Search Results

Search found 28476 results on 1140 pages for 'information architecture'.

Page 14/1140 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • Best architecture for accessing secondary database

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    I'm currently developing an app which will use a Linq to SQL (or possibly EF) data access layer. We already have a database which holds all our Contacts information, but there is currently no API around this. I need to interact with this DB from the new app to retrieve contact details. I can think of two ways I could do this - 1) Develop a suite of web services against the contacts database 2) Write a Linq to SQL (or EF) DAL and API against the contacts database I will probably be developing several further apps in the future which will also need access to the Contacts data. Which would generally be the prefered method? What are the points I need to consider? Am I even asking a sensible question, or am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • Application Architecture using WCF and System.AddIn

    - by Silverhalide
    A little background -- we're designing an application that uses a client/server architecture consisting of: A server which loads server-side modules, potentially developed by other teams. A client which loads corresponding client-side modules (also potentially developed by those other teams; each client module corresponds with a server module). The client side communicates with the server side for general coordination, and as well as module specific tasks. (At this point, I think that means client talks to server, client modules talk to server modules.) Environment is .NET 3.5, and client side is WPF. The deployment scenario introduces the potential to upgrade the server, any server-side module, the client, and any client-side module independently. However, being able to "work" using mismatched versions is required. I'm therefore concerned about versioning issues. My thinking so far: A Windows Service for the server. Using System.AddIn for the server to load and communicate with the server modules will give us the greatest flexibility in terms of version compatability between server and server modules. The server and each server module vend WCF services for communication to the client side; communication between the server and a server module, or between two server modules use the AddIn contracts. (One advantage of this is that a module can expose a different interface within the server and outside it.) Similarly, the client uses System.AddIn to find, load, and communicate with the client modules. Client communications with client modules is via the AddIn interface; communications from the client and from client modules to the server side are via WCF. For maximum resilience, each module will run in a separate app-domain. In general, the system has modest performance requirements, so marshalling and crossing process boundaries is not expected to be a performance concern. (Performance requirement is basically summed up by: don't get in the way of the other parts of the system not described here.) My questions are around the idea of having two different communication and versioning models to work with which will be an added burden on our developers. System.AddIn seems quite powerful, but also a little unwieldly. (I'm also unsure of Microsoft's commitment to it in the future.) On the other hand, I'm not thrilled with WCF's versioning capabilities. I have a feeling that it would be possible to implement the System.AddIn view/adapter/contract system within WCF, but being fairly new to both technologies, I would have no idea of where to start. So... Am I on the right track here? Am I doing this the hard way? Are there gotchas I need to be aware of on this road? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Architecture Suggestions/Recommendations for a Web Application with Sub-Apps

    - by user579218
    Hello. I’m starting to plan an architecture for a big web application, and I wanted to get suggestions and/or recommendations on where to begin and which technologies and/or frameworks to use. The application will be an Intranet-based web site using Windows authentication, running on IIS and using SQL Server and ASP.NET. It’ll need to be structured as a main/shell application with sub-applications that are “pluggable” based on some configuration settings. The main or shell application is to provide the overall user interface structure – header/footer, dynamically built tabs for each available sub-app, and a content area in which the sub-application will be loaded when the user clicks on the sub-application’s tab. So, on start-up of the main/shell application, configuration information will be queried from a database, and, based on the user and which of the sub-apps are available, the main or shell app would dynamically build tabs (or buttons or something) as a way to access each individual application. On start-up, the content area will be populated with the “home” sub-app. But, clicking on an sub-app tab will cause the content area to be populated with the sub-app corresponding to the tab. For example, we’re going to have a reports application, a display application, and probably a couple other distinct applications. On startup of the main/shell application, after determining who the user is, the main app will query the database to determine which sub-apps the user can use and build out the UI. Then the user can navigate between available sub-apps and do their work in each. Finally, the entire app and all sub-apps need to be a layered design with presentation, service, business, and data access layers, as well as cross-cutting objects for things such as logging, exception handling, etc. Anyway, my questions revolve around where to begin to plan something like this application. What technologies/frameworks would work best in developing a solution for this application? MVC? MVP? WCSF? EF? NHibernate? Enterprise Library? Repository Pattern? Others???? I know all these technologies/frameworks are not used for the same purpose, but knowing which ones to focus on is a little overwhelming. Which ones would be the best choice(s) for a solution? Which ones work well together for an end-to-end design? How would one structure the VS project for something like this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Announcing the ADF Architecture Square at OOW12

    - by Chris Muir
    The ADF product management team are happy to announce at Oracle Open World the publication of the ADF Architecture Square: Over the last number of years Oracle has recognized that many customers have matured their ADF skills and are now looking for information on advanced concepts beyond the how-do-I-get-this-poplist-to-work type questions.  In order to satisfy this demand we've devised the ADF Architecture Square where papers, presentations and demos will consider such broad software engineering concepts as ADF architecture, development and testing, building and deployment, and infrastructure.   If you have a look at the site right now it's a rather modest affair, but we hope to continue to expand the content to give further guidance and information to help shortcut your ADF project needs.  Either watch the website or follow our dedicated @adfarchsquare twitter feed.

    Read the article

  • Architecture Guidance Needed?

    - by vijay
    We are about to automate number of process for our reporting team. (The reports are like daily reports, weekly reports, monthly reports, etc..) Mostly the process is like pulling some data from the oracle and then fill them in particular excel template files. Each reports and so their templates are different from each other. Except the excel file manipulation, there are hardly any business logic behind these. Client wanted an integrated tool and all the automated processes are placed as menus/submenus. Right now roughly there are around 30 process waiting to be automated. And we are expecting more new reports in the next quarter. I am nowhere to near having any practical experience when comes to architecuring. Already i have been maintaining two or three systems(they are more than 4yrs old.) for this prestegious client.The possiblity of the above mentioned tool will be manintained for another 3 yrs is very likely. From my past experience i've been through the pain of implmenting change requests to the rigd & undocumented code base resulting in the break down of the system and then eventually myself. So My main and top most concern is the maintainablity. When i was searching for these i came across this link, Smart Clients Using CAB and SCSF is the above link appropriate for my requirement? Also Should i place each automated processes in separate forms under a single project, or place them in separate projects under a single solution.. Please correct me if have missed any other important information. Thx.

    Read the article

  • Domain Validation in a CQRS architecture

    - by Jupaol
    Basically I want to know if there is a better way to validate my domain entities. This is how I am planning to do it but I would like your opinion The first approach I considered was: class Customer : EntityBase<Customer> { public void ChangeEmail(string email) { if(string.IsNullOrWhitespace(email)) throw new DomainException(“...”); if(!email.IsEmail()) throw new DomainException(); if(email.Contains(“@mailinator.com”)) throw new DomainException(); } } I actually do not like this validation because even when I am encapsulating the validation logic in the correct entity, this is violating the Open/Close principle (Open for extension but Close for modification) and I have found that violating this principle, code maintenance becomes a real pain when the application grows up in complexity. Why? Because domain rules change more often than we would like to admit, and if the rules are hidden and embedded in an entity like this, they are hard to test, hard to read, hard to maintain but the real reason why I do not like this approach is: if the validation rules change, I have to come and edit my domain entity. This has been a really simple example but in RL the validation could be more complex So following the philosophy of Udi Dahan, making roles explicit, and the recommendation from Eric Evans in the blue book, the next try was to implement the specification pattern, something like this class EmailDomainIsAllowedSpecification : IDomainSpecification<Customer> { private INotAllowedEmailDomainsResolver invalidEmailDomainsResolver; public bool IsSatisfiedBy(Customer customer) { return !this.invalidEmailDomainsResolver.GetInvalidEmailDomains().Contains(customer.Email); } } But then I realize that in order to follow this approach I had to mutate my entities first in order to pass the value being valdiated, in this case the email, but mutating them would cause my domain events being fired which I wouldn’t like to happen until the new email is valid So after considering these approaches, I came out with this one, since I am going to implement a CQRS architecture: class EmailDomainIsAllowedValidator : IDomainInvariantValidator<Customer, ChangeEmailCommand> { public void IsValid(Customer entity, ChangeEmailCommand command) { if(!command.Email.HasValidDomain()) throw new DomainException(“...”); } } Well that’s the main idea, the entity is passed to the validator in case we need some value from the entity to perform the validation, the command contains the data coming from the user and since the validators are considered injectable objects they could have external dependencies injected if the validation requires it. Now the dilemma, I am happy with a design like this because my validation is encapsulated in individual objects which brings many advantages: easy unit test, easy to maintain, domain invariants are explicitly expressed using the Ubiquitous Language, easy to extend, validation logic is centralized and validators can be used together to enforce complex domain rules. And even when I know I am placing the validation of my entities outside of them (You could argue a code smell - Anemic Domain) but I think the trade-off is acceptable But there is one thing that I have not figured out how to implement it in a clean way. How should I use this components... Since they will be injected, they won’t fit naturally inside my domain entities, so basically I see two options: Pass the validators to each method of my entity Validate my objects externally (from the command handler) I am not happy with the option 1 so I would explain how I would do it with the option 2 class ChangeEmailCommandHandler : ICommandHandler<ChangeEmailCommand> { public void Execute(ChangeEmailCommand command) { private IEnumerable<IDomainInvariantValidator> validators; // here I would get the validators required for this command injected, and in here I would validate them, something like this using (var t = this.unitOfWork.BeginTransaction()) { var customer = this.unitOfWork.Get<Customer>(command.CustomerId); this.validators.ForEach(x =. x.IsValid(customer, command)); // here I know the command is valid // the call to ChangeEmail will fire domain events as needed customer.ChangeEmail(command.Email); t.Commit(); } } } Well this is it. Can you give me your thoughts about this or share your experiences with Domain entities validation EDIT I think it is not clear from my question, but the real problem is: Hiding the domain rules has serious implications in the future maintainability of the application, and also domain rules change often during the life-cycle of the app. Hence implementing them with this in mind would let us extend them easily. Now imagine in the future a rules engine is implemented, if the rules are encapsulated outside of the domain entities, this change would be easier to implement

    Read the article

  • What does "enterprise" means in relation to software architecture?

    - by SkonJeet
    I see the term "enterprise" being thrown around software developers and programmers a lot and used loosely it seems. en·ter·prise/'ent?r?priz/ Noun: A project or undertaking, typically one that is difficult or requires effort. Initiative and resourcefulness. Can someone please clarify what this term actually encompasses? "At an enterprise level", "enterprise scale"? There are even "enterprise editions" of things. What exactly does it mean? It obviously doesn't make sense judging by the above definition so more specifically to software what does one mean when using the word enterprise? EDIT: To add a spin on this - how does this term then fit into phrases such as Enterprise Framework Model? What does data access and data context have to do with company-wide descriptions?

    Read the article

  • Renault under threat from industrial espionage, intellectual property the target

    - by Simon Thorpe
    Last year we saw news of both General Motors and Ford losing a significant amount of valuable information to competitors overseas. Within weeks of the turn of 2011 we see the European car manufacturer, Renault, also suffering. In a recent news report, French Industry Minister Eric Besson warned the country was facing "economic war" and referenced a serious case of espionage which concerns information pertaining to the development of electric cars. Renault senior vice president Christian Husson told the AFP news agency that the people concerned were in a "particularly strategic position" in the company. An investigation had uncovered a "body of evidence which shows that the actions of these three colleagues were contrary to the ethics of Renault and knowingly and deliberately placed at risk the company's assets", Mr Husson said. A source told Reuters on Wednesday the company is worried its flagship electric vehicle program, in which Renault with its partner Nissan is investing 4 billion euros ($5.3 billion), might be threatened. This casts a shadow over the estimated losses of Ford ($50 million) and General Motors ($40 million). One executive in the corporate intelligence-gathering industry, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said: "It's really difficult to say it's a case of corporate espionage ... It can be carelessness." He cited a hypothetical example of an enthusiastic employee giving away too much information about his job on an online forum. While information has always been passed and leaked, inadvertently or on purpose, the rise of the Internet and social media means corporate spies or careless employees are now more likely to be found out, he added. We are seeing more and more examples of where companies like these need to invest in technologies such as Oracle IRM to ensure such important information can be kept under control. It isn't just the recent release of information into the public domain via the Wikileaks website that is of concern, but also the increasing threats of industrial espionage in cases such as these. Information rights management doesn't totally remove the threat, but abilities to control documents no matter where they exist certainly increases the capabilities significantly. Every single time someone opens a sealed document the IRM system audits the activity. This makes identifying a potential source for a leak much easier when you have an absolute record of every person who's had access to the documents. Oracle IRM can also help with accidental or careless loss. Often people use very sensitive information all the time and forget the importance of handling it correctly. With the ability to protect the information from screen shots and prevent people copy and pasting document information into social networks and other, unsecured documents, Oracle IRM brings a totally new level of information security that would have a significant impact on reducing the risk these organizations face of losing their most valuable information.

    Read the article

  • What should be the architecture of an urban game system?

    - by pmichna
    I'm going to develop an urban game using a telco API for phone geolocation and sending/receiving messages. A player would pick up one of the scenarios, move around the city and when he hits a given location, he gets a message and possibly has to answer it. I'm wondering, what approach would be the best in my case. I came up with this general idea: Web application as a user interface (user registration, players ranking, scenarios editing) written in Ruby on Rails. Game server (hosting games, game logic like checking players location, sending and receiving messages) written in Ruby. Database (users, scores, scenarios etc.), probably MySQL or someother open source DB. I want to learn Ruby and RoR, that's why I chose these language and framework. Do you think it's a good choice for a game server? Another question: is this project division good? I mean, I have little experience with Ruby and Rails - that's why I'm asking. Maybe it's better to have web application merged with game server and somehow have the server hosting RoR application do the tasks like mobile phone pinging and message sending? How would that be performed? Maybe this is worth mentioning: the API is RESTful, most results are JSON, few are XML.

    Read the article

  • Where do service implementations fit into the Microsoft Application Architecture guidelines?

    - by tuespetre
    The guidelines discuss the service layer with its service interfaces and data/message/fault contracts. They also discuss the business layer with its logic/workflow components and entities as well as the 'optional' application facade. What is unclear still to me after studying this guide is where the implementations of the service interfaces belong. Does the application facade in the business layer implement these interfaces, or does a separate 'service facade' exist to make calls to the business layer and it's facade/raw components? (With the former, there would be less seemingly trivial calls to yet another layer, though with the latter I could see how the service layer could remove the concerns of translating business entities to data contracts from the business layer.)

    Read the article

  • How can I solve the same problems a CB-architecture is trying to solve without using hacks? [on hold]

    - by Jefffrey
    A component based system's goal is to solve the problems that derives from inheritance: for example the fact that some parts of the code (that are called components) are reused by very different classes that, hypothetically, would lie in a very different branch of the inheritance tree. That's a very nice concept, but I've found out that CBS is often hard to accomplish without using ugly hacks. Implementations of this system are often far from clean. But I don't want to discuss this any further. My question is: how can I solve the same problems a CBS try to solve with a very clean interface? (possibly with examples, there are a lot of abstract talks about the "perfect" design already). Here's an example I was going for before realizing I was just reinventing inheritance again: class Human { public: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other human specific components }; class Zombie { Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other zombie specific components }; After writing that I realized I needed an interface, otherwise I would have needed N containers for N different types of objects (or to use boost::variant to gather them all together). So I've thought of polymorphism (move what systems do in a CBS design into class specific functions): class Entity { public: virtual void on_event(Event) {} // not pure virtual on purpose virtual void on_update(World) {} virtual void on_draw(Window) {} }; class Human { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; class Zombie { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; Which was nice, except for the fact that now the outside world would not even be able to know where a Human is positioned (it does not have access to its position member). That would be useful to track the player position for collision detection or if on_update the Zombie would want to track down its nearest human to move towards him. So I added const Position& get_position() const; to both the Zombie and Human classes. And then I realized that both functionality were shared, so it should have gone to the common base class: Entity. Do you notice anything? Yes, with that methodology I would have a god Entity class full of common functionality (which is the thing I was trying to avoid in the first place).

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu Slow - What architecture does the Windows Installer install?

    - by Benjamin Yep
    I feel absolutely limited by using Windows, and I need to switch to a Unix environment. I once installed Red Hat on my lappie (screen + external monitor setup; 4GB ram; x64; runs fast) and it worked fine, but I saw that the computer cluster that is the birthplace of my unix knowledge switched to Ubuntu, so naturally I follow. To the point. When I installed Ubuntu onto my machine via the Windows Installer, it ran quite slow. Opening Firefox takes about 8-9 seconds, it freezes up often, unable to handle its own background processes. I saw in a thread that, perhaps, it is running slow because the Windows Installer is installing an x64 version. Of course, my computer has had no performance issues in the past(except that time with the trojans but you know, know one is perfect ;) ) Anyways, I uninstalled Ubuntu, freeing up the max allocated memory it took up, and continue to be sad, trapped in my MS world with only a buggy Cygwin, any assistance is greatly appreciated! :) Thanks ~Ben

    Read the article

  • Why did the team at LMAX use Java and design the architecture to avoid GC at all cost?

    - by kadaj
    Why did the team at LMAX design the LMAX Disruptor in Java but all their design points to minimizing GC use? If one does not want to have GC run then why use a garbage collected language? Their optimizations, the level of hardware knowledge and the thought they put are just awesome but why Java? I'm not against Java or anything, but why a GC language? Why not use something like D or any other language without GC but allows efficient code? Is it that the team is most familiar with Java or does Java possess some unique advantage that I am not seeing? Say they develop it using D with manual memory management, what would be the difference? They would have to think low level (which they already are), but they can squeeze the best performance out of the system as it's native.

    Read the article

  • Why are MVC & TDD not employed more in game architecture?

    - by secoif
    I will preface this by saying I haven't looked a huge amount of game source, nor built much in the way of games. But coming from trying to employ 'enterprise' coding practices in web apps, looking at game source code seriously hurts my head: "What is this view logic doing in with business logic? this needs refactoring... so does this, refactor, refactorrr" This worries me as I'm about to start a game project, and I'm not sure whether trying to mvc/tdd the dev process is going to hinder us or help us, as I don't see many game examples that use this or much push for better architectural practices it in the community. The following is an extract from a great article on prototyping games, though to me it seemed exactly the attitude many game devs seem to use when writing production game code: Mistake #4: Building a system, not a game ...if you ever find yourself working on something that isn’t directly moving your forward, stop right there. As programmers, we have a tendency to try to generalize our code, and make it elegant and be able to handle every situation. We find that an itch terribly hard not scratch, but we need to learn how. It took me many years to realize that it’s not about the code, it’s about the game you ship in the end. Don’t write an elegant game component system, skip the editor completely and hardwire the state in code, avoid the data-driven, self-parsing, XML craziness, and just code the damned thing. ... Just get stuff on the screen as quickly as you can. And don’t ever, ever, use the argument “if we take some extra time and do this the right way, we can reuse it in the game”. EVER. is it because games are (mostly) visually oriented so it makes sense that the code will be weighted heavily in the view, thus any benefits from moving stuff out to models/controllers, is fairly minimal, so why bother? I've heard the argument that MVC introduces a performance overhead, but this seems to me to be a premature optimisation, and that there'd more important performance issues to tackle before you worry about MVC overheads (eg render pipeline, AI algorithms, datastructure traversal, etc). Same thing regarding TDD. It's not often I see games employing test cases, but perhaps this is due to the design issues above (mixed view/business) and the fact that it's difficult to test visual components, or components that rely on probablistic results (eg operate within physics simulations). Perhaps I'm just looking at the wrong source code, but why do we not see more of these 'enterprise' practices employed in game design? Are games really so different in their requirements, or is a people/culture issue (ie game devs come from a different background and thus have different coding habits)?

    Read the article

  • How are the conceptual pairs Abstract/Concrete, Generic/Specific, and Complex/Simple related to one another in software architecture?

    - by tjb1982
    (= 2 (+ 1 1)) take the above. The requirement of the '=' predicate is that its arguments be comparable. Any two structures are comparable in this case, and so the contract/requirement is pretty generic. The '+' predicate requires that its arguments be numbers. That's more specific. (socket domain type protocol) the arguments here are much more specific (even though the arguments are still just numbers and the function itself returns a file descriptor, which is itself an int), but the arguments are more abstract, and the implementation is built up from other functions whose abstractions are less abstract, which are themselves built from less and less abstract abstractions. To the point where the requirements are something like move from one location to another, observe whether the switch at that location is on or off, turn the switch on or off, or leave it the same, etc. But are functions also less and less complex the less abstract they are? And is there a relationship between the number and range of arguments of a function and the complexity of its implementation, as you go from more abstract to less abstract, and vice versa? (= 2 (+ 1 1) 2r10) the '=' predicate is more generic than the '+' predicate, and thus could be more complex in its implementation. The '+' predicate's contract is less generic, and so could be less complex in its implementation. Is this even a little correct? What about the 'socket' function? Each of those arguments is a number of some kind. What they represent, though, is something more elaborate. It also returns a number (just like the others do), which is also a representation of something conceptually much more elaborate than a number. To boil it down, I'm asking if there is a relationship between the following dimensions, and why: Abstract/Concrete Complex/Simple Generic/Specific And more specifically, do different configurations of these dimensions have a specific, measurable impact on the number and range of the arguments (i.e., the contract) of a function?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: Getting Caller Information

    - by James Michael Hare
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/BlackRabbitCoder/archive/2013/07/25/c.net-little-wonders-getting-caller-information.aspx Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. There are times when it is desirable to know who called the method or property you are currently executing.  Some applications of this could include logging libraries, or possibly even something more advanced that may server up different objects depending on who called the method. In the past, we mostly relied on the System.Diagnostics namespace and its classes such as StackTrace and StackFrame to see who our caller was, but now in C# 5, we can also get much of this data at compile-time. Determining the caller using the stack One of the ways of doing this is to examine the call stack.  The classes that allow you to examine the call stack have been around for a long time and can give you a very deep view of the calling chain all the way back to the beginning for the thread that has called you. You can get caller information by either instantiating the StackTrace class (which will give you the complete stack trace, much like you see when an exception is generated), or by using StackFrame which gets a single frame of the stack trace.  Both involve examining the call stack, which is a non-trivial task, so care should be done not to do this in a performance-intensive situation. For our simple example let's say we are going to recreate the wheel and construct our own logging framework.  Perhaps we wish to create a simple method Log which will log the string-ified form of an object and some information about the caller.  We could easily do this as follows: 1: static void Log(object message) 2: { 3: // frame 1, true for source info 4: StackFrame frame = new StackFrame(1, true); 5: var method = frame.GetMethod(); 6: var fileName = frame.GetFileName(); 7: var lineNumber = frame.GetFileLineNumber(); 8: 9: // we'll just use a simple Console write for now 10: Console.WriteLine("{0}({1}):{2} - {3}", 11: fileName, lineNumber, method.Name, message); 12: } So, what we are doing here is grabbing the 2nd stack frame (the 1st is our current method) using a 2nd argument of true to specify we want source information (if available) and then taking the information from the frame.  This works fine, and if we tested it out by calling from a file such as this: 1: // File c:\projects\test\CallerInfo\CallerInfo.cs 2:  3: public class CallerInfo 4: { 5: Log("Hello Logger!"); 6: } We'd see this: 1: c:\projects\test\CallerInfo\CallerInfo.cs(5):Main - Hello Logger! This works well, and in fact CallStack and StackFrame are still the best ways to examine deeper into the call stack.  But if you only want to get information on the caller of your method, there is another option… Determining the caller at compile-time In C# 5 (.NET 4.5) they added some attributes that can be supplied to optional parameters on a method to receive caller information.  These attributes can only be applied to methods with optional parameters with explicit defaults.  Then, as the compiler determines who is calling your method with these attributes, it will fill in the values at compile-time. These are the currently supported attributes available in the  System.Runtime.CompilerServices namespace": CallerFilePathAttribute – The path and name of the file that is calling your method. CallerLineNumberAttribute – The line number in the file where your method is being called. CallerMemberName – The member that is calling your method. So let’s take a look at how our Log method would look using these attributes instead: 1: static int Log(object message, 2: [CallerMemberName] string memberName = "", 3: [CallerFilePath] string fileName = "", 4: [CallerLineNumber] int lineNumber = 0) 5: { 6: // we'll just use a simple Console write for now 7: Console.WriteLine("{0}({1}):{2} - {3}", 8: fileName, lineNumber, memberName, message); 9: } Again, calling this from our sample Main would give us the same result: 1: c:\projects\test\CallerInfo\CallerInfo.cs(5):Main - Hello Logger! However, though this seems the same, there are a few key differences. First of all, there are only 3 supported attributes (at this time) that give you the file path, line number, and calling member.  Thus, it does not give you as rich of detail as a StackFrame (which can give you the calling type as well and deeper frames, for example).  Also, these are supported through optional parameters, which means we could call our new Log method like this: 1: // They're defaults, why not fill 'em in 2: Log("My message.", "Some member", "Some file", -13); In addition, since these attributes require optional parameters, they cannot be used in properties, only in methods. These caveats aside, they do let you get similar information inside of methods at a much greater speed!  How much greater?  Well lets crank through 1,000,000 iterations of each.  instead of logging to console, I’ll return the formatted string length of each.  Doing this, we get: 1: Time for 1,000,000 iterations with StackTrace: 5096 ms 2: Time for 1,000,000 iterations with Attributes: 196 ms So you see, using the attributes is much, much faster!  Nearly 25x faster in fact.  Summary There are a few ways to get caller information for a method.  The StackFrame allows you to get a comprehensive set of information spanning the whole call stack, but at a heavier cost.  On the other hand, the attributes allow you to quickly get at caller information baked in at compile-time, but to do so you need to create optional parameters in your methods to support it. Technorati Tags: Little Wonders,CSharp,C#,.NET,StackFrame,CallStack,CallerFilePathAttribute,CallerLineNumberAttribute,CallerMemberName

    Read the article

  • Mutual Information / Entropy Calculation Help

    - by Fillip
    Hi, Hoping someone can give me some pointers with this entropy problem. Say X is chosen randomly from the uniform integer distribution 0-32 (inclusive). I calculate the entropy, H(X) = 32 bits, as each Xi has equal probability of occurring. Now, say the following pseudocode executes. int r = rand(0,1); // a random integer 0 or 1 r = r * 33 + X; How would I work out the mutual information between the two variables r and X? Mutual Information is defined as I(X; Y) = H(X) - H(X|Y) but I don't really understand how to apply the conditional entropy H(X|Y) to this problem. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Consolidate information held in a number of SQL Server Express Instances

    - by user321271
    Hi, I'm trying to determine the best architecture for creating an oData web service for information held in a number of SQL Server Express instances. The web service should provide a consolidated view of the data. All the SQL Server Express instances have the same DB schema. I was initially planning to use SQL server replication however as I understand it, SQL Server 2008 Express cannot be used as a publisher. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • ADF updates: mobile virtual developer day & ADF Mobile 1 day Workshop & ADF Architecture TV

    - by JuergenKress
    ADF Mobile Virtual Developer Day Sessions - YouTube ADF Architecture TV – flows WebLogic Partner Community For regular information become a member in the WebLogic Partner Community please visit: http://www.oracle.com/partners/goto/wls-emea ( OPN account required). If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum WikiTechnorati Tags: adf,ADF Architecture,ADF education,virtual developer day,WebLogic,WebLogic Community,Oracle,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • Des chercheurs dévoilent un prototype d'Internet du futur, reposant sur une architecture sans serveur, complètement décentralisée

    Des chercheurs développent un prototype de réseau d'architecture complètement décentralisée qui fera passer les attaques DoS pour des mauvais souvenirsUne équipe de chercheur de l'université de Cambridge a pour intention de remplacer le modèle relationnel client-serveur dont dépendent de nombreux services, applications et protocoles d'internet, par une architecture complètement décentralisée du réseau des réseaux. Le projet ambitieux se nomme Pursuit, et un prototype de l'internet de demain conçu...

    Read the article

  • Stuck with foreign-architecture=i386 when using apt-get

    - by avilella
    I installed some packages a while ago and for some reason, they would only install with a special set of parameters that I used as recommended on a website (can't remember which one). Now, although harmless, I am stuck with these warnings every time I run apt-get: dpkg: warning: ignoring option --foreign-architecture=i386: this architecture cannot be foreign Any idea where is this lying around? How can I clean this up?

    Read the article

  • ExtJS 5.0 : amélioration de l'aspect tactile et architecture MVVM, Sencha consolide son framework JavaScript

    Sortie de ExtJS 5.0 : amélioration de l'aspect tactile et architecture MVVML'équipe Sencha annonce la sortie de ExtJS 5.0 !Parmi les nouveautés et les améliorations, nous pouvons découvrir :le support des plateformes tactiles ;une architecture MVVM et la liaison des données à deux sens ;la possibilité d'ajouter des composants dans les cellules d'une grille pour la visualisation des données ;un système de mise en page responsive ; Code javasctipt : Sélectionner tout...

    Read the article

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