Search Results

Search found 17259 results on 691 pages for 'behaviour driven design'.

Page 152/691 | < Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >

• How do I create a game that runs on Windows, iOS and Android?

  - by AspaApps

  I use C++ to create windows games and now I want to step into another other OS like Android or iOS. I'm totally familiar with C++ so I tried to create app for iOS using objective C it was working awesome. However, I also want to publish games for Android but not by using Java. I don't want to create a single game 5-6 times for other platforms. Is their any way that if I create game for Windows then it will work in Android and iOS ? Or should I use Action Script 3.0? If I use action script 3.0, will it require Flash player to run the game in Windows, Android, iOS?

  Read the article

• Single Responsibility Principle: Responsibility unknown

  - by lurkerbelow

  I store sessions in a SessionManager. The session manager has a dependency to ISessionPersister. SessionManager private readonly ISessionPersister sessionPersister; public SessionManager(ISessionPersister sessionPersister) { this.sessionPersister = sessionPersister; } ISessionPersister public interface ISessionPersister : IDisposable { void PersistSessions(Dictionary<string, ISession> sessions); } Q: If my application shuts down how / where do I call PersistSessions? Who is responsible? First Approach: Use Dispose in SessionManager protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (disposing) { if (this.sessionPersister != null && this.sessionMap != null && this.sessionMap.Count > 0) { this.sessionPersister.PersistSessions(this.sessionMap); } } } Is that the way to go or are there any better solutions?

  Read the article

• How does URL Rewriting affect SEO?

  - by Costa

  The following paragraph is from SEO Google Guide Google is good at crawling all types of URL structures, even if they're quite complex, but spending the time to make your URLs as simple as possible for both users and search engines can help. Some webmasters try to achieve this by rewriting their dynamic URLs to static ones; while Google is fine with this, we'd like to note that this is an advanced procedure and if done incorrectly, could cause crawling issues with your site. What makes URL re-writing implementation incorrect for GoogleBot? I am using Asp.net 3.5 framework.

  Read the article

• Service Layer - how broad should it be, and should it also be used from the local application?

  - by BornToCode

  The background: I need to build a desktop application with some operations (CRUD and more) (=winforms), I need to make another application which will re-use some of the functions of the main application (=webforms). I'm using service layer for reusing my functions. The service is calling the functions on the BL layer (correct me if I'm doing this wrong). so my desktop has 4 projects - DAL, BL, UI, WEBSERVICES. The dilemma (simple but I still need some more experienced opinions): In my main winform UI - should I call the functions from the BL - bl.getcustomers(), or do it similar to how I call it in the webform, and call the functions from the service - webservices.getcustomers? Should I create a service for every single function on the BL even if I need some of the functions only in one UI? for example - should I create services for all the CRUD operations, even though I need to re-use only update operation in the webform? YOUR HELP IS MUCH APPRECIATED

  Read the article

• Creating a Application in Winrt that requires Internet

  - by wtsang02

  I am making a paid App for Windows 8, c#. I am wondering which is better? If my application doesn't need internet connection normally but does requires internet connection for the first time to download content data. --Makes my life easier Load the default data when installing. Then ask the user if he wants to update in app. -- Making the default data will be pain. Now my big question is, is it safe to assume user has access to internet now-a-days when using application that shouldn't require internet?

  Read the article

• Should one use a separate database for application data and user data?

  - by trycatch

  I’ve been working on a project for a little while and I’m unsure which is the better architecture. I’m interested in the consensus. The answer to me seems fairly obvious but something about it is digging at me and I can't pick out what. The TL;DR is: how do you handle a program with application data and user data in the same DB which needs to be able to receive updates to the application data periodically? One database for user data and one for application, or both in one? The detailed version is.. if an application has a database which needs to maintain application data AND user data, and the user data all references application data, it feels more natural to me to store them in the same database. But if there exists a need to be able to update the application data within this database periodically, should this be stripped into two databases so that one can simply download the updated application data database file as an update and replace the old one? Or should they remain as one database, and the application data be updated via a script which inserts the new data into the existing database? The second sounds clearly preferable to me... but for some reason just doesn’t feel right, and I can't pick out quite why.

  Read the article

• Tester/Doer pattern: Assume the caller conforms to the pattern or be defensive and repeat the check?

  - by Daniel Hilgarth

  Assume a simple class that implements the Tester/Doer pattern: public class FooCommandHandler : ICommandHandler { public bool CanHandle(object command) { return command is FooCommand; } public void Handle(object command) { var fooCommand = (FooCommand)command; // Do something with fooCommand } } Now, if someone doesn't conform to the pattern and calls Handle without verifying the command via CanHandle, the code in Handle throws an exception. However, depending on the actual implementation of Handle this can be a whole range of different exceptions. The following implementation would check CanHandle again in Handle and throw a descriptive exception: public void Handle(object command) { if(!CanHandle(command)) throw new TesterDoerPatternUsageViolationException("Please call CanHandle first"); // actual implementation of handling the command. } This has the advantage that the exception is very descriptive. It has the disadvantage that CanHandle is called twice for "good" clients. Is there a consensus on which variation should be used?

  Read the article

• How can I cleanly and elegantly handle data and dependancies between classes

  - by Neophyte

  I'm working on 2d topdown game in SFML 2, and need to find an elegant way in which everything will work and fit together. Allow me to explain. I have a number of classes that inherit from an abstract base that provides a draw method and an update method to all the classes. In the game loop, I call update and then draw on each class, I imagine this is a pretty common approach. I have classes for tiles, collisions, the player and a resource manager that contains all the tiles/images/textures. Due to the way input works in SFML I decided to have each class handle input (if required) in its update call. Up until now I have been passing in dependencies as needed, for example, in the player class when a movement key is pressed, I call a method on the collision class to check if the position the player wants to move to will be a collision, and only move the player if there is no collision. This works fine for the most part, but I believe it can be done better, I'm just not sure how. I now have more complex things I need to implement, eg: a player is able to walk up to an object on the ground, press a key to pick it up/loot it and it will then show up in inventory. This means that a few things need to happen: Check if the player is in range of a lootable item on keypress, else do not proceed. Find the item. Update the sprite texture on the item from its default texture to a "looted" texture. Update the collision for the item: it might have changed shape or been removed completely. Inventory needs to be updated with the added item. How do I make everything communicate? With my current system I will end up with my classes going out of scope, and method calls to each other all over the place. I could tie up all the classes in one big manager and give each one a reference to the parent manager class, but this seems only slightly better. Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated! If anything is unclear, I'm happy to expand on things.

  Read the article

• Anemic Domain Model, Business Logic and DataMapper (PHP)

  - by sunwukung

  I've implemented a rudimentary ORM layer based on DataMapper (I don't want to use a full blown ORM like Propel/Doctrine - for anything beyond simple fetch/save ops I prefer to access the data directly layer using a SQL abstraction layer). Following the DataMapper pattern, I've endeavoured to keep all persistence operations in the Mapper - including the location of related entities. My Entities have access to their Mapper, although I try not to call Mapper logic from the Entity interface (although this would be simple enough). The result is: // get a mapper and produce an entity $ProductMapper = $di->get('product_mapper'); $Product = $ProductMapper->find('[email protected]','email'); //.. mutaute some values.. save $ProductMapper->save($Product) // uses __get to trigger relation acquisition $Manufacturer = $Product->manufacturer; I've read some articles regarding the concept of an Anemic Domain model, i.e. a Model that does not contain any "business logic". When demonstrating the sort of business logic ideally suited to a Domain Model, however, acquiring related data items is a common example. Therefore I wanted to ask this question: Is persistence logic appropriate in Domain Model objects?

  Read the article

• How to name multi-setter?

  - by IAdapter

  I'm struggling with how to name this method, I don't like the "set" prefix, because I feel it should be reserved for normal "dumb" setters and some tools might not like it (i did not check it in checkstyle, pmd, etc., but I got a feeling they won't like it.) for example (in java, but I feel its language agnostic) public void setField1Field2(String field1, String field2) { this.field1 = field1; this.field2 = field2; } The only purpose of this method is ONLY to set, this method is needed and cannot be joined with any other (because of framework used).

  Read the article

• Necessary Infrastructure for large project with many components communicating through IPCs

  - by jluzwick

  I have a fairly in depth question which probably doesn't have an exact answer. As a software engineer, I am usually tasked with working on a program or project with minimal understanding of how other components or programs in the project interact with each other. When one program fails in a sea of multiple components and processes, what infrastructure elements are necessary to ensure that the problem can be accurately tracked to the violating application? More specifically, what infrastructure elements should be necessary for this large project and which are optional but very helpful. One such example I can think of is some form of a common logging infrastructure that allows for a developer or tester to easily browse through a log that contains numerous components for messages that might allude to the culprit program along with a "trail" of what happened before the issue occurred. I'm thinking of something similar to Androids alogcat tool. These necessary infrastructure elements should be language-agnostic. While these elements should be understood by all engineers on the team in question, which elements should be understood at great detail by the technical system engineers and what should the individual software engineers be responsible for adding to their tools to allow for such infrastructures to take hold? Please feel free to ask for clarification if something does not make sense as I understand this question is very broad and needs some refinement. I will refine as necessary from the answers and comments I receive. Thanks for any help!

  Read the article

• IoC containers and service locator pattern

  - by TheSilverBullet

  I am trying to get an understanding of Inversion of Control and the dos and donts of this. Of all the articles I read, there is one by Mark Seemann (which is widely linked to in SO) which strongly asks folks not to use the service locator pattern. Then somewhere along the way, I came across this article by Ken where he helps us build our own IoC. I noticed that is is nothing but an implementation of service locator pattern. Questions: Is my observation correct that this implementation is the service locator pattern? If the answer to 1. is yes, then Do all IoC containers (like Autofac) use the service locator pattern? If the answer to 1. is no, then why is this differen? Is there any other pattern (other than DI) for inversion of control?

  Read the article

• Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented by definition?

  - by tieTYT

  Is the Entity Component System architecture object oriented, by definition? It seems more procedural or functional to me. My opinion is that it doesn't prevent you from implementing it in an OO language, but it would not be idiomatic to do so in a staunchly OO way. It seems like ECS separates data (E & C) from behavior (S). As evidence: The idea is to have no game methods embedded in the entity. And: The component consists of a minimal set of data needed for a specific purpose Systems are single purpose functions that take a set of entities which have a specific component I think this is not object oriented because a big part of being object oriented is combining your data and behavior together. As evidence: In contrast, the object-oriented approach encourages the programmer to place data where it is not directly accessible by the rest of the program. Instead, the data is accessed by calling specially written functions, commonly called methods, which are bundled in with the data. ECS, on the other hand, seems to be all about separating your data from your behavior.

  Read the article

• Dynamic Query Generation : suggestion for better approaches

  - by Gaurav Parmar

  I am currently designing a functionality in my Web Application where the verified user of the application can execute queries which he wishes to from the predefined set of queries with where clause varying as per user's choice. For example,Table ABC contains the following Template query called SecretReport "Select def as FOO, ghi as BAR from MNO where " SecretReport can have parameters XYZ, ILP. Again XYZ can have values as 1,2 and ILP can have 3,4 so if the user chooses ILP=3, he will get the result of the following query on his screen "Select def as FOO, ghi as BAR from MNO where ILP=3" Again the user is allowed permutations of XYZ / ILP My initial thought is that User will be shown a list of Report names and each report will have parameters and corresponding values. But this approach although technically simple does not appear intuitive. I would like to extend this functionality to a more generic level. Such that the user can choose a table and query based on his requirements. Of course we do not want the end user to take complete control of DB. But only tables and fields that are relevant to him. At present we are defining what is relevant in the code. But I want the Admin to take over this functionality such that he can decide what is relevant and expose the same to the user. On user's side it should be intuitive what is available to him and what queries he can form. Please share your thoughts what is the most user friendly way to provide this feature to the end user.

  Read the article

• Why is x=x++ undefined?

  - by ugoren

  It's undefined because the it modifies x twice between sequence points. The standard says it's undefined, therefore it's undefined. That much I know. But why? My understanding is that forbidding this allows compilers to optimize better. This could have made sense when C was invented, but now seems like a weak argument. If we were to reinvent C today, would we do it this way, or can it be done better? Or maybe there's a deeper problem, that makes it hard to define consistent rules for such expressions, so it's best to forbid them? So suppose we were to reinvent C today. I'd like to suggest simple rules for expressions such as x=x++, which seem to me to work better than the existing rules. I'd like to get your opinion on the suggested rules compared to the existing ones, or other suggestions. Suggested Rules: Between sequence points, order of evaluation is unspecified. Side effects take place immediately. There's no undefined behavior involved. Expressions evaluate to this value or that, but surely won't format your hard disk (strangely, I've never seen an implementation where x=x++ formats the hard disk). Example Expressions x=x++ - Well defined, doesn't change x. First, x is incremented (immediately when x++ is evaluated), then it's old value is stored in x. x++ + ++x - Increments x twice, evaluates to 2*x+2. Though either side may be evaluated first, the result is either x + (x+2) (left side first) or (x+1) + (x+1) (right side first). x = x + (x=3) - Unspecified, x set to either x+3 or 6. If the right side is evaluated first, it's x+3. It's also possible that x=3 is evaluated first, so it's 3+3. In either case, the x=3 assignment happens immediately when x=3 is evaluated, so the value stored is overwritten by the other assignment. x+=(x=3) - Well defined, sets x to 6. You could argue that this is just shorthand for the expression above. But I'd say that += must be executed after x=3, and not in two parts (read x, evaluate x=3, add and store new value). What's the Advantage? Some comments raised this good point. It's not that I'm after the pleasure of using x=x++ in my code. It's a strange and misleading expression. What I want is to be able to understand complicated expressions. Normally, a complicated expression is no more than the sum of its parts. If you understand the parts and the operators combining them, you can understand the whole. C's current behavior seems to deviate from this principle. One assignment plus another assignment suddenly doesn't make two assignments. Today, when I look at x=x++, I can't say what it does. With my suggested rules, I can, by simply examining its components and their relations.

  Read the article

• Avoiding null in a controller

  - by Kevin Burke

  I'm trying to work through how to write this code. def get(params): """ Fetch a user's details, or 404 """ user = User.fetch_by_id(params['id']) if not user: abort(404) # Render some template for the user... What's the best way to handle the case where the lookup fails? One principle says you should avoid returning null values from functions. These lead to mistakes and AttributeErrors etc. later on in the file. Another idea is to have fetch_by_id raise a ValueError or similar if no user exists with that id. However there's a general principle that you shouldn't use exceptions for control flow, either, which doesn't help much. What could be done better in this case?

  Read the article

• How do you plan your asynchronous code?

  - by NullOrEmpty

  I created a library that is a invoker for a web service somewhere else. The library exposes asynchronous methods, since web service calls are a good candidate for that matter. At the beginning everything was just fine, I had methods with easy to understand operations in a CRUD fashion, since the library is a kind of repository. But then business logic started to become complex, and some of the procedures involves the chaining of many of these asynchronous operations, sometimes with different paths depending on the result value, etc.. etc.. Suddenly, everything is very messy, to stop the execution in a break point it is not very helpful, to find out what is going on or where in the process timeline have you stopped become a pain... Development becomes less quick, less agile, and to catch those bugs that happens once in a 1000 times becomes a hell. From the technical point, a repository that exposes asynchronous methods looked like a good idea, because some persistence layers could have delays, and you can use the async approach to do the most of your hardware. But from the functional point of view, things became very complex, and considering those procedures where a dozen of different calls were needed... I don't know the real value of the improvement. After read about TPL for a while, it looked like a good idea for managing tasks, but in the moment you have to combine them and start to reuse existing functionality, things become very messy. I have had a good experience using it for very concrete scenarios, but bad experience using them broadly. How do you work asynchronously? Do you use it always? Or just for long running processes? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Isn't class scope purely for organization?

  - by Di-0xide

  Isn't scope just a way to organize classes, preventing outside code from accessing certain things you don't want accessed? More specifically, is there any functional gain to having public, protected, or private-scoped methods? Is there any advantage to classifying method/property scope rather than to, say, just public-ize everything? My presumption says no simply because, in binary code, there is no sense of scope (other than r/w/e, which isn't really scope at all, but rather global permissions for a block of memory). Is this correct? What about in languages like Java and C#[.NET]?

  Read the article

• How important is index size when searching?

  - by Michael K

  My company has recently began using Apache Solr to search its data. As we learn how to use it we have gone down the path of indexing multiple fields to get the results we need. Most of these are either N-Grammed or Edge-N-Grammed. Gramming by nature takes up a lot of space, which takes more time to search. Space is cheap, but time is less so. Index time is not too important, since a delta-import (only get the changes since last index) is extremely quick and you only pay a penalty on the first import. What we've not been able to determine is what effect the index size has on query times. Obviously a larger index takes longer to search, but the time added by n-gramming a field is difficult to predict. How do you determine whether a field is worth gramming? Can you predict how much longer a query will take when you gram a field?

  Read the article

• Progressbar patterns (Eclipse)

  - by JesperE

  I've struggled quite a bit with Eclipse and progress-monitors to try to have good progressbars which report useful progress information to the user. Inevitably the code gets cluttered with lots of things like if (monitor.isCancelled()) return; ... lengthyMethodCall(monitor.newChild(10)); and all over the place I need to pass a IProgressMonitor as an argument to my methods. This is bad, for several reasons: The code gets cluttered with lots of code which is not relevant to what the function actually does. I need to manually guesstimate which parts of the code takes time, and which parts do not. It interacts badly with automated tests; where much of the information which goes into a progressbar instead should be logged for later inspection. Is there a way out of this? Are there tools which can help me out with one or more of these problems? Should I be looking at Aspect-Oriented Programming tools, or are there other alternatives?

  Read the article

• How should UI layer pass user input to BL layer?

  - by BornToCode

  I'm building an n-tier application, I have UI, BL, DAL & Entities (built from POCO) projects. (All projects have a reference to the Entities). My question is - how should I pass user input from the UI to the BL, as a bunch of strings passed to the BL method and the BL will build the object from the parameters, or should I build the objects inside the UI submit_function and send objects as parameters? EDIT: I wrote n-tier application, but what I actually meant was just layers.

  Read the article

• Passing functions into other functions as parameters, bad practice?

  - by BlueHat

  We've been in the process of changing how our AS3 application talks to our back end and we're in the process of implementing a REST system to replace our old one. Sadly the developer who started the work is now on long term sick leave and it's been handed over to me. I've been working with it for the past week or so now and I understand the system, but there's one thing that's been worrying me. There seems to be a lot of passing of functions into functions. For example our class that makes the call to our servers takes in a function that it will then call and pass an object to when the process is complete and errors have been handled etc. It's giving me that "bad feeling" where I feel like it's horrible practice and I can think of some reasons why but I want some confirmation before I propose a re-work to system. I was wondering if anyone had any experience with this possible problem?

  Read the article

• What are the advantages of storing xml in a relational database?

  - by Chris

  I was poking around the AdventureWorks database today and I noticed that a number of tables (HumanResources.JobCandidate and Sales.Individual for example) have a column which is storing xml data. What I would to know is, what is the advantage of storing basically a database table row's worth of data in another table's column? Doesn't this make it difficult to query off of this information? Or is the assumption that the data won't need to be queried and just needs to be stored?

  Read the article

• Preferred way for dealing with customer-defined data in enterprise application

  - by Axarydax

  Let's say that we have a small enterprise web (intranet) application for managing data for car dealers. It has screens for managing customers, inventory, orders, warranties and workshops. This application is installed at 10 customer sites for different car dealers. First version of this application was created without any way to provide for customer-specific data. For example, if dealer A wanted to be able to attach a photo to a customer, dealer B wanted to add e-mail contact to each workshop, and dealer C wanted to attach multiple PDF reports to a warranty, each and every feature like this was added to the application, so all of the customers received everything on new update. However, this will inevitably lead to conflicts as the number of customers grow as their usage patterns are unique, and if, for instance, a specific dealer requested to have an ability to attach (for some reason) a color of inventory item (and be able to search by this color) as a required item, others really wouldn't need this feature, and definitely will not want it to be a required item. Or, one dealer would like to manage e-mail contacts for their employees on a separate screen of the application. I imagine that a solution for this is to use a kind of plugin system, where we would have a core of the application that provides for standard features like customers, inventory, etc, and all of the customer's installed plugins. There would be different kinds of plugins - standalone screens like e-mail contacts for employees, with their own logic, and customer plugin which would extend or decorate inventory items (like photo or color). Inventory (customer,order,...) plugins would require to have installation procedure, hooks for plugging into the item editor, item displayer, item filtering for searching, backup hook and such. Is this the right way to solve this problem?

  Read the article

• Designing a user-defined list to be stored in a relational database - Should I include user index?

  - by Zaemz

  By index, I mean, as the user creates the list, each item receives an integer index for its place in that particular list. Since there will be a table of ListItems, I'd prefer to avoid using the name "Index" for the field. Then I was thinking - should I even include the list index in the database? I figured I would because the list would be created in the same fashion every time, then. Or I could order the list for the user based on its actual primary key, since the list items are created in succession anyway... What should I do?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >