Search Results

Search found 15300 results on 612 pages for 'programming languages'.

Page 110/612 | < Previous Page | 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117  | Next Page >

  • Java Applet Tower Defence Game needs tweeking

    - by Ephiras
    Hello :) i have made a tower defence Game for my computer science class as one of my major projects, but have encountered some rather fatal roadblocks. here they are creating a menu screen (class Menu) that can set the total number of enimies, the max number of towers, starting money and the map. i tried creating a constructor in my Main class that sets all the values to whatever the Menu class passes in. I want the Menu screen to close after a difficulty has been selected and the main class to begin. Another problem i would really like some help with is instead of having to write entire arrays i would like to create a small segment of code that runs through an entire picture and sets up an array based on that pixels color.this way i can have multiple levels just dragged into a level folder and have the program read through them. users can even create their own. so a 1 if its yellow, a two if blue and a 3 if purple, then everything else = 0; you can download all the classes and code uif you'd like here sorry about having to redirect you but i wasn't sure how to efficently add a code spoiler. help is greatly appreciated

    Read the article

  • Hard Copies VS Soft Copies

    - by Garet Claborn
    Where do you draw the line and say, "OK, I'm actually going to print out this piece of code, spec, formula, or other info and carry it around but these pieces can stay on disk." Well, more importantly why do you draw the line there? I've encountered this a number of times and have some sort of vague conceptions beyond "oh now I'm REALLY stuck, better print this out." I've also found some quicksheets of basic specs to be handy. Really though, I have no particular logic behind what is useful to physically have available in the design and development process. I have a great pile of 'stuff' papers that seemed at least partially relevant at the time, but I only really use about a third of them ever and often end up wishing I had different info on hand. Edit: So this is what I'm hearing in a nutshell: Major parts of the design pattern Common, fairly static and prominently useful code (reference or specs) Some representation of data useful in collaborating or sharing with team Extreme cases of tough problem solving Overwhelmingly,almost never print anything.

    Read the article

  • Push-Based Events in a Services Oriented Architecture

    - by Colin Morelli
    I have come to a point, in building a services oriented architecture (on top of Thrift), that I need to expose events and allow listeners. My initial thought was, "create an EventService" to handle publishing and subscribing to events. That EventService can use whatever implementation it desires to actually distribute the events. My client automatically round-robins service requests to available service hosts which are determined using Zookeeper-based service discovery. So, I'd probably use JMS inside of EventService mainly for the purpose of persisting messages (in the event that a service host for EventService goes down before it can distribute the message to all of the available listeners). When I started considering this, I began looking into the differences between Queues and Topics. Topics unfortunately won't work for me, because (at least for now), all listeners must receive the message (even if they were down at the time the event was pushed, or hadn't made a subscription yet because they haven't completed startup (during deployment, for example) - messages should be queued until the service is available). However, I don't want EventService to be responsible for handling all of the events. I don't think it should have the code to react to events inside of it. Each of the services should do what it needs with a given event. This would indicate that each service would need a JMS connection, which questions the value of having EventService at all (as the services could individually publish and subscribe to JMS directly). However, it also couples all of the services to JMS (when I'd rather that there be a single service that's responsible for determining how to distribute events). What I had thought was to publish an event to EventService, which pulls a configuration of listeners from some configuration source (database, flat file, irrelevant for now). It replicates the message and pushes each one back into a queue with information specific to that listener (so, if there are 3 listeners, 1 event would become 3 events in JMS). Then, another thread in EventService (which is replicated, running on multiple hots) would be pulling from the queue, attempting to make the service call to the "listener", and returning the message to the queue (if the service is down), or discarding the message (if the listener completed successfully). tl;dr If I have an EventService that is responsible for receiving events and delegating service calls to "event listeners," (which are really just endpoints on other services), how should it know how to craft the service call? Should I create a generic "Event" object that is shared among all services? Then, the EventService can just construct this object and pass it to the service call. Or is there a better answer to this problem entirely?

    Read the article

  • How do you navigate and refactor code written in a dynamic language?

