Search Results

Search found 4835 results on 194 pages for 'practice'.

Page 107/194 | < Previous Page | 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114  | Next Page >

• Profit : August, 2012

  - by user462779

  August 2012 issue of Profit is now available online. Way back in 2003, I wrote my first feature for Profit. It was titled “Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Application Servers (But Were Afraid To Ask),” and it discussed “cutting-edge” technologies like portals and XML and the brand-new Java Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE; we’re now on Java EE 7). But despite the dated terms I used in my Profit debut, I noticed something in rereading that old story that has stayed constant: mid-tier technology is where innovative enterprise IT projects happen. It may have been XML in 2003, but it’s SOA in 2012. While preparing the August issue of Profit was more than just a stroll down memory lane for me, it has provided a nice bit of perspective about what changes and what doesn’t in this dynamic IT industry. Technologies continuously evolve—some become standard practice, some are revived or reinvented, and some are left by the wayside. But the drive to innovate and the desire to succeed are business principles that never go out of fashion. Also, be sure to check out the Profit JD Edwards Special Issue 2012 (PDF), featuring partner profiles, customer successes, and Oracle executive interviews. The Middleware Advantage Three ways a flexible, integrate software layer can deliver a competitive edge Playing to Win Electronic Arts’ superefficient hub processes millions of online gaming transactions every day. Adjustable Loans With Oracle Exadata, Reliance Commercial Finance keeps pace with India’s commercial loan market. Future Proof To keep pace with mobile, social, and location-based services, smart technologists are using middleware to innovate. Spring Training Knowledge and communication help Jackson Hewitt’s Tim Bechtold get seasonal workers in top shape. Keeping Online Customers Happy Customers worldwide are comfortable with online service—but are companies meeting customers’ needs?

  Read the article

• What is the advantage to using a factor of 1024 instead of 1000 for disk size units?

  - by Joe Z.

  When considering the disk space of a storage medium, normally the computer or operating system will represent it in terms of powers of 1024 - a kilobyte is 1,024 bytes, a megabyte is 1,048,576 bytes, a gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, and so on. But I don't see any practical reason why this convention was adopted. Usually when disk size is represented in kilo-, mega-, or giga-bytes, it has to be converted into decimal first. In places where a power-of-two byte count actually matters (like the block size on a file system), the size is given in bytes anyway (e.g. 4096 bytes). Was it just a little aesthetic novelty that computer makers decided to adopt, but storage medium vendors decided to disregard? Whenever you buy a hard drive, there's always a disclaimer nowadays that says "One gigabyte means one billion bytes". It would feel like using the binary definition of "gigabyte" would artificially inflate the byte count of a device, making drive-makers have to pack 1.1 terabytes into a drive in order to have it show up as "1 TB", or to simply pack 1 terabyte in and have it show up as "931 GB" (and most of them do the latter). Some people have decided to use units like "KiB" or "MiB" in favour of "KB" and "MB" in order to distinguish the two. But is there any merit to the binary prefixes in the first place? There's probably a bit of old history I'm not aware of on this topic, and if there is, I'm looking for somebody to explain it. (Apologies if this is in the wrong place. I felt that a question on best practice might belong here, but I have faith that it will be migrated to the right place if it's incorrect.)

  Read the article

• Partner OBI 11g 5-Day Hands-on Training Workshop

  - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM

  Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} 14 - 18 January 2013, Oracle Reading (UK) REGISTER HERE NOW This 5 day hands-on workshop provides attendees a hands-on experience to practice with OBI11g environment. Participants will gain in-depth understanding of new architecture of OBIEE 11g, security mode, installation/configuration as well as reporting aspects like new ROLAP/MOLAP style hierarchical browsing, new chart types, Action Framework and Visualization. Please note that attendees are required to have a laptop.  This training is only for OPN member Partners. View here laptop requirements and detailed agenda.

  Read the article

• Switch or a Dictionary when assigning to new object

  - by KChaloux

  Recently, I've come to prefer mapping 1-1 relationships using Dictionaries instead of Switch statements. I find it to be a little faster to write and easier to mentally process. Unfortunately, when mapping to a new instance of an object, I don't want to define it like this: var fooDict = new Dictionary<int, IBigObject>() { { 0, new Foo() }, // Creates an instance of Foo { 1, new Bar() }, // Creates an instance of Bar { 2, new Baz() } // Creates an instance of Baz } var quux = fooDict[0]; // quux references Foo Given that construct, I've wasted CPU cycles and memory creating 3 objects, doing whatever their constructors might contain, and only ended up using one of them. I also believe that mapping other objects to fooDict[0] in this case will cause them to reference the same thing, rather than creating a new instance of Foo as intended. A solution would be to use a lambda instead: var fooDict = new Dictionary<int, Func<IBigObject>>() { { 0, () => new Foo() }, // Returns a new instance of Foo when invoked { 1, () => new Bar() }, // Ditto Bar { 2, () => new Baz() } // Ditto Baz } var quux = fooDict[0](); // equivalent to saying 'var quux = new Foo();' Is this getting to a point where it's too confusing? It's easy to miss that () on the end. Or is mapping to a function/expression a fairly common practice? The alternative would be to use a switch: IBigObject quux; switch(someInt) { case 0: quux = new Foo(); break; case 1: quux = new Bar(); break; case 2: quux = new Baz(); break; } Which invocation is more acceptable? Dictionary, for faster lookups and fewer keywords (case and break) Switch: More commonly found in code, doesn't require the use of a Func< object for indirection.

  Read the article

• What is the precise definition of programming paradigm?

  - by Kazark

  Wikipedia defines programming paradigm thus: a fundamental style of computer programming which is echoed in the descriptive text of the paradigms tag on this site. I find this a disappointing definition. Anyone who knows the words programming and paradigm could do about that well without knowing anything else about it. There are many styles of computer programming at many level of abstraction; within any given programming paradigm, multiple styles are possible. For example, Bob Martin says in Clean Code (13), Consider this book a description of the Object Mentor School of Clean Code. The techniques and teachings within are the way that we practice our art. We are willing to claim that if you follow these teachings, you will enjoy the benefits that we have enjoyed, and you will learn to write code that is clean and professional. But don't make the mistake of thinking that we are somehow "right" in any absolute sense. Thus Bob Martin is not claiming to have the correct style of Object-Oriented programming, even though he, if anyone, might have some claim to doing so. But even within his school of programming, we might have different styles of formatting the code (K&R, etc). There are many styles of programming at many levels. So how can we define programming paradigm rigorously, to distinguish it from other categories of programming styles? Fundamental is somewhat helpful, but not specific. How can we define the phrase in a way that will communicate more than the separate meanings of each of the two words—in other words, how can we define it in a way that will provide additional meaning for someone who speaks English but isn't familiar with a variety of paradigms?

  Read the article

• Session serialization in JavaEE environment

  - by Ionut

  Please consider the following scenario: We are working on a JavaEE project for which the scalability starts to become an issue. Up until now, we were able to scale up but this is no longer an option. Therefore we need to consider scaling out and preparing the App for a clustered environment. Our main concern right now is serializing the user sessions. Sadly, we did not consider from the beginning the issue and we are encountering the following excetion: java.io.WriteAbortedException: writing aborted; java.io.NotSerializableException: org.apache.catalina.session.StandardSessionFacade I did some research and this exception is thrown because there are objects stored on the session which does not implement the Serializable interface. Considering that all over the app there are quite a few custom objects which are stored on the session without implementing this interface, it would require a lot of tedious work and dedication to fix all these classes declaration. We will fix all this declarations but the main concern is that, in the future, there may be a developer which will add a non Serializable object on the session and break the session serialization & replication over multiple nodes. As a quick overview of the project, we are developing using a home grown framework based on Struts 1 with the Servlet 3.0 API. This means that at this point, we are using the standard session.getAttribute() and session.setAttribute() to work with the session and the session handling is scattered all over the code base. Besides updating the classes of the objects stored on session and making sure that they implement the Serializable interface, what other measures of precaution should we take in order to ensure a reliable Session replication capability on the Application layer? I know it is a little bit late to consider this but what would be the best practice in this case? Furthermore, are there any other issues we should consider regarding this transition? Thank you in advance!

  Read the article

• How-to get the binding for a tab in the Dynamic Tab Shell Template

  - by Frank Nimphius

  The Dynamic Tab Shell template does expose a method on the Tab.java class that allows you to get access to the ADF binding container for a tab. At least in theory this works, because in practice this call always returns a null value (a bug is filed for this). To work around the problem, you can use code similar to the following to get the ADF binding for a specific tab DCBindingContainer currentBinding = (DCBindingContainer) BindingContext.getCurrent().getCurrentBindingsEntry(); DCBindingContainer templateBinding = (DCBindingContainer)currentBinding.get("ptb1"); DCBindingContainer tabBinding= (DCBindingContainer)templateBinding.get("r"+0);  In the code line above, the tabBinding variable will hold the binding reference to the first tab in the dynamic tab shell template. Note that the tab doesn't need to be visible for this (which has to do with how the template works).  "ptb1" is the template reference name in the PageDef file (Executable section) of the template consumer view. Check this string in your page before using this code. If it differs, change it also in the code above. "r0" is the binding reference of the first tab in the template. Te last tab is referenced by "r14".  

  Read the article

• Turn-based Client-Server Card Game - Unicast (TCP) or Multicast (UDP)

  - by LDM91

  I am currently planning to make a card game project where the clients will communicate with the server in a turn-based and synchronous manner using messages sent over sockets. The problem I have is how to handle the following scenario: (Client takes it turn and sends its action to server) Client sends a message telling the server its move for the turn (e.g. plays the card 5 from its hand which needs to placed onto the table) Server receives messages and updates game state (server will hold all game state). Server iterates through a list of connected clients and sends a message to tell of them change in state Clients all refresh to display the state This is all based on using TCP, and looking at it now it seems a bit like the Observer pattern. The reason this seems to be an issue to me is this message doesn't seem to be point-to-point like the others as I want to send it to all the clients, and doesn't seem very efficient sending the same message in that way. I was thinking about using multicasting with UDP as then I could send the message to all the clients, however wouldn't this mean that the clients would in theory be able to message each other? There is of course the synchronous aspect as well, though this could be put on top of the UDP I guess. Basically, I would like to know what would be good practice as this project is really all about learning, and even though it won't be big enough to encounter performance issues from this I would like to consider them anyway. However, please note I am not interested in using message oriented middleware as a solution (I have experience with using MOM and I'm interested in considering other options excluding MOM if TCP sockets is a bad idea!).

  Read the article

• Code structure for multiple applications with a common core

  - by Azrael Seraphin

  I want to create two applications that will have a lot of common functionality. Basically, one system is a more advanced version of the other system. Let's call them Simple and Advanced. The Advanced system will add to, extend, alter and sometimes replace the functionality of the Simple system. For instance, the Advanced system will add new classes, add properties and methods to existing Simple classes, change the behavior of classes, etc. Initially I was thinking that the Advanced classes simply inherited from the Simple classes but I can see the functionality diverging quite significantly as development progresses, even while maintaining a core base functionality. For instance, the Simple system might have a Project class with a Sponsor property whereas the Advanced system has a list of Project.Sponsors. It seems poor practice to inherit from a class and then hide, alter or throw away significant parts of its features. An alternative is just to run two separate code bases and copy the common code between them but that seems inefficient, archaic and fraught with peril. Surely we have moved beyond the days of "copy-and-paste inheritance". Another way to structure it would be to use partial classes and have three projects: Core which has the common functionality, Simple which extends the Core partial classes for the simple system, and Advanced which also extends the Core partial classes for the advanced system. Plus having three test projects as well for each system. This seems like a cleaner approach. What would be the best way to structure the solution/projects/code to create two versions of a similar system? Let's say I later want to create a third system called Extreme, largely based on the Advanced system. Do I then create an AdvancedCore project which both Advanced and Extreme extend using partial classes? Is there a better way to do this? If it matters, this is likely to be a C#/MVC system but I'd be happy to do this in any language/framework that is suitable.

  Read the article

• Which is more important in a web application code promotion hierarchy? production environment to repo equivalence or unidirectional propagation?

  - by ghbarratt

  Lets say you have a code promotion hierarchy consisting of several environments, (the polar end) two of which are development (dev) and production (prod). Lets say you also have a web application where important (but not developer controlled) files are created (and perhaps altered) in the production environment. Lets say that you (or someone above you) decided that the files which are controlled/created/altered/deleted in the production environment needed to go into the repository. Which of the following two sets of practice / approaches do you find best: Committing these non-developed file modifications made in the production environment so that the repository reflects the production environment as closely and as often as possible. Generally ignoring the non-developed production environment alterations, placing confidence in backups to restore the production environment should it be harmed, and keeping a resolution to avoid pushing developments through the promotion hierarchy in the reverse direction (avoiding pushing from prod to dev), only committing the files found in the production environment if they were absolutely necessary in other environments for development. So, 1 or 2, and why? PS - I am currently slightly biased toward maintaining production environment to repository equivalence (option 1), but I keep an open mind and would accept an answer supporting either.

  Read the article

• AJAX driven "page complete" function? Am I doing it right?

  - by Julian H. Lam

  This one might get me slaughtered, since I'm pretty sure it's bad coding practice, so here goes: I have an AJAX driven site which loads both content and javascript in one go using Mootools' Request.HTML. Since I have initialization scripts that need to be run to finish "setting up" the template, I include those in a function called pageComplete(), on every page Visiting one page to another causes the previous pageComplete() function to no longer apply, since a new one is defined. The javascript function that loads pages dynamically calls pageComplete() blindly when the AJAX call is completed and is loaded onto the page: function loadPage(page, params) { // page is a string, params is a javascript object if (pageRequest && pageRequest.isRunning) pageRequest.cancel(); pageRequest = new Request.HTML({ url: '<?=APPLICATION_LINK?>' + page, evalScripts: true, onSuccess: function(tree, elements, html) { // Empty previous content and insert new content $('content').empty(); $('content').innerHTML = html; pageComplete(); pageRequest = null; } }).send('params='+JSON.encode(params)); } So yes, if pageComplete() is not defined in one the pages, the old pageComplete() is called, which could potentially be disastrous, but as of now, every single page has pageComplete() defined, even if it is empty. Good idea, bad idea?

  Read the article

• How to tell your boss that his programming style is really bad?

  - by Roflcoptr

  I'm a student and in my spare time I'm working for a big enterprise as Java developer. The job is good, but the problem is, my boss is writing very strange code. I don't want to complain, but some issues are in my opinion really strange. For example: he doesn't know any booleans. All boolean conditions are Strings called "YesOrNo" and then in the condition he uses if (YesOrNo == "Yes") there are a lot of very strange characters in method names and variables like é õ ô or è all loops are infinite loops in the style of for(;;). Then at the end of the loop the condition is tested and if the conditions is fulfilled break; is called. I don't now if I should tell him that I think this isn't a good practice, since he is my boss and decides how and what to do. On the other hand some of this examples are really very weird. Any hints how to cope with? And is this only me who thinks that's bad style?

  Read the article

• rel="nofollow" SEO impact

  - by Torez

  I saw a technique used where there was a block with three parts: 1. Image (wrapped in an anchor tag) 2. Heading (anchor tag with heading text) 3. Paragraph (regular p tag with synopsis content) e.g. <li class="block"> <a rel="nofollow" class="thumb" href="#"><img src="images/placeholder_service_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" /></a> <a class="h3" href="#"Good SEO Heading</a> <pPellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Vestibulum tortor quam, feugiat vitae, ultricies eget, tempor sit amet, ante. Donec eu...</p> </li> With the image tag there was a rel="nofollow" on the wrapped anchor tag. So the idea is that the users still has the ability to click the image and go to the details page, but the image link does not rank. When users click on the heading text, that is only what ranks for that specific page. Q: Is this the correct approach? Does this even do anything? What is the best practice?

  Read the article

• ArchBeat Link-o-Rama for October 17, 2013

  - by OTN ArchBeat

  Oracle Author Podcast: Danny Coward on "Java WebSocket Programming" In this Oracle Author Podcast Roger Brinkley talks with Java architect Danny Coward about his new book, Java WebSocket Programming, now available from Oracle Press. Webcast: Why Choose Oracle Linux for your Oracle Database 12c Deployments Sumanta Chatterjee, VP Database Engineering for Oracle discusses advantages of choosing Oracle Linux for Oracle Database, including key optimizations and features, and talks about tools to simplify and speed deployment of Oracle Database on Linux, including Oracle VM Templates, Oracle Validated Configurations, and pre-install RPM. Oracle BI Apps 11.1.1.7.1 – GoldenGate Integration - Part 1: Introduction | Michael Rainey Michael Rainey launches a series of posts that guide you through "the architecture and setup for using GoldenGate with OBIA 11.1.1.7.1." Should your team use a framework? | Sten Vesterli "Some developers have an aversion to frameworks, feeling that it will be faster to just write everything themselves," observes Oracle ACE Director Sten Vesterli. He explains why that's a very bad idea in this short post. Free Poster: Adaptive Case Management in Practice Thanks to Masons of SOA member Danilo Schmiedel for providing a hi-res copy of the Adaptive Case Management poster, now available for download from the OTN ArchBeat Blog. Oracle Internal Testing Overview: Understanding How Rigorous Oracle Testing Saves Time and Effort During Deployment Want to understand Oracle Engineering's internal product testing methodology? This white paper takes you behind the curtain. Thought for the Day "If I see an ending, I can work backward." — Arthur Miller, American playwright (October 17, 1915 – February 10, 2005) Source: brainyquote.com

  Read the article

• How should an API use http basic authentication

  - by user1626384

  When an API requires that a client authenticates to it, i've seen two different scenarios used and I am wondering which case I should use for my situation. Example 1. An API is offered by a company to allow third parties to authenticate with a token and secret using HTTP Basic. Example 2. An API accepts a username and password via HTTP Basic to authenticate an end user. Generally they get a token back for future requests. My Setup: I will have an JSON API that I use as my backend for a mobile and web app. It seems like good practice for both the mobile and web app to send along a token and secret so only these two apps can access the API blocking any other third party. But the mobile and web app allow users to login and submit posts, view their data, etc. So I would want them to login via HTTP Basic as well on each request. Do I somehow use a combination of both these methods or only send the end user credentials (username and token) on each request? If I only send the end user credentials, do I store them in a cookie on the client?

  Read the article

• Library Organization in .NET

  - by Greg Ros

  I've written a .NET bitwise operations library as part of my projects (stuff ranging from get MSB set to some more complicated bitwise transformations) and I mean to release it as free software. I'm a bit confused about a design aspect of the library, though. Many of the methods/transformations in the library come with different endianness. A simple example is a getBitAt method that regards index 0 as the least significant bit, or the most significant bit, depending on the version used. In practice, I've found that using separate functions for different endianness results in much more comprehensible and reusable code than assuming all operations are little-endian or something. I'm really stumped regarding how best to package the library. Should I have methods that have LE and BE versions take an enum parameter in their signature, e.g. Endianness.Little, Endianness.Big? Should I have different static classes with identically named methods? such as MSB.GetBit and LSB.GetBit On a much wider note, is there a standard I could use in cases like this? Some guide? Is my design issue trivial? I have a perfectionist bent, and I sometimes get stuck on tricky design issues like this... Note: I've sort of realized I'm using endianness somewhat colloquially to refer to the order/place value of digital component parts (be they bits, bytes, or words) in a larger whole, in any setting. I'm not talking about machine-level endianness or serial transmission endianness. Just about place-value semantics in general. So there isn't a context of targeting different machines/transmission techniques or something.

  Read the article

• Tracking feature requests for small-scale components

  - by DXM

  I'm curious how other development teams (especially those that work in moderate to large development groups) track "future" features/wishlists for functionality for internally developed frameworks or components. I know the standard advice is that a development team should find one good tool for tracking bugs/features and use that for everything and I agree with that if the future requests are for the product itself. In my company we have an engineering department, which is broken up into multiple groups and within each there can be one to several agile teams. The bug tracking product we use has been "a leader since 1997" (their UI/usability seems to also be evaluated against that year even today) but my agile team or even group doesn't really control what is being used by the whole department. What we are looking to track is not necessarily product features but expansion/nice to have functionality for internal components that go into our product. So to name a few for example... framework/utility library on top of CppUnit which our developers share low-level IPC communications framework Common development SDK that myself and several other team leads started to help share some common code/tools at the department-wide level (this SDK is released as internal "product" to each of the groups). Is the standard practice to use the one bug tracking tool? Or would it make more sense to setup something more localized specifically for our needs and maintain it ourselves? It's also unclear how management will feel if developers start performing "IT" roles of maintaining software and servers. At the same time, right now, we use excel files, internal wiki and MS OneNote for this kind of stuff and that just doesn't feel right. (I'm afraid to ask for actual software recommendations, since that might make this question more localized or something. Also developers needs this way more than management, so it would be nice to find something either free or no more than the cost of a happy hour).

  Read the article

• Domain Transfer Protection - need advice

  - by Jack

  Hey, I am about to purchase a domain name for a bit of money. I do not personally know the person who I am purchasing the domain name from, we have only chatted via email. The proposed process for the transfer is: The owner of the domain lowest the domain name security and emails me the domain password, I request the transfer After the request, I transfer the money via PayPal When the money has been cleared the current domain name owner confirms the transfer via the link that he receives in that email I wait for it to be transferred. The domain is currently registered with DirectNIC - http://www.directnic.com/ Is this the best practice? Seeing I am paying a bit of money for this domain name, I am worried that after the money has been cleared that I won't see the domain name or hear from the current domain name owner again. Is there a 'domain governing body' which I can report to if this is the case? Is the proposed transfer process the best solution? Any advice would be awesome. Thanks! Jack

  Read the article

• Designing rules to fight smallpox in Civ-style TBS games

  - by Williham Totland

  TL;DR: How do you design a ruleset for a Civ-style TBS game that prevents city smallpox from being a profitable or viable strategy? Long version: Civ-style games are pretty great. Bringing a civilization from cradle to grave is a great endeavor, and practicing diplomacy with hard-line human players is fun and challenging. In theory. In practice, however, many of these games has, especially in multiplayer, exactly one viable strategy: City smallpox, a.k.a. infinite city spread, a.k.a. covering all available space with 1-citizen cities, packed as tight as they will go. I suppose this could count as emergent gameplay, but still; it could hardly be considered to be in the spirit of the class of game. The Civilization series, of course, is stuck in their more or less fixed rule sets, established with Civilization. Yes, there have been major changes in some respects, but the rules pertaining to city building and maintenance have stayed pretty similar. So the question, then: If you build a ruleset for a TBS from the ground up; what rules should be in place to prevent Infinite City Sprawl from being a viable strategy? Or should ICS be a viable strategy?

  Read the article

• Speaking in Sweden in April

  - by Fabrice Marguerie

  As this is my first post in 2011, I wish you all the best for this new year. I don't know for you, but it will be a year of changes for me. I'll tell you more about that when the time comes. For the time being, I just wanted to announce my next speaking engagement: I'll be presenting at SDC2011, the Scandinavian Developer Conference. This event will take place on April 4 and 5 in Göteborg, Sweden. My session will be based on my article about memory leaks: How to detect and avoid memory and resources leaks in .NET applicationsDuring this session we will analyze the most common leak sources in .NET applications and we will see how to detect them in practice. We will demonstrate with live examples several tools that can help you to troubleshoot your applications. The goal of this session is to help you fix and avoid leaks in your .NET applications, whether they are built with Windows Forms, WPF, Silverlight, ASP.NET, or as console or Windows services. You will also get advices on how to improve your applications so they become less greedy. I hope to see you there if you're around in April :-)

  Read the article

• Will people respect a Masters of Science in IT w/software engineering concentration from RPI?

  - by twneale

  Here's my thing: I got my undergraduate degree in political science, then a law degree. Then I figured out that I love programming and I'm pretty good at it too. It's fun and rewarding enough for me that I'd prefer to do it for a living over almost any form of pure law practice. So I'm looking at getting a masters degree to put some weight behind a possible career switch. If I actually want to develop software (web, in particular), would people in programming circles respect a master's of science in IT? Specifically, consider as an example the MS in IT from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (with a concentration in software engineering). Here's the home page: http://www.rpi.edu/IT/graduate/masters_program.html In particular, I mean to draw a contrast between IT as specifically contemplated by the RPI masters program (an interdisciplinary tech/business program) and other MS degrees in computer science or software engineering that focus more on the science and technical aspects. I guess I want to make sure that other programmers would respect my credentials and not consider me as different or underqualified based on the connotations of the phrase "IT". I believe RPI has an unimpeachable reputation for hard science, and the program seems excellent, but it still matters to me how people in industry would perceive it.

  Read the article

• Is it OK to reoccupy my old GitHub username to protect repository redirections?

  - by Idan Arye

  I'm considering changing my GitHub username from the old alias I was using as a kid to my real name. I'm concerned about my repository URLs. GitHub will redirect the old URLs, but if someone creates a new account using my old username and creates a repository with the same name as one of my repositories, the URL redirection will break and the URL will lead to their repository, not mine. Now, this is understandable, and GitHub recommends to not count on the redirect in the long term, and update all the remotes, but I'm concerned about some Vim plugins I'm hosting on GitHub. It's a common practice to manage Vim plugins with Git(either as separate repositories or as submodules), and if one of the plugins' remotes break you'll get error messages when you try to batch-update all your plugins(it happened to me once...). It's not that hard to solve, and the chances that'll happen are slim, but I would still like to avoid causing trouble to the users of my plugins... To prevent this, I think to create a new account with my old username. That way I can avoid the risk of someone else taking my old username and breaking the redirects of my old repositories. While researching this approach I've found GitHub's Name Squatting Policy. According to that policy, GitHub can delete or rename inactive accounts. To my understanding, they do this to prevent Cybersquatting, but surely this isn't the case with my fake account - I'm not holding someone else's name in an attempt to sell it to them, I'm merely occupying a name I was using to protect my old URLs... So, is it acceptable to go with this plan an create a fake account with my old username?

  Read the article

• C++ Iterator lifetime and detecting invalidation

  - by DK.

  Based on what's considered idiomatic in C++11: should an iterator into a custom container survive the container itself being destroyed? should it be possible to detect when an iterator becomes invalidated? are the above conditional on "debug builds" in practice? Details: I've recently been brushing up on my C++ and learning my way around C++11. As part of that, I've been writing an idiomatic wrapper around the uriparser library. Part of this is wrapping the linked list representation of parsed path components. I'm looking for advice on what's idiomatic for containers. One thing that worries me, coming most recently from garbage-collected languages, is ensuring that random objects don't just go disappearing on users if they make a mistake regarding lifetimes. To account for this, both the PathList container and its iterators keep a shared_ptr to the actual internal state object. This ensures that as long as anything pointing into that data exists, so does the data. However, looking at the STL (and lots of searching), it doesn't look like C++ containers guarantee this. I have this horrible suspicion that the expectation is to just let containers be destroyed, invalidating any iterators along with it. std::vector certainly seems to let iterators get invalidated and still (incorrectly) function. What I want to know is: what is expected from "good"/idiomatic C++11 code? Given the shiny new smart pointers, it seems kind of strange that STL allows you to easily blow your legs off by accidentally leaking an iterator. Is using shared_ptr to the backing data an unnecessary inefficiency, a good idea for debugging or something expected that STL just doesn't do? (I'm hoping that grounding this to "idiomatic C++11" avoids charges of subjectivity...)

  Read the article

• Misconceptions about purely functional languages?

  - by Giorgio

  I often encounter the following statements / arguments: Pure functional programming languages do not allow side effects (and are therefore of little use in practice because any useful program does have side effects, e.g. when it interacts with the external world). Pure functional programming languages do not allow to write a program that maintains state (which makes programming very awkward because in many application you do need state). I am not an expert in functional languages but here is what I have understood about these topics until now. Regarding point 1, you can interact with the environment in purely functional languages but you have to explicitly mark the code (functions) that introduces them (e.g. in Haskell by means of monadic types). Also, AFAIK computing by side effects (destructively updating data) should also be possible (using monadic types?) but is not the preferred way of working. Regarding point 2, AFAIK you can represent state by threading values through several computation steps (in Haskell, again, using monadic types) but I have no practical experience doing this and my understanding is rather vague. So, are the two statements above correct in any sense or are they just misconceptions about purely functional languages? If they are misconceptions, how did they come about? Could you write a (possibly small) code snippet illustrating the Haskell idiomatic way to (1) implement side effects and (2) implement a computation with state?

  Read the article

• Is it correct to fix bugs without adding new features when releasing software for system testing?

  - by Pratik

  This question is to experienced testers or test leads. This is a scenario from a software project: Say the dev team have completed the first iteration of 10 features and released it to system testing. The test team has created test cases for these 10 features and estimated 5 days for testing. The dev team of course cannot sit idle for 5 days and they start creating 10 new features for next iteration. During this time the test team found defects and raised some bugs. The bugs are prioritised and some of them have to be fixed before next iteration. The catch is that they would not accept the new release with any new features or changes to existing features until all those bugs fixed. The test team says that's how can we guarantee a stable release for testing if we also introduce new features along with the bug fix. They also cannot do regression tests of all their test cases each iteration. Apparently this is proper testing process according to ISQTB. This means the dev team has to create a branch of code solely for bug fixing and another branch where they continue development. There is more merging overhead specially with refactoring and architectural changes. Can you agree if this is a common testing principle. Is the test team's concern valid. Have you encountered this in practice in your project.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114  | Next Page >