KDiff3 is pretty good at doing this, but its code view isn't as good. What they should do is allow you to define more than one tool for each filetype, so when I do the comparison I can decide whether I want to use one tool or another.
1,137 votes71 comments · Azure DevOps (formerly Visual Studio Team Services) » Version Control (Git/TFVC) · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
We have a lot of investment taking place on our code review platform that will enable iterative code reviews, and we will initially bring that functionality to Git (via pull requests). Improving iterative code reviews for TFVC is still on our backlog, but it is not in our 6 month plan, so we are resetting the status.
315 votes49 comments · Azure DevOps (formerly Visual Studio Team Services) » Work Item Tracking · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
As a workaround, there is a free solution on the marketplace available: TFS Aggregator to do exactly what you are asking for.
Please give them a spin.
4 votes1 comment · Azure DevOps (formerly Visual Studio Team Services) » Version Control (Git/TFVC) · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →john.ludlow.uk shared this idea ·
A XAML-like approach would be great, I think. You could have a designer-like pane which allows you to quickly select common options in a GUI, and a code pane which allows you to make more advanced changes with full intellisense.
The fact that the XAML editor is already works this way and is reasonably mature plays into this nicely.
IMHO, the most important parts of this are
a) making it easy to extend your build logic and see how your build has been extended (not hiding that stuff behind a pointless and restrictive Project Properties dialog)
b) making it easy to do the right things when you are moving things around (e.g dragging a class to a different project should result in a move operation in your source control, as well as a prompt to update the namespace)
@Eric: Because I don't think that's what IntelliTest is *for*.
While it's probably useful for IntelliTest to test lots of things and there may be some overlap, it's a lot more interesting to have it tell me about things my hand-coded tests are *not* testing, and have it help me fix them, rather than trying to automagically fill the gap itself
I think this would make IntelliTest a lot more useful. If its purpose is to highlight gaps in my coverage and suggest test cases I never thought of, then that's so much more useful if it's not reporting things I am already testing.
I think it would also make it easier to deal with the generated code. I'd like to take the test code it generates, reformat it to make it more readable, and add it as a new test, in the same way as if I had written it manually.
Thank you for using Visual Studio and for your commitment to improving it. We are currently evaluating whether we will be able to include this into the product