Search Results

Search found 14602 results on 585 pages for 'objected oriented design'.

Page 110/585 | < Previous Page | 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117  | Next Page >

• Link to article on website libraries

  - by acidzombie24

  I just started another website and it has taken me 30mins to copy/paste my other website and delete stuff because I don't have a template. Theres lots of features I copied over that I haven't seen in libraries/templates. But I don't really know any libraries/templates. This site is ASP.NET. Some things I have is a string.format that escapes strings for HTML (so <hi> is text instead of a tag). Other features are adding or removing items in the url query, a class to pass in a ASP.NET error and log or convert it into a row in a db (I know about elmah but during development on my last site it wasn't Mono compatible), a mini AJAX library for success/fail/redirect/etc, a class to pass in a ASP.NET error and log or convert it into a row in a db and anything else I would use in every site. I don't like my (library) design because I wasn't expecting to do more then 2-3 websites and I am on my 5th. I don't know proper ASP.NET either so what is an article that explains how to make a great library/template for websites?

  Read the article

• Pattern for Accessing MySQL connection

  - by Dipan Mehta

  We have an application which is C++ trying to access MySQL database. There are several (about 5 or so) threads in the application (with Boost library for threading) and in each thread has a few objects, each of which is trying to access Database for its' own purpose. It has a simple ORM kind of model but that really is not an important factor here. There are three potential access patterns i can think of: There could be single connection object per application or thread and is shared between all (or group). The object needs to be thread safe and there will be contentions but MySQL will not be fired with too many connections. Every object could initiate connection on its own. The database needs to take care of concurrency (which i think MySQL can) and the design could be much simpler. There could be two possibilities here. a. either object keeps a persistent connection for its life OR b. object initiate connection as and when needed. To simplify the contention as in case of 1 and not to create too many sockets as in case of 2, we can have group/set based connections. So there could be there could be more than one connection (say N), each of this connection could be shared connection across M objects. Naturally, each of the pattern has different resource cost and would work under different constraints and objectives. What criteria should i use to choose the pattern of this for my own application? What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these pattern over the other? Are there any other pattern which is better? PS: I have been through these questions: mysql, one connection vs multiple and MySQL with mutiple threads and processes But they don't quite answer exactly what i am trying to ask.

  Read the article

• Constructs for wrapping a hardware state machine

  - by Henry Gomersall

  I am using a piece of hardware with a well defined C API. The hardware is stateful, with the relevant API calls needing to be in the correct order for the hardware to work properly. The API calls themselves will always return, passing back a flag that advises whether the call was successful, or if not, why not. The hardware will not be left in some ill defined state. In effect, the API calls advise indirectly of the current state of the hardware if the state is not correct to perform a given operation. It seems to be a pretty common hardware API style. My question is this: Is there a well established design pattern for wrapping such a hardware state machine in a high level language, such that consistency is maintained? My development is in Python. I ideally wish the hardware state machine to be abstracted to a much simpler state machine and wrapped in an object that represents the hardware. I'm not sure what should happen if an attempt is made to create multiple objects representing the same piece of hardware. I apologies for the slight vagueness, I'm not very knowledgeable in this area and so am fishing for assistance of the description as well!

  Read the article

• What web technology could I use which would support a decision tree?

  - by Rami Alhamad

  I am a big game development fan but I haven't done any commercial work in the past. I have been asked by a non-profit to look at developing a game similar to the award-winning www.playspent.org They want the following features: support 5 scenarios mobile isn't important but compatibility with older browsers would be a big bonus they want it to be visual and audible bonus is to have it easily modifiable support 4 languages I don't have much knowledge of Flash and would rather avoid using it as a solution. I started breaking down the problem into segments that I will need to examine, they are as follows: ability to read the game flow from a file that they can produce (xml, etc.) db design to store decision tree language challenge browser compatibility I am leaning towards an Google app engine/GWT solution but I am not sure what technology is best for this. I am really hoping to get your opinion/recommendation on my approach and on what technology is best. A special thanks (and beer if you live in Toronto) will be awarded to anyone who can help give me a ballpark estimate on how much such a game should go for. I know it's tough to estimate but any rough figure will help (how much would you charge for building something like playspent.org?) Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Optimization ended up in casting an object at each method call

  - by Aybe

  I've been doing some optimization for the following piece of code : public void DrawLine(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int color) { _bitmap.DrawLineBresenham(x1, y1, x2, y2, color); } After profiling it about 70% of the time spent was in getting a context for drawing and disposing it. I ended up sketching the following overload : public void DrawLine(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int color, BitmapContext bitmapContext) { _bitmap.DrawLineBresenham(x1, y1, x2, y2, color, bitmapContext); } Until here no problems, all the user has to do is to pass a context and performance is really great as a context is created/disposed one time only (previously it was a thousand times per second). The next step was to make it generic in the sense it doesn't depend on a particular framework for rendering (besides .NET obvisouly). So I wrote this method : public void DrawLine(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int color, IDisposable bitmapContext) { _bitmap.DrawLineBresenham(x1, y1, x2, y2, color, (BitmapContext)bitmapContext); } Now every time a line is drawn the generic context is casted, this was unexpected for me. Are there any approaches for fixing this design issue ? Note : _bitmap is a WriteableBitmap from WPF BitmapContext is from WriteableBitmapEx library DrawLineBresenham is an extension method from WriteableBitmapEx

  Read the article

• Examples of 2D side-scrollers that achieve open non-linear feel?

  - by Milosz Falinski

  I'm working on a 2.5D platformer prototype that aims for an open feel while maintaining familiar core mechanics. Now, there's some obvious challenges with creating a non constricted feel in a spatially constricted environment. What I'm interested in, is examples of how game designers deal with the "here's a level, beat the bad guys/puzzles to get to the next level" design that seems so natural to most platformers (eg. Mario/Braid/Pid/Meat Boy to name a few). Some ideas for achieving openness I've come across include: One obvious successful example is Terraria, which achieves openness simply through complexity and flexibility of the game-system Another example that comes to mind is Cave Story. Game is non-linear, offers multiple choices and side-stories Mario, Rayman and some other 'classics' with a top-down level selection. I actually really dislike this as it never did anything for me emotionally and just seems like a bit of a lazy way to do things. Note: I've not actually had much experience with most of the 'classical' console platformers, apart from the obvious Marios/Zeldas/Metroids, since I've grown up on adventure games. By that I mean, it's entirely possible that I simply missed some games that solve the problem really well and are by some considered obvious 'classics'.

  Read the article

• Should I create my own Assert class based on these reasons?

  - by Mike

  The main reason I don't like Debug.Assert is the fact that these assertions are disabled in Release. I know that there's a performance reason for that, but at least in my situation I believe the gains would outweigh the cost. (By the way, I'm guessing this is the situation in most cases). And yes, I know that you can use Trace.Assert instead. But even though that would work, I find the name Trace distracting, since I don't see this as tracing. The other reason to create my own class is laziness I guess, since I could write methods for the most usual cases like Assert.IsNotNull, Assert.Equals and so forth. The second part of my question has to do with using Environment.FailFast in this class. Would that be a good idea? I do like the ideas put forth in this document. That's pretty much where I got the idea from. One last point. Does creating a design like this imply having an untestable code path, as described in this answer by Eric Lippert on a different (but related) question?

  Read the article

• Finding a way to simplify complex queries on legacy application

  - by glenatron

  I am working with an existing application built on Rails 3.1/MySql with much of the work taking place in a JavaScript interface, although the actual platforms are not tremendously relevant here, except in that they give context. The application is powerful, handles a reasonable amount of data and works well. As the number of customers using it and the complexity of the projects they create increases, however, we are starting to run into a few performance problems. As far as I can tell, the source of these problems is that the data represents a tree and it is very hard for ActiveRecord to deterministically know what data it should be retrieving. My model has many relationships like this: Project has_many Nodes has_many GlobalConditions Node has_one Parent has_many Nodes has_many WeightingFactors through NodeFactors has_many Tags through NodeTags GlobalCondition has_many Nodes ( referenced by Id, rather than replicating tree ) WeightingFactor has_many Nodes through NodeFactors Tag has_many Nodes through NodeTags The whole system has something in the region of thirty types which optionally hang off one or many nodes in the tree. My question is: What can I do to retrieve and construct this data faster? Having worked a lot with .Net, if I was in a similar situation there, I would look at building up a Stored Procedure to pull everything out of the database in one go but I would prefer to keep my logic in the application and from what I can tell it would be hard to take the queried data and build ActiveRecord objects from it without losing their integrity, which would cause more problems than it solves. It has also occurred to me that I could bunch the data up and send some of it across asynchronously, which would not improve performance but would improve the user perception of performance. However if sections of the data appeared after page load that could also be quite confusing. I am wondering whether it would be a useful strategy to make everything aware of it's parent project, so that one could pull all the records for that project and then build up the relationships later, but given the ubiquity of complex trees in day to day programming life I wouldn't be surprised if there were some better design patterns or standard approaches to this type of situation that I am not well versed in.

  Read the article

• Designing Content-Based ETL Process with .NET and SFDC

  - by Patrick

  As my firm makes the transition to using SFDC as our main operational system, we've spun together a couple of SFDC portals where we can post customer-specific documents to be viewed at will. As such, we've had the need for pseudo-ETL applications to be implemented that are able to extract metadata from the documents our analysts generate internally (most are industry-standard PDFs, XML, or MS Office formats) and place in networked "queue" folders. From there, our applications scoop of the queued documents and upload them to the appropriate SFDC CRM Content Library along with some select pieces of metadata. I've mostly used DbAmp to broker communication with SFDC (DbAmp is a Linked Server provider that allows you to use SQL conventions to interact with your SFDC Org data). I've been able to create [console] applications in C# that work pretty well, and they're usually structured something like this: static void Main() { // Load parameters from app.config. // Get documents from queue. var files = someInterface.GetFiles(someFilterOrRegexPattern); foreach (var file in files) { // Extract metadata from the file. // Validate some attributes of the file; add any validation errors to an in-memory // structure (e.g. List<ValidationErrors>). if (isValid) { // Upload using some wrapper for an ORM an someInterface.Upload(meta.Param1, meta.Param2, ...); } else { // Bounce the file } } // Report any validation errors (via message bus or SMTP or some such). } And that's pretty much it. Most of the time I wrap all these operations in a "Worker" class that takes the needed interfaces as constructor parameters. This approach has worked reasonably well, but I just get this feeling in my gut that there's something awful about it and would love some feedback. Is writing an ETL process as a C# Console app a bad idea? I'm also wondering if there are some design patterns that would be useful in this scenario that I'm clearly overlooking. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Class hierarchy problem in this social network model

  - by Gerenuk

  I'm trying to design a class system for a social network data model - basically a link/object system. Now I have roughly the following structure (simplified and only relevant methods shown) class Data: "used to handle the data with mongodb" "can link, unlink data and also return other linked data" "is basically a proxy object that only stores _id and accesses mongodb on requests" "it looks like {_id: ..., _out: [id1, id2,...], _inc: [id3, id4, ...]}" def get_node(self, id) "create a new Data object from the underlying mongodb" "each data object can potentially create a reference object to new mongo data" "this is needed when the data returns the linked objects" class Node: """ this class proxies linking calls to .data it includes additional network logic operations whereas Data only contains a basic database solution """ def __init__(self, data): "the infrastructure realization is stored as composition by an included object data" "Node bascially proxies most calls to the infrastructure object data" def get_node(self, data): "creates a new object of class Object or Link depending on data" class Object(Node): "can have multiple connections to Link" class Link(Node): "has one 'in' and one 'out' connection to an Object" This system is working, however maybe wouldn't work outside Python. Note that after reading links Now I have two questions here: 1) I want to infrastructure of the data storage to be replacable. Earlier I had Data as a superclass of Node so that it provided the neccessary calls. But (without dirty Python tricks) you cannot replace the superclass dynamically. Is using composition therefore recommended? The drawback is that I have to proxy most calls (link, unlink etc). Any thoughts? 2) The class Node contains the common method .get_node which is used to built new Object or Link instances after reading out the data. Some attribute of data decided whether the object which is only stored by id should be instantiated as an Object or Link class. The problem here is that Node needs to know about Object and Link in advance, which seems dodgy. Do you see a different solution? Both Object and Link need to instantiate one of all possible types depending on what the find in their linked data. Are there any other ideas how to implement a flexible Object/Link structure where the underlying database storage is isolated?

  Read the article

• Why, in WPF, do we set an object to Stretch via its Alignment properties instead of Width/Height?

  - by Jonathan Hobbs

  In WPF's XAML, we can tell an element to fill its container like this: <Button HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" VerticalAlignment="Stretch" /> Why is it that when we set an element to Stretch, we do it via the HorizontalAlignment and VerticalAlignment properties? Why did the WPF design team decide to take this approach over having Width="Stretch" and Height="Stretch"? I presume it was a calculated decision, and I'm curious about the reasoning. CSS, among other technologies, follows the convention that stretching is done via the width and height properties, and that alignment affects positioning exclusively. This seems intuitive enough: stretching the element is manipulating its width and height, after all! Using the corresponding alignment property to stretch an element seems counter-intuitive and unusual in comparison. This makes me think they didn't just pick this option for no reason: they made a calculated decision and had reasons behind it. Width and Height use the double data type, which would ordinarily mean assigning it a string would be silly. However, WPF's Window objects can take Width="Auto", which gets treated as double.NaN. Couldn't Width="Stretch" be stored as double.PositiveInfinity or some other value?

  Read the article

• Novice prototyping a massive multiplayer webpage based gaming system

  - by Sean Hendlin

  I'm trying to build a website based game in which various pages of the site act as different areas of the game. I am wondering what you would recommended as a design structure. Which languages would be best if building what will hopefully becomes a massive system able to scale to massive amounts of users. I am wondering if and how various elements from differing languages could be meshed to interact with each other. For example could I use html5, javascript, and PHP? What about asp.net how might that factor in? I'm a newbie programmer but I've been working on this idea for years and I want to build it to reality. Your comments and suggestions are appreciated. P.S.: The game is not all graphics and animation (though flash like appearance and some animation would be nice). What I am thinking of is essentially a heavily gamified system of forms. And LOTS of data in many different categories cross referencing each-other. I'm not sure how to go about structuring the collection of data. Also while I know javascript can be used to process some functions, I'm wondering what sort of base system I would need to handle the server side processing of what I am expecting to be some pretty significant algorithm processing. That is to say I expect to have many many many functions and I'm not sure how to mange this using javascript. I feel like they would be forgotten, mixed up, disorganizes as they essentially only exist where they are coded. I guess I need to learn something of libraries? OK, Thank you! Is enough from me for now.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to build a single game to run in Facebook & Google+?

  - by Songo

  I was asked by my customer to build a Facebook game. The game would be something similar to Mafiawars.com where the game is hosted on a server and run through a frame on Facebook. The thing is after several days of negotiations with the customer and near the finalization of the requirements he mentioned something strange. He said that if the game was successful on Facebook then we may add it to Google+ too. I thought he meant that we'll develop a new version for Google+, but he refused as he argued that the game should be able to support both sites and he won't pay for the same game twice. Now I haven't developed neither Facebook nor Google+ games before, so I don't know if it is possible to build a single Facebook/Google+ game. How would you react to such requirement? How would you design such an application? Notes I confirmed with the customer that he wasn't talking about using Open ID he wanted full integration (sharing post, friend requests,..etc.) I really don't want to lose that customer for numerous reasons (He even agreed to extend the project time to compensate for the time I need to learn Facebook/Google+ APIs)

  Read the article

• MVC + 3 tier; where ViewModels come into play?

  - by mikhairu

  I'm designing a 3-tiered application using ASP.NET MVC 4. I used the following resources as a reference. CodeProject: MVC + N-tier + Entity Framework Separating data access in ASP.NET MVC I have the following desingn so far. Presentation Layer (PL) (main MVC project, where M of MVC was moved to Data Access Layer): MyProjectName.Main Views/ Controllers/ ... Business Logic Layer (BLL): MyProjectName.BLL ViewModels/ ProjectServices/ ... Data Access Layer (DAL): MyProjectName.DAL Models/ Repositories.EF/ Repositories.Dapper/ ... Now, PL references BLL and BLL references DAL. This way lower layer does not depend on the one above it. In this design PL invokes a service of the BLL. PL can pass a View Model to BLL and BLL can pass a View Model back to PL. Also, BLL invokes DAL layer and DAL layer can return a Model back to BLL. BLL can in turn build a View Model and return it to PL. Up to now this pattern was working for me. However, I've ran into a problem where some of my ViewModels require joins on several entities. In the plain MVC approach, in the controller I used a LINQ query to do joins and then select new MyViewModel(){ ... }. But now, in the DAL I do not have access to where ViewModels are defined (in the BLL). This means I cannot do joins in DAL and return it to BLL. It seems I have to do separate queries in DAL (instead of joins in one query) and BLL would then use the result of these to build a ViewModel. This is very inconvenient, but I don't think I should be exposing DAL to ViewModels. Any ideas how I can solve this dilemma? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Approach for developing software that will need to be ported to multiple mobile platforms in the future

  - by Jonathan Henson

  I am currently doing the preliminary design for a new product my company will be pushing out soon. We will start on Android, but then we will need to quickly develop the IPhone, IPad.... and then the Windows 8 ports of the application. Basically the only code that wouldn't be reusable is the view specific code and the multimedia functions. This will be an SIP client (of course the user of the app will not know this) with several bells and whistles for our own business specific purposes. My initial thought is to develop all of the engine in C and provide a nice API for the C library since JAVA and .NET will allow native invoking, and I should just be able to directly link to the C lib in objective-C. Is there a better approach for vast code reuse which also remains close to the native platform? I.e. I don't want dependencies such as Mono-droid and the like or complicated interpreter/translator schemes. I don't mind re-coding the view(s) for each platform, but I do not want to have multiple versions of the main engine. Also, if I want to have some good abstraction mechanisms (like I would in say, C++) is this possible? I have read that C++ is not allowed for the IPad and Iphone devices. I would love to handle the media decoding in the C library, but I assume that this will be platform dependent so that probably will not be an option either. Any ideas here?

  Read the article

• How would you TDD the functionality of getting the corresponding process of a running windows service?

  - by Matt Spinelli

  Purpose Over the last year or more I've been learning unit testing via books I've read recently like The Art of Unit Testing, Working Effectively with Legacy Code, and others. I've also been using unit tests, mocking frameworks, and the like, periodically at work and definitely see the value. However, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my mind around TDD (as opposed to TAD) when the situation calls for code that is gong to mostly use external API calls. Problem to solve Get the process associated with a windows service using the service name. example: Function GetProcess(ByVal serviceName As String) As Process Rules Show each major iteration in production & test code using TDD No need to see any other code or configuration that is required to get things to run. Just curious about the interfaces, concrete classes, and test methods. C# or VB.NET Must use the .Net framework regarding services/processes (i.e. System.Diagnostics.Process) Test Frameworks: Nunit or MSTest Isolation Frameworks: Moq, Rhino Mock, or Microsoft Moles Must write true unit tests (no integration tests) Additional notes As far as I can tell there are two approaches design wise. Use an Inversion of Control approach along with using the Adapter and/or Facade patterns to wrap the underlying .net framework objects dealing with processes and services. Keep the .net framework code in the class containing the Get Process method and use code detouring (interception) via Microsoft Moles to isolate the hard dependencies from the method under test.

  Read the article

• Augmenting functionality of subclasses without code duplication in C++

  - by Rob W

  I have to add common functionality to some classes that share the same superclass, preferably without bloating the superclass. The simplified inheritance chain looks like this: Element -> HTMLElement -> HTMLAnchorElement Element -> SVGElement -> SVGAlement The default doSomething() method on Element is no-op by default, but there are some subclasses that need an actual implementation that requires some extra overridden methods and instance members. I cannot put a full implementation of doSomething() in Element because 1) it is only relevant for some of the subclasses, 2) its implementation has a performance impact and 3) it depends on a method that could be overridden by a class in the inheritance chain between the superclass and a subclass, e.g. SVGElement in my example. Especially because of the third point, I wanted to solve the problem using a template class, as follows (it is a kind of decorator for classes): struct Element { virtual void doSomething() {} }; // T should be an instance of Element template<class T> struct AugmentedElement : public T { // doSomething is expensive and uses T virtual void doSomething() override {} // Used by doSomething virtual bool shouldDoSomething() = 0; }; class SVGElement : public Element { /* ... */ }; class SVGAElement : public AugmentedElement<SVGElement> { // some non-trivial check bool shouldDoSomething() { /* ... */ return true; } }; // Similarly for HTMLAElement and others I looked around (in the existing (huge) codebase and on the internet), but didn't find any similar code snippets, let alone an evaluation of the effectiveness and pitfalls of this approach. Is my design the right way to go, or is there a better way to add common functionality to some subclasses of a given superclass?

  Read the article

• Is creating a separate pool for each individual image created from a png appropriate?

  - by Panzercrisis

  I'm still possibly a little green about object-pooling, and I want to make sure something like this is a sound design pattern before really embarking upon it. Take the following code (which uses the Starling framework in ActionScript 3): [Embed(source = "/../assets/images/game/misc/red_door.png")] private const RED_DOOR:Class; private const RED_DOOR_TEXTURE:Texture = Texture.fromBitmap(new RED_DOOR()); private const m_vRedDoorPool:Vector.<Image> = new Vector.<Image>(50, true); . . . public function produceRedDoor():Image { // get a Red Door image } public function retireRedDoor(pImage:Image):void { // retire a Red Door Image } Except that there are four colors: red, green, blue, and yellow. So now we have a separate pool for each color, a separate produce function for each color, and a separate retire function for each color. Additionally there are several items in the game that follow this 4-color pattern, so for each of them, we have four pools, four produce functions, and four retire functions. There are more colors involved in the images themselves than just their predominant one, so trying to throw all the doors, for instance, in a single pool, and then changing their color properties around isn't going to work. Also the nonexistence of the static keyword is due to its slowness in AS3. Is this the right way to do things?

  Read the article

• Designing business objects, and gui actions

  - by fozz

  Developing a product ordering system using Java SE 6. The previous implementations used combo boxes, text fields, and check boxes. Preforming validation on action events from the GUI. The validation includes limiting existing combo boxes items, or even availability. The issue in the old system was that the action was received and all rules were applied to the entire business object. This resulted in a huge event change as options were changed multiple times. To be honest I have no idea how an infinite loop wasn't produced. Through the next iteration I stepped in and attempted to limit the chaos by controlling the order in which the selections could be made. Making configuration of BO's a top down approach. I implemented custom box models, action events, beans/binding, and an MVC pattern. However I still am unable to fully isolate action even chains. I'm thinking that I've approached the whole concept backwards in an attempt to stay closest to what was already in place. So the question becomes what do I design instead? I'm currently considering an implementation of Interfaces, Beans, Property Change Listeners to manage the back and forth. Other thoughts were validation exceptions, dynamic proxies.... I'm sure there are a ton of different ways. To say that one way is right is crazy, and I'm sure it will take a blending of multiple patterns. My knowledge of swing/awt validation is limited, previously I did backend logic only. Other considerations are were some sort of binding(jgoodies or otherwise) to directly bind GUI state to BO's.

  Read the article

• Is creating a separate pool for each individual png image in the same class appropriate?

  - by Panzercrisis

  I'm still possibly a little green about object-pooling, and I want to make sure something like this is a sound design pattern before really embarking upon it. Take the following code (which uses the Starling framework in ActionScript 3): [Embed(source = "/../assets/images/game/misc/red_door.png")] private const RED_DOOR:Class; private const RED_DOOR_TEXTURE:Texture = Texture.fromBitmap(new RED_DOOR()); private const m_vRedDoorPool:Vector.<Image> = new Vector.<Image>(50, true); . . . public function produceRedDoor():Image { // get a Red Door image } public function retireRedDoor(pImage:Image):void { // retire a Red Door Image } Except that there are four colors: red, green, blue, and yellow. So now we have a separate pool for each color, a separate produce function for each color, and a separate retire function for each color. Additionally there are several items in the game that follow this 4-color pattern, so for each of them, we have four pools, four produce functions, and four retire functions. There are more colors involved in the images themselves than just their predominant one, so trying to throw all the doors, for instance, in a single pool, and then changing their color properties around isn't going to work. Also the nonexistence of the static keyword is due to its slowness in AS3. Is this the right way to do things?

  Read the article

• Methodologies for Managing Users and Access?

  - by MadBurn

  This is something I'm having a hard time getting my head around. I think I might be making it more complicated than it is. What I'm trying to do is develop a method to store users in a database with varying levels of access, throughout different applications. I know this has been done before, but I don't know where to find how they did it. Here is an example of what I need to accomplish: UserA - Access to App1, App3, App4 & can add new users to App3, but not 4 or 1. UserB - Access to App2 only with ReadOnly access. UserC - Access to App1 & App4 and is able to access Admin settings of both apps. In the past I've just used user groups. However, I'm reaching a phase where I need a bit more control over each individual user's access to certain parts of the different applications. I wish this were as cut and dry as being able to give a user a role and let each role inherit from the last. Now, this is what I need to accomplish. But, I don't know any methods of doing this. I could easily just design something that works, but I know this has been done and I know this has been studied and I know this problem has been solved by much better minds than my own. This is for a web application and using sql server 2008. I don't need to store passwords (LDAP) and the information I need to store is actually very limited. Basically just username and access.

  Read the article

• Best way to go for simple online multi-player games?

  - by Mr_CryptoPrime

  I want to create a trivia game for my website. The graphic design does not have to be too fancy, probably no more advanced than a typical flash game. It needs to be secure because I want users to be able to play for real money. It also needs to run fast so users don't spend their time frustrated with game freezing. Compatibility, as with almost all online products, is key because of the large target market. I am most acquainted with Java programming, but I don't want to do it in Java if there is something much better. I am assuming I will have to utilize a variety of different languages in order for everything to come together. If someone could point out the main structure of everything so I could get a good start that would be great! 1) Language choice for simple secure online multiplayer games? 2) Perhaps use a database like MySQL, stored on a secure server for the trivia questions? 3) Free educational resources and even simpler projects to practice? Any ideas or suggestions would be helpful...Thanks!

  Read the article

• Designs for outputting to a spreadsheet

  - by Austin Moore

  I'm working on a project where we are tasked to gather and output various data to a spreadsheet. We are having tons of problems with the file that holds the code to write the spreadsheet. The cell that the data belongs to is hardcoded, so anytime you need to add anything to the middle of the spreadsheet, you have to increment the location for all the fields after that in the code. There are random blank rows, to add padding between sections, and subsections within the sections, so there's no real pattern that we can replicate. Essentially, anytime we have to add or change anything to the spreadsheet it requires a many long and tedious hours. The code is all in this one large file, hacked together overtime in Perl. I've come up with a few OO solutions, but I'm not too familiar with OO programming in Perl and all my attempts at it haven't been great, so I've shied away from it so far. I've suggested we handle this section of the program with a more OO friendly language, but we can't apparently. I've also suggested that we scrap the entire spreadsheet idea, and just move to a webpage, but we can't do that either. We've been working on this project for a few months, and every time we have to change that file, we all dread it. I'm thinking it's time to start some refactoring. However, I don't even know what could make this file easier to work with. The way the output is formatted makes it so that it has to be somewhat hardcoded. I'm wondering if anyone has insight on any design patterns or techniques they have used to tackle a similar problem. I'm open to any ideas. Perl specific answers are welcome, but I am also interested in language-agnostic solutions.

  Read the article

• Are DDD Aggregates really a good idea in a Web Application?

  - by Mystere Man

  I'm diving in to Domain Driven Design and some of the concepts i'm coming across make a lot of sense on the surface, but when I think about them more I have to wonder if that's really a good idea. The concept of Aggregates, for instance makes sense. You create small domains of ownership so that you don't have to deal with the entire domain model. However, when I think about this in the context of a web app, we're frequently hitting the database to pull back small subsets of data. For instance, a page may only list the number of orders, with links to click on to open the order and see its order id's. If i'm understanding Aggregates right, I would typically use the repository pattern to return an OrderAggregate that would contain the members GetAll, GetByID, Delete, and Save. Ok, that sounds good. But... If I call GetAll to list all my order's, it would seem to me that this pattern would require the entire list of aggregate information to be returned, complete orders, order lines, etc... When I only need a small subset of that information (just header information). Am I missing something? Or is there some level of optimization you would use here? I can't imagine that anyone would advocate returning entire aggregates of information when you don't need it. Certainly, one could create methods on your repository like GetOrderHeaders, but that seems to defeat the purpose of using a pattern like repository in the first place. Can anyone clarify this for me?

  Read the article

• How to handle fine grained field-based ACL permissions in a RESTful service?

  - by Jason McClellan

  I've been trying to design a RESTful API and have had most of my questions answered, but there is one aspect of permissions that I'm struggling with. Different roles may have different permissions and different representations of a resource. For example, an Admin or the user himself may see more fields in his own User representation vs another less-privileged user. This is achieved simply by changing the representation on the backend, ie: deciding whether or not to include those fields. Additionally, some actions may be taken on a resource by some users and not by others. This is achieved by deciding whether or not to include those action items as links, eg: edit and delete links. A user who does not have edit permissions will not have an edit link. That covers nearly all of my permission use cases, but there is one that I've not quite figured out. There are some scenarios whereby for a given representation of an object, all fields are visible for two or more roles, but only a subset of those roles my edit certain fields. An example: { "person": { "id": 1, "name": "Bob", "age": 25, "occupation": "software developer", "phone": "555-555-5555", "description": "Could use some sunlight.." } } Given 3 users: an Admin, a regular User, and Bob himself (also a regular User), I need to be able to convey to the front end that: Admins may edit all fields, Bob himself may edit all fields, but a regular User, while they can view all fields, can only edit the description field. I certainly don't want the client to have to make the determination (or even, for that matter, to have any notion of the roles involved) but I do need a way for the backend to convey to the client which fields are editable. I can't simply use a combination of representation (the fields returned for viewing) and links (whether or not an edit link is availble) in this scenario since it's more finely grained. Has anyone solved this elegantly without adding the logic directly to the client?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117  | Next Page >