In Visual Studio 2003, you could easily set your project assembly to auto-increment every time you built it, but with Visual Studio 2005, this functionality was removed. You can still auto-increment your assembly version on every build, but it's a complicated custom build step instead of an integrated feature.
I'm not sure why this was removed, but here's a question I should have asked a while ago - Should I be using a workaround to continue to auto-increment when I build, or is there a good reason to stop doing this, in favor of manually incrementing? Since Microsoft removed it from VS, perhaps there's a good reason, and I'm wondering if anybody knows it.
No, auto-increment on the [AssemblyVersion] is supported in VS2005 and up. Make it look like this:
[assembly: AssemblyVersion("2.0.*")]
I have little use for this capability myself. [AssemblyVersion] describes the outward visible public interface for an assembly. That doesn't change when I simply rebuild the assembly. [AssemblyFileVersion] is appropriate for tracking build numbers. Sadly, it does not have the auto-increment capability. Note how the .NET assemblies use that version numbering strategy as well.
Also note this feedback item.
I personally prefer not to do it since I at the moment work on a project where I need to be able to know exactly what features where added to exactly what version and if it autoincremented every time I built it would increase too rapidly.
However, I think it depends on your project if the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Here's an old MS Patterns page that discusses advantages vs disadvantages of the built in auto incrementation:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee817676.aspx
Related
I am using a third party software in my C# VS2010 project. I am gettong a warning to remap three of their assemblies.
How do I do that? I have no clue and searching through google i come across how to remap specific MS assemblies and it is much more complicated that I need. I just need to remap their version number.
I just want to know an example that shows what is the simplest way of remapping any assembly?
Any help is very much appreciated.
This ended up being a "DLL Hell" kind of issue and I did not have to remap the assmeblies just looked through my machine all over and got rid of the specific dlls wherever they were (whether the buidl code had put it there or myself).So I cleaned all DLLs up, then copied the latest versions to where the build needed them.
from here, I want to download GDAL library. I mean I want to download .h, .lib, .dll files. I'm working in visual studio 2010 and using visual C++:
Solution Configurations : Debug
Solution Platforms : Win32
In fact I don't understand what's the difference between Developement and stable libraries?
And which one should I download?
Even I don't know what other information you need to post here?
The "stable" library is one that's been tested so they believe it to be reasonably bug-free.
The "development" library is one they're currently working on. It's probably had some new features added. It may also have had some bugs added, the documentation may be somewhat out of date, etc.
As to which to download: especially at first you typically want the stable version. It has a much better chance of working as documented (and, for that matter, of just plain working).
The development version is primarily for one of two situations: either when/if you think you might want to contribute some work to the library itself, or if it includes a new feature that happens to be really crucial to your work, so you're willing to put up with possible shortcomings elsewhere to get that addition.
Is there a way to make visual studio not care about dll versions? Is this a bad idea?
I am resetting up my dev machine and I just installed the latest version of Pex and Moles (version .92). All my projects are on version .91.
We are in the middle of a release and don't want to upgrade right now. Also, I cannot find an installer to version .91.
When I try to compile I get a message that I am missing the reference. (Hence this question)
The version is important.. By definition, there is a difference from each released version to the next (or there would be no need for a new version). Your program may not perform correctly if you are expecting one version and instead have another.
This was a part of what was known as "DLL Hell" in the pre-.NET days... If you needed to use a third party component (Crystal Reports Viewer is one we always had to deal with), you would just use the reference to whatever installed version was on the user's PC. Our retail locations had to have a specific version of Crystal Reports for their bookwork reports to print correctly, and because of that, we had to hold on to an old version forever.. Upgrading Crystal on the PC broke the vendor's bookwork app. On my first ever PC, I had several applications break when I would install or upgrade another. In particular, Real Player broke my telephone answering machine software. Goofy stuff like that...
So, the version IS important, even if it is an annoyance. It's also why I have a bias against third party tools that I have no code for, and can't recompile myself.
If you look at the properties of a referenced DLL, you will see a property "Specific Version". If you set it false, it doesn't track the specific version in the project file.
For this to work, you have to somehow fix the references where ever they are used. You can do this by opening every solution and fixing the references (at which time you could also just update the references to the correct version, paying heed to David's comments).
If you have a lot of solutions, you might use a tool like sed (see this post for windows versions of tool like this Is there any sed like utility for cmd.exe) to just update the project files as needed all at once.
I heard that R#5.0 (still in beta) will support VS 2010. My question is
VS2010 == VS2008 + ReSharper ?
I know there are many improvements to VS2010, so I 'm not sure weather is it really worth purchasing the R#5.0 for VS2010?
Well, I haven't explored VS 2010 new refactoring features that much, but its my understanding that VS has some but definitely not all of resharpers features implemented (From MSDN):
Navigate To
You can use the Navigate
To feature to search for a symbol or
file in the source code.
Navigate To lets you find a specific
location in the solution or explore
elements in the solution. It helps you
pick a good set of matching results
from a query.
You can search for keywords that are
contained in a symbol by using Camel
casing and underscore characters to
divide the symbol into keywords.
For more information, see How to:
Search for Objects, Definitions, and
References (Symbols).
Generate From Usage
The Generate From
Usage feature lets you use classes and
members before you define them. You
can generate a stub for any undefined
class, constructor, method, property,
field, or enum that you want to use
but have not yet defined. You can
generate new types and members without
leaving your current location in code,
This minimizes interruption to your
workflow.
Generate From Usage supports
programming styles such as test-first
development.
