Related
So, as a developer, you probably write a small amount of code, and then test it to see if it works before you move onto something else. This is because you don't want to write thousands of lines of code and find that doesn't work. Stating the obvious here. So myself and a few others(soon) are working on a php application where I want to implement some form of version control, most likely subversion since we all know how to use it, somewhat. My question is how do I implement this writing process stated above with writing, and then testing.
My idea was to set each developer up with their own workstation including a web server, and php/mysql etc.. so they can checkout the repo and then test on their own computer as they are writing. I'm really looking for some direction here with that. Currently we aren't using version control as there are only two developers and we simply use a shared directory thats located on the web server. When we make changes, we can view them immediately on the web server. Any input on this? Whats the best way to handle multiple developers when in the development process of an application?
There are a number of different ways to approach this:
1) Each developer has a whole web server stack on their machine, deploys to it, and tests there, then checks in working code.
2) There's a separate test/integration machine. Developers take turns deploying to that machine, do their testing, then check in working code.
3) You use branches in Subversion. Development happens on a branch, and it's OK to check in broken code on a branch. There may be a branch for each developer, or a branch for each feature, or whatever. The developer checks in code onto the branch, checks it out on the separate test machine, tests, fixes, then checks the working code onto the trunk.
Which one is right depends on how big your team is and how complex your server setup is. Choose one that makes sense for your team.
You'd need to start thinking about a build server, using a piece of software like cruisecontrol which monitors for source code changes and is then able to build, run tests and deploy you're code (ed: in a manner as close to live like as possible!).
I'd highly recommend integrating a build server as soon as possible, otherwise you'll find out down the line that automating something that somebody has been doing manually for the last 5 years is somewhat difficult :)
You might also find that each dev ends up with their own methods of deployment and custom environment, it'd be far better to centralise this in one place and then have other devs use the scripts and from that deployment if they want to run the same process locally.
Configuration management is something you want to get right to begin with!
One important thing with CI: You only want to push working code to the central repository. This requires a private repository for each developer, but has the advantage that you never break trunk.
Git and Mercurial are the most obvious tools, and can work with svn as a central repository.
To prevent merge conflicts, there's one trick to prevent pushing broken code to central: always pull/merge from central first, and frequently, prior to pushing:
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FeatureBranch.html
And have a look at our sponsor: http://hginit.com for examples of workflows with multiple developers.
Where can I find the code for creating an online rebol console like the one here ?
http://tryrebol.esperconsultancy.nl/
Update: for the sandbox system on the server, can't Rebol manage it itself with some security wrapper and its security options ?
As for console itself, I don't know Ruby so I don't want to use TryRuby and why would I need it ? Can't I mimic Rebol console itself by "remoting" it somehow ? Why RT or Esper Consultancy can't make an opensource version ? There's no value in keeping it closed source. Rebol needs to prove it's more open than in the past.
In my opinion, you should aim higher with something like the already open-sourced Try Ruby. You'd type in expressions and it would guide you. Their showcase site is at tryruby.org and is fairly slick.
I modified TryRuby to work with Rebol and it wound up looking like this:
But I'm not going to run it on my server because I didn't want to belabor the necessary sandboxing/etc. or protections against someone running an infinite loop. I can give you what I've got so far if you want it.
I started a tutorial script here that no one seemed interested in helping me with, so I wandered off to other tasks:
http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Interactive_tutorial_script
I'm not sure what exactly you want. You mention you want a remote REBOL shell instead of a tutoring setup, but that's what the Try REBOL site is. There are several reasons it's not open source:
It's in heavy development. I'm currently changing the code regularly.
So it's not in a release state. Preparing it for release, documenting and publishing it would take a lot of extra work, as with most projects.
It's written in my CMS that's also in heavy development. Even if the Try REBOL site were open source, it wouldn't run. The CMS is not planned to be open sourced soon.
It's not meant as a generic REBOL remoting tool, but as a one-off demo site. If that site is running, what's the use of more of them?
As others have answered, there are many generic solutions for remoting that you could use. Also, most parts of the Try REBOL site are readily available as open source:
Syllable Server, produced and published by us.
The Cheyenne web server.
The HTML source of the web client can be viewed, including my simple JavaScript command service bus.
Syllable Server is an essential part of the site, as the sandboxing is not done with REBOL facilities (except some extra limits in the R3 backend), but with standard Linux facilities.
A truly air tight (do I mean silica tight?) sandbox is close to impossible with R2.
R3 (still in alpha) is looking a lot more promising. The deep technical discussions in flight right now (see Cure code and AltME/REBOL3 Proposals regarding unwinds and protect and even occasionally mentioning sandboxes should lead to an excellent sandbox capability.
Right now, the big advance R3 has that makes Kaj's tryREBOL possible is R3's secure policy settings which make it possible (with some careful wrapper code) to construct an alpha/demo sandbox.
To answer your precise question("where can I find code...", you could try asking Kaj for his :)
I'm new to StackOverflow. I'm not sure if this is going to end up as a reply to your comment, or as a new answer.
The somewhat common idea that any project can be open sourced and contributed to by others is a naive view. In the case of my Try REBOL site, it makes no sense. It's not just in heavy development; it's written in a CMS that's also in heavy development. Basically noone could contribute to it at this point, because I'm the only one who knows my CMS. Or in any case its newest features, which I develop by developing Try REBOL, and other example sites. So developing Try REBOL means developing the CMS at the same time, and by definition, I'm the only one who can do that.
More generally, my projects are bleeding edge, innovative technology with a strong vision. The vision is mine, and to teach it to others, I have to build it to show how I intended it to work. So there's a catch 22: to enable others to contribute, I have to finish my projects first, because people typically don't understand them until I show them how they work.
There certainly are other projects where mass contribution makes more sense. Still, only the top projects get the contributors. We found that out the hard way. We created Syllable Desktop and Syllable Server with surrounding infrastructure for contributions. These are fairly classic, well understood operating systems that many people could work on in parallel. However, despite years of begging, we get very few contributions.
So, if you feel a burning need to contribute to our projects, please pick one of the many tasks in Syllable to execute. :-)
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
This may be too opinionated, but what I'm trying to understand why some companies mandate the use of an IDE. In college all I used was vim, although on occasion I used netbeans for use with Java. Netbeans was nice because it did code completion and had some nice templates for configuration of some the stranger services I tried.
Now that my friends are working at big companies, they are telling me that they are required to use eclipse or visual studio, but no one can seem to give a good reason why.
Can someone explain to me why companies force their developers into restricted development environments?
IDE vs Notepad
I've written code in lots of different IDEs and occasionally in notepad. You may totally love notepad, but at some point using notepad is industrial sabatoge, kind of like hiring a gardener who shows up with a spoon instead of a shovel and a thimble instead of a bucket. (But who knows, maybe the most beautiful garden can be made with a spoon and a thimble, but it sure isn't going to be fast)
IDE A vs IDE B
Some IDE's have team and management features. For example, in Visual Studio, there is a screen that finds all the TODO: lines in source code. This allows for a different workflow that may or may not exist in other IDEs. Ditto for source control integration, static code analysis, etc.
IDE old vs IDE new
Big organizations are slow to change. Not really a programming related problem.
Because companies standardize on tools, as well as platforms--if your choice of tools is in conflict with their standards then you can either object, silently use your tool, or use the required tool.
All three are valid; provided your alternative doesn't cause other team-members issues, and provided that you have a valid argument to make (not just whining).
For example: I develop in Visual Studio 2008 as required by work, but use VS2010 whenever possible. Solutions/Projects saved in 2010 can't be opened in 2008 without some manual finagling--so I can't use the tool of my choice because it would cause friction for other developers. We also are required to produce code according to documented standards which are enforced by Resharper and StyleCop--if I switched to a different IDE I would have more difficulty in ensuring the code I produced was up to our standards.
If you're good at using vim and know everything there is to know about it, then there is no reason to switch to an IDE. That said, many IDEs will have lots of useful features that come standard. Maintaining an install of Eclipse is a lot easier than maintaining an install of Vim with plugins X, Y, and Z in order to simulate the same capabilities.
IntelliSense is incredibly useful. I realize that vim has all sorts of auto-completion, but it doesn't give me a list of overloaded methods and argument hints.
Multiple panes to provide class hierarchies/outlines, API reference, console output, etc.. can provide you more information than is available in just multiple text buffers. Yes, I know that you have the quickfix window, but sometimes it's just not enough.
Compile as you type. This doesn't quite work for C++, but is really nice in Java and C#. As soon as I type a line, I'll get feedback on correctness. I'm not arrogant enough as a programmer to assume that I never make syntax errors, or type errors, or forget to have a try/catch, or... (the list goes on)
And the most important of all...
