Monday 30 April 2007

.Net 3.5 beta 1 is here

In case you missed it, .Net Framework 3.5 Beta 1 is now available for download. Obviously not something to install on a production (!) box but it is interesting in that .Net 3.5 is now "officially" on its way to becoming a production reality (rather than in technnology preview form, Orcas downloads etc).

As expected it includes LINQ (Language Integrated Query) and ASP.Net AJAX.

Friday 20 April 2007

WPF/E becomes Silverlight

Microsoft's project name WPF/E (Windows Presentation Foundation / Everywhere) has now been officially named Microsoft Silverlight. Although still only on February CTP, watch this space as the full version is due later in the year (July/Aug'ish).

I like the direction this vector-based technology is going in - decarative XAML markup all nice and separate from the code (I'm a big advocate of decarative UI building). I also like the way it can be embedded into existing HTML/ASPX pages, thus offering a doorway for developers to use the technology in existing ASP.Net apps (it does not have to be an all or nothing approach).

Wednesday 11 April 2007

Usefulness of Code Reviews

When I chat with developers about code reviews, generally I get a positive response in terms of their usefulness 'in theory', although most are not exactly forthcoming when it comes to actually offering to take part in them. I think some see them as a 'threat' or an 'opportunity to receive criticism of their precious code'! This shouldn't be the case and those that believe this I think have missed the point. I see code reviews (or more often in my case, 'system reviews') as opportunities to pause for thought, take a step back, look at what you've achieved and do a critique of how 'well' it has been designed and developed. Every review I have ever done has always had positive outputs.

I've just recently completed a code review of a medium sized project written in ASP.Net/Oracle. I did it 'paired' with another developer and was a joint effort. We concentrated on the following points:



  • The Solution and how it was organised into projects and subdirectory structures.

  • Shared libraries and their usage

  • Consistency in 'style of development'

  • Source control/versions. How Visual Source Safe (VSS) is used for (e.g. source code only or some docs too?)

  • Coding style and conformance to coding standards (and are the standards we have in place up to date/suitable?)

  • Any areas where it would benefit from refactoring

  • Upgrade comments (recently undertaken) from .Net 1.1 to .Net 2/VS 2005. Where could the project benefit from refactoring/rewritten using .Net 2 features

  • Use of the N-tier approach, coupling and possible compromising of layers (e.g. SQL in code behind files?!)

  • Stored procs (Oracle) and adopted standards

  • Pass thru SQL vs Stored procs

  • General concerns and feedback on development so far


Here's the outputs from our session:



  • the project could have benefited from being broken down into more sub-projects

  • our coding standards need updating to bring in new .Net 2 features, new controls, app_themes etc, and JavaScript coding guidelines.

  • N-Tier approach used very well in most places by developers although some SQL present in 'higher layers' from earlier coding (!). 

  • There were some areas where standards were not followed but mostly affecting 'early code'. Most of latest code followed guidelines and best practise

  • Would benefit from the use of Web Services in the shared 'site list' library: 

  • Source control working well. Oracle stored procs, views etc also in VSS.. but would be better if integrated with TOAD. To investigate. 

  • Better versioning needed of shared libs. 

  • Some of the system would benefit from some .Net 2 enhancements (eg master pages, themes, new .net 2 menu tree) but decided to only bring in new .Net 2 features on either brand new modules or where a significant change is needed on an existing part of the system. Consistency important though.


All of this I think is good positive feedback and result in actions where necessary. It was a joint effort, which is important. Even if you are reviewing a new starter's code, there is still opportunity to learn from their past experiences.


If anyone else has experience of doing such reviews, do let me know.