IntelliSense Suggestion Mode
IntelliSense now provides two
alternatives for IntelliSense
statement completion, completion mode
and suggestion mode. Use suggestion
mode for situations where classes and
members are used before they are
defined.
In suggestion mode, when you type in
the editor and then commit the entry,
the text you typed is inserted into
the code. When you commit an entry in
completion mode, the editor shows the
entry that is highlighted on the
members list.
When an IntelliSense window is open,
you can press CTRL+ALT+SPACEBAR to
toggle between completion mode and
suggestion mode.
So I guess it would depend on which of Resharpers features you want to use. If you are satisfied with the above which is certainly great improvements, then you don't need Resharper.
On the performance question, well it might perform better because of tighter integration.
Personally the above leaves me still needing a lot of features like (just the ones i can think of right now - might be more):
There are as far as I can tell only about 6 refactorings, where resharper currently has more than 30
No import type completion, which i use ALL the time. One shortcut adds to references and adds import statement
No smart completion
Change namespace to follow navigation structure and update all references with one shortcut
Goto is more advanced in R# you can go to inheritors and bases,
file member, recent files and edits and theres the fast goto feature
Resharpers static analysis is far more comprehensive than what you get from VS
So what do you need? (I am definitely not giving up Resharper)
Peter,
Best person that can answer this question is yourself. What I suggest is you download it, learn it (and note I said learn it, not just play with it). Then decide. However, I'll warn you that it's quite addictive.
My question is VS2010 == VS2008 + ReSharper ?
Oh hell no. VS2010 has more features than VS2008, and some of those feature ideas were stolen from ReSharper, but vanilla VS2010 is still a long way behind VS2010 + ReSharper 5 or even VS2008 + ReSharper 5.
From a quick glance at my 31 Days of ReSharper blog posts (written back in the R# 2.5 days), here are just a few ReSharper features that are still not present in VS2010: (Please correct me if VS2010 does have any of these -- I haven't actually used it that much without ReSharper!)
Unused code highlighted in gray and with quick-fixes to delete the unused code for you (this is just one of many hints and warnings R# does that VS does not)
Visual indication of where you have hints, warnings, and errors in a source file (colored stripe next to the vertical scroll bar)
Integrated unit-test runner that's not locked down to only MS's test framework
Shared settings for code formatting, code templates, etc. -- check these settings into version control, and they'll be picked up automatically by other computers (no manual export/import)
Go To Type -- a pop-up window where you can enter a type name (or part of the name) and jump straight to the right source file
Navigate to derived types / overriding methods
Code Structure View -- view a list of members in your type, and drag/drop to reorder them in your source code
R# will suggest variable names for you
You can invoke an Intellisense dropdown that shows types from all namespaces (and then it adds the using for you)
It's eerily good at guessing what you meant when you tell it to fix an error for you
Remove unused braces and Invert If
Generate Code (I particularly like Generate Equals and GetHashCode, even though I use them very rarely)
Viral Rename (if you rename a type, it'll also suggest that you rename any variables that were named after the type)
And best of all, Safe Delete.
Safe Delete rocks.
And that's just the features that R# had in 2.5 when I wrote the 31 Days of ReSharper. They've added plenty of new features since (I just don't have a comprehensive list handy). A couple of my favorites are the background solution-wide analysis, which will tell you in nearly real-time if you have compiler errors anywhere in your solution, and Inspect > Value Origin, which is just wicked cool.
If your having to ask the question, my guess is that you're not using ReSharper to its full potential. Personally I find that R# writes most of my code for me and I feel like a noob using visual studio without it.
YES. unequivocably YES.
After migrating to Visual Studio 2010 we asked our development team if buying Resharper upgrades is worth the investment. The votes were unanimous: yes!
Btw: we use VS2010 Premium and the devteam has its own budget.
Why don't you try out the R# 5 betas and then you can decide if you're using enough of its features to justify purchasing it.
http://confluence.jetbrains.net/display/ReSharper/ReSharper+5.0+Nightly+Builds
ReSharper has been around long enough that developers might purchase the upgrade just out of habit! :)
I recall that when VS2008 was released, R# wasn't quite ready, and there was griping among the .NET community about it. "Must...have...ReSharper!". Heh. Jetbrains appear to be on top of it this time though.
I've been thinking about the number of projects we have in-house that are still being developed using visual studio 6 and how best to migrate them forward onto visual studio 2008. The projects range in flavours of C/C++ and VB.
Is it better to let VS2008 convert the work-spaces into solutions, fix any compile errors and be on your merry way? Or, is it better to start with a clean solution and migrate code across project by project discarding dead code along the way?
The Microsoft p&p team has recommended some strategies that answers this. Basically they recommend something like the project by project approach you mention. Of course, they're assuming a neatly architected application that has no nasty, dark corners from which late nights of coding and copious amounts of coffee spring from.
It doesn't hurt to let VS2008 convert the project for you and see how much effort is required to fix the errors.
When I had to convert a VB6 app to VS2003 several years ago, I ran the converter and it produced something that basically compiled, but wasn't very good at all. I ended up having to modify a big chunk of the code it generated.
I would start with a clean solution, then run the converter on a project and copy over only the code you need. One of the big differences I noticed between a VB6 project and the converted VB.NET project (WinForm) was with the built-in controls. The converter would try to preserve the type of controls you were using, even if they were old and outdated. So you might be better served by creating new forms with modern controls (text boxes, tab controls, etc), then copy in the code that you need.