Search Results

Search found 11734 results on 470 pages for 'refer to itself'.

Page 209/470 | < Previous Page | 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216  | Next Page >

  • Opportunity Nokia's

    - by Andrew Clarke
    Nokia’s alliance with Microsoft is likely to be good news for anyone using Microsoft technologies, and particularly for .NET developers. Before the announcement, the future wasn’t looking so bright for the ‘mobile’ version of Windows, Windows Phone. Microsoft currently has only 3.1% of the Smartphone market, even though it has been involved in it for longer than its main rivals. Windows Phone has now got the basics right, but that is hardly sufficient by itself to change its predicament significantly. With Nokia's help, it is possible. Despite the promise of multi-tasking for third party apps, integration with Microsoft platforms such as Xbox and Office, direct integration of Twitter support, and the introduction of IE 9 “later this year”, there have been frustratingly few signs of urgency on Microsoft’s part in improving the Windows Phone  product. Until this happens, there seems little prospect of reward for third-party developers brave enough to support the platform with applications. This is puzzling when one sees how well SQL Server and Microsoft’s other server technologies have thrived in recent years, under good leadership from a management that understands the technology. The same just hasn’t been true for some of the consumer products. In consequence, iPads and Android tablets have already exposed diehard Windows users, for the first time, to an alternative GUI for consumer Tablet PCs, and the comparisons aren’t always in Windows’ favour. Nokia’s problem is obvious: Android’s meteoric rise. Android now has 33% of the worldwide market for smartphones, while the market share of Nokia’s Symbian has dropped from 44% to 31%. As details of the agreement emerge, it would seem that Nokia will bring a great deal of expertise, such as imaging and Nokia Maps, to Windows Phone that should make it more competitive. It is wrong to assume that Nokia’s decline will continue: the shock of Android’s sudden rise could be enough to sting them back to their previous form, and they have Microsoft’s huge resources and marketing clout to help them. For the sake of the whole Windows stack, I really hope the alliance succeeds.

    Read the article

  • Unhelpful Help

    - by Geoff N. Hiten
    Up until SQL 2012, I recommended installing Books On-Line (BOL) anywhere you installed SQL Server.  It made looking up reference information simpler, especially when you were on a server that didn’t have direct Internet access.  That all changed today.  I started the new Help Viewer with a local copy of BOL.  I actually found what I was looking for and closed the app.  Or so I thought.  Then I noticed something.  A little parasite had attached itself to my system.      Yep, the “Help” system left an “agent” behind.  Now I shouldn’t have to tell you that running application helper agents on server platforms is a bad idea.  And it gets worse.  There is no way to configure the app so that it does NOT start the parasite agent each time you restart help.  So the solution becomes do not install help on production server platforms.  Which is pretty unhelpful.

    Read the article

  • 2D Collision masks for handling slopes

    - by JiminyCricket
    I've been looking at the example at: http://create.msdn.com/en-US/education/catalog/tutorial/collision_2d_perpixel and am trying to figure out how to adjust the sprite once a collision has been detected. As David suggested at XNA 4.0 2D sidescroller variable terrain heightmap for walking/collision, I made a few sensor points (feet, sides, bottom center, etc.) and can easily detect when these points actually collide with non-transparent portions of a second texture (simple slope). I'm having trouble with the algorithm of how I would actually adjust the sprite position based on a collision. Say I detect a collision with the slope at the sprite's right foot. How can I scan the slope texture data to find the Y position to place the sprite's foot so it is no longer inside the slope? The way it is stored as a 1D array in the example is a bit confusing, should I try to store the data as a 2D array instead? For test purposes, I'm thinking of just using the slope texture alpha itself as a primitive and easy collision mask (no grass bits or anything besides a simple non-linear slope). Then, as in the example, I find the coordinates of any collisions between the slope texture and the sprite's sensors and mark these special sensor collisions as having occurred. Finally, in the case of moving up a slope, I would scan for the first transparent pixel above (in the texture's Ys at that X) the right foot collision point and set that as the new height of the sprite. I'm a little unclear also on when I should make these adjustments. Collisions are checked on every game.update() so would I quickly change the position of the sprite before the next update is called? I also noticed several people mention that it's best to separate collision checks horizontally and vertically, why is that exactly? Open to any suggestions if this is an inefficient or inaccurate way of handling this. I wish MSDN had provided an example of something like this, I didn't know it would be so much more complex than NES Mario style pure box platforming!

    Read the article

  • How can I make sense of the word "Functor" from a semantic standpoint?

    - by guillaume31
    When facing new programming jargon words, I first try to reason about them from an semantic and etymological standpoint when possible (that is, when they aren't obscure acronyms). For instance, you can get the beginning of a hint of what things like Polymorphism or even Monad are about with the help of a little Greek/Latin. At the very least, once you've learned the concept, the word itself appears to go along with it well. I guess that's part of why we name things names, to make mental representations and associations more fluent. I found Functor to be a tougher nut to crack. Not so much the C++ meaning -- an object that acts (-or) as a function (funct-), but the various functional meanings (in ML, Haskell) definitely left me puzzled. From the (mathematics) Functor Wikipedia article, it seems the word was borrowed from linguistics. I think I get what a "function word" or "functor" means in that context - a word that "makes function" as opposed to a word that "makes sense". But I can't really relate that to the notion of Functor in category theory, let alone functional programming. I imagined a Functor to be something that creates functions, or behaves like a function, or short for "functional constructor", but none of those seems to fit... How do experienced functional programmers reason about this ? Do they just need any label to put in front of a concept and be fine with it ? Generally speaking, isn't it partly why advanced functional programming is hard to grasp for mere mortals compared to, say, OO -- very abstract in that you can't relate it to anything familiar ? Note that I don't need a definition of Functor, only an explanation that would allow me to relate it to something more tangible, if there is any.

    Read the article

  • The Stub Proto: Not Just For Stub Objects Anymore

    - by user9154181
    One of the great pleasures of programming is to invent something for a narrow purpose, and then to realize that it is a general solution to a broader problem. In hindsight, these things seem perfectly natural and obvious. The stub proto area used to build the core Solaris consolidation has turned out to be one of those things. As discussed in an earlier article, the stub proto area was invented as part of the effort to use stub objects to build the core ON consolidation. Its purpose was merely as a place to hold stub objects. However, we keep finding other uses for it. It turns out that the stub proto should be more properly thought of as an auxiliary place to put things that we would like to put into the proto to help us build the product, but which we do not wish to package or deliver to the end user. Stub objects are one example, but private lint libraries, header files, archives, and relocatable objects, are all examples of things that might profitably go into the stub proto. Without a stub proto, these items were handled in a variety of ad hoc ways: If one part of the workspace needed private header files, libraries, or other such items, it might modify its Makefile to reach up and over to the place in the workspace where those things live and use them from there. There are several problems with this: Each component invents its own approach, meaning that programmers maintaining the system have to invest extra effort to understand what things mean. In the past, this has created makefile ghettos in which only the person who wrote the makefiles feels confident to modify them, while everyone else ignores them. This causes many difficulties and benefits no one. These interdependencies are not obvious to the make, utility, and can lead to races. They are not obvious to the human reader, who may therefore not realize that they exist, and break them. Our policy in ON is not to deliver files into the proto unless those files are intended to be packaged and delivered to the end user. However, sometimes non-shipping files were copied into the proto anyway, causing a different set of problems: It requires a long list of exceptions to silence our normal unused proto item error checking. In the past, we have accidentally shipped files that we did not intend to deliver to the end user. Mixing cruft with valuable items makes it hard to discern which is which. The stub proto area offers a convenient and robust solution. Files needed to build the workspace that are not delivered to the end user can instead be installed into the stub proto. No special exceptions or custom make rules are needed, and the intent is always clear. We are already accessing some private lint libraries and compilation symlinks in this manner. Ultimately, I'd like to see all of the files in the proto that have a packaging exception delivered to the stub proto instead, and for the elimination of all existing special case makefile rules. This would include shared objects, header files, and lint libraries. I don't expect this to happen overnight — it will be a long term case by case project, but the overall trend is clear. The Stub Proto, -z assert_deflib, And The End Of Accidental System Object Linking We recently used the stub proto to solve an annoying build issue that goes back to the earliest days of Solaris: How to ensure that we're linking to the OS bits we're building instead of to those from the running system. The Solaris product is made up of objects and files from a number of different consolidations, each of which is built separately from the others from an independent code base called a gate. The core Solaris OS consolidation is ON, which stands for "Operating System and Networking". You will frequently also see ON called the OSnet. There are consolidations for X11 graphics, the desktop environment, open source utilities, compilers and development tools, and many others. The collection of consolidations that make up Solaris is known as the "Wad Of Stuff", usually referred to simply as the WOS. None of these consolidations is self contained. Even the core ON consolidation has some dependencies on libraries that come from other consolidations. The build server used to build the OSnet must be running a relatively recent version of Solaris, which means that its objects will be very similar to the new ones being built. However, it is necessarily true that the build system objects will always be a little behind, and that incompatible differences may exist. The objects built by the OSnet link to other objects. Some of these dependencies come from the OSnet, while others come from other consolidations. The objects from other consolidations are provided by the standard library directories on the build system (/lib, /usr/lib). The objects from the OSnet itself are supposed to come from the proto areas in the workspace, and not from the build server. In order to achieve this, we make use of the -L command line option to the link-editor. The link-editor finds dependencies by looking in the directories specified by the caller using the -L command line option. If the desired dependency is not found in one of these locations, ld will then fall back to looking at the default locations (/lib, /usr/lib). In order to use OSnet objects from the workspace instead of the system, while still accessing non-OSnet objects from the system, our Makefiles set -L link-editor options that point at the workspace proto areas. In general, this works well and dependencies are found in the right places. However, there have always been failures: Building objects in the wrong order might mean that an OSnet dependency hasn't been built before an object that needs it. If so, the dependency will not be seen in the proto, and the link-editor will silently fall back to the one on the build server. Errors in the makefiles can wipe out the -L options that our top level makefiles establish to cause ld to look at the workspace proto first. In this case, all objects will be found on the build server. These failures were rarely if ever caught. As I mentioned earlier, the objects on the build server are generally quite close to the objects built in the workspace. If they offer compatible linking interfaces, then the objects that link to them will behave properly, and no issue will ever be seen. However, if they do not offer compatible linking interfaces, the failure modes can be puzzling and hard to pin down. Either way, there won't be a compile-time warning or error. The advent of the stub proto eliminated the first type of failure. With stub objects, there is no dependency ordering, and the necessary stub object dependency will always be in place for any OSnet object that needs it. However, makefile errors do still occur, and so, the second form of error was still possible. While working on the stub object project, we realized that the stub proto was also the key to solving the second form of failure caused by makefile errors: Due to the way we set the -L options to point at our workspace proto areas, any valid object from the OSnet should be found via a path specified by -L, and not from the default locations (/lib, /usr/lib). Any OSnet object found via the default locations means that we've linked to the build server, which is an error we'd like to catch. Non-OSnet objects don't exist in the proto areas, and so are found via the default paths. However, if we were to create a symlink in the stub proto pointing at each non-OSnet dependency that we require, then the non-OSnet objects would also be found via the paths specified by -L, and not from the link-editor defaults. Given the above, we should not find any dependency objects from the link-editor defaults. Any dependency found via the link-editor defaults means that we have a Makefile error, and that we are linking to the build server inappropriately. All we need to make use of this fact is a linker option to produce a warning when it happens. Although warnings are nice, we in the OSnet have a zero tolerance policy for build noise. The -z fatal-warnings option that was recently introduced with -z guidance can be used to turn the warnings into fatal build errors, forcing the programmer to fix them. This was too easy to resist. I integrated 7021198 ld option to warn when link accesses a library via default path PSARC/2011/068 ld -z assert-deflib option into snv_161 (February 2011), shortly after the stub proto was introduced into ON. This putback introduced the -z assert-deflib option to the link-editor: -z assert-deflib=[libname] Enables warning messages for libraries specified with the -l command line option that are found by examining the default search paths provided by the link-editor. If a libname value is provided, the default library warning feature is enabled, and the specified library is added to a list of libraries for which no warnings will be issued. Multiple -z assert-deflib options can be specified in order to specify multiple libraries for which warnings should not be issued. The libname value should be the name of the library file, as found by the link-editor, without any path components. For example, the following enables default library warnings, and excludes the standard C library. ld ... -z assert-deflib=libc.so ... -z assert-deflib is a specialized option, primarily of interest in build environments where multiple objects with the same name exist and tight control over the library used is required. If is not intended for general use. Note that the definition of -z assert-deflib allows for exceptions to be specified as arguments to the option. In general, the idea of using a symlink from the stub proto is superior because it does not clutter up the link command with a long list of objects. When building the OSnet, we usually use the plain from of -z deflib, and make symlinks for the non-OSnet dependencies. The exception to this are dependencies supplied by the compiler itself, which are usually found at whatever arbitrary location the compiler happens to be installed at. To handle these special cases, the command line version works better. Following the integration of the link-editor change, I made use of -z assert-deflib in OSnet builds with 7021896 Prevent OSnet from accidentally linking to build system which integrated into snv_162 (March 2011). Turning on -z assert-deflib exposed between 10 and 20 existing errors in our Makefiles, which were all fixed in the same putback. The errors we found in our Makefiles underscore how difficult they can be prevent without an automatic system in place to catch them. Conclusions The stub proto is proving to be a generally useful construct for ON builds that goes beyond serving as a place to hold stub objects. Although invented to hold stub objects, it has already allowed us to simplify a number of previously difficult situations in our makefiles and builds. I expect that we'll find uses for it beyond those described here as we go forward.

    Read the article

  • On what criteria should I evaluate domain registrars?

    - by jdotjdot89
    Though I've been a web developer for a fair amount of time, I am going for the first time to buy a few domain names. I have looked into the domains I'm going to buy and know that they're available, and I've been looking into which sellers to use. After doing a lot of research, the main ones I'm considering are 1&1, Namecheap, and Gandi. The problem is, when continuing to research, I'm not really sure what makes one domain seller distinct from another. I don't need much in the way of services--definitely not hosting, since I plan to use Heroku for that. I mainly only need the domain itself and DNS management, as well as possibly SSL certificates and WHOIS protection. Question: What makes one domain seller different from another? How can I go about evaluating which one is the best for me? Note: This question is not which domain seller is the best, but rather, what criteria can I use to evaluate them and rank one over another. I'm trying to find out what makes one domain seller different from another, since they all seem to be pretty similar to me right now.

    Read the article

  • What platform to use for browser based turn based strategy game

    - by sunwukung
    I want to write a browser based strategy game that can be played by two players in separate locations. The game itself is predominantly turn based. To that end, I want to determine the correct platform on which to build this game. To prevent gamers "gaming" the system, the business logic needs to reside in the server. I could arguably use AJAX for a large part of the games functionality, but at two key points in the game loop, the opposing player can "counter" the current players move. In addition, when it's time for the players to swap, AJAX polling is likely to fall short, so it's starting to look like WebSockets is going to be a requirement to pull this off smoothly. So, the remaining question is regarding the back end. I'd kinda like to build this in Python/Flask - but this is primarily out of wanting to tackle a project with that language, not neccessarily because it's the appropriate tool for the job. The next most likely candidate has got to be NodeJS given it's (apparently) tighter integration with the WebSockets protocol. My question, then, is regarding the best platform on which to pursue this objective.

    Read the article

  • Accessing the JSESSIONID from JSF

    - by Frank Nimphius
    The following code attempts to access and print the user session ID from ADF Faces, using the session cookie that is automatically set by the server and the Http Session object itself. FacesContext fctx = FacesContext.getCurrentInstance(); ExternalContext ectx = fctx.getExternalContext(); HttpSession session = (HttpSession) ectx.getSession(false); String sessionId = session.getId(); System.out.println("Session Id = "+ sessionId); Cookie[] cookies = ((HttpServletRequest)ectx.getRequest()).getCookies(); //reset session string sessionId = null; if (cookies != null) { for (Cookie brezel : cookies) {     if (brezel.getName().equalsIgnoreCase("JSESSIONID")) {        sessionId = brezel.getValue();        break;      }   } } System.out.println("JSESSIONID cookie = "+sessionId); Though apparently both approaches to the same thing, they are different in the value they return and the condition under which they work. The getId method, for example returns a session value as shown below grLFTNzJhhnQTqVwxHMGl0WDZPGhZFl2m0JS5SyYVmZqvrfghFxy!-1834097692!1322120041091 Reading the cookie, returns a value like this grLFTNzJhhnQTqVwxHMGl0WDZPGhZFl2m0JS5SyYVmZqvrfghFxy!-1834097692 Though both seem to be identical, the difference is within "!1322120041091" added to the id when reading it directly from the Http Session object. Dependent on the use case the session Id is looked up for, the difference may not be important. Another difference however, is of importance. The cookie reading only works if the session Id is added as a cookie to the request, which is configurable for applications in the weblogic-application.xml file. If cookies are disabled, then the server adds the session ID to the request URL (actually it appends it to the end of the URI, so right after the view Id reference). In this case however no cookie is set so that the lookup returns empty. In both cases however, the getId variant works.

    Read the article

  • Is it relatively safe to install kernel from "Canonical Kernel Team ppa" than "Mainline"

    - by tijybba
    I already referred most of the questions stating Upgrade from Mainline Builds or Compiling from latest source or PPA and also concluded that it can cause breakage to Current stable installed system. My question is regarding the kernel builds from Canonical Kernel Team which i have subscribed in Ubuntu 12.04 64-bit , states This is the core kernel team as hired by Canonical. Do not use this team, use ubuntu-kernel-team instead. My stable kernel states 3.2.0-27.42 from Ubuntu repository , also i consider Canonical Kernel Team to be Official ,currently urging me to Upgrade 3.2.0-27.43 , so from the Odd numbered and through the PPA description it is categorized as Unstable. From this ,it can be said next stable release would be 3.2.0-27.44. Is upgrading to .43 version is stable enough to continue , since .44 will be provide by Ubuntu itself based on .43 version and so on. Though i can't expect a lot of Changes ,but does it provide new Improvements or just Bug Fixes since it is just a preceding Release. Also , apart from Ubuntu mainline kernel , is Canonical Kernel Team different. If so , in what development or contribution terms. Is the Ubuntu kernel developed by Two different teams or same team. P.S.: Just noticed that sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade provides me upgrade to .43 kernel , which normally requires sudo apt-get dist-upgrade to upgrade to newer kernel available , unless it normally provides message like " Following packages were not upgraded..." , is it an error or an exception to this Canonical Kernel PPA.

    Read the article

  • Why do I need to create a bios-grub partition when I install 12.04?

    - by raj
    Is the bios-grub partition in Ubuntu 12.04 mandatory? I have used 11.04, 11.10 and 12.04, But I was never asked for this. Today I tried a fresh installation of Ubuntu 12.04 and for the first time I was asked for this Grub partition of minimum 1Mb. I first tried to reinstall 12.04, but the error continued. So I installed Fedora 16, Keeping all partitions as they were (replaced Ubuntu with Fedora), And then did another fresh installation of 12.04. Is it ok to continue with this grub partition or is there a fault in my system's hardware? If this is a (hardware) fault, how can I fix it? I'm using a Lenovo S10-2 Ideapad. The only OS right now installed is Ubuntu 12.04. well, let me answer. It was /usr/bin/xorg issue that I had with firstly installed precise. I used fedora16 basically for removing precise totally (my experience tells me ubuntu can't completely erase and reinstall by itself). this 1mb grub is created by fedora. I then wanted to remove it while reinstalling ubuntu but got caution bootloader may fail. hence I have to keep this 1mb drive. but prior to yesterday, i used both fedora and ubuntu, even same CDs, but had no such partition. my question is if this partition is necessary or not? if not, how can i safely remove it from my system? Am using only ubuntu 12.04 -- before and after (now).

    Read the article

  • A Look Inside JSR 360 - CLDC 8

    - by Roger Brinkley
    If you didn't notice during JavaOne the Java Micro Edition took a major step forward in its consolidation with Java Standard Edition when JSR 360 was proposed to the JCP community. Over the last couple of years there has been a focus to move Java ME back in line with it's big brother Java SE. We see evidence of this in JCP itself which just recently merged the ME and SE/EE Executive Committees into a single Java Executive Committee. But just before that occurred JSR 360 was proposed and approved for development on October 29. So let's take a look at what changes are now being proposed. In a way JSR 360 is returning back to the original roots of Java ME when it was first introduced. It was indeed a subset of the JDK 4 language, but as Java progressed many of the language changes were not implemented in the Java ME. Back then the tradeoff was still a functionality, footprint trade off but the major market was feature phones. Today the market has changed and CLDC, while it will still target feature phones, will have it primary emphasis on embedded devices like wireless modules, smart meters, health care monitoring and other M2M devices. The major changes will come in three areas: language feature changes, library changes, and consolidating the Generic Connection Framework.  There have been three Java SE versions that have been implemented since JavaME was first developed so the language feature changes can be divided into changes that came in JDK 5 and those in JDK 7, which mostly consist of the project Coin changes. There were no language changes in JDK 6 but the changes from JDK 5 are: Assertions - Assertions enable you to test your assumptions about your program. For example, if you write a method that calculates the speed of a particle, you might assert that the calculated speed is less than the speed of light. In the example code below if the interval isn't between 0 and and 1,00 the an error of "Invalid value?" would be thrown. private void setInterval(int interval) { assert interval > 0 && interval <= 1000 : "Invalid value?" } Generics - Generics add stability to your code by making more of your bugs detectable at compile time. Code that uses generics has many benefits over non-generic code with: Stronger type checks at compile time. Elimination of casts. Enabling programming to implement generic algorithms. Enhanced for Loop - the enhanced for loop allows you to iterate through a collection without having to create an Iterator or without having to calculate beginning and end conditions for a counter variable. The enhanced for loop is the easiest of the new features to immediately incorporate in your code. In this tip you will see how the enhanced for loop replaces more traditional ways of sequentially accessing elements in a collection. void processList(Vector<string> list) { for (String item : list) { ... Autoboxing/Unboxing - This facility eliminates the drudgery of manual conversion between primitive types, such as int and wrapper types, such as Integer.  Hashtable<Integer, string=""> data = new Hashtable<>(); void add(int id, String value) { data.put(id, value); } Enumeration - Prior to JDK 5 enumerations were not typesafe, had no namespace, were brittle because they were compile time constants, and provided no informative print values. JDK 5 added support for enumerated types as a full-fledged class (dubbed an enum type). In addition to solving all the problems mentioned above, it allows you to add arbitrary methods and fields to an enum type, to implement arbitrary interfaces, and more. Enum types provide high-quality implementations of all the Object methods. They are Comparable and Serializable, and the serial form is designed to withstand arbitrary changes in the enum type. enum Season {WINTER, SPRING, SUMMER, FALL}; } private Season season; void setSeason(Season newSeason) { season = newSeason; } Varargs - Varargs eliminates the need for manually boxing up argument lists into an array when invoking methods that accept variable-length argument lists. The three periods after the final parameter's type indicate that the final argument may be passed as an array or as a sequence of arguments. Varargs can be used only in the final argument position. void warning(String format, String... parameters) { .. for(String p : parameters) { ...process(p);... } ... } Static Imports -The static import construct allows unqualified access to static members without inheriting from the type containing the static members. Instead, the program imports the members either individually or en masse. Once the static members have been imported, they may be used without qualification. The static import declaration is analogous to the normal import declaration. Where the normal import declaration imports classes from packages, allowing them to be used without package qualification, the static import declaration imports static members from classes, allowing them to be used without class qualification. import static data.Constants.RATIO; ... double r = Math.cos(RATIO * theta); Annotations - Annotations provide data about a program that is not part of the program itself. They have no direct effect on the operation of the code they annotate. There are a number of uses for annotations including information for the compiler, compiler-time and deployment-time processing, and run-time processing. They can be applied to a program's declarations of classes, fields, methods, and other program elements. @Deprecated public void clear(); The language changes from JDK 7 are little more familiar as they are mostly the changes from Project Coin: String in switch - Hey it only took us 18 years but the String class can be used in the expression of a switch statement. Fortunately for us it won't take that long for JavaME to adopt it. switch (arg) { case "-data": ... case "-out": ... Binary integral literals and underscores in numeric literals - Largely for readability, the integral types (byte, short, int, and long) can also be expressed using the binary number system. and any number of underscore characters (_) can appear anywhere between digits in a numerical literal. byte flags = 0b01001111; long mask = 0xfff0_ff08_4fff_0fffl; Multi-catch and more precise rethrow - A single catch block can handle more than one type of exception. In addition, the compiler performs more precise analysis of rethrown exceptions than earlier releases of Java SE. This enables you to specify more specific exception types in the throws clause of a method declaration. catch (IOException | InterruptedException ex) { logger.log(ex); throw ex; } Type Inference for Generic Instance Creation - Otherwise known as the diamond operator, the type arguments required to invoke the constructor of a generic class can be replaced with an empty set of type parameters (<>) as long as the compiler can infer the type arguments from the context.  map = new Hashtable<>(); Try-with-resource statement - The try-with-resources statement is a try statement that declares one or more resources. A resource is an object that must be closed after the program is finished with it. The try-with-resources statement ensures that each resource is closed at the end of the statement.  try (DataInputStream is = new DataInputStream(...)) { return is.readDouble(); } Simplified varargs method invocation - The Java compiler generates a warning at the declaration site of a varargs method or constructor with a non-reifiable varargs formal parameter. Java SE 7 introduced a compiler option -Xlint:varargs and the annotations @SafeVarargs and @SuppressWarnings({"unchecked", "varargs"}) to supress these warnings. On the library side there are new features that will be added to satisfy the language requirements above and some to improve the currently available set of APIs.  The library changes include: Collections update - New Collection, List, Set and Map, Iterable and Iteratator as well as implementations including Hashtable and Vector. Most of the work is too support generics String - New StringBuilder and CharSequence as well as a Stirng formatter. The javac compiler  now uses the the StringBuilder instead of String Buffer. Since StringBuilder is synchronized there is a performance increase which has necessitated the wahat String constructor works. Comparable interface - The comparable interface works with Collections, making it easier to reuse. Try with resources - Closeable and AutoCloseable Annotations - While support for Annotations is provided it will only be a compile time support. SuppressWarnings, Deprecated, Override NIO - There is a subset of NIO Buffer that have been in use on the of the graphics packages and needs to be pulled in and also support for NIO File IO subset. Platform extensibility via Service Providers (ServiceLoader) - ServiceLoader interface dos late bindings of interface to existing implementations. It helpe to package an interface and behavior of the implementation at a later point in time.Provider classes must have a zero-argument constructor so that they can be instantiated during loading. They are located and instantiated on demand and are identified via a provider-configuration file in the METAINF/services resource directory. This is a mechansim from Java SE. import com.XYZ.ServiceA; ServiceLoader<ServiceA> sl1= new ServiceLoader(ServiceA.class); Resources: META-INF/services/com.XYZ.ServiceA: ServiceAProvider1 ServiceAProvider2 ServiceAProvider3 META-INF/services/ServiceB: ServiceBProvider1 ServiceBProvider2 From JSR - I would rather use this list I think The Generic Connection Framework (GCF) was previously specified in a number of different JSRs including CLDC, MIDP, CDC 1.2, and JSR 197. JSR 360 represents a rare opportunity to consolidated and reintegrate parts that were duplicated in other specifications into a single specification, upgrade the APIs as well provide new functionality. The proposal is to specify a combined GCF specification that can be used with Java ME or Java SE and be backwards compatible with previous implementations. Because of size limitations as well as the complexity of the some features like InvokeDynamic and Unicode 6 will not be included. Additionally, any language or library changes in JDK 8 will be not be included. On the upside, with all the changes being made, backwards compatibility will still be maintained. JSR 360 is a major step forward for Java ME in terms of platform modernization, language alignment, and embedded support. If you're interested in following the progress of this JSR see the JSR's java.net project for details of the email lists, discussions groups.

    Read the article

  • What are the possible options for AI path-finding etc when the world is "partitionned"?

    - by Sebastien Diot
    If you anticipate a large persistent game world, and you don't want to end up with some game server crashing due to overload, then you have to design from the ground up a game world that is partitioned in chunks. This is in particular true if you want to run your game servers in the cloud, where each individual VM is relatively week, and memory and CPU are at a premium. I think the biggest challenge here is that the player receives all the parts around the location of the avatar, but mobs/monsters are normally located in the server itself, and can only directly access the data about the part of the world that the server own. So how can we make the AI behave realistically in that context? It can send queries to the other servers that own the neighboring parts, but that sounds rather network intensive and latency prone. It would probably be more performant for each mob AI to be spread over the neighboring parts, and proactively send the relevant info to the part that contains the actual mob atm. That would also reduce the stress in a mob crossing a border between two parts, and therefore "switching server". Have you heard of any AI design that solves those issues? Some kind of distributed AI brain? Maybe some kind of "agent" community working together through message passing?

    Read the article

  • Have unit test generators helped you when working with legacy code?

    - by Duncan Bayne
    I am looking at a small (~70kLOC including generated) C# (.NET 4.0, some Silverlight) code-base that has very low test coverage. The code itself works in that it has passed user acceptance testing, but it is brittle and in some areas not very well factored. I would like to add solid unit test coverage around the legacy code using the usual suspects (NMock, NUnit, StatLight for the Silverlight bits). My normal approach is to start working through the project, unit testing & refactoring, until I am satisfied with the state of the code. I've done this many times in the past, and it's worked well. However, this time I'm thinking of using a test generator (in particular Pex) to create the test framework, then manually fleshing it out. My question is: have you used unit test generators in the past when commencing work on a legacy codebase, and if so, would you recommend them? My fear is that the generated tests will miss the semantic nuances of the code-base, leading to the dreaded situation of having tests for the sake of the coverage metric, rather than tests which clearly express the intended behaviour in code.

    Read the article

  • How can I perform 2D side-scroller collision checks in a tile-based map?

    - by bill
    I am trying to create a game where you have a player that can move horizontally and jump. It's kind of like Mario but it isn't a side scroller. I'm using a 2D array to implement a tile map. My problem is that I don't understand how to check for collisions using this implementation. After spending about two weeks thinking about it, I've got two possible solutions, but both of them have some problems. Let's say that my map is defined by the following tiles: 0 = sky 1 = player 2 = ground The data for the map itself might look like: 00000 10002 22022 For solution 1, I'd move the player (the 1) a complete tile and update the map directly. This make the collision easy because you can check if the player is touching the ground simply by looking at the tile directly below the player: // x and y are the tile coordinates of the player. The tile origin is the upper-left. if (grid[x][y+1] == 2){ // The player is standing on top of a ground tile. } The problem with this approach is that the player moves in discrete tile steps, so the animation isn't smooth. For solution 2, I thought about moving the player via pixel coordinates and not updating the tile map. This will make the animation much smoother because I have a smaller movement unit per frame. However, this means I can't really accurately store the player in the tile map because sometimes he would logically be between two tiles. But the bigger problem here is that I think the only way to check for collision is to use Java's intersection method, which means the player would need to be at least a single pixel "into" the ground to register collision, and that won't look good. How can I solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • Log Blog

    - by PointsToShare
    © 2011 By: Dov Trietsch. All rights reserved Logging – A log blog In a another blog (Missing Fields and Defaults) I spoke about not doing a blog about log files, but then I looked at it again and realized that this is a nice opportunity to show a simple yet powerful tool and also deal with static variables and functions in C#. My log had to be able to answer a few simple logging rules:   To log or not to log? That is the question – Always log! That is the answer  Do we share a log? Even when a file is opened with a minimal lock, it does not share well and performance greatly suffers. So sharing a log is not a good idea. Also, when sharing, it is harder to find your particular entries and you have to establish rules about retention. My recommendation – Do Not Share!  How verbose? Your log can be very verbose – a good thing when testing, very terse – a good thing in day-to-day runs, or somewhere in between. You must be the judge. In my Blog, I elect to always report a run with start and end times, and always report errors. I normally use 5 levels of logging: 4 – write all, 3 – write more, 2 – write some, 1 – write errors and timing, 0 – write none. The code sample below is more general than that. It uses the config file to set the max log level and each call to the log assigns a level to the call itself. If the level is above the .config highest level, the line will not be written. Programmers decide which log belongs to which level and thus we can set the .config differently for production and testing.  Where do I keep the log? If your career is important to you, discuss this with the boss and with the system admin. We keep logs in the L: drive of our server and make sure that we have a directory for each app that needs a log. When adding a new app, add a new directory. The default location for the log is also found in the .config file Print One or Many? There are two options here:   1.     Print many, Open but once once – you start the stream and close it only when the program ends. This is what you can do when you perform in “batch” mode like in a console app or a stsadm extension.The advantage to this is that starting a closing a stream is expensive and time consuming and because we use a unique file, keeping it open for a long time does not cause contention problems. 2.     Print one entry at a time or Open many – every time you write a line, you start the stream, write to it and close it. This work for event receivers, feature receivers, and web parts. Here scalability requires us to create objects on the fly and get rid of them as soon as possible.  A default value of the onceOrMany resides in the .config.  All of the above applies to any windows or web application, not just SharePoint.  So as usual, here is a routine that does it all, and a few simple functions that call it for a variety of purposes.   So without further ado, here is app.config  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <configuration>     <configSections>         <sectionGroup name="applicationSettings" type="System.Configuration.ApplicationSettingsGroup, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, ublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" >         <section name="statics.Properties.Settings" type="System.Configuration.ClientSettingsSection, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" requirePermission="false" />         </sectionGroup>     </configSections>     <applicationSettings>         <statics.Properties.Settings>             <setting name="oneOrMany" serializeAs="String">                 <value>False</value>             </setting>             <setting name="logURI" serializeAs="String">                 <value>C:\staticLog.txt</value>             </setting>             <setting name="highestLevel" serializeAs="String">                 <value>2</value>             </setting>         </statics.Properties.Settings>     </applicationSettings> </configuration>   And now the code:  In order to persist the variables between calls and also to be able to persist (or not to persist) the log file itself, I created an EventLog class with static variables and functions. Static functions do not need an instance of the class in order to work. If you ever wondered why our Main function is static, the answer is that something needs to run before instantiation so that other objects may be instantiated, and this is what the “static” Main does. The various logging functions and variables are created as static because they do not need instantiation and as a fringe benefit they remain un-destroyed between calls. The Main function here is just used for testing. Note that it does not instantiate anything, just uses the log functions. This is possible because the functions are static. Also note that the function calls are of the form: Class.Function.  using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.IO; namespace statics {       class Program     {         static void Main(string[] args)         {             //write a single line             EventLog.LogEvents("ha ha", 3, "C:\\hahafile.txt", 4, true, false);             //this single line will not be written because the msgLevel is too high             EventLog.LogEvents("baba", 3, "C:\\babafile.txt", 2, true, false);             //The next 4 lines will be written in succession - no closing             EventLog.LogLine("blah blah", 1);             EventLog.LogLine("da da", 1);             EventLog.LogLine("ma ma", 1);             EventLog.LogLine("lah lah", 1);             EventLog.CloseLog(); // log will close             //now with specific functions             EventLog.LogSingleLine("one line", 1);             //this is just a test, the log is already closed             EventLog.CloseLog();         }     }     public class EventLog     {         public static string logURI = Properties.Settings.Default.logURI;         public static bool isOneLine = Properties.Settings.Default.oneOrMany;         public static bool isOpen = false;         public static int highestLevel = Properties.Settings.Default.highestLevel;         public static StreamWriter sw;         /// <summary>         /// the program will "print" the msg into the log         /// unless msgLevel is > msgLimit         /// onceOrMany is true when once - the program will open the log         /// print the msg and close the log. False when many the program will         /// keep the log open until close = true         /// normally all the arguments will come from the app.config         /// called by many overloads of logLine         /// </summary>         /// <param name="msg"></param>         /// <param name="msgLevel"></param>         /// <param name="logFileName"></param>         /// <param name="msgLimit"></param>         /// <param name="onceOrMany"></param>         /// <param name="close"></param>         public static void LogEvents(string msg, int msgLevel, string logFileName, int msgLimit, bool oneOrMany, bool close)         {             //to print or not to print             if (msgLevel <= msgLimit)             {                 //open the file. from the argument (logFileName) or from the config (logURI)                 if (!isOpen)                 {                     string logFile = logFileName;                     if (logFileName == "")                     {                         logFile = logURI;                     }                     sw = new StreamWriter(logFile, true);                     sw.WriteLine("Started At: " + DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss"));                     isOpen = true;                 }                 //print                 sw.WriteLine(msg);             }             //close when instructed             if (close || oneOrMany)             {                 if (isOpen)                 {                     sw.WriteLine("Ended At: " + DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss"));                     sw.Close();                     isOpen = false;                 }             }         }           /// <summary>         /// The simplest, just msg and level         /// </summary>         /// <param name="msg"></param>         /// <param name="msgLevel"></param>         public static void LogLine(string msg, int msgLevel)         {             //use the given msg and msgLevel and all others are defaults             LogEvents(msg, msgLevel, "", highestLevel, isOneLine, false);         }                 /// <summary>         /// one line at a time - open print close         /// </summary>         /// <param name="msg"></param>         /// <param name="msgLevel"></param>         public static void LogSingleLine(string msg, int msgLevel)         {             LogEvents(msg, msgLevel, "", highestLevel, true, true);         }           /// <summary>         /// used to close. high level, low limit, once and close are set         /// </summary>         /// <param name="close"></param>         public static void CloseLog()         {             LogEvents("", 15, "", 1, true, true);         }           }     }   }   That’s all folks!

    Read the article

  • Goal Tracking data seems to be inaccurate?

    - by Khuram Malik
    I setup some Goal Tracking about one week ago. I had multiple goals in one set. The goal itself was the "send" button being pressed on the callback form (i did that by pushing a pageview to Google Analytics everytime the send button is pressed) For each goal, i listed the first step as a required step. So for example, the ILR Page was step 1 and set as required and the goal was "/CallbackFormFilled" Looking at the stats a week later i'm getting some very inflated numbers especially when comparing them to my manually filled excel spreadsheet and i'm struggling to understand the cause of this behaviour. I'm unable to attach screenshots unfortunately since my StackExchange account for this site is brand new My own thoughts My own thoughts were that maybe its because i have setup multiple goals with the same end goal URL, but i thought that was a valid setup since i want to track multiple routes so to speak(?) I've disabled all other goals for now to confirm this, but im waiting for stats to come in as i write this. I also wonder if the contact form im using in Wordpress is causing a problem, but i've simply added one javascript line on the send button that pushes a pageview so not sure if that should cause an issue. Here is a link to setting up analytics on this contact form plugin in wordpress for reference: (see javascript action hook section) - http://ideasilo.wordpress.com/2009/05/31/contact-form-7-1-10/

    Read the article

  • Is defining every method/state per object in a series of UML diagrams representative of MDA in general?

    - by Max
    I am currently working on a project where we use a framework that combines code generation and ORM together with UML to develop software. Methods are added to UML classes and are generated into partial classes where "stuff happens". For example, an UML class "Content" could have the method DeleteFromFileSystem(void). Which could be implemented like this: public partial class Content { public void DeleteFromFileSystem() { File.Delete(...); } } All methods are designed like this. Everything happens in these gargantuan logic-bomb domain classes. Is this how MDA or DDD or similar usually is done? For now my impression of MDA/DDD (which this has been called by higherups) is that it severely stunts my productivity (everything must be done The Way) and that it hinders maintenance work since all logic are roped, entrenched, interspersed into the mentioned gargantuan bombs. Please refrain from interpreting this as a rant - I am merely curious if this is typical MDA or some sort of extreme MDA UPDATE Concerning the example above, in my opinion Content shouldn't handle deleting itself as such. What if we change from local storage to Amazon S3, in that case we would have to reimplement this functionality scattered over multiple places instead of one single interface which we can provide a second implementation for.

    Read the article

  • software architecture (OO design) refresher course

    - by PeterT
    I am lead developer and team lead in a small RAD team. Deadlines are tight and we have to release often, which we do, and this is what keep the business happy. While we (the development team) are trying to maintain the quality of the code (clean and short methods), I can't help but notice that the overall quality of the OO design&architecture is getting worse over the time - the library we are working on is gradually reducing itself to a "bag of functions". Well, we try to use the design patterns, but since we don't really have much time for a design as such we are mostly using the creational ones. I have read Code Complete / Design Patterns (GOF & enterprise) / Progmatic Programmer / and many books from Effective XXX series. Should I re-read them again as I have read them a long time ago and forgotten quite a lot, or there are other / better OO design / software architeture books been published since then which I should definitely read? Any ideas, recommendations on how can I get the situation under control and start improving the architecture. The way I see it - I will start improving the architectural / design quality of software components I am working on and then will start helping other team members once I find what is working for me.

    Read the article

  • Why maven so slow compared to automake?

    - by ???'Lenik
    I have a Maven project consists of around 100 modules. I have reason to decompose the project to so many modules, and I don't think I should merge them in order to speed up the build process. I have read a lot of projects by other people, e.g., the Maven project itself, and Apache Archiva, and Hudson project, they all consists of a lot of modules, nearly 100 maybe, more or less. The problem is, to build them all need so much time, 3 hours for the first time build (this is acceptable because a lot of artifacts to download), and 15 minutes for the second build (this is not acceptable). For automake, things are similarly, the first time you need to configure the project, to prepare the magical config.h file, it's far more complex then what maven does. But it's still fast, maybe 10 seconds on my Debian box. After then, make install requires maybe 10 minutes for the first time build. However, when everything get prepared, the .o object files are generated, they don't have to be rebuild at all for the second time build. (In Maven, everything rebuild at everytime.) I'm very wondering, how guys working for Maven projects can bare this long time for each build, I'm just can't sit down calmly during each time Maven build, it took too long time, really.

    Read the article

  • C++11 Tidbits: access control under SFINAE conditions

    - by Paolo Carlini
    Lately I have been spending quite a bit of time on the SFINAE ("Substitution failure is not an error") features of C++, fixing and tweaking various bits of the GCC implementation. An important missing piece was the implementation of the resolution of DR 1170 which, in a nutshell, mandates that access checking is done as part of the substitution process. Consider: class C { typedef int type; }; template <class T, class = typename T::type> auto f(int) - char; template <class> auto f(...) -> char (&)[2]; static_assert (sizeof(f<C>(0)) == 2, "Ouch"); According to the resolution, the static_assert should not fire, and the snippet should compile successfully. The reason being that the first f overload must be removed from the candidate set because C::type is private to C. On the other hand, before the resolution of DR 1170, the expected behavior was for the first overload to remain in the candidate set, win over the second one, to eventually lead to an access control error (*). GCC mainline (would be 4.8) finally implements the DR, thus benefiting the many modern programming techniques heavily exploiting SFINAE, among which certainly the GNU C++ runtime library itself, which relies on it for the internals of <type_traits> and in several other places. Note that the resolution of the DR is active even in C++98 mode, not just in C++11 mode, because it turned out that the traditional behavior, as implemented in GCC, wasn't fully consistent in all the possible circumstances. (*) In practice, GCC didn't really implement this, the static_assert triggered instead.

    Read the article

  • Canonicals with differing content

    - by Jimbo Jonny
    Interesting conundrum here with canonicals. Lets say I have a site with a "verified" system where other websites can become so and so "verified". Their url to send people to to confirm verification is something like "blah.com/verify/company1" and "blah.com/verify/company2". But logically "blah.com/verify" itself is not verifying anyone in particular, so it redirects to the signup form to get verified, at "blah.com/verify/register" As far as the actual companies registered, I figure it doesn't make sense to index every individual url with only the tiny difference of which company name it's saying yay or nay to being verified, so canonicals could come in handy on those pages to condense the indexing. Yet making "blah.com/verify" the canonical "hub" doesn't work well because it's a signup form, not a verification page, so technically has quite different content from the various verification pages themselves. But at the same time it's a bit unfair to choose 1 company to point all the canonical benefits too to use that as the "hub", yet a bit wasteful to have google index every individual verification page and spread out all that linkjuice. Basically, I'm just looking for advice, what's best for this from a search engine standpoint?

    Read the article

  • Daily Blog Archives and Duplicate Content

    - by nemmy
    A few weeks back I realised that my blog software was creating daily post archives. Which basically resulted in duplicate content especially if I only had one post a day. The situation is something like this: www.sitename.com/blog/archives/2013/06/01 - daily archive for 1 June 2013 www.sitename.com/blog/archives/2013/06/my-post-name.html So, here we have two pages that are basically identical except the daily archive has some meaningless title like "Daily Archive for 1 June 2003". And I have no control over which content Google decides is the primary content. It's quite possible (and likely) that the daily archive could be the "primary" content and the actual post itself the "duplicate". Once I realised it was doing this I modified the daily archive template to include <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> Here we are a few weeks later and I still see some daily archives coming up in Google search results. I realise some of those deep pages might not be crawled yet but I am worried that the original post (which should be the PRIMARY content) has been marked duplicate content by Google. Now I've no indexed the daily archives I might end up with no indexed content AND the original articles still flagged as duplicates. And nothing will show up in search at all. Have I screwed myself here or is there a way out?

    Read the article

  • Formal definition for term "pure OO language"?

    - by Yauhen Yakimovich
    I can't think of a better place among SO siblings to pose such a question. Originally I wanted to ask "Is python a pure OO language?" but considering troubles and some sort of discomfort people experience while trying to define the term I decided to start with obtaining a clear definition for the term itself. It would be rather fair to start with correspondence by Dr. Alan Kay, who has coined the term (note the inspiration in biological analogy to cells or other living objects). There are following ways to approach the task: Give a comparative analysis by listing programming languages that exhibits certain properties unique and sufficient to define the term (although Smalltalk and Java are passing examples but IMO this way seems neither really complete or nor fruitful) Give a formal definition (or close to it, e.g. in more academic or mathematical style). Give a philosophical definition that would totally rely on semantical context of concrete language or a priori programming experience (there must be some chance of successful explanation by the community). My current version: "If a certain programing (formal) language that can (grammatically) differentiate between operations and operands as well as infer about the type of each operand whether this type is an object (in sense of OOP) or not then we call such a language an OO-language as long as there is at least one type in this language which is an object. Finally, if all types of the language are also objects we define such language to be pure OO-language." Would appreciate any possible improvement of it. As you can see I just made the definition dependent on the term "object" (often fully referenced as class of objects).

    Read the article

  • Great Example of a Simple Cost-Benefit Analysis

    - by BuckWoody
    I saw a post the other day that you should definitely go check out. It’s a cost/benefit decision, and although the author gives it a quick treatment and doesn’t take all points in the decision into account, you should focus on the process he follows. It’s a quick and simple example of the kind of thought process we should have as data professionals when we pick a server, a process, or application and even platform software. The key is to include more than just the price of a piece of software or hardware. You need to think about the “other” costs in the decision, and then make the right one. Sometimes the cheapest option is the cheapest, and other times, well, it isn’t. I’ve seen this played out not only in the decision to go with a certain selection, but in the options or editions it comes in. You have to put all of the decision points in the analysis to come up with the right answer, and you have to be able to explain your logic to your team and your company. This is the way you become a data professional, not just a DBA. You can check out the post here – it deals with Azure, but the point is the process, not Azure itself: http://blogs.msdn.com/eugeniop/archive/2010/03/19/windows-azure-guidance-a-simplistic-economic-analysis-of-a-expense-migration.aspx Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Update Manager won't open (error related to pythonverbose)

    - by Mateus Machado Luna
    I'm having an issue with update-manager. Last night, my computer restart suddenly during the update process. Now it won't open and it keep appearing on the notifier with a message warning that an error occurred. The error is the same that is displayed when I try to open it on the terminal: Error in sitecustomize; set PYTHONVERBOSE for traceback: EOFError: EOF read where not expected Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/update-manager", line 26, in <module> from __future__ import print_function EOFError: EOF read where not expected I've already seen some questions here, but most of them are related to problems with ppas and the source.list file. This seems to be a bug on update-manager itself. I've already tried to remove it and install again, but the problem persists. I also noted another bug: my source-center doesn't open too. The message for it is similar to the other one: Error in sitecustomize; set PYTHONVERBOSE for traceback: EOFError: EOF read where not expected Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/command-not-found", line 5, in <module> from __future__ import absolute_import, print_function EOFError: EOF read where not expected For now I'm using apt-get update && upgrade for updating and the Synaptic for the source management. But I really would like to fix this stuff. Anyone can help? I'm with Ubuntu 12.10, Gnome-remix, 64-bits.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216  | Next Page >