Search Results

Search found 16554 results on 663 pages for 'programmers identity'.

Page 128/663 | < Previous Page | 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135  | Next Page >

• When to use shared libraries for a web framework?

  - by CamelBlues

  tl;dr: I've found myself hosting a bunch of sites running on the same web framework (symfony 1.4). Would it be helpful if I moved all of the shared library code into the same directory and shared it across the sites? more I see some advantages to this: Each site takes up less disk space Library updates (an unlikely scenario) can take place across all sites I also see some disadvantages, mostly in terms of a single point of failure and the inability to have sites using different versions of the framework. My real concern, though, is performance. I hypothesize that I will see a performance increase, since the PHP code will already be cached for all sites when they call the framework. Is this a correct hypothesis?

  Read the article

• How to communicate within a company what is being Continually Deployed

  - by Francis Spor

  I work for a small development company, 20 people total in the entire company, 3 in actual development, and we've adopted CD for our commits to trunk, and it works great, from a code management and up-time side. However - we're getting flak from our support staff and marketing department that they don't feel that they're getting enough lead time on new features and notifications on bug fixes that could change behavior. Part of why we love the CD system is for us in development, it's fast, we fix the bug, add the quick feature, close the Bugz and move on with our day to the next item. All members of our company are now on HipChat at all times, and when a deployment occurs, a message is sent to a room that all company members are in, letting them know what was just deployed (it just shows the commit messages from tip back to the last recorded deployment). We in development are also attempting to make sure that when we're making a change that modifies the UI or a public facing behavior, we post a screenshot to the All Company room and explain what the behavior change is, seeking pushback or concerns. Often, the response is silence. Sometimes, it's a few minor questions, but nothing that need stop the deployment from happening. What I'm wondering is how do other users of the CD method deal with notifications of new features and changes to areas of the company that are not development - and eventually on to customers in the world? Thanks, Francis

  Read the article

• In which cases Robolectric is a relevant solution?

  - by Francis Toth

  As you may now, Robolectric is a framework that provides stubs for Android objects, in order to make tests runnable outside the Dalvik environment. My concern is that, by doing this, one can fake a third party library, which is, I believe, not a good practice (it should be encapsulated instead). If you make assumptions about an interface you don't own, which is changed once your test has been written, you won't be always noticed about the modifications. This can lead to a misunderstanding between your implementations and the interface they depends on. In addition, Android use mostly inheritance over interfaces which limits contract testing. So here's my question: Are there situations when Robolectric is the way to go? Here are some links you can check for further information: test-doubles-with-mockito in-brief-contract-tests

  Read the article

• Correct For Loop Design

  - by Yttrill

  What is the correct design for a for loop? Felix currently uses if len a > 0 do for var i in 0 upto len a - 1 do println a.[i]; done done which is inclusive of the upper bound. This is necessary to support the full range of values of a typical integer type. However the for loop shown does not support zero length arrays, hence the special test, nor will the subtraction of 1 work convincingly if the length of the array is equal to the number of integers. (I say convincingly because it may be that 0 - 1 = maxval: this is true in C for unsigned int, but are you sure it is true for unsigned char without thinking carefully about integral promotions?) The actual implementation of the for loop by my compiler does correctly handle 0 but this requires two tests to implement the loop: continue: if not (i <= bound) goto break body if i == bound goto break ++i goto continue break: Throw in the hand coded zero check in the array example and three tests are needed. If the loop were exclusive it would handle zero properly, avoiding the special test, but there'd be no way to express the upper bound of an array with maximum size. Note the C way of doing this: for(i=0; predicate(i); increment(i)) has the same problem. The predicate is tested after the increment, but the terminating increment is not universally valid! There is a general argument that a simple exclusive loop is enough: promote the index to a large type to prevent overflow, and assume no one will ever loop to the maximum value of this type.. but I'm not entirely convinced: if you promoted to C's size_t and looped from the second largest value to the largest you'd get an infinite loop!

  Read the article

• Mac OS ? Assembly Language Esoteria

  - by veryfoolish

  I've been playing around with assembly and object files in general on Mac OS ? and was wondering if somebody could provide some edification. Specifically, I'm wondering what the extra code GCC generates when compiling the C file in the following example does. I have a toy C program so I can comprehend the assembly output. int main() { int a = 5; int b = 5; int c = a + b; } Running this through gcc -S creates the following assembly: .text .globl _main _main: LFB2: pushq %rbp LCFI0: movq %rsp, %rbp LCFI1: movl $5, -4(%rbp) movl $5, -8(%rbp) movl -8(%rbp), %eax addl -4(%rbp), %eax movl %eax, -12(%rbp) leave ret LFE2: .section __TEXT,__eh_frame,coalesced,no_toc+strip_static_syms+live_support EH_frame1: .set L$set$0,LECIE1-LSCIE1 .long L$set$0 LSCIE1: .long 0x0 .byte 0x1 .ascii "zR\0" .byte 0x1 .byte 0x78 .byte 0x10 .byte 0x1 .byte 0x10 .byte 0xc .byte 0x7 .byte 0x8 .byte 0x90 .byte 0x1 .align 3 LECIE1: .globl _main.eh _main.eh: LSFDE1: .set L$set$1,LEFDE1-LASFDE1 .long L$set$1 LASFDE1: .long LASFDE1-EH_frame1 .quad LFB2-. .set L$set$2,LFE2-LFB2 .quad L$set$2 .byte 0x0 .byte 0x4 .set L$set$3,LCFI0-LFB2 .long L$set$3 .byte 0xe .byte 0x10 .byte 0x86 .byte 0x2 .byte 0x4 .set L$set$4,LCFI1-LCFI0 .long L$set$4 .byte 0xd .byte 0x6 .align 3 LEFDE1: .subsections_via_symbols The LCFI1 section seems to contain the actual logic for the program, but I'm not sure what the misc. other stuff is for... also, is there any scheme these labels are following? I'm sorry this is such a vague question. I'd appreciate anything, including being pointed to a resource where I can find out more about this. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How should I start with Lisp?

  - by Gary Rowe

  I've been programming for years now, working my way through various iterations of Blub (BASIC, Assembler, C, C++, Visual Basic, Java, Ruby in no particular order of "Blub-ness") and I'd like to learn Lisp. However, I have a lot of intertia what with limited time (family, full time job etc) and a comfortable happiness with my current Blub (Java). So my question is this, given that I'm someone who would really like to learn Lisp, what would be the initial steps to get a good result that demonstrates the superiority of Lisp in web development? Maybe I'm missing the point, but that's how I would initially see the application of my Lisp knowledge. I'm thinking "use dialect A, use IDE B, follow instructions on page C, question your sanity after monads using counsellor D". I'd just like to know what people here consider to be an optimal set of values for A, B, C and perhaps D. Also some discussion on the relative merit of learning such a powerful language as opposed to, say, becoming a Rails expert. Just to add some more detail, I'll be developing on MacOS (or a Linux VM) - no Windows based approaches will be necessary, thanks. Notes for those just browsing by I'm going to keep this question open for a while so that I can offer feedback on the suggestions after I've been able to explore them. If you happen to be browsing by and feel you have something to add, please do. I would really welcome your feedback. Interesting links Assuming you're coming at Lisp from a Java background, this set of links will get you started quickly. Using Intellij's La Clojure plugin to integrate Lisp (videocast) Lisp for the Web Online version of Practical Common Lisp (c/o Frank Shearar) Land of Lisp a (+ (+ very quirky) game based) way in but makes it all so straightforward

  Read the article

• Model Driven Architecture Approach in programming / modelling

  - by yak

  I know the basics of the model driven architecture: it is all about model the system which I want to create and create the core code afterwards. I used CORBA a while ago. First thing that I needed to do was to create an abstract interface (some kind of model of the system I want to build) and generate core code later. But I have a different question: is model driven architecture a broad approach or not? I mean, let's say, that I have the language (modelling language) in which I want to model EXISTING system (opposite to the system I want to CREATE), and then analyze the model of the created system and different facts about that modeled abstraction. In this case, can the process I described above be considered the model driven architecture approach? I mean, I have the model, but this is the model of the existing system, not the system to be created.

  Read the article

• What change in mindset are needed for a Jave/C# programmer when learning Swift?

  - by Ian

  Swift seem to fit into the same “space” as Java/C# as it was created to make it easier to create end user applications. It is also used to target smart phones like Java/C#. However reading it’s documentation it seems to come from anther universe, you could say it is from Jupiter while C#/Java is from Saturn. As a C# programmer I am finding myself making assumptions that are not true, so what are the conceptual “traps” that I should look out for while leaning about Swift?

  Read the article

• Designing javascript chart library

  - by coolscitist

  I started coding a chart library on top of d3js: My chart library. I read Javascript API reusability and Towards reusable charts. However, I am NOT really following the suggestions because I am not really convinced about them. This is how my library can be used to create a bubble chart: var chart = new XYBubbleChart(); chart.data = [{"xValue":200,"yValue":300},{"xValue":400,"yValue":200},{"xValue":100,"yValue":310}]; //set data chart.dataKey.x = "xValue"; chart.dataKey.y = "yValue"; chart.elementId = "#chart"; chart.createChart(); Here are my questions: It does not use chaining. Is it a big issue? Every property and function is exposed publicly. (Example: width, height are exposed in Chart.js). OOP is all about abstraction and hiding, but I don't really see the point right now. I think exposing everything gives flexibility to change property and functionality inside subclasses and objects without writing a lot of code. What could be pitfalls of such exposure? I have implemented functions like: zooming, "showing info boxes when data point is clicked" as "abilities". (example: XYZoomingAbility.js). Basically, such "abilities" accept "chart" object, play around with public variables of "chart" to add functionality. What this allows me to do is to add an ability by writing: activateZoomAbility(chartObject); My goal is to separate "visualization" from "interactivity". I want "interactivity" like: zooming to be plugged into the chart rather than built inside the chart. Like, I don't want my bubble chart to know anything about "zooming". However, I do want zoomable bubble chart. What is the best way to do this? How to test and what to test? I have written mixed tests: jasmine and actual html files so that I can test manually on browser.

  Read the article

• How do you keep code with continuations/callbacks readable?

  - by Heinzi

  Summary: Are there some well-established best-practice patterns that I can follow to keep my code readable in spite of using asynchronous code and callbacks? I'm using a JavaScript library that does a lot of stuff asynchronously and heavily relies on callbacks. It seems that writing a simple "load A, load B, ..." method becomes quite complicated and hard to follow using this pattern. Let me give a (contrived) example. Let's say I want to load a bunch of images (asynchronously) from a remote web server. In C#/async, I'd write something like this: disableStartButton(); foreach (myData in myRepository) { var result = await LoadImageAsync("http://my/server/GetImage?" + myData.Id); if (result.Success) { myData.Image = result.Data; } else { write("error loading Image " + myData.Id); return; } } write("success"); enableStartButton(); The code layout follows the "flow of events": First, the start button is disabled, then the images are loaded (await ensures that the UI stays responsive) and then the start button is enabled again. In JavaScript, using callbacks, I came up with this: disableStartButton(); var count = myRepository.length; function loadImage(i) { if (i >= count) { write("success"); enableStartButton(); return; } myData = myRepository[i]; LoadImageAsync("http://my/server/GetImage?" + myData.Id, function(success, data) { if (success) { myData.Image = data; } else { write("error loading image " + myData.Id); return; } loadImage(i+1); } ); } loadImage(0); I think the drawbacks are obvious: I had to rework the loop into a recursive call, the code that's supposed to be executed in the end is somewhere in the middle of the function, the code starting the download (loadImage(0)) is at the very bottom, and it's generally much harder to read and follow. It's ugly and I don't like it. I'm sure that I'm not the first one to encounter this problem, so my question is: Are there some well-established best-practice patterns that I can follow to keep my code readable in spite of using asynchronous code and callbacks?

  Read the article

• How should I design my database API commands? [closed]

  - by WebDev

  I am developing a database API for a project, with commands for getting data from the database. For example, I have one gib table, so the command for that is: getgib name alias limit fields If the user pass their name: getgib rahul Then it will return all gib data whose name is like rahul. If an alias is given then it will return all the gib owned by the user whose alias (userid) was given. I want to design the commands: limit: to limit the record in query, fields: extra fields I want to add in the select query. So now the commands are set, but: I want the gibs by the gibid, so how to make this or any suggestion to improve my command is welcome. If the user doesn't want to specify the name, and he wants only the gibs by providing alias, then what separator should I use instead of name?

  Read the article

• Practical Meta Programming System (MPS)

  - by INTPnerd

  This is in regards to Meta Programming System or MPS by JetBrains. Thus far, from my efforts to learn how to use MPS, I have only learned its basic purpose and that it is very complex. Is MPS worth learning? Is there anyone who already effectively uses MPS to create their own languages and editors for those languages and uses these created editors as their primary way of programming? If so, what types of programs have they made with this? What are the advantages and disadvantages of working with MPS? What is the best way to learn MPS?

  Read the article

• Why use try … finally without a catch clause?

  - by Nick Rosencrantz

  The classical way to program is with try / catch but when is it appropriate to use try without catch? In Python the following appears legal and can make sense: try: #do work finally: #do something unconditional But we didn't catch anything. Similarly one could think in Java it would be try { //for example try to get a database connection } finally { //closeConnection(connection) } It looks good and suddenly I don't have to worry about exception types etc. But if this is good practice, when is it good practice? Or reasons why this is not good practice or not legal (I didn't compile the source I'm asking about and it could be a syntax error for Java but I checked that the Python surely compiles.) A related problem I've run into is that I continue writing the function / method and at the end I must return something and I'm in a place which should not be reached and it must be a return point so even if I handle the exceptions above I'm still returning null or an empty string at some point in the code which should not be reached, often the end of the method / function. I've always managed to restructure to code so that I don't have to return null since that absolutely appears to look like less than good practice.

  Read the article

• What do you think of a performance engineer should have?

  - by Vance

  I believe performance tuning (or even testing) is one the most challenging for an engineer. Well, in lots of company, this is the lowest priority than others "important" thing. My purpose of opening this post is to know what do you think*good* performance engineer should have. I can list some things like: Solid database,programming knowledge. Do single thread performance testing. Good knowledge of using the load generator tools to simulate the concurrent loads. Use different tools to monitor/measure the app/db server performance status Understand and can debug the codes. Even tune the codes. Any more ideas are always appreciated!

  Read the article

• What ways are there to determine if an idea for change is viable or not?

  - by Kenneth

  A recent discussion on here about whether or not program windows should still be called screens or if we should have improved terminology got me thinking... Dangerous I know! People as a whole tend to be fairly resistant to change. We get comfortable in our niches and used to the way things are. While some changes lead to good results and improve our lives or the way things are done, others are clearly not enough of a change or overall bad and not even worth attempting. What guides can we use as we program to determine if an improvement (whether it be to coding style, terminology, user interface, language use, etc) is really an improvement or not? I'm sure to some extent nothing will replace the try-it-out approach but are there any tests or guides that can be used to eliminate certain ideas that would eventually turn out to be worthless or a waste of time to pursue? EDIT: For anyone who is wondering the discussion that brought this question up in my mind is found here: Does your organization still use the term "screens" to describe a user interface?

  Read the article

• Securing Back End API for Mobile Applications

  - by El Guapo

  I have an application that I am writing for both iOS and Android; this application will be served by a ReSTFUL API running on a cluster of servers on "the internets". I am curious how the rest of the world is going about securing their APIs so only specific applications running on iOS or Android can use these APIs. I could go the same route as other OAuth providers by providing a key/secret combination (2-legged OAuth), however, what do I do if I ever have to change these keys??? Do I create a new key/secret for every person that downloads the app??? The application is a social-based game that will allow the user to interact with other "participants" in the game based on location, achievements, etc. The API will provide the following functions: -Questions, Quests, etc -Profile Management -User Interaction -Possible Social Interaction Once the app gains traction I plan on opening up the API ala Facebook, Twitter, etc. Which is easy enough, I plan on implementing an OAuth Server and whatnot. However, I want to make sure, during this phase, that only people who are using the application can access and use the API.

  Read the article

• Ajax application: using SOAP vs REST ?

  - by coder

  I'm building an ajax heavy application (client-side strictly html/css/js) which will be getting all the data and using server business logic via webservices. I know REST seems to be the hot topic but I can't find any good arguments. The main argument seems to be its "light-weight". My impression so far is that wsdl/soap based services are more expressive and allow for more a more complex transfer of data. It appears that soap would be more useful in the application I'm building where the only code consuming the services will be the js downloaded in the client browser. REST on the other hand seems to have a smaller entry barrier and so can be more useful for services like twitter in allowing other developers to consume these services easily. Also, REST seems to Te better suited for simple data transfers. So in summary SOAP is useful for complex data transfer and REST is useful in simple data transfer. I'm currently under the impression that using SOAP would be best due to the complexity of the messages but perhaps there's other factors. What are your thoughts on the pros/cons of soap/rest for a heavy ajax web app? EDIT: While the wsdl is in xml, the data I'm transferring back and forth is actually in JSON. It just appears more natural to use wsdl/soap here due to the nature of the app. The verbs GET and POST may not be enough. I may want to say something like: processQueue, or executeTimer. This is why my conclusion has been wsdl/soap would be good for bridging a complex layer between two applications (client and server) whereas REST would be better (due to its simplicity) for allowing many developer-users to consume resources programmatically. So you could say the choice falls along two lines Will the app be verb-oriented (completing tasks: use soap) or noun-oriented (consuming resources: use REST) Will the api be consumed by few developers or many developers (REST is strong for many developers)? Since such an ajax heavy app would potentially use many verbs and would only be used by the client developer it appears soap/wsdl would be the best fit.

  Read the article

• How to create a Semantic Network like wordnet based on Wikipedia?

  - by Forbidden Overseer

  I am an undergraduate student and I have to create a Semantic Network based on Wikipedia. This Semantic Network would be similar to Wordnet(except for it is based on Wikipedia and is concerned with "streams of text/topics" rather than simple words etc.) and I am thinking of using the Wikipedia XML dumps for the purpose. I guess I need to learn parsing an XML and "some other things" related to NLP and probably Machine Learning, but I am no way sure about anything involved herein after the XML parsing. Is the starting step: XML dump parsing into text a good idea/step? Any alternatives? What would be the steps involved after parsing XML into text to create a functional Semantic Network? What are the things/concepts I should learn in order to do them? I am not directly asking for book recommendations, but if you have read a book/article that teaches any thing related/helpful, please mention them. This may include a refernce to already existing implementations regarding the subject. Please correct me if I was wrong somewhere. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Newbie worried about CASE tool.

  - by Jason Evans

  Hi there. I'm looking for some guidance on CASE tools and whether my concerns are valid. Recently I was in a meeting between my employer and an external software company which have a CASE tool currently in beta. They demonstrated this tool to us, showing how you build a UML model in Enterprise Architect (or something like it) and then, through their tool, that UML model is transformed into a Visual Studio project, with C# files, stored procedures for SQL Server, code for the data layer, WCF stuff, logging code and allsorts. Now, admittedly, I don't see the point in this, as in I'm not convinced it will save that much time (plus it feels like overkill). The tool authors said that a trial of the tool at another company had saved a team there 5 weeks of development time (from 6 weeks down to about 1 week) using this tool. I find the accuracy of that estimate hard to believe. My main concern is whether using this tool is going slow down my productivity. For example - Say I have a UML model which I built a VS solution from. Now, I want to rename a class method to something else; will this mean having to update the UML model first and then rebuilding the code? Is this how case tools normally work? Something I will need to check with the authors is the structure of the generated VS solution. I like the Domain Driven Design way of project structure - Infrstructure, Services, Model, etc. I doubt very much this tool will do that. Also, I've been playing around with Entity Framework Code First and think it's a great way to build the data model. I have nice repositories, unit of work classes and other design patterns that work well with EF. I have data anootations and stuff like that working great. By not having EF (the CASE tool uses it's own data layer code) I'm concerned that this tool's data layer code might not be a nice to integrate in the UoW pattern, repositories, etc. This I will need to verify when I get a closer look at the generated code. What are other people's experiences with CASE tools? Am I being paranoid about nothing? Am I being unfair - are my negativities unfounded? EDIT: I like to use TDD/BDD for building my code, and using a CASE tool looks like it will make this difficult. Again, any feedback on this would be great. Cheers. Jas.

  Read the article

• RDF and OWL: Have these delivered the promises of the Semantic Web?

  - by Dark Templar

  These days I've been learning a lot about how different scientific fields are trying to move their data over to the Semantic Web in order to "free up data from being stored in isolated silos". I read a lot about how these fields are saying how their efforts are implementing the "visions" of the Semantic Web. As a learner (and from purely a learning perspective) I was curious to know why, if semantic technology is deemed to be so powerful, the efforts have been around for years but myself and a lot of people I know have never even heard of it until very recently? Also, I don't come across any scholarly articles deeming "oh, our inferencing engine was able to make such and such discovery, which is helping us pave our way to solving...." etc. It seems that there are genuine efforts across different institutions, fields, and disciplines to shift all their data to a "semantic" format, but what happens after all that's been done? All the ontologies have been created/unified, and then what?

  Read the article

• Does using GCC specific builtins qualify as incorporation within a project?

  - by DavidJFelix

  I understand that linking to a program licensed under the GPL requires that you release the source of your program under the GPL as well, while the LGPL does not require this. The terminology of the (L)GPL is very clear about this. #include "gpl_program.h" means you'd have to license GPL, because you're linking to GPL licensed code. And #include "lgpl_program.h" means you're free to license however you want, so that it doesn't explicitly prohibit linking to LGPL source. Now, my question about what isn't clear is: [begin question] GCC is GPL licensed, compiling with GCC, does not constitute "integration" into your program, as the GPL puts it; does using builtin functions (which are specific to GCC) constitute "incorporation" even though you haven't explicitly linked to this GPL licensed code? My intuition tells me that this isn't the intention, but legality isn't always intuitive. I'm not actually worried, but I'm curious if this could be considered the case. [end question] [begin aside] The reason for my equivocation is that GCC builtins like __builtin_clzl() or __builtin_expect() are an API technically and could be implemented in another way. For example, many builtins were replicated by LLVM and the argument could be made that it's not implementation specific to GCC. However, many builtins have no parallel and when compiled will link GPL licensed code in GCC and will not compile on other compilers. If you make the argument here that the API could be replicated by another compiler, couldn't you make that identical claim about any program you link to, so long as you don't distribute that source? I understand that I'm being a legal snake about this, but it strikes me as odd that the GPL isn't more specific. I don't see this as a reasonable ploy for proprietary software creators to bypass the GPL, as they'd have to bundle the GPL software to make it work, removing their plausible deniability. However, isn't it possible that if builtins don't constitute linking, then open source proponents who oppose the GPL could simply write a BSD/MIT/Apache/Apple licensed product that links to a GPL'd program and claim that they intend to write a non-GPL interface that is identical to the GPL one, preserving their BSD license until it's actually compiled? [end aside] Sorry for the aside, I didn't think many people would follow why I care about this if I'm not facing any legal trouble or implications. Don't worry too much about the hypotheticals there, I'm just extrapolating what either answer to my actual question could imply.

  Read the article

• Bump version before kicking off new development or when tagging a release, which is better?

  - by linquize

  Some projects bump version before kicking off a new development, while the other projects bump version when tagging a release. Which approach is better? If version number not changed at the start of new phase, the developers may forget to change it and simply release the program. If version number changed before tagging release, then 2 the version numbers (tag and Makefile/AssemblyInfo.cs) do not match. git describe may give you v1.2.3.4-15-g1234567 if current revision is after v1.2.3.4, but you have already changed the files to have v1.2.3.5

  Read the article

• What can I do with the twitter API?

  - by aditya menon

  I've tried googling for this but could not find concrete developer examples. When building mundane daily web applications like Classified websites, Job boards or Intranet targeted Document Management Systems, how can the twitter API help me do more things. May I please have some examples on how developers have used twitter to make their apps better? Other than the obvious use for promotional and search engine optimization purpose (yay there's a new job post on our site), what can I do with it? Also, am I late to the party? I hear a lot of upset on the internet about how twitter is apparently slowly betraying developers (I don't understand the specifics), so should I even look at the system or consider alternatives?

  Read the article

• Low coupling processing big quantities of data

  - by vitalik

  Usually I achieve low coupling by creating classes that exchange lists, sets, and maps between them. Now I am developing a batch application and I can't put all the data inside a data structure because there isn't enough memory. I have to read and process one chunk of data and then going to the next one. So having low coupling is much more difficult because I have to check somewhere if there is still data to read, etc. What I am using now is: Source - Process - Persist The classes that process have to ask to the Source classes if there are more rows to read. What are the best practices and or useful patterns in such situations? I hope I am explaining myself, if not tell me.

  Read the article

• Web2.0, AJAX, HTML5, Facebook, Social web, openid, Oauth, web browsers... where is all this going ?

  - by jokoon

  We have seen many new things appear in the last 7 or 5 five years on the web: Facebook, html5 appeared, new browsers grew strongly, Google failed with Wave... Since Facebook and other stuff like Gtalk and Gmail, I thought and hoped that forums, chat, mail, usenet, conversation rooms and p2p protocols could inter operate to allow the user to use all those services transparently. Of course I realized that things are far much complicated, for several reasons: the IETF cannot invent new things: they just propose standards. Microsoft as well as big players often are obstacles to relevant innovation regarding open formats. The biggest stories being document formats or internet explorer with its long reaction to support web standards. Smartphones, thanks to the appearances of OSes such as iOS and Android, are finally able to navigate on internet: former devices were deaf, they weren't directly connected to internet. The mail protocol were left unchanged even with the grow of spam and malwares. I don't know what to think, because I think there is still a lot to do, but I feel like it will never happen or that nobody seems interested in those basic text transmit features... So what do you think what are the next big steps in the evolution of the web ? Do you think is will still walk hand in hand with open source ?

  Read the article

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