{"QuestionId": 1597932, "AnswerCount": 1, "Tags": "", "CreationDate": "2009-10-20T23:40:33.563", "AcceptedAnswerId": "1597983", "Title": "Forcing lightbox/dhtml over flash", "Body": "

I have read a lot of posts about how you can force lightbox (or other dhtml things) above flash by modifying the embed-tag with wmode=\"opaque\". Just modifying the z-index of lightbox (or whatever else you want above the flash) simply is not enough.

\n\n

But what if you cannot control the embed-tag?

\n\n

I am working with a client that has a banner-system, where I do not have control of the embed tag...

\n\n

Is there really nothing I can do to force the html over the flash-item, that does not require manipulating the embedding of the flash?

\n", "Lable": "No"} {"QuestionId": 1985734, "AnswerCount": 4, "Tags": "", "CreationDate": "2009-12-31T14:59:49.797", "AcceptedAnswerId": "1985868", "Title": "How to implement a winform dialog in Delphi without IDE?", "Body": "

I don't have the Delphi IDE installed. Can I still design forms?

\n", "Lable": "No"} {"QuestionId": 2216392, "AnswerCount": 7, "Tags": "", "CreationDate": "2010-02-07T08:18:36.810", "AcceptedAnswerId": "2216807", "Title": "How to write unit test and not get bored in development of FOSS project?", "Body": "

I'm developing cross-platform project that would support :

\n\n
    \n
  • Four C++ compilers - GCC, MSVC, SunStudio, Intel,
    • \n
  • Five Operating Systems: Linux, OpenSolaris, FreeBSD, Windows, Mac OS X.
    • \n
\n\n

I totally understand that without proper unit testing there is no chance to perform proper QA on all these platforms.

\n\n

However, as you all know writing unit tests is extremely boring and slow down development process (because it is boring and development of FOSS software shouldn't be such)

\n\n

How do you manage to write good unit-testing code and not stop writing code.

\n\n

If you at least get salary for this, you can say - at least I get something for this, but if you don't, this is much harder!

\n\n

Clarification:

\n\n

I understand that TDD should be the key, but TDD has following very strict restrictions:

\n\n
    \n
  1. You have exact specifications.
    2. \n
  2. You have fully defined API.
    3. \n
\n\n

This is true for project that is developed in customer-provider style, but it can't be done for project that evolves.

\n\n

Sometimes to decide what feature do I need, I have to create something and understand if it works well, if API is suitable and helps me or it is ugly and does not satisfy me.

\n\n

I see the development process more like evolution, less development according to specifications. Because when I begin implementing some feature, sometimes I do not know if\nit would work well and what model would it use.

\n\n

This is quite different style of development that contradicts TDD.

\n\n

On the other hand, support of wide range of systems requires unit tests to make sure that\nexisting code works on various platform and if I want to support new one I only need to\ncompile the code and run tests.

\n", "Lable": "No"}