1 00:00:01,080 --> 00:00:05,679 How'd you like to listen to dot NetRocks with no ads? Easy? Become 2 00:00:05,679 --> 00:00:09,839 a patron for just five dollars a month. You get access to a private 3 00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:14,240 RSS feed where all the shows have no ads. Twenty dollars a month, 4 00:00:14,279 --> 00:00:18,839 we'll get you that and a special dot NetRocks patron mug. Sign up now 5 00:00:18,839 --> 00:00:37,320 at Patreon dot dot NetRocks dot com. Hey, welcome back to dot NetRocks. 6 00:00:37,359 --> 00:00:40,880 I'm Carl Franklin and I'machard Campbell. And man, it's been a while 7 00:00:40,960 --> 00:00:43,880 since we've done a show. We've done a studio show. We did recorded 8 00:00:43,880 --> 00:00:47,119 a bunch in Copenhagen, which was fun, right, and we're going to 9 00:00:47,200 --> 00:00:50,439 be in Porto not long from now recording a bunch more. But this is 10 00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:54,039 like the in between the two. We get one studio show and you're in 11 00:00:54,079 --> 00:00:57,759 your studio. I'm in my new studio. Yes, that's cool. How 12 00:00:57,840 --> 00:01:00,560 is it are you? Take a look? I mean it's it seems familiar. 13 00:01:00,600 --> 00:01:04,480 It's exactly what you think because you've been in the old ones. So 14 00:01:04,519 --> 00:01:10,200 the walls are kept the red wall. Look, it's the same fabric. 15 00:01:10,239 --> 00:01:14,480 It's not the same bolts of fabric because obviously I bought new ones time has, 16 00:01:14,640 --> 00:01:21,120 but it's the same stuff. The insulation behind the fabric is rock wall 17 00:01:21,359 --> 00:01:23,560 yep. And on the outside walls before we did rockwell, we did spray 18 00:01:23,599 --> 00:01:29,760 foam insulation. Nice. So it's actually insulated to our fifty if anybody else 19 00:01:30,000 --> 00:01:33,159 in construction, that's really really tight. Yeah, as soon as you can 20 00:01:33,239 --> 00:01:37,040 heat the place with a sixty watt light bulb you know, still existed. 21 00:01:37,959 --> 00:01:42,280 And I'll move my head so you can see that split h VAC unit. 22 00:01:42,359 --> 00:01:45,439 Yeah, yeah, it doesn't have to work very hard. No, No, 23 00:01:45,840 --> 00:01:48,920 that's great. I mean, i mean my space up on the coast, 24 00:01:49,120 --> 00:01:52,560 so this is my office is still not assembled. I've been away a 25 00:01:52,640 --> 00:01:55,159 fair bit, but you know, I've got enough running here to at least 26 00:01:55,159 --> 00:01:57,920 from the portable rig. But this will eventually be the setting, yep. 27 00:01:57,319 --> 00:02:00,599 You know, as we get stuff set up, it's good, you know, 28 00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:04,760 change as I put. Yeah, and I'm sure that my microphone sounds 29 00:02:04,799 --> 00:02:07,400 tighter, in other words, less echoey than it was even in my old 30 00:02:07,439 --> 00:02:10,199 place, without a doubt, which I just had U haul blankets up on 31 00:02:10,240 --> 00:02:14,719 the walls. You know. Yeah, this is like serious, yeah, 32 00:02:14,919 --> 00:02:19,479 really properly proved. I'm probably I was thinking I've probably get a few real 33 00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:22,520 traps in here, because it is a it is a jip rock box. 34 00:02:22,680 --> 00:02:25,159 Yeah, but you know, I actually, you know what, I have 35 00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:30,960 the stuff. Yeah, I have the the insulation and the material and the 36 00:02:30,000 --> 00:02:34,159 glue. I could send it to you. Ethan Weiner is a genius. 37 00:02:34,159 --> 00:02:36,039 Though. You know, a couple of real traps in the corner of this 38 00:02:36,120 --> 00:02:38,599 room would probably go pretty flat. It probably would. Yep. Yeah, 39 00:02:38,759 --> 00:02:52,840 okay, let's start off with something cool for better no framework awesome. You've 40 00:02:52,879 --> 00:03:00,280 heard of Jeff Frits, right, Yeah, I'm lascinating because he's an old 41 00:03:00,319 --> 00:03:02,240 friend of ours. Yeah, well, all I think is purple sequence. 42 00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:07,919 I'm thinking purple sequence, purple sequence, purple goatee. He is working at 43 00:03:07,960 --> 00:03:15,560 Microsoft and he's evangelizing for the Blazer team. He's doing live coding and that's 44 00:03:15,599 --> 00:03:20,520 his job is to just you know, be in touch with the community over 45 00:03:20,560 --> 00:03:28,479 Blazer. So he and I started this new weekly thing called the Blazer Puzzle. 46 00:03:28,560 --> 00:03:30,800 Oh nice, And if you go to Blazer Puzzle dot com you'll see 47 00:03:31,400 --> 00:03:36,000 all the ones that we've done so far. So here's the premise. They're 48 00:03:36,039 --> 00:03:39,159 only like fifteen minutes long, so they're nuggets. Nuggets, yes, but 49 00:03:39,439 --> 00:03:44,879 they're definitely nuggets that you can participate in and win coffee mugs and stuff. 50 00:03:45,879 --> 00:03:51,120 So we show you some code that doesn't work, some Blazer thing. Why 51 00:03:51,159 --> 00:03:55,439 doesn't it work? And then people send in their answers to Blazer Puzzle at 52 00:03:55,439 --> 00:04:00,680 appv next and we pick from all of the correct answers, we pick one 53 00:04:00,719 --> 00:04:06,039 at random. That person gets a you know, a puzzle mug and a 54 00:04:06,080 --> 00:04:12,159 T shirt or a T shirt, we're not sure yet. And then we 55 00:04:12,599 --> 00:04:17,480 basically you know, show the solution and then we do a new puzzle for 56 00:04:17,759 --> 00:04:23,720 next week. Nice. Yeah, simple, and it's fun Blazer puzzle. 57 00:04:24,000 --> 00:04:27,000 Yeah, and just getting people, you know, aware of what's out there, 58 00:04:27,199 --> 00:04:29,279 that's right. I mean, you know, if you don't want to 59 00:04:29,319 --> 00:04:32,639 sit through a lot of training, you know, hours of Blazer train or 60 00:04:32,680 --> 00:04:38,399 even anything that's on YouTube or whatever, you can just have some fun and 61 00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:42,560 learn little bits, a little bits and pieces. I love it. And 62 00:04:43,040 --> 00:04:45,879 yeah, make it digestible just a little bit of the time. Yeah, 63 00:04:45,920 --> 00:04:48,879 make it fun cool. If you've got Google you could probably do pretty well. 64 00:04:50,560 --> 00:04:56,399 And we also have a talk a Blazer Puzzle talk in the upcoming dot 65 00:04:56,439 --> 00:04:59,600 net comf that's awesome. Isn't that cool? Yeah? Dot net comf coming 66 00:04:59,680 --> 00:05:01,399 up in No so, Yeah, it'd be great that you're in that. 67 00:05:01,600 --> 00:05:04,600 Yeah, cool one, dude. Congratulations. You know it's sort of a 68 00:05:04,680 --> 00:05:11,160 related topic area. I shot a video series with the Visual Studio team called 69 00:05:11,360 --> 00:05:15,160 Tea and Technology because it couldn't be coffee and code. I don't drink coffee, 70 00:05:15,839 --> 00:05:19,120 Uh tea, But yeah, I got to go run around and talk 71 00:05:19,160 --> 00:05:24,279 to a bunch of the visual studio leadership folks, or not just leadership, 72 00:05:24,279 --> 00:05:27,240 but like the engineers doing the thing. Of course. I talked to Mad's 73 00:05:27,319 --> 00:05:34,600 Christiansen and Leslie Richardson, James Montamagno and yeapped up with with Amanda Silver. 74 00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:38,480 Wow, that's so cool. And just to sort of reminder, you know, 75 00:05:38,560 --> 00:05:42,560 digging into all the great things they're happening in studio. You know, 76 00:05:42,639 --> 00:05:47,040 it seems like people have forgotten how good our IDEs are. You know, 77 00:05:47,079 --> 00:05:50,639 it's easy to play with the new tools and different approaches to things. It's 78 00:05:50,680 --> 00:05:55,160 like, you know why we like id's because they rock, They rock, 79 00:05:55,519 --> 00:05:58,079 they work, they make you more productive, and so it was really great 80 00:05:58,079 --> 00:06:00,839 to dig into the various products in the stack, Like you forget how good 81 00:06:00,879 --> 00:06:04,879 the debugger is and you know, and those kinds of things. It was 82 00:06:04,879 --> 00:06:08,920 really fun to DEBT series, so I'll include a link in the show notes. 83 00:06:08,959 --> 00:06:12,600 But yeah, T and technology of the visual studios in mini series excellent. 84 00:06:12,720 --> 00:06:15,800 All right, Well that's that's what I got. Who's talking to us? 85 00:06:15,879 --> 00:06:17,920 Richard grabbed a comment of a show seventeen fifty nine, and that was 86 00:06:17,959 --> 00:06:21,519 the show we did with our friend Mark Seeman back in twenty twenty one about 87 00:06:21,600 --> 00:06:27,279 code that fits in your head. And the name on it is ye dev 88 00:06:27,360 --> 00:06:30,720 Text. But I'm pretty sure it's not Kanye. I'm just saying, Kanye, 89 00:06:30,800 --> 00:06:36,480 if you do you listen to the show. Interesting, No, I'm 90 00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:41,160 pretty sure it's not. Anyway, Ye dev Text has a bit of a 91 00:06:41,240 --> 00:06:43,680 rant, and I read it because I could so relate to it too. 92 00:06:43,759 --> 00:06:46,199 He said, because we said something casual like get someone to look at your 93 00:06:46,199 --> 00:06:49,240 code, I think I found the line where the buggies iss. I just 94 00:06:49,279 --> 00:06:53,560 couldn't get a single personal look at the code I'm working on to save my 95 00:06:53,720 --> 00:06:57,600 life. The reality is that zero higher ups could care less about the quality 96 00:06:57,600 --> 00:07:00,519 of code. They only care if it works, then they tell to move 97 00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:02,759 on and put out the next fire. This is from the point of view 98 00:07:02,759 --> 00:07:05,680 of someone who makes internal code. I have an old web app that I'm 99 00:07:05,720 --> 00:07:11,399 being asked to save, and none of it fits in my head. Man 100 00:07:11,480 --> 00:07:14,560 sits in your head. Over time, I have learned the value of making 101 00:07:14,639 --> 00:07:16,399 code that fits in your head, because I myself, in earlier years, 102 00:07:16,439 --> 00:07:21,279 followed mentorship that didn't care about quality or readability of code. The only care 103 00:07:21,319 --> 00:07:26,279 about performance, and more that it was if it worked or not. Zero 104 00:07:26,319 --> 00:07:30,759 care about craftsmanship. As I tried to push for basic automated testing, and 105 00:07:30,800 --> 00:07:32,959 as I tried to even learn how to make code more readable or maintainable, 106 00:07:33,040 --> 00:07:36,600 I got labeled as the guy who just likes to write a lot of code 107 00:07:36,720 --> 00:07:41,879 and that I made things too complex. No one noticed I was trying to 108 00:07:41,879 --> 00:07:45,800 figure out how to go this route of making code that would fit in someone's 109 00:07:45,839 --> 00:07:48,439 head. They even told me no one cared how my code looked as long 110 00:07:48,480 --> 00:07:53,959 as it worked. The internal web app has as many god methods that don't 111 00:07:53,959 --> 00:07:57,360 fit in your head, but the web app kind of works, so it's 112 00:07:57,399 --> 00:08:01,199 considered good. Also, don't tell me to change where I work. I 113 00:08:01,199 --> 00:08:03,120 have medical stuff that runs in my family, and this employer is willing to 114 00:08:03,120 --> 00:08:09,319 be lenient on my leaves. So I'm stuck, or rather, you choose 115 00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:11,160 to be stuck because you get some benefits to make it worthwhile. Yeah. 116 00:08:11,920 --> 00:08:15,639 I used to want to learn so much, but that fire has just about 117 00:08:15,680 --> 00:08:20,160 been put out. Now I do what it can, but slowly I will 118 00:08:20,199 --> 00:08:24,519 bend my own opinions and feelings about should be done versus just get it done. 119 00:08:24,920 --> 00:08:26,879 Experiences made it so that I can write bad code. It looks bad 120 00:08:26,879 --> 00:08:31,839 on my part and underminds me personality. But hey, thanks for the therapy 121 00:08:31,879 --> 00:08:35,679 session. That was a great episode. It's kind of a downer, but 122 00:08:35,720 --> 00:08:39,600 at the same time, it's like, you know, it's hard to do 123 00:08:39,759 --> 00:08:43,480 good when there's just no reinforcement for it at all. Yeah, you know, 124 00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:48,440 although it really I think Ye, and I'm pretty sure his name's not 125 00:08:48,519 --> 00:08:52,279 Ye. It's really about code you can live with too, because you're probably 126 00:08:52,320 --> 00:08:54,279 gonna have to read it again as well, Like, don't make your own 127 00:08:54,279 --> 00:08:58,399 life miserable. But I'm with you. You're not going to get any support 128 00:08:58,399 --> 00:09:01,720 from your team about that, and I understand why you want to stay. 129 00:09:01,759 --> 00:09:03,840 You know, you're taking care of the things that are important to you, 130 00:09:05,600 --> 00:09:09,440 and that doesn't mean you get to spend a lot of time acraftsmanship. Yeah, 131 00:09:09,440 --> 00:09:11,879 but hey, let me send you a copy of music Koba. And 132 00:09:11,879 --> 00:09:13,159 if you'd like a copy of music Koba, I write a comment on the 133 00:09:13,159 --> 00:09:16,559 website at dot net rocks dot com or on the facebooks. We publish every 134 00:09:16,559 --> 00:09:20,120 show there, and if you comment there and I'm reading the show, we'll 135 00:09:20,120 --> 00:09:22,320 send you copy of music Koba. And you can definitely follow us on Twitter 136 00:09:22,480 --> 00:09:26,440 or ex or whatever the hell it's called today. But the real fun that 137 00:09:26,519 --> 00:09:31,679 is happening over on mastadon. I'm at Carl Franklin at tech Hub dot social, 138 00:09:31,840 --> 00:09:35,799 and I'm at Rich Campbell at mastadon dot social. Send us a toot. 139 00:09:35,440 --> 00:09:39,200 We like toots. Yeah, some good conversations going on over there. 140 00:09:39,200 --> 00:09:43,519 I got it, definitely, definitely, definitely more focused. I think people 141 00:09:43,519 --> 00:09:48,600 are there for intentionally. It's just Debrie r. Yeah. So uh, 142 00:09:48,960 --> 00:09:54,279 let me introduce again, bring him back to the show. Egil Hanson. 143 00:09:54,799 --> 00:10:00,799 He's a Dane chilling in Iceland and a developer at Delegate and a Microsoft MVP. 144 00:10:01,720 --> 00:10:05,519 He chats globally at conferences about nifty developer stuff and it's all about that 145 00:10:05,639 --> 00:10:11,639 clean, maintainable code is. He's the creator behind b unit for Blazer tests 146 00:10:11,679 --> 00:10:16,960 and angle sharp dot diffing think spot the HTML difference in c sharp. Though 147 00:10:18,080 --> 00:10:22,840 he's danced to many techtoons. Egil's current jam is everything dot net and cloud 148 00:10:24,360 --> 00:10:31,960 and yes, this bio was written by chat GPT. Oh no, it's 149 00:10:31,000 --> 00:10:35,120 everywhere. Yeah. Yeah, I had to do something right. I had 150 00:10:35,120 --> 00:10:39,639 a very long bias bio and very serious one on that right, so put 151 00:10:39,679 --> 00:10:41,840 it in there and say make it funny. And this was what came out 152 00:10:43,000 --> 00:10:48,080 with us few adjustments stop that at all. Well, welcome back. Yeah, 153 00:10:48,159 --> 00:10:52,240 Hey, how's b unit? B unit is doing okay? And by 154 00:10:52,279 --> 00:10:56,000 the way, just to comment on that, uh comment from ye comments, 155 00:10:56,159 --> 00:11:01,200 yeah comment and coming from from Yeah, I'm a big fan of that book. 156 00:11:01,480 --> 00:11:07,639 Martin Mark Shiemann wrote, we read that at the company actually as sort 157 00:11:07,639 --> 00:11:11,679 of a book coupling and it's a it's it's a completely agree with that. 158 00:11:11,720 --> 00:11:16,240 I think the biggest problem in that regard is you need us, we as 159 00:11:16,240 --> 00:11:22,000 developers need to learn to speak a language that management will understand so that we 160 00:11:22,159 --> 00:11:26,879 are allowed to actually write good, maintainable code because it doesn't actually pay in 161 00:11:26,919 --> 00:11:31,559 the long long run. There's lots of leadershire supporting that yeah, and I 162 00:11:31,559 --> 00:11:35,159 guess that's that's one of the challenges there is the you know, finding a 163 00:11:35,159 --> 00:11:41,960 way to convince to see the value in quality code. But I'm empathizing with 164 00:11:41,000 --> 00:11:45,399 you. I mean, it's it's a hard fight. And he's also got 165 00:11:45,440 --> 00:11:48,279 things to deal with. I mean, obviously some challenges at home that his 166 00:11:48,720 --> 00:11:54,159 employer is supporting. Like the these don't sound like bad people, right, 167 00:11:54,240 --> 00:11:56,399 They're taking care of each other. They just have a different set of priorities 168 00:11:56,399 --> 00:12:00,559 because they don't see the value. Yeah. Yeah, I gotta tell you 169 00:12:00,600 --> 00:12:05,600 that I use B unit in my Blazer classes that I teach that's online. 170 00:12:05,000 --> 00:12:09,720 I did a Blazer train on unit testing and we use b unit, So 171 00:12:09,919 --> 00:12:16,519 I'm really really curious as to what's new in B unit. So curiously, 172 00:12:16,639 --> 00:12:20,399 we haven't had to do a lot of changes, so I guess we started 173 00:12:20,440 --> 00:12:28,559 around twoy nineteen when I sort of started prototyping and building it. And I 174 00:12:28,600 --> 00:12:39,600 think mostly due to Stephen Sanderson's brilliant architecture around not being with a Blazer that 175 00:12:39,320 --> 00:12:45,720 because we are sort of leveraging the low level bits in Blazer, those haven't 176 00:12:45,759 --> 00:12:50,440 really changed a lot, right, So so the call render engine, call 177 00:12:50,519 --> 00:12:54,759 rentering parts of Blazer have stayed the same all lists since then. Yeah, 178 00:12:54,759 --> 00:12:58,559 because if the underlying platforms shifted on you, you be in the middle of 179 00:12:58,559 --> 00:13:03,279 a big rewrite exactly. Yeah, but we do have a yearly cadence where 180 00:13:03,279 --> 00:13:07,120 we have to do at least a small point release of b unit because as 181 00:13:07,120 --> 00:13:11,480 a net release and we want to support that. This is a big one, 182 00:13:11,519 --> 00:13:16,399 isn't it. I mean, this one changes things well, and surprisingly 183 00:13:16,480 --> 00:13:20,279 it doesn't really right because the Blazer renderer is still the same. What it's 184 00:13:20,320 --> 00:13:24,440 doing now is it's allowing you to render things on the server and instead of 185 00:13:24,480 --> 00:13:30,120 sending we had bits and bobs down to the client using signal, of just 186 00:13:30,200 --> 00:13:35,279 generating everything in using BASM on the client, it's generating HTVL and sending that 187 00:13:35,519 --> 00:13:39,519 if you're using the streaming rendering and the service right side rendering things. But 188 00:13:39,639 --> 00:13:43,159 that is all there on top of the core fundamentals of Blazer, so we 189 00:13:43,240 --> 00:13:48,000 haven't actually had to do anything extra to support that, which is super nice. 190 00:13:48,360 --> 00:13:54,480 So some of the things we are working on me and my cointaner Steven 191 00:13:54,519 --> 00:14:00,440 Giselle, is more related to things we want to do for you too, 192 00:14:01,120 --> 00:14:05,120 So you know, looking back, it's always fun to sit and and just 193 00:14:05,679 --> 00:14:09,200 seeing that it's been four years now and and some of the things I would 194 00:14:09,200 --> 00:14:15,120 have done different since then would probably be to remember the good old Yagni principle 195 00:14:15,120 --> 00:14:20,879 you ain't gonna need it. And so I kind of made some design decisions 196 00:14:20,720 --> 00:14:24,679 and we are stuck with them at least as long as we stay with the 197 00:14:24,799 --> 00:14:28,600 V one, because we don't want to break people, right, even though 198 00:14:28,639 --> 00:14:31,240 I think most if not all of the units users are not really using any 199 00:14:31,279 --> 00:14:35,480 of the parts that we could potentially could want to break. But but things 200 00:14:35,559 --> 00:14:41,279 like because of this design we talked about with Blazer at a support, basically 201 00:14:41,360 --> 00:14:45,879 it can spit out everything that was that Blazer mobile bindings at one point, 202 00:14:46,039 --> 00:14:50,480 which was might might become a thing. And I think Steven had a demo 203 00:14:50,519 --> 00:14:56,440 where he generated FLOORA components of Flota code from Blazer. So I decided to 204 00:14:56,559 --> 00:15:00,720 architect B units such that that's a core part that doesn't care what is the 205 00:15:00,799 --> 00:15:03,120 output of your components, if it's HTML or something else. And then there's 206 00:15:03,120 --> 00:15:09,480 a web part and that additional abstraction is there and it's working, but it's 207 00:15:09,519 --> 00:15:13,399 not being used. So that's sort of a layer with added Yeah, and 208 00:15:13,840 --> 00:15:18,399 it really is a classic example of what you ain't gonna need it because I 209 00:15:18,480 --> 00:15:22,919 thought it might be useful at some point, and four years later, we 210 00:15:22,120 --> 00:15:26,320 just have additional abstractions to maintain that we had to uh to have that we 211 00:15:26,399 --> 00:15:33,639 have to work around. But one thing that we have been ironing out during 212 00:15:33,679 --> 00:15:39,759 the last year and a half has been stability. So there are there have 213 00:15:39,919 --> 00:15:43,080 been some it's cases you could get into where you rent a component that does 214 00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:48,840 something maybe a syncness, and you sort of have to get the timing right 215 00:15:48,639 --> 00:15:54,279 in your chest to to wait for that thing. And we've seen some interesting 216 00:15:54,320 --> 00:16:00,879 behaviors Foxample. We had one user that was able to ended with a very 217 00:16:00,000 --> 00:16:03,879 large component try he was rendering doing a test like with thousands of component that 218 00:16:04,000 --> 00:16:08,720 was being rendered in a single test could cause a stag overflow, and we 219 00:16:08,759 --> 00:16:12,440 spent a lot of time and I even actually got on a call with the 220 00:16:12,639 --> 00:16:18,240 entire Blazer team asking for some input on that problem to really chase down and 221 00:16:18,279 --> 00:16:22,320 see if that's anywhere in the code base on the Baser side of things that 222 00:16:22,480 --> 00:16:27,919 isn't sort of thread safe or isn't has any surprising things. And the annoying 223 00:16:27,919 --> 00:16:32,519 thing was actually it turned out after a lot of an investigation, what happened 224 00:16:32,879 --> 00:16:37,000 was that when a test run is over, a test is finished, it 225 00:16:37,080 --> 00:16:41,519 will dispose of the bi unit test contact with the sort of the whole host 226 00:16:41,600 --> 00:16:45,080 for setting up at test right and running and rendering a based component and passing 227 00:16:45,120 --> 00:16:49,759 in parameters and services to it. So typically what you do, if you 228 00:16:49,799 --> 00:16:53,720 are a good you know dot net development, is that when you have something 229 00:16:53,720 --> 00:16:56,639 that implements I disposable, you dispose of that when you're done with it. 230 00:16:56,840 --> 00:17:02,879 So beally white thing to do exactly right, So what happened. What happened 231 00:17:02,919 --> 00:17:07,279 is that we would when the test was over and the test had actually passed 232 00:17:07,319 --> 00:17:11,000 its assertions. So when the test method is exiting, it will typically go 233 00:17:11,039 --> 00:17:17,200 ahead and dispose of the beanal test context, which would then dispose of the 234 00:17:17,359 --> 00:17:22,119 unit renderer. But in cases like this where you have a huge component tree 235 00:17:22,599 --> 00:17:26,519 and some components might still be doing work, they might still be rendering, 236 00:17:26,559 --> 00:17:29,640 they might have timers and other things going on inside them that would cause them 237 00:17:29,680 --> 00:17:33,079 to be in the process of rendering at the time where the test was finished 238 00:17:33,119 --> 00:17:37,720 running and would dispose of itself, and that would be disposed of the Blazer 239 00:17:37,759 --> 00:17:42,960 renderer, which is like the core component that is driving and each test. 240 00:17:44,839 --> 00:17:47,359 Yeah, yeah, well and that is completely fine, that's actually what we 241 00:17:47,400 --> 00:17:52,759 want. The problem was we hadn't really thought about that as a problem because 242 00:17:52,759 --> 00:17:56,440 we said, well, when we're disposing, we don't care about the state 243 00:17:56,480 --> 00:18:00,319 of the componentry. But because things were still going on when we just most 244 00:18:00,359 --> 00:18:06,039 of the renderer, the components that the components generating sort of got into an 245 00:18:06,079 --> 00:18:08,240 invalid state, and all of a sudden it was possible to have cycles in 246 00:18:08,279 --> 00:18:12,559 the components we which would cause the stack overflow. And it was a thing 247 00:18:12,599 --> 00:18:18,359 that only happened obviously when you were running on a CI slow CI could the 248 00:18:18,359 --> 00:18:22,359 server up in the clouds and and uh super high to reproduce, And it 249 00:18:22,440 --> 00:18:26,440 only happened when we were running together with other tests and things like that. 250 00:18:26,680 --> 00:18:33,559 So yeah, I've grown rary of disposables and really also protecting the state of 251 00:18:33,680 --> 00:18:37,759 things after a disposed methods being called husband called. So that was a fun 252 00:18:37,799 --> 00:18:41,759 one to track down. Yes, I mean what I like about this story 253 00:18:41,880 --> 00:18:47,839 is like clearly people are pushing b unit to places you'd never imagine. Like 254 00:18:47,920 --> 00:18:49,640 that's the best compliment you could make a piece of software. So I took 255 00:18:49,640 --> 00:18:55,160 it to somewhere I'd never been before and we found some things. Oh absolutely, 256 00:18:56,200 --> 00:19:00,400 yeah, I remember back you mentioned fridge. I use to jump on 257 00:19:00,400 --> 00:19:04,039 on Twitch and hunt around for people that was using b unit back in two 258 00:19:04,079 --> 00:19:10,079 thousand and twenty nineteen twenty twenty because I wanted to see how they were using 259 00:19:10,079 --> 00:19:14,480 it, and and it's it's it's a fun experience watching people using your your 260 00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:19,440 framework and and and and seeing them start heading down that rosy golden path that 261 00:19:19,480 --> 00:19:22,200 you laid out for them where they will land in the pit up success and 262 00:19:22,240 --> 00:19:26,039 all of a sudden they take a right turn right over the cliff and you're 263 00:19:26,079 --> 00:19:29,720 like, uh, what what And and oh I should have put yeah, 264 00:19:29,759 --> 00:19:33,519 I should have problem and put some guardrails up on there and and so so 265 00:19:33,839 --> 00:19:38,839 I think building b unit has been a massively fun and interesting thing. Also 266 00:19:40,079 --> 00:19:45,000 just learning about API design and being able to learning to design something where people 267 00:19:45,039 --> 00:19:52,559 will land in that pitup success right and intuitively they will get to when they 268 00:19:52,599 --> 00:19:57,599 try something that is probably what happens is probably what they wanted. So when 269 00:19:57,759 --> 00:20:03,759 did you add snow shot testing to be unit? Because when I did my 270 00:20:03,440 --> 00:20:10,880 Blazer train with Simon Cowell. We used b unit and then he introduced his 271 00:20:11,440 --> 00:20:15,079 Snapshot testing framework, and so I was it in there then or did you 272 00:20:15,079 --> 00:20:22,359 add that afterwards? So I initially prototyped something back before V one, and 273 00:20:22,400 --> 00:20:26,920 I actually talked a lot with Simon. He's a fantastic omesource developer as well, 274 00:20:27,160 --> 00:20:32,799 and his library you're talking about verify, which is sort of a foundational 275 00:20:32,839 --> 00:20:34,559 library, and then he has a whole bunch of plugins on top of that 276 00:20:34,880 --> 00:20:41,880 that understands HTML or Blazer or I don't know. In seat framework. He 277 00:20:41,880 --> 00:20:45,000 has a whole bunch of extensions that basically allows us to allows you to do 278 00:20:45,039 --> 00:20:49,759 snapshot testing. And so we prototyped a bit on something that would be embedded 279 00:20:49,799 --> 00:20:56,880 directly in your Blazer test components. But at some point I decided to that 280 00:20:56,000 --> 00:21:02,160 it wasn't really worth to have it built directly into b units and instead, 281 00:21:02,720 --> 00:21:07,640 you know, point O point over to Simon's very I dot Blazer test library, 282 00:21:07,640 --> 00:21:14,279 which uses be uted under the hood. Uh So, uh, I 283 00:21:14,279 --> 00:21:15,960 guess the answer is I I never really did. We tried a little bit, 284 00:21:17,000 --> 00:21:19,200 but then decided to just use whatever he has because it there's a whole 285 00:21:19,240 --> 00:21:23,240 bunch of educases that it will handle for you. Okay, But but there 286 00:21:23,319 --> 00:21:29,400 is snapshot tests in the unit used them, there was. That was sort 287 00:21:29,400 --> 00:21:32,920 of part of the initial before V won. It's kind of been in an 288 00:21:33,480 --> 00:21:37,000 I don't really support it phase since then. I just used it last month. 289 00:21:37,359 --> 00:21:44,119 Has it been taken out since No, we just kept stopped using it. 290 00:21:44,279 --> 00:21:47,000 Yeah, exactly. Like so if you go to b unit ad ev 291 00:21:47,440 --> 00:21:51,519 to read the documentation there, we basically say use use verify, and I 292 00:21:51,559 --> 00:21:55,319 do remember you. Also, I saw that Blazer train with you where you 293 00:21:55,359 --> 00:21:59,039 had Simon on and I do believe you. I got that feeling that you 294 00:21:59,079 --> 00:22:02,440 had some good arguments. Why actually his model was better than the one we 295 00:22:02,440 --> 00:22:06,759 were trying to do. So well, it's different, right, I mean 296 00:22:06,759 --> 00:22:11,039 it's different. Yeah. Yeah. Snapshot testing basically says, you know, 297 00:22:11,119 --> 00:22:17,279 take a snapshot of it and when anything changes the output. Yeah, the 298 00:22:17,319 --> 00:22:19,519 output exactly. Here's the input, you know, here are the parameters, 299 00:22:19,839 --> 00:22:25,119 here's the output, and if anything changes, fail the task and you can 300 00:22:25,160 --> 00:22:27,839 say, now I meant to do that or not. We do have something 301 00:22:27,920 --> 00:22:33,200 now in b unit that is definitely supported and implemented through the angle Shop diffing 302 00:22:33,240 --> 00:22:37,559 library, which was my building anglesh up diffing was a detO I took from 303 00:22:37,640 --> 00:22:41,359 B unit of a couple of months because I wanted a way to semantically compare 304 00:22:41,359 --> 00:22:47,319 two sets of markup like the one you expect, kind of like snapshot testing. 305 00:22:47,400 --> 00:22:49,319 So you define this is what I expect, and then you have whatever 306 00:22:49,519 --> 00:22:55,880 was produced by the component. But I wanted a semantic comparer that understood HTML 307 00:22:55,960 --> 00:23:00,519 and understand that the order of attributes on an element doesn't matter, so that 308 00:23:00,559 --> 00:23:04,400 shouldn't fail the test if you refactor your component to order the attributes differently, 309 00:23:04,519 --> 00:23:07,960 or the order of classes in the class attribute, or even white space, 310 00:23:08,319 --> 00:23:11,799 and white space is for the most part insignificant, at least if you have 311 00:23:11,839 --> 00:23:17,000 two more spaces next to each other, right, So that is what is 312 00:23:17,079 --> 00:23:21,079 that is definitely still there. And that is if you don't want to go 313 00:23:21,240 --> 00:23:26,920 the Verify route with snapshots testing and snapshots being separate from the component test you're 314 00:23:26,920 --> 00:23:33,200 writing, we have the markup matches method and it works. It works really 315 00:23:33,240 --> 00:23:37,680 well if you have, for example, smaller snapshots that you can just in 316 00:23:37,759 --> 00:23:40,759 line and I scally that is my preferred method. So you write a test 317 00:23:40,759 --> 00:23:44,240 for a component and then you get to your assertion step. You say my 318 00:23:44,319 --> 00:23:48,960 component and then you do markup matches and then you pass in the markup that 319 00:23:49,039 --> 00:23:56,599 should be there. And if you write your B unit tests in race of 320 00:23:56,680 --> 00:24:00,599 files, so you're actually writing them in race of files, you can use 321 00:24:00,799 --> 00:24:03,680 mark up in line in your see sharp code, which means you don't have 322 00:24:03,759 --> 00:24:08,839 to escape quotes and things like that, and you get intelliscence and you get 323 00:24:08,839 --> 00:24:12,839 syntax highlighting FORTML directly in your CEE sharp code. So that is that is 324 00:24:12,880 --> 00:24:18,680 actually also if you go and look at at being the the depth the dogmentation 325 00:24:18,119 --> 00:24:22,799 side right now, that is the way we recommend doing it now because the 326 00:24:22,920 --> 00:24:30,359 Razor editor experience in visual studio and in writer have become much much better than 327 00:24:30,400 --> 00:24:33,640 it was originally, so it actually works quite well now. Now if you're 328 00:24:33,680 --> 00:24:36,359 what about if you're using code behind, will it still work there? In 329 00:24:36,400 --> 00:24:40,480 a C sharp class it will, And it's become a lot easier to work 330 00:24:40,519 --> 00:24:44,400 with with C sharp eleven where you've got the wrong string literals, so you 331 00:24:44,400 --> 00:24:48,920 can do triple quotes and then you can have some mark up and then in 332 00:24:48,960 --> 00:24:51,960 the mark up parts it would still be a string, but at least you 333 00:24:52,000 --> 00:24:56,160 don't have to escape all the quotes and and inlining and all of that. 334 00:24:56,279 --> 00:25:00,880 So so it's a it's very good there as well. You know what's funny 335 00:25:00,000 --> 00:25:03,920 is back when when I was doing VB net and I was excited about VB 336 00:25:04,559 --> 00:25:07,839 VB nett a while ago. It was a while ago, but they came 337 00:25:07,839 --> 00:25:11,720 out with these XML literals where you could find XML right in there, and 338 00:25:11,759 --> 00:25:15,359 we were all like, mean, yeah, sea Sharp, you don't have 339 00:25:15,480 --> 00:25:18,480 that, and C sharp programs like why would I need that that? Oh? 340 00:25:18,519 --> 00:25:22,839 I remember being jealous of VB developers back in the two thousands when when 341 00:25:22,880 --> 00:25:26,160 you still had to work with x molina regular basis that was that was a 342 00:25:26,200 --> 00:25:33,039 super nice feature. I think we've opened up a bit more to having margob 343 00:25:33,119 --> 00:25:37,440 and quote mixed together in the recent years. I think maybe react sort of 344 00:25:37,559 --> 00:25:41,839 that that the chart with that with DSX right and saying, hey, it's 345 00:25:41,880 --> 00:25:45,000 probably it might not be a bad idea to just mix concerns a bit more, 346 00:25:45,079 --> 00:25:49,240 right, Right, It's okay, it's a little bit sharp developers got 347 00:25:49,240 --> 00:25:53,319 a little less dogmatic. I think, yeah, yeah, for the better. 348 00:25:53,359 --> 00:25:56,759 I think I think so too. Now you're talking about MADS, is 349 00:25:56,799 --> 00:26:03,559 that what you're saying? No, no, no, no, I I 350 00:26:03,559 --> 00:26:07,799 wouldn't blame him for that. I think it's a general in the community, 351 00:26:07,839 --> 00:26:12,559 but mass has definitely also the interesting parts of the changes that been to c 352 00:26:12,720 --> 00:26:18,599 SHAP for the last ten years or so, where they've gone from. I 353 00:26:18,599 --> 00:26:22,599 remember talking to Annas Heilsberg back when he start just introduced a typescript and I 354 00:26:22,640 --> 00:26:27,039 asked that noble annotations where you can say that this might be Noll might not 355 00:26:27,119 --> 00:26:30,680 be there, are we getting that in C sharp And he was like, 356 00:26:30,440 --> 00:26:36,440 you know, being a bit secret, sepen say maybe. And the history 357 00:26:36,440 --> 00:26:41,759 around that was that originally they didn't want to put something into the language that 358 00:26:41,880 --> 00:26:47,359 could where the compiler could come into a situations where it couldn't give a like 359 00:26:47,480 --> 00:26:51,720 a yes or no answer. It should always be right with nobles. You 360 00:26:51,759 --> 00:26:56,160 can you might have annull here, but we don't know necessarily in all cases. 361 00:26:56,160 --> 00:27:00,319 That's why we have the bang operator and we have the yeah exactly so 362 00:27:00,519 --> 00:27:03,799 like the way that John Skeek calls it the damn it operator. Yeah, 363 00:27:03,839 --> 00:27:10,359 that's damn it. I mean it, trust me, stupid compiler, do 364 00:27:10,400 --> 00:27:14,039 it? Do it? Just do what I say. So the Language group 365 00:27:14,079 --> 00:27:19,319 definitely have loosened a bit up and allowed more we are not entire issue and 366 00:27:19,319 --> 00:27:23,319 allowed the compilots to actually be wrong in a few instances, and I think 367 00:27:23,319 --> 00:27:26,559 that's the better. Yeah, this is booleyant thinking, right, there's yes 368 00:27:26,599 --> 00:27:30,880 and there's no, but there's no. Maybe, come on, is that? 369 00:27:32,000 --> 00:27:36,880 What's that? What? Maybe? Gentlemen, I need to interrupt remote 370 00:27:36,920 --> 00:27:44,640 moment for this very important message and we're back. It's dot net Rocks. 371 00:27:44,640 --> 00:27:47,960 I'm Richard Campbell, that's Carl Franklin. Hey, hey, hey, each 372 00:27:48,000 --> 00:27:52,279 in our respective studios for one studio show before we go back to the in 373 00:27:52,359 --> 00:27:56,359 person live shows at conferences, and we're here with Eagle Hanson talking a bit 374 00:27:56,400 --> 00:27:59,720 about the latest in B unit and all the goodness. I also wanted to 375 00:27:59,720 --> 00:28:03,759 bring up the whole open source conversation because obviously it's been an ongoing thread for 376 00:28:03,880 --> 00:28:07,519 us the past couple of years. And you, you know, you strike 377 00:28:07,599 --> 00:28:12,319 me as a person building leading an open source project that helps you with your 378 00:28:12,400 --> 00:28:17,480 work that other people are now depending on as well. I don't imagine there's 379 00:28:17,480 --> 00:28:22,480 any commercialization in your future around this at all? Am I wrong? No? 380 00:28:22,559 --> 00:28:30,799 Not really no, So I think the whole em Q drama I guess. 381 00:28:30,880 --> 00:28:33,880 Yeah. I really didn't want to jump on that because I felt like 382 00:28:33,880 --> 00:28:40,640 everybody, you're only amplifying rage, like it wasn't necessarily a good thing. 383 00:28:40,839 --> 00:28:45,599 Nobody got off pretty quickly, I agree, So I I tried to say 384 00:28:45,680 --> 00:28:49,519 a you know, a laid back approach and not be too aggressive. But 385 00:28:49,559 --> 00:28:52,960 it's hard to you know, be quiet. But I think it was. 386 00:28:53,079 --> 00:28:56,160 It certainly wasn't fun for Daniel, the maintain of IMQ, but I thought 387 00:28:56,160 --> 00:29:00,759 it got a lot of interesting conversations to the front in the dot eco system 388 00:29:00,799 --> 00:29:06,039 and the open source ecosystem at least. And I also adjusted my thoughts a 389 00:29:06,039 --> 00:29:08,640 bit on what it means to have maintainable open source. So one of the 390 00:29:08,680 --> 00:29:14,880 things I did realize was that is a surprising imbalance in the relationship between the 391 00:29:14,880 --> 00:29:18,599 consumers of open source and the maintenance open source. True, and I don't 392 00:29:18,599 --> 00:29:22,039 think it applies to all open source models. So we have the corporate open 393 00:29:22,079 --> 00:29:25,279 I don't know if that's the right term, but bear with me. Like 394 00:29:25,319 --> 00:29:29,640 the corporate open source models from like where people companies like mysour of the Google, 395 00:29:29,680 --> 00:29:32,960 Amazon, the Linux Foundation, they hire people that work full time on 396 00:29:33,000 --> 00:29:36,640 open source, like the big projects really we know and like that drive a 397 00:29:36,680 --> 00:29:40,440 lot of things that we have thank for granted, like the Linux kernel or 398 00:29:40,480 --> 00:29:45,160 the dot net or Java. Y sure exactly. So I assume that is 399 00:29:45,200 --> 00:29:48,000 a business model in it for those big corporations because they are you know, 400 00:29:48,400 --> 00:29:52,519 stock Rhythm. They wouldn't be doing that unless there was something in it for 401 00:29:52,559 --> 00:29:56,000 them. So in that regard, I sort of consider that as somewhat balance 402 00:29:56,039 --> 00:30:00,759 model. The consumers get the safety of knowing that's big company behind the open 403 00:30:00,799 --> 00:30:03,440 source so they can safely take it a penancy on that, and Microsoft and 404 00:30:03,519 --> 00:30:08,759 the likes probably get something out of that as well, I think. And 405 00:30:08,799 --> 00:30:14,400 then that's the second model, which is sort of maybe where you have open 406 00:30:14,440 --> 00:30:18,119 source that is some sort of dual that's a dual license for example, that 407 00:30:18,200 --> 00:30:21,680 says to it all that is a company behind it that is setting services. 408 00:30:21,680 --> 00:30:26,720 And I think we have examples of in service Bush with hands company and and 409 00:30:26,079 --> 00:30:30,839 doing the software a dentity service. That's I have required a lot of success 410 00:30:30,880 --> 00:30:36,680 stories around that where people have had some open source product that made sense to 411 00:30:37,000 --> 00:30:42,359 lift up to like create a company around in some way and was obviously we 412 00:30:42,440 --> 00:30:47,240 had those conversations on the show for that matter, and they said our customers 413 00:30:47,240 --> 00:30:49,319 came at us and said, hey, you know, we want to pay 414 00:30:49,359 --> 00:30:52,599 you so that we have certain rights, right exactly, yeah, yeah, 415 00:30:52,599 --> 00:30:56,559 So so that again there there is a balance, right, they give money 416 00:30:56,759 --> 00:31:00,599 and in return they get certain guarantees. Port is a lay and software, 417 00:31:00,680 --> 00:31:06,480 right. But the third model is where I see the imbalance. And there 418 00:31:06,559 --> 00:31:10,279 might be four, fourth and fifth models as well, but that is sort 419 00:31:10,319 --> 00:31:15,640 of maybe the open source model where a b unit fits into an EMQ also 420 00:31:15,640 --> 00:31:18,400 fits into even though MQ probably has a hundred times the downloads that we do 421 00:31:18,640 --> 00:31:22,839 or throw automapper to that equation if I'm following you, right, yeah, 422 00:31:22,279 --> 00:31:26,720 exactly. And the idea here is that it might be a loan developer that's 423 00:31:26,720 --> 00:31:30,519 creating something that is becoming quite popular and being used in many places. MOQ 424 00:31:30,720 --> 00:31:34,160 is an excellent example of that. Like, imagine how many projects, commercial 425 00:31:34,200 --> 00:31:40,839 product project projects that are depending on a MOQ to be able to iterate deploy 426 00:31:40,880 --> 00:31:44,960 a new version because it's part of the testing pipeline. So if for some 427 00:31:45,000 --> 00:31:49,640 reason or another EMOQ ceased to exist or wasn't pushed out anymore or as it 428 00:31:49,720 --> 00:31:52,759 were, people started to think, can I trust this? Can I have 429 00:31:52,839 --> 00:31:56,319 this in my pipeline? Inmo Well, there's lots of millions and millions of 430 00:31:56,400 --> 00:32:04,240 dollars and lines of code invested in EMQ and the I think the when you 431 00:32:04,240 --> 00:32:07,680 think about it, the surprising thing to me is that the imbalance between the 432 00:32:07,680 --> 00:32:13,559 consumer and the maintainer here is that it's actually to the It's even though the 433 00:32:13,799 --> 00:32:17,640 consumers are getting em OQ and the likes for free, right, they also 434 00:32:20,200 --> 00:32:23,880 have a huge disadvantage because they have no leverage, that's nothing that is basically 435 00:32:23,920 --> 00:32:30,839 forcing them into the maintainer that is, to keep keep maintaining that product. 436 00:32:31,279 --> 00:32:34,519 Yeah, yeah, no, is that great line when they're yelling at the 437 00:32:34,559 --> 00:32:37,200 maintainer, it's like, would you like me to refund everything? Exactly? 438 00:32:37,240 --> 00:32:43,200 Yeah, but I really appreciate what you're saying here, right eagle is and 439 00:32:43,200 --> 00:32:45,039 I'm sorry interrupt, but it's like, oh, go ahead, Yeah, 440 00:32:45,079 --> 00:32:47,640 we are treating all of these projects the same, and they're clearly not. 441 00:32:49,720 --> 00:32:52,720 If micros, you know, you can rage as an issue in the c 442 00:32:52,960 --> 00:32:57,720 sharp you know, GitHub repository and a set of full time employees are going 443 00:32:57,799 --> 00:33:01,720 to read that that that make real salaries and share allocations on all that sort 444 00:33:01,759 --> 00:33:06,519 of thing, right, or even if you do the same thing in duende 445 00:33:06,599 --> 00:33:13,000 and you're paying customer Like that's another thing. But for Eagle or Jimmy or 446 00:33:13,200 --> 00:33:17,279 Daniel, like come on right, yeah, And I like I saw some 447 00:33:17,319 --> 00:33:23,559 people suggest to Daniel instead of you know, trying to bring awareness by you 448 00:33:23,599 --> 00:33:27,160 know, you can agree a disagree with this tactic, but basically he was 449 00:33:27,200 --> 00:33:29,839 trying to raise a flag and say, hey, I would like to work 450 00:33:29,880 --> 00:33:31,799 more on this, but I don't have I don't have the you know, 451 00:33:31,960 --> 00:33:36,920 time which is money to actually do that, and I want to you know, 452 00:33:37,160 --> 00:33:40,519 keep moving forward with EMOQ, and not of people were suggesting, well, 453 00:33:40,559 --> 00:33:44,000 instead of doing what you're doing, you should in step maybe create a 454 00:33:44,000 --> 00:33:47,079 company, create a dual license and have a proversion. I think that's a 455 00:33:47,160 --> 00:33:52,160 problem with that because certain projects like AMOQ and be unif of that matter are 456 00:33:52,799 --> 00:33:58,960 they have periods where you really can do you can you can work full time 457 00:33:59,000 --> 00:34:00,799 for a couple of months, maybe even a year on that, but then 458 00:34:01,440 --> 00:34:05,880 there is a lot of downtime where it doesn't really make sense to build a 459 00:34:05,880 --> 00:34:09,159 company around something like that. And then that's the thing, like I said, 460 00:34:09,480 --> 00:34:13,000 you guys probably know that you created companies, right, so you know 461 00:34:13,360 --> 00:34:16,679 it's not a real thing to actually have a proper company incorporated with taxes and 462 00:34:16,760 --> 00:34:22,320 selling and vate and you know, sitting across country be making money. Otherwise 463 00:34:22,360 --> 00:34:24,079 it's not worth it. Yeah, there's a there's an overhead to operating all 464 00:34:24,119 --> 00:34:28,559 of that. It's also a different skill set. Like just because you're good 465 00:34:28,599 --> 00:34:32,239 at building testing tools doesn't mean you're good at building testing tool companies. It's 466 00:34:32,239 --> 00:34:37,880 not the same thing. And I can see why somebody like Daniel at least 467 00:34:37,920 --> 00:34:43,199 certainly I wouldn't want to try to attend that because it would it's out of 468 00:34:43,440 --> 00:34:49,639 my comfort zone. So right now, I think the open source system in 469 00:34:49,679 --> 00:34:54,559 open source in general is lacking a way for developers to do what they do 470 00:34:54,639 --> 00:35:01,119 best and then have other people's people, you know, maybe make a platform 471 00:35:01,159 --> 00:35:06,119 that can make it sustainable. If that is a neat I think the best 472 00:35:06,159 --> 00:35:09,840 example we have of that is actually might be the app stole concept that we 473 00:35:09,880 --> 00:35:15,480 have for mobile apps, right because then there, you know, basement developer 474 00:35:15,559 --> 00:35:19,360 can just put out an app and register his credit card with Apple or Google 475 00:35:19,760 --> 00:35:23,000 and if people actually want to buy, and you know, they they may 476 00:35:23,000 --> 00:35:27,679 sort of become the reseller of the software if they want to touch any To 477 00:35:27,800 --> 00:35:30,280 minimize the company part of that overhead. You could be a quote unquote soul 478 00:35:30,360 --> 00:35:36,719 proprietor and I'm using business terms here and just have it money up here and 479 00:35:37,079 --> 00:35:39,840 pay your taxes, but a little ahock a lot simpler. Yeah, So 480 00:35:40,079 --> 00:35:44,360 that that would be one way that it could, in theory go, but 481 00:35:44,960 --> 00:35:49,000 I'm not sure that it's a viable option. No, And it's and again, 482 00:35:49,119 --> 00:35:51,239 this is why it keeps coming up on the show, is that And 483 00:35:51,280 --> 00:35:57,840 I think you've articulated super well that the tech giant's getting involved increase the sense 484 00:35:57,920 --> 00:36:02,639 of the schism, right and then and now we're surfacing more and more and 485 00:36:02,639 --> 00:36:07,400 saying shouldn't we have categories and shouldn't there be a mechanism to support these different 486 00:36:07,440 --> 00:36:13,639 models? So I think this is not not done yet, definitely not a 487 00:36:13,679 --> 00:36:17,280 finished finished so there are perfect solutions yet. I do want to give a 488 00:36:17,320 --> 00:36:21,840 lot of credit to GitHub, because we've been pushing things with that gid ub 489 00:36:21,880 --> 00:36:25,199 sponsors program, and they've been doing things recently where you as a company, 490 00:36:25,199 --> 00:36:28,960 if you have a giit ub organization, you can go in and say, 491 00:36:29,159 --> 00:36:31,400 give me a list of all the source software I depend on, and you 492 00:36:31,480 --> 00:36:35,559 can prioritize those and you can upload a CSV file and say I want to 493 00:36:35,559 --> 00:36:40,519 sponsor all of these, so that lowers the barrier for corporations to come for 494 00:36:40,559 --> 00:36:45,119 companies to come in and say give like they can have I don't know, 495 00:36:45,119 --> 00:36:47,079 one hundred dollars or five hundred dollars every month they want to give out, 496 00:36:47,079 --> 00:36:52,000 and they just base that on what they're actually using. There is. Yeah, 497 00:36:52,360 --> 00:36:55,000 so I definitely think that is also another approach that could be that it 498 00:36:55,119 --> 00:36:59,400 may make it that easy, so there's no excuse, like it shouldn't be 499 00:36:59,440 --> 00:37:02,320 should be a one click like the one click shop button from Amazon, just 500 00:37:02,320 --> 00:37:06,599 re sponsoring all those souls you use, right, And we talked about this 501 00:37:06,639 --> 00:37:08,480 on the show a while back, and I may have called my friend Martin 502 00:37:08,519 --> 00:37:13,000 Woodward in the meantime and we're talking about exactly that that you know, the 503 00:37:13,079 --> 00:37:19,519 average CFO wants to pay attention to this once a year or once a quarter 504 00:37:19,840 --> 00:37:24,000 and no more, and so can getthub roll all that up. Plus I 505 00:37:24,039 --> 00:37:28,239 would throw on top of that that basic hey, what open sources we depend 506 00:37:28,280 --> 00:37:30,760 on. That's bill of material stuff too, right, Like that represents your 507 00:37:30,760 --> 00:37:36,760 security exposure, Like these are things that a corporate customer that uses GitHub in 508 00:37:36,800 --> 00:37:42,159 a meaningful way should be paying for because they're very valuable, and while they're 509 00:37:42,159 --> 00:37:45,760 at it, putting some money into the projects that are important to the company 510 00:37:45,079 --> 00:37:51,159 by utilization alone, if nothing by preference, just makes sense, Like it's 511 00:37:51,199 --> 00:37:52,800 not like we can't afford it, and it's not like we don't get value. 512 00:37:53,039 --> 00:37:55,960 What you got to do is reduce the friction. Yeah, at the 513 00:37:57,039 --> 00:38:00,559 end of the day, I think the best way to ensure that the open 514 00:38:00,599 --> 00:38:07,760 source software that people are depending on in their software sticks around is I don't 515 00:38:07,760 --> 00:38:10,480 know any any better way than actually, you know, giving the maintainers a 516 00:38:10,519 --> 00:38:14,639 little bit of money. That is, I can say I've been very lucky 517 00:38:14,639 --> 00:38:17,039 to have some sponsors for the years. That it does. Actually, even 518 00:38:17,039 --> 00:38:21,960 though it's not quit your job money, it's it's uh, it's it's a 519 00:38:22,000 --> 00:38:28,840 boost some motivation for the things. Yeah, I like that, right, 520 00:38:28,840 --> 00:38:30,920 it's quit your job money is a different ball of wax. But then we 521 00:38:31,039 --> 00:38:36,519 acknowledge you with take your family out to dinner like that, that kind of 522 00:38:36,559 --> 00:38:38,280 thing. I like everything about that, or get it yourself a new monitor, 523 00:38:38,360 --> 00:38:44,239 right like that? That's respectful and beneficial. Mm hmm, yeah, 524 00:38:44,360 --> 00:38:51,159 absolutely all right, So we touched on beat unit uh in dot net eight 525 00:38:51,880 --> 00:38:57,039 and that yes, there's a major Blazer update you know, to the architecture, 526 00:38:57,079 --> 00:39:01,000 and now we don't have to have a signal ar connection for anything that 527 00:39:01,119 --> 00:39:06,840 just runs on the server, which is great. But what do you personally 528 00:39:06,880 --> 00:39:13,719 think about dot net A in terms of its significance in the whole asp ne 529 00:39:13,719 --> 00:39:17,800 net core ecosystem. Good question. I think I think it's going to have 530 00:39:17,880 --> 00:39:29,360 a significant impact on the adoption of Blazer or rather Blazer components, because I 531 00:39:29,400 --> 00:39:36,760 do think it is a superior model of using Blazer component instead of rail pages 532 00:39:36,960 --> 00:39:40,280 or MVC controllers if you if you want to go really old school to model 533 00:39:40,320 --> 00:39:45,840 your application in such a way. So I do think that it will become 534 00:39:45,920 --> 00:39:52,400 a gateway drug to many that can actually just use it to create a classic 535 00:39:52,440 --> 00:39:55,320 old static website. Well not static websites, but but but just websites, 536 00:39:55,360 --> 00:39:59,119 right, not web applications. But you can use it to actually build websites 537 00:39:59,159 --> 00:40:04,800 now, and it's much more intuitive and forgiving development model. And it's not 538 00:40:04,960 --> 00:40:07,760 that you you, oh, let's not create a Blazer app. You know, 539 00:40:07,800 --> 00:40:10,480 we're creating an asp net core app. Oh, and we can we 540 00:40:10,559 --> 00:40:15,760 have this component model that we can use to generate data. Now that just 541 00:40:15,840 --> 00:40:19,920 happens to be called Blazer. Some might even say it looks a bit like 542 00:40:19,960 --> 00:40:25,880 wet forms just in a model or to you, yeah, well the US 543 00:40:27,760 --> 00:40:31,079 easy as Yeah, well, I think wet force and well is a brilliant 544 00:40:31,079 --> 00:40:36,199 technology for its time, right well, and I certainly there's a certain customer 545 00:40:36,360 --> 00:40:42,320 that that familiarity will encourage them sure to tot least look at this. I 546 00:40:42,480 --> 00:40:45,000 that was one of the other aspects I thought about this is this is another 547 00:40:45,039 --> 00:40:49,199 checklist item where you don't know if you want to commit to client or service 548 00:40:49,199 --> 00:40:52,960 side rendering, and you don't have to decide that's right, and you can 549 00:40:52,039 --> 00:40:57,519 use a combination of both. I am so looking forward to r C two 550 00:40:58,000 --> 00:41:04,519 or just the release in November. RC one kind of has a little speed 551 00:41:04,559 --> 00:41:12,559 bomb in it for using you know, client side rendering and auto rendering. 552 00:41:13,519 --> 00:41:17,360 You have to sort of put those things in a separate Razor class library right 553 00:41:17,360 --> 00:41:21,400 now, but that it's only temporary. But I cannot wait. I have 554 00:41:21,519 --> 00:41:24,800 so many websites that I just want to that I just I don't have interactivity, 555 00:41:25,000 --> 00:41:30,199 you know, I just want to generate stuff and not give my users 556 00:41:30,239 --> 00:41:36,239 the white screen of death when the signal service box. No. But yeah, 557 00:41:36,280 --> 00:41:40,360 actually that that was the biggest sort of gotcha with with Blazer Server, 558 00:41:40,440 --> 00:41:45,920 which is also in it off self a fairly good product, especially internal intranet, 559 00:41:46,079 --> 00:41:52,639 not high scale websites. That that kind of grade out. We lost 560 00:41:52,679 --> 00:41:57,800 connection counting up to eight right before it gives up. So the only thing 561 00:41:57,840 --> 00:42:04,000 I can really fault when new the model for UH is gonna be a performance. 562 00:42:04,079 --> 00:42:08,760 It is a bit more expensive to basically spin off the whole Blazer renderer 563 00:42:08,840 --> 00:42:16,199 and spin out HTML compared to the moll UH that's list things going on if 564 00:42:16,199 --> 00:42:21,280 you just do a raise of pages or even NBC just spinning out some HTML 565 00:42:21,360 --> 00:42:24,559 right for dot that eighty speed speed speed speed. But this is a particular 566 00:42:24,559 --> 00:42:30,320 set of libraries where they're adding functionality, so maybe we don't automatically get faster 567 00:42:30,360 --> 00:42:32,840 all the time. It's really funny that I spun up r C one and 568 00:42:32,880 --> 00:42:37,039 I'm messing with it, right, and I'm like, all right, I'm 569 00:42:37,079 --> 00:42:39,159 just gonna do static stuff. And then I just have this little button on 570 00:42:39,199 --> 00:42:44,280 blazertrain dot com that sports ascending, right, It's like one button with a 571 00:42:44,280 --> 00:42:46,679 little bit of code and I'm like, oh, geez, now, I 572 00:42:46,760 --> 00:42:51,079 kind of like do a Plazer server or Plaser reb as suddenly or auto. 573 00:42:51,239 --> 00:42:53,440 I can't do that because the current state of it, it's like, nah, 574 00:42:53,480 --> 00:42:57,840 I'm not just want to write some JavaScript? What what am I thinking? 575 00:42:58,119 --> 00:43:00,760 Oh my god, did I just say that? Did I just think 576 00:43:00,840 --> 00:43:07,400 that? Well? How you know you can just do you know that that 577 00:43:07,440 --> 00:43:09,159 button could just be a link that if you click that it posts back to 578 00:43:09,199 --> 00:43:13,599 the server with you know, corey fs. I know, but you you 579 00:43:13,760 --> 00:43:15,480 all get into that thinging, Oh, it has to be a stateful thing, 580 00:43:15,559 --> 00:43:19,840 right. It actually does, which is a nice thing. But but 581 00:43:20,000 --> 00:43:23,159 again to the performance point of view, it's not a problem for ninety nine 582 00:43:23,199 --> 00:43:27,159 percent of the apps out there. If you're building a new being, you 583 00:43:27,320 --> 00:43:30,360 might not want to do it with Razor rather Blazer component, right, But 584 00:43:30,840 --> 00:43:35,800 if you don't have a million you visit us every day, that's probably not 585 00:43:35,960 --> 00:43:40,280 You probably want to prefer maintainability over a slight bombing performance, right. Well, 586 00:43:40,320 --> 00:43:44,000 you know, and this really was just a hiccup in the current version. 587 00:43:44,119 --> 00:43:45,840 Right, once it's done, I would have just set you know, 588 00:43:46,719 --> 00:43:51,960 render mode to auto, and by the time anybody gets down to flipping that, 589 00:43:52,280 --> 00:43:54,960 you know, sort of sending button. Everything would have been in web 590 00:43:54,960 --> 00:44:01,039 assembly anyway, So it's I just can't wait for it. Yeah, I 591 00:44:01,280 --> 00:44:07,199 agree, I think it's going to I suspect there will be a few more 592 00:44:07,480 --> 00:44:15,639 customers in my boutique as well now with the unit because it's actually b unit's 593 00:44:15,679 --> 00:44:20,400 even more ideal in this scenario because if you're just doing service side rendered stuff, 594 00:44:20,639 --> 00:44:22,960 you don't have a lot of JavaScript in that. And that's the biggest 595 00:44:22,000 --> 00:44:27,000 limitation of being Unit compared to something like play right is that it doesn't run 596 00:44:27,000 --> 00:44:29,960 in a browser. So all the JavaScript that you might be calling from your 597 00:44:29,960 --> 00:44:32,960 Blason components, well it stops sort of at the eye at yas run time 598 00:44:34,079 --> 00:44:37,320 interface, and then you have to intercept that and deal with that in b 599 00:44:37,480 --> 00:44:43,119 unit. So but if you're just generating HTML and making a service side application, 600 00:44:43,719 --> 00:44:45,559 you don't have you don't typically have a lot of JavaScript, if any 601 00:44:45,599 --> 00:44:49,159 at all, and then the unit is going to be a really excellent choice 602 00:44:49,159 --> 00:44:52,960 for testing your components. Yes, so you Gil, is there anything else 603 00:44:52,960 --> 00:44:57,760 that you want to talk about before we wrap it up? Yes, Well, 604 00:44:57,840 --> 00:45:01,719 how about we talk about maybe the most controversial new API and dot net 605 00:45:01,760 --> 00:45:05,960 eight, and it has even been backports to dot it two well dot net 606 00:45:05,960 --> 00:45:09,840 stand dot two point zero, and that would be the time provider API. 607 00:45:10,639 --> 00:45:16,800 So if you don't know what that is, it's basically an abstraction over the 608 00:45:16,920 --> 00:45:22,719 daytime offset get UTC now that we all use in all our code. And 609 00:45:22,199 --> 00:45:29,320 it also includes an abstraction over a timers so you know time that think things 610 00:45:29,320 --> 00:45:34,960 that happens con in reoccurrence. And it also allows you to do things with 611 00:45:36,519 --> 00:45:40,360 timestamps, right, So it's all about a single abstraction that encompass all of 612 00:45:40,400 --> 00:45:46,559 those things. And I thought it was a really interesting API, and that 613 00:45:46,719 --> 00:45:51,199 was designed during dot need eight. It actually started back all the way back 614 00:45:51,239 --> 00:45:55,519 in twenty twenty, and it's a proposal that I've gone i think to three 615 00:45:55,599 --> 00:45:59,719 hundred and fifty plus comments on githob and that issue related to it, and 616 00:46:00,000 --> 00:46:04,440 wow, it was super interesting because there was a lot of objections. So 617 00:46:05,119 --> 00:46:09,599 people didn't like the name a time provider. People thought maybe it should do 618 00:46:09,719 --> 00:46:15,960 less things. People were throwing you know, single responsibility principle and solid principles 619 00:46:16,000 --> 00:46:23,000 into the discussion and and I kind of understand why it like the objections, 620 00:46:24,840 --> 00:46:29,639 So for me, the interesting thing started was actually last year I needed a 621 00:46:29,719 --> 00:46:37,159 way to deal with timers and and day times in some product I was building 622 00:46:37,199 --> 00:46:40,320 for customer, and we wanted to basically be able to test that code as 623 00:46:40,360 --> 00:46:44,519 a fairly complex state machine kind of a thing that did things, you know, 624 00:46:45,079 --> 00:46:47,519 based on clocks and things like that. So I ended up building something 625 00:46:47,599 --> 00:46:52,199 quite similar to time Provider, And you know, as a typical is when 626 00:46:52,239 --> 00:46:54,639 you like to build them solves, you prout an ounswer to the world and 627 00:46:54,679 --> 00:47:00,400 push it to nugad and somebody points at the issue on GitHub and says, 628 00:47:00,440 --> 00:47:06,079 have you seen this? And I was like, oh, but it was 629 00:47:06,119 --> 00:47:09,599 fun. Actually I took a look and I could sort of immediately recognize why 630 00:47:09,599 --> 00:47:15,559 it was designed like that, because I, while my design was similar and 631 00:47:15,599 --> 00:47:20,280 it wasn't as you know, fought through as the one that the Microsoft team 632 00:47:20,320 --> 00:47:24,440 has proposed, but I could immediately recognize the design and why they came to 633 00:47:25,119 --> 00:47:30,239 it, why it came to be what it is, right, and you 634 00:47:30,280 --> 00:47:32,519 know, to sort of in defense of all the people that are that are 635 00:47:32,519 --> 00:47:36,480 sort of challenging the design in that gate tob issue, I would probably have 636 00:47:36,559 --> 00:47:38,440 been on their side as well if I hadn't actually spent a month trying to 637 00:47:38,480 --> 00:47:42,880 sort of go down that same path of myself. That's so that's such a 638 00:47:42,880 --> 00:47:46,599 great statement, like the more I knew, the more I appreciated what problem 639 00:47:46,639 --> 00:47:51,199 they were taking on. So I think why I think this is interesting is 640 00:47:51,239 --> 00:47:55,639 that if you are using time like a time stamp or a daytime officet or 641 00:47:55,679 --> 00:47:59,519 a timer in your application, which I think most of us are, you 642 00:47:59,639 --> 00:48:04,239 probably want to switch to using the time provide our API going forward, and 643 00:48:04,599 --> 00:48:07,239 it is available in seven and six and well all the way to back to 644 00:48:07,320 --> 00:48:13,920 dot need framework actually via the dot need standard compatibility. So the key thing 645 00:48:14,000 --> 00:48:17,719 about the time provider and why it isn't a bad design in my mind, 646 00:48:17,960 --> 00:48:23,239 is that it's not an abstraction over just time and date. So we've seen 647 00:48:23,559 --> 00:48:28,639 you probably have written some of those in your code. Basis the iClock interface 648 00:48:28,760 --> 00:48:31,199 that helps get you to see now or you to see now property on it 649 00:48:31,480 --> 00:48:37,400 that would allow you to replace the y clock with a fake or mock during 650 00:48:37,480 --> 00:48:43,159 testing. Right, what it is actually a time provider is not just that 651 00:48:43,280 --> 00:48:46,760 it's an abstraction over the flow of time or the progress of time. So 652 00:48:47,519 --> 00:48:53,079 to be able to abstract flow of time, you need to start with the 653 00:48:53,119 --> 00:49:00,519 concept of a timer, so can I quish you guys? So a new 654 00:49:00,760 --> 00:49:05,760 time general time timer provider in dot need eight and backport it back is called 655 00:49:05,800 --> 00:49:08,840 eye timer. And what is the promise? Not of that, but in 656 00:49:08,840 --> 00:49:12,920 general, what is the promise of a timer in dot net that it will 657 00:49:13,320 --> 00:49:19,719 fire and lapsed event or an event that you can handle on an interval exactly 658 00:49:20,199 --> 00:49:22,880 until you say stuff. And to be more precise, if you fox sayuple, 659 00:49:22,960 --> 00:49:28,360 create a new timer and say in one second, call my callback, 660 00:49:29,480 --> 00:49:34,800 the promise is that the run time will call that callback in one second or 661 00:49:34,880 --> 00:49:37,760 later. On This the process crisis, of course, and it never calls, 662 00:49:37,960 --> 00:49:42,880 but it's it's it's it's in one second or later. So if the 663 00:49:42,960 --> 00:49:46,280 operating system is doing stuff as busy and you can't get any process or time, 664 00:49:46,599 --> 00:49:49,800 well it might not be in one second, it might be later. 665 00:49:49,920 --> 00:49:55,760 You don't really know. There's no guarantees. So if imagine now that you 666 00:49:55,840 --> 00:50:00,800 create a timer and you want to control that timer, may be doing testing 667 00:50:01,119 --> 00:50:05,440 well to keep that promise. If that timer call back, for example, 668 00:50:05,679 --> 00:50:07,920 checks when the timer came back happens, it goes and checks what is the 669 00:50:07,960 --> 00:50:10,760 clock now? Because it might be relevant to it for it to know if 670 00:50:10,760 --> 00:50:14,280 it actually, you know, had to wait one second or it took a 671 00:50:14,320 --> 00:50:16,000 bit longer. Right, So it's quite typical. Actually you would if you 672 00:50:16,039 --> 00:50:19,920 start looking at your code, you will see it's not It's quite often that 673 00:50:20,280 --> 00:50:23,079 after a timer call back happens, you tend to check what the clock is, 674 00:50:23,159 --> 00:50:25,679 or you tend to check a stop watch how much time has elapsed. 675 00:50:25,719 --> 00:50:31,519 Right, So the promise, the reason why it's a sort of abstraction over 676 00:50:31,559 --> 00:50:36,239 the flow of time or the progress of time, is that when the timer 677 00:50:36,320 --> 00:50:39,119 happens, the clock that you would get when you call get you to see 678 00:50:39,159 --> 00:50:45,079 now should also match the time that has progressed. So that means that the 679 00:50:45,119 --> 00:50:52,000 flow of time is tied heavily, a coupled tightly coupled to what the time 680 00:50:52,079 --> 00:50:54,159 is as well. And that is why it makes sense to couple these things 681 00:50:54,199 --> 00:50:59,000 together, the concept of a timer and what the time is right now, 682 00:50:59,320 --> 00:51:04,280 or what the timestamp would give you in terms of if you call get time. 683 00:51:04,679 --> 00:51:07,079 So so for people not familiar with the time provider, there's a get 684 00:51:07,159 --> 00:51:10,400 uty see now method, there's a great timer method, and there's a good 685 00:51:10,440 --> 00:51:15,199 time stamp method, which is basically the fun foundational building blocks. And what 686 00:51:15,280 --> 00:51:22,119 the dot NED team then did, which was brilliantly uh from from insight. 687 00:51:22,199 --> 00:51:27,000 From that point of a brilliant insight they had was well, if I as 688 00:51:27,039 --> 00:51:30,599 long as I have a timer, I can now use time providers to control 689 00:51:30,639 --> 00:51:32,559 things like task dot delay because task do delays. Yes, the timer with 690 00:51:32,639 --> 00:51:37,159 a single recurrent I can use things. It can be compatible with things like 691 00:51:37,199 --> 00:51:42,280 the periodic timer type. It can be compatible with cancelation tokens that need to 692 00:51:42,320 --> 00:51:45,039 cancel after a certain amount of time. It can be compatible with the weight 693 00:51:45,159 --> 00:51:51,239 asan method. So all of those methods from dot NEIT eight and some of 694 00:51:51,239 --> 00:51:54,400 them are being backparders to the dot NED six and lower. Now take the 695 00:51:54,440 --> 00:51:59,719 time providers input as well, so that in your code, if you rely 696 00:51:59,880 --> 00:52:06,199 on on time US in some way, you can inject the time provider in 697 00:52:06,199 --> 00:52:09,320 your production code and use that and when you want to test that thing, 698 00:52:09,519 --> 00:52:15,679 you can now instead inject a fake time provider that will allow you to forward 699 00:52:15,719 --> 00:52:19,119 time immediately. Eagle, I think you just did it. Better know a 700 00:52:19,159 --> 00:52:30,360 framework. Absolutely no, I can't feel your shoes, you can, but 701 00:52:31,400 --> 00:52:37,719 totally get it. Your explanation was phenomenal. It's it's it's really interesting, 702 00:52:37,960 --> 00:52:44,920 and and so at advice for people listening though, is you can because time 703 00:52:44,960 --> 00:52:47,360 provider is an abstracts type. It's not an eye, it's not an interface. 704 00:52:47,360 --> 00:52:50,920 And many people who also advocating let's get get an interface, it's going 705 00:52:50,960 --> 00:52:53,480 to make it easier for us to you know, mark during testing, but 706 00:52:53,559 --> 00:52:57,719 it is. It is just an abstract class and you can actually easily mark 707 00:52:57,760 --> 00:53:00,000 that using EMO CU or in substitute or whatever you want your favorite thing to 708 00:53:00,039 --> 00:53:06,079 be. But I would highly advise not to do that because unless you're sort 709 00:53:06,119 --> 00:53:12,880 of in the most simple scenarios being able to uphold that I timer promise of 710 00:53:12,920 --> 00:53:15,679 when time moves forward for the time when the callback happens, time for all 711 00:53:15,719 --> 00:53:22,519 the other properties should also be up matching whatever has happened there, that is 712 00:53:22,800 --> 00:53:28,480 a fairly complex thing to configure in a general purpose market framework. And so 713 00:53:28,599 --> 00:53:34,320 Misoft has also built I guess, the official time fake time provider that you 714 00:53:34,320 --> 00:53:37,480 can use during testing, which has a method like advance or get you gc 715 00:53:37,679 --> 00:53:44,280 now that allows you to move time forward. And I was I had the 716 00:53:44,599 --> 00:53:50,079 sort of good experience of being able to contribute to that fake time provider with 717 00:53:50,280 --> 00:53:52,639 my you know what, I what I learned by building my own and and 718 00:53:52,840 --> 00:53:57,480 sort of various educases that needed to be handled there. So that was a 719 00:53:57,519 --> 00:54:02,440 fun, was a fun thing to to really do. So as a side 720 00:54:02,440 --> 00:54:07,280 gig from b unit as as well. Awesome. Yeah, so what's next? 721 00:54:07,400 --> 00:54:13,039 What's in your inbox? Well, I'll be heading to ndcposal and hopefully 722 00:54:13,280 --> 00:54:19,000 have a beer with you guys or if that's still a thing and doing at 723 00:54:19,079 --> 00:54:23,639 least at yes, oh well yeah, yeah, definitely, And well we 724 00:54:23,719 --> 00:54:27,960 will continue working on V two of b unit me and not my my comments, 725 00:54:28,719 --> 00:54:31,159 and I'll also I also have actually have also had the privilege of doing 726 00:54:31,159 --> 00:54:36,960 a talk at dot dot com and then I'll be at erdav in Sweden Melmbury 727 00:54:37,039 --> 00:54:42,280 as well in this year, so conference wise, a fairly full calendar. 728 00:54:42,920 --> 00:54:45,480 And okay, yeah you're you're here, there and everywhere, so all right, 729 00:54:45,599 --> 00:54:50,159 that's me so great. Well we'll see there, We'll see you in 730 00:54:50,199 --> 00:54:54,840 Porto absolutely, and we'll see you, dear listener next time on dot net 731 00:54:55,039 --> 00:55:21,599 rocks. Dot net Rocks is brought to you by Franklin's Net and produced by 732 00:55:21,679 --> 00:55:27,599 Pop Studios, a full service audio, video and post production facility located physically 733 00:55:27,639 --> 00:55:31,599 in New London, Connecticut, and of course in the cloud online at pwop 734 00:55:31,840 --> 00:55:36,719 dot com. Visit our website at d O T N E t R O 735 00:55:36,800 --> 00:55:42,079 c k S dot com for RSS feeds, downloads, mobile apps, comments, 736 00:55:42,400 --> 00:55:45,519 and access to the full archives going back to show number one, recorded 737 00:55:45,559 --> 00:55:50,480 in September two thousand and two. And make sure you check out our sponsors. 738 00:55:50,639 --> 00:55:53,159 They keep us in business. Now, go write some code, see 739 00:55:53,199 --> 00:56:04,440 you next time. You got middle and time, like mess home there, 740 00:56:04,480 --> 00:56:06,920 like Texas line resin Hall