Search Results

Search found 4772 results on 191 pages for 'complex'.

Page 139/191 | < Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >

  • Consumer Oriented Search In Oracle Endeca Information Discovery - Part 2

    - by Bob Zurek
    As discussed in my last blog posting on this topic, Information Discovery, a core capability of the Oracle Endeca Information Discovery solution enables businesses to search, discover and navigate through a wide variety of big data including structured, unstructured and semi-structured data. With search as a core advanced capabilities of our product it is important to understand some of the key differences and capabilities in the underlying data store of Oracle Endeca Information Discovery and that is our Endeca Server. In the last post on this subject, we talked about Exploratory Search capabilities along with support for cascading relevance. Additional search capabilities in the Endeca Server, which differentiate from simple keyword based "search boxes" in other Information Discovery products also include: The Endeca Server Supports Set Search.  The Endeca Server is organized around set retrieval, which means that it looks at groups of results (all the documents that match a search), as well as the relationship of each individual result to the set. Other approaches only compute the relevance of a document by comparing the document to the search query – not by comparing the document to all the others. For example, a search for “U.S.” in another approach might match to the title of a document and get a high ranking. But what if it were a collection of government documents in which “U.S.” appeared in many titles, making that clue less meaningful? A set analysis would reveal this and be used to adjust relevance accordingly. The Endeca Server Supports Second-Order Relvance. Unlike simple search interfaces in traditional BI tools, which provide limited relevance ranking, such as a list of results based on key word matching, Endeca enables users to determine the most salient terms to divide up the result. Determining this second-order relevance is the key to providing effective guidance. Support for Queries and Filters. Search is the most common query type, but hardly complete, and users need to express a wide range of queries. Oracle Endeca Information Discovery also includes navigation, interactive visualizations, analytics, range filters, geospatial filters, and other query types that are more commonly associated with BI tools. Unlike other approaches, these queries operate across structured, semi-structured and unstructured content stored in the Endeca Server. Furthermore, this set is easily extensible because the core engine allows for pluggable features to be added. Like a search engine, queries are answered with a results list, ranked to put the most likely matches first. Unlike “black box” relevance solutions, which generalize one strategy for everyone, we believe that optimal relevance strategies vary across domains. Therefore, it provides line-of-business owners with a set of relevance modules that let them tune the best results based on their content. The Endeca Server query result sets are summarized, which gives users guidance on how to refine and explore further. Summaries include Guided Navigation® (a form of faceted search), maps, charts, graphs, tag clouds, concept clusters, and clarification dialogs. Users don’t explicitly ask for these summaries; Oracle Endeca Information Discovery analytic applications provide the right ones, based on configurable controls and rules. For example, the analytic application might guide a procurement agent filtering for in-stock parts by visualizing the results on a map and calculating their average fulfillment time. Furthermore, the user can interact with summaries and filters without resorting to writing complex SQL queries. The user can simply just click to add filters. Within Oracle Endeca Information Discovery, all parts of the summaries are clickable and searchable. We are living in a search driven society where business users really seem to enjoy entering information into a search box. We do this everyday as consumers and therefore, we have gotten used to looking for that box. However, the key to getting the right results is to guide that user in a way that provides additional Discovery, beyond what they may have anticipated. This is why these important and advanced features of search inside the Endeca Server have been so important. They have helped to guide our great customers to success. 

    Read the article

  • Internet of Things Becoming Reality

    - by kristin.jellison
    The Internet of Things is not just on the radar—it’s becoming a reality. A globally connected continuum of devices and objects will unleash untold possibilities for businesses and the people they touch. But the “things” are only a small part of a much larger, integrated architecture. A great example of this comes from the healthcare industry. Imagine an expectant mother who needs to watch her blood pressure. She lives in a mountain village 100 miles away from medical attention. Luckily, she can use a small “wearable” device to monitor her status and wirelessly transmit the information to a healthcare hub in her village. Now, say the healthcare hub identifies that the expectant mother’s blood pressure is dangerously high. It sends a real-time alert to the patient’s wearable device, advising her to contact her doctor. It also pushes an alert with the patient’s historical data to the doctor’s tablet PC. He inserts a smart security card into the tablet to verify his identity. This ensures that only the right people have access to the patient’s data. Then, comparing the new data with the patient’s medical history, the doctor decides she needs urgent medical attention. GPS tracking devices on ambulances in the field identify and dispatch the closest one available. An alert also goes to the closest hospital with the necessary facilities. It sends real-time information on her condition directly from the ambulance. So when she arrives, they already have a treatment plan in place to ensure she gets the right care. The Internet of Things makes a huge difference for the patient. She receives personalized and responsive healthcare. But this technology also helps the businesses involved. The healthcare provider achieves a competitive advantage in its services. The hospital benefits from cost savings through more accurate treatment and better application of services. All of this, in turn, translates into savings on insurance claims. This is an ideal scenario for the Internet of Things—when all the devices integrate easily and when the relevant organizations have all the right systems in place. But in reality, that can be difficult to achieve. Core design principles are required to make the whole system work. Open standards allow these systems to talk to each other. Integrated security protects personal, financial, commercial and regulatory information. A reliable and highly available systems infrastructure is necessary to keep these systems running 24/7. If this system were just made up of separate components, it would be prohibitively complex and expensive for almost any organization. The solution is integration, and Oracle is leading the way. We’re developing converged solutions, not just from device to datacenter, but across devices, utilizing the Java platform, and through data acquisition and management, integration, analytics, security and decision-making. The Internet of Things (IoT) requires the predictable action and interaction of a potentially endless number of components. It’s in that convergence that the true value of the Internet of Things emerges. Partners who take the comprehensive view and choose to engage with the Internet of Things as a fully integrated platform stand to gain the most from the Internet of Things’ many opportunities. To discover what else Oracle is doing to connect the world, read about Oracle’s Internet of Things Platform. Learn how you can get involved as a partner by checking out the Oracle Java Knowledge Zone. Best regards, David Hicks

    Read the article

  • Top Three Reasons to Move to the Cloud Before Your Next Upgrade

    - by yaldahhakim
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} 1) Reduced Cost - During major upgrades, most organizations typically need to replace or invest in extra hardware and other IT resources to support the upgrade. With the Cloud, this can become more of an Op-ex discussion. The flexibility and scalability of the cloud also allows for new business solution to be set up more quickly with the ability to scale IT resources to closely map to changing business requirements. . This enables more and faster innovation because you are spending money to focus on core business initiatives instead of setting up complex environments. 2) Reduced Risk- This is especially true when you are working with a cloud provider that possesses substantial in-house expertise. Oracle Managed Cloud Services has been hosting and managing customer’s business applications for over a decade and has help hundreds of customers upgrade and adopt new technologies faster and better. Customer have access to over 15,000 Oracle experts in operation centers around the world that can work around the clock and have direct access Oracle Development to optimize our customers’ upgrade experience. 3) Reduced Downtime - Whether a customer is looking to upgrade their E-Business Suite, PeopleSoft, JD-Edwards, or Fusion applications, we’ve developed standardized best practices and tools across the technology stack to accelerate the upgrade and migration with substantially reduced timelines and risk. And because the process is repeatable, customer stay more current on the latest releases, continuously taking advantage of the newest innovations – without the headache.. By leveraging the economies and expertise of scale that belong to Oracle, you can sleep better at night knowing that your next major application upgrade is taken care of. Check out the video of this Managed Cloud Services customer to learn more about their experience.

    Read the article

  • Framework for Everything - Where to begin? [Longer post]

    - by SquaredSoft
    Back story of this question, feel free to skip down for the specific question Hello, I've been very interested in the idea of abstract programming the last few years. I've made about 30 attempts at creating a piece of software that is capable of almost anything you throw at it. I've undertook some attempts at this that have taken upwards of a year, while getting close, never releasing it beyond my compiler. This has been something I've always tried wrapping my head around, and something is always missing. With the title, I'm sure you're assuming, "Yes of course you noob! You can't account for everything!" To which I have to reply, "Why not?" To give you some background into what I'm talking about, this all started with doing maybe a shade of gray hat SEO software. I found myself constantly having to create similar, but slightly different sets of code. I've gone through as many iterations of way to communicate on http as the universe has particles. "How many times am I going to have to write this multi-threaded class?" is something I found myself asking a lot. Sure, I could create a class library, and just work with that, but I always felt I could optimize what I had, which often was a large undertaking and typically involved frequent use of the CRTL+A keyboard shortcut, mixed with the delete button. It dawned on me that it was time to invest in a plugin system. This would allow me to simply add snippets of code. as time went on, and I could subversion stuff out, and distribute small chunks of code, rather than something that encompasses only a specific function or design. This comes with its own complexity, of course, and by the time I had finished the software scope for this addition, it hit me that I would want to add to everything in the software, not just a new http method, or automation code for a specific website. Great, we're getting more abstract. However, the software that I have in my mind comes down to a quite a few questions regarding its execution. I have to have some parameters to what I am going to do. After writing what the perfect software would do in my mind, I came up with this as a list of requirements: Should be able to use networking A "Macro" or "Expression system" which would allow people to do something like : =First(=ParseToList(=GetUrl("http://www.google.com?q=helloworld!"), Template.Google)) Multithreaded Able to add UI elements through some type of XML -- People can make their own addons etc. Can use third party API through the plugins, such as Microsoft CRM, Exchange, etc. This would allow the software to essentially be used for everything. Really, any task you wish to automate, in a simple way. Making the UI was as also extremely hard. How do you do all of this? Its very difficult. So my question: With so many attempts at this, I'm out of ideas how to successfully complete this. I have a very specific idea in my mind, but I keep failing to execute it. I'm a self taught programmer. I've been doing it for years, and work professionally in it, but I've never encountered something that would be as complex and in-depth as a system which essentially does everything. Where would you start? What are the best practices for design? How can I avoid constantly having to go back and optimize my software. What can I do to generalize this and draw everything out to completion. These are things I struggle with. P.s., I'm using c# as my main language. I feel like in this example, I might be hitting the outer limit of the language, although, I don't know if that is the case, or if I'm just a bad programmer. Thanks for your time.

    Read the article

  • Should I manage authentication on my own if the alternative is very low in usability and I am already managing roles?

    - by rumtscho
    As a small in-house dev department, we only have experience with developing applications for our intranet. We use the existing Active Directory for user account management. It contains the accounts of all company employees and many (but not all) of the business partners we have a cooperation with. Now, the top management wants a technology exchange application, and I am the lead dev on the new project. Basically, it is a database containing our know-how, with a web frontend. Our employees, our cooperating business partners, and people who wish to become our cooperating business partners should have access to it and see what technologies we have, so they can trade for them with the department which owns them. The technologies are not patented, but very valuable to competitors, so the department bosses are paranoid about somebody unauthorized gaining access to their technology description. This constraint necessitates a nightmarishly complicated multi-dimensional RBAC-hybrid model. As the Active Directory doesn't even contain all the information needed to infer the roles I use, I will have to manage roles plus per-technology per-user granted access exceptions within my system. The current plan is to use Active Directory for authentication. This will result in a multi-hour registration process for our business partners where the database owner has to manually create logins in our Active Directory and send them credentials. If I manage the logins in my own system, we could improve the usability a lot, for example by letting people have an active (but unprivileged) account as soon as they register. It seems to me that, after I am having a users table in the DB anyway (and managing ugly details like storing historical user IDs so that recycled user IDs within the Active Directory don't unexpectedly get rights to view someone's technologies), the additional complexity from implementing authentication functionality will be minimal. Therefore, I am starting to lean towards doing my own user login management and forgetting the AD altogether. On the other hand, I see some reasons to stay with Active Directory. First, the conventional wisdom I have heard from experienced programmers is to not do your own user management if you can avoid it. Second, we have code I can reuse for connection to the active directory, while I would have to code the authentication if done in-system (and my boss has clearly stated that getting the project delivered on time has much higher priority than delivering a system with high usability). Third, I am not a very experienced developer (this is my first lead position) and have never done user management before, so I am afraid that I am overlooking some important reasons to use the AD, or that I am underestimating the amount of work left to do my own authentication. I would like to know if there are more reasons to go with the AD authentication mechanism. Specifically, if I want to do my own authentication, what would I have to implement besides a secure connection for the login screen (which I would need anyway even if I am only transporting the pw to the AD), lookup of a password hash and a mechanism for password recovery (which will probably include manual identity verification, so no need for complex mTAN-like solutions)? And, if you have experience with such security-critical systems, which one would you use and why?

    Read the article

  • Approach for packing 2D shapes while minimizing total enclosing area

    - by Dennis
    Not sure on my tags for this question, but in short .... I need to solve a problem of packing industrial parts into crates while minimizing total containing area. These parts are motors, or pumps, or custom-made components, and they have quite unusual shapes. For some, it may be possible to assume that a part === rectangular cuboid, but some are not so simple, i.e. they assume a shape more of that of a hammer or letter T. With those, (assuming 2D shape), by alternating direction of top & bottom, one can pack more objects into the same space, than if all tops were in the same direction. Crude example below with letter "T"-shaped parts: ***** xxxxx ***** x ***** *** ooo * x vs * x vs * x vs * x o * x * xxxxx * x * x o xxxxx xxx Right now we are solving the problem by something like this: using CAD software, make actual models of how things fit in crate boxes make estimates of actual crate dimensions & write them into Excel file (1) is crazy amount of work and as the result we have just a limited amount of possible entries in (2), the Excel file. The good things is that programming this is relatively easy. Given a combination of products to go into crates, we do a lookup, and if entry exists in the Excel (or Database), we bring it out. If it doesn't, we say "sorry, no data!". I don't necessarily want to go full force on making up some crazy algorithm that given geometrical part description can align, rotate, and figure out best part packing into a crate, given its shape, but maybe I do.. Question Well, here is my question: assuming that I can represent my parts as 2D (to be determined how), and that some parts look like letter T, and some parts look like rectangles, which algorithm can I use to give me a good estimate on the dimensions of the encompassing area, while ensuring that the parts are packed in a minimal possible area, to minimize crating/shipping costs? Are there approximation algorithms? Seeing how this can get complex, is there an existing library I could use? My thought / Approach My naive approach would be to define a way to describe position of parts, and place the first part, compute total enclosing area & dimensions. Then place 2nd part in 0 degree orientation, repeat, place it at 180 degree orientation, repeat (for my case I don't think 90 degree rotations will be meaningful due to long lengths of parts). Proceed using brute force "tacking on" other parts to the enclosing area until all parts are processed. I may have to shift some parts a tad (see 3rd pictorial example above with letters T). This adds a layer of 2D complexity rather than 1D. I am not sure how to approach this. One idea I have is genetic algorithms, but I think those will take up too much processing power and time. I will need to look out for shape collisions, as well as adding extra padding space, since we are talking about real parts with irregularities rather than perfect imaginary blocks. I'm afraid this can get geometrically messy fairly fast, and I'd rather keep things simple, if I can. But what if the best (practical) solution is to pack things into different crate boxes rather than just one? This can get a bit more tricky. There is human element involved as well, i.e. like parts can go into same box and are thus a constraint to be considered. Some parts that are not the same are sometimes grouped together for shipping and can be considered as a common grouped item. Sometimes customers want things shipped their way, which adds human element to constraints. so there will have to be some customization.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection Introduction

    - by MarkPearl
    I recently was going over a great book called “Dependency Injection in .Net” by Mark Seeman. So far I have really enjoyed the book and would recommend anyone looking to get into DI to give it a read. Today I thought I would blog about the first example Mark gives in his book to illustrate some of the benefits that DI provides. The ones he lists are Late binding Extensibility Parallel Development Maintainability Testability To illustrate some of these benefits he gives a HelloWorld example using DI that illustrates some of the basic principles. It goes something like this… class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var writer = new ConsoleMessageWriter(); var salutation = new Salutation(writer); salutation.Exclaim(); Console.ReadLine(); } } public interface IMessageWriter { void Write(string message); } public class ConsoleMessageWriter : IMessageWriter { public void Write(string message) { Console.WriteLine(message); } } public class Salutation { private readonly IMessageWriter _writer; public Salutation(IMessageWriter writer) { _writer = writer; } public void Exclaim() { _writer.Write("Hello World"); } }   If you had asked me a few years ago if I had thought this was a good approach to solving the HelloWorld problem I would have resounded “No”. How could the above be better than the following…. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("Hello World"); Console.ReadLine(); } }  Today, my mind-set has changed because of the pain of past programs. So often we can look at a small snippet of code and make judgements when we need to keep in mind that we will most probably be implementing these patterns in projects with hundreds of thousands of lines of code and in projects that we have tests that we don’t want to break and that’s where the first solution outshines the latter. Let’s see if the first example achieves some of the outcomes that were listed as benefits of DI. Could I test the first solution easily? Yes… We could write something like the following using NUnit and RhinoMocks… [TestFixture] public class SalutationTests { [Test] public void ExclaimWillWriteCorrectMessageToMessageWriter() { var writerMock = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IMessageWriter>(); var sut = new Salutation(writerMock); sut.Exclaim(); writerMock.AssertWasCalled(x => x.Write("Hello World")); } }   This would test the existing code fine. Let’s say we then wanted to extend the original solution so that we had a secure message writer. We could write a class like the following… public class SecureMessageWriter : IMessageWriter { private readonly IMessageWriter _writer; private readonly string _secretPassword; public SecureMessageWriter(IMessageWriter writer, string secretPassword) { _writer = writer; _secretPassword = secretPassword; } public void Write(string message) { if (_secretPassword == "Mark") { _writer.Write(message); } else { _writer.Write("Unauthenticated"); } } }   And then extend our implementation of the program as follows… class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var writer = new SecureMessageWriter(new ConsoleMessageWriter(), "Mark"); var salutation = new Salutation(writer); salutation.Exclaim(); Console.ReadLine(); } }   Our application has now been successfully extended and yet we did very little code change. In addition, our existing tests did not break and we would just need add tests for the extended functionality. Would this approach allow parallel development? Well, I am in two camps on parallel development but with some planning ahead of time it would allow for it as you would simply need to decide on the interface signature and could then have teams develop different sections programming to that interface. So,this was really just a quick intro to some of the basic concepts of DI that Mark introduces very successfully in his book. I am hoping to blog about this further as I continue through the book to list some of the more complex implementations of containers.

    Read the article

  • Why is this beat detection code failing to register some beats properly?

    - by Quincy
    I made this SoundAnalyzer class to detect beats in songs: class SoundAnalyzer { public SoundBuffer soundData; public Sound sound; public List<double> beatMarkers = new List<double>(); public SoundAnalyzer(string path) { soundData = new SoundBuffer(path); sound = new Sound(soundData); } // C = threshold, N = size of history buffer / 1024 B = bands public void PlaceBeatMarkers(float C, int N, int B) { List<double>[] instantEnergyList = new List<double>[B]; GetEnergyList(B, ref instantEnergyList); for (int i = 0; i < B; i++) { PlaceMarkers(instantEnergyList[i], N, C); } beatMarkers.Sort(); } private short[] getRange(int begin, int end, short[] array) { short[] result = new short[end - begin]; for (int i = 0; i < end - begin; i++) { result[i] = array[begin + i]; } return result; } // get a array of with a list of energy for each band private void GetEnergyList(int B, ref List<double>[] instantEnergyList) { for (int i = 0; i < B; i++) { instantEnergyList[i] = new List<double>(); } short[] samples = soundData.Samples; float timePerSample = 1 / (float)soundData.SampleRate; int sampleIndex = 0; int nextSamples = 1024; int samplesPerBand = nextSamples / B; // for the whole song while (sampleIndex + nextSamples < samples.Length) { complex[] FFT = FastFourier.Calculate(getRange(sampleIndex, nextSamples + sampleIndex, samples)); // foreach band for (int i = 0; i < B; i++) { double energy = 0; for (int j = 0; j < samplesPerBand; j++) energy += FFT[i * samplesPerBand + j].GetMagnitude(); energy /= samplesPerBand; instantEnergyList[i].Add(energy); } if (sampleIndex + nextSamples >= samples.Length) nextSamples = samples.Length - sampleIndex - 1; sampleIndex += nextSamples; samplesPerBand = nextSamples / B; } } // place the actual markers private void PlaceMarkers(List<double> instantEnergyList, int N, float C) { double timePerSample = 1 / (double)soundData.SampleRate; int index = N; int numInBuffer = index; double historyBuffer = 0; //Fill the history buffer with n * instant energy for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) { historyBuffer += instantEnergyList[i]; } // If instantEnergy / samples in buffer < instantEnergy for the next sample then add beatmarker. while (index + 1 < instantEnergyList.Count) { if(instantEnergyList[index + 1] > (historyBuffer / numInBuffer) * C) beatMarkers.Add((index + 1) * 1024 * timePerSample); historyBuffer -= instantEnergyList[index - numInBuffer]; historyBuffer += instantEnergyList[index + 1]; index++; } } } For some reason it's only detecting beats from 637 sec to around 641 sec, and I have no idea why. I know the beats are being inserted from multiple bands since I am finding duplicates, and it seems that it's assigning a beat to each instant energy value in between those values. It's modeled after this: http://www.flipcode.com/misc/BeatDetectionAlgorithms.pdf So why won't the beats register properly?

    Read the article

  • The five steps of business intelligence adoption: where are you?

    - by Red Gate Software BI Tools Team
    When I was in Orlando and New York last month, I spoke to a lot of business intelligence users. What they told me suggested a path of BI adoption. The user’s place on the path depends on the size and sophistication of their organisation. Step 1: A company with a database of customer transactions will often want to examine particular data, like revenue and unit sales over the last period for each product and territory. To do this, they probably use simple SQL queries or stored procedures to produce data on demand. Step 2: The results from step one are saved in an Excel document, so business users can analyse them with filters or pivot tables. Alternatively, SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS) might be used to generate a report of the SQL query for display on an intranet page. Step 3: If these queries are run frequently, or business users want to explore data from multiple sources more freely, it may become necessary to create a new database structured for analysis rather than CRUD (create, retrieve, update, and delete). For example, data from more than one system — plus external information — may be incorporated into a data warehouse. This can become ‘one source of truth’ for the business’s operational activities. The warehouse will probably have a simple ‘star’ schema, with fact tables representing the measures to be analysed (e.g. unit sales, revenue) and dimension tables defining how this data is aggregated (e.g. by time, region or product). Reports can be generated from the warehouse with Excel, SSRS or other tools. Step 4: Not too long ago, Microsoft introduced an Excel plug-in, PowerPivot, which allows users to bring larger volumes of data into Excel documents and create links between multiple tables.  These BISM Tabular documents can be created by the database owners or other expert Excel users and viewed by anyone with Excel PowerPivot. Sometimes, business users may use PowerPivot to create reports directly from the primary database, bypassing the need for a data warehouse. This can introduce problems when there are misunderstandings of the database structure or no single ‘source of truth’ for key data. Step 5: Steps three or four are often enough to satisfy business intelligence needs, especially if users are sophisticated enough to work with the warehouse in Excel or SSRS. However, sometimes the relationships between data are too complex or the queries which aggregate across periods, regions etc are too slow. In these cases, it can be necessary to formalise how the data is analysed and pre-build some of the aggregations. To do this, a business intelligence professional will typically use SQL Server Analysis Services (SSAS) to create a multidimensional model — or “cube” — that more simply represents key measures and aggregates them across specified dimensions. Step five is where our tool, SSAS Compare, becomes useful, as it helps review and deploy changes from development to production. For us at Red Gate, the primary value of SSAS Compare is to establish a dialog with BI users, so we can develop a portfolio of products that support creation and deployment across a range of report and model types. For example, PowerPivot and the new BISM Tabular model create a potential customer base for tools that extend beyond BI professionals. We’re interested in learning where people are in this story, so we’ve created a six-question survey to find out. Whether you’re at step one or step five, we’d love to know how you use BI so we can decide how to build tools that solve your problems. So if you have a sixty seconds to spare, tell us on the survey!

    Read the article

  • College Ratings via the Federal Government

    - by user9147039
    A few weeks back you might remember news about a higher education rating system proposal from the Obama administration. As I've discussed previously, political and stakeholder pressures to improve outcomes and increase transparency are stronger than ever before. The executive branch proposal is intended to make progress in this area. Quoting from the proposal itself, "The ratings will be based upon such measures as: Access, such as percentage of students receiving Pell grants; Affordability, such as average tuition, scholarships, and loan debt; and Outcomes, such as graduation and transfer rates, graduate earnings, and advanced degrees of college graduates.” This is going to be quite complex, to say the least. Most notably, higher ed is not monolithic. From community and other 2-year colleges, to small private 4-year, to professional schools, to large public research institutions…the many walks of higher ed life are, well, many. Designing a ratings system that doesn't wind up with lots of unintended consequences and collateral damage will be difficult. At best you would end up potentially tarnishing the reputation of certain institutions that were actually performing well against the metrics and outcome measures that make sense in their "context" of education. At worst you could spend a lot of time and resources designing a system that would lose credibility with its "customers". A lot of institutions I work with already have in place systems like the one described above. They are tracking completion rates, completion timeframes, transfers to other institutions, job placement, and salary information. As I talk to these institutions there are several constants worth noting: • Deciding on which metrics to measure is complicated. While employment and salary data are relatively easy to track, qualitative measures are more difficult. How do you quantify the benefit to someone who studies in one field that may not compensate him or her as well as another field but that provides huge personal fulfillment and reward is a difficult measure to quantify? • The data is available but the systems to transform the data into actual information that can be used in meaningful ways are not. Too often in higher ed information is siloed. As such, much of the data that need to be a part of a comprehensive system sit in multiple organizations, oftentimes outside the reach of core IT. • Politics and culture are big barriers. One of the areas that my team and I spend a lot of time talking about with higher ed institutions all over the world is the imperative to optimize for student success. This, like the tracking of the students’ achievement after graduation, requires a level or organizational capacity that does not currently exist. The primary barrier is the culture of "data islands" in higher ed, and the need for leadership to drive out the divisions between departments, schools, colleges, etc. and institute academy-wide analytics and data stewardship initiatives that will enable student success. • Data quality is a very big issue. So many disparate systems exist (some on premise, some "in the cloud") that keep data about "persons" using different means to identify them. Establishing a single source of truth about an individual and his or her data is difficult without some type of data quality policy and tools. Good tools actually exist but are seldom leveraged. Don't misunderstand - I think it's a great idea to drive additional transparency and accountability into the system of higher education. And not just at home, but globally. Students and parents need access to key data to make informed, responsible choices. The tools exist to not only enable this kind of information to be shared but to capture the very metrics stakeholders care most about and in a way that makes sense in the context of a given institution's "place" in the overall higher ed panoply.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Writing CASE expressions properly when NULLs are involved

    - by Mladen Prajdic
    We’ve all written a CASE expression (yes, it’s an expression and not a statement) or two every now and then. But did you know there are actually 2 formats you can write the CASE expression in? This actually bit me when I was trying to add some new functionality to an old stored procedure. In some rare cases the stored procedure just didn’t work correctly. After a quick look it turned out to be a CASE expression problem when dealing with NULLS. In the first format we make simple “equals to” comparisons to a value: SELECT CASE <value> WHEN <equals this value> THEN <return this> WHEN <equals this value> THEN <return this> -- ... more WHEN's here ELSE <return this> END Second format is much more flexible since it allows for complex conditions. USE THIS ONE! SELECT CASE WHEN <value> <compared to> <value> THEN <return this> WHEN <value> <compared to> <value> THEN <return this> -- ... more WHEN's here ELSE <return this> END Now that we know both formats and you know which to use (the second one if that hasn’t been clear enough) here’s an example how the first format WILL make your evaluation logic WRONG. Run the following code for different values of @i. Just comment out any 2 out of 3 “SELECT @i =” statements. DECLARE @i INTSELECT  @i = -1 -- first resultSELECT  @i = 55 -- second resultSELECT  @i = NULL -- third resultSELECT @i AS OriginalValue, -- first CASE format. DON'T USE THIS! CASE @i WHEN -1 THEN '-1' WHEN NULL THEN 'We have a NULL!' ELSE 'We landed in ELSE' END AS DontUseThisCaseFormatValue, -- second CASE format. USE THIS! CASE WHEN @i = -1 THEN '-1' WHEN @i IS NULL THEN 'We have a NULL!' ELSE 'We landed in ELSE' END AS UseThisCaseFormatValue When the value of @i is –1 everything works as expected, since both formats go into the –1 WHEN branch. When the value of @i is 55 everything again works as expected, since both formats go into the ELSE branch. When the value of @i is NULL the problems become evident. The first format doesn’t go into the WHEN NULL branch because it makes an equality comparison between two NULLs. Because a NULL is an unknown value: NULL = NULL is false. That is why the first format goes into the ELSE Branch but the second format correctly handles the proper IS NULL comparison.   Please use the second more explicit format. Your future self will be very grateful to you when he doesn’t have to discover these kinds of bugs.

    Read the article

  • Come up with a real-world problem in which only the best solution will do (a problem from Introduction to algorithms) [closed]

    - by Mike
    EDITED (I realized that the question certainly needs a context) The problem 1.1-5 in the book of Thomas Cormen et al Introduction to algorithms is: "Come up with a real-world problem in which only the best solution will do. Then come up with one in which a solution that is “approximately” the best is good enough." I'm interested in its first statement. And (from my understanding) it is asked to name a real-world problem where only the exact solution will work as opposed to a real-world problem where good-enough solution will be ok. So what is the difference between the exact and good enough solution. Consider some physics problem for example the simulation of the fulid flow in the permeable medium. To make this simulation happen some simplyfing assumptions have to be made when deriving a mathematical model. Otherwise the model becomes at least complex and unsolvable. Virtually any particle in the universe has its influence on the fluid flow. But not all particles are equal. Those that form the permeable medium are much more influental than the ones located light years away. Then when the mathematical model needs to be solved an exact solution can rarely be found unless the mathematical model is simple enough (wich probably means the model isn't close to reality). We take an approximate numerical method and after hours of coding and days of verification come up with the program or algorithm which is a solution. And if the model and an algorithm give results close to a real problem by some degree that is good enough soultion. Its worth noting the difference between exact solution algorithm and exact computation result. When considering real-world problems and real-world computation machines I believe all physical problems solutions where any calculations are taken can not be exact because universal physical constants are represented approximately in the computer. Any numbers are represented with the limited precision, at least limited by amount of memory available to computing machine. I can imagine plenty of problems where good-enough, good to some degree solution will work, like train scheduling, automated trading, satellite orbit calculation, health care expert systems. In that cases exact solutions can't be derived due to constraints on computation time, limitations in computer memory or due to the nature of problems. I googled this question and like what this guy suggests: there're kinds of mathematical problems that need exact solutions (little note here: because the question is taken from the book "Introduction to algorithms" the term "solution" means an algorithm or a program, which in this case gives exact answer on each input). But that's probably more of theoretical interest. So I would like to narrow down the question to: What are the real-world practical problems where only the best (exact) solution algorithm or program will do (but not the good-enough solution)? There are problems like breaking of cryptographic ciphers where only exact solution matters in practice and again in practice the process of deciphering without knowing a secret should take reasonable amount of time. Returning to the original question this is the problem where good-enough (fast-enough) solution will do there's no practical need in instant crack though it's desired. So the quality of "best" can be understood in any sense: exact, fastest, requiring least memory, having minimal possible network traffic etc. And still I want this question to be theoretical if possible. In a sense that there may be example of computer X that has limited resource R of amount Y where the best solution to problem P is the one that takes not more than available Y for inputs of size N*Y. But that's the problem of finding solution for P on computer X which is... well, good enough. My final thought that we live in a world where it is required from programming solutions to practical purposes to be good enough. In rare cases really very very good but still not the best ones. Isn't it? :) If it's not can you provide an example? Or can you name any such unsolved problem of practical interest?

    Read the article

  • Cloud Fact for Business Managers #3: Where You Data Is, and Who Has Access to It Might Surprise You

    - by yaldahhakim
    Written by: David Krauss While data security and operational risk conversations usually happen around the desk of a CCO/CSO (chief compliance and/or security officer), or perhaps the CFO, since business managers are now selecting cloud providers, they need to be able to at least ask some high-level questions on the topic of risk and compliance.  While the report found that 76% of adopters were motivated to adopt cloud apps because of quick access to software, most of these managers found that after they made a purchase decision their access to exciting new capabilities in the cloud could be hindered due to performance and scalability constraints put forth  by their cloud provider.  If you are going to let your business consume their mission critical business applications as a service, then it’s important to understand who is providing those cloud services and what kind of performance you are going to get.  Different types of departments, companies and industries will all have unique requirements so it’s key to take this also into consideration.   Nothing puts a CEO in a bad mood like a public data breach or finding out the company lost money when customers couldn’t buy a product or service because your cloud service provider had a problem.  With 42% of business managers having seen a data security breach in their department associated directly with the use of cloud applications, this is happening more than you think.   We’ve talked about the importance of being able to avoid information silos through a unified cloud approach and platform.  This is also important when keeping your data safe and secure, and a key conversation to have with your cloud provider.  Your customers want to know that their information is protected when they do business with you, just like you want your own company information protected.   This is really hard to do when each line of business is running different cloud application services managed by different cloud providers, all with different processes and controls.   It only adds to the complexity, and the more complex, the more risky and the chance that something will go wrong. What about compliance? Depending on the cloud provider, it can be difficult at best to understand who has access to your data, and were your data is actually stored.  Add to this multiple cloud providers spanning multiple departments and it becomes very problematic when trying to comply with certain industry and country data security regulations.  With 73% of business managers complaining that having cloud data handled externally by one or more cloud vendors makes it hard for their department to be compliant, this is a big time suck for executives and it puts the organization at risk. Is There A Complete, Integrated, Modern Cloud Out there for Business Executives?If you are a business manager looking to drive faster innovation for your business and want a cloud application that your CIO would approve of, I would encourage you take a look at Oracle Cloud.  It’s everything you want from a SaaS based application, but without compromising on functionality and other modern capabilities like embedded business intelligence, social relationship management (for your entire business), and advanced mobile.  And because Oracle Cloud is built and managed by Oracle, you can be confident that your cloud application services are enterprise-grade.  Over 25 Million users and 10 thousands companies around the globe rely on Oracle Cloud application services everyday – maybe your business should too.  For more information, visit cloud.oracle.com. Additional Resources •    Try it: cloud.oracle.com•    Learn more: http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/features/complete-cloud/index.html•    Research Report: Cloud for Business Managers: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    Read the article

  • Entity System with C++ templates

    - by tommaisey
    I've been getting interested in the Entity/Component style of game programming, and I've come up with a design in C++ which I'd like a critique of. I decided to go with a fairly pure Entity system, where entities are simply an ID number. Components are stored in a series of vectors - one for each Component type. However, I didn't want to have to add boilerplate code for every new Component type I added to the game. Nor did I want to use macros to do this, which frankly scare me. So I've come up with a system based on templates and type hinting. But there are some potential issues I'd like to check before I spend ages writing this (I'm a slow coder!) All Components derive from a Component base class. This base class has a protected constructor, that takes a string parameter. When you write a new derived Component class, you must initialise the base with the name of your new class in a string. When you first instantiate a new DerivedComponent, it adds the string to a static hashmap inside Component mapped to a unique integer id. When you subsequently instantiate more Components of the same type, no action is taken. The result (I think) should be a static hashmap with the name of each class derived from Component that you instantiate at least once, mapped to a unique id, which can by obtained with the static method Component::getTypeId ("DerivedComponent"). Phew. The next important part is TypedComponentList<typename PropertyType>. This is basically just a wrapper to an std::vector<typename PropertyType> with some useful methods. It also contains a hashmap of entity ID numbers to slots in the array so we can find Components by their entity owner. Crucially TypedComponentList<> is derived from the non-template class ComponentList. This allows me to maintain a list of pointers to ComponentList in my main ComponentManager, which actually point to TypedComponentLists with different template parameters (sneaky). The Component manager has template functions such as: template <typename ComponentType> void addProperty (ComponentType& component, int componentTypeId, int entityId) and: template <typename ComponentType> TypedComponentList<ComponentType>* getComponentList (int componentTypeId) which deal with casting from ComponentList to the correct TypedComponentList for you. So to get a list of a particular type of Component you call: TypedComponentList<MyComponent>* list = componentManager.getComponentList<MyComponent> (Component::getTypeId("MyComponent")); Which I'll admit looks pretty ugly. Bad points of the design: If a user of the code writes a new Component class but supplies the wrong string to the base constructor, the whole system will fail. Each time a new Component is instantiated, we must check a hashed string to see if that component type has bee instantiated before. Will probably generate a lot of assembly because of the extensive use of templates. I don't know how well the compiler will be able to minimise this. You could consider the whole system a bit complex - perhaps premature optimisation? But I want to use this code again and again, so I want it to be performant. Good points of the design: Components are stored in typed vectors but they can also be found by using their entity owner id as a hash. This means we can iterate them fast, and minimise cache misses, but also skip straight to the component we need if necessary. We can freely add Components of different types to the system without having to add and manage new Component vectors by hand. What do you think? Do the good points outweigh the bad?

    Read the article

  • When should I use a Process Model versus a Use Case?

    - by Dave Burke
    This Blog entry is a follow on to https://blogs.oracle.com/oum/entry/oum_is_business_process_and and addresses a question I sometimes get asked…..i.e. “when I am gathering requirements on a Project, should I use a Process Modeling approach, or should I use a Use Case approach?” Not surprisingly, the short answer is “it depends”! Let’s take a scenario where you are working on a Sales Force Automation project. We’ll call the process that is being implemented “Lead-to-Order”. I would typically think of this type of project as being “Process Centric”. In other words, the focus will be on orchestrating a series of human and system related tasks that ultimately deliver value to the business in a cost effective way. Put in even simpler terms……implement an automated pre-sales system. For this type of (Process Centric) project, requirements would typically be gathered through a series of Workshops where the focal point will be on creating, or confirming, the Future-State (To-Be) business process. If pre-defined “best-practice” business process models exist, then of course they could and should be used during the Workshops, but even in their absence, the focus of the Workshops will be to define the optimum series of Tasks, their connections, sequence, and dependencies that will ultimately reflect a business process that meets the needs of the business. Now let’s take another scenario. Assume you are working on a Content Management project that involves automating the creation and management of content for User Manuals, Web Sites, Social Media publications etc. Would you call this type of project “Process Centric”?.......well you could, but it might also fall into the category of complex configuration, plus some custom extensions to a standard software application (COTS). For this type of project it would certainly be worth considering using a Use Case approach in order to 1) understand the requirements, and 2) to capture the functional requirements of the custom extensions. At this point you might be asking “why couldn’t I use a Process Modeling approach for my Content Management project?” Well, of course you could, but you just need to think about which approach is the most effective. Start by analyzing the types of Tasks that will eventually be automated by the system, for example: Best Suited To? Task Name Process Model Use Case Notes Manage outbound calls Ö A series of linked human and system tasks for calling and following up with prospects Manage content revision Ö Updating the content on a website Update User Preferences Ö Updating a users display preferences Assign Lead Ö Reviewing a lead, then assigning it to a sales person Convert Lead to Quote Ö Updating the status of a lead, and then converting it to a sales order As you can see, it’s not an exact science, and either approach is viable for the Tasks listed above. However, where you have a series of interconnected Tasks or Activities, than when combined, deliver value to the business, then that would be a good indicator to lead with a Process Modeling approach. On the other hand, when the Tasks or Activities in question are more isolated and/or do not cross traditional departmental boundaries, then a Use Case approach might be worth considering. Now let’s take one final scenario….. As you captured the To-Be Process flows for the Sales Force automation project, you discover a “Gap” in terms of what the client requires, and what the standard COTS application can provide. Let’s assume that the only way forward is to develop a Custom Extension. This would now be a perfect opportunity to document the functional requirements (behind the Gap) using a Use Case approach. After all, we will be developing some new software, and one of the most effective ways to begin the Software Development Lifecycle is to follow a Use Case approach. As always, your comments are most welcome.

    Read the article

  • Appropriate design / technologies to handle dynamic string formatting?

    - by Mark W
    recently I was tasked with implementing a way of adding support for versioning of hardware packet specifications to one of our libraries. First a bit of information about the project. We have a hardware library which has classes for each of the various commands we support sending to our hardware. These hardware modules are essentially just lights with a few buttons, and a 2 or 4 digit display. The packets typically follow the format {SOH}AADD{ETX}, where AA is our sentinel action code, and DD is the device ID. These packet specs are different from one command to the next obviously, and the different firmware versions we have support different specifications. For example, on version 1 an action code of 14 may have a spec of {SOH}AADDTEXT{ETX} which would be AA = 14 literal, DD = device ID, TEXT = literal text to display on the device. Then we come out with a revision with adds an extended byte(s) onto the end of the packet like this {SOH}AADDTEXTE{ETX}. Assume the TEXT field is fixed width for this example. We have now added a new field onto the end which could be used to say specify the color or flash rate of the text/buttons. Currently this java library only supports one version of the commands, the latest. In our hardware library we would have a class for this command, say a DisplayTextArgs.java. That class would have fields for the device ID, the text, and the extended byte. The command class would expose a method which generates the string ("{SOH}AADDTEXTE{ETX}") using the value from the class. In practice we would create the Args class as needed, populate the fields, call the method to get our packet string, then ship that down across the CAN. Some of our other commands specification can vary for the same command, on the same version, depending on some runtime state. For example, another command for version 1 may be {SOH}AA{ETX}, where this action code clears all of the modules behind a specific controller device of their text. We may overload this packet to have option fields with multiple meanings like {SOH}AAOC{ETX} where OC is literal text, which tells the controller to only clear text on a specific module type, and to leave the others alone, or the spec could also have an option format of {SOH}AADD{ETX} to clear the text off a a specific device. Currently, in the method which generates the packet string, we would evaluate fields on the args class to determine which spec we will be using when formatting the packet. For this example, it would be along the lines of: if m_DeviceID != null then use {SOH}AADD{ETX} else if m_ClearOCs == true then use {SOH}AAOC{EXT} else use {SOH}AA{ETX} I had considered using XML, or a database to store String.format format strings, which were linked to firmware version numbers in some table. We would load them up at startup, and pass in the version number of the hardwares firmware we are currently using (I can query the devices for their firmware version, but the version is not included in all packets as part of the spec). This breaks down pretty quickly because of the dynamic nature of how we select which version of the command to use. I then considered using a rule engine to possibly build out expressions which could be interpreted at runtume, to evaluate the args class's state, and from that select the appropriate format string to use, but my brief look at rule engines for java scared me away with its complexity. While it seems like it might be a viable solution, it seems overly complex. So this is why I am here. I wouldn't say design is my strongest skill, and im having trouble figuring out the best way to approach this problem. I probably wont be able to radically change the args classes, but if the trade off was good enough, I may be able to convince my boss that the change is appropriate. What I would like from the community is some feedback on some best practices / design methodologies / API or other resources which I could use to accomplish: Logic to determine which set of commands to use for a given firmware version Of those command, which version of each command to use (based on the args classes state) Keep the rules logic decoupled from the application so as to avoid needing releases for every firmware version Be simple enough so I don't need weeks of study and trial and error to implement effectively.

    Read the article

  • Multiple Zend application code organisation

    - by user966936
    For the past year I have been working on a series of applications all based on the Zend framework and centered on a complex business logic that all applications must have access to even if they don't use all (easier than having multiple library folders for each application as they are all linked together with a common center). Without going into much detail about what the project is specifically about, I am looking for some input (as I am working on the project alone) on how I have "grouped" my code. I have tried to split it all up in such a way that it removes dependencies as much as possible. I'm trying to keep it as decoupled as I logically can, so in 12 months time when my time is up anyone else coming in can have no problem extending on what I have produced. Example structure: applicationStorage\ (contains all applications and associated data) applicationStorage\Applications\ (contains the applications themselves) applicationStorage\Applications\external\ (application grouping folder) (contains all external customer access applications) applicationStorage\Applications\external\site\ (main external customer access application) applicationStorage\Applications\external\site\Modules\ applicationStorage\Applications\external\site\Config\ applicationStorage\Applications\external\site\Layouts\ applicationStorage\Applications\external\site\ZendExtended\ (contains extended Zend classes specific to this application example: ZendExtended_Controller_Action extends zend_controller_Action ) applicationStorage\Applications\external\mobile\ (mobile external customer access application different workflow limited capabilities compared to full site version) applicationStorage\Applications\internal\ (application grouping folder) (contains all internal company applications) applicationStorage\Applications\internal\site\ (main internal application) applicationStorage\Applications\internal\mobile\ (mobile access has different flow and limited abilities compared to main site version) applicationStorage\Tests\ (contains PHP unit tests) applicationStorage\Library\ applicationStorage\Library\Service\ (contains all business logic, services and servicelocator; these are completely decoupled from Zend framework and rely on models' interfaces) applicationStorage\Library\Zend\ (Zend framework) applicationStorage\Library\Models\ (doesn't know services but is linked to Zend framework for DB operations; contains model interfaces and model datamappers for all business objects; examples include Iorder/IorderMapper, Iworksheet/IWorksheetMapper, Icustomer/IcustomerMapper) (Note: the Modules, Config, Layouts and ZendExtended folders are duplicated in each application folder; but i have omitted them as they are not required for my purposes.) For the library this contains all "universal" code. The Zend framework is at the heart of all applications, but I wanted my business logic to be Zend-framework-independent. All model and mapper interfaces have no public references to Zend_Db but actually wrap around it in private. So my hope is that in the future I will be able to rewrite the mappers and dbtables (containing a Models_DbTable_Abstract that extends Zend_Db_Table_Abstract) in order to decouple my business logic from the Zend framework if I want to move my business logic (services) to a non-Zend framework environment (maybe some other PHP framework). Using a serviceLocator and registering the required services within the bootstrap of each application, I can use different versions of the same service depending on the request and which application is being accessed. Example: all external applications will have a service_auth_External implementing service_auth_Interface registered. Same with internal aplications with Service_Auth_Internal implementing service_auth_Interface Service_Locator::getService('Auth'). I'm concerned I may be missing some possible problems with this. One I'm half-thinking about is a config.ini file for all externals, then a separate application config.ini overriding or adding to the global external config.ini. If anyone has any suggestions I would be greatly appreciative. I have used contextswitching for AJAX functions within the individual applications, but there is a big chance both external and internal will get web services created for them. Again, these will be separated due to authorization and different available services. \applicationstorage\Applications\internal\webservice \applicationstorage\Applications\external\webservice

    Read the article

  • How to be Agile when new work keeps affecting completed work?

    - by jdln
    The project I'm working on is to re-skin an existing website. The functionally will stay the same, its just the styles that are changing. The HTML is not changing, I'm only modifying the CSS files. The site is pretty complex. There are dozens of pages. Users can be logged in and have a number of different roles. Depending on their role the content of the page and what pages they are allowed to see varys. We're using GIT and Github. I'm trying to write CSS that works as components. So when the same form elements, headings, etc appear on multiple pages they are already styled and are consistent. Most of time this is working well. Sadly the format and class names in the HTML are at times messy and unpredictable. When I fix something on one page it can break another. The job is also harder as no one knows exactly all the variations that are possible due to the user roles. As such I'm continuously finding new variations as I go along. I'm making headway by putting a lot of comments in my CSS. If I need to remove a CSS rule Ill comment it out so I can still see it with the chrome dev tools, and ill put a comment in the CSS saying why I removed it and for what page this was done. This means that if on another page I'm about to add add the rule to fix a different problem, there is more of a chance I will see how this would break the first page. This allows me to either find a different solution that will work for both pages, or I can make the override page specific. This has been working quite well for me. If I had complete free reign and the only deadline was to finish the project by the end then this method would be fine. However my manager is trying to mitigate risk by breaking the work into areas to be completed per sprint. This is counter to how I have been approaching things as something like my typography styles will affect all other pages on the site. The other issue is that the different stakeholders want to sign off each section as I go along. However once I've finished a section it may change if I change CSS that affects it and also affects a new section I'm working on. I've asked that the stakeholders have a quick unofficial sign off in stages (eg per sprint), and have the final official sign off at the end of the project, but this is being met with resistance. I do understand why it would be higher risk to do this, but the only way to guarantee that a signed off section will not change is to make ALL future changes page specific. In addition to this I'm being told that all work that I push to the Git repo should be ready to go live, and as such should not contain any code comments. This is risky for me as I wont know until I've finished the site if I will ever benefit from these comments or not. Has anyone else been in a similar situation and managed to find a compromise that worked for my development approach and also the desires of management and stakeholders to have a more Agile approach? A more Agile workflow works great when you can break the work into components and know that once something is done it wont be affected by future work. However the nature of this project makes this hard to achieve.

    Read the article

  • A programmer who doesn't get to program - where to turn? [closed]

    - by Just an Anon
    I'm in my mid 20's, and have been working as a full time programmer / developer for the last ~6 years, with several years of part-time freelancing before this, and three straight years of freelancing in the middle of this short career. I work mostly with PHP and the Drupal framework. By and large, I focus on programming custom pieces of functionality; these, of course, vary greatly from project to project. I've got years of solid experience with OOP (have done some Java & C# years ago, too) including intensive experience with front-end development, and even some design work. I've lead small teams (2-4 people) of developers. And of course, given the large amount of freelancing, I've got decent project- & client-management skills. My problem is staying motivated at any place of employment. In the time mentioned I've worked (full-time) at six local companies. The longest I've stayed at any company was just over a year. I find that I'll get hired and be very excited and motivated for the first few months, but the work quickly gets "stale." By that I mean that the interesting components (ie. the programming) get done, and the rest of the work turns into boring cleanup (move a button, add text, change colours, add a field). I don't get challenged, and I don't feel like I'm learning anything new. This happens repeatedly time and time again, and I always end up leaving for either a new opportunity, or to freelance. I'm wondering if perhaps I've painted myself into a corner with the rather niche work market (although with very high demand and good compensation) and need to explore other career choices. Another possibility is that I may be choosing the wrong places of employment, mostly small agencies, and need to look into working for a larger, more established firm. I find programming, writing code, and architecting solutions very rewarding. When I'm working on an interesting problem I lose all sense of time and 14-16 hours can fly by like minutes. I get the same exciting feeling when I'm doing high-level planning of a complex system, breaking up the work and figuring out how everything will tie-in together. I absolutely hate doing small, "stupid" changes that pose no challenge, yet seem to make up more and more of my work. I want to find a workplace where I will get to work on such tasks, be challenged, and improve in all areas of product development. This maybe a programming job, management, architecture of desktop apps, or may be managing a taco stand on a beach in Mexico - I don't know, and I need some advice and real-world feedback. What are some job areas worth exploring? The requirements are fairly simple: working with computers interacting with others challenging decent pay (I'm making just short of 90k / year with a month of vacation & some benefits, and would like to stay in this range, but am willing to take a temporary cut in pay for a more interesting position) Any advice would be much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Configuring WCF 4 with routing (global.asax) for both http & https endpoints

    - by jammer59
    I'm still a newbie with wcf and not too well informed in .net in general. I have a WCF 4 web service that uses the global.asax routing approach and very simplified web.config using the standard endpoint method. This wcf service runs as an application with the default web site on iis 7.5 at present. I need it support both http and https interfaces, if possible. If that's too complex then only https. How is that best handled maintaining the current approach? The contents of the global.asax.cs and web.config files are pretty basic: public class Global : HttpApplication { void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { RegisterRoutes(); } private void RegisterRoutes() { // Edit the base address of Service1 by replacing the "ippay" string below RouteTable.Routes.Add(new ServiceRoute("myservice", new WebServiceHostFactory(), typeof(myservice))); } } <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment aspNetCompatibilityEnabled="true"/> <standardEndpoints> <webHttpEndpoint> <standardEndpoint name="" helpEnabled="true" contentTypeMapper="myservice.Util.RawMapper,myservice"> </standardEndpoint> </webHttpEndpoint> </standardEndpoints>

    Read the article

  • [WPF] Custom TabItem in TabControl

    - by Simon
    I've created CustomTabItem which inherits from TabItem and i'd like to use it while binding ObservableCollection in TabControl <TabControl ItemsSource="{Binding MyObservableCollection}"/> It should like this in XAML, but i do not know how change default type of the output item created by TabControl while binding. I've tried to create converter, but it has to do something like this inside convertin method: List<CustomTabItem> resultList = new List<CustomTabItem>(); And iterate through my input ObservableCollection, create my CustomTab based on item from collection and add it to resultList... I'd like to avoid it, bacause while creating CustomTabItem i'm creating complex View and it takes a while, so i don't want to create it always when something change in binded collection. My class extends typical TabItem and i'd like to use this class in TabControl instead of TabItem. <TabControl.ItemContainerStyle> <Style TargetType="{x:Type local:CustomTabItem}"> <Setter Property="MyProperty" Value="{Binding xxx}"/> </Style> </TabControl.ItemContainerStyle> Code above generates error that Style cannot be applied to TabItem. My main purpose is to use in XAML my own CustomTabItem and bind properties... Just like above... I've also tried to use <TabControl.ItemTemplate/> <TabControl.ContentTemaplte/> But they are just styles for TabItem, so i'll still be missing my properties wchich i added in my custom class.

    Read the article

  • Why LINQ to Entities won't let me initialize just some properties of an Entity?

    - by emzero
    So I've started to add Entity Framework 4 into a legacy web application (ASP.NET WebForms). As a start I have auto-generated some entities from the database. Also I want to apply Repository Pattern. There is an entity called Visitor and its repository VisitorRepository In VisitorRepository I have the following method: public IEnumerable<Visitor> GetActiveVisitors() { var visitors = from v in _context.Visitors where v.IsActive select new Visitor { VisitorID = v.VisitorID, EmailAddress = v.EmailAddress, RegisterDate = v.RegisterDate, Company = v.Company, Position = v.Position, FirstName = v.FirstName, LastName = v.LastName }; return visitors.ToList(); } That List is then bound to a repeater and when trying to do <%# Eval('EmailAddress') #%> it throws the following exception. The entity or complex type 'Model.Visitor' cannot be constructed in a LINQ to Entities query. A) Why is this happening? How I can workaround this? Do I need to select an anonymous type and then use that to initialize my entities??? B) Why every example I've seen makes use of 'select new' (anonymous object) instead of initializing a known type? Anonymous types are useless unless you are retrieving the data and showing it in the same layer. As far as I know anonymous types cannot be returned from methods? So what's the real point of them??? Thank you all

    Read the article

  • Compress/Decompress NSString in objective-c (iphone) using GZIP or deflate

    - by Steven
    Hi, I have a web-service running on Windows Azure which returns JSON that I consume in my iPhone app. Unfortunately, Windows Azure doesn't seem to support the compression of dynamic responses yet (long story) so I decided to get around it by returning an uncompressed JSON package, which contains a compressed (using GZIP) string. e.g {"Error":null,"IsCompressed":true,"Success":true,"Value":"vWsAAB+LCAAAAAAAB..etc.."} ... where value is the compressed string of a complex object represented in JSON. This was really easy to implement on the server, but for the life of me I can't figure out how to decompress a gzipped NSString into an uncompressed NSString, all the examples I can find for zlib etc are dealing with files etc. Can anyone give me any clues on how to do this? (I'd also be happy for a solution that used deflate as I could change the server-side implementation to use deflate too). Thanks!! Steven Edit 1: Aaah, I see that ASIHTTPRequest is using the following function in it's source code: //uncompress gzipped data with zlib + (NSData *)uncompressZippedData:(NSData*)compressedData; ... and I'm aware that I can convert NSString to NSData, so I'll see if this leads me anywhere!

    Read the article

  • Stateful vs. Stateless Webservices

    - by chrsk
    Imagine a more complex CRUD application which has a three-tier-architecture and communicates over webservices. The client starts a conversation to the server and doing some wizard like stuff. To process the wizard the client needs feedback given by the server. We started a discussion about stateful or stateless webservices for this approach. I made some research combined with my own experience, which points me to the question mentioned later. Stateless webservices having the following properties (in our case): + high scalability + high availability + high speed + rapid testing - bloated contract - implementing more logic on server-side But we can cross out the first two points, our application doesn't needs high scalability and availability. So we come to the stateful webservice. I've read a bunch of blogs and forum posts and the most invented point implementing a stateful webservice was: + simplifies contract (protocol) - bad testing - runs counter to the basic architecture of http But doesn't almost all web applications have these bad points? Web applications uses cookies, query strings, session ids, and all the stuff to avoid the statelessness of http. So why is it that bad for webservices?

    Read the article

  • winforms databinding best practices

    - by Kaiser Soze
    Demands / problems: I would like to bind multiple properties of an entity to controls in a form. Some of which are read only from time to time (according to business logic). When using an entity that implements INotifyPropertyChanged as the DataSource, every change notification refreshes all the controls bound to that data source (easy to verify - just bind two properties to two controls and invoke a change notification on one of them, you will see that both properties are hit and reevaluated). There should be user friendly error notifications (the entity implements IDataErrorInfo). (probably using ErrorProvider) Using the entity as the DataSource of the controls leads to performance issues and makes life harder when its time for a control to be read only. I thought of creating some kind of wrapper that holds the entity and a specific property so that each control would be bound to a different DataSource. Moreover, that wrapper could hold the ReadOnly indicator for that property so the control would be bound directly to that value. The wrapper could look like this: interface IPropertyWrapper : INotifyPropertyChanged, IDataErrorInfo { object Value { get; set; } bool IsReadOnly { get; } } But this means also a different ErrorProvider for each property (property wrapper) I feel like I'm trying to reinvent the wheel... What is the 'proper' way of handling complex binding demands like these? Thanks ahead.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >