Search Results

Search found 7418 results on 297 pages for 'argument passing'.

Page 175/297 | < Previous Page | 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182  | Next Page >

  • MVP Pattern Philsophical Question - Security Checking in UI

    - by Brian
    Hello, I have a philosophical question about the MVP pattern: I have a component that checks whether a user has access to a certain privilege. This privilege turns on or off certain UI features. For instance, suppose you have a UI grid, and for each row that gets bound, I do a security check to see if certain features in the grid should be enabled or disabled. There are two ways to do this: have the UI/view call the component's method, determine if it has access, and enable/disable or show/hide. The other is have the view fire an event to the presenter, have the presenter do the check and return the access back down to the view through the model or through the event arg. As per the MVP pattern, which component should security checks fit into, the presenter or the view? Since the view is using it to determine its accessibility, it seems more fitting in the view, but it is doing database checks and all inside this business component, and there is business logic there, so I can see the reverse argument too. Thoughts? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Discuss: PLs are characterised by which (iso)morphisms are implemented

    - by Yttrill
    I am interested to hear discussion of the proposition summarised in the title. As we know programming language constructions admit a vast number of isomorphisms. In some languages in some places in the translation process some of these isomorphisms are implemented, whilst others require code to be written to implement them. For example, in my language Felix, the isomorphism between a type T and a tuple of one element of type T is implemented, meaning the two types are indistinguishable (identical). Similarly, a tuple of N values of the same type is not merely isomorphic to an array, it is an array: the isomorphism is implemented by the compiler. Many other isomorphisms are not implemented for example there is an isomorphism expressed by the following client code: match v with | ((?x,?y),?z = x,(y,z) // Felix match v with | (x,y), - x,(y,z) (* Ocaml *) As another example, a type constructor C of int in Felix may be used directly as a function, whilst in Ocaml you must write a wrapper: let c x = C x Another isomorphism Felix implements is the elimination of unit values, including those in tuples: Felix can do this because (most) polymorphic values are monomorphised which can be done because it is a whole program analyser, Ocaml, for example, cannot do this easily because it supports separate compilation. For the same reason Felix performs type-class dispatch at compile time whilst Haskell passes around dictionaries. There are some quite surprising issues here. For example an array is just a tuple, and tuples can be indexed at run time using a match and returning a value of a corresponding sum type. Indeed, to be correct the index used is in fact a case of unit sum with N summands, rather than an integer. Yet, in a real implementation, if the tuple is an array the index is replaced by an integer with a range check, and the result type is replaced by the common argument type of all the constructors: two isomorphisms are involved here, but they're implemented partly in the compiler translation and partly at run time.

    Read the article

  • Questioning the motivation for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

    - by oberlies
    Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So dependency injection may really be an advantage in advanced use cases, but I don't need it for easy construction and testability, do I?

    Read the article

  • Creating a layer of abstraction over the ORM layer

    - by Daok
    I believe that if you have your repositories use an ORM that it's already enough abstracted from the database. However, where I am working now, someone believe that we should have a layer that abstract the ORM in case that we would like to change the ORM later. Is it really necessary or it's simply a lot of over head to create a layer that will work on many ORM? Edit Just to give more detail: We have POCO class and Entity Class that are mapped with AutoMapper. Entity class are used by the Repository layer. The repository layer then use the additional layer of abstraction to communicate with Entity Framework. The business layer has in no way a direct access to Entity Framework. Even without the additional layer of abstraction over the ORM, this one need to use the service layer that user the repository layer. In both case, the business layer is totally separated from the ORM. The main argument is to be able to change ORM in the future. Since it's really localized inside the Repository layer, to me, it's already well separated and I do not see why an additional layer of abstraction is required to have a "quality" code.

    Read the article

  • When does the "Do One Thing" paradigm become harmful?

    - by Petr
    For the sake of argument here's a sample function that prints contents of a given file line-by-line. Version 1: void printFile(const string & filePath) { fstream file(filePath, ios::in); string line; while (file.good()) { getline(file, line); cout << line << endl; } } I know it is recommended that functions do one thing at one level of abstraction. To me, though code above does pretty much one thing and is fairly atomic. Some books (such as Robert C. Martin's Clean Code) seem to suggest breaking the above code into separate functions. Version 2: void printLine(const string & line) { cout << line << endl; } void printLines(fstream & file) { string line; while (file.good()) { getline(file, line); printLine(line); } } void printFile(const string & filePath) { fstream file(filePath, ios::in); printLines(file); } I understand what they want to achieve (open file / read lines / print line), but isn't it a bit of overkill? The original version is simple and in some sense already does one thing - prints a file. The second version will lead to a large number of really small functions which may be far less legible than the first version. Wouldn't it be, in this case, better to have the code at one place? At which point does the "Do One Thing" paradigm become harmful?

    Read the article

  • Why the recent shift to removing/omitting semicolons from Javascript?

    - by Jonathan
    It seems to be fashionable recently to omit semicolons from Javascript. There was a blog post a few years ago emphasising that in Javascript, semicolons are optional and the gist of the post seemed to be that you shouldn't bother with them because they're unnecessary. The post, widely cited, doesn't give any compelling reasons not to use them, just that leaving them out has few side-effects. Even GitHub has jumped on the no-semicolon bandwagon, requiring their omission in any internally-developed code, and a recent commit to the zepto.js project by its maintainer has removed all semicolons from the codebase. His chief justifications were: it's a matter of preference for his team; less typing Are there other good reasons to leave them out? Frankly I can see no reason to omit them, and certainly no reason to go back over code to erase them. It also goes against (years of) recommended practice, which I don't really buy the "cargo cult" argument for. So, why all the recent semicolon-hate? Is there a shortage looming? Or is this just the latest Javascript fad?

    Read the article

  • Problems installing Ubuntu on a vaio with SSD, GRUB installation failure

    - by Alberto
    I have installed and used Ubuntu in several computers. But now I have a problem that I don't know how to solve. I have a Vaio (Product name: vpcz13c5e), it has a SSD 128gb. I decided to install Ubuntu (12.04, but I have tried older versions as well). Firstly, I tested with live USB, and everything was fine, so I decided go for the complete installation. Then everything went as follows: I chose to use the whole disk (first option, formatting everything). I got a message Executing 'grub-install' /deb/sdb failed. This is a fatal error After clicking ok I got another window with 3 options: the first offers different devices to install the bootloader on (I tried all of them and none works). Second option: Continue without a bootloader. In that case I got You will need to manually install a bootloader in order to start Ubuntu The third option is Cancel the installation. So, I chose Continue without a bootloader. Then I restart the computer (with the Live cd) and in a terminal type sudo fdisk -l but I obtain fdisk: unable to seek on /dev/sda: Invalid argument What can I do? any help will be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Resizing partition using Gparted gives "can't have overlapping partitions" error

    - by Marcus
    I just decided to install Ubuntu 12.04 alongside Windows 7 on my Dell laptop. However I didn't do this manually but instead used the "Run Ubuntu alongside Windows 7" option upon installation, and now the partition that Ubuntu runs on has very little space (It's giving me warnings). I'm trying to use Gparted 0.12.1-5 (via a live CD) to give Windows less space and give Ubuntu more. I've managed to remove 100GB from the Windows partition so I now have some unallocated space between Windows and Ubuntu. This is what it looks like inside Ubuntu (not using the live CD, since it won't let me mount a USB to save a screenshot): http://i.stack.imgur.com/0keQq.png So first I take sda4 (extended?) and resize it to the left so it takes up all the unallocated space. Then I resize sda5 (ext4) as well so it takes up all the new space. However, when I hit apply, it fails on the first action (resizing sd4), saying "can't have overlapping partitions". Any ideas as to why this happens? I also tried resizing sda4 by just a few MB so that it definitely didn't overlap anything, but I still got the same error message. To clarify, I am doing it using the CD, I just took the screenshot from Ubuntu. Any help would be greatly appreciated! And again, I can't mount any USB (I'm following the guide on the gparted website but it says "Invalid argument" or something like that) so I couldn't attach the details file from Gparted. If this is needed, I may need some hints on how to solve the USB issue as well. :) Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to design a scriptable communication emulator?

    - by Hawk
    Requirement: We need a tool that simulates a hardware device that communicates via RS232 or TCP/IP to allow us to test our main application which will communicate with the device. Current flow: User loads script Parse script into commands User runs script Execute commands Script / commands (simplified for discussion): Connect RS232 = RS232ConnectCommand Connect TCP/IP = TcpIpConnectCommand Send data = SendCommand Receive data = ReceiveCommand Disconnect = DisconnectCommand All commands implement the ICommand interface. The command runner simply executes a sequence of ICommand implementations sequentially thus ICommand must have an Execute exposure, pseudo code: void Execute(ICommunicator context) The Execute method takes a context argument which allows the command implementations to execute what they need to do. For instance SendCommand will call context.Send, etc. The problem RS232ConnectCommand and TcpIpConnectCommand needs to instantiate the context to be used by subsequent commands. How do you handle this elegantly? Solution 1: Change ICommand Execute method to: ICommunicator Execute(ICommunicator context) While it will work it seems like a code smell. All commands now need to return the context which for all commands except the connection ones will be the same context that is passed in. Solution 2: Create an ICommunicatorWrapper (ICommunicationBroker?) which follows the decorator pattern and decorates ICommunicator. It introduces a new exposure: void SetCommunicator(ICommunicator communicator) And ICommand is changed to use the wrapper: void Execute(ICommunicationWrapper context) Seems like a cleaner solution. Question Is this a good design? Am I on the right track?

    Read the article

  • Are Intel compilers really better than Microsoft ones?

    - by Rocket Surgeon
    Years ago I was surprised when discovered that Intel sells Studio compatible compilers. I tried it in particular for C/C++ as well as fantastic diagnostic tools. But the code was simply not that computationally intensive to notice the difference. The only impression was: did Intel really did it for me just now, Wow, amazing tools with nanoseconds resolution, unbeleivable. But the trial ended and team never seriously considered a purchase. From your experience, if license cost does not matter, which vendor is a winner ? It is not broad or vague question or attemt to spark a holy war. This sort of question about 2 very visible tools. Nobody likes when tools have any mysteries or surprises. And choices between best and best are always the pain. I also understand the "grass greener" argument. I want to hear all "what ifs" stories. What if Intel just locally optimizes it for the chip stepping of the month, and not every hardware target will actually work as well as Microsoft compiled ? What if AMD hardware is the target and everything will slow down for no reason ? Or on other hand, what if Intel's hardware has so many unnoticable opportunities, that Microsoft compiler writers are too slow to adopt and never implement in the compiler ? What if both are the same exactly, actually a single codebase just wrapped into 2 different boxes and licensed to both vendors by some 3rd party shop? And so on. But someone knows some answers.

    Read the article

  • A Generic RIDC Test Program

    - by Kevin Smith
    Many times I have found it useful to use a java program that communicates with WebCenter Content (WCC) using RIDC for testing. I might not have access to the web GUI or need to test a service running as a specific user. In the past I had created a number of "one off" programs that submitted specific services, e.g GET_SEARCH_RESULTS, DOCINFO, etc. Recently I decided to create a generic RIDC test program that could submit any service with the desired parameters based on a configuration file. The programs gets the following information from the configuration file: WCC connection information (host, port) User to use to run service Service to run Any parameters for the service The program will make a connection to the WCC server, send the service request, and print the results of the service call using the getResponseAsString() method. Here is a sample configuration file: ridc.host=localhostridc.port=4444ridc.user=sysadminridc.idcservice=GET_SEARCH_RESULTSidcservice.QueryText=dDocType <matches> `Document`idcservice.SortField=dDocNameidcservice.SortDesc=ASC There is a readme file included in the zip with instructions for how to configure and run the program. The program takes one command line argument, the configuration file name. The configuration file name is optional and defaults to config.properties. If you have any suggestions for improvements let me know. Right now it only submits a single service call each time you run it. One enhancement I have already thought about would be to allow you to specify multiple services to tun in the configuration file. You can do that with the current program by having multiple configuration files and running the program multiple times, each with a different configuration file. You can download the program here.

    Read the article

  • How to break the "php is a bad language" paradigm? [closed]

    - by dukeofgaming
    PHP is not a bad language (or at least not as bad as some may suggest). I had teachers that didn't even know PHP was object oriented until I told them. I've had clients that immediately distrust us when we say we are PHP developers and question us for not using chic languages and frameworks such as Django or RoR, or "enterprise and solid" languages such as Java and ASP.NET. Facebook is built on PHP. There are plenty of solid projects that power the web like Joomla and Drupal that are used in the enterprise and governments. There are frameworks and libraries that have some of the best architectures I've seen across all languages (Symfony 2, Doctrine). PHP has the best documentation I've seen and a big community of professionals. PHP has advanced OO features such as reflection, interfaces, let alone that PHP now supports horizontal reuse natively and cleanly through traits. There are bad programmers and script kiddies that give PHP a bad reputation, but power the PHP community at the same time, and because it is so easy to get stuff done PHP you can often do things the wrong way, granted, but why blame the language?. Now, to boil this down to an actual answerable question: what would be a good and solid and short and sweet argument to avoid being frowned upon and stop prejudice in one fell swoop and defend your honor when you say you are a PHP developer?. (free cookie with teh whipped cream to those with empirical evidence of convincing someone —client or other— on the spot) P.S.: We use Symfony, and the code ends being beautiful and maintainable

    Read the article

  • Did Oracle make public any plans to charge for JDK in the near future? [closed]

    - by Eduard Florinescu
    I recently read an article: Twelve Disaster Scenarios Which Could Damage the Technology Industry which mentioned among other the possible "disaster scenarios" also: Oracle starts charging for the JDK, giving the following as argument: Oracle could start requiring license fees for the JDK from everyone but desktop users who haven't uninstalled the Java plug-in for some reason. This would burn down half the Java server-side market, but allow Oracle to fully monetize its acquisitions and investments. [...] Oracle tends to destroy markets to create products it can fully monetize. Even if you're not a Java developer, this would have a ripple effect throughout the market. [...] I actually haven't figured out why Larry hasn't decided Java should go this route yet. Some version of this scenario is actually in my company's statement of risks. I know guessing for the future is impossible, and speculating about that would be endless so I will try to frame my question in an objective answarable way: Did Oracle or someone from Oracle under anonymity, make public, or hinted, leaked to the public such a possibility or the above is plain journalistic speculation? I am unable to find the answer myself with Google generating a lot of noise by searching JDK.

    Read the article

  • Thick models Vs. Business Logic, Where do you draw the distinction?

    - by TokenMacGuy
    Today I got into a heated debate with another developer at my organization about where and how to add methods to database mapped classes. We use sqlalchemy, and a major part of the existing code base in our database models is little more than a bag of mapped properties with a class name, a nearly mechanical translation from database tables to python objects. In the argument, my position was that that the primary value of using an ORM was that you can attach low level behaviors and algorithms to the mapped classes. Models are classes first, and secondarily persistent (they could be persistent using xml in a filesystem, you don't need to care). His view was that any behavior at all is "business logic", and necessarily belongs anywhere but in the persistent model, which are to be used for database persistence only. I certainly do think that there is a distinction between what is business logic, and should be separated, since it has some isolation from the lower level of how that gets implemented, and domain logic, which I believe is the abstraction provided by the model classes argued about in the previous paragraph, but I'm having a hard time putting my finger on what that is. I have a better sense of what might be the API (which, in our case, is HTTP "ReSTful"), in that users invoke the API with what they want to do, distinct from what they are allowed to do, and how it gets done. tl;dr: What kinds of things can or should go in a method in a mapped class when using an ORM, and what should be left out, to live in another layer of abstraction?

    Read the article

  • Demantra 7.3.1.3 Controlling MDP_MATRIX Combinations Assigned to Forecasting Tasks Using TargetTaskSize

    - by user702295
    New 7.3.1.3 parameter: TargetTaskSize Old parameter: BranchID  Multiple, deprecated  7.3.1.3 onwards Parameter Location: Parameters > System Parameters > Engine > Proport   Default: 0   Engine Mode: Both   Details: Specifies how many MDP_MATRIX combinations the analytical engine attempts to assign to each forecasting task.  Allocation will be affected by forecsat tree branch size.  TaskTargetSize is automcatically calculated.  It holds the perferred branch size, in number of combinations in the lowest level. This parameter is adjusted to a lower value for smaller schemas, depending on the number of available engines.   - As the forecast is generated the engine goes up the tree using max_fore_level and not top_level -1.  Max_fore_level has     to be less than or equal to top_level -1.  Due to this requirement, combinations falling under the same top level -1     member must be in the same task.  A member of the top level -1 of the forecast tree is known as a branch.  An engine     task is therefore comprised of one or more branches.     - Reveal current task size       go to Engine Administrator --> View --> Branch Information and run the application on your Demantra schema.  This will be deprecated in 7.3.1.3 since there is no longer a means of adjusting the brach size directly.  The focus is now on proper hierarchy / forecast design.     - Control of tasks       The number of tasks created is the lowest of number of branches, as defined by top level -1 members in forecast       tree, and engine sessions and the value of TargetTaskSize.  You are used to using the branch multiplier in this       calculation.  As of 7.3.1.3, the branch ID multiple is deprecated.     - Discovery of current branch size       To resolve this you must review the 2nd highest level in the forecast tree (below highest/highest) as this is the       level which determines the size of the branches.  If a few resulting tasks are too large it is recommended that       the forecast tree level driving branches be revised or at times completely removed from the forecast tree.     - Control of foreacast tree branch size         - Run the following sql to determine how even the branches are being split by the engine:             select count(*),branch_id from mdp_matrix where prediction_status = 1 and do_fore = 1 group by branch_id;             This will give you an understanding if some of the individual branches have an unusually large number of           rows and thus might indicate that the engine is not efficiently dividing up the parallel tasks.         - Based on the results of this sql, we may want to adjust the branch id multiplier and/or the number of engines           (both of these settings are found in the Engine Administrator)           select count(*), level_id from mdp_matrix where prediction_status = 1 and do_fore = 1 group by level_id;           This will give us an understanding at which level of the Forecast tree where the forecast is being generated.            Having a majority of combinations higher on the forecast tree might indicate either a poorly designed forecast           tree and/or engine parameters that are too strict           Based on the results of this we would adjust the Forecast Tree to see if choosing a different hierarchy might           produce a forecast, with more combinations, at a lower level.           For example:             - Review the 2nd highest level in the forecast tree, below highest/highest, as this is the level which               determines the size of the branches.             - If a few resulting tasks are too large it is recommended that the forecast tree level driving branches               be revised or at times completely removed from the forecast tree.               - For example, if the highest level of the forecast tree is set to Brand/All Locations.             - You have 10 brands but 2 of the brands account for 67% and 29% of all combinations.             - There is a distinct possibility that the tasks resulting from these 2 branches will be too large for               a single engine to process.  Some possible solutions could be to remove the Brand level and instead               use a different product grouping which has a more even distribution, possibly Product Group.               - It is also possible to add a location dimension to this forecast tree level, for example Customer.                This will also reduce forecast tree branch size and will deliver a balanced task allocation.             - A correctly configured Forecast Tree is something that is done by the Implementation team and is               not the responsibility of Oracle Support.  Allocation will be affected by forecast tree branch size.  When TargetTaskSize is set to 0, the default value, the system automatically calculates a value for 'TargetTaskSize' depending on the number of engines.   - QUESTION:  Does this mean that if TargetTaskSize is 1, we use tree branch size to allocate branches to tasks instead                of automatically calculating the size?     ANSWER: DEV Strongly recommends that the setting of TargetTaskSize remain at the DEFAULT of ZERO (0).   - How to control the number of engines?     Determine how many CPUs are on the machine(s) that is (are) running the engine.  As mentioned earlier, the general     rule is that you should designate 2 engines per each CPU that is available.  So for example, if you are running the     engine on a machine that has 4 CPU then you can have up to 8 engines designated in the Engine Administrator.  In this     type of architecture then instead of having one 'localhost' in your Engine Settings Screen, you would have 'localhost'     repeated eight times in this field.     Where do I set the number of engines?                 To add multiples computers where engine will run, please do a back-up of Settings.xml file under         Analytical Engines\bin\ folder, then edit it and add there the selected machines.                 Example, this will allow 3 engines to start:         - <Entry>           <Key argument="ComputerNames" />           <Value type="string" argument="localhost,localhost,localhost" />           </Entry Otherwise, if there are no additional engines defined, the calculated value of 'TargetTaskSize' is used. (Oracle does not recommend changing the default value.) The TargetTaskSize holds the engines prefered branch size, in number of level 1 combinations.   - Level 1 combinations, known as group size The engine manager will use this parameter to attempt creating branches with similar size.   * The engine manager will not create engines that do not have a branch. The engine divider algorithm uses the value of 'TargetTaskSize' as a system-preferred branch size to create branches that are more equal in size which improves engine performance.  The engine divider will try to add as many tasks as possible to an existing branch, up to the limit of 'TargetTaskSize' level 1 combinations, before adding new branches. Coming up next: - The engine divider - Group size - Level 1 combinations - MAX_FORE_LEVEL - Engine Parameters  

    Read the article

  • Who should write the test plan?

    - by Cheng Kiang
    Hi, I am in the in-house development team of my company, and we develop our company's web sites according to the requirements of the marketing team. Before releasing the site to them for acceptance testing, we were requested to give them a test plan to follow. However, the development team feels that since the requirements came from the requestors, they would have the best knowledge of what to test, what to lookout for, how things should behave etc and a test plan is thus not required. We are always in an argument over this, and developers find it a waste of time to write down things like:- Click on button A. Key in XYZ in the form field and click button B. You should see behaviour C. which we have to repeat for each requirement/feature requested. This is basically rephrasing what's already in the requirements document. We are moving towards using an Agile approach for managing our projects and this is also requested at the end of each iteration. Unit and integration testing aside, who should be the one to come up with the end user acceptance test plan? Should it be the reqestors or the developers? Many thanks in advance. Regards CK

    Read the article

  • LASTDATE dates arguments and upcoming events #dax #tabular #powerpivot

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    Recently I had to write a DAX formula containing a LASTDATE within the logical condition of a FILTER: I found that its behavior was not the one I expected and I further investigated. At the end, I wrote my findings in this article on SQLBI, which can be applied to any Time Intelligence function with a <dates> argument.The key point is that when you write LASTDATE( table[column] )in reality you obtain something like LASTDATE( CALCULATETABLE( VALUES( table[column] ) ) )which converts an existing row context into a filter context.Thus, if you have something like FILTER( table, table[column] = LASTDATE( table[column] ) the FILTER will return all the rows of table, whereas you probably want to use FILTER( table, table[column] = LASTDATE( VALUES( table[column] ) ) )so that the existing filter context before executing FILTER is used to get the result from VALUES( table[column] ), avoiding the automatic expansion that would include a CALCULATETABLE that would hide the existing filter context.If after reading the article you want to get more insights, read the Jeffrey Wang's post here.In these days I'm speaking at SQLRally Nordic 2012 in Copenhagen and I will be in Cologne (Germany) next week for a SSAS Tabular Workshop, whereas Alberto will teach the same workshop in Amsterdam one week later. Both workshops still have seats available and the Amsterdam's one is still in early bird discount until October 3rd!Then, in November I expect to meet many blog readers at PASS Summit 2012 in Seattle and I hope to find the time to write other article on interesting things on Tabular and PowerPivot. Stay tuned!

    Read the article

  • CodeStock 2012 Review: Eric Landes( @ericlandes ) - Automated Tests in to automated Builds! How to put the right type of automated tests in to the right automated builds.

    Automated Tests in to automated Builds! How to put the right type of automated tests in to the right automated builds.Speaker: Eric LandesTwitter: @ericlandesBlog: http://ericlandes.com/ This was one of the first sessions I attended during CodeStock 2012. Eric’s talk focused mostly on unit testing, and that the lack of proper unit testing can be compared to stealing from an employer. His point was that if you’re not doing proper unit testing then all of the time wasted on fixing issues that could have been detected with unit tests is like stealing money from employer. He makes the assumption that that time spent on fixing these issues could have been better spent developing new features that drive the business. To a point I can agree with Eric’s argument regarding unit testing and stealing from a company’s perspective. I can see how he relates resources being shifted from new development to bug fixes as stealing based on the fact that the resources used to fix bugs are directly taken from other projects. He also states that Boring/Redundant and Build/Test tasks should be automated because it reduces the changes of errors and frees up developer to do what they do best, DEVELOP! When he refers to testing, he breaks testing down in to four distinct types. Unit Test Acceptance Test (This also includes Integration Tests) Performance Test UI Test With this he also recommends that developers should not go buck wild striving for 100% code coverage because some test my not provide a great return on investment. In his experience he recommends that 70% test coverage was a very acceptable rate.

    Read the article

  • A case for not installing your own software

    - by James Gentsch
    This week I watched some of the Oracle Open World presentations (from the comfort of my Oracle office) and happened on some of Larry Ellison’s comments about cloud computing and engineered systems.  Larry said he sees the move to these as analogous to the moves made by the original adopters of electricity.  The argument goes that the first consumers of electricity had to set up their own power plant.  Then, as the market and infrastructure for electricity matured, power consumers moved from using their own personal power plant to purchasing power from another entity that was focused on power production as their primary product. In the end this was a cheaper and more reliable solution. Now, there are lots of compelling reasons to be looking very seriously at cloud computing and engineered systems for enterprise application deployment.  However, speaking as a software developer of enterprise applications, the part of this that I really love (besides Larry’s early electricity adopter analogy) is that as a mode of application deployment it provides me and my customers a consistent environment in which the applications I am providing will be run.  This cuts way down on the environmental surprises that consistently lead to the hated “well, it works here” situation with the support desk. And just to be clear, I think I hate this situation more than my clients, who I think are happy that at least it is working somewhere.  I hate this because when a problem happens, and let’s face it customers are not wasting their time calling in easy problems, we are seriously disabled when we cannot reproduce the issue which is triggered by something unforeseen in the environment where the application is running.  This situation is incredibly frustrating and an all too often occurrence. I look selfishly forward to cloud computing and engineered systems dramatically reducing the occurrence of problems triggered by unforeseen environmental situations in the software I am responsible for.  I think this is an evolutionary game changer that will be a huge benefit to the reliability and consistent performance of the software for my customers, and may make “well, it works here” a well forgotten phase for future software developers. It may even impact the stress squeeze toy industry.  Well, maybe at least for my group.

    Read the article

  • Clustering and custom applications

    - by Ahmed ilyas
    I was not entirely sure what tags to put but hope this is ok. This is just a general question in regards to clustering and applications: so lets say we have a clustered environment setup. We cluster SQL Server (I dont know exactly how its done but lets just say its been done for the sake of argument). Now if a website or application is trying to access that database for read/write (say an ASP.NET app or a C# Winforms app) and during that time SQL goes down - it takes a couple of minutes for the clustering failover to take affect to switch to another node. What happens during this time? I think it will time out/unable to connect. BUT is there a way for it to place the request in some pipeline so when the cluster node is back up/switched over it will continue as normal? as you can see, I know nothing much about clustering! what about your own custom .NET apps? Would there be a special way to develop them? I know that you can say create a simple Hello world app, and cluster that but they wouldnt be something you could see interms of the UI or anything, so they would effectively need to be developed as a Windows Service perhaps or even as a standard Console app which runs and not wait for user input but you wouldnt see any output from it (unless you redirect output to somewhere else) What im getting at here is... for those who have experience or developed a cluster application in .NET, how did you do it and what are the things to be aware of? For example we have the cloud service - fundamentally its built on clustering - if there is an outage, another node takes place and service is resumed as normal but we dont really see much of that downtime.

    Read the article

  • The Science Behind Technological Moral Panics

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Why do some new technologies cause ripples and reactionary backlash in society but others slip into our daily lives almost entirely uncontested? It turns out there’s a rather specific combination of things the new technology must do to upset the public. At Wired they highlight the work of Genevieve Bell and her studies of how society reacts to new technology: Genevieve Bell believes she’s cracked this puzzle. Bell, director of interaction and experience research at Intel, has long studied how everyday people incorporate new tech into their lives. In a 2011 interview with The Wall Street Journal‘s Tech Europe blog, she outlined an interesting argument: To provoke moral panic, a technology must satisfy three rules. First, it has to change our relationship to time. Then it has to change our relationship to space. And, crucially, it has to change our relationship to one another. Individually, each of these transformations can be unsettling, but if you hit all three? Panic! Why We Freak Out About Some Technologies but Not Others [Wired] How To Play DVDs on Windows 8 6 Start Menu Replacements for Windows 8 What Is the Purpose of the “Do Not Cover This Hole” Hole on Hard Drives?

    Read the article

  • @CodeStock 2012 Review: Leon Gersing ( @Rubybuddha ) - "You"

    "YOU"Speaker: Leon GersingTwitter: @Rubybuddha Site: http://about.me/leongersing I honestly had no idea what I was getting in to when I sat down in to this session. I basically saw the picture of the speaker and knew that it would be a good session. I was completely wrong; it was the BEST SESSION of CodeStock 2012.  In fact it was so good, I texted another coworker attending the conference to get over and listen to Leon. Leon took on the concept of growth in the software development community. He specifically referred David Hansson in his ability to stick to his beliefs when the development community thought that he was crazy for creating Ruby on Rails. If you do not know this story Ruby on Rails is one of the fastest growing web languages today. In addition, he also touched on the flip side of this argument in that we must be open to others ideas and not discard them so quickly because we all come from differing perspectives and can add value to a project/team/community. This session left me with two very profound concepts/quotes: “In order to learn you must do it badly in front of a crowed and fail.” - @Rubybuddha I can look back on my career so far and say that he is correct; I think I have learned the most after failing, especially when I achieved this failure in front of other. “Experts must be able to fail.” - @Rubybuddha I think we can all learn from our own mistakes but we can also learn from others. When respected experts fail it is a great learning opportunity for the entire team as well as the person who failed. When expert admit mistakes and how they worked through them can be great learning tools for other developers so that they know how to avoid specific scenarios and if they do become stuck in the same issue they will know how to properly work their way out of them.

    Read the article

  • Should a stack trace be in the error message presented to the user?

    - by Vilx-
    I've got a bit of an argument at my workplace and I'm trying to figure out who is right, and what is the right thing to do. Context: an intranet web application that our customers use for accounting and other ERP stuff. I'm of the opinion that an error message presented to the user (when things crash) should include as much information as possible, including the stack trace. Of course, it has to start with a nice "An Error has occurred, please submit the below information to the developers" in large, friendly letters. My reasoning is that a screenshot of the crashed application will often be the only easily available source of information. Sure, you can try to get a hold of the client's systems administrator(s), attempt to explain where your log files are, etc, but that will probably be slow and painful (talking to the client representatives mostly is). Also, having an immediate and full information is extremely useful in development, where you don't have to go hunting through the log files to find what you need on every exception. (But that could be solved with a configuration switch.) Unfortunately there has been some kind of "Security audit" (no idea how they did that without the sources... but whatever), and they complained about the full exception messages citing them as a security threat. Naturally, the clients (at least one that I know of) has taken this at face value and now demands that the messages be cleaned. I fail to see how a potential attacker could use a stack trace to figure anything out he couldn't have figured out before. Are there any examples, any documented proof of anyone ever doing that? I think that we should fight this foolish idea, but perhaps I'm the fool here, so... Who's right?

    Read the article

  • C# 4.0 Optional/Named Parameters Beginner&rsquo;s Tutorial

    - by mbcrump
    One of the interesting features of C# 4.0 is for both named and optional arguments.  They are often very useful together, but are quite actually two different things.  Optional arguments gives us the ability to omit arguments to method invocations. Named arguments allows us to specify the arguments by name instead of by position.  Code using the named parameters are often more readable than code relying on argument position.  These features were long overdue, especially in regards to COM interop. Below, I have included some examples to help you understand them more in depth. Please remember to target the .NET 4 Framework when trying these samples. Code Snippet using System;   namespace ConsoleApplication3 {     class Program     {         static void Main(string[] args)         {               //C# 4.0 Optional/Named Parameters Tutorial               Foo();                              //Prints to the console | Return Nothing 0             Foo("Print Something");             //Prints to the console | Print Something 0             Foo("Print Something", 1);          //Prints to the console | Print Something 1             Foo(x: "Print Something", i: 5);    //Prints to the console | Print Something 5             Foo(i: 5, x: "Print Something");    //Prints to the console | Print Something 5             Foo("Print Something", i: 5);       //Prints to the console | Print Something 5             Foo2(i3: 77);                       //Prints to the console | 77         //  Foo(x:"Print Something", 5);        //Positional parameters must come before named arguments. This will error out.             Console.Read();         }           static void Foo(string x = "Return Nothing", int i = 0)         {             Console.WriteLine(x + " " + i + Environment.NewLine);         }           static void Foo2(int i = 1, int i2 = 2, int i3 = 3, int i4 = 4)         {             Console.WriteLine(i3);         }     } }

    Read the article

  • Using template questions in a technical interview

    - by Desolate Planet
    I've recently been in an argument with a colleage about technical questions in interviews. As a graduate, I went round lots of companies and noticed they used the same questions. An example is "Can you write a function that determines if a number is prime or not?", 4 years later, I find that particular question is quite common even for a junior developer. I might not be looking at this the correct way, but shouldn't software houses be intelligent enought to think up their own interview questions. This may well be the case, but I've been to about 16 interviews as a graduate and the same questions came up in about 75% of them. This leads me to believe that many companies are lazy and simply Google: 'Template questions for interviewing software developers' and I kind of look down on that. Question: Is it better to use a sest of questions off some template or should software houses strive to be more original and come up with their own interview material? From my point of view, if I failed an inteview and went off and looked for good answers to the questions I messed up on, I could fly through the next interview if they questions are the same.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182  | Next Page >