February 2004 - Posts
A colleague of mine is an absolute newbie when it comes to .NET (programming in general even). I’m mentoring him for the moment and we’re prototyping this data centric application. At first I started with mapping custom entity classes and collections to the database schema. The horror data binding can causes, ugh! I concluded that since we’re prototyping using DataSet couldn’t hurt us now could it? I plea guilty… I spawn DataSet objects from our Data and Business logic layers.
In a previous post I asked the Dutch .NET developers to be united via OPML. Wouldn’t it be great to communicate with colleagues working in the same field? Don’t hesitate and drop your info below, and be sure to pass the word around.
Get the “Dutch .NET Developers Alliance” opml to be imported in your favorite RSS reader here.
I’ve been asked to develop and present a one day seminar which will be held approximately 2x a year (depending on the success of it). The focus will lie on application integration using XML, implementing the ANSI/ISA S88 Batch and ANSI/ISA S95 Enterprise-Control System Integration standards. I consider this to be a step forward in my career. Meeting interesting people, training my lecturing and communicative skills. Enough reasons for me to get really motivated and to put a lot of effort in the preparations.
We have a board meeting next week and in order to prepare myself I would like to get a broad overview of what people expect when they attend to such an event. I’m in search for the magical ingredients this event needs, to reach its fullest potential.
So my question to you is: What would you, being part of my audience expect? Would you expect me to be purely theoretical (abstract) or to drill down to the core of the subject? What audiovisual signals would help me to get my “clear message” to you? Remember we have exactly one day to spend together ;)
I know a lot of smart, experienced people read this so your feedback would be much appreciated and of great value!
Matt is right, you need to pass the same connection object into database call’s within transactions. I’ve experienced something more disturbing… Every database call within a transaction (COM+) should use the same connection object. Otherwise when a deadlock in SQL server occurs your connection isn’t marked as a deadlock victim en then the shit really starts…
September 11, 2001. I still remember working on an extranet application front-end at home. A colleague of mine msn’ed me and told me to tune in on the news channel. I just couldn’t believe what I saw…
Now more then 2 years later I’m working on the exact same application. Back then the international model agency this application was being build for cancelled the project due to what happened on the 11th. The system is going live next week and thousands of models are made available for booking online. While thinking about it… I noticed the additional requirements haven’t changed since back then. It’s great to feel proud about your previous work.
The coffee is the purest, which without any doubt makes me an Architect according to Michael. Although I’m not a sloppy coder, just not the most experienced one ;)
[edit, thnx Dennis]
Architects drink coffee; developers Jolt, so I qualify for architect. Architects are bad coders, I am not so that makes me a developer. I’m a devArch!
Read Michael’s great post about the differences between Developers and Architects.
Frank beat me to it. I was thinking about 'somehow' gathering the Dutch bloggers a little while back. So, are there Dutch .NET bloggers interested to be OPML’ed? DotNetJunkies and other channels are welcome as well. Drop the necessary info below please…
And do not forget to 'signal to noise' your colleagues about this blog entry.
I’m currently working on integrating a tracking system with factory floor (MES) applications. These applications are sending ‘document messages’ (EIP) into a message channel, currently implemented with Microsoft Message Queue (MSMQ) technology. My requirements force me, that once I receive (or at least know that a message is received) a message to start an explicit transaction, receive, validate, transform, map the data to my domain objects and persist.
The System.Messaging namespace does not expose a “MessageArrived” (VB6 sort of did) event so I decided to implement a MessageQueueListener which notifies the MessageGateway (MessageGateway abstracts the messaging infrastructure from the application) that a new message arrived. The MessageGateway then start an ‘external’ COM+ transaction and receives the message… etc.
I’d rather see a somewhat more sophisticated API for MSMQ with a simple receive event. I know I could always use the async Peek and Receive methods, but that would result in more complicated code. Thoughts?
Serge mentions how Craig catches exceptions ‘to handle’ you’d rather not handle at all. Does that make any sense? Catching exception you are not ‘catching’ in your program. I’d rather see you do this:
// normal execution
catch (SeriousException ex)
// handle as expected
catch (FormatException ex)
// this is plain stupid, use generic catch
catch (Exception ex)
// Conditional... isn’t disrupting exection
Use a generic catch to handle all unexpected exceptions.