|
I've had a beard and moustache since 1993, but along the same lines...
My wife's best friend has been diagnosed with breast cancer; last week she started losing hair.
Her husband and son went bald in support; my wife accompanied her to get her hair cut: scissors solidarity. My wife in buzzed (maybe 1/4 high).
I joined the husband/son and shaved my head (but not the facial hair) this weekend.
We plan to stay this way until Kathy gets her hair back.
|
|
|
|
|
Tell Kathy that my wife's best friend got it too a few years back, and today she is clean and healthy...Give her hope...
(And update your profile picture  )
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
תפסיק לספר לה' כמה הצרות שלך גדולות, תספר לצרות שלך כמה ה' גדול!
|
|
|
|
|
|
My wife started her fight with breast cancer 2 years ago. I planned on shaving my head in solidarity but she asked me not to. Her reasoning - "It's bad enough I have this rotten disease and lost my hair - I don't want to be reminded of it every time I look at you." I didn't argue with her...
Her hair is back and she's cancer free! 
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: Her hair is back and she's cancer free!
 Good to hear about the success stories!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
|
|
|
|
|
Good cause, I've lost 3 friends this year to cancer.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0
There's a fine line between crazy and free spirited and it's usually a prescription.
I'm currently unsupervised, I know it freaks me out too but the possibilities are endless.
|
|
|
|
|
Movember is a campaign that is very close to my heart. My family has been directly affected by prostate cancer, on both my mother and father's side of the families.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult." - C.A.R. Hoare
Home | LinkedIn | Google+ | Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
1) Already have a mustache
2) Still paying off the bill for prostate cancer radiation treatments so cannot donate at this time.
Good cause though.
The treatments seem to have done what thy should.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
And for the record, I:
1. git-cloned the RazorEngine repo
2. changed the System.Web.Razor reference from 3.0.0.0 to 2.0.0.0 (otherwise both were being referenced, 3.0 by RazorEngine and 2.0 by the MVC 4 framework)
3. compiled it
4. Added a reference to RazorEngine from the RazorEngine.core bin folder
And lo-and-behold, I was able to use the RazorEngine to parse a cshtml into a string.
One last note -- when I tried to use WebMail on the host provider, I got a security violation, requiring this fix:
<configuration>
<system.web>
<trust level="Full" originUrl=""/>
Sigh. I feel like I'm playing Whac-a-Mole. Whack one problem, and another surfaces. This should NOT be this hard! (Gee, I think I said the same thing about Ruby on Rails)
So, a couple lessons learned:
1. Don't use NuGet package installer. Build the pieces from the source code directly.
2. Make sure all the System.Web.[crap] assembly references reference exactly the same dll's.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I thought nuget was to manage dll versions properly. Never used it myself though, because I'm a dinosaur  .
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
I've never had issue with NuGet, over a couple of years, except recently with EF 6. It adds a reference to EntityFramework.SqlServer, which is never used in any code, but nonetheless required. So as soon as you "Remove unused references", it vanishes in a loud puff of smoke, leaving you head scratching about what broke.
But then again, I've never even come across this RazorEngine monster. 
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
The moral of the story:
Windows isn't the only product where you should wait until a new version has matured a bit.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I see the file date for RazorEngine 2.1 is 2011. New version? Mature I can see, quite mature. Maybe a bit long in the tooth though.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
But still only 2.1, so still an "early" version.
Going by MS' record, "mature" would be 2.3 or higher -- pretty much any major version of an MS product needs to get to at least the third service pack before most of the complaints are dealt with.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Windows isn't the only product where you should wait until a new version has matured a bit.
Yeah, I've been waiting since I started using Windows 3.1
However, it is MVC 4 (and there's 5 already out too.) So how long does this stuff need to sit in the casket and ferment?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: However, it is MVC 4 (and there's 5 already out too.) So how long does this stuff need to sit in the casket and ferment?
Sir, 6 is also out. They are producing faster than letting a developer learn..
|
|
|
|
|
Suraj Sahoo | Coding Passion wrote: Sir, 6 is also out.
Good grief.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Hanging around a long time just makes it dated. To mature it has to be improved with age.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Wow.
Well, the project I'm on started with MVC 4, Razor 2, and EF 5. All installed with NuGet with no problems.
The updrades to MVC 5, Razor 3, and EF 6 went pretty smoothly, though a few manual steps were required for the upgrades to work properly.
I never had to do any of the stuff you're going through.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: Well, the project I'm on started with MVC 4, Razor 2, and EF 5. All installed with NuGet with no problems.
Agreed - I had no issues with the core components. But the minute I tried adding something on top, kaboom.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: The updrades to MVC 5, Razor 3, and EF 6 went pretty smoothly, though a few manual steps were required for the upgrades to work properly.
I'm thinking of updating to MVC 5, but I might do that on a VM and see how it goes first.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: But the minute I tried adding something on top, kaboom.
Is this not then a fault of the "something on top" rather than of MS, MVC, and Razor?
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
Brady Kelly wrote: Is this not then a fault of the "something on top" rather than of MS, MVC, and Razor?
Well, there is no specific thing to blame. It's a combination of factors -- DLL version hell, DLL dependency hell, package installers that will install the latest and greatest without checking if you've got the latest and greatest other stuff that it depends on, etc.etc.etc.
Which of course, because there is no single point of failure to fix, means the issue doesn't get fixed.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Which of course, because there is no single point of failure to fix, means the issue doesn't get fixed.
Too true, in fact.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
