LINQ...

Language INtegrated Query...

It's the first thing I wrote about in this blog.  I'm completely sold on the importance of this technology, and I still assert it will have a serious impact on many, many applications written for the .Net Framework, but the shipping product is just not complete, and it's incomplete in some really annoying ways.More...

Microsoft® VSTS (Visual Studio Team System) is a really cool idea.  It combines a lot of common concerns for a lot of developers, offering a one-stop shopping experience that's really appealing. 

It's comforting for most people to be able to manage their version control from the same interface in which they are making the changes necessitating the control of versions.

It's useful to be able to see what other members of one's team are up to, and tie issues to actual change sets in code (and be able to report on it all).

It's empowering to be able to apply custom check-in constraints to force comments on code changes (or integrate one's own time tracking, as we have done where I work).

But I'm not writing to discuss all these points.  The points above are well-documented by Microsoft® and require no further lobbying from the likes of me.  I like VSTS, to be sure, but there are some shortcomings, in my opinion.

Last Friday was going to be a big day for my team.  We were about to implement a code branching strategy for our version control system, which was needed, but had been badly applied in the past and which was the cause of a certain amount of angst among the senior development staff.  I was in charge of implementing the changes, which included adding a new layer to our folder hierarchy and moving all active development into that folder.  In my experience with version control systems, it is usually an exceptionally bad idea to change the folder structure while there are pending changes in the system, so I sent a preparatory email to the affected developers (a relatively small, manageable number of people) to please resolve their pending changes before I began the update.More...

Everyone's been to the fair, right? The state fair? The county fair? A travelling carnival? Chuck E. Cheese's? If so, you've more than likely seen (if not played) some variant of the popular game colloquially known to me as "Whack-a-Mole" or by its more obscure moniker "Mole Whack-Em".

For those who haven't enjoyed this passtime, the rules are simple: artificial mole-shaped puppets pop randomly out of roughly mole-sized holes cut into a game board. The player, holding a mallet, tries to strike (or "whack") the artificial moles as quickly as possible since their appearance is timed and, if left unwhacked, they will disappear into the dark belly of the game board whence they came.

A simple game concept, and great fun for all.

Now, consider a version of "Whack-a-Mole" in which the mole-shaped puppets pop up, but do not recede if they are not struck.
Additionally, consider that our hypothetical version of this game has an infinitely large (or at least some very large) domain of potential mole-shaped puppets.
Finally, assume that the game board is free to grow as you play, allowing for an indefinite number of visible mole-shaped puppets at any given time, all waiting for you to clobber them with your mallet. More...

The title comes from a response email I received from a friend of mine who is beginning the search for a new job.  His company - one I previously worked for, as well, and where I still have some friends - has systematically removed the few features that once made them attractive enough to continue drawing a pay check, to name a few:

1. Free drinks and regular "ice cream socials" during non-payroll weeks
2. A sane telecommuting policy
3. Annual salary increases that at least kept pace with increases in the cost of living
4. Respectable middle management

I make no apologies if any of the items above seem petty.  The simple fact is, they were all provided at some point; they all made employment at said company more attractive - either through some kind of social interaction, job satisfaction or by simply compensating on pace with the current economy, and they have all been removed (or, in the case of item 4, fled the company) over a period of time for no stated reason: therefore they are perceived as losses to the quality of the work environment by its employees.  I've seen this pattern repeated with at least three companies in sequence in the Austin area alone. More...