Search Results

Search found 18556 results on 743 pages for 'computer organization'.

Page 15/743 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Remote Control Holder Mod Stores Tablet Close At Hand

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    If you spend most of your iPad time lounging on your couch or in bed, this simple IKEA hack will keep your favorite tablet stowed right at your finger tips. IKEA’s inexpensive remote control holder, the $4.99 Flort, is easy to hack from a remote holster into an tablet holder. You simply flip it around, sew up the edge of the back flap, and holster your tablet in it–your tablet fits all the way inside, in the above image the iPad is tucked in semi-precariously to demonstrate it sliding inside. Hit up the link below for step-by-step pictures. Smartest Way to Store Your iPad for $4.99 [IKEAHackers] HTG Explains: When Do You Need to Update Your Drivers? How to Make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *Actually* Fast! Amazon’s New Kindle Fire Tablet: the How-To Geek Review

    Read the article

  • Organizing code for iOS app development

    - by KronoS
    I've been developing an app for the iOS platform, and as I've been going along, I've noticed that I've done a terrible job of keeping my files (.h, .m, .mm) organized. Is there any industry standards or best practices when it comes to organizing files for an iOS project? My files include custom classes (beside the view controllers), customized View Controllers, third-party content, code that works only on iOS 5.0+ and code that works on previous versions. What I'm looking for is a solution to keep things organized in a manner that others (or myself in years to come) can look at this and understand the basic structure of the application and not get lost in the multiple files found therein.

    Read the article

  • When using membership provider, do you use the user ID or the username?

    - by Chris
    I've come across this is in a couple of different applications that I've worked on. They all used the ASP.NET Membership Provider for user accounts and controlling access to certain areas, but when we've gotten down into the code I've noticed that in one we're passing around the string based user name, like "Ralph Waters", or we're passing around the Guid based user ID from the membership table. Now both seem to work. You can make methods which get by username, or get by user ID, but both have felt somewhat "funny". When you pass a string like "Ralph Waters" you're passing essentially two separate words that make up a unique identifier. And with a Guid, you're passing around a string/number combination which can be cast and made unique. So my question is this; when using Membership Provider, which do you use, the username or the user ID to get back to the user? Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • Calendar like tool for managing multiple clients simultaneously?

    - by Yuji Tomita
    I've tried several systems to keep my clients requests / work organized, but somehow they still fall through the cracks. I don't like the idea of a bug tracker-like site for every client (I would not check them all). Ideally, it's all in one page but separated by client. What systems do you guys use? I'm about to just use a spreadsheet with columns for clients. Just curious if there's something better out there :) I've seen smartsheet in action which is basically a really nice spreadsheet that shows bars of time between things that are due. This looks promising.

    Read the article

  • What are the tradeoffs for using 'partial view models'?

    - by Kenny Evitt
    I've become aware of an itch due to some non-DRY code pertaining to view model classes in an (ASP.NET) MVC web application and I'm thinking of scratching my itch by organizing code in various 'partial view model' classes. By partial-view-model, I'm referring to a class like a view model class in an analogous way to how partial views are like views, i.e. a way to encapsulate common info and behavior. To strengthen the 'analogy', and to aid in visually organizing the code in my IDE, I was thinking of naming the partial-view-model classes with a _ prefix, e.g. _ParentItemViewModel. As a slightly more concrete example of why I'm thinking along these lines, imagine that I have a domain-model-entity class ParentItem and the user-friendly descriptive text that identifies these items to users is complex enough that I'd like to encapsulate that code in a method in a _ParentItemViewModel class, for which I can then include an object or a collection of objects of that class in all the view model classes for all the views that need to include a reference to a parent item, e.g. ChildItemViewModel can have a ParentItem property of the _ParentItemViewModel class type, so that in my ChildItemView view, I can use @Model.ParentItem.UserFriendlyDescription as desired, like breadcrumbs, links, etc. Edited 2014-02-06 09:56 -05 As a second example, imagine that I have entity classes SomeKindOfBatch, SomeKindOfBatchDetail, and SomeKindOfBatchDetailEvent, and a view model class and at least one view for each of those entities. Also, the example application covers a lot more than just some-kind-of-batches, so that it wouldn't really be useful or sensible to include info about a specific some-kind-of-batch in all of the project view model classes. But, like the above example, I have some code, say for generating a string for identifying a some-kind-of-batch in a user-friendly way, and I'd like to be able to use that in several views, say as breadcrumb text or text for a link. As a third example, I'll describe another pattern I'm currently using. I have a Contact entity class, but it's a fat class, with dozens of properties, and at least a dozen references to other fat classes. However, a lot of view model classes need properties for referencing a specific contact and most of those need other properties for collections of contacts, e.g. possible contacts to be referenced for some kind of relationship. Most of these view model classes only need a small fraction of all of the available contact info, basically just an ID and some kind of user-friendly description (i.e. a friendly name). It seems to be pretty useful to have a 'partial view model' class for contacts that all of these other view model classes can use. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding 'view model class' – I understand a view model class as always corresponding to a view. But maybe I'm assuming too much.

    Read the article

  • Organizing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

    - by OnesimusUnbound
    As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application project folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three tier, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

    Read the article

  • Type dependencies vs directory structure

    - by paul
    Something I've been wondering about recently is how to organize types in directories/namespaces w.r.t. their dependencies. One method I've seen, which I believe is the recommendation for both Haskell and .NET (though I can't find the references for this at the moment), is: Type Type/ATypeThatUsesType Type/AnotherTypeThatUsesType My natural inclination, however, is to do the opposite: Type Type/ATypeUponWhichTypeDepends Type/AnotherTypeUponWhichTypeDepends Questions: Is my inclination bass-ackwards? Are there any major benefits/pitfalls of one over the other? Is it just something that depends on the application, e.g. whether you're building a library vs doing normal coding?

    Read the article

  • What You Said: How You Organize Your Apps

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Earlier this week we asked you to share your tips and tricks for keeping your apps organized and accessible; now we’re back to showcase some great reader tips to help you manage your mountain of apps. One of the trends was striving for consistency across environments. Henrique highlights how this plays out on a dual OS setup: On my windows desktop I use the taskbar and to keep my day to day applications (basically firefox, itunes, office, adobe, evernote and wunderkit), and whenever I need something else, I use windows built in search, which is quite fast, despite needing a few more clicks than spotlight would. On my macbook the dock is basically mirrors my taskbar, and I use spotlight for other applications, but launchpad is wining my heart a bit more every day. It’s faster then than accessing the applications folder and the windows start menu, and possibly even than spotlight, at least for apps How To Properly Scan a Photograph (And Get An Even Better Image) The HTG Guide to Hiding Your Data in a TrueCrypt Hidden Volume Make Your Own Windows 8 Start Button with Zero Memory Usage

    Read the article

  • How do you organize information?

    - by zvrba
    I have a relatively large collection of useful books (paper and electronic), [academic] papers (mostly electronic) and web bookmarks. However, I don't have an overview of the material. Currently I have most of the electronic (PDF/DJVU) material in a single hierarchical folder and use filename search. Two questions. Do you have a similar problem, and how do you deal with it? Can you recommend some software to help with organizing bibliographic information, including web links. Easy editing of hierarchy and tags is a must. I would also like to be able to write own comments for each entry. [With my current scheme, just using the filesystem, does not provide other metadata.] A plugin for emacs would be perfect, but it's not a must. (org-mode MIGHT be adequate).

    Read the article

  • how do you remember programming related stuff?

    - by dan leadgy
    How do you remember programming related stuff? Did you get the feeling you did encounter the error you have now a few years ago and you could swear you knew the cause but now you forgot it? Did you work with the xsl's string parsing some time ago but now you can't remember exactly which are the string functions altogether from xsl and you have to start from scratch? Or perhaps you forget about some feature from Apache Commons like "filtering a collection by some predicate" that you surely used in the past. So how do you do it? I tried having a blog but when I develop apps, I never find the time to update the blog or write about my experiences. Also, using a wiki is a nice thing but then I found it difficult to keep a clean separation between them since many times I needed to change a blog post to add new information about that topic. This made me think that I actually should have put this topic in the wiki instead of the blog. Do you have any systems that help you remember about your programming experience? What's your setup?

    Read the article

  • What tool do you use to organise your tasks?

    - by Gearóid
    Hi, I've been a web developer for four years now and I've yet to come across a nice piece of software that allows me to manage my day to day tasks well. In theory, I should be able to just pull up a textfile and write: write test scripts check code into svn remember to go home But obviously this isnt very usable. I've tried stuff like Ta-da List but it feels quite limited. JIRA is great for bug tracking but what if I have to remember to go to the bank at 2pm. Is there anything piece of software out there that helps organise programmers? I'm really interested in hearing what you guys have to say on this one. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What You Said: How You Sync and Organize Your Bookmarks

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Earlier this week we asked you to share your favorite techniques for synchronizing and organizing your browser bookmarks. Now we’re back to highlight the most popular techniques, tricks, and services. By far and away, Xmarks was the most frequently mentioned service. For the unfamiliar, Xmarks is a bookmark syncing service that is packed with features. Not only does Xmarks sync bookmarks between browsers and/or computers it also supports iOS, Android, and BlackBerry (mobile integration requires an upgrade to the premium account). In addition to syncing the bookmarks it also integrates with your search results so you can see how other Xmarks users have ranked sites within your search results. Steve-O-Rama highlights one of the many benefits of Xmarks: Xmarks seems to do the job for me. I’ve got a handful of machines, each with three or four browsers; over the years, I’ve accumulated thousands of bookmarks, stretching across many areas of interest. Trying to keep them all straight had been quite a struggle until Xmarks came along. I freaked out when the company was acquired by LastPass, but was subsequently relieved when they continued the free service. Xmarks has a very nice web interface to access, export, search, organize, and do many other things with your bookmarks. In this way, even if I’m on the go, I can access every bookmark I’ve made. Even so, I still make occasional local backups, directly from the browsers to a network folder. Delicious bookmarks, another veteran of the bookmark syncing services, had a fair number of supporters among the HTG readership. Use Amazon’s Barcode Scanner to Easily Buy Anything from Your Phone How To Migrate Windows 7 to a Solid State Drive Follow How-To Geek on Google+

    Read the article

  • Organazing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

    - by OnesimusUnbound
    As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application ptoject folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three teir, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

    Read the article

  • Static teams or dynamic teams?

    - by Richard DesLonde
    Is it better to assemble permanent teams of developers within the company that always work together, from project to project, or is it better to have dynamic teams that assemble for a project, and then dissasemble afterwards? My inclination is to treat the entire company as a "platoon" and to assemble "fireteams" for individual projects, choosing from the "platoon" those developers best suited for the project.

    Read the article

  • Layout of mathematical views (iOS)

    - by William Jockusch
    I am trying to figure out the right way to encapsulate graphical information about mathematical objects. It is not simple. For example, a matrix can include square brackets around its entries, or not. Some things carry down to sub-objects -- for example, a matrix might track the font size to be used by its entries. Similarly, the font color and the background color would carry down to the entries. Other things do not carry down. For example, the entries of the matrix do not need to know whether or not the matrix has those square brackets. Based on all of the above, I need to calculate sizes for everything, then frames. All of this can depend on the properties stored above. The size of a matrix depends on the sizes of its entries, and also on whether or not it has those brackets. What I am having a hard time with is not the individual ways to calculate sensible frames for this or that. It is the overall organizational structure of the whole thing. How can I keep track of it all without going crazy. One particular obstacle is worth mentioning -- for reasons I don't want to go into here, I need to calculate the sizes and frames for everything before I instantiate any actual views. So, for example, if I have a Matrix object, I need to calculate its size before I make a MatrixView. If I have an equation, I need to calculate the size of the view for the equation before I create the actual view. So I clearly need separate objects for those calculations. But I can't figure out a sensible class structure for those objects. If I put them all into a single class, I get some advantages because copying then becomes easy. But I also end up with a bloated class that contains info that is irrelevant for some objects -- such as whether or not to include those brackets around the matrix. But if I use a lot of different classes, copying properties becomes a real pain. If it matters, this is all in Objective C, for an iOS environment. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How do you organize your projects?

    - by Sergio
    Do you have any particular style of organizing projects? For example, currently I'm creating a project for a couple of schools here in Bolivia, this is how I organized it: TutoMentor (Solution) TutoMentor.UI (Winforms project) TutoMentor.Data (Class library project) How exactly do you organize your project? Do you have an example of something you organized and are proud of? Can you share a screenshot of the Solution pane? In the UI area of my application, I'm having trouble deciding on a good schema to organize different forms and where they belong. Edit: What about organizing different forms in the .UI project? Where/how should I group different form? Putting them all in root level of the project is a bad idea.

    Read the article

  • Is individual code ownership important?

    - by Jim Puls
    I'm in the midst of an argument with some coworkers over whether team ownership of the entire codebase is better than individual ownership of components of it. I'm a huge proponent of assigning every member of the team a roughly equal share of the codebase. It lets people take pride in their creation, gives the bug screeners an obvious first place to assign incoming tickets, and helps to alleviate "broken window syndrome". It also concentrates knowledge of specific functionality with one (or two) team members making bug fixes much easier. Most of all, it puts the final say on major decisions with one person who has a lot of input instead of with a committee. I'm not advocating for requiring permission if somebody else wants to change your code; maybe have the code review always be to the owner, sure. Nor am I suggesting building knowledge silos: there should be nothing exclusive about this ownership. But when suggesting this to my coworkers, I got a ton of pushback, certainly much more than I expected. So I ask the community: what are your opinions on working with a team on a large codebase? Is there something I'm missing about vigilantly maintaining collective ownership?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 (C#) Software Architecture

    - by ryanzec
    I am starting on a relatively large and ambitious ASP.NET MVC 3 project and just thinking about the best way to organize my code. The project is basically going to be a general management system that will be capable of supporting any type management system whether it be a blogging system, cms, reservation system, wikis, forums, project management system, etc…, each of them being just a separate 'module'. You can read more about it on my blog posted here : http://www.ryanzec.com/index.php/blog/details/8 (forgive me, the style of the site kinda sucks). For those who don't want to read the long blog post the basic idea is that the core system itself is nothing more than a users system with an admin interface to manage the users system. Then you just add on module as you need them and the module I will be creating is a simple blog post to test it out before I move on to the big module which is a project management system. Now I am just trying to think of the best way to structure this so that it is easy for users to add in there own modules but easy for me to update to core system without worrying about the user modifying the core code. I think the ideal way would be to have a number of core projects that user is specifically told not to modify otherwise the system may become unstable and future updates would not work. When the user wants to add in there own modules, they would just add in a new project (or multiple projects). The thing is I am not sure that it is even possible to use multiple projects all with their own controllers, razor view template, css, javascript, etc... in one web application. Ideally each module would have some of it own razor view templates, css, javascript, image files and also need access to some of the core razor view templates, css, javascript, image files which would is in a separate project. It is possible to have 1 web application run off of controllers, razor view templates, css, javascript, image files that are store in multiple projects? Is there a better was to structure this to allow the user to easily add in module with having to modify the core code?

    Read the article

  • What is a good way to share internal helpers?

    - by toplel32
    All my projects share the same base library that I have build up over quite some time. It contains utilities and static helper classes to assist them where .NET doesn't exactly offer what I want. Originally all the helpers were written mainly to serve an internal purpose and it has to stay that way, but sometimes they prove very useful to other assemblies. Now making them public in a reliable way is more complicated than most would think, for example all methods that assume nullable types must now contain argument checking while not charging internal utilities with the price of doing so. The price might be negligible, but it is far from right. While refactoring, I have revised this case multiple times and I've come up with the following solutions so far: Have an internal and public class for each helper The internal class contains the actual code while the public class serves as an access point which does argument checking. Cons: The internal class requires a prefix to avoid ambiguity (the best presentation should be reserved for public types) It isn't possible to discriminate methods that don't need argument checking   Have one class that contains both internal and public members (as conventionally implemented in .NET framework). At first, this might sound like the best possible solution, but it has the same first unpleasant con as solution 1. Cons: Internal methods require a prefix to avoid ambiguity   Have an internal class which is implemented by the public class that overrides any members that require argument checking. Cons: Is non-static, atleast one instantiation is required. This doesn't really fit into the helper class idea, since it generally consists of independent fragments of code, it should not require instantiation. Non-static methods are also slower by a negligible degree, which doesn't really justify this option either. There is one general and unavoidable consequence, alot of maintenance is necessary because every internal member will require a public counterpart. A note on solution 1: The first consequence can be avoided by putting both classes in different namespaces, for example you can have the real helper in the root namespace and the public helper in a namespace called "Helpers".

    Read the article

  • Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

    - by Bob Horn
    Disclaimer: The intent of this question isn't to discern what is better for the individual developer, but for the system as a whole. I've worked in environments where small teams managed certain areas. For example, there would be a small team for every one of these functions: UI Framework code Business/application logic Database I've also worked on teams where the developers were responsible for all of these areas and more (QA, analsyt, etc...). My current environment promotes agile development (specifically scrum) and everyone has their hands in every area mentioned above. While there are pros and cons to each approach, I'd be curious to know if there are more pros and cons than I list below, and also what the generally feeling is about which approach is better. Devs Do It All Pros 1. Developers may be more well-rounded 2. Developers know more of the system Cons 1. Everyone has their hands in all areas, increasing the probability of creating less-than-optimal results in that area 2. It can take longer to do something with which you are unfamiliar (jack of all trades, master of none) Devs Specialize Pros 1. Developers can create policies and procedures for their area of expertise and more easily enforce them 2. Developers have more of a chance to become deeply knowledgeable about their specific area and make it the best it can be 3. Other developers don't cross boundaries and degrade another area Cons 1. As one colleague put it: "Why would you want to pigeon-hole yourself like that?" (Meaning some developers won't get a chance to work in certain areas.) It's easy to say how wonderful agile is, and that we should do it all, but I'm somewhat of a fan of having areas of expertise. Without that expertise, I've seen code degrade, database schemas become difficult to manage, hack UI code, etc... Let's face it, some people make careers out of doing just UI work, or just database work. It's not that easy to just fill in and do as good of a job as an expert in that area.

    Read the article

  • Is individual code ownership important?

    - by Jim Puls
    I'm in the midst of an argument with some coworkers over whether team ownership of the entire codebase is better than individual ownership of components of it. I'm a huge proponent of assigning every member of the team a roughly equal share of the codebase. It lets people take pride in their creation, gives the bug screeners an obvious first place to assign incoming tickets, and helps to alleviate "broken window syndrome". It also concentrates knowledge of specific functionality with one (or two) team members making bug fixes much easier. Most of all, it puts the final say on major decisions with one person who has a lot of input instead of with a committee. I'm not advocating for requiring permission if somebody else wants to change your code; maybe have the code review always be to the owner, sure. Nor am I suggesting building knowledge silos: there should be nothing exclusive about this ownership. But when suggesting this to my coworkers, I got a ton of pushback, certainly much more than I expected. So I ask the community: what are your opinions on working with a team on a large codebase? Is there something I'm missing about vigilantly maintaining collective ownership?

    Read the article

  • Software/Application needed to store and organize random content [on hold]

    - by Rami.Shareef
    I have the need to store random contents (on my local hard drive/ laptop hard drive) for personal use so I can look these contents up later on when I need them. What I mean by random content is one of the following: Some sort of code Random fact Css / html / Javascript tips Or anything I might find interesting and want to keep for future reference I want to look up these entries by tags, the software should give me the ability to associate every entry with one tag or more. I have been having difficult time find applications offer this functionality, it is like a local database with search ability and easy data-entry methods. I can build one, but I don't have the time to invest in doing so. Can you refer me to any application/software that can do that, it would be great. It does not matter if it is paid or free.

    Read the article

  • How to become more productive in design and programming

    - by aurel
    Usually whenever I see tutorial videos (apart from the main subject) I learn a lot from their working habits, for example; they way they have set up their folders, what shotcuts they use. The best example was (long time a go) I say a jquery video, and half way through the author said something like “by the way you could have a code library” – that’s the only thing I remember from that video (but the author said it as something he assumed people know about) So I was wondering if someone knows any tip or any website which goes other how other professionals work, how they have set up their programming habits to help them not waste time in repetitive tasks.

    Read the article

  • Should accessible members of an internal class be internal too?

    - by Jeff Mercado
    I'm designing a set of APIs for some applications I'm working on. I want to keep the code style consistent in all the classes I write but I've found that there are a few inconsistencies that I'm introducing and I don't know what the best way to resolve them is. My example here is specific to C# but this would apply to any language with similar mechanisms. There are a few classes that I need for implementation purposes that I don't necessarily want to expose in the API so I make them internal whereever needed. Generally what I would do is design the class as I normally would (e.g., make members public/protected/private where necessary) and change the visibility level of the class itself to internal. So I might have a few classes that look like this: internal interface IMyItem { ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set); } internal class _SmallItem : IMyItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _SmallItem(/* small item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set) { /* ... */ } } internal abstract class _CompositeItem: IMyItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _CompositeItem(/* composite item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public abstract object UsefulInformation { get; } protected void HelperMethod(/* parameters */) { /* ... */ } } internal class _BigItem : _CompositeItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _BigItem(/* big item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public override object UsefulInformation { get { /* ... */ } } public ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set) { /* ... */ } } In another generated class (part of a parser/scanner), there is a structure that contains fields for all possible values it can represent. The class generated is internal too but I have control over the visibility of the members and decided to make them internal as well. internal partial struct ValueType { internal string String; internal ItemSet ItemSet; internal IMyItem MyItem; } internal class TokenValue { internal static int EQ(ItemSetScanner scanner) { /* ... */ } internal static int NAME(ItemSetScanner scanner, string value) { /* ... */ } internal static int VALUE(ItemSetScanner scanner, string value) { /* ... */ } //... } To me, this feels odd because the first set of classes, I didn't necessarily have to make some members public, they very well could have been made internal. internal members of an internal type can only be accessed internally anyway so why make them public? I just don't like the idea that the way I write my classes has to change drastically (i.e., change all uses of public to internal) just because the class is internal. Any thoughts on what I should do here? It makes sense to me that I might want to make some members of a class declared public, internal. But it's less clear to me when the class is declared internal.

    Read the article

  • What is an effective way to organize tasks for a new project?

    - by Dulan
    Is there a practical solution to organizing the initial tasks for a new project? To elaborate, imagine the features/stories/goals are laid out for a project. How might one go about organizing those into sane tasks for the first few versions? The scenario I typically have in mind has the features listed as a high-level reference for what the end user-experience should involve. The tasks for constructing such features are then broken down into chunks (such as "create interface for X component"). Such a task is not necessarily "tied" to only that feature and may be useful when building subsequent features. Is breaking features down into small, code-able solutions valid? Or should they be slightly removed from any specific implementation? I do not expect that there is one "right" answer to this question, but I am looking for a fairly pragmatic and unobtrusive approach. As a note, I'm looking for solutions that are independent of any tools or "systems" used for managing the tasks themselves.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >