There are new versions of C# every year.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csharp-version-history

It’s taking the piss out of Andrew Tate and the gullible guys that he’s convinced are superior to women.

It’s your responsibility to manage your finances, not theirs. It’s bullshit that they’d even consider any method of processing payments other than first come, first served.

I used to be a contractor and was sometimes bad at processing timesheets and invoices.

I had one occasion where I had (numbers made up because it was ages ago) £100 in the business bank account with no overdraft facility when a £150 payment went out.

The payment went out putting me overdrawn. They waited a day before deciding that I wasn’t allowed an overdraft and putting the money back.

During that 24 hour period a payment for £25 was processed and blocked because I was overdrawn.

They then charged me two fees for refusing the payments even though I had money for the second one in the bank.

I switched banks right after that.

Dying Light, the zombie parkour game was also good and had great movement mechanics.

I think that the main difference is that developers tend to test for success (i.e. does it work as defined) and that testers should also test that it doesn’t fail when a user gets hold of it.

I have worked with some excellent testers but I have also worked with a team that literally required us to write down the tests for them.

To be fair, that wasn’t their fault because they weren’t testers. They were finance people that had been seconded to testing because we didn’t have a real test team.

The current team is somewhere in between.

I wish our test team was like that. Ours would respond with something like “How would I test this?”

And they can play Brothers A Tale Of Two Sons.

This is very frustrating! I get so many requests from customers asking why we returned response code 400 when we gave a description of the problem in the response body.

There are so many people using WhatsApp that have to share their contacts with them to get a remotely usable UI that I’m certain that you’re correct.

I remember when our company split up and we had to give them the source code of some older versions that they still used. We couldn’t do that because the repo was corrupt meaning that we couldn’t access some older revisions. We had no problems using it day to day so nobody noticed which meant that all backups were also corrupted.

I loved Titanfall 1 so much. Titanfall 2’s campaign was absolutely fantastic but I didn’t get on with the multiplayer so much.

I actually think that was a “me problem” rather than a problem with the game. I think that I had just had enough of multiplayer shooters as I’ve not played one since.

I got stuck on it and then stopped playing for so long that I feel that I need to start again. I do intend to start it again if I ever get the time to put into it.

I felt that Portal 2’s difficulty curve was a little off but was perfect other than that. It was too easy for most of the game and then ramped up to what I consider to be a good difficulty level later on.

The two player portion was fantastic though.

It’s not the mechanism of branching that I prefer.

It’s the fact that Mercurial tags the commit with the name of the branch that it was committed to which makes it much easier to determine whether a commit is included in your current branch or not.

Also, Mercurial has a powerful revision search feature built in which I love (https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/hg.1.html#revisions).

It’s definitely up with Git in my opinion. I much prefer the branching in Mercurial.

It’s certainly very offensive to lump it in the same band as SVN and TFVC.

The only reason that we stopped using Mercurial is that Microsoft used Git in Azure DevOps. I still wish that they’d supported Mercurial instead of or as well as Git.

I really liked Mercurial too. It was much easier to follow branches to find out if a branch included a commit.

And worse than all of those options is Visual Sourcesafe.