generate barcode in crystal report Organizational Standards in Font

Draw Code 3 of 9 in Font Organizational Standards

Organizational Standards
Drawing USS Code 39 In None
Using Barcode creation for Font Control to generate, create ANSI/AIM Code 39 image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Creating EAN13 In None
Using Barcode printer for Font Control to generate, create EAN 13 image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
We have also implemented the standards as described in the previous section in terms of source control organization, the VS .NET settings, the use of class libraries instead of web projects, and also the shared assembly area at D:\BookCode\Assemblies. It is difficult to assess the implications of the standards in isolation since they are tied together in terms of usage and therefore in terms of tokenizing of this information within the scripts, but we can see the effects the standards have on the build scripts.
Encode Barcode In None
Using Barcode drawer for Font Control to generate, create Barcode image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Data Matrix 2d Barcode Drawer In None
Using Barcode generation for Font Control to generate, create Data Matrix image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Comparing the Build Files
QR Code 2d Barcode Encoder In None
Using Barcode printer for Font Control to generate, create Quick Response Code image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Code 3/9 Generator In None
Using Barcode printer for Font Control to generate, create USS Code 39 image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
The application of these particular standards mean that the similarities between the build files are significant. Table 5-1 shows the differences highlighted in the files using the differencing capabilities of VSS. Table 5-1. Web build vs. Windows build
PDF417 Generation In None
Using Barcode drawer for Font Control to generate, create PDF-417 2d barcode image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Ames Code Generation In None
Using Barcode drawer for Font Control to generate, create Monarch image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Line
Code 39 Full ASCII Drawer In None
Using Barcode creation for Font Control to generate, create ANSI/AIM Code 39 image in Font applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Code 3 Of 9 Maker In Java
Using Barcode creator for Eclipse BIRT Control to generate, create Code 3 of 9 image in BIRT reports applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
2, 3 8 99
Barcode Scanner In C#.NET
Using Barcode reader for .NET Control to read, scan read, scan image in .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Code 128 Code Set C Creation In Objective-C
Using Barcode printer for iPad Control to generate, create Code 128 Code Set B image in iPad applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Difference
EAN 13 Drawer In .NET
Using Barcode printer for Reporting Service Control to generate, create European Article Number 13 image in Reporting Service applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Print EAN-13 In VB.NET
Using Barcode generator for .NET framework Control to generate, create EAN / UCC - 13 image in .NET framework applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
The description of the solution the build file is designed for The solution.name property The use of .dll in the web file compared to the use of .exe in the Windows file for the FxCop analysis
Making Data Matrix In Java
Using Barcode drawer for Java Control to generate, create Data Matrix ECC200 image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
USS Code 39 Encoder In Java
Using Barcode generator for Java Control to generate, create Code 39 image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
CHAPTER 5 PROCESS STANDARDS
PDF417 Recognizer In None
Using Barcode recognizer for Software Control to read, scan read, scan image in Software applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Barcode Generation In None
Using Barcode printer for Microsoft Word Control to generate, create Barcode image in Microsoft Word applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Line
PDF 417 Generator In Java
Using Barcode maker for Java Control to generate, create PDF417 image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
PDF-417 2d Barcode Creation In None
Using Barcode generator for Online Control to generate, create PDF417 image in Online applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
108 142 152
Difference
The same in the NDoc task The addition of specific copy tasks and filters for the web assets
We can also compare the web build file (or the Windows build file) against the library build file. The differences are shown in Table 5-2. Table 5-2. Web build vs. library build
Line
2,3 8 9 97 103 142 152 173+
Difference
The description of the solution the build file is designed for The solution.name property The project.name.1 property The inclusion of the unit-testing information The addition of specific copy tasks and filters for the web assets The inclusion of the NUnit report failure target in the library file
Again, very few differences exist between the two files. While this is encouraging, we should consider why there are differences, whether there would be more with a more complete application, and what we can do to eliminate the differences: Solution naming. This is always going to be different, of course. This does not constitute a particular issue and presents an opportunity to pass the solution name as a parameter to the script execution. .exe vs .dll. Although this difference could have been prevented in FxCop and NDoc at the points demonstrated, it would have presented itself in the XML aspect of NDoc, so there is no particularly obvious way to tackle this problem in itself. NDoc. At first glance, the solution would be to use a fileset filter to provide the information necessary for documentation instead of explicitly stating the documentation requirements, but it is more problematic than that. Even if the particular solution assemblies can be differentiated (which may not be as easy as you think), then it is not obvious whether they are supposed to be documented. You could argue that all assemblies should be documented. If so, then there is potentially a solution here. FxCop. This particular task is challenging since it does not have an especially friendly management method. We are stuck with this awkward task for the time being, but we can tackle it by extending NAnt, and we will. Unit testing. The unit testing is similar to the NDoc situation, although the identification of testing assemblies is now obvious because we are using the test-naming pattern from the standards. However, the tasks will begin to fail if they find no unit testing to perform or transform. Since we need the tasks to fail, the solution is to perform checks on the existence of files and so on, but this is not necessarily a pleasant experience.
CHAPTER 5 PROCESS STANDARDS
Publish. Web projects certainly have their own patterns for organizing assets because they contain so many different assets, such as images, web forms, and the like. Perhaps with a little more effort we could arrive at a standard pattern for publishing. So there are some problems in the files. All in all, though, things are generally satisfactory. Across different types of solutions particularly those with differing features such as unit testing we need to make structural changes to the script file. However, in solutions of the same type and with the same features, changes are broadly parameter changes. At this point it would be fairly easy to continue to work with the scripts as they are, but we can also make some changes now to improve the scripts.
Copyright © OnBarcode.com . All rights reserved.