Search Results

Search found 25564 results on 1023 pages for 'design studio'.

Page 194/1023 | < Previous Page | 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201  | Next Page >

• Expression Studio 4 Launch on June 7th

  I cant wait til next week when Expression Studio 4 (Expression Blend, SketchFlow, Expression Web, Expression Design) will launch at the Internet Week conference in New York City on June 7th! I wish I could go, I grew up in NY and still call it home, but there will be a lot of great people there including Blenders: Adam Kinney Arturo Toledo Bill Buxton Christian Schormann Pete Blois Weve shown some of the new features off on Silverlight TV but we have even more to share! Here are...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

• Visual Studio 2010 & Windows Azure Launch

  If youre involved in any capacity with software development, or want to understand more about cloud computing, this is a half-day event not to be missed. Come along to the official New Zealand launch of Visual Studio 2010 and Windows Azure. Weve lined up two international experts, Sam Guckenheimer and David Chappell to deliver our two keynote sessions. Plus, to mark the occasion, were producing a very cool retro t-shirt for all attendees,...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

• How to install Visual Studio 2010 Search References and Pro Power Tools side by side

  - by Daniel Cazzulino

  The new Visual Studio 2010 Pro Power Tools bring a new Add Reference dialog that completely replaces the classic one when you click the familiar Add Reference command: It seems like a nice dialog that is more aligned with the new Add New dialog and the Extension Manager one. But for this particular case, I believe it's awfully overkill (what's the use of that right sidebar? what's the use for the categories of assemblies split between Framework and Extensions?). The (also new) Search References extension which I blogged about earlier, gives you the familiar classic dialog enhanced with the must-have Search capability:...Read full article

  Read the article

• How can I solve the same problems a CB-architecture is trying to solve without using hacks? [on hold]

  - by Jefffrey

  A component based system's goal is to solve the problems that derives from inheritance: for example the fact that some parts of the code (that are called components) are reused by very different classes that, hypothetically, would lie in a very different branch of the inheritance tree. That's a very nice concept, but I've found out that CBS is often hard to accomplish without using ugly hacks. Implementations of this system are often far from clean. But I don't want to discuss this any further. My question is: how can I solve the same problems a CBS try to solve with a very clean interface? (possibly with examples, there are a lot of abstract talks about the "perfect" design already). Here's an example I was going for before realizing I was just reinventing inheritance again: class Human { public: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other human specific components }; class Zombie { Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; // other zombie specific components }; After writing that I realized I needed an interface, otherwise I would have needed N containers for N different types of objects (or to use boost::variant to gather them all together). So I've thought of polymorphism (move what systems do in a CBS design into class specific functions): class Entity { public: virtual void on_event(Event) {} // not pure virtual on purpose virtual void on_update(World) {} virtual void on_draw(Window) {} }; class Human { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; class Zombie { private: Position position; Movement movement; Sprite sprite; public: virtual void on_event(Event) { ... } virtual void on_update(World) { ... } virtual void on_draw(Window) { ... } }; Which was nice, except for the fact that now the outside world would not even be able to know where a Human is positioned (it does not have access to its position member). That would be useful to track the player position for collision detection or if on_update the Zombie would want to track down its nearest human to move towards him. So I added const Position& get_position() const; to both the Zombie and Human classes. And then I realized that both functionality were shared, so it should have gone to the common base class: Entity. Do you notice anything? Yes, with that methodology I would have a god Entity class full of common functionality (which is the thing I was trying to avoid in the first place).

  Read the article

• Designing Videogame Character Parodies [duplicate]

  - by David Dimalanta

  This question already has an answer here: Is it legal to add a cameo appearance of a known video game character in my game? 2 answers Was it okay to make a playable character when making a videogame despite its resemblance? For example, I'm making a 3rd-person action-platform genre and I have to make a character design resembling like Megaman but not exactly the same as him since there is little alternate in color, details, and facial features.

  Read the article

• What's the problem with Scala's XML literals?

  - by Oak

  In this post, Martin (the language's head honcho) writes: [XML literals] Seemed a great idea at the time, now it sticks out like a sore thumb. I believe with the new string interpolation scheme we will be able to put all of XML processing in the libraries, which should be a big win. Being interested in language design myself, I'm wondering: Why does he write that it was a mistake to incorporate XML literals into the language? What is the controversy regarding this feature?

  Read the article

• Started wrong with a project. Should I start over?

  - by solidsnake

  I'm a beginner web developer (one year of experience). A couple of weeks after graduating, I got offered a job to build a web application for a company whose owner is not much of a tech guy. He recruited me to avoid theft of his idea, the high cost of development charged by a service company, and to have someone young he can trust onboard to maintain the project for the long run (I came to these conclusions by myself long after being hired). Cocky as I was back then, with a diploma in computer science, I accepted the offer thinking I can build anything. I was calling the shots. After some research I settled on PHP, and started with plain PHP, no objects, just ugly procedural code. Two months later, everything was getting messy, and it was hard to make any progress. The web application is huge. So I decided to check out an MVC framework that would make my life easier. That's where I stumbled upon the cool kid in the PHP community: Laravel. I loved it, it was easy to learn, and I started coding right away. My code looked cleaner, more organized. It looked very good. But again the web application was huge. The company was pressuring me to deliver the first version, which they wanted to deploy, obviously, and start seeking customers. Because Laravel was fun to work with, it made me remember why I chose this industry in the first place - something I forgot while stuck in the shitty education system. So I started working on small projects at night, reading about methodologies and best practice. I revisited OOP, moved on to object-oriented design and analysis, and read Uncle Bob's book Clean Code. This helped me realize that I really knew nothing. I did not know how to build software THE RIGHT WAY. But at this point it was too late, and now I'm almost done. My code is not clean at all, just spaghetti code, a real pain to fix a bug, all the logic is in the controllers, and there is little object oriented design. I'm having this persistent thought that I have to rewrite the whole project. However, I can't do it... They keep asking when is it going to be all done. I can not imagine this code deployed on a server. Plus I still know nothing about code efficiency and the web application's performance. On one hand, the company is waiting for the product and can not wait anymore. On the other hand I can't see myself going any further with the actual code. I could finish up, wrap it up and deploy, but god only knows what might happen when people start using it. What do you think I should do?

  Read the article

• Web Development Goes Pre-Visual InterDev

  - by Ken Cox [MVP]

  As a longtime and hardcore ASP.NET webforms developer, I’m finding the new client-side development world a bit of a grind.  I love learning new technologies, but I can’t help feeling we’ve regressed and lost our old RAD advantage as we move heavy lifting to the client. For my latest project, I’m using Telerik’s KendoUI in Visual Studio 2012. To say I feel clumsy writing this much JavaScript is an understatement. It seems like the only safe way to ‘write’ this code is by copying a working snippet from someone else and pasting it into my HTML page.  For me, JavaScript has largely been for small UI tasks like client-side validation and a bit of AJAX – and often emitted by a server-side control. I find myself today lost in nests of curly braces that Ctrl+K, Ctrl+D doesn’t seem to understand that well either. IntelliSense, my old syntax saviour, doesn’t seem to have kept up with this cobweb of code either. Code completion? Not seeing it. As I fumbled about this evening, I thought about how web development rocketed forward when Microsoft introduced Visual InterDev. Its Design-Time Controls (DTCs) changed the way we created sites. All the iterations of Visual Studio have enhanced that server-side experience where you let a tool write the bulk of the code and manually finesse it from there. What happened? Why am I typing  properties and values (especially default values!) into VS 2012 to get a client-side grid on a page? Where are the drag and drop objects that traditionally provided 70 percent of the mark-up and configuration?  Did we forget how to write Property Pages where you enter a value and the correct syntax appears magically in the source code? To me, the tooling was looking the other way as the scene shifted from server-side code to nimble client-side script. It’ll have to catch up. Although JavaScript is the lingua franca of web browsers, the language is unwieldy, tough to maintain, and messy to debug. If a .NET JIT compiler can turn our VB, F#, and C# source code into an Intermediate Language that executes on a computer, I don’t see why there can’t be a client-side compiler that turns a .NET language into JavaScript that browsers can consume.

  Read the article

• Is game development Subcontracted?

  - by Darv

  I was having a conversation with someone who believed that components of a games code where subcontracted out to programmers in different countries where it would be cheaper, then assembled by the local company. I understand that people often use pre-built engines but I would think that making the actual game would require people to work closely in the same studio. I couldn't find much clear information on this when I looked, does anyone know?

  Read the article

• As a tooling/automation developer, can I be making better use of OOP?

  - by Tom Pickles

  My time as a developer (~8 yrs) has been spent creating tooling/automation of one sort or another. The tools I develop usually interface with one or more API's. These API's could be win32, WMI, VMWare, a help-desk application, LDAP, you get the picture. The apps I develop could be just to pull back data and store/report. It could be to provision groups of VM's to create live like mock environments, update a trouble ticket etc. I've been developing in .Net and I'm currently reading into design patterns and trying to think about how I can improve my skills to make better use of and increase my understanding of OOP. For example, I've never used an interface of my own making in anger (which is probably not a good thing), because I honestly cannot identify where using one would benefit later on when modifying my code. My classes are usually very specific and I don't create similar classes with similar properties/methods which could use a common interface (like perhaps a car dealership or shop application might). I generally use an n-tier approach to my apps, having a presentation layer, a business logic/manager layer which interfaces with layer(s) that make calls to the API's I'm working with. My business entities are always just method-less container objects, which I populate with data and pass back and forth between my API interfacing layer using static methods to proxy/validate between the front and the back end. My code by nature of my work, has few common components, at least from what I can see. So I'm struggling to see how I can better make use of OOP design and perhaps reusable patterns. Am I right to be concerned that I could be being smarter about how I work, or is what I'm doing now right for my line of work? Or, am I missing something fundamental in OOP? EDIT: Here is some basic code to show how my mgr and api facing layers work. I use static classes as they do not persist any data, only facilitate moving it between layers. public static class MgrClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Perform logic to validate or apply biz logic // call APIClass to do the work return APIClass.PowerOnVM(VMName); } } public static class APIClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Calls to 3rd party API to power on a virtual machine // returns true or false if was successful for example } }

  Read the article

• SQL: empty string vs NULL value

  - by Jacek Prucia

  I know this subject is a bit controversial and there are a lot of various articles/opinions floating around the internet. Unfortunatelly, most of them assume the person doesn't know what the difference between NULL and empty string is. So they tell stories about surprising results with joins/aggregates and generally do a bit more advanced SQL lessons. By doing this, they absolutely miss the whole point and are therefore useless for me. So hopefully this question and all answers will move subject a bit forward. Let's suppose I have a table with personal information (name, birth, etc) where one of the columns is an email address with varchar type. We assume that for some reason some people might not want to provide an email address. When inserting such data (without email) into the table, there are two available choices: set cell to NULL or set it to empty string (''). Let's assume that I'm aware of all the technical implications of choosing one solution over another and I can create correct SQL queries for either scenario. The problem is even when both values differ on the technical level, they are exactly the same on logical level. After looking at NULL and '' I came to a single conclusion: I don't know email address of the guy. Also no matter how hard i tried, I was not able to sent an e-mail using either NULL or empty string, so apparently most SMTP servers out there agree with my logic. So i tend to use NULL where i don't know the value and consider empty string a bad thing. After some intense discussions with colleagues i came with two questions: am I right in assuming that using empty string for an unknown value is causing a database to "lie" about the facts? To be more precise: using SQL's idea of what is value and what is not, I might come to conclusion: we have e-mail address, just by finding out it is not null. But then later on, when trying to send e-mail I'll come to contradictory conclusion: no, we don't have e-mail address, that @!#$ Database must have been lying! Is there any logical scenario in which an empty string '' could be such a good carrier of important information (besides value and no value), which would be troublesome/inefficient to store by any other way (like additional column). I've seen many posts claiming that sometimes it's good to use empty string along with real values and NULLs, but so far haven't seen a scenario that would be logical (in terms of SQL/DB design). P.S. Some people will be tempted to answer, that it is just a matter of personal taste. I don't agree. To me it is a design decision with important consequences. So i'd like to see answers where opion about this is backed by some logical and/or technical reasons.

  Read the article

• "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD." Why?

  - by Florents

  William Cook in a tweet wrote that: "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD. Fortunately many people now realize this ..." I would like to know the reasoning behind that claim (apparently, I'm not referring to his personal opinion). I've noticed that many people out there don't like UML that much. Also it is worth mentioning that he is in academia, where UML is preety much the holy grail of effective design and modelling.

  Read the article

• Should I use JavaFx properties?

  - by Mike G

  I'm usually very careful to keep my Model, View, and Controller code separate. The thing is JavaFx properties are so convenient to bind them all together. The issue is that it makes my entire code design dependent on JavaFx, which I feel I should not being doing. I should be able to change the view without changing too much of the model and controller. So should I ignore the convenience of JavaFx properties, or should I embrace them and the fact that it reduces my codes flexibility.

  Read the article

• What's the most useful 10% of UML and is there a quick tutorial on it?

  - by Hanno Fietz

  I want my scribbles of a program's design and behaviour to become more streamlined and have a common language with other developers. I looked at UML and in principle it seems to be what I'm looking for, just way overkill. The information I found online also seems very bloated and academic. Is there a no-bullshit, 15-minutes introduction to the handful of UML symbols I'll need when discussing the architecture of some garden variety software on a whiteboard with my colleagues?

  Read the article

• What are DRY, KISS, SOLID, etc. classified as?

  - by Morgan Herlocker

  Is something like DRY a design pattern, a methodology, or something in between? They do not have specific implementations that could neccessarily be demonstrated(even if you can easily demonstrate a case NOT using something like KISS... see The Daily WTF for a plethora of examples), nor do they fully explain a development process like a methodology generally would. Where does that leave these types of "rule of thumb"'s?

  Read the article

• Creating a SOLID Visual Studio Solution

  The SOLID acronym describes five object-oriented design principles that, when followed, produce code that is cleaner and more maintainable. The last principle, the Dependency Inversion Principle, suggests that details depend upon abstractions. Unfortunately, typical project relationships in .NET applications can make this principle difficult to follow. In this article, I'll describe how one can structure a set of projects in a Visual Studio solution such that DIP can be followed, allowing for the creation of a SOLID solution. You can download the sample solution and use it as a starting point for your new solutions if you like.

  Read the article

• What are the essential things one needs to know about UML?

  - by Hanno Fietz

  I want my scribbles of a program's design and behaviour to become more streamlined and have a common language with other developers. I looked at UML and in principle it seems to be what I'm looking for, but it seems to be overkill. The information I found online also seems very bloated and academic. How can I understand UML in plain-English way, enough to be able to explain it to my colleagues? What are the canonical resources for understanding UML at a ground level?

  Read the article

• Starting all over again?

  - by kyndigs

  Have you ever been developing something and just came to a point where you think that this is rubbish, the design is bad and although I will lose time it will be better to just start all over again? What should you consider before making this step? I know it can be drastic in some cases, is it best to just totally ignore what you did before, or take some of the best bits from it? Some real life examples would be great.

  Read the article

• Visual Studio 2010 Find and Replace With Regular Expressions

  - by Lance Robinson

  Here is a quick notes about using regular expressions in the VS2010 Find Replace dialog.  1.  To create a backreference, use curly braces (“{“ and “}” ) instead of regular parentheses. 2.  To use the captured backreference, use \1\2 etc, where \1 is the first captured value, \2 is the second captured value, etc. Example: I want to find*: info.setFieldValue(param1, param2); and replace it with: SetFieldValue(info, param1, param2); To do this, I can use the following find/replace values: Find what: {[a-zA-Z0-9]+}.setFieldValue\({[a-zA-Z0-9., ]+}\); Replace with: SetFieldValue(\1, \2); Use Regular Expressions is checked, of course. *If you’re wondering why I’d want to do this – because I don’t have control over the setFieldValue function – its in a third party library that doesn’t behave in a very friendly manner. Technorati Tags: Visual Studio,Regular Expressions

  Read the article

• Copy and Paste problems in Visual Studio 2010

  tweetmeme_source = 'alpascual';After installing Visual Studio 2010 I started having problems with Copy and Paste. Trying to find out how many users are being affected by this bug. The use case to reproduce the bug, just using VS2010 for a few minutes and eventually doing Control C and Control V to copy lines of code does not work. Using the menu to do the copy and paste also wont work. Looks like a problem in the clipboard itself IMHO. The set up of my computer. Windows 7 Professional with 4...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

• Visual Studio 2010 Zooming Keyboard Commands, Global Zoom

  One of my favorite features in Visual Studio 2010 is zoom. It first caught my attention as a useful tool for screencasts and presentations, but after getting used to it Im finding that its really useful when Im developing letting me zoom out to see the big picture, then zoom in to concentrate on a few lines of code. Zooming without the scroll wheel The common way youll see this feature demonstrated is with the mouse wheel you hold down the control key and scroll up or down to change font size....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

• Connect Digest : 2012-07-06

  - by AaronBertrand

  I've filed a few Connect items recently that I think are important. In #752210 , I complain that the documentation for DDL triggers suggests that they can prevent certain DDL from being run, which is not the case at all. http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/752210/doc-ddl-trigger-topic-suggests-that-rollbacks-run-before-action In #745796 , I complain that scripting datetime data in Management Studio yields output that contains a binary representation instead of a human-readable...(read more)

  Read the article

• Should I use multiple column primary keys or add a new colum?

  - by Covar

  My current database design makes use of a multiple column primary key to use existing data (that would be unique anyway) instead of creating an additional column assigning each entry an arbitrary key. I know that this is allowed, but was wondering if this is a practice that I might want to use cautiously and possibly avoid (much like goto in C). So what are some of the disadvantages I might see in this approach or reasons I might want a single column key?

  Read the article

• How can I improve my skills while working on actual projects, in the absence of more experienced developers?

  - by LolCoder

  I'm the lead developer at a small company, working with C# and ASP.Net. Our team is small, 2-3 people, without much experience in development and design. I don't have the opportunity to learn from more senior developers, there is no one in my team to guide me and help me choose the best approaches, as I take care most of the projects myself. How can I improve my software development skills while working on actual projects, in the absence of more experienced developers?

  Read the article

• Attaching new animations onto skeleton via props, a good idea?

  - by Cardin

  I'm thinking of coding a game with an idea of mine. I've coded 2D games before, but I'm new to 3D programming, so I'd like to ask if this idea of mine is feasible or out of my depth. I'm making a game where there are many different characters for the player to choose from (JRPG style). So to save time, I have an idea of creating many different varied characters using a completely naked body mesh and animation skeleton, standardised across all characters. For example, by placing different hair, boots, armor props on the character mesh, new characters can be formed. Kinda like playing dress-up with a barbie doll. I'm thinking this can be done by having a bone on the prop that I can programmically attach to the main mesh. Also, I plan to have some props add new animations to the base skeleton, so equipping some particular props would give it new attack, damage, idle animations. This is because I can't expect the character to have the same swinging animation if he had a big sword or an axe. I think this might be possible if the prop has its own instance of the animation skeleton with just only the new animations, and parenting the base body mesh to this new skeleton. So all the base body mesh has are just the basic animations, other animations come from the props. My concerns are, 1) the props might not attach to the mesh properly and jitter a lot, 2) since prop and body are animated differently, the props and base mesh will cause visual artefacts, like the naked thighs showing through the pants when the character walks, 3) a custom pipeline have to be developed to export skeletons without mesh, and also to attach the base body mesh to a new skeleton during runtime in the game. So my question: are these features considered 'easy' to code? Or am I trying to do something few have ever succeeded with on their own? It feels like all these can be done given enough time and I know I definitely have to do a bit of bone matrix calculations, but I really don't want to drag out the development timeline unnecessarily from coding mathematically intense things or analyzing how to parse 3D export formats. I'm currently only at the Game Design stage, so if these features aren't a good idea, I can simply change the design of the game. (Unrelated to question) I could always, as last resort, have the characters have predetermined outfit and weapon selections so as to animate everything manually.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201  | Next Page >