The observant amongst you may have noticed that this blog has a brand new and shiny domain name! That's right, after happily trading under "icanmakethiswork.blogspot.com" for the longest time it's now "blog.icanmakethiswork.io". Trumpets and fanfare!
Enough with the horrific misquotes - this is about Moq and async (that's my slight justification for robbing Herman Melville).
I previously attempted to migrate my Jasmine tests from JavaScript to TypeScript. The last time I tried it didn't go so well and I bailed. Thank the Lord for source control. But feeling I shouldn't be deterred I decided to have another crack at it.
Anyone who reads my blog will know that I have been long in the habit of writing unit tests for my C# code. I'm cool like that. However, it took me a while to get up and running writing unit tests for my JavaScript code. I finally got there using a combination of Jasmine 2.0 and Chutzpah. (Jasmine being my test framework and Chutzpah being my test runner.)
I wrote a little while ago about creating a directive to present server errors on the screen in an Angular application. In my own (not so humble opinion), it was really quite nice. I was particularly proud of my usage of isolate scope. However, pride comes before a fall.
Up until, well yesterday really, I tended to have my Web API action methods all returning 200's no matter what. Successful request? 200 for you sir! Some validation error in the model? 200 for you too ma'am - but I'll wrap up the validation errors and send them back too. Database error? 200 and and an error message.
So. You're using AngularJS to build your front end with ASP.Net running on the server side. You're a trustworthy dev - you know that validation on the client will only get you so far. You need to validate on the server.
I've recently ported John Papa's popular Hot Towel Angular SPA Template to TypeScript. Why? Because it was there.
If you ever take a step back from what you're doing it can sometimes seem pretty abstract. Here's an example. I was looking at an issue in an app that I was supporting. The problem concerned a field which was to store a date value. Let's call it, for the sake of argument, valuation_date. (Clearly in reality the field name was entirely different... Probably.) This field was supposed to represent a specific date, like June 15th 2012 or 19th August 2014. To be clear, a date and *not* in any way, a time.
It started with nuns. Don't all good stories start that way? One of my (many) aunts is a Poor Clare nun. At some point in the distant past I was cajoled into putting together a simple website for her convent. This post is a walkthrough of how to migrate from AngularJS using JavaScript to AngularJS using TypeScript. It just so happens that the AngularJS app in question is the one that belongs to my mother's sister's convent.
Do you like to separate out your unit tests from the project you are testing? I imagine so. My own practice when creating a new project in Visual Studio is to create a separate unit test project alongside whose responsibility is to house unit tests for that new project.
I was recently reading Jeff Walker's blog post "Why TypeScript Isn't the Answer". This is part of series in which Jeff goes through various compile-to-JavaScript technologies including TypeScript, CoffeeScript and Dart and explains his view of why he feels they don't quite hit the mark.
I’ve long used Globalize for my JavaScript number formatting / parsing needs. In a current project I’m using Knockout for the UI. When it came to data-binding numeric values none of the default binding handlers seemed appropriate. What I wanted was a binding handler that:
Having put together a demo of using TypeScript with RequireJS my attention turned quickly to caching. Or rather, IE forced me to think about caching.