Exactly! (Or ar least Win+space with power toys) TTFN - Kent

Yeah you just have to work with what tools you are given. I did a project once that used 2 3rd party api's with very little documentation. I worked my butt off for 3 days, with little sleep or help from project manager only to be told that the project wouldn't be used. A home without books is a body without soul. Marcus Tullius Cicero PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com Latest Article: EventAggregator

Article wrote: Users just want stuff that works. How hard can it be? Devs just want clear and binding requirements, how hard can it be? M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

Mainly because Atmel tools stink. However, you can run Arduino on most of them rendering the issue largely moot, as long as you're willing to use Arduino. Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

Article wrote: But the rock still has to be sent back to Earth for extensive testing. hehehe[^] M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

When QA itself is being automated, you have to ensure your tests can anticipate the unpredictable, no matter how unlikely. That's a tall order. And a terrible idea all around. I mean, was anyone who installed that update unaffected? If it's a 100% crash rate, then CrowdStrike has a lot to answer for, starting with, how was it unable to detect the problem before it got released to the world?

Quote: NASA fired its space lasers... As long as they do not hit Vespa's hair... :~:~:~:~ Just in case: My Hair! He Shot My Hair! -Princess Vespa, Spaceballs(1987) - YouTube[^] M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

The recreation of the account might have played more role than obvious. Like if it was bowling or throwing darts or something, maybe it was just too busy.

Heh. Haven't read just yet. I'm aware of some folks who would definitely not see it this way, but I think auto-generation of tests is a pretty good idea. A big reason though (maybe irony?) is that we cannot get this bit wrong. When we mess up a test it's like we did worse than any other kind of mess up and we did it on code we don't even have to have. What if when I clicked Post Message, I held down a magic key combo which caused a branching on the repo with a new commit that contained tests across all logic that click caused to run?

I think it's really more that you cover or don't but with INTENT across 100%. It's not so much that you literally cover 100%. So something like typical MSFT webapi... It's fine to just chuck a bunch of that all into the same bucket where it's going to be a bug in a black box or a bug in the way you're interfacing with it. The reason you do coverage isn't so much about bug elimination by a misguided notion that bug count has an inverse relation to coverage %. Rather, it's about WHEN a bug happens, rapidly reproducing it, precise identification of its source, knowing right where to correct for it, and authoring a new test which would have found it before it went live.

That's what they get for writing their code in MS-Word.

Since it's web-based, Bootstrap icons are here: Bootstrap Icons · Official open source SVG icon library for Bootstrap[^] They are colorable. Do Ctrl+F if you don't see something. ("Exclam" for exclamation mark; octagon for stop sign.) Thermometer might be interesting but probably vague.