Search Results

Search found 9254 results on 371 pages for 'approach'.

Page 172/371 | < Previous Page | 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179  | Next Page >

• Develop in trunk and then branch off, or in release branch and then merge back?

  - by Torben Gundtofte-Bruun

  Say that we've decided on following a "release-based" branching strategy, so we'll have a branch for each release, and we can add maintenance updates as sub-branches from those. Does it matter whether we: develop and stabilize a new release in the trunk and then "save" that state in a new release branch; or first create that release branch and only merge into the trunk when the branch is stable? I find the former to be easier to deal with (less merging necessary), especially when we don't develop on multiple upcoming releases at the same time. Under normal circumstances we would all be working on the trunk, and only work on released branches if there are bugs to fix. What is the trunk actually used for in the latter approach? It seems to be almost obsolete, because I could create a future release branch based on the most recent released branch rather than from the trunk. Details based on comment below: Our product consists of a base platform and a number of modules on top; each is developed and even distributed separately from each other. Most team members work on several of these areas, so there's partial overlap between people. We generally work only on 1 future release and not at all on existing releases. One or two might work on a bugfix for an existing release for short periods of time. Our work isn't compiled and it's a mix of Unix shell scripts, XML configuration files, SQL packages, and more -- so there's no way to have push-button builds that can be tested. That's done manually, which is a bit laborious. A release cycle is typically half a year or more for the base platform; often 1 month for the modules.

  Read the article

• Spreading incoming batched data into a real-time stream

  - by pr1001

  I would like to display some events in 'real-time'. However, I must fetch the data from another source. I can request the last X minutes, though the source is updated approximately every 5 minutes. This means that there will be a delay between the most recent data retrieved and the point in time that I make the request. Second, because I will be receiving a batch of data, I don't want to just fire out all the events down a socket once my fetcher has retrieved it: I would like to spread out the events so that they are both accurately spaced amongst each other and in sync with their original occurrences (e.g. an event is always displayed 6 minutes after it actually happened). My thought is to fetch the data every 5 minutes from the source, knowing that I won't get the very latest data. The original data would be then queued to be sent down the socket 7.5 minutes from its original timestamp – that is, at least ~2.5 minutes from when its batch was fetched and at most 7.5 minutes since then. My question is this: is this the best way to approach the problem? Does this problem have any standard approaches or associated literature related to implementation best-practices and edge cases? I am a bit worried that the frequency of my fetches and the frequency in which the source is updated will get out of sync, leading to points where no data will be retrieved from the source. However, since my socket delay is greater than my fetch frequency, the subsequent fetch should retrieve newer data before the socket queue is empty. Is that correct? Am I missing something? Thanks!

  Read the article

• SEO and links content

  - by AntonAL

  For usability purposes, entire article thumbnail is wrapped to a link. <a href="/some_article"> <h2>Article title</h2> <div class="summary">Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet</div> </a> User needs to click on any place of a thumb and it will be redirected to article. Does this approach have some negative effect to SEO ? Another question: What is more valueable for Search Engine ? Just a link to article in articles list <a href="/article1">Article 1</a> <a href="/article2">Article 2</a> <a href="/article3">Article 3</a> Or h2, wrapped to link: <a href="/article1"><h2>Article 1</h2></a> <a href="/article2"><h2>Article 2</h2></a> <a href="/article3"><h2>Article 3</h2></a>

  Read the article

• Why is math taught "backwards"? [closed]

  - by Yorirou

  A friend of mine showed me a pretty practical Java example. It was a riddle. I got excited and quickly solved the problem. After it, he showed me the mathematical explanation of my solution (he proved why is it good), and it was completely clear for me. This seems like natural approach for me: solve problems, and generalize. This is very familiar to me, I do it all the time when I am programming: I write a function. When I have to write a similar function, I generalize the problem, grab the generic parts, and refactor them to a function, and solve the original problems as a specialization of the general function. At the university (or at least where I study), things work backwards. The professors shows just the highest possible level of the solutions ("cryptic" mathematical formulas). My problem is that this is too abstract for me. There is no connection of my previous knowledge (== reality in my sense), so even if I can understand it, I can't really learn it properly. Others are learning these formulas word-by-word, and get good grades, since they can write exactly the same to the test, but this is not an option for me. I am a curious person, I can learn interesting things, but I can't learn just text. My brain is for storing toughts, not strings. There are proofs for the theories, but they are also really hard to understand because of this, and in most of the cases they are omitted. What is the reason for this? I don't understand why is it a good idea to show the really high level of abstraction and then leave the practical connections (or some important ideas / practical motivations) out?

  Read the article

• c# scripting execution with xna (actions take more than 1 frame)

  - by user658091

  I'm trying to figure out how to implement c# scripting into my game (XNA with C#). I will be using C# as the scripting language. My question is, how to call functions that take more than 1 frame to finish? For example: class UserScript : Script { public override void execute(Game game) { //script must wait for dialog to be closed game.openDialog("This is a dialog"); //script should'nt wait for this int goldToGive = 100; goldToGive += 100; game.addGold(goldToGive); // //script should wait for cinematic to end game.startCinematic("name_of_cinematic"); //doesn't wait game.addGold(100); } } I found that you can do that with yield, but I'm not sure if it's the correct way (It's from 2010, the article mentioned no longer exists). http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3540231/implementing-a-simple-xml-based-scripting-language-for-an-xna-game Is yield the answer? If so, can anyone point me any examples/tutorials/books? I haven't found any regarding my situation. If not, what approach should I take? or am I better off with multi-threading?

  Read the article

• 3D physics engine for accurate collision handling on desktop/laptop computers (non-console)

  - by Georges Oates Larsen

  What are your suggestions for a physics engine that satisfies the following criteria? Capable of calculating collisions between multiple concave mesh-based colliders Handles many collisions going on at once (for instance one mesh being wedged between two others, which themselves may be wedged between two meshes) Does not allow for collider passthrough, even at high speeds. For instance, if I am applying force to a programmatically hinged object that makes it spin, I do not want it to pass through another rigidbody that it collides with while spinning. I have this problem using PhysX As implied before, reacts well to hinged objects, preferably has its own implementation of a hinge, but I am willing to program my own. The important part is that it has some sort of interface that guarantees accurate collision tracking even when dealing with these things Platform independent -- runs on mac as well as PC, also not tied down to specific graphics cards I think that's the best way to explain what I am looking for. Basically, I need SUPER reliable collisions. Something that can't be accomplished with a simple ray casting approach that sends a ray from the last position of the object to the current position (as this object may be potentially large and colliding with small objects via rotation) Bonus points for also including an OPEN SOURCE engine.

  Read the article

• How to determine the amount to spend per phrase on Adwords research?

  - by Anonymous -

  My company would like to start a PPC advertising campaign. Whilst I understand the concept and how to set everything up from a technical point of view, this is something I've never done before. Logically, we'd like to test out a wide range of keywords that we think would lead to conversions, which we've put together through brainstorming and with some help from Google's External Keyword Tool. Sub-question whilst I remember - am I correct in thinking that in Google's keyword tool, keywords that we think will perform well that have a low competition yet high monthly searches are good since there will be less advertisers, meaning our bid per click will be less? Is there a common benchmark or process of doing a round of tests with keywords? Should we wait for 100 clicks on each keyword, see which ones have lead to the most sales (or rather, sales that are sustainable with the cost per click of that keyword), then drop the ones which aren't converting and put that budget onto the converting keywords? We realistically have a few hundred keywords/phrases we would like to test, but spending $100 per keyword/phrase is going to work out as quite an expensive test. It would be nice to be able to spend $5-10 per phrase, but I don't think the sample size would be great enough to determine anything usefully reliable. Another approach might be to setup all the keywords, and those that bring the most sales within x hours/days would be the ones we use. What is the common procedure with things like this? I know there are a plethora of companies that specialize in exactly this, but this is something we anticipate doing a lot in the future, so it would make sense to do it in house if at all possible.

  Read the article

• Can too much abstraction be bad?

  - by m3th0dman

  As programmers I feel that our goal is to provide good abstractions on the given domain model and business logic. But where should this abstraction stop? How to make the trade-off between abstraction and all it's benefits (flexibility, ease of changing etc.) and ease of understanding the code and all it's benefits. I believe I tend to write code overly abstracted and I don't know how good is it; I often tend to write it like it is some kind of a micro-framework, which consists of two parts: Micro-Modules which are hooked up in the micro-framework: these modules are easy to be understood, developed and maintained as single units. This code basically represents the code that actually does the functional stuff, described in requirements. Connecting code; now here I believe stands the problem. This code tends to be complicated because it is sometimes very abstracted and is hard to be understood at the beginning; this arises due to the fact that it is only pure abstraction, the base in reality and business logic being performed in the code presented 1; from this reason this code is not expected to be changed once tested. Is this a good approach at programming? That it, having changing code very fragmented in many modules and very easy to be understood and non-changing code very complex from the abstraction POV? Should all the code be uniformly complex (that is code 1 more complex and interlinked and code 2 more simple) so that anybody looking through it can understand it in a reasonable amount of time but change is expensive or the solution presented above is good, where "changing code" is very easy to be understood, debugged, changed and "linking code" is kind of difficult. Note: this is not about code readability! Both code at 1 and 2 is readable, but code at 2 comes with more complex abstractions while code 1 comes with simple abstractions.

  Read the article

• 12c - Invisible Columns...

  - by noreply(at)blogger.com (Thomas Kyte)

  Remember when 11g first came out and we had "invisible indexes"?  It seemed like a confusing feature - indexes that would be maintained by modifications (hence slowing them down), but would not be used by queries (hence never speeding them up).  But - after you looked at them a while, you could see how they can be useful.  For example - to add an index in a running production system, an index used by the next version of the code to be introduced later that week - but not tested against the queries in version one of the application in place now.  We all know that when you add an index - one of three things can happen - a given query will go much faster, it won't affect a given query at all, or... It will make some untested query go much much slower than it used to.  So - invisible indexes allowed us to modify the schema in a 'safe' manner - hiding the change until we were ready for it.Invisible columns accomplish the same thing - the ability to introduce a change while minimizing any negative side effects of that change.  Normally when you add a column to a table - any program with a SELECT * would start seeing that column, and programs with an INSERT INTO T VALUES (...) would pretty much immediately break (an INSERT without a list of columns in it).  Now we can add a column to a table in an invisible fashion, the column will not show up in a DESCRIBE command in SQL*Plus, it will not be returned with a SELECT *, it will not be considered in an INSERT INTO T VALUES statement.  It can be accessed by any query that asks for it, it can be populated by an INSERT statement that references it, but you won't see it otherwise.For example, let's start with a simple two column table:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> create table t  2  ( x int,  3    y int  4  )  5  /Table created.ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> insert into t values ( 1, 2 );1 row created.Now, we will add an invisible column to it:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> alter table t add                     ( z int INVISIBLE );Table altered.Notice that a DESCRIBE will not show us this column:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> desc t Name              Null?    Type ----------------- -------- ------------ X                          NUMBER(38) Y                          NUMBER(38)and existing inserts are unaffected by it:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> insert into t values ( 3, 4 );1 row created.A SELECT * won't see it either:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> select * from t;         X          Y---------- ----------         1          2         3          4But we have full access to it (in well written programs! The ones that use a column list in the insert and select - never relying on "defaults":ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> insert into t (x,y,z)                         values ( 5,6,7 );1 row created.ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> select x, y, z from t;         X          Y          Z---------- ---------- ----------         1          2         3          4         5          6          7and when we are sure that we are ready to go with this column, we can just modify it:ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> alter table t modify z visible;Table altered.ops$tkyte%ORA12CR1> select * from t;         X          Y          Z---------- ---------- ----------         1          2         3          4         5          6          7I will say that a better approach to this - one that is available in 11gR2 and above - would be to use editioning views (part of Edition Based Redefinition - EBR ).  I would rather use EBR over this approach, but in an environment where EBR is not being used, or the editioning views are not in place, this will achieve much the same.Read these for information on EBR:http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2010/10-jan/o10asktom-172777.htmlhttp://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2010/10-mar/o20asktom-098897.htmlhttp://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2010/10-may/o30asktom-082672.html

  Read the article

• One monitor getting spilled over into other monitor: how to do a 100% reset of gnome graphics configuration

  - by Paul Nathan

  I had to kill a VMWare process and afterwards, my monitor's configuration is buggy. I have 2 monitors in a side-by-side configuration. My right-hand monitor is the secondary monitor. Upon its right-hand side there are about 50 pixels showing from the left side of the lefthand monitor (ie, as if it was wrapped around). Further, my mouse clicks are registering as about 50 pixels sideways from where they should be. It's as if those 50 pixels between monitors got gobbled. What have I done? I've reset the screen configuration in multiple ways, using xrandr, multiple monitors app, etc. This persists in different side-by-side configurations, and also persists with another user. It does not occur with XFCE. Resetting the Window manager with the Compiz reset WM app does not fix this. I've concluded the burn-to-the-ground approach is likely the best, and would like to do a 100% reset of my graphics settings. It's an Intel integrated chipset. Removing ~/.config/monitors.xml did not work. Also, interestingly, the mouse can mouse-over the 50 errant pixels on the rhs of the right-hand monitor. I hypothesize that it's a compositing problem occurring at the layer where the background, selection, and clicks are caught. Also, inverting the right-hand monitor removes the issue, but renders the screen unusable. Even more datapoints: This happens in KDE as well Sometimes logging into Gnome and running xrandr --output DVI1 --auto resets it, but the issue immediately reappears when I press alt-tab. With Compiz Application Switch turned on, the workspace is 'pushed back' a bit, and the slice on the RHS follows it as well. I'm wondering if it's a flaw in the compiz workspace compositing configuration. I suspect the error was in the compositing configuration. I installed 11.10.

  Read the article

• How to collaborate on features using github

  - by Robert Dailey

  github encourages 1 fork per user, so that that user can work independently on a feature and then request that feature to be accepted into the main repository via pull request. However, what if 2 developers need to collaborate on that feature? What is the ideal workflow for this? I could see a number of options: Both developers fork the original repository. Each developer pulls/pushes changes between each other's repository. This seems like a lot of work (tiny micro operations) and also creates a delay between changes, so increases the window for conflicts. Developer 1 forks from the main repository, developer 2 forks from developer 1. Same as #1 mainly but hopefully simplifies Developer 2's life a little? Developer 1 gives Developer 2 permissions to his own fork, so they both work out of the same central repository. Not sure if this is ideal. I'm also curious where branches come into this. Obviously there would be a branch for the feature itself but that branch can't exist in a single place, it would have to exist on multiple forks and be synchronized. Basically just really confused about this workflow, would like an approach for how this can be best accomplished.

  Read the article

• Strategy for versioning on a public repo

  - by biril

  Suppose I'm developing a (javascript) library which is hosted on a public repo (e.g. github). My aim in terms of how version numbers are assigned and incremented is to follow the guidelines of semantic versioning. Now, there's a number of files in my project which compose the actual lib and a number of files that 'support it', the latter being docs, a test suite, etc. My perspective this far has been that version numbers should only apply to the actual lib - not the project as a whole - since the lib alone is 'the unit' that defines the public API. However I'm not satisfied with this approach as, for example, a fix in the test suite constitutes an 'improvement' in my project, which will not be reflected in the version number (or the docs which contain a reference to it). On a more practical level, various tools, such as package managers, may (understandably) not play along with this strategy. For example, when trying to publish a change which is not reflected in the version number, npm publish fails with the suggestion "Bump the 'version' field set the --force flag, or npm unpublish". Am I doing it wrong?

  Read the article

• Questions before I revamp my rendering engine to use shaders (GLSL)

  - by stephelton

  I've written a fairly robust rendering engine using OpenGL ES 1.1 (fixed-function.) I've been looking into revamping the engine to use OpenGL ES 2.0, which necessitates that I use shaders. I've been absorbing information all day long and still have some questions. Firstly, lighting. The fixed-function pipeline is guaranteed to have at least 8 lights available. My current engine finds lights that are "close" to the primitives being drawn and enables them; I don't know how many lights are going to be enabled until I draw a given model. Nothing is dynamically allocated in GLSL, so I have to define in a shader some number of lights to be used, right? So if I want to stick with 8, should I write my general purpose shader to have 8 lights and then use uniforms to tell it how many / which lights to use? Which brings me to another question: should I be concerned with the amount of data I'm allocating in a shader? Recent video cards have hundreds of "stream processors." If I've got a fragment shader being used on some number of fragments in a given triangle, I assume they must each have their own stack to work on. Are read-only variables copied here, or read when needed? My initial goal is to rework my code so that it is virtually identical to the current implementation. What I have in mind is to create my own matrix stack so that I can implement something along the lines of push/popMatrix and apply all my translations, rotations, and scales to this matrix, then provide the matrix to the vertex shader so that it can make very quick vertex translations. Is this approach sound? Edit: My original intention was to ask if there was a tutorial that would explain the bare minimum necessary to jump from fixed-function to using shaders. Thanks!

  Read the article

• CoffeeScript - inability to support progressive adoption

  - by Renso

  First if, what is CoffeeScript?Web definitionsCoffeeScript is a programming language that compiles statement-by-statement to JavaScript. The language adds syntactic sugar inspired by Ruby and Python to enhance JavaScript's brevity and readability, as well as adding more sophisticated features like array comprehension and pattern matching.The issue with CoffeeScript is that it eliminates any progressive adoption. It is a purist approach, kind of like the Amish, if you're not borne Amish, tough luck. So for folks with thousands of lines of JavaScript code will have a tough time to convert it to CoffeeScript. You can use the js2coffee API to convert the JavaScript file to CoffeeScript but in my experience that had trouble converting the files. It would convert the file to CoffeeScript without any complaints, but then when trying to generate the CoffeeScript file got errors with guess what: INDENTATION!Tried to convince the CoffeeScript community on github but got lots of push-back to progressive adoption with comments like "stupid", "crap", "child's comportment", "it's like Ruby, Python", "legacy code" etc. As a matter of interest one of the first comments were that the code needs to be re-designed before converted to CoffeeScript. Well I rest my case then :-)So far the community on github has been very reluctant to even consider introducing some way to define code-blocks, obviously curly braces is not an option as they use it for json object definitions. They also have no consideration for a progressive adoption where some, if not all, JavaScript syntax will be allowed which means all of us in the real world that have thousands of lines of JavaScript will have a real issue converting it over. Worst, I for one lack the confidence that tools like js2coffee will provide the correct indentation that will determine the flow of control in your code!!! Actually it is hard for me to find enough justification for using spaces or tabs to control the flow of code. It is no wonder that C#, C, C++, Java, all enterprise-scale frameworks still use curly braces. Have never seen an enterprise app built with Ruby or PhP.Let me know what your concerns are with CoffeeScript and how you dealt with large scale JavaScript conversions to CoffeeScript.

  Read the article

• Where can I find design exercises to work on?

  - by Oak

  I feel it's important to continue practicing my problem-solving skills. Writing my own mini-projects is one way, but another is to try and solve problems posted online. It's easy to find interesting programming quizzes online that require applying clever algorithms to solve - Project Euler is one well-known example. However, in a lot of real-life projects the design of the software - especially in the initial phases - has a large impact and at later stages it cannot be tweaked as easily as plain algorithms. In order to improve these skills, I'm looking for any collection of design problems. When I say "design", I mean the abstract design of a software solution - for example what modules will there be and what are the dependencies between them, how data will flow in the program, what sort of data needs to be saved in the database, etc. Design problems are those problems that are critical to solve in the early stages of any project, but their solution is a whiteboard diagram without a single line of code. Of course these sort of problems do not have a single correct solution, but I'll be especially happy with any place that also displays pros and cons of the typical solutions that might be used to approach the problem.

  Read the article

• How should I architect a personal schedule manager that runs 24/7?

  - by Crawford Comeaux

  I've developed an ADHD management system for myself that's attempting to change multiple habits at once. I know this is counter to conventional wisdom, but I've tried the conventional for years & am now trying it my way. (just wanted to say that to try and prevent it from distracting people from the actual question) Anyway, I'd like to write something to run on a remote server that monitors me, helps me build/avoid certain habits, etc. What this amounts to is a system that: runs 24/7 may have multiple independent tasks to run at once may have tasks that require other tasks to run first lets tasks be scheduled by specific time, recurrence (ie. "run every 5 mins"), or interval (ie. "run from 2pm to 3pm") My first naive attempt at this was just a single PHP script scheduled to run every minute by cron (language was chosen in order to use a certain library, but no longer necessary). The logic behind when to run this or that portion of code got hairy pretty quick. So my question is how should I approach this from here? I'm not tied to any one language, though I'm partial to python/javascript. Thoughts: Could be done as a set of scripts that include a scheduling mechanism with one script per bit of logic...but the idea just feels wrong to me. Building it as a daemon could be helpful, but still unsure what to do about dozens of if-else statements for detecting the current time

  Read the article

• What are some ways to separate game logic from animations and the draw loop?

  - by TMV

  I have only previously made flash games, using MovieClips and such to separate out my animations from my game logic. Now I am getting into trying my hand at making a game for Android, but the game programming theory around separating these things still confuses me. I come from a background of developing non game web applications so I am versed in more MVC like patterns and am stuck in that mindset as I approach game programming. I want to do things like abstract my game by having, for example, a game board class that contains the data for a grid of tiles with instances of a tile class that each contain properties. I can give my draw loop access to this and have it draw the game board based on the properties of each tile on the game board, but I don't understand where exactly animation should go. As far as I can tell, animation sort of sits between the abstracted game logic (model) and the draw loop (view). With my MVC mindset, it's frustrating trying to decide where animation is actually supposed to go. It would have quite a bit of data associated with it like a model, but seemingly needs to be very closely coupled with the draw loop in order to have things like frame independent animation. How can I break out of this mindset and start thinking about patterns that make more sense for games?

  Read the article

• 'Buy the app' landing page implementations: redirect or javascript popup?

  - by benwad

  My site (using Django) has an app that I'm trying to push - I currently have a piece of middleware that redirects the user to a page advertising the app if they're accessing the page on the iPhone, then setting a cookie so that the user isn't bugged by the message every time they visit the site. This works fine, however checking the page with the mobile Googlebot checker shows that the Googlebot gets stuck in the redirect (since it doesn't store cookies) and therefore won't index the proper content. So, I'm trying to think of an alternative implementation that won't hurt the site's Google ranking and won't have any other adverse effects. I've considered a couple of options: Redirect (the current solution), but don't redirect if the user agent matches the Googlebot's UA string. This would be ideal, however I'm not sure if Google like their bot being treated differently from other users, and I'm afraid the site's ranking may be somehow penalised if I go ahead with this. Use a Javascript popup instead of a redirect. This would make sure the Googlebot finds the content it needs, however I envision this approach causing compatibility issues with the myriad mobile devices/browsers out there, and may affect the page load time. How valid are these options? And is there a better option for implementing this feature out there? I've tried researching this topic but surprisingly can't find any reputable-looking blog posts that explore this topic.

  Read the article

• Using HTML5 Today part 4&ndash;What happened to XHTML?

  - by Steve Albers

  This is the fourth entry in a series of descriptions & demos from the “Using HTML5 Today” user group presentation. For practical purposes, the original XHTML standard is a historical footnote, although XHTML transitional will probably live on forever in the default web page templates of old web page editors. The original XHTML spec was released in 2000, on the heels of the HTML 4.01 spec.  The plan was to move web development away from HTML to the more formal, rigorous approach that XHTML offered, but it was built on a principle that conflicts with the history and culture of the Internet: XHTML introduced the idea of Draconian Error Handling, which essentially means that invalid XML markup on a page will cause a page to stop rendering. There is a transitional mode offered in the original XHTML spec, but the goal was to move to D.E.H.  You can see the result by changing the doc type for a document to “application/xhtml+xml” - for my class example we change this setting in the web.config file: <staticContent> <remove fileExtension=".html" /> <mimeMap fileExtension=".html" mimeType="application/xhtml+xml" /> </staticContent> With the new strict syntax a simple error, in this case a duplicate </td> tag, can cause a critical page error: While XHTML became very popular in the ensuing decade, the Strict form of XHTML never achieved widespread use. Draconian Error Handling was one of the factors that led in time to the creation of the WHATWG, or Web Hypertext Application Technology Group.  WHATWG contributed to the eventually disbanding of the XHTML 2.0 working group and the W3C’s move to embrace the HTML5 standard. For developers who long for XML markup the W3C HTML5 standard includes an XHTML5 syntax. For the longer, more definitive look at what happened to XHTML and how HTML5 came to be check out the Dive Into HTML mirror site or Bruce Lawson’s “HTML5: Who, What, When Why” talk.

  Read the article

• Commands in Task-It - Part 1

  Download Source Code NOTE: To run the source code provided your will need to update to the RC (release candidate) versions of Silverlight 4 and VisualStudio 2010. In recent blog posts, like my MVVM post, I used Commands to invoke actions, like Saving a record. In this rather simplistic sample I will talk about the basics of Commands, and in my next post will get deeper into it. What is a Command? I remember the first time a UI designer used the word "command" I wasn't really sure what she was referring to. I later realized that it is just a term that is used to represent some UI control that can invoke an action, like a Button, HyperlinkButton, RadMenuItem, RadRadioButton, etc. Why should we use Commands? I'm sure you're familiar with the code behind approach of handling events. For example, if you had a Button and a RadMenuItem that ...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

  Read the article

• You may be tempted by IaaS, but you should PaaS on that or your database cloud journey will be a short one

  - by B R Clouse

  Before we examine Consolidation, the next step in the journey to cloud, let's take a short detour to address a critical choice you will face at the outset of your journey: whether to deploy your databases in virtual machines or not. A common misconception we've encountered is the belief that moving to cloud computing can be accomplished by simply hosting one's current operating environment as-is within virtual machines, and then stacking those VMs together in a consolidated environment.  This solution is often described as "Infrastructure as a Service" (IaaS) because the building block for deployments is a VM, which behaves like a full complement of infrastructure.  This approach is easy to understand and may feel like a good first step, but it won't take your databases very far in the journey to cloud computing.  In fact, if you follow the IaaS fork in the road, your journey will end quickly, without realizing the full benefits of cloud computing.  The better option to is to rationalize the deployment stack so that VMs are needed only for exceptional cases.  By settling on a standard operating system and patch level, you create an infrastructure that potentially all of your databases can share.  Now, the building block will be database instances or possibly schemas within databases.  These components are the platforms on which you will deploy workloads, hence this is known as "Platform as a Service" (PaaS). PaaS opens the door to higher degrees of consolidation than IaaS, because with PaaS you will not need to accommodate the footprint (operating system, hypervisor, processes, ...) that each VM brings with it.  You will also reduce your maintenance overheard if you move forward without the VMs and their O/Ses to patch and monitor.  So while IaaS simply shuffles complex and varied environments into VMs,  PaaS actually reduces complexity by rationalizing to the small possible set of components.  Now we're ready to look at the consolidation options that PaaS provides -- in our next blog posting.

  Read the article

• Parsing an header with two different version [ID3] avoiding code duplication?

  - by user66141

  I really hope you could give me some interesting viewpoints for my situation, my ways to approach my issue are not to my liking . I am writing an mp3 parser , starting with an ID3v2 parser . Right now I`m working on the extended header parsing , my issue is that the optional header is defined differently in version 2.3 and 2.4 of the tag . The 2.3 version optional header is defined as follows : struct ID3_3_EXTENDED_HEADER{ DWORD dwExtHeaderSize; //Extended header size (either 6 or 8 bytes , excluded) WORD wExtFlags; //Extended header flags DWORD dwSizeOfPadding; //Size of padding (size of the tag excluding the frames and headers) }; While the 2.4 version is defined : struct ID3_4_EXTENDED_HEADER{ DWORD dwExtHeaderSize; //Extended header size (synchsafe int) BYTE bNumberOfFlagBytes; //Number of flag bytes BYTE bFlags; //Flags }; How could I parse the header while minimizing code duplication ? Using two different functions to parse each version sounds less great , using a single function with a different flow for each occasion is similar , any good practices for this kind of issues ? any tips for avoiding code duplication ? anything would be great .

  Read the article

• Why is the use of abstractions (such as LINQ) so taboo?

  - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt

  I am an independent contractor and, as such, I interview 3-4 times a year for new gigs. I am in the midst of that cycle now and got turned down for an opportunity even though I felt like the interview went well. The same thing has happened to me a couple of times this year. Now, I am not a perfect guy and I don't expect to be a good fit for every organization. That said, my batting average is lower than usual so I politely asked my last interviewer for some constructive feedback, and he delivered! The main thing, according to the interviewer, was that I seemed to lean too much towards the use of abstractions (such as LINQ) rather than towards lower-level, organically grown algorithms. On the surface, this makes sense--in fact, it made the other rejections make sense too because I blabbed about LINQ in those interviews as well and it didn't seem that the interviewers knew much about LINQ (even though they were .NET guys). So now I am left with this question: If we are supposed to be "standing on the shoulders of giants" and using abstractions that are available to us (like LINQ), then why do some folks consider it so taboo? Doesn't it make sense to pull code "off the shelf" if it accomplishes the same goals without extra cost? It would seem to me that LINQ, even if it is an abstraction, is simply an abstraction of all the same algorithms one would write to accomplish exactly the same end. Only a performance test could tell you if your custom approach was better, but if something like LINQ met the requirements, why bother writing your own classes in the first place? I don't mean to focus on LINQ here. I am sure that the JAVA world has something comparable, I just would like to know why some folks get so uncomfortable with the idea of using an abstraction that they themselves did not write. UPDATE As Euphoric pointed out, there isn't anything comparable to LINQ in the Java world. So, if you are developing on the .NET stack, why not always try and make use of it? Is it possible that people just don't fully understand what it does?

  Read the article

• Fusion HCM in Boots

  - by Kristin Rose

  These boots are made for walking, and that’s just what they’ll do…Of course by boots, we’re referring to Oracle’s HCM Boot Camps for OPN members, which offer a hands-on approach to learning about Oracle Fusion HCM and Taleo positioning and capabilities. Those who attend an Oracle HCM boot camp will be prepared to achieve Oracle Fusion HCM Presales Specialist status, discuss Oracle Fusion HCM with customers to build pipeline, and complete competency criteria toward Oracle Fusion HCM 11g Specialization! This in-person event offers expert-led sessions, discussion, and hands-on activities meaning you will get the information quicker and remember it better! Plus, we think a free lunch is always a good thing. As a next step, all interested partners should: Obtain self-service knowledge from the Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management 11g PreSales Specialist Guided Learning Path. Become a Specialist by completing the Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management 11g PreSales Specialist Assessment . Contact their regional Oracle Alliances & Channels point-of-contact to learn more about these free OPN Boot Camp events, and the opportunity to attend the next one. We know you’ll be strutting your stuff after you've gained the knowledge and expertise to become Oracle Fusion HCM Specialized! Check it out! The OPN Communications Team 

  Read the article

• Handling deleted users - separate or same table?

  - by Alan Beats

  The scenario is that I've got an expanding set of users, and as time goes by, users will cancel their accounts which we currently mark as 'deleted' (with a flag) in the same table. If users with the same email address (that's how users log in) wish to create a new account, they can signup again, but a NEW account is created. (We have unique ids for every account, so email addresses can be duplicated amongst live and deleted ones). What I've noticed is that all across our system, in the normal course of things we constantly query the users table checking the user is not deleted, whereas what I'm thinking is that we dont need to do that at all...! [Clarification1: by 'constantly querying', I meant that we have queries which are like: '... FROM users WHERE isdeleted="0" AND ...'. For example, we may need to fetch all users registered for all meetings on a particular date, so in THAT query, we also have FROM users WHERE isdeleted="0" - does this make my point clearer?] (1) continue keeping deleted users in the 'main' users table (2) keep deleted users in a separate table (mostly required for historical book-keeping) What are the pros and cons of either approach?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179  | Next Page >