Search Results

Search found 16554 results on 663 pages for 'programmers identity'.

Page 149/663 | < Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >

  • Can an aggregate root hold references of members of another aggregate root?

    - by Rushino
    Hello, I know outside aggregates cant change anything inside an aggregate without passing by his root. That said i would like to know if an aggregate root can hold references of members (objects insides) of another aggregate root? (fellowing DDD rules) Example : a Calendar contain a list of phases which contain a list of sequences which contain a list of assignations Calendar is root because phases and sequences and assignations only work in context of a calendar. You also have Students and Groups of student (called groups) It is possible (fellowing DDD rules) to make Groups holding references of assignations or it need to pass by the root for accessing groups from assignations ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How does one improve one's problem-solving ability?

    - by gcc
    How can one improve one's problem-solving ability? Everyone says same thing: "a real programmer knows how to handle real problem." But they forget how they learn this ability, or where (I know in school, no one gives us any ability, of course in my opinion). If you have any idea except above ones, feel free when you give your advice solve more problems do more exercises, write code, search google then write more ... For me, my question is like "use complex/known library instead of using your own." In other words, I want your personal experience, book recommendation, webpage on problem solving. Moreover, look your problem-solving method and give us your personal ability as if it is an algorithm

    Read the article

  • How do you prefer to handle image spriting in your web projects?

    - by Macy Abbey
    It seems like these days it is pretty much mandatory for web applications to sprite images if they want many images on their site AND a fast load time. (Spriting is the process of combining all images referenced from a style sheet into one/few image(s) with each reference containing a different background position.) I was wondering what method of implementing sprites you all prefer in your web applications, given that we are referring to non-dynamic images which are included/designed by the programming team and not images which are dynamically uploaded by a third party. 1. Add new images to an existing sprite by hand, create new css reference by hand. 2. Generate a sprite server-side from your css files which all reference single images set to be background images of an html element that is the same size of the image you are spriting once per build and update all css references programmatically. 3. Use a sprite generating program to generate a sprite image for you once per release and hand insert the new css class / image into your project. 4. Other methods? I prefer two as it requires very little hand-coding and image editing.

    Read the article

  • What management/development practices do you change when a team of 1-3 developers grows to 10+?

    - by Mag20
    My team built a website for a client several years ago. The site taffic has been growing very quickly and our client has been asking us to grow our team to fill their maintenance and feature request needs. We started with a small number of developers, and our team has grown - now we're in the double digits. What management/development changes are the most beneficial when team grows from small "garage-size" team to 10+ developers?

    Read the article

  • Does UX matter for enterprise software?

    - by Ryan
    I've come to notice that a lot of software that companies use for managing things like time, expenses, setting up phone systems, etc is very non-intuitive from a user experience point of view. I know personally I waste a lot of time just trying to figure out how to navigate these systems, especially if I don't have a co-worker close by who I can bug to help me out. The help files are usually just as bad as the user interface itself. Are companies that complacent or are there just not any comparable enterprise products out there which do the job for these sorts of tasks? It seems that on the consumer side there is plenty of market opportunity for creating better user experiences, but how about for enterprise software? Obviously a certain level of slickness is not going to matter to a company, but when a better UX design translates to time saved, it's hard to argue against that. Edit: I'm not referring to in-house applications, but rather off the shelf systems from large software companies.

    Read the article

  • Is Ubuntu workable as a laptop for an IT consultant?

    - by Eric Wilson
    I work as a consultant programmer, typically in large businesses. I use a Windows Laptop, and many of my colleagues use a Mac. My personal preference would be to run Ubuntu if I could have complete control over my development environment. But I will have occasional need for Microsoft specific products, especially IE. My colleagues that use a Mac often run Windows on a virtual machine for these situations. My question is: Is Ubuntu a workable solution for the laptop of an enterprise programmer? For example, is it as easy to run Windows on a VM on Ubuntu as it is on a Mac? Has anyone out there tried this? Is there any particular reason why Ubuntu would not serve as well as a Mac for development in this environment? Note that I am not doing .NET development, so I am typically dealing with Java that is going to be run on an Apache server and used by clients running Windows.

    Read the article

  • How to manage PHP projects?

    - by Shakti Singh
    I am a PHP developer and I want to know how to manage a project with more than one developer working on the same time. Are there some tools to manage them if any please let me know I don't know about that? The tool which can show everything which developer is working on what task. when he will be available for another task. Who one is free right now? Something managing project as well as utilization of your team member. Tool which can take care of all the phases of a project from coding to delivery.

    Read the article

  • EF4 generates invalid script

    - by Jaxidian
    When I right-click in a .EDMX file and click Generate Database From Model, the resulting script is obviously wrong because of the table names. What it generates is the following script. Note the table names in the DROP TABLE part versus the CREATE TABLE part. Why is this inconsistent? This is obviously not a reusable script. What I created was an Entity named "Address" and an Entity named "Company", etc (all singular). The EntitySet names are pluralized. The "Pluralize New Objects" boolean does not change this either. So what's the deal? For what it's worth, I originally generated the EDMX by pointing it to a database that had tables with non-pluralized names and now that I've made some changes, I want to go back the other way. I'd like to have the option to go back and forth as neither the db-first nor the model-first model is ideal in all scenarios, and I have the control to ensure that there will be no merging issues from multiple people going both ways at the same time. -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Dropping existing FOREIGN KEY constraints -- NOTE: if the constraint does not exist, an ignorable error will be reported. -- -------------------------------------------------- ALTER TABLE [Address] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Address_StateID-State_ID]; GO ALTER TABLE [Company] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Company_AddressID-Address_ID]; GO ALTER TABLE [Employee] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_BossEmployeeID-Employee_ID]; GO ALTER TABLE [Employee] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_CompanyID-Company_ID]; GO ALTER TABLE [Employee] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_PersonID-Person_ID]; GO ALTER TABLE [Person] DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_Person_AddressID-Address_ID]; GO -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Dropping existing tables -- NOTE: if the table does not exist, an ignorable error will be reported. -- -------------------------------------------------- DROP TABLE [Address]; GO DROP TABLE [Company]; GO DROP TABLE [Employee]; GO DROP TABLE [Person]; GO DROP TABLE [State]; GO -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating all tables -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating table 'Addresses' CREATE TABLE [Addresses] ( [ID] int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [StreetAddress] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [City] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [StateID] int NOT NULL, [Zip] nvarchar(10) NOT NULL ); GO -- Creating table 'Companies' CREATE TABLE [Companies] ( [ID] int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Name] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [AddressID] int NOT NULL ); GO -- Creating table 'People' CREATE TABLE [People] ( [ID] int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [FirstName] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [LastName] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [AddressID] int NOT NULL ); GO -- Creating table 'States' CREATE TABLE [States] ( [ID] int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Name] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [Abbreviation] nvarchar(2) NOT NULL ); GO -- Creating table 'Employees' CREATE TABLE [Employees] ( [ID] int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [PersonID] int NOT NULL, [CompanyID] int NOT NULL, [Position] nvarchar(100) NOT NULL, [BossEmployeeID] int NULL ); GO -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating all PRIMARY KEY constraints -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating primary key on [ID] in table 'Addresses' ALTER TABLE [Addresses] ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_Addresses] PRIMARY KEY ([ID] ); GO -- Creating primary key on [ID] in table 'Companies' ALTER TABLE [Companies] ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_Companies] PRIMARY KEY ([ID] ); GO -- Creating primary key on [ID] in table 'People' ALTER TABLE [People] ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_People] PRIMARY KEY ([ID] ); GO -- Creating primary key on [ID] in table 'States' ALTER TABLE [States] ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_States] PRIMARY KEY ([ID] ); GO -- Creating primary key on [ID] in table 'Employees' ALTER TABLE [Employees] ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_Employees] PRIMARY KEY ([ID] ); GO -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating all FOREIGN KEY constraints -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Creating foreign key on [StateID] in table 'Addresses' ALTER TABLE [Addresses] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Address_StateID_State_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([StateID]) REFERENCES [States] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Address_StateID_State_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Address_StateID_State_ID] ON [Addresses] ([StateID]); GO -- Creating foreign key on [AddressID] in table 'Companies' ALTER TABLE [Companies] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Company_AddressID_Address_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([AddressID]) REFERENCES [Addresses] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Company_AddressID_Address_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Company_AddressID_Address_ID] ON [Companies] ([AddressID]); GO -- Creating foreign key on [AddressID] in table 'People' ALTER TABLE [People] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Person_AddressID_Address_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([AddressID]) REFERENCES [Addresses] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Person_AddressID_Address_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Person_AddressID_Address_ID] ON [People] ([AddressID]); GO -- Creating foreign key on [CompanyID] in table 'Employees' ALTER TABLE [Employees] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_CompanyID_Company_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([CompanyID]) REFERENCES [Companies] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Employee_CompanyID_Company_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Employee_CompanyID_Company_ID] ON [Employees] ([CompanyID]); GO -- Creating foreign key on [BossEmployeeID] in table 'Employees' ALTER TABLE [Employees] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_BossEmployeeID_Employee_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([BossEmployeeID]) REFERENCES [Employees] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Employee_BossEmployeeID_Employee_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Employee_BossEmployeeID_Employee_ID] ON [Employees] ([BossEmployeeID]); GO -- Creating foreign key on [PersonID] in table 'Employees' ALTER TABLE [Employees] ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Employee_PersonID_Person_ID] FOREIGN KEY ([PersonID]) REFERENCES [People] ([ID]) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION; -- Creating non-clustered index for FOREIGN KEY 'FK_Employee_PersonID_Person_ID' CREATE INDEX [IX_FK_Employee_PersonID_Person_ID] ON [Employees] ([PersonID]); GO -- -------------------------------------------------- -- Script has ended -- --------------------------------------------------

    Read the article

  • vb.net and mysql connectivity [closed]

    - by kalpana
    I have used adodb using odbc database connectivity for connecting vb.net to mysql. I have fetched table values into recordset. I want to fetch only one column values (for example, table name-login, column name-password and values in password column are "manage","sales","general"). I want to fetch these values in text boxes. I have written code but it's not working. Dim conn As New ADODB.Connection Dim res As New ADODB.Recordset conn.Open("test", "root", "root") res = conn.Execute("select password from login") textbox1.text=res(0).value textbox2.text=res(1).value textbox3.text=res(2).value I am getting data in textbox1 but other data is not getting inserted into textbox2 and textbox3..I am getting error i.e (1) Item cannot be found in the collection corresponding to the requested name or ordinal.

    Read the article

  • Are short identifiers bad?

    - by Daniel C. Sobral
    Are short identifiers bad? How does identifier length correlate with code comprehension? What other factors (besides code comprehension) might be of consideration when it comes to naming identifiers? Just to try to keep the quality of the answers up, please note that there is some research on the subject already! Edit Curious that everyone either doesn't think length is relevant or tend to prefer larger identifiers, when both links I provided indicate large identifiers are harmful!

    Read the article

  • Why should you document code?

    - by Edwin Tripp
    I am a graduate software developer for a financial company that uses an old COBOL-like language/flat-file record storage system. The code is completely undocumented, both code comments and overall system design and there is no help on the web (unused outside the industry). The current developers have been working on the system for between 10 and 30 years and are adamant that documentation is unnecessary as you can just read the code to work out what's going on and that you can't trust comments. Why should such a system be documented?

    Read the article

  • REST or Non-REST on Internal Services

    - by tyndall
    I'm curious if others have chosen to implement some services internally at their companies as non-REST (SOAP, Thrift, Proto Buffers, etc...) as a way to auto-generate client libraries/wrappers? I'm on a two year project. I will be writing maybe 40 services over that period with my team. 10% of those services definitely make sense as REST services, but the other 90% feel more like they could be done in REST or RPC style. Of these 90%, 100% will be .NET talking to .NET. When I think about all the effort to have my devs develop client "wrappers" for REST services I cringe. WADL or RSDL don't seem to have enough mindshare. Thoughts? Any good discussions of this "internal service" issue online? If you have struggled with this what general rules for determining REST or non-REST have you used?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing statically typed functional code

    - by back2dos
    I wanted to ask you people, in which cases it makes sense to unit test statically typed functional code, as written in haskell, scala, ocaml, nemerle, f# or haXe (the last is what I am really interested in, but I wanted to tap into the knowledge of the bigger communities). I ask this because from my understanding: One aspect of unit tests is to have the specs in runnable form. However when employing a declarative style, that directly maps the formalized specs to language semantics, is it even actually possible to express the specs in runnable form in a separate way, that adds value? The more obvious aspect of unit tests is to track down errors that cannot be revealed through static analysis. Given that type safe functional code is a good tool to code extremely close to what your static analyzer understands. However a simple mistake like using x instead of y (both being coordinates) in your code cannot be covered. However such a mistake could also arise while writing the test code, so I am not sure whether its worth the effort. Unit tests do introduce redundancy, which means that when requirements change, the code implementing them and the tests covering this code must both be changed. This overhead of course is about constant, so one could argue, that it doesn't really matter. In fact, in languages like Ruby it really doesn't compared to the benefits, but given how statically typed functional programming covers a lot of the ground unit tests are intended for, it feels like it's a constant overhead one can simply reduce without penalty. From this I'd deduce that unit tests are somewhat obsolete in this programming style. Of course such a claim can only lead to religious wars, so let me boil this down to a simple question: When you use such a programming style, to which extents do you use unit tests and why (what quality is it you hope to gain for your code)? Or the other way round: do you have criteria by which you can qualify a unit of statically typed functional code as covered by the static analyzer and hence needs no unit test coverage?

    Read the article

  • Naming Convention for Dedicated Thread Locking objects

    - by Chris Sinclair
    A relatively minor question, but I haven't been able to find official documentation or even blog opinion/discussions on it. Simply put: when I have a private object whose sole purpose is to serve for private lock, what do I name that object? class MyClass { private object LockingObject = new object(); void DoSomething() { lock(LockingObject) { //do something } } } What should we name LockingObject here? Also consider not just the name of the variable but how it looks in-code when locking. I've seen various examples, but seemingly no solid go-to advice: Plenty of usages of SyncRoot (and variations such as _syncRoot). Code Sample: lock(SyncRoot), lock(_syncRoot) This appears to be influenced by VB's equivalent SyncLock statement, the SyncRoot property that exists on some of the ICollection classes and part of some kind of SyncRoot design pattern (which arguably is a bad idea) Being in a C# context, not sure if I'd want to have a VBish naming. Even worse, in VB naming the variable the same as the keyword. Not sure if this would be a source of confusion or not. thisLock and lockThis from the MSDN articles: C# lock Statement, VB SyncLock Statement Code Sample: lock(thisLock), lock(lockThis) Not sure if these were named minimally purely for the example or not Kind of weird if we're using this within a static class/method. Several usages of PadLock (of varying casing) Code Sample: lock(PadLock), lock(padlock) Not bad, but my only beef is it unsurprisingly invokes the image of a physical "padlock" which I tend to not associate with the abstract threading concept. Naming the lock based on what it's intending to lock Code Sample: lock(messagesLock), lock(DictionaryLock), lock(commandQueueLock) In the VB SyncRoot MSDN page example, it has a simpleMessageList example with a private messagesLock object I don't think it's a good idea to name the lock against the type you're locking around ("DictionaryLock") as that's an implementation detail that may change. I prefer naming around the concept/object you're locking ("messagesLock" or "commandQueueLock") Interestingly, I very rarely see this naming convention for locking objects in code samples online or on StackOverflow. Question: What's your opinion generally about naming private locking objects? Recently, I've started naming them ThreadLock (so kinda like option 3), but I'm finding myself questioning that name. I'm frequently using this locking pattern (in the code sample provided above) throughout my applications so I thought it might make sense to get a more professional opinion/discussion about a solid naming convention for them. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Convince developer to use IDE

    - by artjom
    There is a developer, lets call him John (currently on probationary period) in company(pretty small company approx. 10 persons, 3 developers, one of them works long in this company know business process around and can be consider as Team leader) who didn't want to use any IDE at all(he is using some text editor). Application this team working on is medium size Java application with Spring Hibernate technology stack and refactoring/adding new features to launch new version of that application in near future. John performance working without IDE on this application is lower then desirable, team leader's (lets call him Bill) assumption is this happens because John is not using IDE. Bill try to persuade John to use IDE, but this idea meets a lot of resistance and main reason is "I want to be in total control of what I am doing, so I need to write all code by myself". How can Bill convince John to try to use IDE? (considering the fact what Bill already protected John from company owner several complaints about John performance)

    Read the article

  • Should a view and a model communicate or not?

    - by Stefano Borini
    According to the wikipedia page for the MVC architecture, the view is free to be notified by the model, and is also free to query the model about its current state. However, according to Paul Hegarty's course on iOS 5 at Stanford, lecture 1, page 18 all interaction must go through the controller, with Model and View that are never supposed to know each other. It is not clear to me if Hegarty's statement must be intended as a simplification for the course, but I am tempted to say that he intends the design as such. How do you explain these two opposite points of view ?

    Read the article

  • How accurate is "Business logic should be in a service, not in a model"?

    - by Jeroen Vannevel
    Situation Earlier this evening I gave an answer to a question on StackOverflow. The question: Editing of an existing object should be done in repository layer or in service? For example if I have a User that has debt. I want to change his debt. Should I do it in UserRepository or in service for example BuyingService by getting an object, editing it and saving it ? My answer: You should leave the responsibility of mutating an object to that same object and use the repository to retrieve this object. Example situation: class User { private int debt; // debt in cents private string name; // getters public void makePayment(int cents){ debt -= cents; } } class UserRepository { public User GetUserByName(string name){ // Get appropriate user from database } } A comment I received: Business logic should really be in a service. Not in a model. What does the internet say? So, this got me searching since I've never really (consciously) used a service layer. I started reading up on the Service Layer pattern and the Unit Of Work pattern but so far I can't say I'm convinced a service layer has to be used. Take for example this article by Martin Fowler on the anti-pattern of an Anemic Domain Model: There are objects, many named after the nouns in the domain space, and these objects are connected with the rich relationships and structure that true domain models have. The catch comes when you look at the behavior, and you realize that there is hardly any behavior on these objects, making them little more than bags of getters and setters. Indeed often these models come with design rules that say that you are not to put any domain logic in the the domain objects. Instead there are a set of service objects which capture all the domain logic. These services live on top of the domain model and use the domain model for data. (...) The logic that should be in a domain object is domain logic - validations, calculations, business rules - whatever you like to call it. To me, this seemed exactly what the situation was about: I advocated the manipulation of an object's data by introducing methods inside that class that do just that. However I realize that this should be a given either way, and it probably has more to do with how these methods are invoked (using a repository). I also had the feeling that in that article (see below), a Service Layer is more considered as a façade that delegates work to the underlying model, than an actual work-intensive layer. Application Layer [his name for Service Layer]: Defines the jobs the software is supposed to do and directs the expressive domain objects to work out problems. The tasks this layer is responsible for are meaningful to the business or necessary for interaction with the application layers of other systems. This layer is kept thin. It does not contain business rules or knowledge, but only coordinates tasks and delegates work to collaborations of domain objects in the next layer down. It does not have state reflecting the business situation, but it can have state that reflects the progress of a task for the user or the program. Which is reinforced here: Service interfaces. Services expose a service interface to which all inbound messages are sent. You can think of a service interface as a façade that exposes the business logic implemented in the application (typically, logic in the business layer) to potential consumers. And here: The service layer should be devoid of any application or business logic and should focus primarily on a few concerns. It should wrap Business Layer calls, translate your Domain in a common language that your clients can understand, and handle the communication medium between server and requesting client. This is a serious contrast to other resources that talk about the Service Layer: The service layer should consist of classes with methods that are units of work with actions that belong in the same transaction. Or the second answer to a question I've already linked: At some point, your application will want some business logic. Also, you might want to validate the input to make sure that there isn't something evil or nonperforming being requested. This logic belongs in your service layer. "Solution"? Following the guidelines in this answer, I came up with the following approach that uses a Service Layer: class UserController : Controller { private UserService _userService; public UserController(UserService userService){ _userService = userService; } public ActionResult MakeHimPay(string username, int amount) { _userService.MakeHimPay(username, amount); return RedirectToAction("ShowUserOverview"); } public ActionResult ShowUserOverview() { return View(); } } class UserService { private IUserRepository _userRepository; public UserService(IUserRepository userRepository) { _userRepository = userRepository; } public void MakeHimPay(username, amount) { _userRepository.GetUserByName(username).makePayment(amount); } } class UserRepository { public User GetUserByName(string name){ // Get appropriate user from database } } class User { private int debt; // debt in cents private string name; // getters public void makePayment(int cents){ debt -= cents; } } Conclusion All together not much has changed here: code from the controller has moved to the service layer (which is a good thing, so there is an upside to this approach). However this doesn't look like it had anything to do with my original answer. I realize design patterns are guidelines, not rules set in stone to be implemented whenever possible. Yet I have not found a definitive explanation of the service layer and how it should be regarded. Is it a means to simply extract logic from the controller and put it inside a service instead? Is it supposed to form a contract between the controller and the domain? Should there be a layer between the domain and the service layer? And, last but not least: following the original comment Business logic should really be in a service. Not in a model. Is this correct? How would I introduce my business logic in a service instead of the model?

    Read the article

  • CQRS without using others patterns

    - by John Smith
    I would like to explain CQRS to my team of developers. I just can't figure out how to explain it in the simplest way so they can implement the pattern rapidly without any others frameworks. I've read a lot of resources including video and articles but I don't find how to implement CQRS without using others patterns like a service Bus, event sourcing pattern, domain driven design. I know the purpose of these pattern but for the first step, I don't want them to think CQRS and theses patterns must be tied together. My first idea is to say that CQRS is about separating the read part and the write part. The read part is composed only of the UI project, and DAL project. Then the write part is composed of a typical multilayer architecture: UI/BLL/DAL. Then, does CQRS say we must also have two datastore ? What about the notion of commands which reveal the user's intention, is it also something part of CQRS or DDD ? Basically, how to implement CQRS without using others patterns. I concede it's also not that clear in my mind because I've used to work with NCQRS/DDD/Event Sourcing/ServiceBus in my personal project. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to make a system time-zone sensitive?

    - by Jerry Dodge
    I need to implement time zones in a very large and old Delphi system, where there's a central SQL Server database and possibly hundreds of client installations around the world in different time zones. The application already interacts with the database by only using the date/time of the database server. So, all the time stamps saved in both the database and on the client machines are the date/time of the database server when it happened, never the time of the client machine. So, when a client is about to display the date/time of something (such as a transaction) which is coming from this database, it needs to show the date/time converted to the local time zone. This is where I get lost. I would naturally assume there should be something in SQL to recognize the time zone and convert a DateTime field dynamically. I'm not sure if such a thing exists though. If so, that would be perfect, but if not, I need to figure out another way. This Delphi system (multiple projects) utilizes the SQL Server database using ADO components, VCL data-aware controls, and QuickReports (using data sources). So, there's many places where the data goes directly from the database query to rendering on the screen, without any code to actually put this data on the screen. In the end, I need to know when and how should I get the properly converted time? There must be a standard method for this, and I'm hoping SQL Server 2008 R2 has this covered...

    Read the article

  • Purchasing Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate and Professional version

    - by Don
    We are a small team with 5-7 developers. We are planning to purchase Visual Studio 2010, better with one or two Ultimate version, others with professional version. The suggestion from Microsoft is getting it from retail. We find we can get them from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/buy.aspx or http://www.amazon.com/Visual-Studio-2010-Ultimate-MSDN/dp/B0038KNER0/ref=sr_1_fkmr3_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1296675635&sr=8-2-fkmr3. From Amazon, it will be lower cost. We wonder if we buy from Microsft directly we can get additional benefits like supports, which other retailers can not provide. Anyone has any ideas? What is the cost effient way? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Stereo images rectification and disparity: which algorithms?

    - by alessandro.francesconi
    I'm trying to figure out what are currently the two most efficent algorithms that permit, starting from a L/R pair of stereo images created using a traditional camera (so affected by some epipolar lines misalignment), to produce a pair of adjusted images plus their depth information by looking at their disparity. Actually I've found lots of papers about these two methods, like: "Computing Rectifying Homographies for Stereo Vision" (Zhang - seems one of the best for rectification only) "Three-step image recti?cation" (Monasse) "Rectification and Disparity" (slideshow by Navab) "A fast area-based stereo matching algorithm" (Di Stefano - seems a bit inaccurate) "Computing Visual Correspondence with Occlusions via Graph Cuts" (Kolmogorov - this one produces a very good disparity map, with also occlusion informations, but is it efficient?) "Dense Disparity Map Estimation Respecting Image Discontinuities" (Alvarez - toooo long for a first review) Anyone could please give me some advices for orienting into this wide topic? What kind of algorithm/method should I treat first, considering that I'll work on a very simple input: a pair of left and right images and nothing else, no more information (some papers are based on additional, pre-taken, calibration infos)? Speaking about working implementations, the only interesting results I've seen so far belongs to this piece of software, but only for automatic rectification, not disparity: http://stereo.jpn.org/eng/stphmkr/index.html I tried the "auto-adjustment" feature and seems really effective. Too bad there is no source code...

    Read the article

  • Web Developer interview questions

    - by Baba
    I read an article today that listed some basic questions about web development: Describe how POST data was submitted to a server by a browser. Explain a number of HTTP status codes (except maybe 404 and 500). Explain SOLID or name a design pattern. Explain ways to improve a page load speed or user experience. The author says "if you can’t answer the questions above there are a lot of people who wouldn’t think of you as a Senior Web Developer." My questions are: How relevant are these questions in respect to real life web programming and scalability? How true is that statement? In other words, do you consider this knowledge a requirement to be considered a Senior Web Developer? I was able to answer all the questions, too easily it seemed, so I'm wondering whether it is effective to use these or similar questions to screen developers rather than asking them to write sample code.

    Read the article

  • In the Aggregate: How Will We Maintain Legacy Systems?

    - by Jim G.
    NEW YORK - With a blast that made skyscrapers tremble, an 83-year-old steam pipe sent a powerful message that the miles of tubes, wires and iron beneath New York and other U.S. cities are getting older and could become dangerously unstable. July 2007 Story About a Burst Steam Pipe in Manhattan We've heard about software rot and technical debt. And we've heard from the likes of: "Uncle Bob" Martin - Who warned us about "the consequences of making a mess". Michael C. Feathers - Who gave us guidance for 'Working Effectively With Legacy Code'. So certainly the software engineering community is aware of these issues. But I feel like our aggregate society does not appreciate how these issues can plague working systems and applications. As Steve McConnell notes: ...Unlike financial debt, technical debt is much less visible, and so people have an easier time ignoring it. If this is true, and I believe that it is, then I fear that governments and businesses may defer regular maintenance and fortification against hackers until it is too late. [Much like NYC and the steam pipes.] My Question: Do you share my concern? And if so, is there a way that we can avoid the software equivalent of NYC and the steam pipes?

    Read the article

  • MBO in software development

    - by Euphoric
    I just found out our middle sized software development company is going to implement MBO. As a big fan of Agile, I see this as counter-intuitive, because I believe it is impossible to create a objective, that is measurable. Especialy where creativity, experience, knowledge and profesionalism are important traits and expanding those are objectives and goals of many. So my question is, what is your opinion on using MBO in software development? And if there are development companies using MBO, either successfuly or unsucessfuly.

    Read the article

  • Improvements to Joshua Bloch's Builder Design Pattern?

    - by Jason Fotinatos
    Back in 2007, I read an article about Joshua Blochs take on the "builder pattern" and how it could be modified to improve the overuse of constructors and setters, especially when an object has a large number of properties, most of which are optional. A brief summary of this design pattern is articled here [http://rwhansen.blogspot.com/2007/07/theres-builder-pattern-that-joshua.html]. I liked the idea, and have been using it since. The problem with it, while it is very clean and nice to use from the client perspective, implementing it can be a pain in the bum! There are so many different places in the object where a single property is reference, and thus creating the object, and adding a new property takes a lot of time. So...I had an idea. First, an example object in Joshua Bloch's style: Josh Bloch Style: public class OptionsJoshBlochStyle { private final String option1; private final int option2; // ...other options here <<<< public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private String option1; private int option2; // other options here <<<<< public Builder option1(String option1) { this.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.option2 = option2; return this; } public OptionsJoshBlochStyle build() { return new OptionsJoshBlochStyle(this); } } private OptionsJoshBlochStyle(Builder builder) { this.option1 = builder.option1; this.option2 = builder.option2; // other options here <<<<<< } public static void main(String[] args) { OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation1 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation2 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } Now my "improved" version: public class Options { // note that these are not final private String option1; private int option2; // ...other options here public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private final Options options = new Options(); public Builder option1(String option1) { this.options.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.options.option2 = option2; return this; } public Options build() { return options; } } private Options() { } public static void main(String[] args) { Options optionsVariation1 = new Options.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); Options optionsVariation2 = new Options.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } As you can see in my "improved version", there are 2 less places in which we need to add code about any addition properties (or options, in this case)! The only negative that I can see is that the instance variables of the outer class are not able to be final. But, the class is still immutable without this. Is there really any downside to this improvement in maintainability? There has to be a reason which he repeated the properties within the nested class that I'm not seeing?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >