• S (unregistered) in reply to William
    William:
    Easy - just use opacity: 0 instead of background-color: transparent. I use this to style file input controls.

    On at least one IE version, that wasn't sufficient - zero opacity was treated the same as transparent. You had to set it it 1% or something stupid like that - not enough to be visible, but enough for IE to treat it normally.

  • (cs)

    I think that the IE team is made up of a bunch of people like me who would love for the Internet to be displayed properly on a monochrome screen.

  • (cs) in reply to J
    J:
    You go to meetings where you are commended for your achievements? Seriously, dude, count your blessings.

    I read this, hearing it in Rajesh Koothrapolli's voice.

  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to chubertdev
    chubertdev:
    I think that the IE team is made up of a bunch of people like me who would love for the Internet to be displayed properly on a monochrome screen.
    No, the internet is not displayed properly on a monochrome screen. Were you perhaps thinking of RSS or @media print?
  • Pogla (unregistered) in reply to RFox
    RFox:
    Never would have happened if the build versions would have used LaTex or TeX's versioning scheme.

    Never would have happened if Seppos didn't insist on using Big-Endian dates

  • Sir Sanford Fleming (unregistered) in reply to eric76
    eric76:
    ANON:
    TRWTF is time
    TRWTF is time zones.
    WTF? You should have seen what it was like before my time.
  • God (unregistered) in reply to Sir Sanford Fleming
    Sir Sanford Fleming:
    eric76:
    ANON:
    TRWTF is time
    TRWTF is time zones.
    WTF? You should have seen what it was like before my time.
    No, he was right. I created heaven, I created earth, it was night, and then it was day. It was night all over the earth, and then it was day all over the earth. God knows who changed the shape -- no wait, actually I don't. Just wait til I get my hands on the guy who made that rounding error.
  • Cheong (unregistered)

    If it were the product I've been using last year... I think I've also include the workaround CSS at that support thread that'll fix it in IE8. In that case that should have added that in the software's CSS generating method... :O

  • Serious (unregistered) in reply to anonymous
    anonymous:
    Wait, I'm confused. What did the fact that they broke the build have to do with the fact that their versioning system was fucked, other than the fact that the need to roll back the build led them to discover it?

    Chekhov's gun had been fired. What more do you want?

  • (cs) in reply to anonymous
    anonymous:
    Wait, I'm confused. What did the fact that they broke the build have to do with the fact that their versioning system was fucked, other than the fact that the need to roll back the build led them to discover it?
    That's more or less the WTF here. They broke the build in an inexcusably lame way, and couldn't roll it back because they had no idea what version of the build any client had. (One suspects that the automated roller-backer was unable to do the job because it found all these weird version numbers - vaguely reasonable behaviour - and the humans who tried to do it were unable to place any confidence in the information they found...)
  • (cs)

    No the real WTF is "big bang" builds and releases where you have to roll back everything if there is a tiny bug in one component rather than being able to roll back just that component and dependencies.

    Also not being able to use configuration to switch between components used so you can mix and match.

    Then they could make 2.11 available for IE8 users whilst letting everyone else use 2.12.

  • Bob (unregistered) in reply to S
    Dave hurried to Sally's desk, who was the local head of QA. "We turned off one of our regression tests by accident before launch.
    Am I the only person who thinks this is TRWTF?
  • moz (unregistered) in reply to Nobulate
    Nobulate:
    faoileag:
    "When my fridge starts talking to my grocer, why shouldn't my smartwatch talk to my coffein supplier?"

    coffein is what you get buried in. You probably meant caffeine?

    You say that like there's a difference.

  • Tux "Tuxedo" Penguin (unregistered)

    "There were a dozen high-priority idiots who still used IE at all in corporate environments, so they had to support it."

    FTFY

  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Tux "Tuxedo" Penguin
    Tux "Tuxedo" Penguin:
    "There were a dozen high-priority idiots who still used IE at all in corporate environments, so they had to support it."

    FTFY

    ...you seem to think that corporate environments can change course at the drop of a hat.

  • Bill (unregistered)

    The real WTF is that Sally's desk is the local head of QA.

  • (cs)

    Boston, Brisbane, Budapest and Build of the Baskervilles. Am I missing a "B" joke?

  • Norman Diamond (unregistered) in reply to levbor
    levbor:
    Boston, Brisbane, Budapest and Build of the Baskervilles. Am I missing a "B" joke?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJuGKJaSyVU
    
            
    
        
    • 
        
  • 
 Jeremy   (unregistered)                                         in reply to QJo
            
            
    
                
    [quote user="QJo"][quote user="faoileag"]The [i]real[/i> real WTF is working for companies who do not make available a supply of free filter coffee (and instant coffee for those who prefer it) which may be consumed in as extravagant quantities as desired.[/quote]
    

    I'm not convinced there is really a net gain -- what happens with free coffee is, everyone builds up a tolerance for caffeine, so it doesn't improve their work anymore (relative to how productive they would be if they didn't drink coffee) -- but now they're addicted, so they can't work without it, and they now have to jump up every 30 minutes to get more coffee and/or use the restroom.
    
            
    
        
    • 
        
  • 
    (cs)                                         in reply to faoileag
            
            
    
                
     faoileag:
     MrBester:
     faoileag:
    IE7 and IE8 are known problem cases ... IETester is a good tool for that.
    

    Bzzzt Wrong. The only way to properly test IEx is to have a native installation. All the kludges like IETester, MultiIE and dicking about in the Dev Tools to try and fake a lower version just don't work properly.
    
In my experience they do work properly, unless you need alerts() in Javascript.
    

    At least they do work well enough so that the problems with the menues mentioned in the article would have been detected far earlier in the process.
    

    They might give you false positives, however, so getting a VM with the real thing is definitely better, not to mention regression testing on a real machine with XP and and IE 8.
    

    But for the development process it is definitely better to test on IETester (as IE8) than not to test at all.
    

    It is only better than nothing if you are aware of the limitations, which many people are not. Those people are lulled into a false sense of security, thinking that tools like IETester or the development tools' document mode switching equates to the real browser.
    

    With all those tools there is a fairly consistent pool of false negatives, i.e., bugs that will only show up in a real IE8 or IE7 installation. And if you're not aware of that fact, it's a matter of time before you get caught by one of them.
    

     S:
     William:
    Easy - just use opacity: 0 instead of background-color: transparent.  I use this to style file input controls.
    

    On at least one IE version, that wasn't sufficient - zero opacity was treated the same as transparent. You had to set it it 1% or something stupid like that - not enough to be visible, but enough for IE to treat it normally.
    

    Something you could also try is
background-image:url('#');
    

    This interprets the current (CSS) file as a background image, which fails and results in an empty background image. However IE's compositor will still act as if a background image was present and will capture pointer events. This works for every version ever that supports CSS background-image properties, afaik.
    
            
    
        
    • 
    


            


            
  • 



            


                

                
Leave a comment on “The Build of the Baskervilles”


                
Log In or post as a guest


                
                
Replying to comment #:


                

                    
                    Log Out
                


                

                    
                


                





                

                    
                


            


            
« Return to Article