled is a property that has a setter. And in a setter there can be a lot of code that gets executed when a value gets assigned, mainly if this is a property belonging to UI controls. So while the value of IsEnabled will always be the same at the end no matter if I do my conditional checks before, there is a difference in the amount of code that gets executed during this process. So it's a valid approach to check if I need to assign this value no matter if the outcome of the VALUE for this property will always be the same. Of course, inside the setter, there should also be mechanisms to prevent unneccesary code to be executed if the value reamins unchanged, but UI controls are often blackboxes and you cannot know - so in performance-critic applications like a mobile app, I rather check for myself before calling setters of properties that might execute more code than needed.

That's why I think that it's not good resharper recommends to remove this check. If some code isn't executed in certain conditions, it's valid to have those checks there. The final value of a property is not always the only thing that counts ;)

As for ReSharpers suggestions - I won't blame it only to the developers as I mentioned earlier. ReSharper does a lot to push them in some directions, curly underlining screams "error". The theory that devs only take ReSharpers suggestions if they know exactly why ReSharper does suggest this is unfortunately only a theory. Even some devs I know that do question ReSharpes recommendations sometimes rewrite their (fine) code just to get rid of curly lines in their code. It was, in this case, the thing with the (wrong) null reference warning from my example above. The result was more unreadable code, but without curly underlining.

It's good that ReSharper now offers to show infos about why a change is recommended, but it's still incomplete: for example, the change to var when i do something like DataSet data = GetData(); does not have an explanation and also not when ReSharper recommends to use var in a foreach statement. So devs just convert it because they think that if ReSharper recommends it, it must be the right thing to do.

No offense, I find a lot to like in ReSharper and of course I see your points and understand your position. But I think ReShaprer should be a tool that needs to get out of the developer's way as good as it can. It should supplement the development work, but not dictate it. Too much features too offensivly promoted to the user. And unfortunately also sometimes buggy and problematic.

I know the dilemma: this is also why most people love ReSharper :)]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-20Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:08:50 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-20
Take the binary input values. Calculate the result of isEnabled for every single combination. Now remove the conditional and calculate isEnabled for every single combination. You will see that both lead to exactly the same result. That is why it's redundant whether or not you have that check.

ReSharpers offers suggestions. In 6.0 you can now even ask Why in every quick action before applying a quickfix. If developers blindly apply things, then there's little we can do, even if IMHO those suggestions are correct. ]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-18Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:10:05 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-18
The check is redundant because independently of the input values, the end result will always be the same. Try it out. Take different input values and see the outcome. As such, that conditional adds absolutely no value. Why it doesn't add value is because of the way you've written the conditional statement.

All other points, in ReSharper we now have an option to explain Why we think this is a good idea. We need to set some defaults. No matter what we choose, someone won't like it. Many people hate regions and love var's and like that ReSharper recommends var by default. I understand it's a matter of taste, but I think it's important to distinguish between what is evil and what is preference. And I'd say that the issues you outline are not evil per se.

]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-19Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:10:12 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2012/2/8/why-resharper-is-evil.aspx#comment-19
thanks again for your response. Maybe I understand something wrong but the outcome IS different:

* Possibility 1:

IsEnabled = True; SyncState = True;

As in the condition, SyncState has a negation operator, this gets translated to:

IsEnabled = True; SyncState = False;

The != condition will result in TRUE.

* Possibility 2:

IsEnabled = True; SyncState = False;

As in the condition, SyncState has a negation operator, this gets translated to:

IsEnabled = True; SyncState = True;

The != condition will result in FALSE.

The outcome is: in possibility one, the IsEnabled property setter WILL be called, in possibility two the property setter WON'T be called. So the check is absolutely valid to prevent unneccesary calls to the setter of property IsEnabled.

And again, my issue with ReSharper is mainly its offensive way to propagate this changes. The examples considered in isolation aren't all evil (besides for example the 1st example where needed code gets removed) but the whole concept of Resharper: it really should not force developers to do all this changes by massive curly underlining. Developers start changing their code just to get curly underlines removed.

The var example is a good one here: just because ReSharper changes this:

DataSet data = GetData();

To this:

var data = GetData();

... the developer doesn't rename data to something more meaningful. The developer does not apply this change because he knows why, but because ReSharper tells him that this is the better code. The result is bad, unreadable code.

Only if the developer wants to change this because of his own intention, ReSharper should help him to do that, but not with curly underlines that suggest him he did something wrong.]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2010/12/17/feed7-december-update-brings-many-new-features.aspx#comment-9Mon, 20 Dec 2010 05:53:32 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/12/17/feed7-december-update-brings-many-new-features.aspx#comment-9http://www.bpk.cc/2010/12/17/feed7-december-update-brings-many-new-features.aspx#comment-10Mon, 20 Dec 2010 11:31:45 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/12/17/feed7-december-update-brings-many-new-features.aspx#comment-10
sure: http://www.bpk.cc/blog/rss.aspx

I really should add a link to it on the page page ;)]]>http://www.bpk.cc/2011/4/28/http-error-403-(forbidden)-when-using-aspnet-mvc-3-on-iis-6.aspx#comment-15Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:59:15 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2011/4/28/http-error-403-(forbidden)-when-using-aspnet-mvc-3-on-iis-6.aspx#comment-15http://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/6/new-compactrss-release-–-live-search-is-now-working-again.aspx#comment-14Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:12:53 GMThttp://www.bpk.cc/2010/5/6/new-compactrss-release-–-live-search-is-now-working-again.aspx#comment-14