Search Results

Search found 16554 results on 663 pages for 'programmers identity'.

Page 103/663 | < Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >

• Dilemma for growing a project: Open source volunteer developers VS closed source paid / revshare developers? [closed]

  - by giorgio79

  I am trying to grow my project, and I am vaccillating between some examples. Some options seem to be: 1. open sourcing the project to draw volunteer developers. Pros This would mean anyone can try and make some money off the code that would motivate them to contribute back and grow the project. Cons Existing bigger could easily copy and paste my work so far. They can also replicate without having access to the code, but that would take more time. I also thought of using AGPL license, but again, code can still be copied without redistribution. After all, enforcing a license costs a lot of money, and I cannot just say to a possible copycat that it seems you copied my code, show me what you got. 2. Keep the project closed source, but create some kind of a developer program where they get revshare Pros I keep the main rights for the project, but still generate interest by creating a developer program. Noone can copy code easily, just with some considerable effort, but make contributions easy as a breeze. I am also seeing many companies just open source a part of their projects, like Acquia does not open source its multisite setup, or github does not open source some of its core business. Cons Less attention from open source committed devs. Conclusion So option 2 seems the most secure, but would love some feedback.

  Read the article

• Who practices, or is likely to practice, the IEEE Software Engineering? [closed]

  - by user72757

  There is an interesting issue in Software Engineering which I'd like to explore. The issue is firstly what is and what is not software engineering. Secondly, if software engineering is what the IEEE defines it to be, what are good examples of companies which practice the SE? Detailed question: Software engineering (SE) is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the design, development, operation, and maintenance of software, and the study of these approaches; that is, the application of engineering to software. [updated definition, originating in 610.12-1990 - IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology] If we consider as SE only those approaches that 100% match the above definition, we naturally get to SWEBOK (Software Engineering Body of Knowledge) which is created by the IEEE and the ACM. I'm seeking the answer to this: How can I find a company outside the defence industry which practices the SE as defined by IEEE? Clues: SE originates in 1968 NATO conference. The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) is based in the US at Carnegie Mellon University. Funding of the SEI is largely done by the US DoD. Defence industry uses the SE and sometimes has a partnership with the IEEE (as in case of Boeing). Possible decomposition of my big question into smaller chunks: a) Where is anyone who acknowledges the IEEE Software Engineering standards at work and perhaps even uses some of them? http://cs.hbg.psu.edu/cmpsc487/IEEEStds_List.htm b) Where can I find a person or a company building around SWEBOK? http://www.computer.org/portal/web/swebok/html/contents c) What is an example of a company professionally using CSDP (apart from those at IEEE website)? Does anyone have any possible contribution to this question?

  Read the article

• Does my use of the strategy pattern violate the fundamental MVC pattern in iOS?

