Search Results

Search found 15088 results on 604 pages for 'programming books'.

Page 104/604 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • Would you use UML if it kept stakeholders from requesting changes frequently?

    - by Huperniketes
    As much as programmers hate to document their code/system and draw UML (especially, Sequencing, Activity and State machine diagrams) or other diagramming notation, would you agree to do it if it kept managers from requesting a "minor change" every couple of weeks? IOW, would you put together visual models to document the system if it helped you demonstrate to managers what the effect of changes are and why it takes so long to implement them? (Edited to help programmers understand what type of answer I'm looking for.) 2nd edit: Restating my question again, "Would you be willing to use some diagramming notation, against your better nature as a programmer, if it helped you manage change requests?" This question isn't asking if there might be something wrong with the process. It's a given that there's something wrong with the process. Would you be willing to do more work to improve it?

    Read the article

  • How do I implement a score database in Android?

    - by Michael Seun Araromi
    I making a 2D game for Android using OpenGL-ES technology. It is a space shooting game where the player shoots enemy ships. I want to keep a track of score for the amount of enemy ships destroyed and a record of a local highscore. The score should be incremented whenever an enemy is destroyed. I also want a way of displaying both the current score and highscore on the game screen. I am not familiar with databases at all and I will appreciate a clear answer or a link to a good tutorial for my cause. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Appropriate level of granularity for component-based architecture

    - by Jon Purdy
    I'm working on a game with a component-based architecture. An Entity owns a set of Component instances, each of which has a set of Slot instances with which to store, send, and receive values. Factory functions such as Player produce entities with the required components and slot connections. I'm trying to determine the best level of granularity for components. For example, right now Position, Velocity, and Acceleration are all separate components, connected in series. Velocity and Acceleration could easily be rewritten into a uniform Delta component, or Position, Velocity, and Acceleration could be combined alongside such components as Friction and Gravity into a monolithic Physics component. Should a component have the smallest responsibility possible (at the cost of lots of interconnectivity) or should related components be combined into monolithic ones (at the cost of flexibility)? I'm leaning toward the former, but I could use a second opinion.

    Read the article

  • Should code comments have scope?

    - by Rig Veda
    I am asking this because I have seen places where, whoever coded initially had provided proper comments, but later on modifications were made to the code but the comments were left untouched. I remember reading somewhere " Don't get suckered in by the comments, debug only code". So is it a good/ relevant/ practical idea that tells the scope of the comments so as to prompt the developer for editing the comment. Your thoughts.

    Read the article

  • What does "context-free" mean in the term "context-free grammar"?

    - by rick
    Given the amount of material that tries to explain what a context-free grammar (CFG) is, I found it surprising that very few (in my sample, less than 1 in 20) give an explanation on why such grammars are called "context-free". And, to my mind, none succeeds in doing so. My question is, why are context-free grammars called context-free? What is "the context"? I had an intuition that the context could be other language constructs surrounding the currently analyzed construct, but that seems not to be the case. Could anyone provide a precise explanation?

    Read the article

  • Does a mature agile team requires any management?

    - by ashy_32bit
    After a recent heated debate over Scrum, I realized my problem is that I think of management as a quite unnecessary and redundant activity in a fully agile team. I believe a mature Agile team does not require management or any non-technical decision making process whatsoever. To my (apparently erring) eyes it is more than obvious that the only one suitable and capable of managing a mature development team is their coach (who is the most technically competent colleague with proper communication skills). I can't imagine how a Scrum master can contribute to such a team. I am having great difficulty realizing and understanding the value of such things in Scrum and the manager as someone who is not a veteran developer but is well skilled in planning the production cycles when a coach exists in the team. What does that even mean? How on earth can someone with no edge-skills of development manage a highly technical team? Perhaps management here means something else? I see management as a total waste of time and a by-product of immaturity. In my understanding a mature team is fully self-managing. Apparently I'm mistaken since many great people say the contrary but I can't convince myself.

    Read the article

  • Turning your code inside out (functional style) compared to a OO paradigm

    - by Acaz Souza
    I have find this article Turning Your Code Inside Out and I want to know how this approach described in article is for OO programmers/languages. Is this style of design used in OO programmers/languages? What's downsides and goodsides of this approach in a OO language? Update: OO objects have state and behavior, the design explained in article is stateless. Is not only Single Responsability Principle. (If I'm talking shit, please explain to me instead of only downside/close votes)

    Read the article

  • Displaying performance data per engine subsystem

    - by liortal
    Our game (Android based) traces how long it takes to do the world logic updates, and how long it takes to a render a frame to the device screen. These traces are collected every frame, and displayed at a constant interval (currently every 1 second). I've seen games where on-screen data of various engine subsystems is displayed, with the time they consume (either in text) or as horizontal colored bars. I am wondering how to implement such a feature?

    Read the article

  • Stuff you should have learned in school but didn't pay attention to at the time

    - by HLGEM
    This question made me think that there was a better question to ask. What did you learn in school that you didn't care about at the time, but turned out to be useful or you had to relearn in the workplace because you had it in school, but didn't retain the information and you needed it? (I mean for software related jobs.) I think this might help college students identify some of what they really should be paying attention to while they are in school.

    Read the article

  • Biggest mistake you've ever made

    - by Rogue Coder
    Similar to the question I read on Server Fault, what is the biggest mistake you've ever made in an IT related position. Some examples from friends: I needed to do some work on a production site so I decided to copy over the live database to the beta site. Pretty standard, but when I went to the beta site it was still pulling out-of-date info. OOPS! I had copied the beta database over to the live site! Thank god for backups. And for me, I created a form for an event that was to be held during a specific time range. Participants would fill out the form for a chance to win, and we would send the event organizers a CSV from the database. I went into the database, and found ONLY 1 ENTRY, MINE. Upon investigating, it appears as though I forgot an auto increment key, and because of the server setup there was no way to recover the lost data. I am aware this question is similar to ones on Stack Overflow but the ones I found seemed to receive generic answers instead of actual stories :) What is the biggest coding error/mistake ever…

    Read the article

  • airplanes operating system and choice of programing language

    - by adhg
    I was wondring if anyone knows what is the operating system used in commercial airplanes (say Boeing or Airbus). Also, what is the (preferred) real-time programing language? I heard that Ada is used in Boeing, so my question is - why Ada? what are the criteria the Boeing-guys had to choose this language? (I guess Java wouldn't be a great choice if the exactly in lift off the garbage collector wakes up). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What's a nice explanation for pointers?

    - by Macneil
    In your own studies (on your own, or for a class) did you have an "ah ha" moment when you finally, really understood pointers? Do you have an explanation you use for beginner programmers that seems particularly effective? For example, when beginners first encounter pointers in C, they might just add &s and *s until it compiles (as I myself once did). Maybe it was a picture, or a really well motivated example, that made pointers "click" for you or your student. What was it, and what did you try before that didn't seem to work? Were any topics prerequisites (e.g. structs, or arrays)? In other words, what was necessary to understand the meaning of &s and *, when you could use them with confidence? Learning the syntax and terminology or the use cases isn't enough, at some point the idea needs to be internalized. Update: I really like the answers so far; please keep them coming. There are a lot of great perspectives here, but I think many are good explanations/slogans for ourselves after we've internalized the concept. I'm looking for the detailed contexts and circumstances when it dawned on you. For example: I only somewhat understood pointers syntactically in C. I heard two of my friends explaining pointers to another friend, who asked why a struct was passed with a pointer. The first friend talked about how it needed to be referenced and modified, but it was just a short comment from the other friend where it hit me: "It's also more efficient." Passing 4 bytes instead of 16 bytes was the final conceptual shift I needed.

    Read the article

  • Difference between the terms Material & Effect

    - by codey
    I'm making an effect system right now (I think, because it may be a material system... or both!). The effects system follows the common (e.g. COLLADA, DirectX) effect framework abstraction of Effects have Techniques, Techniques have Passes, Passes have States & Shader Programs. An effect, according to COLLADA, defines the equations necessary for the visual appearance of geometry and screen-space image processing. Keeping with the abstraction, effects contain techniques. Each effect can contain one or many techniques (i.e. ways to generate the effect), each of which describes a different method for rendering that effect. The technique could be relate to quality (e.g. high precision, high LOD, etc.), or in-game-situation (e.g. night/day, power-up-mode, etc.). Techniques hold a description of the textures, samplers, shaders, parameters, & passes necessary for rendering this effect using one method. Some algorithms require several passes to render the effect. Pipeline descriptions are broken into an ordered collection of Pass objects. A pass provides a static declaration of all the render states, shaders, & settings for "one rendering pipeline" (i.e. one pass). Meshes usually contain a series of materials that define the model. According to the COLLADA spec (again), a material instantiates an effect, fills its parameters with values, & selects a technique. But I see material defined differently in other places, such as just the Lambert, Blinn, Phong "material types/shaded surfaces", or as Metal, Plastic, Wood, etc. In game dev forums, people often talk about implementing a "material/effect system". Is the material not an instance of an effect? Ergo, if I had effect objects, stored in a collection, & each effect instance object with there own parameter setting, then there is no need for the concept of a material... Or am I interpreting it wrong? Please help by contributing your interpretations as I want to be clear on a distinction (if any), & don't want to miss out on the concept of a material if it should be implemented to follow the abstraction of the DirectX FX framework & COLLADA definitions closely.

    Read the article

  • Basis of definitions

    - by Yttrill
    Let us suppose we have a set of functions which characterise something: in the OO world methods characterising a type. In mathematics these are propositions and we have two kinds: axioms and lemmas. Axioms are assumptions, lemmas are easily derived from them. In C++ axioms are pure virtual functions. Here's the problem: there's more than one way to axiomatise a system. Given a set of propositions or methods, a subset of the propositions which is necessary and sufficient to derive all the others is called a basis. So too, for methods or functions, we have a desired set which must be defined, and typically every one has one or more definitions in terms of the others, and we require the programmer to provide instance definitions which are sufficient to allow all the others to be defined, and, if there is an overspecification, then it is consistent. Let me give an example (in Felix, Haskell code would be similar): class Eq[t] { virtual fun ==(x:t,y:t):bool => eq(x,y); virtual fun eq(x:t, y:t)=> x == y; virtual fun != (x:t,y:t):bool => not (x == y); axiom reflex(x:t): x == x; axiom sym(x:t, y:t): (x == y) == (y == x); axiom trans(x:t, y:t, z:t): implies(x == y and y == z, x == z); } Here it is clear: the programmer must define either == or eq or both. If both are defined, the definitions must be equivalent. Failing to define one doesn't cause a compiler error, it causes an infinite loop at run time. Defining both inequivalently doesn't cause an error either, it is just inconsistent. Note the axioms specified constrain the semantics of any definition. Given a definition of == either directly or via a definition of eq, then != is defined automatically, although the programmer might replace the default with something more efficient, clearly such an overspecification has to be consistent. Please note, == could also be defined in terms of !=, but we didn't do that. A characterisation of a partial or total order is more complex. It is much more demanding since there is a combinatorial explosion of possible bases. There is an reason to desire overspecification: performance. There also another reason: choice and convenience. So here, there are several questions: one is how to check semantics are obeyed and I am not looking for an answer here (way too hard!). The other question is: How can we specify, and check, that an instance provides at least a basis? And a much harder question: how can we provide several default definitions which depend on the basis chosen?

    Read the article

  • Get Hands On with Raspberry Pi via Free OS-Building Course

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Cambridge University is now offering a free 12-segment course that will guide you through building an OS from scratch for the tiny Raspberry Pi development board–learn the ins and outs of basic OS design on the cheap. You’ll need a Raspberry Pi board, a computer running Windows, OS X, or Linux, and an SD card, as well as a small amount of free software. The 12-part tutorial starts you off with basic OS theory and then walks you through basic control of the board, graphics manipulation, and, finally, creating a command line interface for your new operating system. Hit up the link below to read more and check out the lessons. Baking Pi – Operating Systems Development HTG Explains: What The Windows Event Viewer Is and How You Can Use It HTG Explains: How Windows Uses The Task Scheduler for System Tasks HTG Explains: Why Do Hard Drives Show the Wrong Capacity in Windows?

    Read the article

  • Why should I use List<T> over IEnumerable<T>?

    - by Rowan Freeman
    In my ASP.net MVC4 web application I use IEnumerables, trying to follow the mantra to program to the interface, not the implementation. Return IEnumerable(Of Student) vs Return New List(Of Student) People are telling me to use List and not IEnumerable, because lists force the query to be executed and IEumerable does not. Is this really best practice? Is there any alternative? I feel strange using concrete objects where an interface could be used. Is my strange feeling justified?

    Read the article

  • Broad topics needed for teaching game development

    - by livingtech
    I am going to be doing a presentation on game development to an iPhone user group in the near(ish) future. My audience are iPhone developers, but not necessarily very experienced ones, and this is meant to be an introduction. My question is, what broad topics are needed to understand game development? I acknowledge that this is fairly subjective, but I really am hoping for a comprehensive list of high-level topics that apply to a broad enough swath of games that anyone interested in the topic SHOULD know about them. I would be ecstatic with some pointers to any resources that attempt to make a list such as this this. (I have looked, but my google-fu is failing me tonight.) Here's what I have so far: The Game Loop a sub-note about event driven games 2D Animation sprites/texture maps 3D Animation importance of frameworks modeling software Particles and particle effects hit detection AI Obviously I will not be covering all these topics with any depth, more like simply defining them so that after my talk, the audience will (hopefully) be able to wrap their heads around how any given game might be developed. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Is reference to bug/issue in commit message considered good practice?

    - by Christian P
    I'm working on a project where we have the source control set up to automatically write notes in the bug tracker. We simply write the bug issue ID in the commit message and the commit message is added as a note to the bug tracker. I can see only a few downsides for this practice. If sometime in the future the source code gets separated from the bug tracking software (or the reported bugs/issues are somehow lost). Or when someone is looking in the history of commits but doesn't have access to our bug tracker. My question is if having a bug/issue reference in the commit message is considered good practice? Are there some other downsides?

    Read the article

  • Should I provide fallbacks for HTML5/CSS3 elements in a web page at this point?

    - by Abluescarab
    I'm wondering if I should bother providing a fallback for HTML5 tags and attributes and CSS3 styling at this point in time. I know that there's probably still a lot of people out there who use older versions of browsers and HTML5/CSS3 are still fairly new. I read this article: Should I use non-standard tags in a HTML page for highlighting words? and one answer mentioned that people kind of "cheat" with older browsers by using the new tags and attributes, but styling them in CSS to ensure they show up right. This question: Relevance of HTML5: Is now the time? was asked about two years ago and I don't know how relevant it is anymore. For example, I want to use the placeholder and required attributes in a web form I'm building and it has no labels to show what each <input> is. How do I handle this, or do I bother?

    Read the article

  • Question about separating game core engine from game graphics engine...

    - by Conrad Clark
    Suppose I have a SquareObject class, which implements IDrawable, an interface which contains the method void Draw(). I want to separate drawing logic itself from the game core engine. My main idea is to create a static class which is responsible to dispatch actions to the graphic engine. public static class DrawDispatcher<T> { private static Action<T> DrawAction = new Action<T>((ObjectToDraw)=>{}); public static void SetDrawAction(Action<T> action) { DrawAction = action; } public static void Dispatch(this T Obj) { DrawAction(Obj); } } public static class Extensions { public static void DispatchDraw<T>(this object Obj) { DrawDispatcher<T>.DispatchDraw((T)Obj); } } Then, on the core side: public class SquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<SquareObject>(); } #endregion } And on the graphics side: public static class SquareRender{ //stuff here public static void Initialize(){ DrawDispatcher<SquareObject>.SetDrawAction((Square)=>{//my square rendering logic}); } } Do this "pattern" follow best practices? And a plus, I could easily change the render scheme of each object by changing the DispatchDraw parameter, as in: public class SuperSquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<SquareObject>(); } #endregion } public class RedSquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<RedSquareObject>(); } #endregion } RedSquareObject would have its own render method, but SuperSquareObject would render as a normal SquareObject I'm just asking because i do not want to reinvent the wheel, and there may be a design pattern similar (and better) to this that I may be not acknowledged of. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Writing Large Portions Of Code Then Debugging?

    - by The Floating Brain
    Lately I have been writing a game engine, and I have been writing a lot of "foundation stuff" (standard interfaces, modules, a message system ect.), but I have noticed a pattern, a lot of the stuff is interdependent and I can not debug until everything is done, hence I do not debug for about 3 to 5 hours at a time. I am wondering if this is an acceptable practice for this part of the project, and if not, if anyone can give me some advice? -----Update-----: I downloaded some code metrics tools, and my programs cyclomatic complexity is 1.52 which as I understand it is good, and should correlate to high cohesion, if I am wrong please correct me/

    Read the article

  • How to have a maintainable and manageable Javascript code base

    - by dade
    I am starting a new job soon as a frontend developer. The App I would be working on is 100% Javascript on the client side. all the server returns is an index page that loads all the Javascript files needed by the app. Now here is the problem: The whole of the application is built around having functions wrapped to different namespaces. And from what I see, a simple function like rendering the HTML of a page can be accomplished by having a call to 2 or more functions across different namespace... My initial thought was "this does not feel like the perfect solution" and I can just envisage a lot of issues with maintaining the code and extending it down the line. Now I would soon start working on taking the project forward and would like to have suggestions on good case practices when it comes to writing and managing a relatively large amount of javascript code.

    Read the article

  • Creating an expandable, cross-platform compatible program "core".

    - by Thomas Clayson
    Hi there. Basically the brief is relatively simple. We need to create a program core. An engine that will power all sorts of programs with a large number of distinct potential applications and deployments. The core will be an analytics and algorithmic processor which will essentially take user-specific input and output scenarios based on the information it gets, whilst recording this information for reporting. It needs to be cross platform compatible. Something that can have platform specific layers put on top which can interface with the core. It also needs to be able to be expandable, for instance, modular with developers being able to write "add-ons" or "extensions" which can alter the function of the end program and can use the core to its full extent. (For instance, a good example of what I'm looking to create is a browser. It has its main core, the web-kit engine, for instance, and then on top of this is has a platform-specific GUI and can also have add-ons and extensions which can change the behavior of the program.) Our problem is that the extensions need to interface directly with the main core and expand/alter that functionality rather than the platform specific "layer". So, given that I have no experience in this whatsoever (I have a PHP background and recently objective-c), where should I start, and is there any knowledge/wisdom you can impart on me please? Thanks for all the help and advice you can give me. :) If you need any more explanation just ask. At the moment its in the very early stages of development, so we're just researching all possible routes of development. Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • How to handle mutiple API calls using javascript/jquery

    - by James Privett
    I need to build a service that will call multiple API's at the same time and then output the results on the page (Think of how a price comparison site works for example). The idea being that as each API call completes the results are sent to the browser immediately and the page would get progressively bigger until all process are complete. Because these API calls may take several seconds each to return I would like to do this via javascript/jquery in order to create a better user experience. I have never done anything like this before using javascript/jquery so I was wondering if there was any frameworks/advice that anyone would be willing to share.

    Read the article

  • Prioritize compiler functionality/tasks, when designing a new language

    - by Mahdi
    Well, the question should be so hard to ask and I expect couple of down votes, however, I'm really interested to have your ideas and recommendations. :) I've already made a very simple compiler, with a few and limited functionality. Now I'm getting more on it to make it more like a real-world compiler. I definitely need to start over 'cause I've much more experience and ideas in this area rather a few years ago. So, I want to know, right now, from the very first step again, which tasks/features for the new compiler should implement first and which tasks has lower priority rather than others? For example, I'd say, first I'd go to decide about the object-oriented structure for the new language, but you might say, hey, just go for a compiler that could define a variable, when you finished that, then start thinking about OOP designs ... I prefer to hear the pros and cons for your suggestions also. Actually I like to start from Bottom to Top, where I could add simplest tasks first, and later adding more complex ones, but I'm totally open for any new ideas, and really appreciate that. Also please consider that I'm thinking about the design concepts. Actually I expect answers like: Priority from Highest to Lowest: variables, because .... functions, because .... loops, because .... ... Not: define a syntax for your new language, and start parsing your source code ...

    Read the article

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