1. Enhance CLI/CLR metadata for both templates and generics, including variadic.

2. Enhance CLI/CLR metadata for both the partial and full specialization of templates and generics.

3. Enhance CLI/CLR metadata for enhanced expressiveness with regard to template and generic parameter constraints. For example, Expression<Func<Type, bool>>[] GetGenericParameterConstraints().

4. Enhance type, method and extension method resolution and inference heuristics for compile-time, runtime and dynamic language scenarios.

5. Facilitate static interfaces or static interface methods as well as their use in generic parameter constraints and generic method implementations, e.g. T parsed = T.Parse(...).

6. Enhance the structure of builtin datatypes for generic programming.

7. Enhance CLI/CLR metadata for C++ concepts or similar expressiveness.

8. Enhance the C++, C++/CX, C++/CLI and C# programming languages for generic programming, for instance the expressiveness for simultaneous templates or generic types or methods which differ by parameter constraints.

9. Enhance IDL for generic programming.

10. Enhance COM for generic programming efficiently with JIT-optimized .NET programs. Possible is that methods like QueryInterface could exist with either a tree of GUID's parameter, a _Type parameter or another parameter. Additionally possible is that generic methods could receive generics-related parameters (vectors of trees of GUID's, _Type parameters, et cetera) before a this pointer. Additionally possible is that a set of COM interfaces could, as efficiently interoperable with the .NET runtime and JIT, facilitate returning specialized types, method pointers or delegates as per .NET's MakeGenericType() and MakeGenericMethod().

11. Enhance .NET and COM interoperability with regard to generic programming.

I am performing data driven unit testing and typically in the test results window, it displays the details like the one displayed on attachment(1).

I added the data conditions under the additional information section using : testContext.WriteLine().

I would like to display the data conditions in the "data row" column.

I saw a workaround by Laurent de Laprade in another forum (http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/is/vststest/thread/04dbb1c2-0dca-45d0-b98a-2bf0c1fd4f4c),
but it doesn't give the details of the implementation.

I would like Visual Studio Test interface have the ability to have custom test results interface as described.
That will make the data driven unit testing more flexible.

Thanks!

First of all: Thanks for supporting Git, it's not that we don't like TFS. It's more that Git fits our workflow better.

However I must ask the following:

Since version 0.8.0.0 the default in the .gitAttributes is * text = auto. Which means that every CRLF line ending will be converted to LF on commit, and vice versa upon checkout.

However this is not the way it should be in my opinion. It should be to the creator of the project to decide that. If he writes an application he should be given the choice. Some developers are not comfortable with the fact that a SCM system changes my source code when commits are done.

I think it is wrong to do auto, since that will use the core.autocrlf setting in the user's .gitconfig, which potentially causes merging issues.

I think the option should be either: turn it off, don't touch it. Commit as is, or commit as LF.

Thanks!

Today we put a todo comment and it appears in the todo task list. Many times that "todo" comments is optional and many times it become mandatory after a given date.

The suggestion is to put a date with todo comment. e.g.
//todo: 28/March/2013 : Replace this hard coded value by the value that we pull from database.

When a compilation triggered in IDE(Visual Studio), all such todo comments whose date has expired should be shown as error. To fix it either user can
1> postpone the date or
2> remove the comment or
3> mark the todo as complete. e.g. //todo: 28/March/2013 : Complete:
Replace this hard coded value by the value that we pull from database.

Guys, the feature is awesome! Really, really useful and needed improvement. But still require usability polishing.

1) Please keep current zoom level untouched when changing thread/frame context, just scroll to new location

2) Add "Zoom Here" feature

3) Hide unavailable items from the legend (keep it smaller)

4) Add an ability to collapse portions of run paths to hide irrelevant information. Probably many would want to at least collapse external code portions (hide API call chains).

5) Relationship categories need additional visualization. For example you can emphasize current thread stack frames. Another silly use case - I add a relationship between Func1 starting a new thread for Func2. Its important to know this was not direct stack call, rather cross thread call. Customizable graphical annotation would be great.

6) Can you provide graph filtering via thread flagged states? I mean I would want an ability to observe flagged thread call stacks on the plot and switch between threads/frames using Code Map window. Maybe show each thread's current call stack with different link arrow color?

PS: Thanks for you work, keep doing great additions.

I recently encountered a scenario in my TFS 2010 where I was getting latest of the project but the source files were not getting updated in my local system and every time TFS would give me a message that the source files are up-to-date . I tried everything deleting the whole folder from local, getting a specific version and it wouldn’t work.

The reason behind this was I didn’t have get permissions on the particular project folder in TFS. The message that my source files are up-to-date is mis-leading most of the times and can result in deployment of wrong build or code.

If there would have been a message box saying I don’t have get permission on the folder it would have solved my problem. I hope this issue is fixed in TFS 2012, if not it would be great to have a notification window in future version and this could actually prevent wrong code getting deployment.