Integrated Debuggers. Double click to set a break point, right click on a variable to set a watch, have a separate pane for changing values on the fly, detailed exception handling all within the same program.
I love vim, and will use it for simple things, or when I want to run a macro, or am stuck with C code. But for more complicated tasks, I'll fire up Eclipse/Visual Studio/Wing.
Sufficiently bad developers are greatly assisted by the adoption of an appropriately-configured IDE. It takes a lot of extra time to help each snowflake through his own custom development environment; if somebody doesn't have the chops to maintain their own dev environment independently, it gets very expensive to support them.
Corporate IT shops are very bad at telling the difference between "sufficiently bad" and "sufficiently good" developers. So they just make everybody do the same thing.
Disclaimer: I use Eclipse and love it.
Theoretically, it would decrease the amount of training needed to get an unexperienced developer to deal with the problems of a particular IDE if all the team uses that one tool.
Anyway, most of the top companies don't force developers to use some specific IDE for now...
I agree with this last way of thinking: You don't need your team to master one particular tool, having team knowledge in many will improve your likelyhood to know better ways to solve a particular roblems.
For me, I use Visual Studio with ReSharper. I cannot be nearly as productive (in .Net) without it. At least, nobody has ever shown me a way to be more productive... Vim, that is great. You can run Vim inside of Visual Studio + R# and get all the niceties that the IDE provides, like code navigation, code completion and refactoring.
Same reason we use a hammer to nail things instead of rocks. It's a better tool.
Now if you are asking why you are forced to use a specific IDE over another, well that's a different topic.
A place that uses .NET will use Visual Studio 99% of the time, at least that's what I've seen. And I haven't found anything out there that is better than Visual Studio for writing .NET applications.
There is much more than code completion into an IDE:
debugging facilities
XML validation
management of servers
automatic imports
syntax checking
graphical modeling
support of popular technologies like Hibernate, TestNG or Spring
integration of source code management
indexing of file names for quick opening
follow "links" in code: implementation, declaration
integration of source code control
searching for classes or methods
code formatting
process monitoring
one click/button debugging/building
method/variable/field/... renaming
etc
Nothing to do with incompetence from the programmers. Anybody would be A LOT less productive using vim for developing a big Java EE application.
How big were you projects at college? A couple of classes in a couple of files? Or rather a couple of hundreds of classes in a couple of hundreds of files?
Today I had the "honor" of looking at a file in a rather large project where the programmer opted to use vi (yes vi, not vim) and a handcrafted commandline compiler call (no make). The file contained on function spanning about 900 lines with a series of if-else-if-else-constructs (because that way you have all your code in one place!!!!!!). Macho-Programmer at his finest.
OK there are very good reasons for enforcing a particular toolset within a production environment:
Companies want to standardize everything so that if an employee leaves they can replace that person with minimal effort.
Commercial IDEs provide a complex enough environment to support a single interface for a variety of development needs and supporting varying levels of code access. For instance the same file-set could be used by the developer, by non-programmers (graphics designers etc.) and document writers.
Combine this with integrated version control and code management without the need of someone learning a particular version control system, all of a sudden IDEs start to look nicer and nicer.
It also streamlines maintenance of build systems in a multi-homed environment.
IDEs are easier to give tutorials to via phone or video, and probably come with those.
etc. etc. and so forth.
The business decision making behind enforcing a standardized environment goes beyond the preference of a single programmer or for that matter perhaps the understanding of the programming team.
Using an IDE helps an employee to work with huge projects with minimal training. Learn a few key combos - and you will comfortably work with multi-thousand-file project in Eclipse, IDE handles most of the work for you under the hood. Just imagine how many years of learning it takes to feel comfortable developing such projects in Vim.
Besides, with an IDE it is easy to support common coding standards across the entire team: just set a couple of options and an IDE will force you to write code in a standardized way.
Plus, IDE gives a few added bonuses like refactoring tools (especially good in Eclipse), integrated debugging (especially good in Visual Studio), intellisense, integrated unit tests, integrated version control system etc.
The advantages and disadvantages of using an IDE also greatly depends on the development platform. Some platforms are geared towards the use of IDEs, others are not. As a rule of thumb, you should use IDE for Java and .Net development (unless you're extremely advanced); you should not use IDE for ruby, python, perl, LISP etc development (unless you're extremely new to these languages and associated frameworks).
Features like these aren't available in vim:
Refactoring
Integrated debuggers
Knowing your code base as an integrated whole (e.g., change a Java class name; have the change reflected in a Spring XML configuration)
Being able to run an app server right inside the IDE so you can deploy and debug your code.
Those are the reasons I choose IntelliJ. I could go back to sticks and bones, but I'd be a lot less productive.
As said before, the question about using an IDE is basicaly productivity. However there is some questions that should be considered by the company when choosing a specific IDE. that includes:
Company culture
Standardize use of tool, making it accessible for all developers. That easies training, reduces costs and improve the speed of learn curve.
Requirements from specific contract. As an example, there are some development packages that are fully supported (i.e. plugins) by some IDE and not by anothers. So, if you are working with the support contract you will want to work with the supported IDE. A concrete example is when you are working with not common OS like VxWorks, where you can work with the Workbench (that truely is an eclipse with lot of specific plugins for eclipse).
Company policy (and also I include the restriction on company budget)
Documentation relating to the IDE
Comunity (A strong one can contribute and develop still further the IDE and help you with your doubts)
Installed Base (no one wants to be the only human to use that IDE on the world)
Support from manufacturers (an IDE about to be discontinued probably will not be a good option)
Requirements from the IDE. (i.e. cross platform or hardware requirements that are incompatible with some machines of the company)
Of course, there is a lot more. However, I think that this short list help you to see that there is some decisions that are not so easy to take, when we are talking about money and some greater companies.
And if you start using your own IDE think what mess will be when another developer start doing maintenance into your code. How do you think will the application be signed at the version manager ? Now think about a company with 30+ developers each using its own IDE (each with its own configuration files, version and all that stuff)...
http://xkcd.com/378/
Real programmers use the best tools available to get the job done. Some companies have licenses for tools but there's nothing saying you can't license/use another IDE and then just have the other IDE open to copy/paste what you've done in your local IDE.
The question is a bit open-ended, perhaps you can make it community wiki...
As you point out, the IDE can be useful, or even a must have, for some operations, like refactoring, or even project exploring: I use Eclipse at my work, on Java projects, and I find very useful to get a list of all occurrences of the usage of a public method or a class in a project. Likely, I appreciate to be able to rename it from where it is defined, and having all these occurrences automatically updated.
The fact I have the JavaDoc displayed when hovering over a name is very nice too. Like autocompletion, jump to a class name, etc.
And, of course, debugging facilities...
Now, usage of Eclipse isn't mandatory in our shop! Some years ago, some people used the Delphi IDE (forgot its name), I tried NetBeans, etc. But I think we de facto standardized on Eclipse, but it was a natural evolution rather than a company policy. And we often just open files in a text editor when we need a quick update...
The company I work for is building a managed force.com application as an integration with the service we provide.
We are having issues working concurrently on the same set of files due to the shoddy tooling that is provided with the force.com Eclipse plugin. If 2 developers are working on the same file, one is given a message that he can't save -- once he merges he has to manually force the plugin to push his changes to the server along with clicking 2 'Are you really sure' messages.
Basically, the tooling does a shoddy job of merging in changes and forces minutes of work every time the developer wants to save if another person has modified the file he's working on.
We're currently working around this by basically 'locking' individual files by letting co-workers know who is editing a file.
It feels like there has got to be a better way in this day and age. Does anyone know of a different toolset we could use, process we could change, or anything we can do to make this easier?
When working with the Force.com platform my current organisation has found a number of different approaches can work depending on the situation. We all use the Eclipse Force.com plugin without issues and have found the following set ups to work well.
We have a centralised version control system that we deploy from using a series of ant commands to a developer org instance. We then depending on the scope of the work either separate it off into chunks with each developer having their own development org and merging the changes and testing them regularly, or working in a single development org together (which if you have 2 developers should be no major problem) allowing you to have almost instant integration.
If you are both trying to work on the same file you should be pair programming anyway, but if working on two components of a similar system together, sharing the same org can allow you to develop in a fast and flexible manner by creating the skeleton of the system you wish to use and then individually fleshing out the detail.
I have used both methods extensively and a I say, work really well depending on the situation.
Each developer could work in separate development sandbox (if you have enterprise edition, I think 10 sandboxes with full config & limited amount of data are included in the fee?). From time to time you would merge your changes (diff tool from any version control system should be enough) and test them in integration environment. The chain development->integration->system test->Q&A-> production can be useful for other reasons too.
Separate trick to consider can be used if for example 2 guys work on the same trigger. I've learned it on the "DEV 401" course for Developers.
Move all your logic to classes. Seriously. They will be simpler to unit test too.
Add custom field (multi-select picklist) to User object. Values should be equal to each separate feature people are working on. It can hold up to 500 values so you should be safe.
For User account of developer 1 set "feature1" in the picklist. Set "feature2" for the other guy.
In the trigger write an if that tests presence of each picklist value and enters or leaves the call to relevant class. This wastes 1 query but you are sure that only the code you want will be called.
Each developer keeps on working in his own class file.
For integration test of both features simply set the multiselect to contain both features.
I found this trick especially useful when other guy's code turned out to be non-optimal and ate too many resources. I've just disabled his feature on my user account and kept on working.
This trick can be to some extend applied to Visualforce pages too (if you can divide them into components).
If you don't want to waste query - use some logic like "user's first name contains X" ;)
We had/have the exact same problem, we have a team of 10 Devs working on a force.com application that has loads of apex classes (>300) and VF pages (>300).
We started using Eclipse plugin but found it:
too slow working outside of the USA each time a save is called takes > 5 sections
to many merge issues with a team of 10 developers
Next we tried developing in our own individual sandboxes and then merging code. This is ok for a small project but when you have lots of files and need changes to be pushed between sandboxes it becomes impossible to manage as the only thing worse then force.com development tooling, is force.coms deployment/build tools. No automation its all manual. No easy way to move data between sandboxes either.
Our third approach was to just edit all our VF pages and Apex code in the browser. (not using their embedded editor that shows up in the bottom half of the page because that is buggy and slow) but just using the regular Editor under setup > develop > Apex classes. This worked ok. To supplement this we also had a scheduled job that would download all our code and save it into our SVN repository. We also built a tool that allow us to click a folder on our desktop and zip its contents and deploy it as static resources for us.
However this approach still has its short comings, i.e. it is slow and painful to develop in the cloud, their (salesforce) idea of Development As a Service is crazy. Also we have no real SCM we only have it acting as backups.
Bottom line is force.com is a CRM and not a Development platform, if you can? run, flee, get away from it as fast as you can. Using it for anything apart from a CRM is more trouble then it is worth. Even their Slogan "No Software" makes me laugh everytime
I'm not familiar with force.com, but couldn't you use source control and pull all the files down from force.com into your repository. Then you could all do your work, and merge your changes back into the mainline. Then whenever it's necessary push the mainline up to force.com?
Take a look at the "Development Lifecycle Guide: Enterprise Development on the Force.com Platform". You can find it on developer.force.com's documentation page.
You might want to consider working on separate static resources and pages and then just being careful when editing objects, classes etc.. If most of your development happens on client side code (page, staticresource, lightning component/app) you might be interested in this project: https://github.com/bvellacott/salesforce-build . In any case I strongly suggest using version control. If not on a server then at least locally on your machine, in case your peers overwrite your work.
I am rather new to Sitecore and would like to know a bit more about the regular approach to a new project. I'm therefore willing to listen and try out some of the experienced Sitecore developers solutions. I have alot of questions, i won't ask them all. I am just very curious to the approach other people have.
What would be the best approach to start a Sitecore project?
How would you set your project up?
What will be your approach looking at the recycling of code in future projects?
In short: What experiences do YOU have (if you have worked with or are working on Sitecore projects) and how would you recommend other people to work with Sitecore.
Right now we are busy on building Sitecore blocks that we can just recycle in other projects but i know for sure there are 1001 handy tips and tricks out there. I hope we have some Sitecore pro's # stackoverflow that could help a bit.
Here is some general setup info, based on how we do things.
Subversion
This is not Sitecore specific but we set up our repository like this
branches - This is used for working on big updates to the site that may take a while. Say for example I wanted to update how all of the sidebars on the site worked, and this was going to take a few weeks to complete. What we do is create a new branch, and set up another sitecore instance for this dev branch and do what we need to do. When it is complete we merge it back into the trunk for testing and deployment.
tags - This is used for keeping a copy of code that will never be merged back into the trunk (that is the difference between this and branches), so for example when we deploy an update to a site we can create a tag of said code so we can go back to it if necessary.
trunk - The active code, anything checked in here should always be deployable.
The Trunk
This is where we are actively developing/fixing bugs, depending on which part of the project that we are on. We set it up something like this (as an example the project is called TheProject)
We keep our solution file at the root of this folder, this will reference the various libraries in the src folder as well as the web project in the website folder.
docs - A place to put documentation about the site. I strongly suggest that as you complete features/sections you write up a little guide about any special knowledge needed for it to work. So say I am working on a featured content box on a landing page. This box will automatically pull some content unless it is explicitly overridden. What I do when I complete something like this is I write a guide for the customer, using a lot of screenshots. I send the guide to the customer as well as put it in the docs folder. This both helps the customer train their staff, as well as helps new developers come up to speed with how things are done.
lib - This is where we keep any DLLs we are going to need to reference in our projects.
test - A place to put unit tests.
src - This is where we keep our project specific library code. So in here we would have a folder called TheProject.Library, and in there would be the visual studio project for said
web/Website - This is where we have Sitecore installed and is the root of the site. In here we have a project called something along the lines of TheProject.Web. In the project we add all of the general stuff like the web.config/layouts folder and so on.
General Sitecore Code Library
One the best things you can do is from the start setup a general Sitecore library that can be added onto over time. Then when you write any code for a project that is not only applicable to the project, you can add it there. It may seem obvious, but this will really help in the long term. You will end up with much more solid code, see link text .
So when we are done with all this we have something like this as a solution/project structure
TheProject (The solution)
TheProject.Library
TheProject.Web
MyCompany.SitecoreLibrary (our general sitecore library)
Tools
This is another general thing, but I find it can really help speed up Sitecore development. If you find yourself doing something over and over in Sitecore, using API write a tool to do it for you. This not only helps with solving whatever problem you are tackling, but also helps to get you more familiar with the API.
Resharper
This is more of a general .NET development suggestion, use Resharper(http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/index.html). I am sort of a a Resharper fan boy, it makes so many things with development easier and quicker. In my mind the biggest advantage though is how easy it makes refactoring code, which is really important to do over time to keep things clean and understandable.
I hope some of this helps.
Gabe
This is, as you said, quite a big question. Here are some of my thoughts:
Developing Environment
First of all when I start a new project I install Sitecore on my developing environment and I make sure everything works. Either during installation or after I place the databases on a separate SQL-server and change the connectionstring accordingly.
I open up Visual Studio and create a solution and include the files needed. I create some kind of HelloWorld rendering and try building the solution so that I can verify that everything is working as it should.
When everything is up and running I create a zip-file of the whole solution, including the data-folder. Now it is time to add this to some kind of version control system, in my case Subversion.
I add the zip-file to subversion and also add all files that I think will be changed during the project, usually I tell subversion to ignore the sitecore folder, this speeds up performance drastically when checking in files.
After I perform a commit-action the other team members of my project can check out the code and start developing (after unzipping the zip-file, off-course)
We all work towards the same database although this goes against Sitecore recommendations, we havent had any problems with this approach however items in GUI created/changed by one developer take some time before it is created/changed for all the others.
We could off-course develop several different projects using the same Sitecore installation but since almost all customers use different versions of Sitecore we have found this approach a bit cumbersome.
Often we set up an automated build-server but this is a whole other issue.
Reusable code and renderings
I would like to say that we create neat packages based on the same codebase that gets reused between projects but unfortunately we are not there yet. Today it is a lot of cut and pasting between solutions.
Uploading code to customer
This is done via sitecore packages, normally with some kind of dynamic selection for what files to include, say all ascx-files in a specific folder changed the last 5 days.
There you have it.
Take a look at this series.
Especially the component architecture part have increased our level of reusability.
When you create your Visual Studio's project in Sitecore's web root folder and you will keep all Sitecore's dlls files inside bin directory, don't forget to add to project's references all these files:
bin\ComponentArt.Web.UI.dll
bin\HtmlAgilityPack.dll
bin\ITHit.WebDAV.Server.dll
bin\Lucene.Net.dll
bin\Mvp.Xml.dll
bin\Newtonsoft.Json.dll
bin\RadEditor.Net2.dll
bin\Sitecore.Kernel.dll
bin\Sitecore.Logging.dll
bin\Sitecore.NVelocity.dll
bin\Sitecore.Zip.dll
Because when you CLEAN your project and you will have reference only Sitecore.Kernel.dll (in most of cases), you will lost most of dlls from bin directory!!