Monday, November 23, 2015
- Provides services such as garbage-collection, exception-handling, debugging, and security
- Compilers output metadata in a format recognisable by the CLR
- Executes code that has been compiled by a .NET-compliant compiler
- Automatic memory-management – arguably the primary feature of the CLR
- Once compiled, all CLR-based languages interface seamlessly
The asynchronous programming model looked a lot like C#'s async/await on the surface.
That's not a coincidence. I was the architect and lead developer on .NET tasks
At the core of our asynchronous model was a technology called promises. These days, the idea is ubiquitous.
Because of the sheer magnitude of asynchronous code in the system, we embellished lots of patterns in the language that
C# still doesn't support. For example, iterators, for loops, and LINQ queries:
Saturday, November 21, 2015
Over the last decade, software development and deployment methods have changed considerably with the rising prevalence of Agile approaches. Ensuring application performance has become increasingly important, however, performance testing has had difficulty keeping up with modern testing principles and continuous deployment processes.
It’s true, many organizations still view performance testing as a single experiment, run against a completely assembled, code-frozen environment. But what happens when testers need to validate application performance and reliability before the software is complete, while it’s still being assembled, or when the software will need to be deployed in more than one environment? Check out this video in which Eric Proegler suggests strategies and techniques for testing early and often, while also deconstructing “realism” in performance simulation.
Friday, November 20, 2015
Thursday, November 19, 2015
Token Binding Protocol | Venki's Writings
Support for Token Binding Protocol
Microsoft and Google have been collaborating on
a new approach to authentication, called the Token Binding Protocol. The
premise is that authentication tokens (in your browser cache) can be stolen and
used by criminals to access otherwise secure resources (e.g. your bank account)
without the requirement of your password or any other priviliged knowledge. The
new protocol aims to mitigate this problem.
The Token Binding Protocol will be implemented in Windows 10, as a browser
feature. ASP.NET apps will participate in the protocol, such that
authentication tokens are validated to be legitimate. The client and the server
implementations establish the end-to-end protection specified by the protocol.
The difference between Verification and Validation | Serendipity
he terms Verification and Validation are commonly used in software
engineering to mean two different types of analysis. The usual
- Validation: Are we building the right system?
- Verification: Are we building the system right?
will meet the customer’s actual needs, while verification is concerned
with whether the system is well-engineered, error-free, and so on.
Verification will help to determine whether the software is of high
quality, but it will not ensure that the system is useful.
Ultimately the 21’s goal is to put something like this bitcoin system
into every phone and computer. This move would change the way the
blockchain is processed in a very real way and could result in some
interesting changes in the entire ecosystem.
updated SDK support for the Windows 10 November update.
As well as the GDB debugging extension, Azure Service Fabric—the
management infrastructure for microservices on Azure that's used by
Microsoft for Cortana, Lync, and Azure SQL—is now available in public
preview. So too is access to the Microsoft Graph API that allows
software to explore the connections between data within Office 365.
Microsoft also announced that it will soon have a version of its Android emulator available for OS X.
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
.NET Core on the .NET team blog, and more on ASP.NET 5 on the ASP.NET team blog and Scott Hanselman’s blog.
Microsoft Graph (GA and Preview), described in detail on the Office Blog and Office Dev Blog and found on https://graph.microsoft.com,
more than 70 on-demand videos with additional details on https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Visual-Studio/Connect-event-2015.
check out this course on Microsoft Virtual Academy:
John Deere & Co. had little to no agile experience before starting with SAFe, but had great success
with it. John Deere's main priority was reducing time-to-market while
keeping budget in check, and Scrum and SAFe achieved it. If your
organization's goals are to streamline delivery and allow for releases
every three months vs. every year, a cookie cutter framework may well bring success
TakeawayIf you're more concerned with costs-cutting or efficiency, then maybe
a more regimented agile framework that supports regular, predictable
delivery such as SAFe is the best approach for you. If you're really
need to be adaptive and responsive to industry trends, then a more lean
approach to agile would work better. And as you bring agile to the
organization, don't forget to give your teams the tools they need to be
successful too: goals, minimal and clear standards, autonomy and the
ability to organize themselves into collaborative networks delivering to
the organizational goals.
Agile Frameworks and Template Zombies -LeadingAgile
It doesn’t matter if you’re choosing an Agile development framework like SAFe or an Agile Transformation Framework like the LeadingAgile Basecamp model, the models and frameworks are incomplete, by design! They need to be adapted to meet your organizational goals.
SAFe, Large-Scale Scrum (LeSS), Scaled Professional Scrum (SPS),
OpenSpace Agility (OSA); or perhaps bits and pieces from each? In the
end, what matters most is
(1) an alignment with the Manifesto’s “4 and
(2) an organization’s willingness for embracing change (not
just senior leaders, BTW), and
(3) the expertise to thoughtfully guide
toward a newly desired state using measures that don’t drive unintended
BaseCamp is the one model I haven’t experienced directly (up to this
point), but I’ve lived through the others (above) at varying levels in
big company transformation. Out of all of them, the one that was most
fascinating (and uncomfortable!) to me was OpenSpace Agility (OSA).
Admittedly, I carry mixed views on an approach that’s guided exclusively
by opt-in, invitation-based OpenSpace, but I think it’s possible to
leverage the principles from OSA to guide a healthy and
engagement-filled journey into BaseCamp, LeSS, SAFe, etc. This is an
area that is very interesting to me.
Like all of us, I’m continuously learning and don’t have all of the
answers, but I do find a lot of value by understanding these various
approaches in-depth and experimenting with a principled blend in an
organization where it makes sense (e.g., start a transformation with
OpenSpace, use the proceedings to guide BaseCamp in an area where the
interest & urgency are highest, run another OpenSpace after 90-120
days, etc.), etc.
To enrich the conversation, the one comment I might caution on is the
use of “common sense” to guide decisions on complex organizational
change. I have found this to be a challenged view for those who haven’t
discovered the power of a Systems Thinking approach. Instead, they will
make decisions using “common sense”, which in a complex and turbulent
environment, are oftentimes sub-optimal decisions that make things worse
rather than better.