Search Results

Search found 5547 results on 222 pages for 'flyweight pattern'.

Page 141/222 | < Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >

  • JavaScript and callback nesting

    - by Jake King
    A lot of JavaScript libraries (notably jQuery) use chaining, which allows the reduction of this: var foo = $(".foo"); foo.stop(); foo.show(); foo.animate({ top: 0 }); to this: $(".foo").stop().show().animate({ top: 0 }); With proper formatting, I think this is quite a nice syntactic capability. However, I often see a pattern which I don't particularly like, but appears to be a necessary evil in non-blocking models. This is the ever-present nesting of callback functions: $(".foo").animate({ top: 0, }, { callback: function () { $.ajax({ url: 'ajax.php', }, { callback: function () { ... } }); } }); And it never ends. Even though I love the ease non-blocking models provide, I hate the odd nesting of function literals it forces upon the programmer. I'm interesting in writing a small JS library as an exercise, and I'd love to find a better way to do this, but I don't know how it could be done without feeling hacky. Are there any projects out there that have resolved this problem before? And if not, what are the alternatives to this ugly, meaningless code structure?

    Read the article

  • Why do Google search results include pages disallowed in robots.txt?

    - by Ilmari Karonen
    I have some pages on my site that I want to keep search engines away from, so I disallowed them in my robots.txt file like this: User-Agent: * Disallow: /email Yet I recently noticed that Google still sometimes returns links to those pages in their search results. Why does this happen, and how can I stop it? Background: Several years ago, I made a simple web site for a club a relative of mine was involved in. They wanted to have e-mail links on their pages, so, to try and keep those e-mail addresses from ending up on too many spam lists, instead of using direct mailto: links I made those links point to a simple redirector / address harvester trap script running on my own site. This script would return either a 301 redirect to the actual mailto: URL, or, if it detected a suspicious access pattern, a page containing lots of random fake e-mail addresses and links to more such pages. To keep legitimate search bots away from the trap, I set up the robots.txt rule shown above, disallowing the entire space of both legit redirector links and trap pages. Just recently, however, one of the people in the club searched Google for their own name and was quite surprised when one of the results on the first page was a link to the redirector script, with a title consisting of their e-mail address followed by my name. Of course, they immediately e-mailed me and wanted to know how to get their address out of Google's index. I was quite surprised too, since I had no idea that Google would index such URLs at all, seemingly in violation of my robots.txt rule. I did manage to submit a removal request to Google, and it seems to have worked, but I'd like to know why and how Google is circumventing my robots.txt like that and how to make sure that none of the disallowed pages will show up in their search results. Ps. I actually found out a possible explanation and solution, which I'll post below, while preparing this question, but I thought I'd ask it anyway in case someone else might have the same problem. Please do feel free to post your own answers. I'd also be interested in knowing if other search engines do this too, and whether the same solutions work for them also.

    Read the article

  • Where did I write that code ?

    - by Tarun Arora
    Every been in that situation when you desperately need to find that code you checked into TFS a few days back but just can’t remember what team project, what branch, what solution or what file you checked it into. Well you are not alone… Only if there was a way to efficiently search for files and text with in TFS. It is possible… You need to get your hands on Agent Ransack… This is a stand a lone tool that does not integrate with TFS but gives you the capability to search through text files effortlessly. Agent Ransack searches through files, text or otherwise, fast and efficiently. When searching the contents of files for code, or other text, Agent Ransack displays the text found so you can quickly browse the results without having to separately open each file! Agent Ransack is free for both Personal and Commercial use and can be Download from here.   Set the Look In directory of the Ransack search tool to your TFS Workspace and type the text you would like to scan for, you can limit the search by narrowing down the filter path or the name of the file. Found text is shown with highlighted keywords so you don't need to waste time opening each file looking for the right information.         The regular expression wizard helps you build regular expressions for complex pattern matching searches         You even have the option of searching by modified, created or last accessed date          Export your results to a file for importing into other apps or for sharing with others          Agent Ransack also provides search support for popular Office formats including Office 2007 and OpenOffice Next time you are looking for that illusive line of code whether it is a method declaration, function call, or algorithm that you checked into TFS, use Agent Ransack for a quick search.

    Read the article

  • How to control messages to the same port from different emitters?

    - by Alex In Paris
    Scene: A company has many factories X, each emits a message to the same receive port in a Biztalk server Y; if all messages are processed without much delay, each will trigger an outgoing message to another system Z. Problem: Sometimes a factory loses its connection for a half-day or more and, when the connection is reestablished, thousands of messages get emitted. Now, the messages still get processed well by Y (Biztalk can easily handle the load) but system Z can't handle the flood and may lock up and severely delay the processing of all other messages from the other X. What is the solution? Creating multiple receive locations that permits us to pause one X or another would lose us information if the factory isn't smart enough to know whether the message was received or not. What is the basic pattern to apply in Biztalk for this problem? Would some throttling parameters help to limit the flow from any one X? Or are their techniques on the end part of Y which I should use instead ? I would prefer this last one since I can be confident that the message box will remember any failures, which could then be resumed.

    Read the article

  • what should I read in Windows [closed]

    - by Umesha MS
    I think I am asking generic question. Being a developer in windows what should I read to improve my skills? Do I need to read concepts on need basis or do I need to read concepts well in advance? If I want to read the concepts in advance then what topics do I need to read. (Note : I am a Windows developer. I use c++ programming language, Win32/MFC frame work and I use Visual studio IDE.) Updated: To be more specific when a fresher comes to my team I will ask him to read the following things and I tell him that these are very important. 1)C++ : 1 The C++ Programming Language by Bjarne Stroustrup's 2 Thinking in C++ 2nd Edition by Bruce Eckel 2)Win32/MFC : 1 Programming Applications for Microsoft Windows by Jeffrey Richter 2 windows programming by charles petzold 3 Programming Windows with MFC –by Jeff Prosise For 2 years and above developer I ask them to read 1)Above concepts (C++ and Win32/MFC)are mandate 2)Design Pattern : 1)Gang Of Four. 2)Head first patter. 3)Design princples. But for above 6 years’ experience developer what are the concepts are important.

    Read the article

  • Best practice to collect information from child objects

    - by Markus
    I'm regularly seeing the following pattern: public abstract class BaseItem { BaseItem[] children; // ... public void DoSomethingWithStuff() { StuffCollection collection = new StuffCollection(); foreach(child c : children) c.AddRequiredStuff(collection); // do something with the collection ... } public abstract void AddRequiredStuff(StuffCollection collection); } public class ConcreteItem : BaseItem { // ... public override void AddRequiredStuff(StuffCollection collection) { Stuff stuff; // ... collection.Add(stuff); } } Where I would use something like this, for better information hiding: public abstract class BaseItem { BaseItem[] children; // ... public void DoSomethingWithStuff() { StuffCollection collection = new StuffCollection(); foreach(child c : children) collection.AddRange(c.RequiredStuff()); // do something with the collection ... } public abstract StuffCollection RequiredStuff(); } public class ConcreteItem : BaseItem { // ... public override StuffCollection RequiredStuff() { StuffCollection stuffCollection; Stuff stuff; // ... stuffCollection.Add(stuff); return stuffCollection; } } What are pros and cons of each solution? For me, giving the implementation access to parent's information is some how disconcerting. On the other hand, initializing a new list, just to collect the items is a useless overhead ... What is the better design? How would it change, if DoSomethingWithStuff wouldn't be part of BaseItem but a third class? PS: there might be missing semicolons, or typos; sorry for that! The above code is not meant to be executed, but just for illustration.

    Read the article

  • State Changes in a Component Based Architecture [closed]

    - by Maxem
    I'm currently working on a game and using the naive component based architecture thingie (Entities are a bag of components, entity.Update() calls Update on each updateable component), while the addition of new features is really simple, it makes a few things really difficult: a) multithreading / currency b) networking c) unit testing. Multithreading / Concurrency is difficult because I basically have to do poor mans concurrency (running the entity updates in separate threads while locking only stuff that crashes (like lists) and ignoring the staleness of read state (some states are already updated, others aren't)) Networking: There are no explicit state changes that I could efficiently push over the net. Unit testing: All updates may or may not conflict, so automated testing is at least awkward. I was thinking about these issues a bit and would like your input on these changes / idea: Switch from the naive cba to a cba with sub systems that work on lists of components Make all state changes explicit Combine 1 and 2 :p Example world update: statePostProcessing.Wait() // ensure that post processing has finished Apply(postProcessedState) state = new StateBag() Concurrently( () => LifeCycleSubSystem.Update(state), // populates the state bag () => MovementSubSystem.Update(state), // populates the state bag .... }) statePostProcessing = Future(() => PostProcess(state)) statePostProcessing.Start() // Tick is finished, the post processing happens in the background So basically the changes are (consistently) based on the data for the last tick; the post processing can a) generate network packages and b) fix conflicts / remove useless changes (example: entity has been destroyed - ignore movement etc.). EDIT: To clarify the granularity of the state changes: If I save these post processed state bags and apply them to an empty world, I see exactly what has happened in the game these state bags originated from - "Free" replay capability. EDIT2: I guess I should have used the term Event instead of State Change and point out that I kind of want to use the Event Sourcing pattern

    Read the article

  • How to choose between Tell don't Ask and Command Query Separation?

    - by Dakotah North
    The principle Tell Don't Ask says: you should endeavor to tell objects what you want them to do; do not ask them questions about their state, make a decision, and then tell them what to do. The problem is that, as the caller, you should not be making decisions based on the state of the called object that result in you then changing the state of the object. The logic you are implementing is probably the called object’s responsibility, not yours. For you to make decisions outside the object violates its encapsulation. A simple example of "Tell, don't Ask" is Widget w = ...; if (w.getParent() != null) { Panel parent = w.getParent(); parent.remove(w); } and the tell version is ... Widget w = ...; w.removeFromParent(); But what if I need to know the result from the removeFromParent method? My first reaction was just to change the removeFromParent to return a boolean denoting if the parent was removed or not. But then I came across Command Query Separation Pattern which says NOT to do this. It states that every method should either be a command that performs an action, or a query that returns data to the caller, but not both. In other words, asking a question should not change the answer. More formally, methods should return a value only if they are referentially transparent and hence possess no side effects. Are these two really at odds with each other and how do I choose between the two? Do I go with the Pragmatic Programmer or Bertrand Meyer on this?

    Read the article

  • How to populate a private container for unit test?

    - by Sardathrion
    I have a class that defines a private (well, __container to be exact since it is python) container. I am using the information within said container as part of the logic of what the class does and have the ability to add/delete the elements of said container. For unit tests, I need to populate this container with some data. That date depends on the test done and thus putting it all in setUp() would be impractical and bloated -- plus it could add unwanted side effects. Since the data is private, I can only add things via the public interface of the object. This run codes that need not be run during a unit test and in some case is just a copy and paste from another test. Currently, I am mocking the whole container but somehow it does not feel that elegant a solution. Due to Python mocking frame work (mock), this requires the container to be public -- so I can use patch.dict(). I would rather keep that data private. What pattern can one use to still populate the containers without excising the public method so I have data to test with? Is there a way to do this with mock' patch.dict() that I missed?

    Read the article

  • Are super methods in JavaScript limited to functional inheritance, as per Crockford's book?

    - by kindohm
    In Douglas Crockford's "JavaScript: The Good Parts", he walks through three types of inheritance: classical, prototypal, and functional. In the part on functional inheritance he writes: "The functional pattern also gives us a way to deal with super methods." He then goes on to implement a method named "superior" on all Objects. However, in the way he uses the superior method, it just looks like he is copying the method on the super object for later use: // crockford's code: var coolcat = function(spec) { var that = cat(spec), super_get_name = that.superior('get_name'); that.get_name = function (n) { return 'like ' + super_get_name() + ' baby'; }; return that; }; The original get_name method is copied to super_get_name. I don't get what's so special about functional inheritance that makes this possible. Can't you do this with classical or prototypal inheritance? What's the difference between the code above and the code below: var CoolCat = function(name) { this.name = name; } CoolCat.prototype = new Cat(); CoolCat.prototype.super_get_name = CoolCat.prototype.get_name; CoolCat.prototype.get_name = function (n) { return 'like ' + this.super_get_name() + ' baby'; }; Doesn't this second example provide access to "super methods" too?

    Read the article

  • When decomposing a large function, how can I avoid the complexity from the extra subfunctions?

    - by missingno
    Say I have a large function like the following: function do_lots_of_stuff(){ { //subpart 1 ... } ... { //subpart N ... } } a common pattern is to decompose it into subfunctions function do_lots_of_stuff(){ subpart_1(...) subpart_2(...) ... subpart_N(...) } I usually find that decomposition has two main advantages: The decomposed function becomes much smaller. This can help people read it without getting lost in the details. Parameters have to be explicitly passed to the underlying subfunctions, instead of being implicitly available by just being in scope. This can help readability and modularity in some situations. However, I also find that decomposition has some disadvantages: There are no guarantees that the subfunctions "belong" to do_lots_of_stuff so there is nothing stopping someone from accidentally calling them from a wrong place. A module's complexity grows quadratically with the number of functions we add to it. (There are more possible ways for things to call each other) Therefore: Are there useful convention or coding styles that help me balance the pros and cons of function decomposition or should I just use an editor with code folding and call it a day? EDIT: This problem also applies to functional code (although in a less pressing manner). For example, in a functional setting we would have the subparts be returning values that are combined in the end and the decomposition problem of having lots of subfunctions being able to use each other is still present. We can't always assume that the problem domain will be able to be modeled on just some small simple types with just a few highly orthogonal functions. There will always be complicated algorithms or long lists of business rules that we still want to correctly be able to deal with. function do_lots_of_stuff(){ p1 = subpart_1() p2 = subpart_2() pN = subpart_N() return assembleStuff(p1, p2, ..., pN) }

    Read the article

  • How to divide work to a network of computers?

    - by Morpork
    Imagine a scenario as follows: Lets say you have a central computer which generates a lot of data. This data must go through some processing, which unfortunately takes longer than to generate. In order for the processing to catch up with real time, we plug in more slave computers. Further, we must take into account the possibility of slaves dropping out of the network mid-job as well as additional slaves being added. The central computer should ensure that all jobs are finished to its satisfaction, and that jobs dropped by a slave are retasked to another. The main question is: What approach should I use to achieve this? But perhaps the following would help me arrive at an answer: Is there a name or design pattern to what I am trying to do? What domain of knowledge do I need to achieve the goal of getting these computers to talk to each other? (eg. will a database, which I have some knowledge of, be enough or will this involve sockets, which I have yet to have knowledge of?) Are there any examples of such a system? The main question is a bit general so it would be good to have a starting point/reference point. Note I am assuming constraints of c++ and windows so solutions pointing in that direction would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid the GameManager god object?

    - by lorancou
    I just read an answer to a question about structuring game code. It made me wonder about the ubiquitous GameManager class, and how it often becomes an issue in a production environment. Let me describe this. First, there's prototyping. Nobody cares about writing great code, we just try to get something running to see if the gameplay adds up. Then there's a greenlight, and in an effort to clean things up, somebody writes a GameManager. Probably to hold a bunch of GameStates, maybe to store a few GameObjects, nothing big, really. A cute, little, manager. In the peaceful realm of pre-production, the game is shaping up nicely. Coders have proper nights of sleep and plenty of ideas to architecture the thing with Great Design Patterns. Then production starts and soon, of course, there is crunch time. Balanced diet is long gone, the bug tracker is cracking with issues, people are stressed and the game has to be released yesterday. At that point, usually, the GameManager is a real big mess (to stay polite). The reason for that is simple. After all, when writing a game, well... all the source code is actually here to manage the game. It's easy to just add this little extra feature or bugfix in the GameManager, where everything else is already stored anyway. When time becomes an issue, no way to write a separate class, or to split this giant manager into sub-managers. Of course this is a classical anti-pattern: the god object. It's a bad thing, a pain to merge, a pain to maintain, a pain to understand, a pain to transform. What would you suggest to prevent this from happening?

    Read the article

  • MVC and delegation

    - by timjver
    I am a beginning iOS programmer and use the Model-View-Controller model as a design pattern: my model doesn't know anything about my view (in order to make it compatible with any view), my view doesn't know anything about my model so they interact via my controller. A very usual way for a view to interact with the controller is through delegation: when the user interacts with the app, my view will notify my controller, which can call some methods of my model and update my view, if necessary. However, would it make sense to also make my controller the delegate of my model? I'm not convinced this is the way to go. It could be handy for my model to notify my controller of some process being finished, for example, or to ask for extra input of the user if it doesn't have enough information to complete the task. The downside of this, though, is that my controller would be the delegate for both my controller and my model, so there wouldn't be really a proper way to notify my model of changes in my view, and vice versa. (correct me if I'm wrong.) Conclusion: I don't really think it's a good idea to to have my controller to be the delegate of my model, but just being the delegate of my view would be fine. Is this the way most MVC models handle? Or is there a way to have the controller be the delegate of both the controller and the model, with proper communication between them? Like I said, I'm a beginner, so I want to do such stuff the right way immediately, rather than spending loads of hours on models that won't work anyway. :)

    Read the article

  • How to quickly search through a very large list of strings / records on a database

    - by Giorgio
    I have the following problem: I have a database containing more than 2 million records. Each record has a string field X and I want to display a list of records for which field X contains a certain string. Each record is about 500 bytes in size. To make it more concrete: in the GUI of my application I have a text field where I can enter a string. Above the text field I have a table displaying the (first N, e.g. 100) records that match the string in the text field. When I type or delete one character in the text field, the table content must be updated on the fly. I wonder if there is an efficient way of doing this using appropriate index structures and / or caching. As explained above, I only want to display the first N items that match the query. Therefore, for N small enough, it should not be a big issue loading the matching items from the database. Besides, caching items in main memory can make retrieval faster. I think the main problem is how to find the matching items quickly, given the pattern string. Can I rely on some DBMS facilities, or do I have to build some in-memory index myself? Any ideas? EDIT I have run a first experiment. I have split the records into different text files (at most 200 records per file) and put the files in different directories (I used the content of one data field to determine the directory tree). I end up with about 50000 files in about 40000 directories. I have then run Lucene to index the files. Searching for a string with the Lucene demo program is pretty fast. Splitting and indexing took a few minutes: this is totally acceptable for me because it is a static data set that I want to query. The next step is to integrate Lucene in the main program and use the hits returned by Lucene to load the relevant records into main memory.

    Read the article

  • Architecture for dashboard showing aggregated stats [on hold]

    - by soulnafein
    I'd like to know what are common architectural pattern for the following problem. Web application A has information on sales, users, responsiveness score, etc. Some of this information are computationally intensive and or have a complex business logic (e.g. responsiveness score). I'm building a separate application (B) for internal admin tasks that modifies data in web application A and report on data from web application A. For writing I'm planning to use a restful api. E.g. create a new entity, update entity, etc. In application B I'd like to show some graphs and other aggregate data for the previous 12 months. I'm planning to store the aggregate data for each month in redis. Some data should update more often, e.g every 10 minutes. I can think of 3 ways of doing this. A scheduled task in app B that connects to an api of app A that provides some aggregated data. Then app B stores it in Redis and use that to visualise pages. Cons: it makes complex calculation within a web request, requires lot's of work e.g. api server and client, storing, etc., pros: business logic still lives in app A. A scheduled task in app A that aggregates data in an non-web process and stores it directly in Redis to be accessed by app B. A scheduled task in app A that aggregates data in a non-web process and uses an api in app B to save it. I'd like to know if there is a well known architectural solution to this type of problems and if not what are other pros/cons for the solution I've suggested?

    Read the article

  • How should I structure the implementation of turn-based board game rules?

    - by Setzer22
    I'm trying to create a turn-based strategy game on a tilemap. I'm using design by component so far, but I can't find a nice way to fit components into the part I want to ask. I'm struggling with the "game rules" logic. That is, the code that displays the menu, allows the player to select units, and command them, then tells the unit game objects what to do given the player input. The best way I could thing of handling this was using a big state machine, so everything that could be done in a "turn" is handled by this state machine, and the update code of this state machine does different things depending on the state. However, this approach leads to a large amount of code (anything not model-related) going into a big class. Of course I can subdivide this big class into more classes, but it doesn't feel modular and upgradable enough. I'd like to know of better systems to handle this in order to be able to upgrade the game with new rules without having a monstruous if/else chain (or switch / case, for that matter). Any ideas? What specific design pattern other than MVC should I be using?

    Read the article

  • Which are the best ways to organize view hierarchies in GUI interfaces?

    - by none
    I'm currently trying to figure out the best techniques for organizing GUI view hierarchies, that is dividing a window into several panels which are in turn divided into other components. I've given a look to the Composite Design Pattern, but I don't know if I can find better alternatives, so I'd appreciate to know if using the Composite is a good idea, or it would be better looking for some other techniques. I'm currently developing in Java Swing, but I don't think that the framework or the language can have a great impact on this. Any help will be appreciated. ---------EDIT------------ I was currently developing a frame containing three labels, one button and a text field. At the button pressed, the content inside the text field would be searched, and the results written inside the three labels. One of my typical structure would be the following: MainWindow | Main panel | Panel with text field and labels. | Panel with search button Now, as the title explains, I was looking for a suitable way of organizing both the MainPanel and the other two panels. But here came problems, since I'm not sure whether organizing them like attributes or storing inside some data structure (i.e. LinkedList or something like this). Anyway, I don't really think that both my solution are really good, so I'm wondering if there are really better approaches for facing this kind of problems. Hope it helps

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection: At what point am I allowed to create a new object?

    - by Gaz_Edge
    I am refactoring a PHP application, and I am trying to do has much dependency injection (DI) as possible. I feel like I've got a good grasp of how it works, and I can certainly see my classes becoming a lot leaner and more robust. I'm refactoring so that I can inject a dependency rather than create a new object within the class, but at some point I am going to have to create some objects, that is, use the dreaded new keyword. The problem I have now run into is at what point can I actually create new objects? It's looking like I'll end up at a top level class, creating loads of new objects as there is no where else to go. This feels wrong. I've read some blogs that use factory classes to create all the objects, and then you inject the factory into other classes. You can then call the factory methods, and the factory creates the new object for you. My concern with doing this is now my factory classes are going to be a new free-for-all! I guess this may be OK as they are factory classes, but are there some rules to stick to when using a factory pattern and DI, or am I going way off the mark here?

    Read the article

  • Best approach for tracking dependent state

    - by Pace
    Let's pretend I work on a project tracking application. The application is a database backed, server hosted, web application. In this application there are Projects which have many Activities which have many Tasks. A Task has two date fields an originalDueDate and a projectedDueDate. In addition, there are dynamic fields on the Activities and the Projects which indicate whether the Activity or Project is behind schedule based on the projected due dates of the child tasks and various other variables such as remaining buffer time, etc. There are a number of things that can cause the projectedDueDate to change. For example, an employee working on the project may (via a server request) enter in a shipping delay. Alternatively, a site may (via a server request) enter in an unexpected closure. When any of these things occur I need to not only update the projectedDueDate of the Task but also trigger the corresponding Project and Activity to update as well. What is the best way to do this? I've thought of the observer pattern but I don't keep a single copy of all these objects in memory. When a request comes in, I query the Task in from the database, at that point there is no associated Activity in memory that would be a listener. I could remove the ability to query for Tasks and force the application to query first by Project, then by Activity (in context of Project), then by task (in context of Activity) adding the observer relationships at each step but I'm not sure if that is the best way. I could setup a database event listening system so when a Task modified event is dispatched I have a handler which queries for the Activity at that point. I could simply setup a two-way relationship between Task and Activity so that the Task knows about the parent Activity and when the Task updates his state the Task grabs his parent and updates state. Right now I'm stuck considering all the options and am wondering if any single approach (doesn't have to be a listed approach) is jumping out at others as the best approach.

    Read the article

  • Emailing Service: To or Bcc?

    - by Shelakel
    I'm busy coding a reusable e-mail service for my company. The e-mail service will be doing quite a few things via injection through the strategy pattern (such as handling e-mail send rate throttling, switching between Smtp and AmazonSES or Google AppEngine for e-mail clients when daily quotas are exceeded, send statistics tracking (mostly because it is neccessary in order to stay within quotas) to name a few). Because e-mail sending will need to be throttled and other limitations exist (ex. max recipient quota on AmazonSES limiting recipients to 50 per send), the e-mails typically need to be broken up. From your experience, would it be better to send bulk (multiple recipients per e-mail) or a single e-mail per recipient? The implications of the above would be to send to a 1000 recipients, with a limit of 50 per send, you would send 20 e-mails using BCC in a newsletter scenario. When sending an e-mail per recipient, it would send 1000 e-mails. E-mail sending is asynchronous (due to inherit latency when sending, it's typically only possible to send 5 e-mails per second unless you are using multiple client asynchronously). Edit Just for full disclosure, this service won't be used by or sold to spammers and will as far as possible automatically comply with national and international laws. Closed< Thanks for all the valuable feedback. The concerns regarding compliance towards laws, user experience (generic vs. personalized unsubscribe) and spam regulation via ISP blacklisting does make To the preferred and possibly the only choice when sending system generated e-mails to recipients.

    Read the article

  • Hard-drive will randomly fail to load GRUB. Booting a live USB/CD fixes the issue temporarily

    - by Usagi
    I am running 12.04 64-bit and am dual booting with Win7, for full disclosure, although I suspect that has nothing to do with my problem. Occasionally the boot-loader(GRUB) will fail to load and I will be presented with a black screen with a single blinking line. There is no apparent pattern although I suspect there is one and it is related to a program I am running. This has happened to me eight out of ten power cycles now and I can fix it consistently, however, I have no idea why it happens. My current fix is to boot a live CD (I've tried both KNOPPIX and Ubuntu with the same result) and that's it. Somehow booting with the live CD is enough to "wake-up" my hard drive. I then reboot and GRUB magically appears again. So what is going on? Is it possible that a program is corrupting my MBR and the live CD is restoring it? How can I narrow down the possibilities? Thanks. Additional: This is still a problem. I'm convinced now that it is not hardware related as I've spent the last month and several boot cycles on Windows without a hiccup. Recently when I started using Ubuntu again the problem started again. I am more interested in figuring out what is going on rather than actually fixing the problem. Are there any tools, logs, etc. I can use to unravel this mystery?

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture: How to divide work to a network of computers?

    - by Morpork
    Imagine a scenario as follows: Lets say you have a central computer which generates a lot of data. This data must go through some processing, which unfortunately takes longer than to generate. In order for the processing to catch up with real time, we plug in more slave computers. Further, we must take into account the possibility of slaves dropping out of the network mid-job as well as additional slaves being added. The central computer should ensure that all jobs are finished to its satisfaction, and that jobs dropped by a slave are retasked to another. The main question is: What approach should I use to achieve this? But perhaps the following would help me arrive at an answer: Is there a name or design pattern to what I am trying to do? What domain of knowledge do I need to achieve the goal of getting these computers to talk to each other? (eg. will a database, which I have some knowledge of, be enough or will this involve sockets, which I have yet to have knowledge of?) Are there any examples of such a system? The main question is a bit general so it would be good to have a starting point/reference point. Note I am assuming constraints of c++ and windows so solutions pointing in that direction would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to handle class dependency with interfaces and implementatons

    - by lealand
    I'm using ObjectAid with Eclipse to generate UML class diagrams for my latest Java project, and I currently have a handful of situations like this, where I have a dependency between two interfaces, as well as one of the implementations of one of the interfaces. Here, foo is the graphics library I'm using. In the previous example, FooCanvas draws ITexture objects to the screen, and both FooCanvas and its interface, ICanvas, take ITexture objects as arguments to their methods. The method in the canvas classes which cause this dependency is the following: void drawTexture(ITexture texture, float x, float y); Additionally, I tried a variation on the method signature using Java's generics: <T extends ITexture> void drawTexture(T texture, float x, float y); The result of this was a class diagram where the only dependencies where between the interfaces and the implementing classes, and no dependency by a canvas object on a texture. I'm not sure if this is more ideal or not. Is the dependency of both the interface and implementation on another interface an expected pattern, or is it typical and/or possible to keep the implementation 'isolated' from its interfaces dependencies? Or is the generic method the ideal solution?

    Read the article

  • Creating my own PHP framework

    - by onlineapplab.com
    Disclaimer: I don't want to start any flame war so there will not be no name of any framework mentioned. I've been using quite many from the existing PHP frameworks and my experience in each case was similar: everything is nice a the beginning but in the moment you require something non standard you get into lot of problems to fix otherwise simple issues. In case of frameworks following the MVC design pattern there are some issues with the implementation of each layer for example there is a lot of codding used for model and data access with using ORM and presentation is not much more than pure phtml. Some frameworks use their own wrappers for existing PHP functionality and in some cases severely limiting original functionality. Depending on framework you can have additional problems like lack of documentation, slow or non existent development cycle and last but not least speed. While ago I made my own framework which while doing it's job and being used for few different applications after couple of years more of experience with PHP doesn't seem to be perfect piece of codding. I could write my own framework and use additional experience I've gathered during these years to make it better on the other hand I'm aware that there is quite many better programmers working on creating/upgrading existing frameworks. So does it make at all nay sense to write my own PHP framework if there is so many possibilities to choose from?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >