Our current production version is PC 11.52 patch1 and our company is going to start IE11 roll out soon. We don't have many issues with our current production version so we would like to use it. But 11.52 doesn't support IE11. Because full migration needs lots of work (we have more than 100 projects), we are investigating alternative solutions. We tested 11.52 Vugen with IE11 and it seems, that Vugen can record scripts in WinInet mode. Would it be possible to record scripts using WinInet level capture and run them using Sockets? Is there some limitations using WinInet capturing and what pitfalls this approach might bring?
I don't know about PC 11.52 but I can answer regarding LoadRunner 11.52 (VuGen 11.52) It doesn't support IE11 because in IE11 Microsoft added some API which we had to add to the LoadRunner in order for it to work. The API was officially added in version 12 but a patch exists for version 11.52. The problem is that the patch is not available for direct download so you will have to open a support case. When you open the case please describe the problem and ask the patch for defect (77102).
EDIT: If you ask the same question on the official LoadRunner support forum then the support staff will be able to attach the file directly.
Related
As a front-end developer, how should I realize what is the minimum version of Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and etc that my web app should support? Should I consider all the users would use the last stable version? If not, how many older versions should be considered?
P.S. I faced this question wen I decided to use CSS grid display and my colleagues believed some users' browsers may not be updated to support this feature.
I have just upgraded myself to new version and started development in 9.0.1 Revision 20131022.0932 ( release 9.0.1). I have couple of small queries.
1) Am I using the right version for development or need to upgrade by implementing patches etc?. This is stable for development?
2) Previously I was developing applications on 8.5.2 but my clients were on 8.5.x and 9.x.
This migration is safe for existing applications? no crashes? no code mismatch? Is their any guideline for developer? Co-Existence of clients is possible?
Please guide me and thanks in advance
Best Regards,
Qaiser
In general, upgrading to the latest Designer version is ideal, especially with (as Per recommends) the latest fix packs, as well as on the server.
For non-XPage design elements, there should be no incompatibilities with 8.5.x through 9.0.1, so you're good there.
If you do XPages intended to be rendered by older versions (either older servers or XPiNC in older clients), you could run into trouble there, using properties and controls that don't exist there. You can mitigate that a bit by going to the app's "Xsp Properties" in Designer and changing the "Minimum Supported Release". That won't help you avoid trouble with third-party plugins not installed everywhere, but it helps with the core runtime controls.
I'm looking for the way to conduct cross-browser compatibility test on my ubuntu. Firefox and opera don't cause problems, but I didn't find any guide how to install older versions of chrome. Do you know how to check my code in this browser on my computer?
You can take screenshots in different versions in Browserstack. Also you can browse there using different browsers, but you will need to pay for that.
In general, there is no need to test compatibility against anything but the latest version of Chrome, since Chrome updates itself automatically. Just expect that anyone using Chrome to view your site will have the latest version.
I am wondering what level of support the latest MonoTouch has for using SQLite. The closest information I can find is this article here which referes to limited support in v1.2 however it concedes that you may run into run time errors while using this.
This is what I found on the Xamarin website: http://docs.xamarin.com/ios/Guides/Advanced_Topics/System.Data
This really scares me. Is there any documentation out there indicating what current level of support Xamarin has for SQLite?
I can't speak about the changes in System.Data support past that article, but I think it's quite common for folks to use csharp-sqlite, or better yet sqlite-net instead. Csharp-sqlite is an independent port of SQLite. And sqlite-net is "better yet" in the sense that its a minimal library where you can drop a single file in your project and use it to support sqlite on the various mono platforms. Yet it has nice features still such as "strongly typed queries" due to reflection-based ORM. So if you don't need a full Sqlite driver its a good option.
Greg Shackles did a nice seminar on x-platform dev with Monotouch/droid back in April where he covers these and other libraries: http://blog.xamarin.com/2012/04/25/cross-platform-mobile-development-seminar/
This link is outdated, it's about MonoTouch 1.2 and the latest MonoTouch's version is 6.0.
I'm using Sqlite with Vici CoolStorage in two apps on App Store: easy and no problems at all. I've never see any runtime errors using Sqlite.
When using 3rd party libraries/components in production projects, are you rigorous about using only released versions of said libraries?
When do you consider using a pre-release or beta version of a library (in dev? in production, under certain circumstances)?
If you come across a bug or shortcoming of the library and you're already committed to using it, do you apply a patch to the library or create a workaround in your code?
I am a big fan of not coding something when someone else has a version that I could not code in a reasonable amount of time or would require me to become an expert on something that wouldn't matter in the long run.
There are several open source components and libraries I have used in our production environment such as Quartz.NET, Log4Net, nLog, SharpFTPLibrary (heavily modified) and more. Quartz.NET was in beta when I first released an application using it into production. It was a very stable beta and I had the source code so I could debug an issue and there were a few. When I encountered a bug or an error I would fix it and post the issue to the bug tracker or author. I feel very comfortable using a beta product if the source is available for me to debug any issues or there is a strong following of developers hammering out any issues.
I've used beta libraries in commercial projects before but mostly during development and when the vendor is likely to release a final version before I finish the product.
For example, I developed a small desktop application using Visual Studio 2005 Beta 2 because I knew that the RTM version would be available before the final release of my app. Also I used a beta version of FirebirdSQL ADO.NET Driver during development of another project.
For bugs I try to post complete bug reports whenever there's a way to reproduce it but most of the time you have to find a workaround to release the application ASAP.
Yes. Unless there's a feature we really need in a beta version.
There's no point using a beta version in dev if you aren't certain you'll use it in production. That just seems like a wasted exercise
I'll use the patch. Why write code for something you've paid for?
There's no point using a beta version in dev if you aren't certain you'll use it in production. That just seems like a wasted exercise
Good point, I was also considering the scenario of evaluation of the pre-release version in dev, but I supposed that taints the dev -> test/qa -> prod path.
I'll use the patch. Why write code for something you've paid for?
What if it's not a commercial library, but an open source one? What if the patch to be applied is not from the releasing entity (e.g. your own patch)?
I use:
Infragistics (.NET WinForms controls)
LeadTools (video capture)
Xtreme ToolkitPro (MFC controls)
National Instruments Measurement Studio (computational libraries, plotting, and DAQ)
I've found significant bugs in every one of these, so I try to limit their use as much as possible. Infragisitcs is pretty good for what it is, and National Instruments is by far the best, although quite limited. I would avoid LeadTools at all cost.