    - by Philippe Beaudoin
    I love that writing Python, Ruby or Javascript requires so little boilerplate. I love simple functional constructs. I love the clean and simple syntax. However, there are three things I'm really bad at when developing a large software in a dynamic language: Navigating the code Identifying the interfaces of the objects I'm using Refactoring efficiently I have been trying simple editors (i.e. Vim) as well as IDE (Eclipse + PyDev) but in both cases I feel like I have to commit a lot more to memory and/or to constantly "grep" and read through the code to identify the interfaces. As for refactoring, for example changing method names, it becomes hugely dependent on the quality of my unit tests. And if I try to isolate my unit tests by "cutting them off" the rest of the application, then there is no guarantee that my stub's interface stays up to date with the object I'm stubbing. I'm sure there are workarounds for these problems. How do you work efficiently in Python, Ruby or Javascript?

    Read the article

  • Could someone break this nasty habit of mine please?

    - by MimiEAM
    I recently graduated in cs and was mostly unsatisfied since I realized that I received only a basic theoretical approach in a wide range of subjects (which is what college is supposed to do but still...) . Anyway I took the habit of spending a lot of time looking for implementations of concepts and upon finding those I will used them as guides to writing my own implementation of those concepts just for fun. But now I feel like the only way I can fully understand a new concept is by trying to implement from scratch no matter how unoptimized the result may be. Anyway this behavior lead me to choose by default the hard way, that is time consuming instead of using a nicely written library until I hit my head again a huge wall and then try to find a library that works for my purpose.... Does anyone else do that and why? It seems so weird why would anyone (including me) do that ? Is it a bad practice ? and if so how can i stop doing that ?

    Read the article

  • Why to say, my function is of IFly type rather than saying it's Airplane type

    - by Vishwas Gagrani
    Say, I have two classes: Airplane and Bird, both of them fly. Both implement the interface IFly. IFly declares a function StartFlying(). Thus both Airplane and Bird have to define the function, and use it as per their requirement. Now when I make a manual for class reference, what should I write for the function StartFlying? 1) StartFlying is a function of type IFly . 2) StartFlying is a function of type Airplane 3) StartFlying is a function of type Bird. My opinion is 2 and 3 are more informative. But what i see is that class references use the 1st one. They say what interface the function is declared in. Problem is, I really don't get any usable information from knowing StartFlying is IFly type. However, knowing that StartFlying is a function inside Airplane and Bird, is more informative, as I can decide which instance (Airplane or Bird ) to use. Any lights on this: how saying StartFlying is a function of type IFly, can help a programmer understanding how to use the function?

    Read the article

  • Enterprise VS Regular corporate developer

    - by Rick Ratayczak
    Ok, I "almost" lost a job offer because I "didn't have enough experience as an enterprise software engineer". I've been a programmer for over 16 years, and the last 12-14 professionally, at companies big and small. So this made me think of this question: What's the difference between a software engineer and an enterprise software engineer? Is there really a difference between software architecture and enterprise architecture? BTW: I try to do what every other GOOD software programmer does, like architecture, tdd, SDLC, etc.

    Read the article

  • Celko's SQL Stumper: Eggs in one Basket

    Joe Celko returns with another stumper to celebrate Easter. Unsurprisingly, this involves eggs. More surprising is the nature of the puzzle: This time, the puzzle is one of designing a database rather than a query. DDL as well as the DML.

    Read the article

  • Refactor or Concentrate on Completing App

    - by Jiew Meng
    Would you refactor your app as you go or focus on completing app first? Refactoring will mean progress of app app will slow down. Completing app will mean you get a possibly very hard to maintain app later on? The app is a personal project. I don't really know how to answer "What drives the functionality and design", but I guess it's to solve inefficiencies in current software out there. I like minimal easy to use software too. So I am removing some features and add some that I feel will help.

    Read the article

  • Is the copy/paste approach professionally viable when working with the Google Maps API?

    - by Ian Campbell
    I find that I understand much of the Javascript concepts used in the Google Maps API code, but then again there is quite a bit that is way over my head in syntax. For example, the geocoder syntax seems to be of Ajax form, though I don't understand what is happening under the hood (especially with lines like results[0].geometry.location). I am able to modify the body of if (status == google.maps.GeocoderStatus.OK) for different purposes though. So, being that I am able to take various code from the Developer's Guide and rework it to an extent for my own purposes, all the while not fully understanding what Google Maps is actually doing, does this make me a copy-paste programmer? Is this a bad practice, or is this professionally viable? I am, of course, interested in learning as much as I can, but what if time-constraints outweigh the learning process?

    Read the article

  • How can I optimize my development machines files/dirs?

    - by LuxuryMode
    Like any programmer, I've got a lot of stuff on my machine. Some of that stuff is projects of my own, some are projects I'm working on for my employer, others are open-source tools and projects, etc. Currently, I have my files organized as follows: /Code --/development (things I'm sort of hacking on plus maybe libraries used in other projects) --/scala (organized by language...why? I don't know!) --/android --/ruby --/employer_name -- /mobile --/android --/ios --/open-source (basically my forks that I'm pushing commits back upstream from) --/some-awesome-oss-project --/another-awesome-one --/tools random IDE settings sprinkled in here plus some other apps As you can see, things are kind of a mess here. How can I keep things organized in some sort of coherent fashion?

    Read the article

  • What are approaches for analyzing the cost-benefits of a development methodology?

    - by Garrett Hall
    There are many development practices (TDD, continuous integration, cowboy-coding), principles (SOLID, layers of abstraction, KISS), and processes (RUP, Scrum, XP, Waterfall). I have learned you can't follow any of these blindly, but have to consider context and ROI (return on investment). My question is: How do you know whether you are getting a good ROI by following a particular methodology? Metrics, guesstimation, experience? Do analytical methods exist? Or is this just the million-dollar question in software engineering that has no answer?

    Read the article

  • Should a project start with the client or the server?

    - by MadBurn
    Pretty simple question with a complex answer. Should a project start with the client or the server, and why? Where should a single programmer start a client/server project? What are the best practices and what are the reasons behind them? If you can't think of any, what reasons do you use to justify why you would choose to start one before the other? Personally, I'm asking this question because I'm finishing up specs for a project I will be doing for myself on the side for fun. But now that I'm finishing this phase, I'm wondering "ok, now where do I begin?" Since I've never done a project like this by myself, I'm not sure where I should start. In this project, my server will be doing all the heavy lifting and the client will just be sending updates, getting information from the server, and displaying it. But, I don't want that to sway the answer as I'm looking for more of an in depth and less specific answer that would apply to any project I begin in the future.

    Read the article

  • design a model for a system of dependent variables

    - by dbaseman
    I'm dealing with a modeling system (financial) that has dozens of variables. Some of the variables are independent, and function as inputs to the system; most of them are calculated from other variables (independent and calculated) in the system. What I'm looking for is a clean, elegant way to: define the function of each dependent variable in the system trigger a re-calculation, whenever a variable changes, of the variables that depend on it A naive way to do this would be to write a single class that implements INotifyPropertyChanged, and uses a massive case statement that lists out all the variable names x1, x2, ... xn on which others depend, and, whenever a variable xi changes, triggers a recalculation of each of that variable's dependencies. I feel that this naive approach is flawed, and that there must be a cleaner way. I started down the path of defining a CalculationManager<TModel> class, which would be used (in a simple example) something like as follows: public class Model : INotifyPropertyChanged { private CalculationManager<Model> _calculationManager = new CalculationManager<Model>(); // each setter triggers a "PropertyChanged" event public double? Height { get; set; } public double? Weight { get; set; } public double? BMI { get; set; } public Model() { _calculationManager.DefineDependency<double?>( forProperty: model => model.BMI, usingCalculation: (height, weight) => weight / Math.Pow(height, 2), withInputs: model => model.Height, model.Weight); } // INotifyPropertyChanged implementation here } I won't reproduce CalculationManager<TModel> here, but the basic idea is that it sets up a dependency map, listens for PropertyChanged events, and updates dependent properties as needed. I still feel that I'm missing something major here, and that this isn't the right approach: the (mis)use of INotifyPropertyChanged seems to me like a code smell the withInputs parameter is defined as params Expression<Func<TModel, T>>[] args, which means that the argument list of usingCalculation is not checked at compile time the argument list (weight, height) is redundantly defined in both usingCalculation and withInputs I am sure that this kind of system of dependent variables must be common in computational mathematics, physics, finance, and other fields. Does someone know of an established set of ideas that deal with what I'm grasping at here? Would this be a suitable application for a functional language like F#? Edit More context: The model currently exists in an Excel spreadsheet, and is being migrated to a C# application. It is run on-demand, and the variables can be modified by the user from the application's UI. Its purpose is to retrieve variables that the business is interested in, given current inputs from the markets, and model parameters set by the business.

    Read the article

  • Should I modify an entity with many parameters or with the entity itself?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    We have a SOA-based system. The service methods are like: UpdateEntity(Entity entity) For small entities, it's all fine. However, when entities get bigger and bigger, to update one property we should follow this pattern in UI: Get parameters from UI (user) Create an instance of the Entity, using those parameters Get the entity from service Write code to fill the unchanged properties Give the result entity to the service Another option that I've experienced in previous experiences is to create semantic update methods for each update scenario. In other words instead of having one global all-encompasing update method, we had many ad-hoc parametric methods. For example, for the User entity, instead of having UpdateUser (User user) method, we had these methods: ChangeUserPassword(int userId, string newPassword) AddEmailToUserAccount(int userId, string email) ChangeProfilePicture(int userId, Image image) ... Now, I don't know which method is truly better, and for each approach, we encounter problems. I mean, I'm going to design the infrastructure for a new system, and I don't have enough reasons to pick any of these approaches. I couldn't find good resources on the Internet, because of the lack of keywords I could provide. What approach is better? What pitfalls each has? What benefits can we get from each one?

    Read the article

  • Generalise variable usage inside code

    - by Shirish11
    I would like to know if it is a good practice to generalize variables (use single variable to store all the values). Consider simple example Strings querycre,queryins,queryup,querydel; querycre = 'Create table XYZ ...'; execute querycre ; queryins = 'Insert into XYZ ...'; execute queryins ; queryup = 'Update XYZ set ...'; execute queryup; querydel = 'Delete from XYZ ...'; execute querydel ; and Strings query; query= 'Create table XYZ ... '; execute query ; query= 'Insert into XYZ ...'; execute query ; query= 'Update XYZ set ...'; execute query ; query= 'Delete from XYZ ...'; execute query ; In first case I use 4 strings each storing data to perform the actions mentioned in their suffixes. In second case just 1 variable to store all kinds the data. Having different variables makes it easier for someone else to read and understand it better. But having too many of them makes it difficult to manage. Also does having too many variables hamper my performance?

    Read the article

  • How to shift development culture from tech fetish to focusing on simplicity and getting things done?

    - by Serge
    Looking for ways to switch team/individual culture from chasing latest fads, patterns, and all kinds of best practices to focusing on finding quickest and simplest solutions and shipping features. My definition of "tech fetish": Chasing latest fads, applying new technologies and best practices without considering product/project impact, focusing on micro optimization, creating platforms and frameworks instead of finding simple and quick ways to ship product features. Few examples of culture differences: From "Spent a day on trying to map database query with five complex joins in NHibernate" to "Wrote a SQL query and used DataReader to pull data in" From "Wrote super-fast JSON parser in C++" to "Used Python to parse JSON response and call C++ code" From "Let's use WCF because it supports all possible communication standards" to "REST is simple text-based format, let's stick with it and use simple HTTP handlers"

    Read the article

  • Motivation and use of move constructors in C++

    - by Giorgio
    I recently have been reading about move constructors in C++ (see e.g. here) and I am trying to understand how they work and when I should use them. As far as I understand, a move constructor is used to alleviate the performance problems caused by copying large objects. The wikipedia page says: "A chronic performance problem with C++03 is the costly and unnecessary deep copies that can happen implicitly when objects are passed by value." I normally address such situations by passing the objects by reference, or by using smart pointers (e.g. boost::shared_ptr) to pass around the object (the smart pointers get copied instead of the object). What are the situations in which the above two techniques are not sufficient and using a move constructor is more convenient?

    Read the article

  • Refactoring and Open / Closed principle

    - by Giorgio
    I have recently being reading a web site about clean code development (I do not put a link here because it is not in English). One of the principles advertised by this site is the Open Closed Principle: each software component should be open for extension and closed for modification. E.g., when we have implemented and tested a class, we should only modify it to fix bugs or to add new functionality (e.g. new methods that do not influence the existing ones). The existing functionality and implementation should not be changed. I normally apply this principle by defining an interface I and a corresponding implementation class A. When class A has become stable (implemented and tested), I normally do not modify it too much (possibly, not at all), i.e. If new requirements arrive (e.g. performance, or a totally new implementation of the interface) that require big changes to the code, I write a new implementation B, and keep using A as long as B is not mature. When B is mature, all that is needed is to change how I is instantiated. If the new requirements suggest a change to the interface as well, I define a new interface I' and a new implementation A'. So I, A are frozen and remain the implementation for the production system as long as I' and A' are not stable enough to replace them. So, in view of these observation, I was a bit surprised that the web page then suggested the use of complex refactorings, "... because it is not possible to write code directly in its final form." Isn't there a contradiction / conflict between enforcing the Open / Closed Principle and suggesting the use of complex refactorings as a best practice? Or the idea here is that one can use complex refactorings during the development of a class A, but when that class has been tested successfully it should be frozen?

    Read the article

  • Is 2 lines of push/pop code for each pre-draw-state too many?

    - by Griffin
    I'm trying to simplify vector graphics management in XNA; currently by incorporating state preservation. 2X lines of push/pop code for X states feels like too many, and it just feels wrong to have 2 lines of code that look identical except for one being push() and the other being pop(). The goal is to eradicate this repetitiveness,and I hoped to do so by creating an interface in which a client can give class/struct refs in which he wants restored after the rendering calls. Also note that many beginner-programmers will be using this, so forcing lambda expressions or other advanced C# features to be used in client code is not a good idea. I attempted to accomplish my goal by using Daniel Earwicker's Ptr class: public class Ptr<T> { Func<T> getter; Action<T> setter; public Ptr(Func<T> g, Action<T> s) { getter = g; setter = s; } public T Deref { get { return getter(); } set { setter(value); } } } an extension method: //doesn't work for structs since this is just syntatic sugar public static Ptr<T> GetPtr <T> (this T obj) { return new Ptr<T>( ()=> obj, v=> obj=v ); } and a Push Function: //returns a Pop Action for later calling public static Action Push <T> (ref T structure) where T: struct { T pushedValue = structure; //copies the struct data Ptr<T> p = structure.GetPtr(); return new Action( ()=> {p.Deref = pushedValue;} ); } However this doesn't work as stated in the code. How might I accomplish my goal? Example of code to be refactored: protected override void RenderLocally (GraphicsDevice device) { if (!(bool)isCompiled) {Compile();} //TODO: make sure state settings don't implicitly delete any buffers/resources RasterizerState oldRasterState = device.RasterizerState; DepthFormat oldFormat = device.PresentationParameters.DepthStencilFormat; DepthStencilState oldBufferState = device.DepthStencilState; { //Rendering code } device.RasterizerState = oldRasterState; device.DepthStencilState = oldBufferState; device.PresentationParameters.DepthStencilFormat = oldFormat; }

    Read the article

  • Which web site gives the most accurate indication of a programmer's capabilities?

    - by Jerry Coffin
    If you were hiring programmers, and could choose between one of (say) the top 100 coders on topcoder.com, or one of the top 100 on stackoverflow.com, which would you choose? At least to me, it would appear that topcoder.com gives a more objective evaluation of pure ability to solve problems and write code. At the same time, despite obvious technical capabilities, this person may lack any hint of social skills -- he may be purely a "lone coder", with little or no ability to help/work with others, may lack mentoring ability to help transfer his technical skills to others, etc. On the other hand, stackoverflow.com would at least appear to give a much better indication of peers' opinion of the coder in question, and the degree to which his presence and useful and helpful to others on the "team". At the same time, the scoring system is such that somebody who just throws up a lot of mediocre (or even poor answers) will almost inevitably accumulate a positive total of "reputation" points -- a single up-vote (perhaps just out of courtesy) will counteract the effects of no fewer than 5 down-votes, and others are discouraged (to some degree) from down-voting because they have to sacrifice their own reputation points to do so. At the same time, somebody who makes little or no technical contribution seems unlikely to accumulate a reputation that lands them (even close to) the top of the heap, so to speak. So, which provides a more useful indication of the degree to which this particular coder is likely to be useful to your organization? If you could choose between them, which set of coders would you rather have working on your team?

    Read the article

  • How to deal with tautology in comments?

    - by Tamás Szelei
    Sometimes I find myself in situations when the part of code that I am writing is (or seems to be) so self-evident that its name would be basically repeated as a comment: class Example { /// <summary> /// The location of the update. /// </summary> public Uri UpdateLocation { get; set; }; } (C# example, but please refer to the question as language-agnostic). A comment like that is useless; what am I doing wrong? Is it the choice of the name that is wrong? How could I comment parts like this better? Should I just skip the comment for things like this?

    Read the article

  • graphical interface when using assembly language

    - by Hellbent
    Im looking to use assembly language to make a great game, not just an average game but a really great game. I want to learn a framework to use in assembly. I know thats not possible without learning the framework in c first. So im thinking of learning sdl in c and then learn, teach myself, how to interpret the program and run it as assembly language code which shouldnt be that hard. Then i will have a window and some graphics routines to display the game while using assembly to code everything in. I need to spend some time learning sdl and then some more time learning how to code all those statements using assembly while calling c functions and knowing what registers returned calls use and what they leave etc. My question is , Is this a good way to go or is there something better to get a graphical window display using assembly language? Regards HellBent

    Read the article

  • Check if an object is facing another based on angles

    - by Isaiah
    I already have something that calculates the bearing angle to get one object to face another. You give it the positions and it returns the angle to get one to face the other. Now I need to figure out how tell if on object is facing toward another object within a specified field and I can't find any information about how to do this. The objects are obj1 and obj2. Their angles are at obj1.angle and obj2.angle. Their vectors are at obj1.pos and obj2.pos. It's in the format [x,y]. The angle to have one face directly at another is found with direction(obj1.pos,obj2.pos). I want to set the function up like this: isfacing(obj1,obj2,area){...} and return true/false depending if it's in the specified field area to the angle to directly see it. I've got a base like this: var isfacing = function (obj1,obj2,area){ var toface = direction(obj1.pos,obj2.pos); if(toface+area >= obj1.angle && ob1.angle >= toface-area){ return true; } return false; } But my problem is that the angles are in 360 degrees, never above 360 and never below 0. How can I account for that in this? If the first object's angle is say at 0 and say I subtract a field area of 20 or so. It'll check if it's less than -20! If I fix the -20 it becomes 340 but x < 340 isn't what I want, I'd have to x 340 in that case. Is there someone out there with more sleep than I that can help a new dev pulling an all-nighter just to get enemies to know if they're attacking in the right direction? I hope I'm making this harder than it seems. I'd just make them always face the main char if the producer didn't want attacks from behind to work while blocking. In which case I'll need the function above anyways. I've tried to give as much info as I can think would help. Also this is in 2d.

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to output from within a function?

    - by Nick
    For example, should I be doing something like: <?php function output_message($message,$type='success') { ?> <p class="<?php echo $type; ?>"><?php echo $message; ?></p> <?php } output_message('There were some errors processing your request','error'); ?> or <?php function output_message($message,$type='success') { ob_start(); ?> <p class="<?php echo $type; ?>"><?php echo $message; ?></p> <?php return ob_get_clean(); } echo output_message('There were some errors processing your request','error'); ?> I understand they both achieve the same end result, but are there benefits doing one way over the other? Or does it not even matter?

    Read the article

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