Search Results

Search found 1399 results on 56 pages for 'separation of concerns'.

Page 13/56 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Is there a term for "Use procedures that execute a single task"?

    - by Tom
    I'm having a discussion with a fellow developer, and I'm trying to argument this in something like a short "term". SoC (Separation of Concerns) is pretty straight forward design practice, but it dwells deeper. If we want to pick on it's deep corners, we can Google it and there are plenty of articles that pop up, and after taking a glimpse, we know a lot more, and might find some examples. But, what about "Use procedures that execute a single task"? That's also a great design principle to use when writing applications and it becomes more and more rewarding, the larger the application gets. Is there a term for Use procedures that execute a single task?

    Read the article

  • Incorporating GPL Code in my Open Source Project

    - by rutherford
    I have downloaded a currently inactive GPL project with a view to updating it and releasing the completed codebase as open source. I'm not really a fan of GPL though and would rather licence my project under BSD. What are my options? Is it just a case of keeping any existing non-touched code under the GPL and any updated stuff can be BSD (messy)? The source will essentially be the same codebase i.e. there is no logical separation between the two and they certainly can't be split into anything resembling different libraries. Are my only realistic options to either GPL the whole thing or seek the original author's permission to release everthing under BSD?

    Read the article

  • Techniques for separating game model from presentation

    - by liortal
    I am creating a simple 2D game using XNA. The elements that make up the game world are what i refer to as the "model". For instance, in a board game, i would have a GameBoard class that stores information about the board. This information could be things such as: Location Size Details about cells on the board (occupied/not occupied) etc This object should either know how to draw itself, or describe how to draw itself to some other entity (renderer) in order to be displayed. I believe that since the board only contains the data+logic for things regarding it or cells on it, it should not provide the logic of how to draw things (separation of concerns). How can i achieve a good partitioning and easily allow some other entity to draw it properly? My motivations for doing so are: Allow multiple "implementations" of presentation for a single game entity Easier porting to other environments where the presentation code is not available (for example - porting my code to Unity or other game technology that does not rely on XNA).

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between industrial development and open source development?

    - by Ida
    Intuitively, I think open source development should be much more "casual" than industrial development process (like in Microsoft). Because for OSS development: Duty separation is not that strict than in big companies (maybe developers == testers in open source development?) People come in and out of the open source community, much more frequently than in big companies However, above are just my guesses. I really want to know more about the major difference between the open source and industrial development. Is their division of duty totally different (e.g., is there a leader/manager-like role in open source development?)? Maybe it is their communication style that differs a lot? Or their workflow? Please share your opinions. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • JavaFX - the right way to use Properties with domain objects

    - by pjm56
    JavaFX has provided a bunch of new Property objects, such as javafx.beans.property.DoubleProperty which allow you to define fields which can be automatically observed and synchronised. In many JFX examples, the MVC model class has a number of these Property fields, which can then bind automatically to the view. However, this seems to be encouraging us to put JFX properties into our Domain objects (if you assume that the Model class is going to be a domain object), which strikes me as a poor separation of concerns (i.e. putting GUI code in the Domain). Has anyone seen this problem being solved in 'real life' and, if so, how was it done?

    Read the article

  • How Uranium Refinement Works [Video]

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    While building a nuclear weapon is a complex task in and of itself, the most difficult part is refining uranium. In this informative video, Bill Hammack explains. Weapons and power plants require uranium that contains a greater amount of the isotope uranium-235 than found in natural uranium, which is mostly uranium-238. He outlines the key difficulty in separating the two isotope: They have nearly identical properties. He explains the two key methods for separation: Gas diffusion and centrifuges. What Keeps Nuclear Weapons from Proliferating HTG Explains: What Is Two-Factor Authentication and Should I Be Using It? HTG Explains: What Is Windows RT and What Does It Mean To Me? HTG Explains: How Windows 8′s Secure Boot Feature Works & What It Means for Linux

    Read the article

  • LightView: JavaFX 2 real-time visualizer for GlassFish

    - by arungupta
    Adam Bien launched LightFish, a light-weight monitoring and visualization application for GlassFish. It comes with a introduction and a screencast to get you started. The tool provides monitoring information about threads and memory (such as heap size, thread count, peak thread count), transactions (commits and rollbacks), HTTP sessions, JDBC sessions, and even "paranormal activity". In a recently released first part of a tri-part article series at OTN, Adam explains how REST services can be exposed as bindable set of properties for JavaFX. The article titled "Enterprise side of JavaFX" shows how a practical combination of REST and JavaFX together. It explains how read-only and dynamic properties can be created. The fine-grained binding model allows clear separation of the view, presentation, and business logic. Read the first part here.

    Read the article

  • What is MVC, really?

    - by NickC
    As a serious programmer, how do you answer the question What is MVC? In my mind, MVC is sort of a nebulous topic — and because of that, if your audience is a learner, then you're free to describe it in general terms that are unlikely to be controversial. However, if you are speaking to a knowledgeable audience, especially an interviewer, I have a hard time thinking of a direction to take that doesn't risk a reaction of "well that's not right!...". We all have different real-world experience, and I haven't truly met the same MVC implementation pattern twice. Specifically, there seem to be disagreements regarding strictness, component definition, separation of parts (what piece fits where), etc. So, how should I explain MVC in a way that is correct, concise, and uncontroversial?

    Read the article

  • The sign of a true manager is delegation (C# style)

    - by MarkPearl
    Today I thought I would write a bit about delegates in C#. Up till recently I have managed to side step any real understanding of what delegates do and why they are useful – I mean, I know roughly what they do and have used them a lot, but I have never really got down dirty with them and mucked about. Recently however with my renewed interest in Silverlight delegates came up again as a possible solution to a particular problem, and suddenly I found myself opening a bland little console application to just see exactly how far I could take delegates with my limited knowledge. So, let’s first look at the MSDN definition of delegates… A delegate declaration defines a reference type that can be used to encapsulate a method with a specific signature. A delegate instance encapsulates a static or an instance method. Delegates are roughly similar to function pointers in C++; however, delegates are type-safe and secure. Well, don’t you love MSDN for such a useful definition. I must give it credit though… later on it really explains it a bit better by saying “A delegate lets you pass a function as a parameter. The type safety of delegates requires the function you pass as a delegate to have the same signature as the delegate declaration.” A little more reading up on delegates mentions that delegates are similar to interfaces in that they enable the separation of specification and implementation. A delegate declares a single method, while an interface declares a group of methods. So enough reading - lets look at some code and see a basic example of a delegate… Let’s assume we have a console application with a simple delegate declared called AdjustValue like below… class Program { private delegate int AdjustValue(int val); static void Main(string[] args) { } } In a sense, all we have said is that we will be creating one or more methods that follow the same pattern as AdjustValue – i.e. they will take one input value of type int and return an integer. We could then expand our code to have various methods that match the structure of our delegate AdjustValue (remember the structure is int xxx (int xxx)) class Program { private delegate int AdjustValue(int val); private static int Dbl(int val) { return val * 2; } private static int AlwaysOne(int val) { return 1; } static void Main(string[] args) { } }  Above I have expanded my project to have two methods, one called Dbl and the other AlwaysOne. Dbl always returns double the input val and AlwaysOne always returns 1. I could now declare a variable and assign it to be one of those functions, like the following… class Program { private delegate int AdjustValue(int val); private static int Dbl(int val) { return val * 2; } private static int AlwaysOne(int val) { return 1; } static void Main(string[] args) { AdjustValue myDelegate; myDelegate = Dbl; Console.WriteLine(myDelegate(1).ToString()); Console.ReadLine(); } } In this instance I have declared an instance of the AdjustValue delegate called myDelegate; I have then told myDelegate to point to the method Dbl, and then called myDelegate(1). What would the result be? Yes, in this instance it would be exactly the same as me calling the following code… static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine(Dbl(1).ToString()); Console.ReadLine(); }   So why all the extra work for delegates when we could just do what we did above and call the method directly? Well… that separation of specification to implementation comes to mind. So, this all seems pretty simple. Let’s take a slightly more complicated variation to the console application. Assume that my project is the same as the one previously except that my main method is adjusted as follows… static void Main(string[] args) { AdjustValue myDelegate; myDelegate = Dbl; myDelegate = AlwaysOne; Console.WriteLine(myDelegate(1).ToString()); Console.ReadLine(); } What would happen in this scenario? Quite simply “1” would be written to the console, the reason being that myDelegate was last pointing to the AlwaysOne method before it was called. Make sense? In a way, the myDelegate is a variable method that can be swapped and changed when needed. Let’s make the code a little more confusing by using a delegate in the declaration of another delegate as shown below… class Program { private delegate int AdjustValue(InputValue val); private delegate int InputValue(); private static int Dbl(InputValue val) { return val()*2; } private static int GetInputVal() { Console.WriteLine("Enter a whole number : "); return Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine()); } static void Main(string[] args) { AdjustValue myDelegate; myDelegate = Dbl; Console.WriteLine(myDelegate(GetInputVal).ToString()); Console.ReadLine(); } }   Now it gets really interesting because it looks like we have passed a method into a function in the main method by declaring… Console.WriteLine(myDelegate(GetInputVal).ToString()); So, what it the output? Well, try take a guess on what will happen – then copy the code and see if you got it right. Well that brings me to the end of this short explanation of Delegates. Hopefully it made sense!

    Read the article

  • MEF (Microsoft Extensibility Framework) made simple (ish)

    Microsoft Extensibility Framework or MEF is one of the great features in Silverlight, designed around making Silverlight applications more extensible generally and provides a much more complete story for the separation of concerns. MEF then begs the question 'Why we care?' and 'What can MEF really do?' and we will address that here.Let us talk about a real world example for a moment.Say you are a vertical selling corporation of some kind, meaning that you sell to companies that do similar things....Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • New perspectives in a SPARC/virtualization/cloud session at the Oracle OpenWorld

    - by Karoly Vegh
    Attending Oracle OpenWorld? You definitely should.  If you do, come see me at the "Breakthrough in Private Cloud Management on SPARC T-Series Servers" session on Wednesday at 11:45 in Moscone South 270, the right session to get the consolidation discussion running at lunch :)  I am of course going to talk about Oracle VM for SPARC (former LDoms), the performance overhead impact of virtualization, the importance of data security in the cloud, instance separation and the open potentials of verified platform and cost savings.  For more details:  https://oracleus.activeevents.com/connect/sessionDetail.ww?SESSION_ID=2590 See you there! 

    Read the article

  • SEO perspective on non existent directory base in URL?

    - by Sandro Dzneladze
    I'm wondering if there will be any SEO/readability/memorability benefit to using this kind of URL structure for my upcoming project: www.moviereviews.com/movie/name? Considering that /movie is not a real directory. So that page doesn't exist. Something similar to wordpress /category/ base that is used purely for content separation on the site. What do you think? For user it will be beneficial, if domain doesn't signal what content is about my extra dir will tell what it is about. Correct? But from SEO perspective?

    Read the article

  • ERROR_PROCEDURE Does Not Return a Schema Name

    "A recent blog entry I read reminded me again that I wanted to rant about an issue in SQL Server for quite some time now. SQL Server 2005 introduced the separation between user and schema. Though schemata already existed before SQL Server 2005, they really became usable with this version, imho. At the same time TRY...CATCH was a new way for structured error handling introduced. And so it finally became possible…" NEW! SQL Monitor 2.0Monitor SQL Server Central's servers withRed Gate's new SQL Monitor.No installation required. Find out more.

    Read the article

  • Processing a stream. Must layers be violated?

    - by Lord Tydus
    Theoretical situation: One trillion foobars are stored in a text file (no fancy databases). Each foobar must have some business logic executed on it. A set of 1 trillion will not fit in memory so the data layer cannot return a big set to the business layer. Instead they are to be streamed in 1 foobar at a time, and have business logic execute on 1 foobar at a time. The stream must be closed when finished. In order for the stream to be closed the business layer must close the stream (a data operation detail), thus violating the separation of concerns. Is it possible to incrementally process data without violating layers?

    Read the article

  • Where should I put a method that returns a list of active entries of a table?

    - by darga33
    I have a class named GuestbookEntry that maps to the properties that are in the database table named "guestbook". Very simple! Originally, I had a static method named getActiveEntries() that retrieved an array of all GuestbookEntry objects. Each row in the guestbook table was an object that was added to that array. Then while learning how to properly design PHP classes, I learned some things: Static methods are not desirable. Separation of Concerns Single Responsibility Principle If the GuestbookEntry class should only be responsible for managing single guestbook entries then where should this getActiveEntries() method most properly go? Update: I am looking for an answer that complies with the SOLID acronym principles and allows for test-ability. That's why I want to stay away from static calls/standard functions. DAO, repository, ...? Please explain as though your explanation will be part of "Where to Locate FOR DUMMIES"... :-)

    Read the article

  • How should I implement the repository pattern for complex object models?

    - by Eric Falsken
    Our data model has almost 200 classes that can be separated out into about a dozen functional areas. It would have been nice to use domains, but the separation isn't that clean and we can't change it. We're redesigning our DAL to use Entity Framework and most of the recommendations that I've seen suggest using a Repository pattern. However, none of the samples really deal with complex object models. Some implementations that I've found suggest the use of a repository-per-entity. This seems ridiculous and un-maintainable for large, complex models. Is it really necessary to create a UnitOfWork for each operation, and a Repository for each entity? I could end up with thousands of classes. I know this is unreasonable, but I've found very little guidance implementing Repository, Unit Of Work, and Entity Framework over complex models and realistic business applications.

    Read the article

  • Domain Model and Querying

    - by Tyrsius
    I am new to DDD, having worked only in Transaction-Script apps with an anemic model, or just Big Balls of Mud, so please forgive any terminology I abuse. I am trying to understand the proper separation between the domain model and the repository. What is the proper way to construct a domain object that is coming from a database, assuming the (incredibly simplified) need to query for objects by status (returns enumerable), or by ID. Should a factory be building the objects, exposing methods for GetByStatus() and GetByID(), using a DIed repository? Should a repository be called directly, knowing how to build a domain model from the DTO? Should the domain model have a constructor for get by ID, using a DIed repoistory to load the initial state, using some other (?) method for the list? I am not really sure what the best way would be, and this question has an answer advocating each one (these are certainly mutuallu exclusive).

    Read the article

  • Where would a senior PHP developer locate the method getActiveEntries()?

    - by darga33
    I have a class named GuestbookEntry that maps to the properties that are in the database table named "guestbook". Very simple! Originally, I had a static method named getActiveEntries() that retrieved an array of all GuestbookEntry objects. Each row in the guestbook table was an object that was added to that array. Then while learning how to properly design PHP classes, I learned some things: Static methods are not desirable. Separation of Concerns Single Responsibility Principle If the GuestbookEntry class should only be responsible for managing single guestbook entries then where should this getActiveEntries() method most properly go? Update: I am looking for an answer that complies with the SOLID acronym principles and allows for test-ability. That's why I want to stay away from static calls/standard functions. DAO, repository, ...? Please explain as though your explanation will be part of "Where to Locate FOR DUMMIES"... :-)

    Read the article

  • How to make show desktop work only on the current workspace?

    - by thenasko
    I am an active user of workspaces in Ubuntu. Until recently, pressing Ctrl+Alt+D (show desktop) acted only on the current workspace. For example, one might want to minimize the applications in the current workspace, open a file, and then bring some of them back. The current implementation works on all workspaces uniformly which is counter-intuitive to me. The reason for the existence of workspaces is the separation of logic -- one can have a browser open in one workspace, a text editor in another, a terminal in a third. The current functionality goes against this idea. Is there a way to restrict the action of the show desktop command to a single workspace only?

    Read the article

  • ????????

    - by ???02
    ????????Oracle Database VaultOracle Database Vault???????2???????????????????(DBA)???????????·?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????(??????)??????????????????????? Oracle Database Vault????????????DBA????????????????????DBA????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????Oracle Database Vault??Oracle-EBS?PeopleSoft?Siebel?SAP?????????????????????????????·?????????????????1. Separation of Duties (????)DBA(?????????)????????????????????????????????????????????????????·????? ????·???????????????????????????DBA????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????Database Vault??DBA?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????2. ???(????)???????·?????????????·???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SELECT/DML/EXECUTE ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? DDL ???????????????????????????3. Multi-Factor Access Control Policy Enforcement (???????·??????)Oracle Database Vault???????????????????????????????????????????????????????·???????????????????????????????????????????????????DDL?DML???????????????????????????4. ???????·?????? ???????????????? (ex ???IP??????)??????? ??????????????? "??" or "???" ????????????????1???????????????????? ???·??? ???????????????? ???????????5. ????·???SQL???????????·???????????????·????true ???????????SQL??????????????????? ?????? Oracle Direct

    Read the article

  • What do you do when your team leader doesn't know something simple?

    - by leppie
    What do you do when your team leader does not know why the following is wrong: a.SomeProp = a.SomeProp; // no funny side-effects, plain old property He claims 15 years of programming experience, and 7 years of C#/.NET. To me, someone of 3-6 months experience should know this. What I have done: Tried to make him understand why it is wrong. He told me not to criticize him. Told him it's not about criticism, but project risk. He got upset with me. I have addressed the risk of this person with our manager (few weeks back). I have addressed my concerns with this person with our manager several times, since 1 month after I started there (7 months now). Currently, I just feel like just not going back to work... I hardly have any nails left, and this is really just the tip of the iceberg. As nothing has changed after I have spoken to the manager for the last 6 months, I feel like I need to make some sort of ultimatum. Do you have any suggestions? PS: Please do not make this subjective. I have no need for arguing. The level of incompetence is pretty clear. I just need some advice before going insane. Update: Thanks for all the answers (trying to update before close, buggers). I think I will forward this thread to our manager :) Update 2: I sent my manager another mail with my concerns, and a link to this question. Awaiting response.

    Read the article

  • Good Replacement for User Control?

    - by David Lively
    I found user controls to be incredibly useful when working with ASP.NET webforms. By encapsulating the code required for displaying a control with the markup, creation of reusable components was very straightforward and very, very useful. While MVC provides convenient separation of concerns, this seems to break encapsulation (ie, you can add a control without adding or using its supporting code, leading to runtime errors). Having to modify a controller every time I add a control to a view seems to me to integrate concerns, not separate them. I'd rather break the purist MVC ideology than give up the benefits of reusable, packaged controls. I need to be able to include components similar to webforms user controls throughout a site, but not for the entire site, and not at a level that belongs in a master page. These components should have their own code not just markup (to interact with the business layer), and it would be great if the page controller didn't need to know about the control. Since MVC user controls don't have codebehind, I can't see a good way to do this. I've searched previous SO questions, and have yet to find a good answer. Options so far In an attempt to avoid turning the comments section into a discussion... RenderAction This allows the view to call another controller, which will be responsible for interacting with the BLL and whatever data is necessary to its corresponding view. The calling view needs to be aware of the sub controller. This seems to provide a nice way to encapsulate partial views and controls, without having to modify the calling controller. RenderPartial The calling controller is still responsible for executing whatever code is associated with the partial view, and making sure that the model passed to the partial view contains the data it expects. Effectively, modifying the partial view potentially means modifying the calling controller. Annoying especially if this is used in multiple places. Portable Areas Place each control in its own project/area?

    Read the article

  • Protecting sensitive entity data

    - by Andreas
    Hi, I'm looking for some advice on architecture for a client/server solution with some peculiarities. The client is a fairly thick one, leaving the server mostly to peristence, concurrency and infrastructure concerns. The server contains a number of entities which contain both sensitive and public information. Think for example that the entities are persons, assume that social security number and name are sensitive and age is publicly viewable. When starting the client, the user is presented with a number of entities, not disclosing any sensitive information. At any time the user can choose to log in and authenticate against the server, given the authentication is successful the user is granted access to the sensitive information. The client is hosting a domain model and I was thinking of implementing this as some kind of "lazy loading", making the first request instantiating the entities and later refreshing them with sensitive data. The entity getters would throw exceptions on sensitive information when they've not been disclosed, f.e.: class PersonImpl : PersonEntity { private bool undisclosed; public override string SocialSecurityNumber { get { if (undisclosed) throw new UndisclosedDataException(); return base.SocialSecurityNumber; } } } Another more friendly approach could be to have a value object indicating that the value is undisclosed. get { if (undisclosed) return undisclosedValue; return base.SocialSecurityNumber; } Some concerns: What if the user logs in and then out, the sensitive data has been loaded but must be disclosed once again. One could argue that this type of functionality belongs within the domain and not some infrastructural implementation(i.e. repository implementations). As always when dealing with a larger number of properties there's a risk that this type of functionality clutters the code Any insights or discussion is appreciated!

    Read the article

  • WCF with MANY database connections

    - by Jorge Dominguez
    I'm working in the development of an ERP type .Net WinForms application consuming a WCF service. It's to be used by many small companies (in the range of 100-200). Database is SQL Server 2008 and the service will be hosted as a Windows service. Even thought there will be a single DB Server, our customer insists in having separate databases for each company. That is because of stability/support concerns (like DB being damaged or took offline for some reason thus affecting all clients). Concerns coming from previous experiences (not necessarily with same platform). With a single database, connections to the DB would be opened at service start up and pooling used, but, I'm not sure how connections could be managed in a multiple DB scenario: Could a connection to the corresponding DB be opened and closed for each service request? would performance be acceptable? If a connection is opened and maintained for each company accessing the system, what's the practical limit of opened connections (to different databases)? It would be very interesting to hear your opinions and suggestions for this situation. Tanks

    Read the article

  • Mutually beneficial IP/copyright clauses for contract-based freelance work

    - by Nathan de Vries
    I have a copyright section in the contract I give to my clients stating that I retain copyright on any works produced during my work for them as an independent contractor. This is most definitely not intended to place arbitrary restrictions on my clients, but rather to maintain my ability to decide on how the software I create is licensed and distributed. Almost every project I work on results in at least one part of it being released as open source. Every project I work on makes use of third-party software released in the same fashion, so returning the favour is something I would like to continue doing. Unfortunately, the contract is not so clear when it comes to defining the rights of the client in the use of said software. I mention that the code will be licensed to them, but do not mention specifics about exclusivity, ability to produce derivatives etc. As such, a client has raised concerns about the copyright section of my contract, and has suggested that I reword it such that all copyrights are transferred entirely to the client on final payment for the project. This will almost certainly reduce my ability to distribute the software I have created; I would much prefer to find a more mutually beneficial agreement where both our concerns are appeased. Are there any tried and true approaches to licensing software in this kind of situation? To summarise: I want to maintain the ability to license (parts of) the software under my own terms, independently of my relationship with the client; with some guarantee to the client that no trade-secrets or critical business logic will be shared; giving them the ability to re-use my code in their future projects; but not necessarily letting them sell it (I'm not sure about this, though...what happens if they sell their business and the software along with it?) I realise that everyone's feedback is going to be prefixed with "IANAL", however I appreciate any thoughts you might have on the matter.

    Read the article

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