Without any "artifacts" (i.e. deliverables), the "process" is useless; i.e. 1) Scope (Context diagram) 2) Problem Definition (doc) 3) Preliminary analysis (level 0 DFD; UML; whatever) 4) - Current physical 5) - Current logical 6) Design 7) - New logical 8) - New physical etc. "(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then". ― Blaise Pascal

It states that Visual Studio Code supports only a "limited subset" of VS project types. If you "guys" are going to succeed at working together, you better agree on a common IDE and source code manager / version control.

But doesn't everyone want to be a "project manager" ... and skip all that "techie" stuff?

Awesome thanks for the feedback.

You are filling a void. You mention nothing of the team, or the size of the team. Which of the two candidates is likely to GIVE and TAKE from the team in positive ways. How amenable to tutoring are the two candidates? Code Reviews will help keep the clean code function, which is easier to teach algorithms. Which candidate is most likely to appreciate the growth they need to do the most? Which one has the longest work cycles and the best references? I could hire either, depending on the impact I am willing to absorb, and the effect on the team. If one is a self-righteous SOB, then he will fit right in (LOL, just kidding), we would pass. Bring them both in. Toss them in a conference room with a butter knife and ONE envelope... :-) Inside the envelope: "You are too aggressive for our team, choose the other person!" LOL

Thanks. And I appreciate your post. Sometimes I need a kick in the right direction, which is also why I ask these types of questions. I try to follow this advice: I am the smartest man in Athens because I know that I know nothing. - Socrates

Yes, I agree with you. This is one of the paths. Aquecedor solar

I spent some time learning it, and then discarded it as being useless for my requirements. All it did was triple the amount of time it took to develop anything, as I'd simply be writing code to the same requirements twice and then debugging it twice. Sure, it helps if the requirements are set, but most of the time I have little idea what the final product will look like because the boss doesn't know what he wants either. Sure, I could make a prototype, but if I do that, the boss says 'looks okay, tweak that and that and you're done - I'll expect that by Friday then?' It also helps when the cost of failure is high. eg. a bank or publicly available software. The cost if my software doesn't work for a few hours? Pretty much nothing unless it screws up so badly as to corrupt the database.

Really? Golly. Given that that's precisely what you said, I'd never have guessed that it was what you meant. I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

Create your helper like this UrlHelper helper = new UrlHelper(HttpContext.Current.Request.RequestContext);

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not. :~ Jeremy Falcon

Oh I don't know. It takes a lot of hard work to create my crappy code. We're philosophical about power outages here. A.C. come, A.C. go.

Having human problems that create human pain are what motivates human solutions that humans value. An AI with AI problems doesn't seem relevant. Lions and humans both have pain and suffering in their design. Intelligence is only one part of the complete package that must include empathy for the hosts of problems there are to solve using intelligence. "Solve all suffering = destroy all life" is pretty intelligent but not so empathetic.

TheOnlyRealTodd wrote: I'll implement something like this and then not even have to mess with it for a while (month or more), then start to forget it.. It is for this reason that I am really starting to like Sandcastle. It requires a lot more effort when writing XML comments but the end product is worth it. I love having a code documentation website with the exact look and feel of MSDN but features my code. It even links forward to the official documentation of .Net classes. if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016

IIS Express does seem to be more stable than full-blown IIS. A bit odd, eh? What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question? The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism. Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???

Firstly, you should show some of your work. If it's not work you've done for a client then it should be work you've done at home. Secondly, unless you're showing your work to someone who understands and also has the time to look through your code, you will need a nice UI to go with it. It adds that Jazz Factor to your work. You can then explain that you did the back end to that UI. Finally, There are great sites out there to display you work. I'm going to recommend one (because it's mine :)) codeenv.com allows you to share and show off backend work. You can share your work in an environment which allows users to instantly click and run your code. There are other websites of course which allow you to do similar stuff but I won't recommend them purely out of bias

You miss out a lot outdated plugin that is not fixed because no long support

AMAZINGhttp://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/[^]

TheOnlyRealTodd wrote: Clearly, I love back-end more than front-end; Ewww, TMI. ;P

Johnny J. wrote: This one[^] sums up my feelings about CSS perfectly! CSS is [^ A W E S O M E!]