  - by Goodsquirrel

  I'm about to use the 'strategy' pattern in my iOS app, but feel like my approach violates the somehow fundamental MVC pattern. My app is displaying visual "stories", and a Story consists (i.e. has @properties) of one Photo and one or more VisualEvent objects to represent e.g. animated circles or moving arrows on the photo. Each VisualEvent object therefore has a eventType @property, that might be e.g. kEventTypeCircle or kEventTypeArrow. All events have things in common, like a startTime @property, but differ in the way they are being drawn on the StoryPlayerView. Currently I'm trying to follow the MVC pattern and have a StoryPlayer object (my controller) that knows about both the model objects (like Story and all kinds of visual events) and the view object StoryPlayerView. To chose the right drawing code for each of the different visual event types, my StoryPlayer is using a switch statement. @implementation StoryPlayer // (...) - (void)showVisualEvent:(VisualEvent *)event onStoryPlayerView:storyPlayerView { switch (event.eventType) { case kEventTypeCircle: [self showCircleEvent:event onStoryPlayerView:storyPlayerView]; break; case kEventTypeArrow: [self showArrowDrawingEvent:event onStoryPlayerView:storyPlayerView]; break; // (...) } But switch statements for type checking are bad design, aren't they? According to Uncle Bob they lead to tight coupling and can and should almost always be replaced by polymorphism. Having read about the "Strategy"-Pattern in Head First Design Patterns, I felt this was a great way to get rid of my switch statement. So I changed the design like this: All specialized visual event types are now subclasses of an abstract VisualEvent class that has a showOnStoryPlayerView: method. @interface VisualEvent : NSObject - (void)showOnStoryPlayerView:(StoryPlayerView *)storyPlayerView; // abstract Each and every concrete subclass implements a concrete specialized version of this drawing behavior method. @implementation CircleVisualEvent - (void)showOnStoryPlayerView:(StoryPlayerView *)storyPlayerView { [storyPlayerView drawCircleAtPoint:self.position color:self.color lineWidth:self.lineWidth radius:self.radius]; } The StoryPlayer now simply calls the same method on all types of events. @implementation StoryPlayer - (void)showVisualEvent:(VisualEvent *)event onStoryPlayerView:storyPlayerView { [event showOnStoryPlayerView:storyPlayerView]; } The result seems to be great: I got rid of the switch statement, and if I ever have to add new types of VisualEvents in the future, I simply create new subclasses of VisualEvent. And I won't have to change anything in StoryPlayer. But of cause this approach violates the MVC pattern since now my model has to know about and depend on my view! Now my controller talks to my model and my model talks to the view calling methods on StoryPlayerView like drawCircleAtPoint:color:lineWidth:radius:. But this kind of calls should be controller code not model code, right?? Seems to me like I made things worse. I'm confused! Am I completely missing the point of the strategy pattern? Is there a better way to get rid of the switch statement without breaking model-view separation?

  Read the article

• Learning Smalltalk as a Java programmer

  - by VeeKay

  I am a Java programmer willing to learn smalltalk. As of now I am working within the Pharo environment. Trying to switch from Java to Smalltalk is being a bit of a headache, honestly. I would like to learn Smalltalk with the help of a code base available but I believe that there aren't many Smalltalk example projects available on the web. So are there any particular websites that involve learning Smalltalk (Pharo) based on some simple examples? Currently I am taking the help of Pharo By Example doc but I feel it is just not sufficient for me. I am looking for more some code examples in Smalltalk.

  Read the article

• Exception Handling Frequency/Log Detail

  - by Cyborgx37

  I am working on a fairly complex .NET application that interacts with another application. Many single-line statements are possible culprits for throwing an Exception and there is often nothing I can do to check the state before executing them to prevent these Exceptions. The question is, based on best practices and seasoned experience, how frequently should I lace my code with try/catch blocks? I've listed three examples below, but I'm open to any advice. I'm really hoping to get some pros/cons of various approaches. I can certainly come up with some of my own (greater log granularity for the O-C approach, better performance for the Monolithic approach), so I'm looking for experience over opinion. EDIT: I should add that this application is a batch program. The only "recovery" necessary in most cases is to log the error, clean up gracefully, and quit. So this could be seen to be as much a question of log granularity as exception handling. In my mind's eye I can imagine good reasons for both, so I'm looking for some general advice to help me find an appropriate balance. Monolitich Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } public static void Step2(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } public static void Step3(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } } Delegated Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step2(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step3(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } } Obsessive-Compulsive Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step2(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step3(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } } Other approaches welcomed and encouraged. Above are examples only.

  Read the article

• Why does Clojure neglect the uniform access principle?

  - by Alexey

  My background is Ruby, C#, JavaScript and Java. And now I'm learning Clojure. What makes me feel uncomfortable about the later is that idiomatic Clojure seems to neglect the Uniform access principle (wiki, c2) and thus to a certain degree encapsulation as well by suggesting to use maps instead of some sort of "structures" or "classes". It feels like step back. So a couple of questions, if anyone informed: Which other design decisions/concerns it conflicted with and why it was considered less important? Did you have the same concern as well and how it end up when you switched from a language supporting UAP by default (Ruby, Eiffel, Python, C#) to Clojure?

