<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://ljusberg.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Smöråkning - All Comments</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/default.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2007 SP2 (Build: 20611.960)</generator><item><title>re: Web Services Software Factory, the solution to all our problems?</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/03/07/web-services-software-factory-the-solution-to-all-our-problems.aspx#6083</link><pubDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:27:04 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6083</guid><dc:creator>TC</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;My experience with the Web Service factory (or more accurately responses from people TO the factory) is as follows:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1. Enterprise Architects relate (falsely) the Wizard/Recipe nature of the factory to magically producing a useful Service - in reality the devil is in the details.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2. Developers consider it 'to complicated' and opt for a more simple approach without all the different layers and additional Request/Response classes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3. Developers consider it 'to time consuming' and opt for a faster approach whereby a 'working' service can be built more readily.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The complication/productivity issue is analogous to justifications for not performing unit testing - the perception of productivity in the short term is considered more important than long term loss of productivity. I recall a project I worked on whereby when I inquired why unit tests were not being written, the response was &amp;quot;We don't have time for that&amp;quot;. Sometime later the project was repeatedly delayed predominately due to the number and severity of bugs and design issues as a result of the &amp;quot;we don't have enough time for that&amp;quot; ethos.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don't agree with the aforementioned justifications - it is simply what I have experienced in the 'real world'.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6083" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: "Weak" assembly reference not found by MSBuild</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2006/07/06/_2200_Weak_2200_-assembly-reference-not-found-by-MSBuild.aspx#6082</link><pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:43:32 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6082</guid><dc:creator>Oleg Yaroshevych</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks, I've spent few hours trying to fix it...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6082" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#6081</link><pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:49:24 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6081</guid><dc:creator>Daniel Saidi</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi there!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The following blog discusses the issues of dynamically loading user controls.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://daniel-saidi.blogspot.com/2008/07/aspnet-dynamically-loaded-usercontrol.html"&gt;daniel-saidi.blogspot.com/.../aspnet-dynamically-loaded-usercontrol.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It features a small, downloadable class which, hopefully, will take care of this issue for you and let you focus on other things.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6081" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Error 1327 Invalid drive</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2005/06/28/Error-1327-Invalid-drive.aspx#6079</link><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:11:32 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6079</guid><dc:creator>Micke</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks! &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This was exactly what I needed instead of all crappy advices to delete any references to the problem drive. There is a reason why you would use folder redirection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This shitty problem occured for me in Windows Vista BTW:-).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most embarrasing about it is that it was my own fault. I redirected My Documents and used device path instead of UNC-path and didn't think about the problem when you use secondary logon...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Anyways, Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6079" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#6077</link><pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:25:30 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6077</guid><dc:creator>anders</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;No, of course not. The only reason why you would want to use this method is in order to overcome the initial problem with caching dynamically loaded controls where each control has different content even though they share the same .ascx (as mentioned in the first post).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With that said, I don't expect this method to be very slow since compiling the page only happens the first time it is shown.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6077" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#6076</link><pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:12:14 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6076</guid><dc:creator>Stewart</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;This seems counter intuitive, Can dynamically generating and compiling the code really be quicker than just using LoadControl ? surely not?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6076" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>Scrum Dashboard</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/going-to-redmond.aspx#6075</link><pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:31:40 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6075</guid><dc:creator>Smöråkning</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;If you&amp;amp;#39;re a fan of Scrum and Team Foundation Server you&amp;amp;#39;ll probably want to have a look at the&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6075" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>What's up?</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#6073</link><pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:09:52 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:6073</guid><dc:creator>Smöråkning</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I know, I know.. I&amp;amp;#39;ve been extremely lazy lately, at least when it comes to sharing knowledge with&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=6073" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#5982</link><pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:33:22 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5982</guid><dc:creator>anders</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Matt, &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Can you explain in a bit more detail? I didn't quite get what you are trying to do I'm afraid.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5982" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/10/17/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net-solution.aspx#5981</link><pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:11:40 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5981</guid><dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi, I had a look at your solution as i was trying to do the same kind of stuff, but i'm having problems with update panels which are loaded in a dynamic way in some of my user controls ascx. Do you know a way to do that? Cheers&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5981" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Error 1327 Invalid drive</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2005/06/28/Error-1327-Invalid-drive.aspx#5907</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:18:32 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5907</guid><dc:creator>Kai C</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Super. Tack!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5907" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Generating a cross-product with MSBuild</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/02/02/generating-a-cross-product-with-msbuild.aspx#5904</link><pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:53:18 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5904</guid><dc:creator>chmarroc</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;There is yet another solution I proposed at &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://channel9.msdn.com/wiki/default.aspx/MSBuild.BatchingExamples"&gt;channel9.msdn.com/.../MSBuild.BatchingExamples&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5904" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>Caching dynamic controls in ASP.NET - solution</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/09/10/caching-dynamic-controls-in-asp-net.aspx#5900</link><pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:05:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5900</guid><dc:creator>Smöråkning</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;In my last post , I asked for help with a problem we&amp;amp;#39;ve been having with caching of dynamic controls&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5900" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Documenting Web Services</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/03/02/documenting-web-services.aspx#5898</link><pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:12:17 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5898</guid><dc:creator>anders</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I started out building a wrapper around Microsoft UDDI services that was more tailored to the way we work (and that would be able to hold the documentation). Unfortunately, I wasn't able to spend enough time on it. Still, it was looking promising so I might revisit it when the work-load decreases a bit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5898" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: Documenting Web Services</title><link>http://ljusberg.com/blogs/smorakning/archive/2007/03/02/documenting-web-services.aspx#5897</link><pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:45:14 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d8c7d797-13b4-459d-b3ca-3ae05fd06865:5897</guid><dc:creator>Will Nourse</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi - just found this and am running into the same issue. &amp;nbsp;Started down the Sandcastle route, but I don't think that's really going to cut it for now. &amp;nbsp;Wondering if you have made any progress?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;img src="http://ljusberg.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=5897" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>