the configSource attribute is a great feature of .NET, but it has a few drawbacks. It would be nice if you could enhance configSource to make it more useful:

Allow configSource to "override" an element that contains content. Currently, the framework will throw an error if the element contains content.

This is helpful when multiple developers are working on a project and they all have their own settings they need to apply to their app/web.config. We can simply have our own file that we do not check into version control that overrides the entry specified.

If there is a security problem with this, then add another attribute "allowConfigSourceOverride" or something. If there is a compatibility issue, then introduce a new attribute that does this.

Given the furor caused by dropping vdProj in VS2012, why have you not done damage control by publicizing the vdProj to WIX converter that is available from a 3rd Party (costs) and also the WIX template that is available free?
People need to know there is a path forward not just blind acceptance of Installshield lite.

The converter allows currently deployed projects to be moved forward to VS2012 and be deployed immediately.
The template allows you to generate your own WIX project so you can practice and compare to the converted project. So you are ready when a green fields project is started.

I had no idea what WIX was a few days ago and had convinced myself to stay on VS2010. The next renewal of our MSDN subscription needless to say was looking doubtful.

I am still annoyed that it is just chance that I ferreted around on this forum (thanks to WiX posters) and the net, thus becoming aware of the possibilities.

The apparently cavalier approach taken by Microsoft on this issue is disappointing.
If it is a financially tainted decision to present Installshield as the only option, then shame on you.
Your development community deserves better.

Hi,

There should be option to save the regular expression by name in VS 2012 find and replace window, so that we can save any regular expression and use it while next time. E.g. to remove extra space we can save the (^(?([^\r\n])\s)*\r?$\r?\n) regular expression as “Remove extra lines”, and this will be appear under the standard regular expression list under “Custom Expressions” menu, So that we can use this saved expression next time.

We can also provide manage custom search menu where we can provide the functionality to add edit, delete existing custom (User defined) saved regular expression.

Anand More,
C3IT Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

My idea is to implement a 'ClassCast'. In scenario's where you want to pick the algorithm to use based on the situation, changing the class instead of the data can add a lot of flexibility to the language. The basic idea is that if you have Foo : IBase and Bar : IBase and both Foo and Bar have the same field layout, you can do a 'var bar = classcast<Bar>(myFoo);' on an instance of an object that changes the type, but keeps the data in-tact. Because the layout has to be identical, you can do a compile-time check on the layout.

The only way to implement this at this moment is to copy all data from Foo to Bar or introduce a separate data object, which both introduce so much overhead that in most cases developers don't even consider changing the algorithm while executing it (the algorithm is usually picked before executing it). Note that this is a paradigm change from OO programming; a lot of common-place design patterns can be changed to benefit from a class-cast (f.ex. proxies, commands, lazy instantiation, etc).

When checking out excel and access files only one person can check out a file at a time.

When using access databases on a LAN drive multiple people can edit a single table at a time without an issue. When using a shared excel document on a LAN drive multiple people can edit a single tab at a time without an issue. These features are already there. Why are they removed when checked out by TFS which is supposed to make merging and versioning of files easier?

For automated testing projects excel and access files are used almost as often as actual code. Note being able to have multiple people work on and merge them makes it much ****** to get work done.

This idea is in contrast to http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/suggestions/2723735-make-net-4-5-work-on-any-os-that-supports-4-0 and http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/suggestions/3116039-support-xp-for-4-5-until-the-end-of-xp-support-, which I do not support. It is parallel to http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/suggestions/3095632-make-vs2012-not-hide-net-4-0-bugs-when-targeting-, but I think is the converse of it.

Consider a developer who must support customers running Windows XP, and who also is unable or unwilling to debug their applications on a machine separate from their main development machine. Such a developer may feel that he cannot upgrade to Visual Studio 2012, since that installation would replace the .NET 4.0 assemblies on the developer machine, making it impossible for the developer to encounter the fixed .NET 4.0 bugs.

Unfortunately, it is not impossible for their customers to encounter the fixed bugs!

Microsoft should make available a service pack for Windows XP and all other operating system versions which currently support .NET 4.0. This service pack should fix all of the bugs currently fixed in .NET 4.5.

Furthermore, as Microsoft produces service packs for .NET 4.5, there should be a corresponding service pack for .NET 4.0 systems, again targeting those .NET 4.0 bugs fixed by the service pack.

Some of the developers who are unwilling to upgrade to Visual Studio 2012 may be willing to do so if they can require their customers to install a service pack.

This may mitigate some of the ill will and confusion caused by the in-place upgrade of .NET 4.0 by .NET 4.5.