  Read the article

• Triggering custom events in AJAX callbacks

  - by Sabrina Gelbart

  I'm pretty new to JavaScript, but one of the things that's been frustrating is that our AJAX callbacks have been getting packed with different functionality, making it difficult to keep everything separated and organized. I'm really new to programming, I have a feeling learning MVC a bit more would help me, but for now using custom events seems like it could help me keep my code a lot cleaner and prevent some problems. Here's what I'm talking about: function myAjaxFunction(){ $.post('ajax/test.html', function(data) { $(document).trigger('testDataLoaded',data); }); } function myOtherFunctionThatsDependentUponAjax(){ $(document).one('testDataLoaded', function(data){ alert (data); } } I also don't know if it's ok that I'm triggering document or not... Are there any patterns that look like this that I can read more about? What are the potential problems with this?

  Read the article

• What are the disadvantages of automated testing?

  - by jkohlhepp

  There are a number of questions on this site that give plenty of information about the benefits that can be gained from automated testing. But I didn't see anything that represented the other side of the coin: what are the disadvantages? Everything in life is a tradeoff and there are no silver bullets, so surely there must be some valid reasons not to do automated testing. What are they? Here's a few that I've come up with: Requires more initial developer time for a given feature Requires a higher skill level of team members Increase tooling needs (test runners, frameworks, etc.) Complex analysis required when a failed test in encountered - is this test obsolete due to my change or is it telling me I made a mistake? Edit I should say that I am a huge proponent of automated testing, and I'm not looking to be convinced to do it. I'm looking to understand what the disadvantages are so when I go to my company to make a case for it I don't look like I'm throwing around the next imaginary silver bullet. Also, I'm explicity not looking for someone to dispute my examples above. I am taking as true that there must be some disadvantages (everything has trade-offs) and I want to understand what those are.

  Read the article

• Android Design - Service vs Thread for Networking

  - by Nevyn

  I am writing an Android app, finally (yay me) and for this app I need persistant, but user closeable, network sockets (yes, more than one). I decided to try my hand at writing my own version of an IRC Client. My design issue however, is I'm not sure how to run the Socket connectivity itself. If I put the sockets at the Activity level, they keeps getting closed shortly after the Activity becomes non-visible (also a problem that needs solving...but I think i figured that one out)...but if I run a "connectivity service", I need to find out if I can have multiple instances of it running (the service, that is...one per server/socket). Either that or a I need a way to Thread the sockets themselves and have multiple threads running that I can still communicate with directly (ID system of some sort). Thus the question: Is it a 'better', or at least more "proper" design pattern, to put the Socket and networking in a service, and have the Activities consume said service...or should I tie the sockets directly to some Threaded Process owned by the UI Activity and not bother with the service implementation at all? I do know better than to put the networking directly on the UI thread, but that's as far as I've managed to get.

  Read the article

• Implicit Intent is not working [migrated]

  - by Sayem Siam

  I have a activity class named Notelist.In the Notelist class i have tried to insert a new note.For that i have used implicit Intent.But when i click to insert a new note it gives a run time error. public boolean onOptionsItemSelected(MenuItem item) { switch (item.getItemId()) { case R.id.menu_add: Log.d("sayem", "in case of fd"); Toast.makeText(this, "in the", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show(); startActivity(new Intent(Intent.ACTION_INSERT, getIntent() .getData())); break; default: throw new IllegalArgumentException("not matched"); } return true; } And i have NoteEditor activity clas to Insert a new note. And here is my Androidmanifesto.xml file. <uses-sdk android:minSdkVersion="14" /> <application android:icon="@drawable/ic_launcher" android:label="@string/app_name" > <activity android:label="@string/app_name" android:name=".NotesList" > <intent-filter > <action android:name="android.intent.action.MAIN" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.LAUNCHER" /> </intent-filter> <intent-filter> <action android:name="android.intent.action.VIEW" /> <action android:name="android.intent.action.EDIT" /> <action android:name="android.intent.action.PICK" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.DEFAULT" /> <data android:mimeType="vnd.android.cursor.dir/vnd.google.note" /> </intent-filter> <intent-filter > <action android:name="android.intent.action.GET_CONTENT" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.DEFAULT" /> <data android:mimeType="vnd.android.cursor.item/vnd.google.note" /> </intent-filter> </activity> <activity android:name="NoteEditor" > <intent-filter> <action android:name="NoteEditor"></action> <action android:name="android.intent.action.INSERT" /> <action android:name="android.intent.action.PASTE" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.DEFAULT" /> <data android:mimeType="vnd.android.cursor.dir/vnd.google.note" /> </intent-filter> </activity> </application>

  Read the article

• What micro web-framework has the lowest overhead but includes templating

  - by Simon Martin

  I want to rewrite a simple small (10 page) website and besides a contact form it could be written in pure html. It is currently built with classic asp and Dreamweaver templates. The reason I'm not simply writing 10 html pages is that I want to keep the layout all in 1 place so would need either includes or a masterpage. I don't want to use Dreamweaver templates, or batch processing (like org-mode) because I want to be able to edit using notepad (or Visual Studio) because occasionally I might need to edit a file on the server (Go Daddy's IIS admin interface will let me edit text). I don't want to use ASP.NET MVC or WebForms (which I use in my day job) because I don't need all the overhead they bring with them when essentially I'm serving up 9 static files, 1 contact form and 1 list of clubs (that I aim to use jQuery to filter). The shared hosting package I have on Go Daddy seems to take a long time to spin up when serving aspx files. Currently the clubs page is driven from an MS SQL database that I try to keep up to date by manually checking the dojo locator on the main HQ pages and editing the entries myself, this is again way over the top. I aim to get a text file with the club details (probably in JSON or xml format) and use that as the source for the clubs page. There will need to be a bit of programming for this as the HQ site is unable to provide an extract / feed so something will have to scrape the site periodically to update my clubs persistence file. I'd like that to be automated - but I'm happy to have that triggered on a visit to the clubs page so I don't need to worry about scheduling a job. I would probably have a separate process that updates the persistence that has nothing to do with the rest of the site. Ideally I'd like to use Mercurial (or git) to publish, I know Bitbucket (and github) both serve static page sites so they wouldn't work in this scenario (dynamic pages and a contact form) but that's the model I'd like to use if there is such a thing. My requirements are: Simple templating system, 1 place to define header, footers, menu etc., that can be edited using just notepad. Very minimal / lightweight framework. I don't need a monster for 10 pages Must run either on IIS7 (shared Go Daddy Windows hosting) or other free host

  Read the article

• Going into Web Development without a C.S. Degree - Suggestions

  - by Klaint Cokeman

  I plan on seeking a career in web development and I'm about two semesters away from graduating with a CIS degree. Although I'm very satisfied with my choice of degree, I'm concerned that I may be lacking knowledge in a few areas because of not majoring in computer science. The programming side of things is no problem for me, I'm just wondering to what extent data structures/theory/etc. might benefit me to learn over spending more time with hands-on programming... and also what aspects of C.S. would be most appropriate to look into you would think would be most applicable to web development. In short, I'd like to expand my horizons a little bit. I'd very much appreciate and advice/suggestions/book or tutorial recommendations, etc. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Is there any evidence that one of the current alternate JVM languages might catch on?

  - by FarmBoy

  There's been a lot of enthusiasm about JRuby, Jython, Groovy, and now Scala and Clojure as the language to be the successor to Java on the JVM. But currently only Groovy and Scala are in the TIOBE top 100, and none are in the top 50. Is there any reason to think that any of this bunch will ever gain significant adoption? My question is not primarily about TIOBE, but about any evidence that you might see that could indicate that one of these languages could get significant backing that goes beyond the enthusiasts.

  Read the article

• What's the benefit of object-oriented programming over procedural programming?

  - by niko

  I'm trying to understand the difference between procedural languages like C and object-oriented languages like C++. I've never used C++, but I've been discussing with my friends on how to differentiate the two. I've been told C++ has object-oriented concepts as well as public and private modes for definition of variables: things C does not have. I've never had to use these for while developing programs in Visual Basic.NET: what are the benefits of these? I've also been told that if a variable is public, it can be accessed anywhere, but it's not clear how that's different from a global variable in a language like C. It's also not clear how a private variable differs from a local variable. Another thing I've heard is that, for security reasons, if a function needs to be accessed it should be inherited first. The use-case is that an administrator should only have as much rights as they need and not everything, but it seems a conditional would work as well: if ( login == "admin") { // invoke the function } Why is this not ideal? Given that there seems to be a procedural way to do everything object-oriented, why should I care about object-oriented programming?

  Read the article

• Does programming knowledge have a half-life?

  - by Gary Rowe

  In answering this question, I asserted that programming knowledge has a half-life of about 18 months. In physics, we have radioactive decay which is the process by which a radioactive element transforms into something less energetic. The half-life is the measure of how long it takes for this process to result in only half of the material to remain. A parallel concept might be that over time our programming knowledge ceases to be the current idiom and eventually becomes irrelevant. Noting that a half-life is asymptotic (so some knowledge will always be relevant), what are your thoughts on this? Is 18 months a good estimate? Is it even the case? Does it apply to design patterns, but over a longer period? What are the inherent advantages/disadvantages of this half-life? Update Just found this question which covers the material fairly well: "Half of everything you know will be obsolete in 18-24 months" = ( True, or False? )

  Read the article

• when to use a scaled/enterprise agile software development framework and when to let agile processes 'emerge'?

  - by SHC

  There are quite a few enterprise agile software development frameworks available: Scott Ambler: Disciplined Agile Delivery Dean Leffingwell: Scaled Agile Framework Alan Shalloway: Enterprise Agile Book Craig Larman: Scaling Lean and Agile Barry Boehm: Balancing Agility and Discipline Brian Wernham: Agile Project Management in Government - DSDM I've also spoken with people that state that your enterprise agile processes should just 'emerge' and that you shouldn't need or use a framework because they constrain you. Question 1: When should one choose an enterprise agile software development framework, and when should one just let their agile processes 'emerge'. Question 2: If choosing an enterprise agile software development framework, how does one select the appropriate framework to use for their organisation? Please provide evidence of your experience or research when answering questions rather than just presenting opinions.

  Read the article

• unix systems programming jobs in India [closed]

  - by mnunna

  Hi, I am currently working on a HP-UX platform and my role as a prod support team member involves mostly to write shell scripts. But i want to branch out into core systems programming in unix. A quick search on the internet threw no "unix systems programming jobs" in india. I'm confused as what to do. I really would like to continue with unix as my core competency, but unix jobs in india are mostly of sys admin/ prod support type, of which i do not want a part of. Can anyone of you give me an informed advice on the career oppurtinities that await unix professionals in india?? Any advice would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• What functionality does dynamic typing allow?

  - by Justin984

  I've been using python for a few days now and I think I understand the difference between dynamic and static typing. What I don't understand is under what circumstances it would be preferred. It is flexible and readable, but at the expense of more runtime checks and additional required unit testing. Aside from non-functional criteria like flexibility and readability, what reasons are there to choose dynamic typing? What can I do with dynamic typing that isn't possible otherwise? What specific code example can you think of that illustrates a concrete advantage of dynamic typing?

  Read the article

• Pure Front end JavaScript with Web API versus MVC views with ajax

  - by eyeballpaul

  This was more a discussion for what peoples thoughts are these days on how to split a web application. I am used to creating an MVC application with all its views and controllers. I would normally create a full view and pass this back to the browser on a full page request, unless there were specific areas that I did not want to populate straight away and would then use DOM page load events to call the server to load other areas using AJAX. Also, when it came to partial page refreshing, I would call an MVC action method which would return the HTML fragment which I could then use to populate parts of the page. This would be for areas that I did not want to slow down initial page load, or areas that fitted better with AJAX calls. One example would be for table paging. If you want to move on to the next page, I would prefer it if an AJAX call got that info rather than using a full page refresh. But the AJAX call would still return an HTML fragment. My question is. Are my thoughts on this archaic because I come from a .net background rather than a pure front end background? An intelligent front end developer that I work with, prefers to do more or less nothing in the MVC views, and would rather do everything on the front end. Right down to web API calls populating the page. So that rather than calling an MVC action method, which returns HTML, he would prefer to return a standard object and use javascript to create all the elements of the page. The front end developer way means that any benefits that I normally get with MVC model validation, including client side validation, would be gone. It also means that any benefits that I get with creating the views, with strongly typed html templates etc would be gone. I believe this would mean I would need to write the same validation for front end and back end validation. The javascript would also need to have lots of methods for creating all the different parts of the DOM. For example, when adding a new row to a table, I would normally use the MVC partial view for creating the row, and then return this as part of the AJAX call, which then gets injected into the table. By using a pure front end way, the javascript would would take in an object (for, say, a product) for the row from the api call, and then create a row from that object. Creating each individual part of the table row. The website in question will have lots of different areas, from administration, forms, product searching etc. A website that I don't think requires to be architected in a single page application way. What are everyone's thoughts on this? I am interested to hear from front end devs and back end devs.

  Read the article

• Perforce: Best diff editor on Linux ?

  - by shan23

  I'm looking for a Linux based diff viewer/editor for Perforce, which would allow me to retain my VIM editing shortcuts, at the same time having the navigational advantages of a diff editor (goto next/previous edit, view old and new side by side). I have a very good Windows diff viewer(BC3), so please don't suggest anything for Windows. If that editor doesn't require X server (i.e it can be used from cmd line in a putty session), that would be ideal !!

  Read the article

• Progressive Enhancement vs. Single Page Apps

  - by SeanPlusPlus

  I just got back from a conference in Boston called An Event Apart. A really popular theme amongst the speakers was the idea of progressive enhancement - a site's content should go in the HTML, and JavaScript should only be used to enhance behavior. The arguments that the speakers gave for progressive enhancement were very compelling. Not only is it a solid pattern for supporting older browsers, and devices on a network with low bandwidth, but HTML fails much more gracefully than JavaScript (i.e. markup that is not supported is just ignored, while if a browser throws an exception while executing your script - you are hosed). Jeremy Keith gave a particularly insightful talk about this. But what about single page web apps like Backbone and Angular? The whole design behind these frameworks seems to push the developer toward moving content out of the HTML, and into something like a JSON API. I can not seem to gel these two design patterns: progressive enhancement vs. single page web apps. Are there instances when one is better than the other? Or are they not even antagonistic technologies, and I am missing something here with my mental model?

  Read the article

• Is this a secure solution for RESTful authentication?

  - by Chad Johnson

  I need to quickly implement a RESTful authentication system for my JavaScript application to use. I think I understand how it should work, but I just want to double check. Here's what I'm thinking -- what do you guys think? Database schema users id : integer first_name : varchar(50) last_name : varchar(50) password : varchar(32) (MD5 hashed) etc. user_authentications id : integer user_id : integer auth_token : varchar(32) (AES encrypted, with keys outside database) access_token : varchar(32) (AES encrypted, with keys outside database) active : boolean Steps The following happens over SSL. I'm using Sinatra for the API. JavaScript requests authentication via POST to /users/auth/token. The /users/auth/token API method generates an auth_token hash, creates a record in user_authentications, and returns auth_token. JavaScript hashes the user's password and then salts it with auth_token -- SHA(access_token + MD5(password)) POST the user's username and hashed+salted password to /users/auth/authenticate. The /users/auth/authenticate API method will verify that SHA(AES.decrypt(access_token) + user.password) == what was received via POST. The /users/auth/authenticate will generate, AES encrypt, store, and return an access token if verification is successful; otherwise, it will return 401 Unauthorized. For any future requests against the API, JavaScript will include access_token, and the API will find the user account based on that.

  Read the article

• If some standards apply when "it depends" then should I stick with custom approaches?

  - by Travis J

  If I have an unconventional approach which works better than the industry standard, should I just stick with it even though in principal it violates those standards? What I am talking about is referential integrity for relational database management systems. The standard for enforcing referential integrity is to CASCADE delete. In practice, this is just not going to work all the time. In my current case, it does not. The alternative suggested is to either change the reference to NULL, DEFAULT, or just to take NO ACTION - usually in the form of a "soft delete". I am all about enforcing referential integrity. Love it. However, sometimes it just does not fully apply to use all the standards in practice. My approach has been to slightly abandon a small part of one of those practices which is the part about leaving "hanging references" around. Oops. The trade off is plentiful in this situation I believe. Instead of having deprecated data in the production database, a splattering of "soft delete" logic all across my controllers (and views sometimes depending on how far down the chain the soft delete occurred), and the prospect of queries taking longer and longer - instead of all that - I now have a recycle bin and centralized logic. The only tradeoff is that I must explicitly manage the possibility of "hanging references" which can be done through generics with one class. Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• Declarative programming vs. Imperative programming

  - by EpsilonVector

  I feel very comfortable with Imperative programming. I never have trouble expressing algorithmically what I want the computer to do once I figured out what is it that I want it to do. But when it comes to languages like SQL or Relational Algebra I often get stuck because my head is too used to Imperative programming. For example, suppose you have the relations band(bandName, bandCountry), venue(venueName, venueCountry), plays(bandName, venueName), and I want to write a query that says: all venueNames such that for every bandCountry there's a band from that country that plays in venue of that name. In my mind I immediately go "for each venueName iterate over all the bandCountries and for each bandCountry get the list of bands that come from it. If none of them play in venueName, go to next venueName. Else, at the end of the bandCountries iteration add venueName to the set of good venueNames". ...but you can't talk like that in SQL and I actually need to think about how to formulate this, with the intuitive Imperative solution constantly nagging in the back of my head. Did anybody else had this problem? How did you overcome this? Did you figured out a paradigm shift? Made a map from Imperative concepts to SQL concepts to translate Imperative solutions into Declarative ones? Read a good book? PS I'm not looking for a solution to the above query, I did solve it.

  Read the article

• Advices and strategies for browser compatibility on web applications into a corporate environment

  - by TiagoBrenck

  With the new CSS 3 and HTML 5 tecnology, the web applications gained a lot of new tools for a better UI(user interface) interaction, beautifull templates and even responsive layout to fit into tablets and smartphones. Within a corporate environment, those new tecnologies are required so the company can "follow" the IT evolution and their concurrent, but they also want that those new web applications supports old browsers. How to deal with this situation? By one side we are asked to follow the news and IT evolutions, create responsive layouts and use a lot of cool jQuery's plugins. And by the other side, we are asked to support old browsers that doesn't support those new responsive features, plugins or components. I would like advices and strategies to create "modern" web applications that are also supported on old browsers. How does your company deal with this situation? Is it possible to have the same web application running good and beauty on old browsers, and responsive, interactive on actual browsers?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >