Search Results

Search found 3283 results on 132 pages for 'aspect oriented'.

Page 14/132 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Which free and open source frameworks would you recommend for replacing which aspect of ATG

    - by Vihung
    ATG (http://www.atg.com) is a frameowrk, a platform and a solution for content presentation and management, personalisation, e-commerce and customer relationship management. Which free and open source frameworks or products would you recommend to replace the basic functionality it provides? In the spirit of Stack Overflow, can you answer with one item in each answer and use the voting rather than duplicating someone else's answer. I have started with some answers

    Read the article

  • Display stretches 4:3 ratios; Adds scrolling to other ratios

    - by Matt
    I have a dual monitor setup. Normally, they both display at 1680x1050. They have been setup this way for about a year. I'm using Windows XP Professional 2003 x64 SP2. Today, out of nowhere, one of the monitors kicked back to a lower resolution. I was not playing with any configuration at the time.. in fact all I had done was close a window (maybe a browser). But the thing is that the resolution is still preserved partially by the fact that the screen will scroll when you move the mouse. So it's like looking through a 1024x768 window into a 1680x1050 world. The monitor itself does not appear to be damaged, because I also have it connected to my netbook (via KVM) and higher resolutions work fine. I tried uninstalling/reinstalling the drivers to no avail. System restore doesn't help either. I'm unsure of the exact ATI card I'm using.. Device Manager lists it as "Radeon X300/X550/X1050". There is no Catalyst Control Center software installed. I tried to install it, but there doesn't seem to be a way to install it by itself ... it forces you to install another driver, which breaks both of my displays, forcing me to go into safe mode and run system restore again. Any ideas? Thanks EDIT: After playing around more, I discovered that the "scrolling" behavior is only present for aspect ratios that are not 4:3. For 4:3 ratios, it just stretches out to fit the wide screen. My monitor's native ratio is 16:9 .. what could be causing it to think it needs to scroll?

    Read the article

  • Log files legal aspect?

    - by relwarc
    I like data. That is why I add a standalone PHP script which logs all relevant HTTP variables like: Date of visit IP User-agent Request URI Referer Am I allowed to store all this in non-public text files? Am I allowed to evaluate the data? What am I allowed to do with the log files? Do I have to delete them after some time?

    Read the article

  • Worst aspect of Python for a newbie

    - by schickb
    I'm wondering specifically what experienced programmers thought when they started developing in Python. I'm sure the answer depends on your background, but my own personal answer is the conversion of basically anything in the language to a True/False value in boolean contexts. Resulting in "oddities" like: if x: not meaning the same thing as: if x == True: I understand why, but it bugs me, and I certainly had to think about it a bit when I first ran into it.

    Read the article

  • Status of stack based languages

    - by Andrea
    I have recently become curious about Factor, which, as far as I understand, is the most practical stack based language around. Forth seems not to be used much these days - I think it is because it was meant to be used on its own, instead of inside an operating system, although ports of course exist. It is also pretty low level. Joy is essentially dead, as the author stated that it does not make sense to mantain it in spite of adopting Factor. The fact is that Factor itself does not seem much developed today. The GitHub repo does not seem very active, and a lot of stuff languishes in unmantained. So, are there any other languages of this type that are more actively mantained? Are any in production use?

    Read the article

  • Objective-C As A First OOP Language?

    - by Daniel Scocco
    I am just finishing the second semester of my CS degree. So far I learned C, all the fundamental algorithms and data structures (e.g., searching, sorting, linked lists, heaps, hash tables, trees, graphs, etc). Next year we'll start with OOP, using either Java or C++. Recently I got some ideas for some iPhone apps and got itchy to start working on them. However I heard some bad things about Objectice-C in the past, so I am wondering if learning it as my first OOP language could be a problem. Not to mention that I think it will be hard to find books/online courses that teach basic OOP concepts using Objective-C to illustrate the concepts (as opposed to books using Java or C++, which are plenty), so this could be another problem. In summary: should I start learning Objective-C and OOP concepts right now by my own, or wait one more semester until I learn Java/C++ at university and then jump into Objective-C? Update: For those interested in getting started with OOP via Objective-C I just found some nice tutorials inside Apple's Developer Library - http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/OOP_ObjC/Introduction/Introduction.html

    Read the article

  • What Functional features are worth a little OOP confusion for the benefits they bring?

    - by bonomo
    After learning functional programming in Haskell and F#, the OOP paradigm seems ass-backwards with classes, interfaces, objects. Which aspects of FP can I bring to work that my co-workers can understand? Are any FP styles worth talking to my boss about retraining my team so that we can use them? Possible aspects of FP: Immutability Partial Application and Currying First Class Functions (function pointers / Functional Objects / Strategy Pattern) Lazy Evaluation (and Monads) Pure Functions (no side effects) Expressions (vs. Statements - each line of code produces a value instead of, or in addition to causing side effects) Recursion Pattern Matching Is it a free-for-all where we can do whatever the programming language supports to the limit that language supports it? Or is there a better guideline?

    Read the article

  • How to structure classes in the filesystem?

    - by da_b0uncer
    I have a few (view) classes. Table, Tree, PagingColumn, SelectionColumn, SparkLineColumn, TimeColumn. currently they're flat under app/view like this: app/view/Table app/view/Tree app/view/PagingColumn ... I thought about restructuring it, because the Trees and Tables use the columns, but there are some columns, which only work in a tree, some who work in trees and tables and in the future there are probably some who only work in tables, I don't know. My first idea was like this: app/view/Table app/view/Tree app/view/column/PagingColumn app/view/column/SelectionColumn app/view/column/SparkLineColumn app/view/column/TimeColumn But since the SelectionColumn is explicitly for trees, I have the fear that future developers could get the idea of missuse them. But how to restructure it probably? Like this: app/view/table/panel/Table app/view/tree/panel/Tree app/view/tree/column/PagingColumn app/view/tree/column/SelectionColumn app/view/column/SparkLineColumn app/view/column/TimeColumn Or like this: app/view/Table app/view/Tree app/view/column/SparkLineColumn app/view/column/TimeColumn app/view/column/tree/PagingColumn app/view/column/tree/SelectionColumn

    Read the article

  • Secure an Application/Software by expiration with Date?

    - by JNL
    I have been working on some software application and I update them every 6 months. Currently, the way I track the date is by extracting the date from the system when the user installes the application, encrypt it and store it in a file locally. Whenever the application is started, it checks if 6 months have passed, then it works or it doesn't, in which case it shows an error message telling the user to update. I wonder whether there is a better way to do this. Any comments or suggestions would be highly appreciated

    Read the article

  • Refactoring in domain driven design

    - by Andrew Whitaker
    I've just started working on a project and we're using domain-driven design (as defined by Eric Evans in Domain-Driven Design: Tackling Complexity in the Heart of Software. I believe that our project is certainly a candidate for this design pattern as Evans describes it in his book. I'm struggling with the idea of constantly refactoring. I know refactoring is a necessity in any project and will happen inevitably as the software changes. However, in my experience, refactoring occurs when the needs of the development team change, not as understanding of the domain changes ("refactoring to greater insight" as Evans calls it). I'm most concerned with breakthroughs in understanding of the domain model. I understand making small changes, but what if a large change in the model is necessary? What's an effective way of convincing yourself (and others) you should refactor after you obtain a clearer domain model? After all, refactoring to improve code organization or performance could be completely separate from how expressive in terms of the ubiquitous language code is. Sometimes it just seems like there's not enough time to refactor. Luckily, SCRUM lends it self to refactoring. The iterative nature of SCRUM makes it easy to build a small piece and change and it. But over time that piece will get larger and what if you have a breakthrough after that piece is so large that it will be too difficult to change? Has anyone worked on a project employing domain-driven design? If so, it would be great to get some insight on this one. I'd especially like to hear some success stories, since DDD seems very difficult to get right. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Do I suffer from encapsulation overuse?

    - by Florenc
    I have noticed something in my code in various projects that seems like code smell to me and something bad to do, but I can't deal with it. While trying to write "clean code" I tend to over-use private methods in order to make my code easier to read. The problem is that the code is indeed cleaner but it's also more difficult to test (yeah I know I can test private methods...) and in general it seems a bad habit to me. Here's an example of a class that reads some data from a .csv file and returns a group of customers (another object with various fields and attributes). public class GroupOfCustomersImporter { //... Call fields .... public GroupOfCustomersImporter(String filePath) { this.filePath = filePath; customers = new HashSet<Customer>(); createCSVReader(); read(); constructTTRP_Instance(); } private void createCSVReader() { //.... } private void read() { //.... Reades the file and initializes the class attributes } private void readFirstLine(String[] inputLine) { //.... Method used by the read() method } private void readSecondLine(String[] inputLine) { //.... Method used by the read() method } private void readCustomerLine(String[] inputLine) { //.... Method used by the read() method } private void constructGroupOfCustomers() { //this.groupOfCustomers = new GroupOfCustomers(**attributes of the class**); } public GroupOfCustomers getConstructedGroupOfCustomers() { return this.GroupOfCustomers; } } As you can see the class has only a constructor which calls some private methods to get the job done, I know that's not a good practice not a good practice in general but I prefer to encapsulate all the functionality in the class instead of making the methods public in which case a client should work this way: GroupOfCustomersImporter importer = new GroupOfCustomersImporter(filepath) importer.createCSVReader(); read(); GroupOfCustomer group = constructGoupOfCustomerInstance(); I prefer this because I don't want to put useless lines of code in the client's side code bothering the client class with implementation details. So, Is this actually a bad habit? If yes, how can I avoid it? Please note that the above is just a simple example. Imagine the same situation happening in something a little bit more complex.

    Read the article

  • Explanation needed, for “Ask, don't tell” approach?

    - by the_naive
    I'm taking a course on design patterns in software engineering and here I'm trying to understand the good and the bad way of design relating to "coupling" and "cohesion". I could not understand the concept described in the following image. The example of code shown in the image is ambiguous to me, so I can't quite clearly get what exactly "Ask, don't tell!" approach mean. Could you please explain?

    Read the article

  • Triggering custom events in AJAX callbacks

    - by Sabrina Gelbart
    I'm pretty new to JavaScript, but one of the things that's been frustrating is that our AJAX callbacks have been getting packed with different functionality, making it difficult to keep everything separated and organized. I'm really new to programming, I have a feeling learning MVC a bit more would help me, but for now using custom events seems like it could help me keep my code a lot cleaner and prevent some problems. Here's what I'm talking about: function myAjaxFunction(){ $.post('ajax/test.html', function(data) { $(document).trigger('testDataLoaded',data); }); } function myOtherFunctionThatsDependentUponAjax(){ $(document).one('testDataLoaded', function(data){ alert (data); } } I also don't know if it's ok that I'm triggering document or not... Are there any patterns that look like this that I can read more about? What are the potential problems with this?

    Read the article

  • Object model design: collections on classes

    - by Luke Puplett
    Hi all, Consider Train.Passengers, what type would you use for Passengers where passengers are not supposed to be added or removed by the consuming code? I'm using .NET Framework, so this discussion would suit .NET, but it could apply to a number of modern languages/frameworks. In the .NET Framework, the List is not supposed to be publicly exposed. There's Collection and ICollection and guidance, which I tend to agree with, is to return the closest concrete type down the inheritance tree, so that'd be Collection since it is already an ICollection. But Collection has read/write semantics and so possibly it should be a ReadOnlyCollection, but its arguably common sense not to alter the contents of a collection that you don't have intimate knowledge about so is it necessary? And it requires extra work internally and can be a pain with (de)serialization. At the extreme ends I could just return Person[] (since LINQ now provides much of the benefits that previously would have been afforded by a more specified collection) or even build a strongly-typed PersonCollection or ReadOnlyPersonCollection! What do you do? Thanks for your time. Luke

    Read the article

  • design pattern advice: graph -> computation

    - by csetzkorn
    I have a domain model, persisted in a database, which represents a graph. A graph consists of nodes (e.g. NodeTypeA, NodeTypeB) which are connected via branches. The two generic elements (nodes and branches will have properties). A graph will be sent to a computation engine. To perform computations the engine has to be initialised like so (simplified pseudo code): Engine Engine = new Engine() ; Object ID1 = Engine.AddNodeTypeA(TypeA.Property1, TypeA.Property2, …, TypeA.Propertyn); Object ID2 = Engine.AddNodeTypeB(TypeB.Property1, TypeB.Property2, …, TypeB.Propertyn); Engine.AddBranch(ID1,ID2); Finally the computation is performed like this: Engine.DoSomeComputation(); I am just wondering, if there are any relevant design patterns out there, which help to achieve the above using good design principles. I hope this makes sense. Any feedback would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • When should method overloads be refactored?

    - by Ben Heley
    When should code that looks like: DoThing(string foo, string bar); DoThing(string foo, string bar, int baz, bool qux); ... DoThing(string foo, string bar, int baz, bool qux, string more, string andMore); Be refactored into something that can be called like so: var doThing = new DoThing(foo, bar); doThing.more = value; doThing.andMore = otherValue; doThing.Go(); Or should it be refactored into something else entirely? In the particular case that inspired this question, it's a public interface for an XSLT templating DLL where we've had to add various flags (of various types) that can't be embedded into the string XML input.

    Read the article

  • design of 'game engine' for small javascript games?

    - by Matt Ball
    I'm making a group of two or three simple javascript games for fun. After someone finishes one game, they'll be presented with a harder or easier version of another game depending on whether the original game was won or lost. I have a high-level question about the design of things: So far I've created a class for one game type that manages the interaction with the UI and the state of the game itself. But for tracking how many of the subgames have been won, or for understanding whether the next game presented should be more or less difficult, are there arguments to be made for making a 'game engine' class? How does the engine communicate to the games? For instance, when a game is won, how is that information relayed to the engine? Is there a better or more common design? (If you want to see what I have so far, the games are slowly taking shape here: https://github.com/yosemitebandit/candela and can be viewed at http://yosemitebandit.com/candela)

    Read the article

  • How to avoid general names for abstract classes?

    - by djechlin
    In general it's good to avoid words like "handle" or "process" as part of routine names and class names, unless you are dealing with (e.g.) file handles or (e.g.) unix processes. However abstract classes often don't really know what they're going to do with something besides, say, process it. In my current situation I have an "EmailProcessor" that logs into a user's inbox and processes messages from it. It's not really clear to me how to give this a more precise name, although I've noticed the following style matter arises: better to treat derived classes as clients and named the base class by the part of the functionality it implements? Gives it more meaning but will violate is-a. E.g. EmailAcquirer would be a reasonable name since it's acquiring for the derived class, but the derived class won't be acquiring for anyone. Or just really vague name since who knows what the derived classes will do. However "Processor" is still too general since it's doing many relevant operations, like logging in and using IMAP. Any way out of this dilemma? Problem is more evident for abstract methods, in which you can't really answer the question "what does this do?" because the answer is simply "whatever the client wants."

    Read the article

  • Differentiate procedural language(c) from oop languages(c++)

    - by niko
    I have been trying to differentiate c and c++(or oop languages) but I don't understand where the difference is. Note I have never used c++ but I asked my friends and some of them to differentiate c and c++ They say c++ has oop concepts and also the public, private modes for definition of variables and which c does not have though. Seriously I have done vb.net programming for a while 2 to 3 months, I never faced a situation to use class concepts and modes of definition like public and private. So I thought what could be the use for these? My friend explained me a program saying that if a variable is public, it can be accessed anywhere I said why not declare it as a global variable like in c? He did not get back to my question and he said if a variable is private it cannot be accessed by some other functions I said why not define it as a local variable, even these he was unable to answer. No matter where I read private variables cannot be accessed whereas public variables can be then why not make public as global and private as local whats the difference? whats the real use of public and private ? please don't say it can be used by everyone, I suppose why not we use some conditions and make the calls? I have heard people saying security reasons, a friend said if a function need to be accessed it should be inherited first. He explained saying that only admin should be able to have some rights and not all so that functions are made private and inherited only by the admin to use Then I said why not we use if condition if ( login == "admin") invoke the function he still did not answer these question. Please clear me with these things, I have done vb.net and vba and little c++ without using oop concepts because I never found their real use while I was writing the code, I'm a little afraid am I too back in oop concepts?

    Read the article

  • Central Exception Handler

    - by J-unior
    Recently I've been thinking about a general ExceptionHandler, that I could initialize once in my app context and inject it everywhere. The idea that it will have quite simple interface with just public void handle(Exception ex), and then according to exception type it should decide what to do, maybe just log it, or show an alert message to the user, or maybe kill the whole app. The question is, what is the prettiest way to write such handler without lots of instanceofs? Unfortunately googling gives me only the default exception handler for RuntimeException that was introduced in Java 5. My first idea is to create an enum, that will have Class field for exception type and it will return the appropriate execution point, for example a concrete exception handler that also implements the interface public void handle(Exception ex), but with the required casting already.

    Read the article

  • Code Reuse and Abstraction in FP vs OOP

    - by Electric Coffee
    I've been told that code reuse and abstraction in OOP is far more difficult to do than it is in FP, and that all the claims that have been made about Object Orientedness (for lack of a better term) being great at reusing code have been flat out lies So I was wondering if anyone here could tell me why that is, and perhaps show me some code to back up these claims, I'm not saying I don't believe you Functional programmers, it's just that I've been "indoctrinated" to think Object Orientedly, and thus can't (yet) think Functionally enough to see it myself To quote Jimmy Hoffa (from an answer to one of my previous questions): The cake is a lie, code reuse in OO is far more difficult than in FP. For all that OO has claimed code reuse over the years, I have seen it follow through a minimum of times. (feel free to just say I must be doing it wrong, I'm comfortable with how well I write OO code having had to design and maintain OO systems for years, I know the quality of my own results) That quote is the basis of my question, I want to see if there's anything to the claim or not

    Read the article

  • How can I get my progress reviewed as a solo junior developer

    - by Oliver Hyde
    I am currently working for a 2 person company, as the solo primary developer. My boss gets the clients, mocks up some png design templates and hands them over to me. This system has been working fine and i'm really enjoying it. The types of projects I work on are for small - medium sized businesses and they usually want a CMS system. Developed from scratch i'll build a customised backend for the client to add/edit/remove categories, tags, products etc and then output them to the front end according to the design template handed to me. As time has gone on, the projects have increased in complexity, with shopping cart / ordering features and other common e-commerce type features. Again, this system has been working fine and i'm really enjoying it. My issue is my personal development as a programmer. I spend a lot of my spare time reading programming blogs, checking through stackexchange, reading suggested programming books (currently on 'The Pragmatic Programmer', really good so far), doing brain exercises (lumosity.com and khanacademy math problems), doing lots of physical exercise and other personal development type activities. I can't help but feel though, that I'm missing out on feedback, critique. My boss is great and never holds back on praise in regards to my work, but he unfortunately is either to busy to check my code, or to be honest, I don't think it's one of his specialties and so can't provide feedback. I want to know what i'm doing wrong and what i'm doing right. Should I be putting that much logic in the controller, am I modulating my code enough etc. So what I have done is developed a little 'Family Budgeting' app and tried to do it as cleanly and effectively as I currently know how. What i'm wanting to know is, is there somewhere I can submit this app, and have some seasoned developers provide feedback. It's not just a subsection of my code like 'codereview.stackexchange' appears to require, it's my entire workflow that I want critiqued. I know this is a lot to ask, and I expect the main advice given will be to look for a job within a team, which is certainly something I will look into later down the track, but for now I want to persist with my current employment situation, but just don't want to develop too many bad habits. Let me know if I can provide any further information to help clarify, or if this isn't the right place for this type of question I apologise in advance. Didn't want to use reddit as I felt this community fosters more well thought out responses.

    Read the article

  • Is there any functional difference between immutable value types and immutable reference types?

    - by Kendall Frey
    Value types are types which do not have an identity. When one variable is modified, other instances are not. Using Javascript syntax as an example, here is how a value type works. var foo = { a: 42 }; var bar = foo; bar.a = 0; // foo.a is still 42 Reference types are types which do have an identity. When one variable is modified, other instances are as well. Here is how a reference type works. var foo = { a: 42 }; var bar = foo; bar.a = 0; // foo.a is now 0 Note how the example uses mutatable objects to show the difference. If the objects were immutable, you couldn't do that, so that kind of testing for value/reference types doesn't work. Is there any functional difference between immutable value types and immutable reference types? Is there any algorithm that can tell the difference between a reference type and a value type if they are immutable? Reflection is cheating. I'm wondering this mostly out of curiosity.

    Read the article

  • Design patterns and multiple programming language

    - by Eduard Florinescu
    I am referring here to the design patterns found in the GOF book. First how I see it, there are a few peculiarities to design pattern and knowing multiple language knowledge, for example in Java you really need a singleton but in Python you can do without it you write a module, I saw somewhere a wiki trying to write all GOF patterns for JavaScript and the entries where empty, I guess because it might be a daunting task. If there is someone who is using design patterns and is programming in multiple programming languages supporting the OOP paradigm and can give me a hint on how should I approach design patterns that might help me in all languages I use(Java, JavaScript, Python, Ruby): Can I write good application without knowing exactly the GOF design patterns or I might need some of them which might be crucial and if yes which one, are they alternatives to GOF for specific languages, and should a programmer or a team make its own design patterns set?

    Read the article

  • How might one teach OO without referencing physical real-world objects?

    - by hal10001
    I remember reading somewhere that the original concepts behind OO were to find a better architecture for handling the messaging of data between multiple systems in a way that protected the state of that data. Now that is probably a poor paraphrase, but it made me wonder if there is a way of teaching OO without the (Bike, Car, Person, etc.) object analogies, and that instead focuses on the messaging aspects. If you have articles, links, books, etc., that would be helpful.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >