Search Results

Search found 17041 results on 682 pages for 'architecture design'.

Page 104/682 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

• Loadbalancing Questions

  - by Van Holtz

  I have been learning networking for about 4 months. Wrote a single standalone Multiplayer server and succeeded with authoritative approach. Now I want to extend it by splitting the single server into clusters to allow even more players to log in to avoid latency issues. Now I have protyped the Loadbalancing server and its running pretty good so far. This is my architecture, I have a master server which acts as a proxy, every sub servers(chat, login, game) connect to the master server as well as all the clients. when a client connects, Client Request: Send Request - MS(Master) - Decides which SS(SubServer) to forward to - Forwards Request to SS - SS - Analyze Message - Send Response to MS - Decides which Client to forward to - Forwards Response to Client Well, it looks like its going through lots of stages. it takes double the time to process the message than a single server approach. i feel like my model isnt the best or i may be wrong. is there any better model or the one they use in professional games? I still want a Master-SubServer approach. I just want to clarify that I'm going in the right direction before writing all my codes. Thanks for any answer :)

  Read the article

• Avoid overwriting all the methods in the child class

  - by Heckel

  The context I am making a game in C++ using SFML. I have a class that controls what is displayed on the screen (manager on the image below). It has a list of all the things to draw like images, text, etc. To be able to store them in one list I created a Drawable class from which all the other drawable class inherit. The image below represents how I would organize each class. Drawable has a virtual method Draw that will be called by the manager. Image and Text overwrite this method. My problem is that I would like Image::draw method to work for Circle, Polygon, etc. since sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inherit from sf::Shape. I thought of two ways to do that. My first idea would be for Image to have a pointer on sf::Shape, and the subclasses would make it point onto their sf::CircleShape or sf::ConvexShape classes (Like on the image below). In the Polygon constructor I would write something like ptr_shape = &polygon_shape; This doesn't look very elegant because I have two variables that are, in fact, just one. My second idea is to store the sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inside the ptr_shape like ptr_shape = new sf::ConvexShape(...); and to use a function that is only in ConvexShape I would cast it like so ((sf::ConvexShape*)ptr_shape)->convex_method(); But that doesn't look very elegant either. I am not even sure I am allowed to do that. My question I added details about the whole thing because I thought that maybe my whole architecture was wrong. I would like to know how I could design my program to be safe without overwriting all the Image methods. I apologize if this question has already been asked; I have no idea what to google.

  Read the article

• Example: Cross Cutting Concerns of an Application

  A little while ago I was given an opportunity to design and implement a new system that sent data via an HTTP Post method and then processed the results that were returned so that they could be inserted in to a database. My system had eight core concerns that it needed to fulfill. Eight Core Concerns Database Access Data Entities Worker Result Processing Process Flow Manager Email/Notification Error Handling Logging Of these eight, five were actually cross cutting concerns. 5 Cross Cutting Concerns Database Access Data Entities Email/Notification Error Handling Logging These five cross cutting concerns were determined after I created an aspect oriented model to help identity the system components that could be factored out into separate components.  These separated components would then be included in the system so that they could be used by various other components.  These five components allow all of the other components to access the database, store data, send notifications, handle errors, and log all system events.  Thus, these components are used to share unique aspects to the system via their implementation. The use of Aspect oriented architecture greatly helped me define what components I needed to create and what each of those components could do.  It also showed how all of the other aspects depended on each other so that each component did not have to re-implement code that was already created in the existing system.

  Read the article

• MVVM and service pattern

  - by alfa-alfa

  I'm building a WPF application using the MVVM pattern. Right now, my viewmodels calls the service layer to retrieve models (how is not relevant to the viewmodel) and convert them to viewmodels. I'm using constructor injection to pass the service required to the viewmodel. It's easily testable and works well for viewmodels with few dependencies, but as soon as I try to create viewModels for complex models, I have a constructor with a LOT of services injected in it (one to retrieve each dependencies and a list of all available values to bind to an itemsSource for example). I'm wondering how to handle multiple services like that and still have a viewmodel that I can unit test easily. I'm thinking of a few solutions: Creating a services singleton (IServices) containing all the available services as interfaces. Example: Services.Current.XXXService.Retrieve(), Services.Current.YYYService.Retrieve(). That way, I don't have a huge constructor with a ton of services parameters in them. Creating a facade for the services used by the viewModel and passing this object in the ctor of my viewmodel. But then, I'll have to create a facade for each of my complexe viewmodels, and it might be a bit much... What do you think is the "right" way to implement this kind of architecture ?

  Read the article

• decouple software components via nameconvention

  - by csteinmueller

  I'm currently evaluating alternatives to refactor a drivermanagement. In my multitier architecture I have Baseclass DAL.Device //my entity Interfaces BL.IDriver //handles the dataprocessing between application and device BL.IDriverCreator //creates an IDriver from a Device BL.IDriverFactory //handles the driver creation requests Every specialization of Device has a corresponding IDriver implementation and a corresponding IDriverCreator implementation. At the moment the mapping is fix via a type check within the business layer / DriverFactory. That means every new driver needs a) changing code within the DriverFactory and b) referencing the new IDriver implementation / assembly. On a customers point of view that means, every new driver, used or not, needs a complex revalidation of their hardware environment, because it's a critical process. My first inspiration was to use a caliburn micro like nameconvention see Caliburn.Micro: Xaml Made Easy BL.RestDriver BL.RestDriverCreator DAL.RestDevice After receiving the RestDevicewithin the IDriverFactory I can load all driver dlls via reflection and do a namesplitting/comparing (extracting the xx from xxDriverCreator and xxDevice) Another idea would be a custom attribute (which also leads to comparing strings). My question: is that a good approach above layer borders? If not, what would be a good approach?

  Read the article

• Implementing Explosions

  - by Xkynar

  I want to add explosions to my 2D game, but im having a hard time with the architecture. Several game elements might be responsible for explosions, like, lets say, explosive barrels and bullets (and there might be chain reactions with close barrels). The only options i can come up with are: 1 - Having an array of explosions and treat them as a game element as important as any other Pros: Having a single array which is updated and drawn with all the other game element arrays makes it more organized and simple to update, and the explosive barrels at a first glance would be easy to create, simply by passing the explosion array as a pointer to each explosive barrel constructor Cons: It might be hard for the bullets to add an explosion to the vector, since bullets are shot by a Weapon class which is located in every mob, so lets say, if i create a new enemy and add it to the enemy array, that enemy will have a weapon and functions to be able to use it, and if i want the weapon (rocket launcher in this case) to have access to the explosions array to be able to add a new one, id have to pass the explosion array as a pointer to the enemy, which would then pass it to the weapon, which would pass it to the bullets (ugly chain). Another problem I can think of is a little more weird: If im checking the collisions between explosions and barrels (so i create a chain reaction) and i detect an explosion colliding with a barrel, if i add a new explosion while im iterating the explosions java will trow an exception. So this is kinda annoying, i cant iterate through the explosions and add a new explosion, i must do it in another way... The other way which isnt really well thought yet is to just add an explosive component to every element that might explode so that when it dies, it explodes or something, but i dont have good ways on implementing this theory either Honestly i dont like either the solutions so id like to know how is it usually done by actual game developers, sorry if my problem seems trivial and dumb.

  Read the article

• What is the most effective approach to learn an unfamiliar complex program? [closed]

  - by bdroc

  Possible Duplicate: How do you dive into large code bases? I have quite a bit of experience with different programming languages and writing small and functional programs for a variety of purposes. My coding skills aren't what I have a problem with. In fact, I've written a decent web application from scratch for my startup. However, I have trouble jumping into unfamiliar applications. What's the most effective way to approach learning a new program's structure and/or architecture so that I can start attacking the code effectively? Are there useful tools for their respective languages (Python and Java are my two primary languages)? Should I be starting with just looking at function names or documentation? How do you veterans approach this problem? I find this has to be with minimal help from coworkers or contributors who are already familiar with the application and have better things to do than help me. I'd love to practice this skill in an open source project so any suggestions for starting points (maybe mildly complex) would be great too!

  Read the article

• How do OSes work on multiple CPUs? [on hold]

  - by user3691093

  Assumption: "OS es (atleast in some part) should be written in assembly.Assembly programs are CPU specefic." If so how can one os run on different CPUs ? For example: how is that I can load Ubuntu on different systems having different CPUs (like intel i3,i5,i7, amd a8,a6,etc) from the same bootable disk? Does the disk contain seporate assembly programs for each CPU? Are these CPUs 'similar' enough to run the same assembly program? Is my assumption wrong? Something else.... Thanks for responding. I tried to find out in what way are the CPUs that I mentioned 'similar'. I came across the concepts of Instruction Set Architecture and Microarchitecture of CPUs.A CPU will understand a program if it is combatible with its ISA. Even if CPUs are 'wired up' differently (different microarchitecture) , as long as the ISA implemented on top is same ,the program will work. ARM and x86 have different ISA ( that why there are 2 windows 8 versions, right?). And if an app program is written in an HLL with compilers for both platforms we will saved from wasting time writing 2 programs. Did I understand anything wrong? Are there programs that can take a compiled program as input and produce a program executable on another CPU as output? Is it possible? (Virtualisation?) 32 bit windows programs do install on 64 bit windows ,dont they? Arent 64 bit CPUs 'differerent' from 32 bit CPUs? They do get seporate OS versions, right? Is this backward combatibility achieved using programes mentioned in (3) ?

  Read the article

• How to correctly write an installation or setup document

  - by UmNyobe

  I just joined a small start-up as a software engineer after graduation. The start-up is 4 year old, and I am working with the CEO and the COO, even if there are some people abroad. Basically they both used to do almost everything. I am currently on some kind of training phase. I have at my disposition architecture, setup and installation internal documentation. Architecture documentation is like a bible and should contain complete information. The rest are used to give directions in different processes. The issue is that these documents are more or less dated, as they just didn't have the time to change them. I will be in charge of training the next hires, and updating these documents is part of my training. In some there is a lot of hard-coded information like: Install this_module_which_still_exists cd this_dir_name_changed cp this_file_name_changed other_dir_name_changed ./config_script.sh ./execute_script.sh The issues i have faced : Either the module installation is completely different (for instance now there is an rpm, or a different OS) Either names changed, and i need to switch old names by new names Description of the purpose of the current step missing. Information about a whole topic is missing Fortunately these guys are around and I get all the information I want and all the explanations I need. I want to bring a design to the next documents so in the future people don't feel like they are completely rewriting a document each time they are updating it. Do you have suggestions? If there is a lightweight design methodology available online you can point me to it's nice too. One thing I will do for sure is set up a versioning repository for the documents alone. There is already one for the source code so I don't know why internal documents deserve a different treatment.

  Read the article

• About Data Objects and DAO Design when using Hibernate

  - by X. Ma

  I'm hesitating between two designs of a database project using Hibernate. Design #1. (1) Create a general data provider interface, including a set of DAO interfaces and general data container classes. It hides the underneath implementation. A data provider implementation could access data in database, or an XML file, or a service, or something else. The user of a data provider does not to know about it. (2) Create a database library with Hibernate. This library implements the data provider interface in (1). The bad thing about Design #1 is that in order to hide the implementation details, I need to create two sets of data container classes. One in the general data provider interface - let's call them DPI-Objects, the other set is used in the database library, exclusively for entity/attribute mapping in Hibernate - let's call them H-Objects. In the DAO implementation, I need to read data from database to create H-Objects (via Hibernate) and then convert H-Objects into DPI-Objects. Design #2. Do not create a general data provider interface. Expose H-Objects directly to components that use the database lib. So the user of the database library needs to be aware of Hibernate. I like design #1 more, but I don't want to create two sets of data container classes. Is that the right way to hide H-Objects and other Hibernate implementation details from the user who uses the database-based data provider? Are there any drawbacks of Design #2? I will not implement other data provider in the new future, so should I just forget about the data provider interface and use Design #2? What do you think about this? Thanks for your time!

  Read the article

• release management system - architectural question

  - by Sonic Soul

  Every place i've worked created their own release process, and all of them worked pretty well, however it took pretty good effort (and often a dedicated team) to manage releases. I am currently at a new place, and about to design such a system, however this time the team is very lean and we won't have dedicated resources to releasing. It will be up to development manager until the system is proofed enough for other developers to use. we're using Subversion as code repository, Team City as the build server, Jira issue tracker, Oracle db. I was thinking about writing a basic workflow app, that will let developers create a new manifest which will specify the following items. release details (who, jira issues etc) workflow step (dev, test, uat, prod approved, prod released) source files that last item is where it can get hairy. especially with database scripts. Figured I'd ask if there is a good pattern, or off the shelf product that could help with the database part, or perhaps the whole process. I briefly tested Red Gate Oracle deployment tool, but it didn't work out as well as I had hoped (from 1 day of testing at least) Questions: I think I could get around releasing of our code with something like Octopus Deploy straight from Team City. I am not clear however, how I could create a simple database deployment part, that will track which version of which script (from subversion) has been deployed where. Is there already some utility I could utilize for navigating subversion to choose which scripts should be released, instead of writing one from scratch. I'd just need it to produce some manifest of paths + versions.

  Read the article

• Data transfer between"main" site and secured virtual subsite

  - by Emma Burrows

  I am currently working on a C# ASP.Net 3.5 website I wrote some years ago which consists of a "main" public site, and a sub-site which is our customer management application, using forms-based authentication. The sub-site is set up as a virtual folder in IIS and though it's a subfolder of "main", it functions as a separate web app which handles CRUD access to our customer database and is only accessible by our staff. The main site currently includes a form for new leads to fill in, which generates an email to our sales staff so they can contact them and convince them to become customers. If that process is successful, the staff manually enter the information from the email into the database. Not surprisingly, I now have a new requirement to feed the data from the new lead form directly into the database so staff can just check a box for instance to turn the lead into a customer. My question therefore is how to go about doing this? Possible options I've thought of: Move the new lead form into the customer database subsite (with authentication turned off). Add database handling code to the main site. (No, not seriously considering this duplication of effort! :) Design some mechanism (via REST?) so a webpage outside the customer database subsite can feed data into the customer database I'd welcome some suggestions on how to organise the code for this situation, preferably with extensibility in mind, and particularly if there are any options I haven't thought of. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Staying OO and Testable while working with a database

  - by Adam Backstrom

  What are some OOP strategies for working with a database but keeping thing testable? Say I have a User class and my production environment works against MySQL. I see a couple possible approaches, shown here using PHP: Pass in a $data_source with interfaces for load() and save(), to abstract the backend source of data. When testing, pass a different data store. $user = new User( $mysql_data_source ); $user-load( 'bob' ); $user-setNickname( 'Robby' ); $user-save(); Use a factory that accesses the database and passes the result row to User's constructor. When testing, manually generate the $row parameter, or mock the object in UserFactory::$data_source. (How might I save changes to the record?) class UserFactory { static $data_source; public static function fetch( $username ) { $row = self::$data_source->get( [params] ); $user = new User( $row ); return $user; } } I have Design Patterns and Clean Code here next to me, but I'm struggling to find applicable concepts.

  Read the article

• Is there an established or defined best practice for source control branching between development and production builds?

  - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt

  Thanks for looking. I struggled in how to phrase my question, so let me give an example in hopes of making more clear what I am after: I currently work on a dev team responsible for maintaining and adding features to a web application. We have a development server and we use source control (TFS). Each day everyone checks in their code and when the code (running on the dev server) passes our QA/QC program, it goes to production. Recently, however, we had a bug in production which required an immediate production fix. The problem was that several of us developers had code checked in that was not ready for production so we had to either quickly complete and QA the code, or roll back everything, undo pending changes, etc. In other words, it was a mess. This made me wonder: Is there an established design pattern that prevents this type of scenario. It seems like there must be some "textbook" answer to this, but I am unsure what that would be. Perhaps a development branch of the code and a "release-ready" or production branch of the code?

  Read the article

• Data transfer between "main" site and secured virtual subsite

  - by Emma Burrows

  I am currently working on a C# ASP.Net 3.5 website I wrote some years ago which consists of a "main" public site, and a sub-site which is our customer management application, using forms-based authentication. The sub-site is set up as a virtual folder in IIS and though it's a subfolder of "main", it functions as a separate web app which handles CRUD access to our customer database and is only accessible by our staff. The main site currently includes a form for new leads to fill in, which generates an email to our sales staff so they can contact them and convince them to become customers. If that process is successful, the staff manually enter the information from the email into the database. Not surprisingly, I now have a new requirement to feed the data from the new lead form directly into the database so staff can just check a box for instance to turn the lead into a customer. My question therefore is how to go about doing this? Possible options I've thought of: Move the new lead form into the customer database subsite (with authentication turned off). Add database handling code to the main site. (No, not seriously considering this duplication of effort! :) Design some mechanism (via REST?) so a webpage outside the customer database subsite can feed data into the customer database How to organise the code for this situation, preferably with extensibility in mind, and particularly are there any options I haven't thought of?

  Read the article

• Doing powerups in a component-based system

  - by deft_code

  I'm just starting really getting my head around component based design. I don't know what the "right" way to do this is. Here's the scenario. The player can equip a shield. The the shield is drawn as bubble around the player, it has a separate collision shape, and reduces the damage the player receives from area effects. How is such a shield architected in a component based game? Where I get confused is that the shield obviously has three components associated with it. Damage reduction / filtering A sprite A collider. To make it worse different shield variations could have even more behaviors, all of which could be components: boost player maximum health health regen projectile deflection etc Am I overthinking this? Should the shield just be a super component? I really think this is wrong answer. So if you think this is the way to go please explain. Should the shield be its own entity that tracks the location of the player? That might make it hard to implement the damage filtering. It also kinda blurs the lines between attached components and entities. Should the shield be a component that houses other components? I've never seen or heard of anything like this, but maybe it's common and I'm just not deep enough yet. Should the shield just be a set of components that get added to the player? Possibly with an extra component to manage the others, e.g. so they can all be removed as a group. (accidentally leave behind the damage reduction component, now that would be fun). Something else that's obvious to someone with more component experience?

  Read the article

• Doing powerups in a component-based system

  - by deft_code

  I'm just starting really getting my head around component based design. I don't know what the "right" way to do this is. Here's the scenario. The player can equip a shield. The the shield is drawn as bubble around the player, it has a separate collision shape, and reduces the damage the player receives from area effects. How is such a shield architected in a component based game? Where I get confused is that the shield obviously has three components associated with it. Damage reduction / filtering A sprite A collider. To make it worse different shield variations could have even more behaviors, all of which could be components: boost player maximum health health regen projectile deflection etc Am I overthinking this? Should the shield just be a super component? I really think this is wrong answer. So if you think this is the way to go please explain. Should the shield be its own entity that tracks the location of the player? That might make it hard to implement the damage filtering. It also kinda blurs the lines between attached components and entities. Should the shield be a component that houses other components? I've never seen or heard of anything like this, but maybe it's common and I'm just not deep enough yet. Should the shield just be a set of components that get added to the player? Possibly with an extra component to manage the others, e.g. so they can all be removed as a group. (accidentally leave behind the damage reduction component, now that would be fun). Something else that's obvious to someone with more component experience?

  Read the article

• How to mange big amount users at server side?

  - by Rami

  I built a social android application in which users can see other users around them by gps location. at the beginning thing went well as i had low number of users, But now that I have increasing number of users (about 1500 +100 every day) I revealed a major problem in my design. In my Google App Engine servlet I have static HashMap that holding all the users profiles objects, currenty 1500 and this number will increase as more users register. Why I'm doing it Every user that requesting for the users around him compares his gps with other users and check if they are in his 10km radius, this happens every 5 min on average. That is why I can't get the users from db every time because GAE read/write operation quota will tare me apart. The problem with this desgin is As the number of users increased the Hashmap turns to null every 4-6 hours, I thing that this time is getting shorten but I'm not sure. I'm fixing this by reloading the users from the db every time I detect that it became null, But this causes DOS to my users for 30 sec, So I'm looking for better solution. I'm guessing that it happens because the size of the hashmap, Am I right? I have been advised to use spatial database, but that mean that I can't work with GAE any more and that mean that I need to build my big server all over again and lose my existing DB. Is there something I can do with the existing tools? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Entity system in Lua, communication with C++ and level editor. Need advice.

  - by Notbad

  Hi!, I know this is a really difficult subject. I have been reading a lot this days about Entity systems, etc... And now I'm ready to ask some questions (if you don't mind answering them) because I'm really messed. First of all, I have a 2D basic editor written in Qt, and I'm in the process of adding entitiy edition. I want the editor to be able to receive RTTI information from entities to change properties, create some logic being able to link published events to published actions (Ex:A level activate event throws a door open action), etc... Because all of this I guess my entity system should be written in scripting, in my case Lua. In the other hand I want to use a component based design for my entities, and here starts my questions: 1) Should I define my componentes en C++? If I do this en C++ won't I loose all the RTTI information I want for my editor?. In the other hand, I use box2d for physics, if I define all my components in script won't it be a lot of work to expose third party libs to lua? 2) Where should I place the messa system for my game engine? Lua? C++?. I'm tempted to just have C++ object to behave as servers, offering services to lua business logic. Things like physics system, rendering system, input system, World class, etc... And for all the other things, lua. Creation/Composition of entities based on components, game logic, etc... Could anyone give any insight on how to accomplish this? And what aproach is better?. Thanks in advance, HexDump.

  Read the article

• How should I structure moving from overworld to menu system / combat?

  - by persepolis

  I'm making a text-based "Arena" game where the player is the owner of 5 creatures that battle other teams for loot, experience and glory. The game is very simple, using Python and a curses emulator. I have a static ASCII map of an "overworld" of sorts. My character, represented by a glyph, can move about this static map. There are locations all over the map that the character can visit, that break down into two types: 1) Towns, which are a series of menus that will allow the player to buy equipment for his team, hire new recruits or do other things. 2) Arenas, where the player's team will have a "battle" interface with actions he can perform, messages about the fight, etc. Maybe later, an ASCII representation of the fight but for now, just screens of information with action prompts. My main problem is what kind of design or structure I should use to implement this? Right now, the game goes through a master loop which waits for keyboard input and then moves the player about the screen. My current thinking is this: 1) Upon keyboard input, the Player coordinates are checked against a list of Location objects and if the Player coords match the Location coords then... 2) ??? I'm not sure if I should then call a seperate function to initiate a "menu" or "combat" mode. Or should I create some kind of new GameMode object that contains a method itself for drawing the screen, printing the necessary info? How do I pass my player's team data into this object? My main concern is passing around the program flow into all these objects. Should I be calling straight functions for different parts of my game, and objects to represent "things" within my game? I was reading about the MVC pattern and how this kind of problem might benefit - decouple the GUI from the game logic and user input but I have no idea how this applies to my game.

  Read the article

• how to architect this to make it unit testable

  - by SOfanatic

  I'm currently working on a project where I'm receiving an object via web service (WSDL). The overall process is the following: Receive object - add/delete/update parts (or all) of it - and return the object with the changes made. The thing is that sometimes these changes are complicated and there is some logic involved, other databases, other web services, etc. so to facilitate this I'm creating a custom object that mimics the original one but has some enhanced functionality to make some things easier. So I'm trying to have this process: Receive original object - convert/copy it to custom object - add/delete/update - convert/copy it back to original object - return original object. Example: public class Row { public List<Field> Fields { get; set; } public string RowId { get; set; } public Row() { this.Fields = new List<Field>(); } } public class Field { public string Number { get; set; } public string Value { get; set; } } So for example, one of the "actions" to perform on this would be to find all Fields in a Row that match a Value equal to something, and update them with some other value. I have a CustomRow class that represents the Row class, how can I make this class unit testable? Do I have to create an interface ICustomRow to mock it in the unit test? If one of the actions is to sum all of the Values in the Fields that have a Number equal to 10, like this function, how can design the custom class to facilitate unit tests. Sample function: public int Sum(FieldNumber number) { return row.Fields.Where(x => x.FieldNumber.Equals(number)).Sum(x => x.FieldValue); } Am I approaching this the wrong way?

  Read the article

• Cookie Settings Storage Method

  - by Paul

  I've got an web app that needs to store some non-sensitive preferences for the user. Right now I'm storing their language preference and what mode they want a window opened in by default in two cookies: "lang" can be "en" or "de" "mode" can be "design" or "view" I might add a few more in the future. I'm not sure how many, but probably never more than a dozen. Language is parsed on every request, whereas the mode cookie is only used occasionally. I saw a recommendation that made sense I shouldn't try to do what I was originally planning to do and strongly type a user settings class deserialized on each request because of the overhead involved. I see three options here and I'm not sure which is the best overall. Keep things as they are, add a new cookie for each new setting Combine the cookies into a single settings cookie and add future values to it Change the mode cookie to settings (leaving language alone), add new user settings values to the settings cookie All would work obviously. I'm leaning toward option three, but I'm not sure if there's a best practice for this?

  Read the article

• knowing all available entity types

  - by plofplof

  I'm making a game where at some point the game will create enemies of random types. Each type of enemy available is defined on its own class derived from an enemy superclass. To do this, obviously the different types of enemies should be known. This is what I have thought of: Just make a list manually. Very simple to do, but I don't like it because I'll be adding more enemy types over time, so any time I add a new class I have to remember to update this (same if I remove an enemy). I would like some kind of auto-updating list. A completely component based system. There are no different classes for each enemy, but definitions of enemies in some file where all enemy types can be found. I really don't need that level of complexity for my game. I'm still using a component based model to some degree, but each Enemy type gets defined on its own class. Java Annotation processing. Give each enemy subclass an annotation like @EnemyType("whatever"), then code an annotation processor that writes in a file all available enemy types. Any time a new class is added the file gets updated after compilation.This gives me a feeling of failure even if its a good solution, it's very dependant on Java, so it means I cant think of a general design good for any kind of language. Also I think that this would be too much work for something so simple. I would like to see comments on these ideas and other possible solutions Thanks

  Read the article

• Tales from the Trenches – Building a Real-World Silverlight Line of Business Application

  - by dwahlin

  There's rarely a boring day working in the world of software development. Part of the fun associated with being a developer is that change is guaranteed and the more you learn about a particular technology the more you realize there's always a different or better way to perform a task. I've had the opportunity to work on several different real-world Silverlight Line of Business (LOB) applications over the past few years and wanted to put together a list of some of the key things I've learned as well as key problems I've encountered and resolved. There are several different topics I could cover related to "lessons learned" (some of them were more painful than others) but I'll keep it to 5 items for this post and cover additional lessons learned in the future. The topics discussed were put together for a TechEd talk: Pick a Pattern and Stick To It Data Binding and Nested Controls Notify Users of Successes (and failures) Get an Agent – A Service Agent Extend Existing Controls The first topic covered relates to architecture best practices and how the MVVM pattern can save you time in the long run. When I was first introduced to MVVM I thought it was a lot of work for very little payoff. I've since learned (the hard way in some cases) that my initial impressions were dead wrong and that my criticisms of the pattern were generally caused by doing things the wrong way. In addition to MVVM pros the slides and sample app below also jump into data binding tricks in nested control scenarios and discuss how animations and media can be used to enhance LOB applications in subtle ways. Finally, a discussion of creating a re-usable service agent to interact with backend services is discussed as well as how existing controls make good candidates for customization. I tried to keep the samples simple while still covering the topics as much as possible so if you’re new to Silverlight you should definitely be able to follow along with a little study and practice. I’d recommend starting with the SilverlightDemos.View project, moving to the SilverlightDemos.ViewModels project and then going to the SilverlightDemos.ServiceAgents project. All of the backend “Model” code can be found in the SilverlightDemos.Web project. Custom controls used in the app can be found in the SivlerlightDemos.Controls project.   Sample Code and Slides

  Read the article

• Should I be using a JavaScript SPA designed when security is important

  - by ryanzec

  I asked something kind of similar on stackoverflow with a particular piece of code however I want to try to ask this in a broader sense. So I have this web application that I have started to write in backbone using a Single Page Architecture (SPA) however I am starting to second guess myself because of security. Now we are not storing and sending credit card information or anything like that through this web application but we are storing sensitive information that people are uploading to us and will have the ability to re-download too. The obviously security concern that I have with JavaScript is that you can't trust anything that comes from JavaScript however in a Backbone SPA application, everything is being sent through JavaScript. There are two security features that I will have to build in JavaScript; permissions and authentication. The authentication piece is just me override the Backbone.Router.prototype.navigate method to check the fragment it is trying to load and if the JavaScript application.session.loggedIn is not set to true (and they are not viewing a none authenticated page), they are redirected to the login page automatically. The user could easily modify application.session.loggedIn to equal true (or modify Backbone.Router.prototype.navigate method) but then they would also have to not so easily dynamically embedded a link into the page (or modify a current one) that has the proper classes, data-* attributes, and href values to then load a page that should only be loaded when they user has logged in (and has the permissions). So I have an acl object that deals with the permissions stuff. All someone would have to do to view pages or parts of pages they should not be able to is to call acl.addPermission(resource, permission) with the proper permissions or modify the acl.hasPermission() to always return true and then navigate away and then back to the page. Now certain things is EMCAScript 5 like Object.seal() or Object.freeze() would help with some of this however we have to support IE 8 which does not support those pieces of functionality. Now the REST API also performs security checks on every request so technically even if they are able to see parts of the interface that they should not be able to, they still should not be able to actually affect any data. The main benefits for me in developing a JavaScript SPA application is that the application is a lot more responsive since it is only transferring the minimum amount of JSON data for the requested action and performing the minimum amount of work too. There are also other things that I think are beneficial like you are going to have to develop an API for the data (which is good if you want expand your application to different platforms/technologies) or their is more of a separation between front-end and back-end however if security is a concern, it is really wise to go down the road of a JavaScript SPA application for the front-end?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >