Search Results

Search found 12287 results on 492 pages for 'column oriented'.

Page 2/492 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Getting started with Oracle Database In-Memory Part III - Querying The IM Column Store

    - by Maria Colgan
    In my previous blog posts, I described how to install, enable, and populate the In-Memory column store (IM column store). This weeks post focuses on how data is accessed within the IM column store. Let’s take a simple query “What is the most expensive air-mail order we have received to date?” SELECT Max(lo_ordtotalprice) most_expensive_order FROM lineorderWHERE  lo_shipmode = 5; The LINEORDER table has been populated into the IM column store and since we have no alternative access paths (indexes or views) the execution plan for this query is a full table scan of the LINEORDER table. You will notice that the execution plan has a new set of keywords “IN MEMORY" in the access method description in the Operation column. These keywords indicate that the LINEORDER table has been marked for INMEMORY and we may use the IM column store in this query. What do I mean by “may use”? There are a small number of cases were we won’t use the IM column store even though the object has been marked INMEMORY. This is similar to how the keyword STORAGE is used on Exadata environments. You can confirm that the IM column store was actually used by examining the session level statistics, but more on that later. For now let's focus on how the data is accessed in the IM column store and why it’s faster to access the data in the new column format, for analytical queries, rather than the buffer cache. There are four main reasons why accessing the data in the IM column store is more efficient. 1. Access only the column data needed The IM column store only has to scan two columns – lo_shipmode and lo_ordtotalprice – to execute this query while the traditional row store or buffer cache has to scan all of the columns in each row of the LINEORDER table until it reaches both the lo_shipmode and the lo_ordtotalprice column. 2. Scan and filter data in it's compressed format When data is populated into the IM column it is automatically compressed using a new set of compression algorithms that allow WHERE clause predicates to be applied against the compressed formats. This means the volume of data scanned in the IM column store for our query will be far less than the same query in the buffer cache where it will scan the data in its uncompressed form, which could be 20X larger. 3. Prune out any unnecessary data within each column The fastest read you can execute is the read you don’t do. In the IM column store a further reduction in the amount of data accessed is possible due to the In-Memory Storage Indexes(IM storage indexes) that are automatically created and maintained on each of the columns in the IM column store. IM storage indexes allow data pruning to occur based on the filter predicates supplied in a SQL statement. An IM storage index keeps track of minimum and maximum values for each column in each of the In-Memory Compression Unit (IMCU). In our query the WHERE clause predicate is on the lo_shipmode column. The IM storage index on the lo_shipdate column is examined to determine if our specified column value 5 exist in any IMCU by comparing the value 5 to the minimum and maximum values maintained in the Storage Index. If the value 5 is outside the minimum and maximum range for an IMCU, the scan of that IMCU is avoided. For the IMCUs where the value 5 does fall within the min, max range, an additional level of data pruning is possible via the metadata dictionary created when dictionary-based compression is used on IMCU. The dictionary contains a list of the unique column values within the IMCU. Since we have an equality predicate we can easily determine if 5 is one of the distinct column values or not. The combination of the IM storage index and dictionary based pruning, enables us to only scan the necessary IMCUs. 4. Use SIMD to apply filter predicates For the IMCU that need to be scanned Oracle takes advantage of SIMD vector processing (Single Instruction processing Multiple Data values). Instead of evaluating each entry in the column one at a time, SIMD vector processing allows a set of column values to be evaluated together in a single CPU instruction. The column format used in the IM column store has been specifically designed to maximize the number of column entries that can be loaded into the vector registers on the CPU and evaluated in a single CPU instruction. SIMD vector processing enables the Oracle Database In-Memory to scan billion of rows per second per core versus the millions of rows per second per core scan rate that can be achieved in the buffer cache. I mentioned earlier in this post that in order to confirm the IM column store was used; we need to examine the session level statistics. You can monitor the session level statistics by querying the performance views v$mystat and v$statname. All of the statistics related to the In-Memory Column Store begin with IM. You can see the full list of these statistics by typing: display_name format a30 SELECT display_name FROM v$statname WHERE  display_name LIKE 'IM%'; If we check the session statistics after we execute our query the results would be as follow; SELECT Max(lo_ordtotalprice) most_expensive_order FROM lineorderWHERE lo_shipmode = 5; SELECT display_name FROM v$statname WHERE  display_name IN ('IM scan CUs columns accessed',                        'IM scan segments minmax eligible',                        'IM scan CUs pruned'); As you can see, only 2 IMCUs were accessed during the scan as the majority of the IMCUs (44) in the LINEORDER table were pruned out thanks to the storage index on the lo_shipmode column. In next weeks post I will describe how you can control which queries use the IM column store and which don't. +Maria Colgan

    Read the article

  • Object Oriented Design of a Small Java Game

    - by user2733436
    This is the problem i am dealing with. I have to make a simple game of NIM. I am learning java using a book so far i have only coded programs that deal with 2 classes. This program would have about 4 classes i guess including the main class. My problem is i am having a difficult time designing classes how they will interact with each other. I really want to think and use a object oriented approach. So the first thing i did was design the Pile CLASS as it seemed the easiest and made the most sense to me in terms of what methods go in it. Here is what i have got down for the Pile Class so far. package Nim; import java.util.Random; public class Pile { private int initialSize; public Pile(){ } Random rand = new Random(); public void setPile(){ initialSize = (rand.nextInt(100-10)+10); } public void reducePile(int x){ initialSize = initialSize - x; } public int getPile(){ return initialSize; } public boolean hasStick(){ if(initialSize>0){ return true; } else { return false; } } } Now i need help in designing the Player Class. By that i mean i am not asking for anyone to write code for me as that defeats the purpose of learning i was just wondering how would i design the player class and what would go on it. My guess is that the player class would contain method for choosing move for computer and also receiving the move human user makes. Lastly i am guessing in the Game class i am guessing the turns would be handeled. I am really lost right now so i was wondering if someone can help me think through this problem it would be great. Starting with the player class would be appreciated. I know there are some solutions for this problem online but i refuse to look at because i want to develop my own approach to such problems and i am confident if i can get through this problem i can solve other problems. I apologize if this question is a bit poor but in specific i need help in designing the Player class.

    Read the article

  • Change column height as other column gets longer

    - by Infiniti Fizz
    Hi, I have tried a few things to solve this problem but I can't seem to get it working. The problem is that I have 2 columns as the main part of my website, right and left. On some pages, there is a lot of text in the left column, therefore it is very long, the problem is that the right column doesn't elongate with the left column. Both columns have the same background colour and a footer s displayed across the width of both columns after the columns finish. My first thought was to put both columns inside a div which would have the same background colour as them and therefore if the left column became 1500px long in total and the right column stayed at around 600px (due to the elements inside it) then this wouldn't show as the new, outer div would elongate along with the left column. But for some reason this didn't work. Could it be because the columns are floated? Does anyone have any other ideas? Here is the website (Obviously not finished yet): Beansheaf Hotel I have chosen a page where there is a lot of text in the left column so the problem is apparent. Thanks in advance, InfinitiFizz

    Read the article

  • Why did object-oriented paradigms take so long to go mainstream?

    - by Earlz
    I read this question and it got me thinking about another fairly recent thing. Object oriented languages. I'm not sure when the first one was created, but why did it take so long before they became mainstream? C became vastly popular, but didn't become the object-oriented C++ for years(decades?) later No mainstream language before the 90s was object oriented Object oriented really seemed to take off with Java and C++ around the same time Now, my question, why did this take so long? Why wasn't C originally conceived as an object-oriented language? Taking a very small subset of C++ wouldn't have affected the core language a whole lot, so why was this idea not popular until the 90s?

    Read the article

  • Loose Coupling in Object Oriented Design

    - by m3th0dman
    I am trying to learn GRASP and I found this explained (here on page 3) about Low Coupling and I was very surprised when I found this: Consider the method addTrack for an Album class, two possible methods are: addTrack( Track t ) and addTrack( int no, String title, double duration ) Which method reduces coupling? The second one does, since the class using the Album class does not have to know a Track class. In general, parameters to methods should use base types (int, char ...) and classes from the java.* packages. I tend to diasgree with this; I believe addTrack(Track t) is better than addTrack(int no, String title, double duration) due to various reasons: It is always better for a method to as fewer parameters as possible (according to Uncle Bob's Clean Code none or one preferably, 2 in some cases and 3 in special cases; more than 3 needs refactoring - these are of course recommendations not holly rules). If addTrack is a method of an interface, and the requirements need that a Track should have more information (say year or genre) then the interface needs to be changed and so that the method should supports another parameter. Encapsulation is broke; if addTrack is in an interface, then it should not know the internals of the Track. It is actually more coupled in the second way, with many parameters. Suppose the no parameter needs to be changed from int to long because there are more than MAX_INT tracks (or for whatever reason); then both the Track and the method need to be changed while if the method would be addTrack(Track track) only the Track would be changed. All the 4 arguments are actually connected with each other, and some of them are consequences from others. Which approach is better?

    Read the article

  • How to practice object oriented programming?

    - by user1620696
    I've always programmed in procedural languages and currently I'm moving towards object orientation. The main problem I've faced is that I can't see a way to practice object orientation in an effective way. I'll explain my point. When I've learned PHP and C it was pretty easy to practice: it was just matter of choosing something and thinking about an algorithm for that thing. In PHP for example, it was matter os sitting down and thinking: "well, just to practice, let me build one application with an administration area where people can add products". This was pretty easy, it was matter of thinking of an algorithm to register some user, to login the user, and to add the products. Combining these with PHP features, it was a good way to practice. Now, in object orientation we have lots of additional things. It's not just a matter of thinking about an algorithm, but analysing requirements deeper, writing use cases, figuring out class diagrams, properties and methods, setting up dependency injection and lots of things. The main point is that in the way I've been learning object orientation it seems that a good design is crucial, while in procedural languages one vague idea was enough. I'm not saying that in procedural languages we can write good software without design, just that for sake of practicing it is feasible, while in object orientation it seems not feasible to go without a good design, even for practicing. This seems to be a problem, because if each time I'm going to practice I need to figure out tons of requirements, use cases and so on, it seems to become not a good way to become better at object orientation, because this requires me to have one whole idea for an app everytime I'm going to practice. Because of that, what's a good way to practice object orientation?

    Read the article

  • Is functional programming a superset of object oriented?

    - by Jimmy Hoffa
    The more functional programming I do, the more I feel like it adds an extra layer of abstraction that seems like how an onion's layer is- all encompassing of the previous layers. I don't know if this is true so going off the OOP principles I've worked with for years, can anyone explain how functional does or doesn't accurately depict any of them: Encapsulation, Abstraction, Inheritance, Polymorphism I think we can all say, yes it has encapsulation via tuples, or do tuples count technically as fact of "functional programming" or are they just a utility of the language? I know Haskell can meet the "interfaces" requirement, but again not certain if it's method is a fact of functional? I'm guessing that the fact that functors have a mathematical basis you could say those are a definite built in expectation of functional, perhaps? Please, detail how you think functional does or does not fulfill the 4 principles of OOP.

    Read the article

  • Recommended reading for (Object Oriented) application design architecture?

    - by e4rthdog
    In life it doesnt matter if you do one thing for 15 years. You will end up waking one day and asking stuff that are equal to "how do i walk?" :) My specific question is that as a new entrant to C# and OOP i am stepping into many little "details" that need to be addressed. Written a lot of code in VB.NET / cobol / simple php e.t.c surely does not help much into the OOP world... So , even after reading entry level books for C# and watching some videos i recently found out about the "factory model design" for applications. I would appreciate if any of you guys recomment some reading on application design architecture for further reading...

    Read the article

  • Object oriented EDI handling in PHP

    - by Robert van der Linde
    I'm currently starting a new sub project where I will: Retrieve the order information from our mainframe Save the order information to our web-apps' database Send the order as EDI (either D01b or D93a) Receive the order response, despatch advice and invoice messages Do all kinds of fun things with the resulting datasets. However I am struggling with my initial class designs. The order information will be retrieved from the mainframe which will result in a "AOrder" class, this isn't a problem, I am not sure about how to mold this local object into an EDI string. Should I create EDIOrder/EDIOrderResponse/etc classes with matching decorators (EDIOrderD01BDecorator, EDIOrderD93ADecorator)? Do I need builder objects or can I do: // $myOrder is instance of AOrder $myOrder->toEDIOrder(); $decorator = new EDIOrderD01BDecorator($myOrder); $edi = $decorator->getEDIString(); And it'll have to work the other way around as well. Is the following code a good way of handling this problem or should I go about this differently? $ediString = $myEDIMessageBroker->fetch(); $ediOrderResponse = EDIOrderResponse::fromString($ediString); I'm just not so sure about how I should go about designing the classes and interactions between them. Thanks for reading and helping.

    Read the article

  • OOP oriented PHP app source code samples and advice

    - by abel
    The day I have been dreading has arrived. I never felt OOP or good software design was important(I knew they were important, but I thought I could manage without them.). However having read otherwise almost everywhere on the interwebs, I started dreading the day when my client would ask me for new features in an existing app. The day has come and the pain is unbearable! I have never coded my PHP websites "properly"(PHP is my primary language and the bulk of my work. I am learning Python (using web2py)) I take care that the website doesn't fall apart in a daily use scenario. I code pages like I was creating a list of static html files with bits of "magic code" in each of them(this bugs me a lot). How do I make the whole app more or less a single object? For eg. How do I design the object model for an invoicing app? I use a lot of functions for doing any particular thing in the same fashion throughout the app(for eg. validation, generating ids, calculating taxes etc.). I know the basics of OOP in general. Can anyone point me to source code samples of functional apps written in php? Or can someone provide pointers so I can recode my existing apps in a more modular way.

    Read the article

  • The Underlying Value of Aspect-Oriented Programming

    - by Brian
    Hello, I recently got into PostSharp, an AOP tool for weaving in code. I've been finding a lot of resistance with other developers over giving up writing code to perform the tasks the weaving was meant to simplify. For instance, I'm finding logging or error-handling code where I have postsharp already doing that. I can understand why its happening, since its hard to remember everything that weaving was setup to do (I'm applying a global attribute definition). With that said, factoring in levels of experience, etc, is AOP beneficial to a project? What is your opinion? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Object oriented wrapper around a dll

    - by Tom Davies
    So, I'm writing a C# managed wrapper around a native dll. The dll contains several hundred functions. In most cases, the first argument to each function is an opaque handle to a type internal to the dll. So, an obvious starting point for defining some classes in the wrapper would be to define classes corresponding to each of these opaque types, with each instance holding and managing the opaque handle (passed to its constructor) Things are a little awkward when dealing with callbacks from the dll. Naturally, the callback handlers in my wrapper have to be static, but the callbacks arguments invariable contain an opaque handle. In order to get from the static callback back to an object instance, I've created a static dictionary in each class, associating handles with class instances. In the constructor of each class, an entry is put into the dictionary, and this entry is then removed in the Destructors. When I receive a callback, I can then consult the dictionary to retrieve the class instance corresponding to the opaque reference. Are there any obvious flaws to this? Something that seems to be a problem is that the existence static dictionary means that the garbage collector will not act on my class instances that are otherwise unreachable. As they are never garbage collected, they never get removed from the dictionary, so the dictionary grows. It seems I might have to manually dispose of my objects, which is something absolutely would like to avoid. Can anyone suggest a good design that allows me to avoid having to do this?

    Read the article

  • Tips about how to spread Object Oriented practices

    - by Augusto
    I work for a medium company that has around 250 developers. Unfortunately, lots of them are stuck in a procedural way of thinking and some teams constantly deliver big Transactional Script applications, when in fact the application contains rich logic. They also fail to manage the design dependencies, and end up with services which depend on another large number of services (a clean example of Big Ball of Mud). My question is: Can you suggest how to spread this type of knowledge? I know that the surface of the problem is that these applications have a poor architecture and design. Another issue is that there are some developers who are against writing any kind of test. A few things I'm doing to change this (but I'm either failing or the change is too small are) Running presentations about design principles (SOLID, clean code, etc). Workshops about TDD and BDD. Coaching teams (this includes using sonar, findbugs, jdepend and other tools). IDE & Refactoring talks. A few things I'm thinking to do in the future (but I'm concern that they might not be good) Form a team of OO evangelists, who disseminate an OO way of thinking in differet teams (these people would need to change teams every few months). Running design review sessions, to criticise the design and suggest improvements (even if the improvements are not done because of time constraints, I think this might be useful) . Something I found with the teams I coach, is that as soon as I leave them, they revert back to the old practices. I know I don't spend a lot of time with them, usually just one month. So whatever I'm doing, it doesn't stick. I'm sorry this question is spattered with frustration, but the alterative to write this was to hit my head on the wall until I pass out.

    Read the article

  • Test Column exists, Add Column, and Update Column

    - by david.clarke
    I'm trying to write a SQL Server database update script. I want to test for the existence of a column in a table, then if it doesn't exist add the column with a default value, and finally update that column based on the current value of a different column in the same table. I want this script to be runnable multiple times, the first time updating the table and on subsequent runs the script should be ignored. My script currently looks like the following: IF NOT EXISTS(SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLUMNS WHERE TABLE_NAME = 'PurchaseOrder' AND COLUMN_NAME = 'IsDownloadable') BEGIN ALTER TABLE [dbo].[PurchaseOrder] ADD [IsDownloadable] bit NOT NULL DEFAULT 0 UPDATE [dbo].[PurchaseOrder] SET [IsDownloadable] = 1 WHERE [Ref] IS NOT NULL END SQL Server returns error "Invalid column name 'IsDownloadable'", i.e. I need to commit the DDL before I can update the column. I've tried various permutations but I'm getting nowhere fast.

    Read the article

  • Use decorator and factory together to extend objects?

    - by TheClue
    I'm new to OOP and design pattern. I've a simple app that handles the generation of Tables, Columns (that belong to Table), Rows (that belong to Column) and Values (that belong to Rows). Each of these object can have a collection of Property, which is in turn defined as an enum. They are all interfaces: I used factories to get concrete instances of these products, depending on circumnstances. Now I'm facing the problem of extending these classes. Let's say I need another product called "SpecialTable" which in turn has some special properties or new methods like 'getSomethingSpecial' or an extended set of Property. The only way is to extend/specialize all my elements (ie. build a SpecialTableFactory, a SpecialTable interface and a SpecialTableImpl concrete)? What to do if, let's say, I plan to use standard methods like addRow(Column column, String name) that doesn't need to be specialized? I don't like the idea to inherit factories and interfaces, but since SpecialTable has more methods than Table i guess it cannot share the same factory. Am I wrong? Another question: if I need to define product properties at run time (a Table that is upgraded to SpecialTable at runtime), i guess i should use a decorator. Is it possible (and how) to combine both factory and decorator design? Is it better to use a State or Strategy pattern, instead?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: One large persisted computed column for Fulltext Indexing

    - by Alex
    It appears to me as the easiest, most straightforward solution, but please correct me if I'm wrong. Instead of having a fulltext index on all individual columns of a table, isn't it better to just generate one single wide computed column and run the fulltext index against that only? It appears to me that it gets rid of all the issues of having multiple columns, incl. that I can't search "x AND y" as this will not match a row with "x" present in column 1 and "y" present in column 2. Any counterarguments?

    Read the article

  • When to use Aspect Oriented Architecture (AOA/AOD)

    When is it appropriate to use aspect oriented architecture? I think the only honest answer to this question is that it depends on the context for which the question is being asked. There really are no hard and fast rules regarding the selection of an architectural model(s) for a project because each model provides good and bad benefits. Every system is built with a unique requirements and constraints. This context will dictate when to use one type of architecture over another or in conjunction with others. To me aspect oriented architecture models should be a sub-phase in the architectural modeling and design process especially when creating enterprise level models. Personally, I like to use this approach to create a base architectural model that is defined by non-functional requirements and system quality attributes.   This general model can then be used as a starting point for additional models because it is targets all of the business key quality attributes required by the system.Aspect oriented architecture is a method for modeling non-functional requirements and quality attributes of a system known as aspects. These models do not deal directly with specific functionality. They do categorize functionality of the system. This approach allows a system to be created with a strong emphasis on separating system concerns into individual components. These cross cutting components enables a systems to create with compartmentalization in regards to non-functional requirements or quality attributes.  This allows for the reduction in code because an each component maintains an aspect of a system that can be called by other aspects. This approach also allows for a much cleaner and smaller code base during the implementation and support of a system. Additionally, enabling developers to develop systems based on aspect-oriented design projects will be completed faster and will be more reliable because existing components can be shared across a system; thus, the time needed to create and test the functionality is reduced.   Example of an effective use of Aspect Oriented ArchitectureIn my experiences, aspect oriented architecture can be very effective with large or more complex systems. Typically, these types of systems have a large number of concerns so the act of defining them is very beneficial for reducing the system’s complexity because components can be developed to address each concern while exposing functionality to the other system components. The benefits to using the aspect oriented approach as the starting point for a system is that it promotes communication between IT and the business due to the fact that the aspect oriented models are quality attributes focused so not much technical understanding is needed to understand the model.An example of this can be in developing a new intranet website. Common Intranet Concerns: Error Handling Security Logging Notifications Database connectivity Example of a not as effective use of Aspect Oriented ArchitectureAgain in my experiences, aspect oriented architecture is not as effective with small or less complex systems in comparison.  There is no need to model concerns for a system that has a limited amount of them because the added overhead would not be justified for the actual benefits of creating the aspect oriented architecture model.  Furthermore, these types of projects typically have a reduced time schedule and a limited budget.  The creation of the Aspect oriented models would increase the overhead of a project and thus increase the time needed to implement the system. An example of this is seen by creating a small application to poll a network share for new files and then FTP them to a new location.  The two primary concerns for this project is to monitor a network drive and FTP files to a new location.  There is no need to create an aspect model for this system because there will never be a need to share functionality amongst either of these concerns.  To add to my point, this system is so small that it could be created with just a few classes so the added layer of componentizing the concerns would be complete overkill for this situation. References:Brichau, Johan; D'Hondt, Theo. (2006) Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD) - An Introduction. Retreived from: http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~jbrichau/courses/introductionToAOSD.pdf

    Read the article

  • What kind of programs/solutions can only be written with OOP or are too hard to achieve without it?

    - by user1598390
    Paraphrasing a recent question: What is Object Oriented Programming ill-suited for? I would like to ask the opposite question: What kind of programs cannot be written unless you use OOP? What kind of programs are not recommended to be written using non-OOP techniques? What kind of programs need OOP in order to even be written? What kind of programs would be too hard to write without OOP ? The answer to this question can help sell the idea of OOP to project leaders that have no special interest in code quality. At least they could buy the idea if one shows them the kind of things that are not even possible unless you use OOP.

    Read the article

  • How can be data oriented programming applied for GUI system?

    - by Miro
    I've just learned basics of Data oriented programming design, but I'm not very familiar with that yet. I've also read Pitfalls of Object Oriented Programming GCAP 09. It seems that data oriented programming is much better idea for games, than OOP. I'm just creating my own GUI system and it's completely OOP. I'm thinking if is data oriented programming design applicable for structured things like GUI. The main problem I see is that every type widget has different data, so I can hardly group them into arrays. Also every type of widget renders differently so I still need to call virtual functions.

    Read the article

  • WPF - DataGrid Column's ToolTip visibility based on the column's data length

    - by S.C.Vidhya
    In my application, i have tried to implement the visibility of tooltip based on the dataGrid Column's text length by using a converter. I am facing some problems in displaying the toolTip text. In the ToolTip, TextBlock's text binding is not working. If its binded with some hard coded strings, it works fine. Here below is the code that i have added for the grid column... <Custom:DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate> <DataTemplate> <TextBlock Text="{Binding Text}"> <TextBlock.ToolTip> <ToolTip DataContext="{Binding Path=PlacementTarget, RelativeSource={x:Static RelativeSource.Self}}" Visibility="{Binding Converter={StaticResource ToolTipVis}}"> <TextBlock Text="{Binding Text}"> </ToolTip> </TextBlock.ToolTip> </TextBlock> </DataTemplate> </Custom:DataGridTemplateColumn.CellTemplate>

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of object-oriented programming over procedural programming?

    - by niko
    I'm trying to understand the difference between procedural languages like C and object-oriented languages like C++. I've never used C++, but I've been discussing with my friends on how to differentiate the two. I've been told C++ has object-oriented concepts as well as public and private modes for definition of variables: things C does not have. I've never had to use these for while developing programs in Visual Basic.NET: what are the benefits of these? I've also been told that if a variable is public, it can be accessed anywhere, but it's not clear how that's different from a global variable in a language like C. It's also not clear how a private variable differs from a local variable. Another thing I've heard is that, for security reasons, if a function needs to be accessed it should be inherited first. The use-case is that an administrator should only have as much rights as they need and not everything, but it seems a conditional would work as well: if ( login == "admin") { // invoke the function } Why is this not ideal? Given that there seems to be a procedural way to do everything object-oriented, why should I care about object-oriented programming?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >