Search Results

Search found 8397 results on 336 pages for 'implementation'.

Page 160/336 | < Previous Page | 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167  | Next Page >

  • Canonical representation of a class object containing a list element in XML

    - by dendini
    I see that most implementations of JAX-RS represent a class object containing a list of elements as follows (assume a class House containing a list of People) <houses> <house> <person> <name>Adam</name> </person> <person> <name>Blake</name> </person> </house> <house> </house> </houses> The result above is obtained for instance from Jersey 2 JAX-RS implementation, notice Jersey creates a wrapper class "houses" around each house, however strangely it doesn't create a wrapper class around each person! I don't feel this is a correct mapping of a list, in other words I'd feel more confortable with something like this: <houses> <house> <persons> <person> <name>Adam</name> </person> <person> <name>Blake</name> </person> </persons> </house> <house> </house> </houses> Is there any document explaining how an object should be correctly mapped apart from any opninion?

    Read the article

  • Understanding Box2d Restitution & Bouncing

    - by layzrr
    I'm currently trying to implement basketball bouncing into my game using Box2d (jBox2d technically), but I'm a bit confused about restitution. While trying to create the ball in the testbed first, I've run into infinite bouncing, as described in this question, however obviously not using my own implementation. The Box2d manual describes restitution as follows: Restitution is used to make objects bounce. The restitution value is usually set to be between 0 and 1. Consider dropping a ball on a table. A value of zero means the ball won't bounce. This is called an inelastic collision. A value of one means the ball's velocity will be exactly reflected. This is called a perfectly elastic collision. My confusion lies in that I am still getting infinite bouncing with restitution values at 0.75/0.8. The same behavior can be seen in the testbed under Collision Watching - Varying Restitution, on the 6th and 7th balls. I believe the last one has restitution of 1, which makes sense, but I don't understand why the second to last ball bounces infinitely (as is happening with my working basketball I've created). I am looking to understand the restitution concept more fully, as well as look for a solution to infinite bouncing with the Box2d framework. My instinct was to sleep objects that appeared to be moving in very small increments, but this seems like a misuse of the engine. Should I just work with lower restitution values altogether?

    Read the article

  • Should I use an interface when methods are only similar?

    - by Joshua Harris
    I was posed with the idea of creating an object that checks if a point will collide with a line: public class PointAndLineSegmentCollisionDetector { public void Collides(Point p, LineSegment s) { // ... } } This made me think that if I decided to create a Box object, then I would need a PointAndBoxCollisionDetector and a LineSegmentAndBoxCollisionDetector. I might even realize that I should have a BoxAndBoxCollisionDetector and a LineSegmentAndLineSegmentCollisionDetector. And, when I add new objects that can collide I would need to add even more of these. But, they all have a Collides method, so everything I learned about abstraction is telling me, "Make an interface." public interface CollisionDetector { public void Collides(Spatial s1, Spatial s2); } But now I have a function that only detects some abstract class or interface that is used by Point, LineSegment, Box, etc.. So if I did this then each implementation would have to to a type check to make sure that the types are the appropriate type because the collision algorithm is different for each different type match up. Another solution could be this: public class CollisionDetector { public void Collides(Point p, LineSegment s) { ... } public void Collides(LineSegment s, Box b) { ... } public void Collides(Point p, Box b) { ... } // ... } But, this could end up being a huge class that seems unwieldy, although it would have simplicity in that it is only a bunch of Collide methods. This is similar to C#'s Convert class. Which is nice because it is large, but it is simple to understand how it works. This seems to be the better solution, but I thought I should open it for discussion as a wiki to get other opinions.

    Read the article

  • Complexity of defense AI

    - by Fredrik Johansson
    I have a non-released game, and currently it's only possible to play with another human being. As the game rules are made up by me, I think it would be great if new players could learn basic game play by playing against an AI opponent. I mean it's not like Tennis, where the majority knows at least the fundamental rules. On the other hand, I'm a bit concerned that this AI implementation can be quite complex. I hope you can help me with an complexity estimation. I've tried to summarize the gameplay below. Is this defense AI very hard to do? Basic Defense Game Play Player Defender can move within his land, i.e. inside a random, non-convex, polygon. This land will also contain obstacles modeled as polygons, that Defender has to move around. Player Attacker has also a land, modeled as another such polygon. Assume that Defender shall defend against Attacker. Attacker will then throw a thingy towards Defender's land. To be rewarded, Attacker wants to hit Defender's land, and Defender will want to strike away the thingy from his land before it stops to prevent Attacker from scoring. To feint Defender, Attacker might run around within his land before the throw, and based on these attacker movements Defender shall then continuously move to the best defense position within his land.

    Read the article

  • ArchBeat Link-o-Rama for December 4, 2012

    - by Bob Rhubart
    Exalogic 2.0.1 Tea Break Snippets - Creating and using Distribution Groups | The Old Toxophilist "Although in many cases we, as Cloud Users, may not be to worried how the Virtualisation Algorithm decides where to place our vServers," says The Old Toxopholist, "there are cases where it is extremely important that vServers run on distinct physical compute nodes." There's plenty more on the subject in his blog post. Oracle Endeca (2.3) Record Level Security | Adam Seed Adam Sneed's blog post covers "the basics of security within Endeca Information Discovery, as these basic security objects are required in order to explain the implementation of record level security." ODI Handling DQ | Gurcan Orhan Oracle ACE Director Gurcan Orhan suggests you have fun with these scripts for Oracle Data Integrator. Parleys Testimonial at GlassFish Community Event - JavaOne 2012 Video of Parley's webmaster Stephan Janssen's presentation at the GlassFish Community Event at JavaOne 2012, in which he explains why Parley's moved from Tomcat to GlassFish. Java Spotlight Episode 109: Pete Muir on CDI 1.1 This edition of Roger Brinkley's Java Spotlight Podcast features an interview with CDI 1.1 spec lead Pete Muir of JBoss/Red Hat. Muir talks about the features in CDI 1.1 and what to expect in the future. Webcast: Java Management Extensions with Oracle WebLogic Server 12c Dr. Frank Munz and Dave Cabelus do the talking in this on-demand webcast focused on Oracle WebLogic Server 12c with Java Management Extensions (JMX). Using the Coherence API to get Portable Object Format bytes | Bruno Borges Bruno Borges shares a code snippet that illustrates how easy it is to use the Coherence API. Thought for the Day "Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it." — Anonymous Source: SoftwareQuotes.com

    Read the article

  • Automatic Generalization

    - by Nick Harrison
    I have been interested in functional programming since college. I played around a little with LISP back then, but I have not had an opportunity since then. Now that F# ships standard with VS 2010, I figured now is my chance. So, I was reading up on it a little over the weekend when I came across a very interesting topic. F# includes a concept called "Automatic Generalization". As I understand it, the compiler will look at your method and analyze how you are using parameters. It will automatically switch to a generic parameter if it is possible based on your usage. Wow! I am looking forward to playing with this. I have long been an advocate of using the most generic types possible especially when developing library classes. Use the highest level base class that you can get away with. Use an interface instead of a specific implementation. I don't advocate passing object around, but you get the idea. Tools like resharper, fxCop, and most static code analysis tools provide guidance to help you identify when a more generalized type is possible, but this is the first time I have heard about the compiler taking matters into its own hands. I like the sound of this. We'll see if it is a good idea or not. What are your thoughts? Am I missing the mark on what Automatic Generalization does in F#? How would this work in C#? Do you see any problems with this?

    Read the article

  • System testing - making sure the system conforms to specification. Validation?

    - by user970696
    After weeks of research I have nearly completed my thesis, yet I am unable to clear up my confusion contained in all previous threads here (and in many books): During system testing, we check the system function against system analysis (functional system design) - but that would fit to a definition of verification according to many books. But I follow ISO12207, which considers all testing as validation (making sure work product meets requirement for intended use). How can I justify that unit testing or system testing is validation, even though when I check it against specification? Which fullfils the definiton of verification? When testing that e.g. "Save button" works, is it validation? This picture shows my understanding of V&V, so different from many other sources, including ISTQB etc. Essential problem I have is that a book using the same picture also states on another place that: test activities in the area of validation are usability, alpha and beta testing. For verification, testable system requirements are defined whose correct implementation can be tested through system tests. Isn't that the opposite of what the picture says? Most books present the following picture, where validation is just making sure that customer needs are satisfied. Mind you that according to ISO, validation activity is testing.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection with SAT: False Collision for Diagonal Movement Towards Vertical Tile-Walls?

    - by Macks
    Edit: Problem solved! Big thanks to Jonathan who pointed me in the right direction. Sean describes the method I used in a different thread. Also big thanks to him! :) Here is how I solved my problem: If a collision is registered by my SAT-method, only fire the collision-event on my character if there are no neighbouring solid tiles in the direction of the returned minimum translation vector. I'm developing my first tile-based 2D-game with Javascript. To learn the basics, I decided to write my own "game engine". I have successfully implemented collision detection using the separating axis theorem, but I've run into a problem that I can't quite wrap my head around. If I press the [up] and [left] arrow-keys simultaneously, my character moves diagonally towards the upper left. If he hits a horizontal wall, he'll just keep moving in x-direction. The same goes for [up] and [left] as well as downward-diagonal movements, it works as intended: http://i.stack.imgur.com/aiZjI.png Diagonal movement works fine for horizontal walls, for both left and right-movement However: this does not work for vertical walls. Instead of keeping movement in y-direction, he'll just stop as soon as he "enters" a new tile on the y-axis. So for some reason SAT thinks my character is colliding vertically with tiles from vertical walls: http://i.stack.imgur.com/XBEKR.png My character stops because he thinks that he is colliding vertically with tiles from the wall on the right. This only occurs, when: Moving into top-right direction towards the right wall Moving into top-left direction towards the left wall Bottom-right and bottom-left movement work: the character keeps moving in y-direction as intended. Is this inherited from the way SAT works or is there a problem with my implementation? What can I do to solve my problem? Oh yeah, my character is displayed as a circle but he's actually a rectangular polygon for the collision detection. Thank you very much for your help.

    Read the article

  • QA - Developer communication

    - by exiter2000
    I am a developer and have worked at this company 4~5 years by now. We have been practicing scrum for about 2 years. I think, I have been worked well with QAs. I believe QAs/developers/technical writers are all one team. We are also actively hiring new team members. As a legacy member of the team, I have faced to assist new member(including developers and testers) with my business knowledge. We work on 2 weeks base scrum. I usually deliver my user story completely by the first date of second week and do some qa build with partial functionality of my user story so that QA has a good idea about my implementation and flow. Recently, I have met some QAs. In first week, the QAs do not talk... In stand up meeting, they say they are developing test cases regardless I deliver the user story or not. In second week, I do not have a single defect till Thursday afternoon and suddenly I have a major defect with several minor UI defect, which I delivered one week ago. Or I have one or two minor defects on second week however major defects on Thursday afternoon or Friday morning. This eventually make the story rolls over to the next sprint. Major defect takes time to fix and more importantly it would trigger the regression test for the story... Even if I worked Thursday evening and fixed it, the testing will not finish. And this happens multiple times with certain QAs. As a same team member, I talked to the QAs if they could test major defect with higher priority... Rejected... Because I do not understand QA process.. So I asked roughly how many major test cases are covered so far in the stand up meeting on 2nd week Wednesday.. The response is I should not ask this to the QA in the stand up meeting... What do I do?

    Read the article

  • A (slight) Change of Focus

    - by StuartBrierley
    When I started this blog in September 2009 I was working as a BizTalk developer for a financial institution based in the South West of England.  At the time I was developing using BizTalk Server 2004 and intended to use my blog to collate and share any useful information and experiences that I had using this version of BizTalk (and occasionally other technologies) in an effort to bring together as many useful details as I could in one place. Since then my circumstances have changed and I am no longer working in the financial industry using BizTalk 2004.  Instead I have recently started a new post in the logistics industry, in the North of England, as "IT Integration Manager".  The company I now work for has identified a need to boost their middleware/integration platform and have chosen BizTalk Server 2009 as their platform of choice; this is where I come in. To start with my role is to provide the expertise with BizTalk that they currently lack, design and direct the initial BizTalk 2009 implementation and act as lead developer on all pending BizTalk projects.  Following this it is my hope that we will be able to build on the initial BizTalk "proof of concept" and eventually implement a fully robust enterprise level BizTalk 2009 environment. As such, this blog is going to see a shift in focus from BizTalk 2004 to BizTalk 2009 and at least initially is likely to include posts on the design and installation of our BizTalk environment - assuming of course that I have the time to write them! The last post I made was the start of a chapter by chapter look at the book SOA Patterns with BizTalk Server 2009.  Due to my change of job I am currently "paused" half way through this book, and my lack of posts on the subject are directly as a result of the job move and the pending relocation of my family.  I am hoping to write about my overall opinion of this book sometime soon; so far it certainly looks like it will be a positive one. Thanks for reading; I'm off to manage some integration.

    Read the article

  • What should a developer know before building a public web site?

    - by Joel Coehoorn
    What things should a programmer implementing the technical details of a web site address before making the site public? If Jeff Atwood can forget about HttpOnly cookies, sitemaps, and cross-site request forgeries all in the same site, what important thing could I be forgetting as well? I'm thinking about this from a web developer's perspective, such that someone else is creating the actual design and content for the site. So while usability and content may be more important than the platform, you the programmer have little say in that. What you do need to worry about is that your implementation of the platform is stable, performs well, is secure, and meets any other business goals (like not cost too much, take too long to build, and rank as well with Google as the content supports). Think of this from the perspective of a developer who's done some work for intranet-type applications in a fairly trusted environment, and is about to have his first shot and putting out a potentially popular site for the entire big bad world wide web. Also: I'm looking for something more specific than just a vague "web standards" response. I mean, HTML, JavaScript, and CSS over HTTP are pretty much a given, especially when I've already specified that you're a professional web developer. So going beyond that, Which standards? In what circumstances, and why? Provide a link to the standard's specification. This question is community wiki, so please feel free to edit that answer to add links to good articles that will help explain or teach each particular point. To search in only the answers from this question, use the inquestion:this option.

    Read the article

  • BPM Solution Catalogue–promote your process templates

    - by JuergenKress
    Oracle’s BPM Solution Catalogue showcasing our solutions with partners is now live. Take a look at the initial entries here. We are planning to use this catalogue not only to publish and highlight successful BPM implementations but also will be running campaigns in industry verticals with your solutions. If you have delivered a successful implementation in BPM and think it could be reused and applied again in a similar scenario in the same industry or in a similar environment, then we are keen to know about it and will add it to the solution catalogue. The solution catalogue will showcase successful BPM solutions both inside and outside Oracle. Be in touch with us on this via this e-mail id and we will make sure to add your solution. For more information you can also read the article “Leading-Edge BPM Benefits Without Bleeding-Edge Pain” SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit  www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Technorati Tags: BPM,Solution Catalogue,process templates,BPM Suite,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • Acceptable placement of the composition root using dependency injection and inversion of control containers

    - by Lumirris
    I've read in several sources including Mark Seemann's 'Ploeh' blog about how the appropriate placement of the composition root of an IoC container is as close as possible to the entry point of an application. In the .NET world, these applications seem to be commonly thought of as Web projects, WPF projects, console applications, things with a typical UI (read: not library projects). Is it really going against this sage advice to place the composition root at the entry point of a library project, when it represents the logical entry point of a group of library projects, and the client of a project group such as this is someone else's work, whose author can't or won't add the composition root to their project (a UI project or yet another library project, even)? I'm familiar with Ninject as an IoC container implementation, but I imagine many others work the same way in that they can scan for a module containing all the necessary binding configurations. This means I could put a binding module in its own library project to compile with my main library project's output, and if the client wanted to change the configuration (an unlikely scenario in my case), they could drop in a replacement dll to replace the library with the binding module. This seems to avoid the most common clients having to deal with dependency injection and composition roots at all, and would make for the cleanest API for the library project group. Yet this seems to fly in the face of conventional wisdom on the issue. Is it just that most of the advice out there makes the assumption that the developer has some coordination with the development of the UI project(s) as well, rather than my case, in which I'm just developing libraries for others to use?

    Read the article

  • Android Card Game Database for Deck Building

    - by Singularity222
    I am making a card game for Android where a player can choose from a selection of cards to build a deck that would contain around 60 cards. Currently, I have the entire database of cards created that the user can browse. The next step is allowing the user to select cards and create a deck with whatever cards they would like. I have a form where the user can search for specific cards based off a few different attributes. The search results are displayed in a List Activity. My thought about deck creation is to add the primary key of each card the user selects to a SQLite Database table with the amount they would like in the deck. This way as the user performs searches for cards they can see the state of the deck. Once the user decides to save the deck. I'll export the card list to XML and wipe the contents of the table. If the user wanted to make changes to the deck, they would load it, it would be parsed back into the table so they could make the changes. A similar situation would occur when the eventually load the deck to play a game. I'm just curious what the rest of you may think of this method. Currently, this is a personal project and I am the only one working on it. If I can figure out the best implementation before I even begin coding I'm hoping to save myself some time and trouble.

    Read the article

  • Priority Manager&ndash;Part 1- Laying out the plan

    - by Patrick Liekhus
    Now that we have shown the EDMX with XPO/XAF and how use SpecFlow and BDD to run EasyTest scripts, let’s put it all together and show the evolution of a project using all the tools combined. I have a simple project that I use to track my priorities throughout the day.  It uses some of Stephen Covey’s principles from The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.  The idea is to write down all your priorities the night before and rank them.  This way when you get started tomorrow you will have your list of priorities.  Now it’s not that new things won’t appear tomorrow and reprioritize your list, but at least now you can track them.  My idea is to create a project that will allow you manage your list from your desktop, a web browser or your mobile device.  This way your list is never too far away.  I will layout the data model and the additional concepts as time progresses. My goal is to show the power of all of these tools combined and I thought the best way would be to build a project in sequence.  I have had this idea for quite some time so let’s get it completed with the outline below. Here is the outline of the series of post in the near future: Part 2 – Modeling the Business Objects Part 3 – Changing XAF Default Properties Part 4 – Advanced Settings within Liekhus EDMX/XAF Tool Part 5 – Custom Business Rules Part 6 – Unit Testing Our Implementation Part 7 – Behavior Driven Development (BDD) and SpecFlow Tests Part 8 – Using the Windows Application Part 9 – Using the Web Application Part 10 – Exposing OData from our Project Part 11 – Consuming OData with Excel PowerPivot Part 12 – Consuming OData with iOS Part 13 – Consuming OData with Android Part 14 – What’s Next I hope this helps outline what to expect.  I anticipate that I will have additional topics mixed in there but I plan on getting this outline completed within the next several weeks.  Thanks

    Read the article

  • Website Ethics / legal issues, image copyrights

    - by RailsN00b
    Ignoring the technical implementation of a website for a second, assume a website that is similar to twitter but with pictures. A user say something and puts a picture of whatever they said. As the nature of the internet, the images will most likely not be his/hers image. There are 2 options that I see for dealing with this: 1. The user will post a URL of the picture and the website will pull the picture from that URL everytime someone enters that page 2. The website will save the image in its own database of images and display the image to the visitors 'locally' The problem with option #1, while it saved storage, I see an issue with 'stealing' other websites bandwidth and if my website has many many visitors it could cost the image-hosting websites a lot and possible even crash it if the server can't handle the load. The problem with opion #2, while it saves the load to other websites, it practically takes pictures that could have copyright on them. Which option is better to implement in terms of legal issues and ethics? When do I need to contact another website to request permission to use the images from that site? Does anyone really care about that anymore. Where can I read about this?

    Read the article

  • How can Highscores be more meaningful and engaging?

    - by Anselm Eickhoff
    I'm developing a casual Android game in which the player's success can very easily be represented by a number (I'm not more specific because I'm interested in the topic in general). Although I myself am not a highscore person at all, I was thinking of implementing a highscore for that game, but I see at least 2 problems in the classical leaderboard approach: very soon the highscore will be dominated by hardcore players, leaving no chance for beginners, who are then frustrated. This is very severe especially in casual games. there is no direct reward for being a loyal player who plays the game over and over again My current idea is to "reset" the highscore every 24 hours (for example) and each day nominate the "player of the day" who then gets a "star". Then there would be some kind of meta-highscore of players with the most stars. That way even beginners might have a chance to be "player of the day" once and continued or repeated play is rewarded much more. The idea is still very rough and there are many problems in the details and the technical implementation but I have a feeling it is a step in the right direction. Do you have creative and new ideas on how to implement highscores? Which games are doing this well / what types of highscores do you find most engaging?

    Read the article

  • Price Drop for Processor based License on Exalytics

    - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM
    ·       33% reduction in the list `per processor` license pricing for the Oracle BI Foundation Suite ·       New capacity-based licensing which allows customers to think big & start small, significantly lowering the entry price point for an Exalytics. Oracle BI Software List Price changes In response to new powerful platforms like the in-memory Oracle Exalytics with 40 cpu cores (counted under Oracle pricing policy as 20 “processors”), the list price of “Oracle BI Foundation Suite” (BIFS) is reduced by 33% from $450K per processor to $300K per processor. Capacity-based licensing on Exalytics (Trusted Partitions) “Capacity-based pricing” for the BIFS, Endeca, Essbase and Times Ten for Exalytics software is now available for Exalytics systems. This is delivered using “Oracle VM” (OVM).  We still ship a full Exalytics machine to all customers, but they may choose to only use and license a subset of the processors installed in the machine.   Customers can license Exalytics software in units of 5 “processors”: 5, 10, 15 or the full capacity 20.   As the customer’s implementation and workload increases, it is a simple matter to license additional processors and, using OVM, make them available to the BI or EPM application. Endeca Information Discovery now available on Exalytics Oracle has also announced the certification of “Oracle Endeca Information Discovery” (EID) on the Exalytics machine.    EID can be licensed alone or in combination with the BIFS & Times Ten for an Exalytics stack, and also participates in the capacity based pricing outlined above.   The Exalytics hardware is the perfect platform for EID, and provides superb power and performance for this in-memory hybrid text-search-analytics.   For more information : Oracle Price lists Oracle Partitioning Policy Discussion by Mark Rittman (Rittman Mead Consulting ltd.) on Oracle Trusted Partitions for Oracle Engineered Systems, Oracle Exalytics and Updated BI Foundation Pricing.

    Read the article

  • Rope Colliding with a Rectangle

    - by Colton
    I have my rope, and I have my rectangles. The rope is similar to the implementation found here: http://nehe.gamedev.net/tutorial/rope_physics/17006/ Now, I want to make the rope properly collide with the rectangle such that the rope will not pass through a rectangle, and wrap around the rectangle and all that good stuff. Currently, I have it set so no rope node can pass through a rect (successfully), however, this means a rope segment can still pass through a block. Ex: So the question is, what can I do to fix this? What I have tried: I create a rectangle between two nodes of a rope, calculate rotation between the nodes, and get myself a transformed rectangle. I can successfully detect a collision between rope segments and a (non-transformed) rectangle. Create a new node or pivot point around the corner of the block, and rearrange nodes to point to the corner node. Trouble is determining what corner the rope segment is passing through. And then the current rope setup goes wonky (based on verlet integration, so a sudden change in position causes the rope to wiggle like a seismograph during a magnitude 8 earth quake.) Among other issues that might be solvable, but its turning into a case by case thing, which doesn't seem right. I think the best answer here would just be a link to a tutorial (I simply can't find any, most lead to box2D or farseer, but I want to at least learn how it works before I hide behind an engine).

    Read the article

  • What benefits can I get upgrading my ASP.NET (Webform) + DAL(EF) + Repository + BLL structure to MVC?

    - by Etienne
    I'm in the process of defining an approach that may best fit our needs for a big web application development. For now, I'm thinking going with an ASP.NET Architecture with a DAL using Entity Framework, a Repository concept to not access DAL directly from BLL and a BLL that call the repository and make every manipulations necessary to prepare data to push in a presentation layer (.aspx files). I don't plan to use ASP.Net controls and prefer to keep things simple and lightweight using plain html, jQuery UI controls and do most of the server calls with jQuery Ajax. Sometimes, when needed, I plan to use handlers (.ashx) to call BLL methods that will return JSON or HTML to client for dynamic stuff. My solution also has a test project that Mock the Repository with in-memory data to not repose on database for testing BLL methods... It may be usefull to add that we will build a big application over this architecture with hundreds of tables and store procedures with a lot of reading and writing to database. My question is, having this architecture in mind, Is there any evident advantages that I can obtain by using an MVC3 project instead of the described architecture base on Webform? Do you see any problem in this architecture that may cause us problem during the next steps of development? I know the MVC pattern for using it in others projects with Django... but the Microsoft MVC implementation look so much more complex and verbose than Django MVC and it's why I'm hesitating (or waiting for a little push?) right now before jumping into it... We are in a real project with deadlines and don't want to slow the development process without any real benefits.

    Read the article

  • sqlplus: Running "set lines" and "set pagesize" automatially

    - by katsumii
    This is a followup to my previous entry. Using the full tty real estate with sqlplus (INOUE Katsumi @ Tokyo) 'rlwrap' is widely used for adding 'sqlplus' the history function and command line editing. Here's another but again kludgy implementation. First this is the alias. alias sqlplus="rlwrap -z ~/sqlplus.filter sqlplus" And this is the file content. #!/usr/bin/env perl use lib ($ENV{RLWRAP_FILTERDIR} or "."); use RlwrapFilter; use POSIX qw(:signal_h); use strict; my $filter = new RlwrapFilter; $filter -> prompt_handler(\&prompt); sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, POSIX::SigSet->new(28)); $SIG{WINCH} = 'winchHandler'; $filter -> run; sub winchHandler { $filter -> input_handler(\&input); sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, POSIX::SigSet->new(28)); $SIG{WINCH} = 'winchHandler'; $filter -> run; } sub input { $filter -> input_handler(undef); return `resize |sed -n "1s/COLUMNS=/set linesize /p;2s/LINES=/set pagesize /p"` . $_; } sub prompt { if ($_ =~ "SQL> ") { $filter -> input_handler(\&input); $filter -> prompt_handler(undef); } return $_; } I hope I can compare these 2 implementations after testing more and getting some feedbacks.

    Read the article

  • Floating point undesireable in highly critical code?

    - by Kirt Undercoffer
    Question 11 in the Software Quality section of "IEEE Computer Society Real-World Software Engineering Problems", Naveda, Seidman, lists fp computation as undesirable because "the accuracy of the computations cannot be guaranteed". This is in the context of computing acceleration for an emergency braking system for a high speed train. This thinking seems to be invoking possible errors in small differences between measurements of a moving object but small differences at slow speeds aren't a problem (or shouldn't be), small differences between two measurements at high speed are irrelevant - can there be a problem with small roundoff errors during deceleration for an emergency braking system? This problem has been observed with airplane braking systems resulting in hydroplaning but could this actually happen in the context of a high speed train? The concern about fp errors seems to not be well-founded in this context. Any insight? The fp is used for acceleration so perhaps the concern is inching over a speed limit? But fp should be just fine if they use a double in whatever implementation language. The actual problem in the text states: During the inspection of the code for the emergency braking system of a new high speed train (a highly critical, real-time application), the review team identifies several characteristics of the code. Which of these characteristics are generally viewed as undesirable? The code contains three recursive functions (well that one is obvious). The computation of acceleration uses floating point arithmetic. All other computations use integer arithmetic. The code contains one linked list that uses dynamic memory allocation (second obvious problem). All inputs are checked to determine that they are within expected bounds before they are used.

    Read the article

  • Security in Robots and Automated Systems

    - by Roger Brinkley
    Alex Dropplinger posted a Freescale blog on Securing Robotics and Automated Systems where she asks the question,“How should we secure robotics and automated systems?”.My first thought on this was duh, make sure your robot is running Java. Java's built-in services for authentication, authorization, encryption/confidentiality, and the like can be leveraged and benefit robotic or autonomous implementations. Leveraging these built-in services and pluggable encryption models of Java makes adding security to an exist bot implementation much easier. But then I thought I should ask an expert on robotics so I fired the question off to Paul Perrone of Perrone Robotics. Paul's build automated vehicles and other forms of embedded devices like auto monitoring of commercial vehicles on highways.He says that most of the works that robots do now are autonomous so it isn't a problem in the short term. But long term projects like collision avoidance technology in automobiles are going to require it.Some of the work he's doing with his Java-based MAX, set of software building blocks containing a wide range of low level and higher level software modules that developers can use to build simple to complex robot and automation applications faster and cheaper, already provide some support for JAUS compliance and because their based on Java, access to standards based security APIs.But, as Paul explained to me, "the bottom line is…it depends on the criticality level of the bot, it's network connectivity, and whether or not a standards compliance is required."

    Read the article

  • Proper updating of GeoClipMaps

    - by thr
    I have been working on an implementation of gpu-based geo clip maps, but there is a section of the GPU Gems 2 article that i just can't seem to understand, specifically this paragraph and more precisely the bolded part: The choice of grid size n = 2k-1 has the further advantage that the finer level is never exactly centered with respect to its parent next-coarser level. In other words, it is always offset by 1 grid unit either left or right, as well as either top or bottom (see Figure 2-4), depending on the position of the viewpoint. In fact, it is necessary to allow a finer level to shift while its next-coarser level stays fixed, and therefore the finer level must sometimes be off-center with respect to the next-coarser level. An alternative choice of grid size, such as n = 2k-3, would provide the possibility for exact centering Let's take an example image from the article: My "understanding" of the way the clip maps were update was that you floor the position of the viewpoint to an int, and such get the center vertex point if this is not the same as the previous center point, you update the entire map. Now, this obviously is not the case - but what I am failing to understand is this: If you look at the image above, if the viewpoint was to move one unit to the right, then the inner ring (the one just around the view point + white center square) would end up getting a 1 unit space on both the left and right side of itself. But there is nothing in the paper that deals with this, what i mean is that it would end up looking like this (excuse my crummy cut-and-paste editing of the above image): This is obviously not a valid state of the. So, would the solution be that a clip ring (layer) can only move in increments of the ring/layer it's contained within? Wouldn't this end up being very restrictive? I feel like I am missing some crucial understanding of parts of the algorithm, but I have been over both this paper and the original paper from 2004 and I just can't see what I am not getting.

    Read the article

  • Implicit OAuth2 endpoint vs. cookies

    - by Jamie
    I currently have an app which basically runs two halves of an API - a restful API for the web app, and a synchronisation API for the native clients (all over SSL). The web app is completely javascript based and is quite similar to the native clients anyway - except it currently does not work offline. What I'm hoping to do is merge the fragmented APIs into a single restful API. The web app currently authenticates by issuing a cookie to the client whereas the native clients work using a custom HMAC access token implementation. Obviously a public/private key scenario for a javascript app is a little pointless. I think the best solution would be to create an OAuth2 endpoint on the API (like Instagram, for example http://instagram.com/developer/authentication/) which is used by both the native apps and the web app. My question is, in terms of security how does an implicit OAuth2 flow compare (storing the access token in local storage) to "secure" cookies? Presumably although SSL solves man in the middle attacks, the user could theoretically grab the access token from local storage and copy it to another machine?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167  | Next Page >