Search Results

Search found 5267 results on 211 pages for 'use cases'.

Page 11/211 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • What is the most effective way to add functionality to unfamiliar, structurally unsound code?

    - by Coder
    This is probably something everyone has to face during the development sooner or later. You have an existing code written by someone else, and you have to extend it to work under new requirements. Sometimes it's simple, but sometimes the modules have medium to high coupling and medium to low cohesion, so the moment you start touching anything, everything breaks. And you don't feel that it's fixed correctly when you get the new and old scenarios working again. One approach would be to write tests, but in reality, in all cases I've seen, that was pretty much impossible (reliance on GUI, missing specifications, threading, complex dependencies and hierarchies, deadlines, etc). So everything sort of falls back to good ol' cowboy coding approach. But I refuse to believe there is no other systematic way that would make everything easier. Does anyone know a better approach, or the name of the methodology that should be used in such cases?

    Read the article

  • How come verification does not include actual testing?

    - by user970696
    Having read a lot about this topic, I still did not get it. Verification should prove that you are building the product right, while validation you build the right product. But only static techniques are mentioned as being verification methods (code reviews, requirements checks...). But how can you say if its implemented correctly if you do not test it? It is said that verification checks e.g. code for its correctnes. Verification - ensure that the product meet specified requirements. Again, if the function is specified to work somehow, only by testing I can say that it does. Could anyone explain this to me please? EDIT: As Wiki says: Verification:Preparing of the test cases (based on the analysis of the requireemnts) Validation: Running of the test cases

    Read the article

  • Several New Hints

    - by Ondrej Brejla
    Hi all! Today we would like to introduce you some of our new experimental hints for NetBeans 7.2. They are called: Unused Use Statement and Immutable Variables. Unused Use Statement This hint is quite simple. It highlights (underlines) your use statements, which are not used. Typical use case is after some refactoring, when you forgot to remove some obsolete use statements. This hint warns you on them and allows you to remove them easily. Just click on the hint bulb in the gutter and select Remove Unused Use Statement. And of course, it works in multiple use statements combined too. Immutable Variables The next one is the hint which checks too many assignments into a variable. And why? That's simple. Mostly you should use just one assignment into one variable. But sometimes you are lazy and you do something like: But it's quite wrong, because what you really do is: And that's exactly the case, when our new hint warns you, that Too many assignments (2) into variable $foo occured. Nothing more. Yes, we know that there are some cases, where could be more assignments and no warning should occur, e.g.: Because maybe one likes longer increment syntax more than the short one. So we tried to handle these cases to don't bother you if it's not a need. Note: We are almost sure that this hint doesn't cover all your use cases, because there are a lot of them. So if you find something strange, write it into our bugzilla so we can handle it better for you. Thanks for your patience! And the last thing is, that you can set the number of allowed assignments in Tools -> Options -> Editor -> Hints -> PHP: Immutable Variables. Note: This hint works just for a common variables, not for fields. We have an enhancement request for that and it should be implemented in next version of NetBeans (probably 7.3). And that's all for today and as usual, please test it and if you find something strange, don't hesitate to file a new issue (product php, component Editor). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Keeping rackspace vserver alive

    - by mit
    It appears to me that rackspace somehow freezes cloud VMs after some idle time. This means the first page request to a php page takes much longer to respond than the subsequent requests. This is in some cases good, in other cases not acceptable. I am actually querying a machine with wget from a different host now to keep it "alive". But I wonder what frequency would be necessary. Does anyone know the time period after which they send a VM to "sleep"? I guess it would be some minutes. EDIT: There is absolutely no caching involved on the php site. It just recently moved from another vhost and there was never such latency on the first request.

    Read the article

  • Tree position terminology/naming

    - by wst
    This is a naming things question. I am processing trees (XML documents), and there are often special rules applied to nodes based on structure. It's been very difficult coming up with concise naming conventions for some cases, namely for nodes in the first position among their siblings, along with some recursive relationship: Given an arbitrary node, I want to describe its first child, and then that node's first child, and so on recursively. Given another arbitrary node, I want to describe its parent if the parent is first among its siblings, and that parent's parent if it's first, and so on recursively. Is there existing terminology to describe these tree positions? How would you name a variable or function that captures one of these cases so that it's intuitive to an unfamiliar developer trying to understand an algorithm?

    Read the article

  • Designing exceptions for conversion failures

    - by Mr.C64
    Suppose there are some methods to convert from "X" to "Y" and vice versa; the conversion may fail in some cases, and exceptions are used to signal conversion errors in those cases. Which would be the best option for defining exception classes in this context? A single XYConversionException class, with an attribute (e.g. an enum) specifying the direction of the conversion (e.g. ConversionFromXToY, ConversionFromYToX). A XYConversionException class, with two derived classes ConversionFromXToYException and ConversionFromYToXException. ConversionFromXToYException and ConversionFromYToXException classes without a common base class.

    Read the article

  • How common are circular references? Would reference-counting GC work just fine?

    - by user9521
    How common are circular references? The less common they are, the fewer hard cases you have if you are writing in a language with only reference counting-GC. Are there any cases where it wouldn't work well to make one of the references a "weak" reference so that reference counting still works? It seems like you should be able to have a language only use reference counting and weak references and have things work just fine most of the time, with the goal of efficiency. You could also have tools to help you detect memory leaks caused by circular references. Thoughts, anyone? It seems that Python uses references counting (I don't know if it uses a tracing collector occasionally or not for sure) and I know that Vala uses reference counting with weak references; I know that it's been done before, but how well would it work?

    Read the article

  • Is possible to write too many asserts?

    - by Lex Fridman
    I am a big fan of writing assert checks in C++ code as a way to catch cases during development that cannot possibly happen but do happen because of logic bugs in my program. This is a good practice in general. However, I've noticed that some functions I write (which are part of a complex class) have 5+ asserts which feels like it could potentially be a bad programming practice, in terms of readability and maintainability. I think it's still great, as each one requires me to think about pre- and post-conditions of functions and they really do help catch bugs. However, I just wanted to put this out there to ask if there is a better paradigms for catching logic errors in cases when a large number of checks is necessary.

    Read the article

  • How important is the unit test in the software development?

    - by Lo Wai Lun
    We are doing software testing by testing a lot if I/O cases, so developers and system analysts can open reviews and test for their committed code within a given time period (e.g. 1 week). But when it come across with extracting information from a database, how to consider the cases and the corresponding methodology to start with? Although that is more likely to be a case studies because the unit-testing depends on the project we have involved which is too specific and particular most of the time. What is the general overview of the steps and precautions for unit-testing?

    Read the article

  • What software development model has worked best for software teams with heavy dependancy on hardware teams?

    - by MasterDIB
    So, let me explain more. There are a number of competing best practices for software development. I can find that many teams have benefited from Agile practices in some cases. In some other cases, using the Unified Process has been championed by large companies like IBM. The common themes that I find seemed to work well for teams that mainly develop software. I am interested to know what has worked best for people who have worked in shops where there is a team on the other side that produce the hardware that your software is running on. For example, one team puts together a crate with several custom hardware on it; while you need to develop the software that would run on those crates. I can't find a development model (agile, spiral ...) that works best in this case. Any wisdom is this area will be well appreciated.

    Read the article

  • When should an API favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is to use as much of the native domain language as possible in the API. While doing so, I've noticed that there are some cases in the API outline where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for an API design preferring (marginally) more efficient implementations?

    Read the article

  • When should code favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is that the API should be as close to the domain language as possible. While working on the design, I've noticed that there are some cases in the code where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for a design preferring more efficient implementations—even if only marginally so?

    Read the article

  • TDD, new tests while old ones not implemented yet

    - by liori
    I am experimenting with test-driven development, and I found that I often come to a following situation: I write tests for some functionality X. Those tests fail. While trying to implement X, I see that I need to implement some feature Y in a lower layer of my code. So... I write tests for Y. Now both tests for X and Y fail. Once I had 4 features in different layers of code being worked on at the same time, and I was losing my focus on what I am actually doing (too many tests failing at the same time). I think I could solve this by putting more effort into planning my tasks even before I start writing tests. But in some cases I didn't know that I will need to go deeper, because e.g. I didn't know the API of lower layer very well. What should I do in such cases? Does TDD have any recommendations?

    Read the article

  • Why do we use networking libraries instead of plain NSURLRequests and NSURLConnection ?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    in iOS development, I have often seen people creating a networking module to interact with their APIs. This module generally sits on top of a networking framework like MKNetWorkKit or AFNetWorking. In most of the cases, It's all about sending GET,POST request and parsing the response which is in most cases JSON. What extra practical benefits that these libraries provide that an iOS developer should be leveraging which the plain Cocoa Networking APIs lack ? I can understand RESTKit as one exception where it takes care of the conversion of JSON to native objects and also interfaces with Core Data but what about others ?

    Read the article

  • EAV - is it really bad in all scenarios?

    - by Giedrius
    I'm thinking to use EAV for some of the stuff in one of the projects, but all questions about it in stackoverflow end up to answers calling EAV an anti pattern. But I'm wondering, if is it that wrong in all cases? Let's say shop product entity, it has common features, like name, description, image, price, etc., that take part in logic many places and has (semi)unique features, like watch and beach ball would be described by completely different aspects. So I think EAV would fit for storing those (semi)unique features? All this is assuming, that for showing product list, it is enough info in product table (that means no EAV is involved) and just when showing one product/comparing up to 5 products/etc. data saved using EAV is used. I've seen such approach in Magento commerce and it is quite popular, so may be there are cases, when EAV is reasonable?

    Read the article

  • Specifying and applying broad changes to a program

    - by Victor Nicollet
    How do you handle incomplete feature requests, when the ones asking for the feature cannot possibly write a complete request? Consider an imaginary situation. You are a tech lead working on a piece of software that revolves around managing profiles (maybe they're contacts in a CRM-type application, or employees in an HR application), with many operations being directly or indirectly performed on those profiles — edit fields, add comments, attach documents, send e-mail... The higher-ups decide that a lock functionality should be added whereby a profile can be locked to prevent anyone else from doing any operations on it until it's unlocked — this feature would be used by security agents to prevent anyone from touching a profile pending a security audit. Obviously, such a feature interacts with many other existing features related to profiles. For example: Can one add a comment to a locked profile? Can one see e-mails that were sent by the system to the owner of a locked profile? Can one see who recently edited a locked profile? If an e-mail was in the process of being sent when the lock happened, is the e-mail sending canceled, delayed or performed as if nothing happened? If I just changed a profile and click the "cancel" link on the confirmation, does the lock prevent the cancel or does it still go through? In all of these cases, how do I tell the user that a lock is in place? Depending on the software, there could be hundreds of such interactions, and each interaction requires a decision — is the lock going to apply and if it does, how will it be displayed to the user? And the higher-ups asking for the feature probably only see a small fraction of these, so you will probably have a lot of questions coming up while you are working on the feature. How would you and your team handle this? Would you expect the higher-ups to come up with a complete description of all cases where the lock should apply (and how), and treat all other cases as if the lock did not exist? Would you try to determine all potential interactions based on existing specifications and code, list them and ask the higher-ups to make a decision on all those where the decision is not obvious? Would you just start working and ask questions as they come up? Would you try to change their minds and settle on a more easily described feature with similar effects? The information about existing features is, as I understand it, in the code — how do you bridge the gap between the decision-makers and that information they cannot access?

    Read the article

  • is 'protected' ever reasonable outside of virtual methods and destructors?

    - by notallama
    so, suppose you have some fields and methods marked protected (non-virtual). presumably, you did this because you didn't mark them public because you don't want some nincompoop to accidentally call them in the wrong order or pass in invalid parameters, or you don't want people to rely on behaviour that you're going to change later. so, why is it okay for that nincompoop to use those fields and methods from a subclass? as far as i can tell, they can still screw up in the same ways, and the same compatibility issues still exist if you change the implementation. the cases for protected i can think of are: non-virtual destructors, so you can't break things by deleting the base class. virtual methods, so you can override 'private' methods called by the base class. constructors in c++. in java/c# marking the class as abstract will do basically the same. any other use cases?

    Read the article

  • Number Game Algorithm

    - by 7Aces
    Problem Link - http://www.iarcs.org.in/inoi/2011/zco2011/zco2011-1b.php The task is to find the maximum score you can get in the game. Such problems, based on games, where you have to simulate, predict the result, or obtain the maximum possible score always seem to puzzle me. I can do it with recursion by considering two cases - first number picked or last number picked, each of which again branches into two states similarly, and so on... which finally can yield the max possible result. But it's a very time-inefficient approach, since time increases exponentially, due to the large test cases. What is the most pragmatic approach to the problem, and to such problems in general?

    Read the article

  • rotating an object on an arc

    - by gardian06
    I am trying to get a turret to rotate on an arc, and have hit a wall. I have 8 possible starting orientations for the turrets, and want them to rotate on a 90 degree arc. I currently take the starting rotation of the turret, and then from that derive the positive, and negative boundary of the arc. because of engine restrictions (Unity) I have to do all of my tests against a value which is between [0,360], and due to numerical precision issues I can not test against specific values. I would like to write a general test without having to go in, and jury rig cases //my current test is: // member variables public float negBound; public float posBound; // found in Start() function (called immediately after construction) // eulerAngles.y is the the degree measure of the starting y rotation negBound = transform.eulerAngles.y-45; posBound = transform.eulerAngles.y+45; // insure that values are within bounds if(negBound<0){ negBound+=360; }else if(posBound>360){ posBound-=360; } // called from Update() when target not in firing line void Rotate(){ // controlls what direction if(transform.eulerAngles.y>posBound){ dir = -1; } else if(transform.eulerAngles.y < negBound){ dir = 1; } // rotate object } follows is a table of values for my different cases (please excuse my force formatting) read as base is the starting rotation of the turret, neg is the negative boundry, pos is the positive boundry, range is the acceptable range of values, and works is if it performs as expected with the current code. |base-|-neg-|-pos--|----------range-----------|-works-| |---0---|-315-|--45--|-315-0,0-45----------|----------| |--45--|---0---|--90--|-0-45,54-90----------|----x----| |-135-|---90--|-180-|-90-135,135-180---|----x----| |-180-|--135-|-225-|-135-180,180-225-|----x----| |-225-|--180-|-270-|-180-225,225-270-|----x----| |-270-|--225-|-315-|-225-270,270-315-|----------| |-315-|--270-|---0---|--270-315,315-0---|----------| I will need to do all tests from derived, or stored values, but can not figure out how to get all of my cases to work simultaneously. //I attempted to concatenate the 2 tests: if((transform.eulerAngles.y>posBound)&&(transform.eulerAngles.y < negBound)){ dir *= -1; } this caused only the first case to be successful // I attempted to store a opposite value, and do a void Rotate(){ // controlls what direction if((transform.eulerAngles.y > posBound)&&(transform.eulerAngles.y<oposite)){ dir = -1; } else if((transform.eulerAngles.y < negBound)&&(transform.eulerAngles.y>oposite)){ dir = 1; } // rotate object } this causes the opposite situation as indicated on the table. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • What is the good way of sharing specific data between ViewModels

    - by voroninp
    We have IAppContext which is injected into ViewModel. This service contains shared data: global filters and other application wide properties. But there are cases when data is very specific. For example one VM implements Master and the second one - Details of selected tree item. Thus DetailsVm must know about the selected item and its changes. We can store this information either in IAppContext or inside each concerned VM. In both cases update notifications are sent via Messenger. I see pros and cons for any of the approaches and can not decide which one is better. 1st: + explicitly exposed shared proerties, easy to follow dependencies - IAppContxt becomes cluttered with very specific data. 2nd: the exact opposite of the first and more memory load due to data duplication. May be someone can offer design alternatives or tell that one of the variants is objectively superior to the other cause I miss something important?

    Read the article

  • Macro vs. Static functions in Header

    - by wirrbel
    for a lot of quick tasks where one could employ a function f(x,y), in plain C, macros are used. I would like to ask specifically about these cases, that are solvable by a function call (i.e. macros used for inlining functions, not for code expansion of arbitrary code). Typically C functions are not inlined since they might be linked to from other C files. However, static C functions are only visible from within the C file they are defined in. Therefore they can be inlined by compilers. I have heard that a lot of macros should be replaced by turning them into static functions, because this produces safer code. Are there cases where this is a not good idea? Again: Not asking about Code-Production macros with ## alike constructs that cannot at all be expressed as a function.

    Read the article

  • How do people maintain their test suite?

    - by Ida
    In particular, I'm curious about the following aspects: How do you know that your test cases are wrong (or out-of-date) and needed to be repaired (or discarded)? I mean, even if a test case became invalid, it might still pass and remain silent, which could let you falsely believe that your software works okay. So how do you realize such problems of your test suite? How do you know that your test suite is no longer sufficient and that new test cases should be added? I guess this has something to do with the requirement changes, but is there any systematic approach to check the adequacy of test suite?

    Read the article

  • When to Use workflow engines?

    - by A01_
    I'm totally new to this concept from design perspective. I've worked in past on some of the workflow engines as programmer but never had a clarity on why we chose the work-flow engines in first place. And as programmer I know that there are at least 100 ways to do anything when you are writing code but only few of the ways are the best! I still don't understand which use cases are best solved by workflow engines (or rather their concept) than designing a good DI enabled application. I'm looking for any general characteristics of domain-neutral use cases, where work-flow engines are one of the the best options. So my question is: What are general characteristics of a requirement which can be taken as a signal for opting for a good workflow engine and coding around it? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • What is realism?

    - by eversor
    Beyond the obvious something that seams real, realism in games is a hard feature to hit. In some cases, things that are completely impossible in real life are seen as realistic by gamers. For instance, in some FPS you can survive being hit by a fair amount of bullets when in real life one is enough, Newton-defying car drifts, etc. So, in some cases, reductions of life-like actions or consequences implies a bigger sense of realism. The root of this pseudo-philosophical question lies in: I am going to create a engine for battles in an online (browser-based) strategic game. Browser-based means that the battle would not be seen. And i do not know how to approach this realism issue.

    Read the article

  • New eBook: In-Memory Data Grids for Dummies

    - by jeckels
    We've just released a new eBook In-Memory Data Grids for Dummies. This is a fantastic resource if you're looking to explain in-memory data grids to colleagues, convince your boss of their value, or even discover some new use cases for your existing investment. In true "Dummies" style, this eBook will walk you through the basics tenets of in-memory data grids, their common use cases, where IMDGs sit in your architecture, and some key considerations when looking to implement them. While the title may say "Dummies," we know you'll find some useful overview and technical information in the resource. It's published by us on the Coherence team in partnership with Wiley (the "Dummies" company), but it's not only about Coherence or Oracle. In fact, we took pains to make this book fairly neutral to give you the best information, not a product pitch. Happy reading! Download the eBook now 

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >