Search Results

Search found 13859 results on 555 pages for 'non functional'.

Page 208/555 | < Previous Page | 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215  | Next Page >

  • Tuesday at Oracle OpenWorld 2012 - Must See Session: “Oracle Fusion Applications: Best Practices in Integration Design Patterns”

    - by Lionel Dubreuil
    Don’t miss this “CON8685 - Oracle Fusion Applications: Best Practices in Integration Design Patterns “ session: Speakers: Rajesh Raheja - Senior Director, Development, Oracle Ravi Sankaran - Director, Applications Development, Oracle Date: Tuesday, Oct 2 Time: 1:15 PM - 2:15 PM Location: Palace Hotel - Telegraph Oracle Fusion Applications provide various ways to integrate their functional capabilities with other Oracle applications as well as third-party and legacy applications. In this session, you will learn the patterns used when communicating with Oracle Fusion Applications with a SOA approach. It addresses items related to identifying the integration artifacts available, also known as assets, in Oracle Enterprise Repository; how to invoke synchronous and asynchronous Web services; importing and exporting bulk data; and any integration issues to look out for. The patterns will be applicable to on-premises and SaaS/cloud deployment modes and are indicated as such. Objectives for this session are to: Highlight the various ways to integrate with Oracle Fusion Applications Showcase use of Oracle Fusion Middleware technologies for integration Describe best practices and design patterns for integration Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}

    Read the article

  • Should the syntax for disabling code differ from that of normal comments?

    - by deltreme
    For several reasons during development I sometimes comment out code. As I am chaotic and sometimes in a hurry, some of these make it to source control. I also use comments to clarify blocks of code. For instance: MyClass MyFunction() { (...) // return null; // TODO: dummy for now return obj; } Even though it "works" and alot of people do it this way, it annoys me that you cannot automatically distinguish commented-out code from "real" comments that clarify code: it adds noise when trying to read code you cannot search for commented-out code for for instance an on-commit hook in source control. Some languages support multiple single-line comment styles - for instance in PHP you can either use // or # for a single-line comment - and developers can agree on using one of these for commented-out code: # return null; // TODO: dummy for now return obj; Other languages - like C# which I am using today - have one style for single-line comments (right? I wish I was wrong). I have also seen examples of "commenting-out" code using compiler directives, which is great for large blocks of code, but a bit overkill for single lines as two new lines are required for the directive: #if compile_commented_out return null; // TODO: dummy for now #endif return obj; So as commenting-out code happens in every(?) language, shouldn't "disabled code" get its own syntax in language specifications? Are the pro's (separation of comments / disabled code, editors / source control acting on them) good enough and the cons ("shouldn't do commenting-out anyway", not a functional part of a language, potential IDE lag (thanks Thomas)) worth sacrificing? Edit I realise the example I used is silly; the dummy code could easily be removed as it is replaced by the actual code.

    Read the article

  • What's cool about Lisp nowadays? [closed]

    - by Kos
    Possible Duplicates: Why is Lisp useful? Is LISP still useful in today's world? Which version is most used? First of all, let me clarify: I'm aware of Lisp's place in history, as well as in education. I'm asking about its place in practical application, as of 2011. The question is: What features of Lisp make it the preferred choice for projects today? It's widely used in various AI areas as far as I know, and probably also elsewhere. I can imagine projects choosing, for instance... Python because of its concise, readable syntax and it being dynamic, Haskell for being pure functional with a powerful type system, Matlab/Octave for the focus on numerics and big standard libraries, Etc. When should I consider Lisp the proper language for a given problem? What language features make it the preferred choice then? Is its "purity and generality" an advantage which makes it a better choice for some subset of projects than the modern languages? edit- On your demand, a little rephrase (or simply a tl;dr) to make this more specific: a) What problems are solvable with Lisp much more easily than with more common, modern languages like Python or C# (or even F# or Scala)? b) What language features specific for Lisp make it the best choice for those problems?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Automatic Generalization

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

    Read the article

  • The most mind-bending programming language? [closed]

    - by Xepoch
    From a reasonably common programming language, which do you find to be the most mind-bending? I have been listening to a lot of programming podcasts and taking some time to learn some new languages that are being considered upcoming, and important. I'm not necessarily talking about BrainFuck, but which language would you consider to be one that challenges the common programming paradigms? For me, I did some functional and logic (ex. Prolog) programming in the 90s, so can't say that I find anything special there. I am far from being an expert in it, but even today the most mind-bending programming language for me is Perl. Not because "Hello World" is hard to implement but rather there is so much lexical flexibility that some of the hardest solutions can be decomposed so poetically that I have to walk outside away from my terminal to clear my head. I'm not saying I'd likely sell a commercial software implementation, just that there is a distinct reason Perl is so (in)famous. Just look at the basic list of books on it. So, what is your mind-bending language that promotes your better programming and practices?

    Read the article

  • Why was my site rejected for Google Adsense?

    - by hyuun jjang
    I have a 3 year old blog and its got around 16 articles/tutorials about some programming problems and solutions. It's getting pretty much a lot of view lately so I decided to apply for a google adsense account. When I first applied via blogger, google replied with the following statement: Page Type: In order to participate in Google AdSense, publishers' websites and application information must satisfy the following guidelines: - Your website must be your own top-level domain (www.example.com and not www.example.com/mysite). - You must provide accurate personal information with your application that matches the information on your domain registration. - Your website must contain substantial, original content... So, as I understood it, I decide to buy a domain and point my blogger blog to that new naked domain. and here is the newly bought domain where all the contents of my old blog resides. http://icodeya.com/ I reapplied, hoping that this time, I will make the cut. But then I got this reply Further detail: Unable to review your site: While reviewing http://www.icodeya.com/, we found that your site was down or unavailable. We suggest you check whether there was a typo in the URL submitted. When your site is operational, you can resubmit your application with the correct site by following the directions below. I'm a bit disappointed. Maybe I did something wrong with DNS configuration or something. But you can clearly see that my site is fully functional. I heard that google sends robots to crawl on to the site etc. It's just sad because I invested on a domain name, and now I can't even find ways to earn from it. Any tips?

    Read the article

  • Customer Experience in the Year Ahead

    - by Christina McKeon
    With 2012 coming to an end soon, we find ourselves reflecting on the year behind us and the year ahead. Now is a good time for reflection on your customer experience initiatives to see how far you have come and where you need to go. Looking back on your customer experience efforts this year, were you able to accomplish the following? Customer journey mapping Align processes across the entire customer lifecyle (buying and owning) Connect all functional areas to the same customer data Deliver consistent and personal experiences across all customer touchpoints Make it easy and rewarding to be your customer Hire and develop talent that drives better customer experiences Tie key performance indicators (KPIs) to each of your customer experience objectives This is by no means a complete checklist for your customer experience strategy, but it does help you determine if you have moved in the right direction for delivering great customer experiences. If you are just getting started with customer experience planning or were not able to get to everything on your list this year, consider focusing on customer journey mapping in 2013. This exercise really helps your organization put your customer in the center and understand how everything you do affects that customer. At Oracle, we see organizations in various stages of customer experience maturity all learn a lot when they go through journey mapping. Companies just starting out with customer experience get a complete understanding of what it is like to be a customer and how everything they do affects that customer. And, organizations that are further along with customer experience often find journey mapping helps provide perspective when re-visiting their customer experience strategy. Happy holidays and best wishes for delivering great customer journeys in 2013!

    Read the article

  • Partner Training for Oracle Business Intelligence Applications 4-Day Bootcamp

    - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM
    Partners 4-Day training from 15th - 18th October 2012, at Oracle Reading (UK) The Oracle Business Intelligence Applications provide pre-built Operational BI solutions for eBusiness Suite, Peoplesoft, Siebel, JDE and SAP; offering out-of-the-box integration. This FREE for Partners 4-Day training will provide attendees with an in-depth working understanding of the architecture, the technical and the functional content of the Oracle Business Intelligence Applications, whilst also providing an understanding of their installation, configuration and extension. The course will cover the following topics: Overview of Oracle Business Intelligence Applications Oracle BI Applications Fundamentals and Features Configuring BI Applications for Oracle E-Business Suite Understanding BI Applications Architecture Fundamentals of BI Applications Security   REGISTER HERE NOW    (acceptance is subject to availability and your place will be confirmed within two weeks: for help see the Partner Registration Guide) Location: Bray Room, at Oracle Corporation UK Ltd Oracle Parkway Thames Valley Park Reading, Berkshire RG6 1RA 15th - 18th October 2012, 4-Days :  9:30 am – 5:00 pm BST Audience The seminar is aimed at BI Consultants and Implementation Consultants within Oracle's Gold and Platinum Partners. Good understanding of basic data warehousing concepts Hands on experience in Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition Hands on experience in Informatica Some understanding of  Oracle BI Applications is required (See Sales & Technical Tutorials for OBI, BI-Apps and Hyperion EPM)  Good understanding of any of the following Oracle EBS modules: General Ledger, Accounts Receivables, Accounts Payables Please note that attendees are required to bring a laptop: 4GB RAM Windows 64 bits 80GB free space in Hard drive or External Device CPU Core 2 Duo or Higher Windows 7, Windows XP, Windows 2003 NOT ALLOWED with Windows Vista An Administrator User For more information please contact [email protected].

    Read the article

  • MRP/SCP (Not ASCP) Common Issues

    - by Annemarie Provisero
    ADVISOR WEBCAST: MRP/SCP (Not ASCP) Common Issues PRODUCT FAMILY: Manufacturing - Value Chain Planning   March 9, 2010 at 8 am PT, 9 am MT, 11 am ET   This session is intended for System Administrators, Database Administrator's (DBA), Functional Users, and Technical Users. We will discuss issues that are fairly common and will provide the general solutions to same. We will not only review power point information but review some of the application setups/checks as well. TOPICS WILL INCLUDE: Gig data memory limitation Setup Requirements for MRP Manager, Planning Manager, and Standard Manager Why components are not planned Sales Order Flow to MRP Calendars Patching Miscellaneous Forecast Consumption - only if we have time A short, live demonstration (only if applicable) and question and answer period will be included. Oracle Advisor Webcasts are dedicated to building your awareness around our products and services. This session does not replace offerings from Oracle Global Support Services. Click here to register for this session ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above webcast is a service of the E-Business Suite Communities in My Oracle Support. For more information on other webcasts, please reference the Oracle Advisor Webcast Schedule.Click here to visit the E-Business Communities in My Oracle Support Note that all links require access to My Oracle Support.

    Read the article

  • Software Licencing [closed]

    - by Craig
    A colleague of mine wanted a means to do something, so it was suggested that I write some software to do this. The software has turned into more than the original specification and is now something rather complex, however it is not fully functional still. My colleague has not paid me anything so far and I am unwilling to continue writing the software until some faith has been reciprocated in my direction, as I have put a lot of effort into writing the software. I am also unwilling to finish the software as I do not want to give away a huge chunk of my time and effort away as free, neither do I want to be under compensated for my efforts. Some concerns I have. If I finish the software, what if the client doesn't pay me anything or pays too little, or what if I write the software to a usable level, but not complete and the client pays me a too little. I have lost my motivation to finish the software, as more and more specifications have been added to the software and I have developed a substantially complex piece of software and been effectively paid nothing. To finish the software, I need motivation, money would do this, however the client doesn't want to pay for something that isn't complete, yet keeps adding more requirements. I seem to be in a catch 22 with this, as I have developed some software on faith and have had no faith reciprocated in my direction. I'm really not sure how to get some payment from the client or on how to develop a licencing model so that I get some money from the client and development resumes.

    Read the article

  • What are some Java patterns well-suited for fast, algorithmic coding?

    - by Casey Chu
    I'm in college, and I've recently started competing in programming competitions with my friends. These competitions involve solving algorithmic problems quickly. It's a lot of fun, but there's one problem: I'm forced to use Java. (My teammates use Java.) Background: I'm a self-taught JavaScript programmer, and it hurts to write Java code. I find it very verbose and inflexible, and I feel slowed down when having to declare types and decide which of the eighty list data structure to use. I'm also frustrated about the lack of functional programming features and how verbose using regular expressions, arrays, and dictionaries are. As an example, consider the problem of finding the length of the longest string of consecutive characters in a given string. So the string XX22BBBBccXX222 would give 4, for the string of four Bs. In Java, I'd have to loop through and manually count characters and manually keep track of the maximum. (That's at least as far as I'm aware -- I'm not as familiar with Java as I am with JavaScript.) In JavaScript, I'd find it like this: var max = Math.max.apply(Math, str.match(/(.)\1*/g).map(function (s) { return s.length; })); Much quicker and simpler, in my book. The question: what are some Java features, techniques, or patterns well-suited for fast, algorithmic coding?

    Read the article

  • Does your programming knowledge decrease if you don't practice?

    - by Codereview
    I'm a beginner programmer, I study languages such as C/C++/Python and Java (Mainly focused on C++). I'm What you'd call "Young and inexperienced" and I admit that because I can't claim otherwise. As a student I have many other problems besides programming.I practice programming as often as I can, and especially because my teacher gives me a lot more exercises than the rest of the class (It's a very low level), so oftentimes I spend weeks doing something else such as school projects or sports, or travelling, anything besides programming. Don't get me wrong though, I love programming, I love to build functional code, to watch as a program comes alive at the push of a button and to learn as much as I can - I simply don't have much time for it. Straight to the question, now: does your programming knowledge decrease as time passes and you don't practice? You may ask "How much time do you mean?". I don't mean a specific amount of time, but for reference you could take a month-two or even a year as an example. By knowledge I mean anything: From syntax to language functionality.

    Read the article

  • Applying to a company while personally working on a comparable project

    - by Developer Art
    That's going to be an unusual question but here it goes. I'm entertaining the thought to send my docs to a place which develops a large web project of a social type. Social meaning people, communities, interaction and all that usual stuff. The issue is that I myself am working on something that falls into the category of social in my private time. Now the question. Is it wise to apply there under these circumstances? I think there may be issues of intellectual ownership if I develop something similar that exists or will exist in that company's work. On the other hand, the web of full of social places (even this site is one of them), many of them utilize the same ideas and move in the same direction and it seems to work for everyone. It's hard to come up with something which hasn't been tried yet by somebody else so it's all basically reuse of the commonly available ideas and experience. What I'm working on is not a functional equivalent, it's rather largely off. There may be some intersections, but on a large scale this is not an equivalent. And whatever features might coincide, they already exist everywhere on the web anyway. Also technology stacks are entirely different so the issue with directly copying out parts of the code is probably not applicable. I plan to say it up front that I'm engaged in a personal project of mine and let them see if it represents a problem for them. What do you think? Am I making things up or is there really an issue?

    Read the article

  • Enterprise Manager 12c Grand Tour Customer/Partner Workshop

    - by mseika
    EMEA | Customer/Partner Workshop EMEA Oracle Solution Centre Enterprise Manager 12c Grand Tour Customer/Partner Workshop em.us.oracle.com On the WebSales ToolsCollateral Enterprise Manager 12c Grand Tour Customer/Partner Workshop The EMEA OSC is hosting a one day Customer/Partner Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c Grand Tour workshop in Thames Valley Park, Reading, UK on 31 Oct and 01 Nov 2012. The Workshop gives attendees a good insight into the latest release by highlighting several new functional areas of the product. The format of the day will provide opportunity for discussion as well as a number of presentations and exercises covering: EM User Interface Monitoring and Framework Database Lifecycle Management Database Management Middleware Management Using comprehensive workbooks attendees will be able to follow step-by-step instructions, with OSC SME's being on hand for any questions, to gain ‘hands on’ experience of EM12c functionality. Logistics Dates31 Oct and 01 Nov 2012 Time10:00 - 16:00 LocationOracle Solution Center, Oracle 520 Thames Valley Park, Reading, RG6 1RA Space is limited. If you have a customer/partner who would like to attend please register their details: For Wed 31 Oct 2012 REGISTER For Thu 01 Nov 2012REGISTER . Please note that this workshop is ONLY for customers/partners and seats will not be allocated to Oracle employees.

    Read the article

  • Application Scope v's Static - Not Quite the same

    - by Duncan Mills
    An interesting question came up today which, innocent as it sounded, needed a second or two to consider. What's the difference between storing say a Map of reference information as a Static as opposed to storing the same map as an application scoped variable in JSF?  From the perspective of the web application itself there seems to be no functional difference, in both cases, the information is confined to the current JVM and potentially visible to your app code (note that Application Scope is not magically propagated across a cluster, you would need a separate instance on each VM). To my mind the primary consideration here is a matter of leakage. A static will be (potentially) visible to everything running within the same VM (OK this depends on which class-loader was used but let's keep this simple), and this includes your model code and indeed other web applications running in the same container. An Application Scoped object, in JSF terms, is much more ring-fenced and is only visible to the Web app itself, not other web apps running on the same server and not directly to the business model layer if that is running in the same VM. So given that I'm a big fan of coding applications to say what I mean, then using Application Scope appeals because it explicitly states how I expect the data to be used and a provides a more explicit statement about visibility and indeed dependency as I'd generally explicitly inject it where it is needed.  Alternative viewpoints / thoughts are, as ever, welcomed...

    Read the article

  • How often is seq used in Haskell production code?

    - by Giorgio
    I have some experience writing small tools in Haskell and I find it very intuitive to use, especially for writing filters (using interact) that process their standard input and pipe it to standard output. Recently I tried to use one such filter on a file that was about 10 times larger than usual and I got a Stack space overflow error. After doing some reading (e.g. here and here) I have identified two guidelines to save stack space (experienced Haskellers, please correct me if I write something that is not correct): Avoid recursive function calls that are not tail-recursive (this is valid for all functional languages that support tail-call optimization). Introduce seq to force early evaluation of sub-expressions so that expressions do not grow to large before they are reduced (this is specific to Haskell, or at least to languages using lazy evaluation). After introducing five or six seq calls in my code my tool runs smoothly again (also on the larger data). However, I find the original code was a bit more readable. Since I am not an experienced Haskell programmer I wanted to ask if introducing seq in this way is a common practice, and how often one will normally see seq in Haskell production code. Or are there any techniques that allow to avoid using seq too often and still use little stack space?

    Read the article

  • How do you convince the client their application's backend needs a rewrite?

    - by Richard DesLonde
    I have been supporting a LOB winforms application for a client the last 3 years. The application is built with a simple monolithic architecture and uses .NET 2.0. The application is a core part of their operations and its longevity is paramount. It needs to evolve with their evolving business processes, as well as implement improved functionality etc....this brings me to believe that this application needs an overhaul of sorts on the back-end. The problem is changing a back-end is "invisible"...i.e. the user never actually sees it. It's a quality of the system that is changing (stability, maintainability, reliability, longevity), not some functional requirement that will be easily seen...i.e. the ROI is not obvious. There is a lot of new functionality to be added to the front-end as well (user experience). I am considering a strategy of changing the back-end over time...i.e. when making a change or adding a feature to the front-end, change those components in the back-end that are affected, eventually you get to everything. How do I convince the client that we need to rebuild the back-end?

    Read the article

  • What is logical cohesion, and why is it bad or undesirable?

    - by Matt Fenwick
    From the c2wiki page on coupling & cohesion: Cohesion (interdependency within module) strength/level names : (from worse to better, high cohesion is good) Coincidental Cohesion : (Worst) Module elements are unrelated Logical Cohesion : Elements perform similar activities as selected from outside module, i.e. by a flag that selects operation to perform (see also CommandObject). i.e. body of function is one huge if-else/switch on operation flag Temporal Cohesion : operations related only by general time performed (i.e. initialization() or FatalErrorShutdown?()) Procedural Cohesion : Elements involved in different but sequential activities, each on different data (usually could be trivially split into multiple modules along linear sequence boundaries) Communicational Cohesion : unrelated operations except need same data or input Sequential Cohesion : operations on same data in significant order; output from one function is input to next (pipeline) Informational Cohesion: a module performs a number of actions, each with its own entry point, with independent code for each action, all performed on the same data structure. Essentially an implementation of an abstract data type. i.e. define structure of sales_region_table and its operators: init_table(), update_table(), print_table() Functional Cohesion : all elements contribute to a single, well-defined task, i.e. a function that performs exactly one operation get_engine_temperature(), add_sales_tax() (emphasis mine). I don't fully understand the definition of logical cohesion. My questions are: what is logical cohesion? Why does it get such a bad rap (2nd worst kind of cohesion)?

    Read the article

  • Companies and Ships

    - by TechnicalWriting
    I have worked for small, medium, large, and extra large companies and they have something in common with ships. These metaphors have been used before, I know, but I will have a go at them.The small company is like a speed boat, exciting and fast, and can turn on a dime, literally. Captain and crew share a lot of the work. A speed boat has a short range and needs to refuel a lot. It has difficulty getting through bad weather. (Small companies often live quarter to quarter. By the way, if a larger company is living quarter to quarter, it is taking on water.)The medium company is is like a battleship. It can maneuver, has a longer range, and the crew is focused on its mission. Its main concern are the other battleships trying to blow it out of the water, but it can respond quickly. Bad weather can jostle it, but it can get through most storms.The large company is like an aircraft carrier; a floating city. It is well-provisioned and can carry a specialized load for a very long range. Because of its size and complexity, it has to be well-organized to be effective and most of its functions are specialized (with little to no functional cross-over). There are many divisions and layers between Captain and crew. It is not very maneuverable; it has to set its course well in advance and have a plan of action.The extra large company is like a cruise liner. It also has to be well-organized and changes in direction are often slow. Some of the people are hard at work behind the scenes to run the ship; others can be along for the ride. They sail the same routes over and over again (often happily) with the occasional cosmetic face-lift to the ship and entertainment. It should stay in warm, friendly waters and avoid risky speed through fields of ice bergs.I have enjoyed my career on the various Ships of Technical Writing, but I get the most of my juice from the battleship where I am closer to the campaign and my contributions have the greater impact on success.Mark Metcalfewww.linkedin.com/in/MarkMetcalfe

    Read the article

  • What are `Developmental Milestones` for programming skills?

    - by Holmes
    I studied in the field of Computer Science for 6 years, bachelor's degree and master's degree. I have studied all the basic programming like C, Java, VB, C#, Python, and etc. When I have free times, I will learn new programming languages and follow new programming trends by myself , such as PHP, HTML5, CSS5, LESS, Bootstrap, Symfony2, and GitHub. So, if someone wants me to write some instructions using these languages, I'm certain that I can do it, not so good but I can get a job done. However, I don't have any favorite programming language. Moreover, I also have studied about algorithms, database, and etc. Everything I just wrote so far seems that I know a lot in this field. In fact, I feel I am very stupid. I cannot answer 80% of the questions on SO. In spite of those languages??, I have studied. Perhaps it is because I have never worked before. As there is the Developmental Milestones for children, which refers to how a child becomes able to do more complex things as they get older, I would like to evaluate the same thing but for programming skills. What are the set of functional skills or age-specific tasks that most programmers can do at a certain age range? In order to evaluate myself, I would like to ask your opinions that all of the skills I mentioned above, are they enough for programmers to know when they are 25 years old? What are your suggestions in order to improve the skills in this field?

    Read the article

  • Should you always pass the bare minimum data needed into a function

    - by Anders Holmström
    Let's say I have a function IsAdmin that checks whether a user is an admin. Let's also say that the admin checking is done by matching user id, name and password against some sort of rule (not important). In my head there are then two possible function signatures for this: public bool IsAdmin(User user); public bool IsAdmin(int id, string name, string password); I most often go for the second type of signature, thinking that: The function signature gives the reader a lot more info The logic contained inside the function doesn't have to know about the User class It usually results in slightly less code inside the function However I sometimes question this approach, and also realize that at some point it would become unwieldy. If for example a function would map between ten different object fields into a resulting bool I would obviously send in the entire object. But apart from a stark example like that I can't see a reason to pass in the actual object. I would appreciate any arguments for either style, as well as any general observations you might offer. I program in both object oriented and functional styles, so the question should be seen as regarding any and all idioms.

    Read the article

  • How to efficiently protect part of an application with a license

    - by Patrick
    I am working on an application that has many functional parts. When a customer buys the application, he buys the standard functionality, but he can also buy some additional elements of the application for an additional price. All of the elements are part of the same application executable. A license key is used to indicate which of the elements should be accessible in the application. Some of the elements can be easily disabled if the user didn't pay for it. These are typically the modules that you can access via the application's menu. However, some elements give more problems: What if a part of the data model is related to an optional part? Do I build up these data structures in my application so the rest of my application can just assume they're always there? Or do I don't build them, and add checks in the rest of may application? What if some optional part is still useful to perform some internal tasks, but I don't want to expose it to the user externally? What if the marketing responsible wants to make a standard part now an optional part? In all of my application I assume that that part is present, but if it becomes optional, I should add checks on it everywhere in the application. I have some ideas on how to solve some of the problems (e.g. interfaces with dual implementations: one working implementation, and one that is activated if the optional part is not activated). Do you know of any patterns that can be used to solve this kind of problem? Or do you have any suggestions on how to handle this licensing problem? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Parse text file on click - and then display

    - by John R
    I am thinking of a methodology for rapid retrieval of code snippets. I imagine an HTML table with a setup like this: one two ... ten one oneTwo() oneTen() two twoOne() twoTen() ... ten tenOne() tenTwo() When a user clicks a function in this HTML table, a snippet of code is shown in another div tag or perhaps a popup window (I'm open to different solutions). I want to maintain only one PHP file named utitlities.php that contains a class called 'util'. This file & class will hold all the functions referenced in the above table (it is also used on various projects and is functional code). A key idea is that I do not want to update the HTML documentation everytime I write/update a new function in utilities.php. I should be able to click a function in the table and have PHP open the utilities file, parse out the apropriate function and display it in an HTML window. Questions: 1) I will be coding this in PHP and JavaScript but am wondering if similar scripts are available (for all or part) so I don't reinvent the wheel. 2) Quick & easy Ajax suggestions appreciated too (probably will use jquery, but am rusty). 3) Methodology for parsing out the functions from the utilities.php file (I'm not to good with regex).

    Read the article

  • Modular Database Structures

    - by John D
    I have been examining the code base we use in work and I am worried about the size the packages have grown to. The actual code is modular, procedures have been broken down into small functional (and testable) parts. The issue I see is that we have 100 procedures in a single package - almost an entire domain model. I had thought of breaking these packages down - to create sub domains that are centered around the procedure relationships to other objects. Group a bunch of procedures that have 80% of their relationships to three tables etc. The end result would be a lot more packages, but the packages would be smaller and I feel the entire code base would be more readable - when procedures cross between two domain models it is less of a struggle to figure which package it belongs to. The problem I now have is what the actual benefit of all this would really be. I looked at the general advantages of modularity: 1. Re-usability 2. Asynchronous Development 3. Maintainability Yet when I consider our latest development, the procedures within the packages are already reusable. At this advanced stage we rarely require asynchronous development - and when it is required we simply ladder the stories across iterations. So I guess my question is if people know of reasons why you would break down classes rather than just the methods inside of classes? Right now I do believe there is an issue with these mega packages forming but the only benefit I can really pin down to break them down is readability - something that experience gained from working with them would solve.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215  | Next Page >