Search Results

Search found 14074 results on 563 pages for 'programmers'.

Page 128/563 | < Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >

  • What happened to GremCheck? Is there a viable replacement?

    - by goober
    I was a big fan of an app called "GremCheck" that was out a while back, that seems to have disappeared. It was a JavaScript included in a master page that placed an icon at the bottom of the page. It was used during testing. You could define your own tests, and the box could pop up per page and viewers would answer the questions you define (such as "Does this page have the correct title?", "Is the Grammar Correct", "Does the design look consistent"). This was useful for end-user tests groups and quick testing for developers if time was squeezed on full functional testing. Anyone know where GremCheck went, if I can get to it, and if there's anything out there that does something similar?

    Read the article

  • Functional Methods on Collections

    - by GlenPeterson
    I'm learning Scala and am a little bewildered by all the methods (higher-order functions) available on the collections. Which ones produce more results than the original collection, which ones produce less, and which are most appropriate for a given problem? Though I'm studying Scala, I think this would pertain to most modern functional languages (Clojure, Haskell) and also to Java 8 which introduces these methods on Java collections. Specifically, right now I'm wondering about map with filter vs. fold/reduce. I was delighted that using foldRight() can yield the same result as a map(...).filter(...) with only one traversal of the underlying collection. But a friend pointed out that foldRight() may force sequential processing while map() is friendlier to being processed by multiple processors in parallel. Maybe this is why mapReduce() is so popular? More generally, I'm still sometimes surprised when I chain several of these methods together to get back a List(List()) or to pass a List(List()) and get back just a List(). For instance, when would I use: collection.map(a => a.map(b => ...)) vs. collection.map(a => ...).map(b => ...) The for/yield command does nothing to help this confusion. Am I asking about the difference between a "fold" and "unfold" operation? Am I trying to jam too many questions into one? I think there may be an underlying concept that, if I understood it, might answer all these questions, or at least tie the answers together.

    Read the article

  • How to store Role Based Access rights in web application?

    - by JonH
    Currently working on a web based CRM type system that deals with various Modules such as Companies, Contacts, Projects, Sub Projects, etc. A typical CRM type system (asp.net web form, C#, SQL Server backend). We plan to implement role based security so that basically a user can have one or more roles. Roles would be broken down by first the module type such as: -Company -Contact And then by the actions for that module for instance each module would end up with a table such as this: Role1 Example: Module Create Edit Delete View Company Yes Owner Only No Yes Contact Yes Yes Yes Yes In the above case Role1 has two module types (Company, and Contact). For company, the person assigned to this role can create companies, can view companies, can only edit records he/she created and cannot delete. For this same role for the module contact this user can create contacts, edit contacts, delete contacts, and view contacts (full rights basically). I am wondering is it best upon coming into the system to session the user's role with something like a: List<Role> roles; Where the Role class would have some sort of List<Module> modules; (can contain Company, Contact, etc.).? Something to the effect of: class Role{ string name; string desc; List<Module> modules; } And the module action class would have a set of actions (Create, Edit, Delete, etc.) for each module: class ModuleActions{ List<Action> actions; } And the action has a value of whether the user can perform the right: class Action{ string right; } Just a rough idea, I know the action could be an enum and the ModuleAction can probably be eliminated with a List<x, y>. My main question is what would be the best way to store this information in this type of application: Should I store it in the User Session state (I have a session class where I manage things related to the user). I generally load this during the initial loading of the application (global.asax). I can simply tack onto this session. Or should this be loaded at the page load event of each module (page load of company etc..). I eventually need to be able to hide / unhide various buttons / divs based on the user's role and that is what got me thinking to load this via session. Any examples or points would be great.

    Read the article

  • Why are PHP function signatures so inconsistent?

    - by Shamim Hafiz
    I was going through some PHP functions and I could not help notice the following: <?php function foo(&$var) { } foo($a); // $a is "created" and assigned to null $b = array(); foo($b['b']); var_dump(array_key_exists('b', $b)); // bool(true) $c = new StdClass; foo($c->d); var_dump(property_exists($c, 'd')); // bool(true) ?> Notice the array_key_exists() and property_exists() function. In the first one, the property name(key for an array) is the first parameter while in the second one it is the second parameter. By intuition, one would expect them to have similar signature. This can lead to confusion and the development time may be wasted by making corrections of this type. Shouldn't PHP, or any language for that matter, consider making the signatures of related functions consistent?

    Read the article

  • Should I organize my folders by business domain or by technical domain?

    - by Florian Margaine
    For example, if I'm using some MVC-like architecture, which folder structure should I use: domain1/ controller model view domain2/ controller model view Or: controllers/ domain1 domain2 models/ domain1 domain2 views/ domain1 domain2 I deliberately left out file extensions to keep this question language-agnostic. Personally, I'd prefer to separate by business domain (gut feeling), but I see that most/many frameworks separate by technical domain. Why whould I choose one over the other?

    Read the article

  • Don Knuth and MMIXAL vs. Chuck Moore and Forth -- Algorithms and Ideal Machines -- was there cross-pollination / influence in their ideas / work?

    - by AKE
    Question: To what extent is it known (or believed) that Chuck Moore and Don Knuth had influence on each other's thoughts on ideal machines, or their work on algorithms? I'm interested in citations, interviews, articles, links, or any other sort of evidence. It could also be evidence of the form of A and B here suggest that Moore might have borrowed or influenced C and D from Knuth here, or vice versa. (Opinions are of course welcome, but references / links would be better!) Context: Until fairly recently, I have been primarily familiar with Knuth's work on algorithms and computing models, mostly through TAOCP but also through his interviews and other writings. However, the more I have been using Forth, the more I am struck by both the power of a stack-based machine model, and the way in which the spareness of the model makes fundamental algorithmic improvements more readily apparent. A lot of what Knuth has done in fundamental analysis of algorithms has, it seems to me, a very similar flavour, and I can easily imagine that in a parallel universe, Knuth might perhaps have chosen Forth as his computing model. That's the software / algorithms / programming side of things. When it comes to "ideal computing machines", Knuth in the 70s came up with the MIX computer model, and then, collaborating with designers of state-of-the-art RISC chips through the 90s, updated this with the modern MMIX model and its attendant assembly language MMIXAL. Meanwhile, Moore, having been using and refining Forth as a language, but using it on top of whatever processor happened to be in the computer he was programming, began to imagine a world in which the efficiency and value of stack-based programming were reflected in hardware. So he went on in the 80s to develop his own stack-based hardware chips, defining the term MISC (Minimal Instruction Set Computers) along the way, and ending up eventually with the first Forth chip, the MuP21. Both are brilliant men with keen insight into the art of programming and algorithms, and both work at the intersection between algorithms, programs, and bare metal hardware (i.e. hardware without the clutter of operating systems). Which leads me to the headlined question... Question:To what extent is it known (or believed) that Chuck Moore and Don Knuth had influence on each other's thoughts on ideal machines, or their work on algorithms?

    Read the article

  • Should each app have its own database, or should small apps be merged into one?

    - by King
    We have a bunch of small to medium sized apps, each of which has its own database (MSSQL Server). There was a suggestion that we consoldate the 'related' databases into a smaller set amount of larger databases. They don't particularly share a lot of data, they would just be under a similar business group. For example, using a 'Finance' DB to hold the tables and procedures for finance apps. Would it be appropriate to use a different schema for each app? E.g. App1.SomeTable App1.SomeOtherTable AppTwo.SomeTable What are the pros and cons of this approach? What should I watch out for? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Weaknesses of 3-Strike Security

    - by prelic
    I've been reading some literature on security, specifically password security/encryption, and there's been one thing that I've been wondering: is the 3-strike rule a perfect solution to password security? That is, if the number of password attempts is limited to some small number, after which all authentication requests will not be honored, will that not protect users from intrusion? I realize gaining access or control over something doesn't always mean going through the authentication system, but doesn't this feature make dictionary/brute-force attacks obsolete? Is there something I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Architecture design with MyBatis mappers

    - by Wolf
    I am creating rest web service for providing data. I am using Spring MVC for handling rest requests, and MyBatis for data access. Application should be designed in the way that it should be easy to change the data access implementation (for example to hibernate or something else) and it has to be fast (so I am trying to avoid unnecessary overcomplication of design). Now my question is about the general design of layers. I would normally use DAO interface and then different implementations for different data access strategies, but MyBatis uses interfaces to access the data. So I can think of 2 possible models but I am not sure which one is better or if there is any other nice way: Controller layer - uses Service layer interfaces services are then implemented for each data access stretegy - for example for mybatis: service implementation uses Mapper classes to access data and do whatever it needs to do with them and sends them to controller layer Controller layer - uses Service layer - service layer uses DAO interfaces DAOs are then implemented for each data access strategy - for example for mybatis: DAO class uses mapper interface to access data and sends them to service layer, service layer then do whatever it needs to do with them and sends them to controller layer I prefer the first strategy as it seems to be less complicated, but then I would have to write all of the service code for another data access again. What do you think? Thank You

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection in constructor, method or just use a static class instead?

    - by gaetanm
    What is the best between: $dispatcher = new Dispatcher($request); $dispatcher->dispatch(); and $dispatcher = new Dispatcher(); $dispatcher->dispatch($request); or even Dispatcher::dispatch($request); Knowing that only one method of this class uses the $request instance. I naturally tend to the last solution because the class have no other states, but by I feel that it may not be the best OOP solution.

    Read the article

  • Is it normal needing time to understand code i wrote recently

    - by user1478167
    By recently i mean some weeks ago. I am trying to continue a project i left 2 weeks ago and i need time to understand some functions i wrote(not copied from somewhere) and it takes me time. Normally i don't need to because my functions,methods etc are black boxes but when i need to change something it's really hard. Does this mean i write bad code? I am still in school and i am the only who writes/uses the code so i don't have feedback, but i am afraid that if it is difficult for me to understand it, it would be 10 times more difficult for someone else. What should i do? I write a lot of comments but most of the time are useless when reviewing. Do you have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Best way for a technical manager to stay up to date on technology

    - by JoelFan
    My manager asked for a list of technical blogs he should follow to stay current on technology. His problem is he keeps hearing terms that he hasn't heard of (i.e. NoSql, sharding, agure, sevice bus, etc.) and he would prefer to at least have a fighting chance of knowing something about them without having to be reactive and looking them up. Also I think he wants to have a big picture of all the emerging technologies and where they fit in together instead of just learning about each thing in isolation. He asked about blogs but I'm thinking print magazines may also help.

    Read the article

  • const vs. readonly for a singleton

    - by GlenH7
    First off, I understand there are folk who oppose the use of singletons. I think it's an appropriate use in this case as it's constant state information, but I'm open to differing opinions / solutions. (See The singleton pattern and When should the singleton pattern not be used?) Second, for a broader audience: C++/CLI has a similar keyword to readonly with initonly, so this isn't strictly a C# type question. (Literal field versus constant variable in C++/CLI) Sidenote: A discussion of some of the nuances on using const or readonly. My Question: I have a singleton that anchors together some different data structures. Part of what I expose through that singleton are some lists and other objects, which represent the necessary keys or columns in order to connect the linked data structures. I doubt that anyone would try to change these objects through a different module, but I want to explicitly protect them from that risk. So I'm currently using a "readonly" modifier on those objects*. I'm using readonly instead of const with the lists as I read that using const will embed those items in the referencing assemblies and will therefore trigger a rebuild of those referencing assemblies if / when the list(s) is/are modified. This seems like a tighter coupling than I would want between the modules, but I wonder if I'm obsessing over a moot point. (This is question #2 below) The alternative I see to using "readonly" is to make the variables private and then wrap them with a public get. I'm struggling to see the advantage of this approach as it seems like wrapper code that doesn't provide much additional benefit. (This is question #1 below) It's highly unlikely that we'll change the contents or format of the lists - they're a compilation of things to avoid using magic strings all over the place. Unfortunately, not all the code has converted over to using this singleton's presentation of those strings. Likewise, I don't know that we'd change the containers / classes for the lists. So while I normally argue for the encapsulations advantages a get wrapper provides, I'm just not feeling it in this case. A representative sample of my singleton public sealed class mySingl { private static volatile mySingl sngl; private static object lockObject = new Object(); public readonly Dictionary<string, string> myDict = new Dictionary<string, string>() { {"I", "index"}, {"D", "display"}, }; public enum parms { ABC = 10, DEF = 20, FGH = 30 }; public readonly List<parms> specParms = new List<parms>() { parms.ABC, parms.FGH }; public static mySingl Instance { get { if(sngl == null) { lock(lockObject) { if(sngl == null) sngl = new mySingl(); } } return sngl; } } private mySingl() { doSomething(); } } Questions: Am I taking the most reasonable approach in this case? Should I be worrying about const vs. readonly? is there a better way of providing this information?

    Read the article

  • Books tailored for Java to C/C++ development?

    - by soulesschild
    Does anyone know of good books that are tailored for Java developers looking to transition to C/C++? I have the classic K&R Ansi C book but was looking for something more tailored to those that learned Java first, such as having examples of similar code/functionality between Java and C/C++. I know there is this list, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/388242/the-definitive-c-book-guide-and-list, but was looking for books specifically written for Java developers. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Development environment to manage multiple Oracle databases

    - by jkohlhepp
    I am in an enterprise environment where we have applications that need to run against multiple Oracle databases. Developers may need to manage multiple vintages of these databases to support different test data or diagnose bugs against different versions of the code. Right now, we have a limited set of test environments set up on "real" Oracle servers within the data center. We juggle these among development and QA groups and there is a lot of conflicts and inefficiencies that arise because of it. I am taking a look at Oracle Express Edition which would allow me to spin up a local Oracle database. This is similar to the workflow I most often see with SQL Server. Devs work on their location machine until they are ready to integration and then they push their DB changes to integration / QA environments. However, from what I read it seems that Oracle XE only supports one database instance at a time. So if I have an application that utilizes two different databases, I can't have both of them running on my local machine. Is that correct? Does Oracle Standard or Personal editions get around this limitation? If I had one of those installed locally, how difficult would it be to get multiple databases working on the same development machine? How do dev shops handle developing against Oracle where they need to be using several different Oracle instances for their applications?

    Read the article

  • What defines code readability?

    - by zxcdw
    It is often said that readability is perhaps the most important quality-defining measure of a given piece of code for reasons concerning maintainability, ease of understanding and use. What defines the word readable in context of program source code? What kind of definitive aspects are there to code readability? I would be grateful with code examples of readable code, along with reasoning why it is readable.

    Read the article

  • Using XML as data storage

    - by Kian Mayne
    I was thinking about the XML format and the following quote: “XML is not a database. It was never meant to be a database. It is never going to be a database. Relational databases are proven technology with more than 20 years of implementation experience. They are solid, stable, useful products. They are not going away. XML is a very useful technology for moving data between different databases or between databases and other programs. However, it is not itself a database. Don't use it like one.“ -Effective XML: 50 Specific Ways to Improve Your XML by Elliotte Rusty Harold (page 230, Part 4, Item 41, 2nd paragraph) This seems to really stress that XML should not be used for data storage and should only be used for program to program interoperability. Personally, I disagree and .NET's app.config file that's used to store a program's settings is an example of data storage in an XML file. However for databases rather than configurations etc XML should not be used. To develop my point, I will use two examples: A) Data about customers with fields that are all on one level i.e. there are a number of fields all relating to one customer with no children B) Data about configuration of an application where nested fields and properties make a lot of sense So my question is, Is this still a valid statement and is it now acceptable to store data using XML? EDIT: I've sent an email to the author of that quote to ask for his input/extra context.

    Read the article

  • Best C# database communication technique

    - by user65439
    A few days ago I read a reply to a question where people said that the days of writing queries within your c# code are long gone. I'm not sure what the specific person meant with the comment but it got me thinking. At the company I'm currently working at we maintain an assembly containing all the queries to the database (let's call it Queries), this assembly is reference by a QueryService (Retrieve the correct queries) assembly which in turn is referenced by a UnitOfWork assembly (The database connector classes, we have different connector classes for SQL, MySQL etc.). We use these three assemblies to perform operations on our database and all queries/commands are written in our C# code. Is there a better way to communicate with the database and is there a better way to communicate with different database types?

    Read the article

  • How to incorporate existing open source software from a licensing perspective?

    - by Matt
    I'm working on software that uses the following libraries: Biopython SciPy NumPy All of the above have licenses similar to MIT or BSD. Three scenarios: First, if I don't redistribute those dependencies, and only my code, then all I need is my own copyright and license (planing on using the MIT License) for my code. Correct? What if I use py2exe or py2app to create a binary executable to distribute so as to make it easy for people to run the application without needing to install python and all the dependencies. Of course this also means that my binary file(s) contains python itself (along with any other packages I might have performed a pip install xyz). What if I bundle Biopython, SciPy, and NumPy binaries in my package? In the latter two cases, what do I need to do to comply with copyright laws.

    Read the article

  • Naming Convention for Dedicated Thread Locking objects

    - by Chris Sinclair
    A relatively minor question, but I haven't been able to find official documentation or even blog opinion/discussions on it. Simply put: when I have a private object whose sole purpose is to serve for private lock, what do I name that object? class MyClass { private object LockingObject = new object(); void DoSomething() { lock(LockingObject) { //do something } } } What should we name LockingObject here? Also consider not just the name of the variable but how it looks in-code when locking. I've seen various examples, but seemingly no solid go-to advice: Plenty of usages of SyncRoot (and variations such as _syncRoot). Code Sample: lock(SyncRoot), lock(_syncRoot) This appears to be influenced by VB's equivalent SyncLock statement, the SyncRoot property that exists on some of the ICollection classes and part of some kind of SyncRoot design pattern (which arguably is a bad idea) Being in a C# context, not sure if I'd want to have a VBish naming. Even worse, in VB naming the variable the same as the keyword. Not sure if this would be a source of confusion or not. thisLock and lockThis from the MSDN articles: C# lock Statement, VB SyncLock Statement Code Sample: lock(thisLock), lock(lockThis) Not sure if these were named minimally purely for the example or not Kind of weird if we're using this within a static class/method. Several usages of PadLock (of varying casing) Code Sample: lock(PadLock), lock(padlock) Not bad, but my only beef is it unsurprisingly invokes the image of a physical "padlock" which I tend to not associate with the abstract threading concept. Naming the lock based on what it's intending to lock Code Sample: lock(messagesLock), lock(DictionaryLock), lock(commandQueueLock) In the VB SyncRoot MSDN page example, it has a simpleMessageList example with a private messagesLock object I don't think it's a good idea to name the lock against the type you're locking around ("DictionaryLock") as that's an implementation detail that may change. I prefer naming around the concept/object you're locking ("messagesLock" or "commandQueueLock") Interestingly, I very rarely see this naming convention for locking objects in code samples online or on StackOverflow. Question: What's your opinion generally about naming private locking objects? Recently, I've started naming them ThreadLock (so kinda like option 3), but I'm finding myself questioning that name. I'm frequently using this locking pattern (in the code sample provided above) throughout my applications so I thought it might make sense to get a more professional opinion/discussion about a solid naming convention for them. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Wisdom of using open source code in a commercial software product

    - by Mr. Jefferson
    I'm looking at using some open source code in my ASP.NET web app (specifically dapper). Management is not a fan, because open source is seen as a risk that has bitten us before. Apparently previous developers have had to rewrite things after having open-source components fail. The pros seem to be: It does a lot of stuff for me that would otherwise involve either lots of boilerplate code or Microsoft's recommended but slower solution (Entity Framework). Cons: It's complex enough that if it were to fail suddenly in production, I would be hard pressed to fix it. However, it's in use on a much higher-traffic site than mine, so I don't think it'll end up being a high risk portion of the project. What is the consensus here? Is it unwise to use open source code in my project that I don't know/understand as well as I do my own code?

    Read the article

  • What is an effective git process for managing our central code library?

    - by Mathew Byrne
    Quick background: we're a small web agency (3-6 developers at any one time) developing small to medium sized Symfony 1.4 sites. We've used git for a year now, but most of our developers have preferred Subversion and aren't used to a distributed model. For the past 6 months we've put a lot of development time into a central Symfony plugin that powers our custom CMS. This plugin includes a number of features, helpers, base classes etc. that we use to build custom functionality. This plugin is stored in git, but branches wildly as the plugin is used in various products and is pulled from/pushed to constantly. The repository is usually used as a submodule within a major project. The problems we're starting to see now are a large number of Merge conflicts and backwards incompatible changes brought into the repository by developers adding custom functionality in the context of their own project. I've read Vincent Driessen's excellent git branching model and successfully used it for projects in the past, but it doesn't seem to quite apply well to our particular situation; we have a number of projects concurrently using the same core plugin while developing new features for it. What we need is a strategy that provides the following: A methodology for developing major features within the code repository. A way of migrating those features into other projects. A way of versioning the core repository, and of tracking which version each major project uses. A plan for migrating bug fixes back to older versions. A cleaner history that's easier to see where changes have come from. Any suggestions or discussion would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What are some arguments AGAINST using EntityFramework?

    - by Rachel
    The application I am currently building has been using Stored procedures and hand-crafted class models to represent database objects. Some people have suggested using Entity Framework and I am considering switching to that since I am not that far into the project. My problem is, I feel the people arguing for EF are only telling me the good side of things, not the bad side :) My main concerns are: We want Client-Side validation using DataAnnotations, and it sounds like I have to create the client-side models anyways so I am not sure that EF would save that much coding time We would like to keep the classes as small as possible when going over the network, and I have read that using EF often includes extra data that is not needed We have a complex database layer which crosses multiple databases, and I am not sure EF can handle this. We have one Common database with things like Users, StatusCodes, Types, etc and multiple instances of our main databases for different instances of the application. SELECT queries can and will query across all instances of the databases, however users can only modify objects that are in the database they are currently working on. They can switch databases without reloading the application. Object modes are very complex and there are often quite a few joins involved Arguments for EF are: Concurrency. I wouldn't have to code in checks to see if the record was updated before each save Code Generation. EF can generate partial class models and POCOs for me, however I am not positive this would really save me that much time since I think we would still need to create the client-side models for validation and some custom parsing methods. Speed of development since we wouldn't need to create the CRUD stored procedures for every database object Our current architecture consists of a WPF Service which handles database calls via parameterized Stored Procedures, POCO objects that go to/from the WCF service and the WPF client, and the WPF client itself which transforms POCOs into class Models for the purpose of Validation and DataBinding.

    Read the article

  • Can an agile shop really score 12 on the Joel Test?

    - by Simon
    I really like the Joel test, use it myself, and encourage my staff and interviewees to consider it carefully. However I don't think I can ever score more than 9 because a few points seem to contradict the Agile Manifesto, XP and TDD, which are the bedrocks of my world. Specifically: the questions about schedule, specs, testers and quiet working conditions run counter to what we are trying to create and the values that we have adopted in being genuinely agile. So my question is: is it possible for a true Agile shop to score 12?

    Read the article

  • Retrieving system information without WMI

    - by user94481
    I want to write an application where I can fetch system information like CPU-Z (for example) does. I don't want to rely on WMI, because I want to grab stuff like information about the manufacturing process of the GPU (like from a database) and I don't want to maintain this by myself, because that would require too much effort. I already came up with HWiNFO32 SDK but I wonder if there are any (maybe free) alternatives to it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >