Search Results

Search found 664 results on 27 pages for 'oo olo oo'.

Page 13/27 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Empirical evidence for choice of programming paradigm to address a problem

    - by Graham Lee
    The C2 wiki has a discussion of Empirical Evidence for Object-Oriented Programming that basically concludes there is none beyond appeal to authority. This was last edited in 2008. Discussion here seems to bear this out: questions on whether OO is outdated, when functional programming is a bad choice and the advantages and disadvantages of AOP are all answered with contributors' opinions without reliance on evidence. Of course, opinions of established and reputed practitioners are welcome and valuable things to have, but they're more plausible when they're consistent with experimental data. Does this evidence exist? Is evidence-based software engineering a thing? Specifically, if I have a particular problem P that I want to solve by writing software, does there exist a body of knowledge, studies and research that would let me see how the outcome of solving problems like P has depended on the choice of programming paradigm? I know that which paradigm comes out as "the right answer" can depend on what metrics a particular study pays attention to, on what conditions the study holds constant or varies, and doubtless on other factors too. That doesn't affect my desire to find this information and critically appraise it. It becomes clear that some people think I'm looking for a "turn the crank" solution - some sausage machine into which I put information about my problem and out of which comes a word like "functional" or "structured". This is not my intention. What I'm looking for is research into how - with a lot of caveats and assumptions that I'm not going into here but good literature on the matter would - certain properties of software vary depending on the problem and the choice of paradigm. In other words: some people say "OO gives better flexibility" or "functional programs have fewer bugs" - (part of) what I'm asking for is the evidence of this. The rest is asking for evidence against this, or the assumptions under which these statements are true, or evidence showing that these considerations aren't important. There are plenty of opinions on why one paradigm is better than another; is there anything objective behind any of these?

    Read the article

  • Is there a resource that explains the benefits of layered programming?

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    Some developers I know favor what I would call a procedural programming style. I recognize that procedural programming has its uses, albeit not in the business application world of .NET programming. So let's say we have a winform application with a buttonclick event. The buttonclick handles everything from the UI configuration to the database call and data manipulation. So you end up with a method that is 100's of lines of code long. Outside the fact that this code can't be considered test-able for various reasons, this style of programming is fragile to change. I can talk bout OO, Anti-patterns, etc. The problem is that any distinct topic I can dream up requires a great deal of explanation to understand the potential benefits. Outside of finding a new job (lots of businesses program this way), how can I teach these kinds of developers how to write better code? Obviously we can't sit around a round table and discuss pro's and con's all day due to time constraints and real work that has to be done. Although, training and intense training is the only thing I can think of to fix these problems. Not to say I write perfect code, I most certainly do not. I do believe there are certain best practices that should be followed as a rule E.G. OO in the context of .NET. The most common excuse I hear is "we can't write code fast enough if we do it like that".

    Read the article

  • good literature for teaching object oriented thinking in C [closed]

    - by Dipan Mehta
    Quite often C is the primary platform for the development. And when things are large scale, I have seen partitioning of the system as different objects is quite a natural thing. Some or many of the object orientated analysis and design principles are used here very well. This is not a debate question about whether or not C is a good candidate for object oriented programming or not. This is also NOT a question how to do OO in C. You can refer to this question and there are probably many such citations. As far as I am concerned, I have learned some of this things while working with many open source and commercial projects. (libjpeg, ffmpeg, Gstreamer which is based on GObject). I can probably extend a few references that explains some of these concepts such as - 1. Event Helix article, 2. Linux Mag article 3. one of my answers which links Schreiner's reference. Unfortunately, when we induct younger folks, it seems too hard to make them learn all of it the hard way. Usually, when we say it's C, a general reaction is to throw away all of the "Object thinking". Looking for help extending above references from those who have been in the similar areas of work. Are there any good formal literature that explains how Object thinking can be made to use while you are working in C? I have seen tons of book on general "object oriented paradigms" but they all focus on advanced languages mostly not in C. You see most C books - but most focus only on the syntax and the obfuscated corners of C and that's it. There are hardly ANY good reference, specially books or any systematic (I mean formal) literature on how to apply OO in C. This is very surprising given that so many large scale open source projects use C which are truly using this very well; but we hardly see any good formal literature on this subject.

    Read the article

  • Tips about how to spread Object Oriented practices

    - by Augusto
    I work for a medium company that has around 250 developers. Unfortunately, lots of them are stuck in a procedural way of thinking and some teams constantly deliver big Transactional Script applications, when in fact the application contains rich logic. They also fail to manage the design dependencies, and end up with services which depend on another large number of services (a clean example of Big Ball of Mud). My question is: Can you suggest how to spread this type of knowledge? I know that the surface of the problem is that these applications have a poor architecture and design. Another issue is that there are some developers who are against writing any kind of test. A few things I'm doing to change this (but I'm either failing or the change is too small are) Running presentations about design principles (SOLID, clean code, etc). Workshops about TDD and BDD. Coaching teams (this includes using sonar, findbugs, jdepend and other tools). IDE & Refactoring talks. A few things I'm thinking to do in the future (but I'm concern that they might not be good) Form a team of OO evangelists, who disseminate an OO way of thinking in differet teams (these people would need to change teams every few months). Running design review sessions, to criticise the design and suggest improvements (even if the improvements are not done because of time constraints, I think this might be useful) . Something I found with the teams I coach, is that as soon as I leave them, they revert back to the old practices. I know I don't spend a lot of time with them, usually just one month. So whatever I'm doing, it doesn't stick. I'm sorry this question is spattered with frustration, but the alterative to write this was to hit my head on the wall until I pass out.

    Read the article

  • Learning curve webdevelopment

    - by refro
    At the moment our team has a huge challenge, we're being asked to deliver a new GUI for an embedded controller. De deadline is very tight and is set on april 2013. Our team is very diverse some people are on the level of functional programming (mostly C), others (including myself) also master object oriented programming (C++, C#). We build a prototype with android, although it has its quirks it is mostly just OO. For the future there is a wish to support multiple platforms (Windows, Android, iOS). In my opinion a HTML5 app with a native app shell is the way to go. When gathering more information on the frameworks to use etc it becomes obvious to me a paradigm shift is needed. None of us have a web background so we need to learn from the ground up. The shift from functional to oo took us about 6 months to become productive (and some of the early subsystems were rewritten because they were a total mess) . Can we expect the learning curve to be similar? Can this be pulled off with a webapp? (My feeling says it will already be hard to pull off as a native app which is at the edge of our comfort zone)

    Read the article

  • Learning curve for web development

    - by refro
    At the moment our team has a huge challenge, we're being asked to deliver a new GUI for an embedded controller. The deadline is very tight and is set on April 2013. Our team is very diverse, some people are on the level of functional programming (mostly C), others (including myself) have mastered object oriented programming (C++, C#). We built a prototype for Android, although it has its quirks, it is mostly just OO. For the future there is a wish to support multiple platforms (Windows, Android, iOS). In my opinion a HTML5 app with a native app shell is the way to go. When gathering more information on the frameworks to use etc., it became obvious to me a paradigm shift is needed. None of us have a web background so we need to learn from the ground up. The shift from functional to OO took us about 6 months to become productive (and some of the early subsystems were rewritten because they were a total mess). Can we expect the learning curve to be similar? Can this be pulled off with a web app? (My feeling says it will already be hard to pull off as a native app which is at the edge of our comfort zone).

    Read the article

  • Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented by definition?

    - by tieTYT
    Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented, by definition? It seems more procedural or functional to me. My opinion is that it doesn't prevent you from implementing it in an OO language, but it would not be idiomatic to do so in a staunchly OO way. It seems like ECS separates data (E & C) from behavior (S). As evidence: The idea is to have no game methods embedded in the entity. And: The component consists of a minimal set of data needed for a specific purpose Systems are single purpose functions that take a set of entities which have a specific component I think this is not object oriented because a big part of being object oriented is combining your data and behavior together. As evidence: In contrast, the object-oriented approach encourages the programmer to place data where it is not directly accessible by the rest of the program. Instead, the data is accessed by calling specially written functions, commonly called methods, which are bundled in with the data. ECS, on the other hand, seems to be all about separating your data from your behavior.

    Read the article

  • Mono-LibreOffice System.TypeLoadException

    - by Marco
    In the past I wrote a C# library to work with OpenOffice and this worked fine both in Windows than under Ubuntu with Mono. Part of this library is published here as accepted answer. In these days I discovered that Ubuntu decided to move to LibreOffice, so I tried my library with LibreOffice latest stable release. While under Windows it's working perfectly, under Linux I receive this error: Unhandled Exception: System.TypeLoadException: A type load exception has occurred. [ERROR] FATAL UNHANDLED EXCEPTION: System.TypeLoadException: A type load exception has occurred. Usually Mono tells us which library can't load, so I can install correct package and everything is OK, but in this case I really don't know what's going bad. I'm using Ubuntu oneiric and my library is compiled with Framework 4.0. Under Windows I had to write this into app.config: <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration> <startup useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy="true"> <supportedRuntime version="v4.0" sku=".NETFramework,Version=v4.0,Profile=Client"/> </startup> </configuration> because LibreOffice assemblies uses Framework 2.0 (I think). How can I find the reason of this error to solve it? Thanks UPDATE: Even compiling with Framework 2.0 problem (as expected) is the same. Problem (I think) is that Mono is not finding cli-uno-bridge package (installable on previous Ubuntu releases and now marked as superseded), but I cannot be sure. UPDATE 2: I created a test console application referencing cli-uno dlls on Windows (they are registered in GAC_32 and GAC_MSIL). CONSOLE app static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("Starting"); string dir = Path.GetDirectoryName(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location); string doc = Path.Combine(dir, "Liberatoria siti web.docx"); using (QOpenOffice.OpenOffice oo = new QOpenOffice.OpenOffice()) { if (!oo.Init()) return; oo.Load(doc, true); oo.ExportToPdf(Path.ChangeExtension(doc, ".pdf")); } } LIBRARY: using unoidl.com.sun.star.lang; using unoidl.com.sun.star.uno; using unoidl.com.sun.star.container; using unoidl.com.sun.star.frame; using unoidl.com.sun.star.beans; using unoidl.com.sun.star.view; using unoidl.com.sun.star.document; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.IO; using System; namespace QOpenOffice { class OpenOffice : IDisposable { private XComponentContext context; private XMultiServiceFactory service; private XComponentLoader component; private XComponent doc; public bool Init() { Console.WriteLine("Entering Init()"); try { context = uno.util.Bootstrap.bootstrap(); service = (XMultiServiceFactory)context.getServiceManager(); component = (XComponentLoader)service.createInstance("com.sun.star.frame.Desktop"); XNameContainer filters = (XNameContainer)service.createInstance("com.sun.star.document.FilterFactory"); return true; } catch (System.Exception ex) { Console.WriteLine(ex.Message); if (ex.InnerException != null) Console.WriteLine(ex.InnerException.Message); return false; } } } } but I'm not able to see "Starting" !!! If I comment using(...) on application, I see line on console... so I think it's something wrong in DLL. There I'm not able to see "Entering Init()" message on Init(). Behaviour is the same when LibreOffice is not installed and when it is !!! try..catch block is not executed...

    Read the article

  • Is Programming == Math?

    - by moffdub
    I've heard many times that all programming is really a subset of math. Some suggest that OO, at its roots, is mathematically based. I don't get the connection. Aside from some obvious examples: using induction to prove a recursive algorithm formal correctness proofs functional languages lambda calculus asymptotic complexity DFAs, NFAs, Turing Machines, and theoretical computation in general the fact that everything on the box is binary In what ways is programming really a subset of math? I'm looking for an explanation that might have relevance to enterprise/OO development (if there is a strong enough connection, that is). Thanks in advance. Edit: as I stated in a comment to an answer, math is uber important to programming, but what I struggle with is the "subset" argument.

    Read the article

  • Object Oriented Design Questions

    - by Robert
    Hello there. I am going to develop a Tic-Tac-Toe game using Java(or maybe other OO Languages).Now I have a picture in my mind about the general design. Interface: Player ,then I will be able to implement a couple of Player classes,based on how I want the opponent to be,for example,random player,intelligent player. Classes: Board class,with a two-dimensional array of integers,0 indicates open,1 indicates me,-1 indicates opponent.The evaluation function will be in here as well,to return the next best move based on the current board arrangement and whose turn it is. Refree class,which will create instance of the Board and two player instances,then get the game begin. This is a rough idea of my OO design,could anybody give me any critiques please,I find this is really beneficial,thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • Ria Services vs WCF Dataservices

    - by NPehrsson
    My Team are evaluation to a bigger Business portal. (Invoicing, Bookkeeping, Salaries.....) We are all used to work with DDD, O/R mappers with NHibernate as our first choice. We have chosen to work with CompositeWPF to keep modularity between all modules and part system in the business portal. Now we have evaluated Ria Services and are kind of disappointed how it works in a Data Oriented way, Data Oriented can be good in a service oriented scenario, but we feel that we can with an Object Oriented approach to, and we feel that we can get an application with less complexity with the OO approach than the DO approach. For example it doesn't allow Value Objects, Many-to-many relations, everything needs to have keys and so on. We haven't looked at WCF Data Services yet so our question is WCF Data Services our answere? Does it integrate good with Silverlight 4? Can we work with it in a OO manor?

    Read the article

  • Moose::Error::Croak error reporting not from perspective of caller.

    - by crashpoint_zero
    I just recently started out on Moose and its a great OO framework not only to use but also to learn new OO concepts. One of the things I wanted to do was to do error reporting from perspective of caller during object creation. I saw that Moose has the module Moose::Error::Croak which tells Moose to override the default error reporting by croak call. I used it but it did not seem to help Moose code - Foo.pm package Foo; use metaclass ( metaclass => 'Moose::Meta::Class', error_class => 'Moose::Error::Croak', ); use Moose; has 'attr1' => ( is => 'rw', isa => 'Str', required => '1', ); no Moose; 1; Moose code - fooser.pl #!/usr/bin/perl use strict; use warnings; use Foo; my $foobj = Foo->new(); This fails with error: Attribute (attr1) is required at /usr/local/lib/perl/5.8.8/Class/MOP/Class.pm line 364 which is terse than the actual stack trace if Moose::Error::Croak is not used. But it does not report it from perspective of caller. If this were a Perl 5 OO code and I had Foo.pm as: package Foo; use strict; use warnings; use Carp; sub new { my ($class, %args) = @_; my $self = {}; if (! exists $args{'attr1'}) { croak "ERR: did not provide attr1"; } $self->{'attr1'} = $args{attr1}; bless $self, $class; return $self; } 1; And if fooser.pl was executed I would have got the error: "ERR: did not provide attr1 at fooser.pl line 6" which is from the perspective of the caller as it points to line no. 6 of fooser.pl rather than MOP.pm's line no. 364. How can I do this in Moose? Or am I misunderstanding something here?

    Read the article

  • How to compare two maps by their values

    - by lewap
    How to compare two maps by their values? I have two maps containing equal values and want to compare them by their values. Here is an example: Map a = new HashMap(); a.put("f"+"oo", "bar"+"bar"); a.put("fo"+"o", "bar"+"bar"); Map b = new HashMap(); a.put("f"+"oo", "bar"+"bar"); a.put("fo"+"o", "bar"+"bar"); System.out.println("equals: " + a.equals(b)); // obviously false .... what to call to obtain a true? Obviously, to implement a comparison it not difficult, it is enough to compare all keys and their associated values. I don't believe I'm the first one to do this, so there must be already a library functions either in java or in one of the jakarta.commons libraries. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Learning to think in the Object Oriented Way

    - by SpikETidE
    Hi Everyone.... I am a programmer trying to learn to code in the object oriented paradigm... I mainly work with PHP and i thought of learning the zend framework... So, felt I need to learn to code in OO PHP.... The problem is, having done code using functions for quite a long time, i just can't get my head to think in the OO way.... Also felt that probably I am not the only one facing this problem since the beginning of time... So, how did you people learn object oriented programming... especially how did you succeed in "unlearning" to code using functions... and learn to see you code as objects...? Is there any good resource books or sites where one could find help...?? Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experiences...

    Read the article

  • Is Python appropriate for algorithms focused on scientific computing?

    - by gmatt
    My interests in programming lie mainly in algorithms, and lately I have seen many reputable researchers write a lot of their code in python. How easy and convenient is python for scientific computing? Does it have a library of algorithms that compares to matlab's? Is Python a scripting language or does it compile? Is it a great language for prototyping an algorithm? How long would it take me to learn enough of it to be productive provided I know C well and OO programming somewhat? Is it OO based? Sorry for the condensed format of questions, but I'm very curious and was hoping a more experienced programmer could help me out.

    Read the article

  • Whats the deal with python?

    - by gmatt
    My interests in programming lie mainly in algorithms, and lately I have seen many reputable researchers write a lot of their code in python. How easy and convenient is python for scientific computing? Does it have a library of algorithms that compares to matlab's? Is Python a scripting language or does it compile? Is it a great language for prototyping an algorithm? How long would it take me to learn enough of it to be productive provided I know C well and OO programming somewhat? Is it OO based? Sorry for the condensed format of questions, but I'm very curious and was hoping a more experienced programmer could help me out.

    Read the article

  • Interview question: difference between object and object-oriented languages.

    - by Bar
    My friend was asked the following question: what's the difference between object language and object-oriented language? It's a little unintelligible question. What does term «object language» correspond to? Does that mean «pure» object-oriented language, like the Wikipedia article says: Languages called "pure" OO languages, because everything in them is treated consistently as an object, from primitives such as characters and punctuation, all the way up to whole classes, prototypes, blocks, modules, etc. They were designed specifically to facilitate, even enforce, OO methods. Examples: Smalltalk, Eiffel, Ruby, JADE, VB.NET.

    Read the article

  • Pass javascript array to php by using curly braces key name

    - by user7031
    My js code: $(function(){ var arr = new Array('jj', 'kk', 'oo'); $.post('test12.php', {'arr[]': arr}, function(data){ alert(data); }); }); PHP code: <?php echo print_r($_POST['arr']); The thing is,$.post receive a key named 'arr[]',it should be used in PHP as 'arr[]' instead of 'arr',but '$_POST['arr[]']' doesn't work,'arr' works.Which seems that Jquery might do something with curly braces '[]' before sending something to PHP. Secondly,when I remove the single quotas around 'arr[]',PHP can not receive anything by using $_POST['arr'];,I don't know why? Doing this task in a traditional way with no curly braces: $.post('test12.php', {arr: arr}, function(data){ alert(data); }); It works fine. So when sending javascript array to PHP,why bothering using single quote and curly braces like 'arr[]' instead of using a concise way like arr:arr My return result is Array( [0]=>jj [1]=>kk [2]=>oo ) 1 Notice there is a 1 under the array,why?

    Read the article

  • Where to store frequently used functions in a OOP correct way

    - by Stefan Kuijers
    I'm working on a project which I want to build up OO. Now I came with a function that checks or a value is valid. private function valid(value:*, acceptedValues:Array):Boolean { for(var i:uint = 0; i < acceptedValues.length; i++) { if (value == acceptedValues[i]) { return true; } } return false; } As you can see, the function is very general and will be accessed across different classes. Now my question is; where do I store it in a OO correct way? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Why are configuration arrays acceptible parameters in PHP and Javascript?

    - by RenderIn
    In most other OO languages it would be sacrilege to have each function receive a single associative array of Objects rather than enumerating each in the method signature. Why is it acceptable and commonly used in most popular frameworks for both of these languages to do this? Is there some justification beyond wishing to have concise method signatures? I do see a benefit in this -- that the API could remain unchanged as new, optional parameters are added. But Javascript and PHP already allow for optional parameters in their method signatures. If anything, it seems like Java or another OO language would benefit from this more... and yet I rarely see this pattern there. What gives?

    Read the article

  • Intel GMA 500 support for 11.10

    - by lucazade
    I would like to know if the new open-source video driver included in kernel 3.0.x for the Intel GMA 500 will be included by default in the kernel that will be shipped in OO. The driver support of this GFX chipset has always been poor and mainly community-driven, now finally we have a KMS open-source driver, written by kernel hackers, and actually included in staging kernel repo. If there is any kind of testing needed there is a mega-thread on Ubuntu Forums with hundreds of users ready to test everything.

    Read the article

  • What source code organization approach helps improve modularity and API/Implementation separation?

    - by Berin Loritsch
    Few languages are as restrictive as Java with file naming standards and project structure. In that language, the file name must match the public class declared in the file, and the file must live in a directory structure matching the class package. I have mixed feelings about that approach. While I never have to guess where a file lives, there's still a lot of empty directories and artificial constraints. There's several languages that define everything about a class in one file, at least by convention. C#, Python (I think), Ruby, Erlang, etc. The commonality in most these languages is that they are object oriented, although that statement can probably be rebuffed (there is one non-OO language in the list already). Finally, there's quite a few languages mostly in the C family that have a separate header and implementation file. For C I think this makes sense, because it is one of the few ways to separate the API interface from implementations. With C it seems that feature is used to promote modularity. Yet, with C++ the way header and implementation files are split seems rather forced. You don't get the same clean API separation that you do with C, and you are forced to include some private details in the header you would rather keep only in the implementation. There's quite a few languages that have a concept that overlaps with interfaces like Java, C#, Go, etc. Some languages use what feels like a hack to provide the same concept like C# using pure virtual abstract classes. Still others don't really have an interface concept and rely on "duck" typing--for example Ruby. Ruby has modules, but those are more along the lines of mixing in behaviors to a class than they are for defining how to interact with a class. In OO terms, interfaces are a powerful way to provide separation between an API client and an API implementation. So to hurry up and ask the question, from a personal experience point of view: Does separation of header and implementation help you write more modular code, or does it get in the way? (it helps to specify the language you are referring to) Does the strict file name to class name scheme of Java help maintainability, or is it unnecessary structure for structure's sake? What would you propose to promote good API/Implementation separation and project maintenance, how would you prefer to do it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >