Search Results

Search found 13317 results on 533 pages for 'interior design'.

Page 24/533 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

• TDD and your emerging design

  - by andrewstopford

  I was at DevWeek last week, it was a great week and I got a chance to speak with some of my geek heroes (Jeff Richter is a walking, talking CLR). One of the folks I most enjoyed listening to was ThoughtWorker Neal Ford who gave a session on emergeant design in TDD. Something struck me about the RGR cycle in TDD in that design could either be missed or misplaced if the refactor phase is never carried out and after the inital green phase the design is considered done. In TDD the emergant design that evolves as part of the cycle is key to the approach.  Neal talked about using cyclometric complexity as a measure of your emerging design but other considerations would surely include SOLID and DRY during the cycles. As you refactor to these kinds of design principles your design evolves.

  Read the article

• Oracle Fusion Applications User Experience Design Patterns: Feeling the Love after Launch

  - by mvaughan

  By Misha Vaughan, Oracle Applications User ExperienceIn the first video by the Oracle Applications User Experience team on the Oracle Partner Network, Vice President Jeremy Ashley said that Oracle is looking to expand the ecosystem of support for Oracle’s applications customers as they begin to assess their investment and adoption of Oracle Fusion Applications. Oracle has made a massive investment to maintain the benefits of the Fusion Applications User Experience. This summer, the Applications User Experience team released the Oracle Fusion Applications user experience design patterns.Design patterns help create consistent experiences across devices.The launch has been very well received:Angelo Santagata, Senior Principal Technologist and Fusion Middleware evangelist for Oracle,  wrote this to the system integrator community: “The web site is the result of many years of Oracle R&D into user interface design for Fusion Applications and features a really cool web app which allows you to visualise the UI components in action.”  Grant Ronald, Director of Product Management, Application Development Framework (ADF) said: “It’s a science I don't understand, but now I don't have to ... Now you can learn from the UX experience of Fusion Applications.”Frank Nimphius, Senior Principal Product Manager, Oracle (ADF) wrote about the launch of the design patterns for the ADF Code Corner, and Jürgen Kress, Senior Manager EMEA Alliances & Channels for Fusion MiddleWare and Service Oriented Architecture, (SOA), shared the news with his Partner Community. Oracle Twitter followers also helped spread the message about the design patterns launch: ?@bex – Brian Huff, founder and Chief Software Architect for Bezzotech, and Oracle ACE Director:“Nifty! The Oracle Fusion UX team just released new ADF design patterns.”@maiko_rocha, Maiko Rocha, Oracle Consulting Solutions Architect and Oracle FMW engineer: “Haven't seen any other vendor offer such comprehensive UX Design Patterns catalog for free!”@zirous_chad, Chad Thompson, Senior Solutions Architect for Zirous, Inc. and ADF Developer:Wow - @ultan and company did a great job with the Fusion UX PatternsWhat is a user experience design pattern?A user experience design pattern is a re-usable, usability tested functional blueprint for a particular user experience.  Some examples are guided processes, shopping carts, and search and search results.  Ultan O’Broin discusses the top design patterns every developer should know.The patterns that were just released are based on thousands of hours of end-user field studies, state-of-the-art user interface assessments, and usability testing.  To be clear, these are functional design patterns, not technical design patterns that developers may be used to working with.  Because we know there is a gap, we are putting together some training that will help close that gap.Who should care?This is an offering targeted primarily at Application Development Framework (ADF) developers. If you are faced with the following questions regarding Fusion Applications, you will want to know and learn more:•    How do I build something that looks like Fusion Applications?•    How do I build a next-generation application?•    How do I extend a Fusion Application and maintain the user experience?•    I don’t want to re-invent the wheel on the user interface, so where do I start?•    I need to build something that will eventually co-exist with Fusion Applications. How do I do that?These questions are relevant to partners with an ADF competency, individual practitioners, or small consultancies with an ADF specialization, and customers who are trying to shift their IT staff over to supporting Fusion Applications.Where you can find out more?OnlineOur Fusion User Experience design patterns maven is Ultan O’Broin. The Oracle Partner Network is helping our team bring this first e-seminar to you in order to go into a more detail on what this means and how to take advantage of it:? Webinar: Build a Better User Experience with Oracle: Oracle Fusion Applications Functional Design PatternsSept 20, 2012 , 10:30am-11:30am PacificDial-In:  1. 877-664-9137 / Passcode 102546?International:  706-634-9619  http://www.intercall.com/national/oracleuniversity/gdnam.htmlAccess the Live Event Or Via Webconference Access http://ouweb.webex.com  ?and enter this session number: 598036234At a Usergroup eventThe Fusion User Experience Advocates (FXA) are also going to be getting some deep-dive training on this content and can share it with local user groups.At OpenWorld Ultan O’Broin               Chris MuirIf you will be at OpenWorld this year, our own Ultan O’Broin will be visiting the ADF demopod to say hello, thanks to Shay Shmeltzer, Senior Group Manager for ADF outbound communication and at the OTN lounge: Monday 10-10:45, Tuesday 2:15-2:45, Wednesday 2:15-3:30 ?  Oracle JDeveloper and Oracle ADF,  Moscone South, Right - S-207? “ADF Meet and Greett”, OTN Lounge, Wednesday 4:30 And I cannot talk about OpenWorld and ADF without mentioning Chris Muir’s ADF EMG event: the Year After the Year Of the ADF Developer – Sunday, Sept 30 of OpenWorld. Chris has played host to Ultan and the Applications user experience message for his online community and is now a seasoned UX expert.Expect to see additional announcements about expanded and training on similar topics in the future.

  Read the article

• Delving into design patterns, and what that means for the Oracle user experience

  - by Kathy.Miedema

  By Kathy Miedema, Oracle Applications User Experience George Hackman, Senior Director, Applications User Experiences The Oracle Applications User Experience team has some exciting things happening around Fusion Applications design patterns. Because we’re hoping to have some new offerings soon (stay tuned with VoX to see what’s in the pipeline around Fusion Applications design patterns), now is a good time to talk more about what design patterns can do for the individual user as well as the entire company. George Hackman, Senior Director of Operations User Experience, says the first thing to note is that user experience is not just about the user interface. It’s about understanding how people do things, observing them, and then finding the patterns that emerge. The Applications UX team develops those patterns and then builds them into Oracle applications. What emerges, Hackman says, is a consistent, efficient user experience that promotes a productive workplace. Creating design patterns What is a design pattern in the context of enterprise software? “Every day, people use technology to get things done,” Hackman says. “They navigate a virtual world that reaches from enterprise to consumer apps, and from desktop to mobile. This virtual world is constantly under construction. New areas are being developed and old areas are being redone. As this world is being built and remodeled, efficient pathways and practices emerge. “Oracle's user experience team watches users navigate this world. We measure their productivity and ask them about their satisfaction. We take the most efficient, most productive pathways from the enterprise and consumer world and turn them into Oracle's user experience patterns.” Hackman describes the process as combining all of the best practices from every part of a user’s world. Members of the user experience team observe, analyze, design, prototype, and measure each work task to find the best possible pattern for a particular work flow. As the team builds the patterns, “we make sure they are fully buildable using Oracle technology,” Hackman said. “So customers know they can use these patterns. There’s no need to make something up from scratch, not knowing whether you can even build it.” Hackman says that creating something on a computer is a good example of a user experience pattern. “People are creating things all the time,” he says. “On the consumer side, they are creating documents. On the enterprise side, they are creating expense reports. On a mobile phone, they are creating contacts. They are using different apps like iPhone or Facebook or Gmail or Oracle software, all doing this creation process.” The Applications UX team starts their process by observing how people might create something. “We observe people creating things. We see the patterns, we analyze and document, then we apply them to our products. It might be different from phone to web browser, but we have these design patterns that create a consistent experience across platforms, and across products, too. The result for customers Oracle constantly improves its part of the virtual world, Hackman said. New products are created and existing products are upgraded. Because Oracle builds user experience design patterns, Oracle's virtual world becomes both more powerful and more familiar at the same time. Because of design patterns, users can navigate with ease as they embrace the latest technology – because it behaves the way they expect it to. This means less training and faster adoption for individual users, and more productivity for the business as a whole. Hackman said Oracle gives customers and partners access to design patterns so that they can build in the virtual world using the same best practices. Customers and partners can extend applications with a user experience that is comfortable and familiar to their users. For businesses that are integrating different Oracle applications, design patterns are key. The user experience created in E-Business Suite should be similar to the user experience in Fusion Applications, Hackman said. If a user is transitioning from one application to the other, it shouldn’t be difficult for them to do their work. With design patterns, it isn’t. “Oracle user experience patterns are the building blocks for the virtual world that ensure productivity, consistency and user satisfaction,” Hackman said. “They are built for the enterprise, but incorporate the best practices from across the virtual world. They empower productivity and facilitate social interaction. When you build with patterns, you get all the end-user benefits of less training / retraining from the finished product. You also get faster / cheaper development.” What’s coming? You can already access design patterns to help you build Dashboards with OBIEE here. And we promised you at the beginning that we had something in the pipeline on Fusion Applications design patterns. Look for the announcement about when they are available here on VoX.

  Read the article

• Is component-based design an architectural pattern or design pattern?

  - by xEnOn

  When using the component-based paradigm in game development with engines like Unity, is component-based design an architectural pattern, or a design pattern? Can I even say that component-based design is my "main" architectural pattern for my game? I see architectural patterns as being more high-level than design pattern. The component-based design in game development's context (like with Unity engine) seems to fit as an architectural pattern to me. However, on some sites, I read that component-based design is a behavioural pattern, much like other behavioural design patterns, and not so much like an architectural pattern like MVC.

  Read the article

• Making a Web Gui to design a Garden Layout

  - by paddydub

  I would like to design a web page Gui where users can design a simple interactive garden. The user would pick a template design and receive price estimates based on the design template and the dimensions entered. I'd like the user to be able to move items such as plants, stones and be able to adjust the dimensions of the grass, paving. I'm thinking i could make it using flash but I would like to know there are any other ways I could use to implement this?

  Read the article

• What design pattern will you choose ?

  - by MemoryLeak

  I want to design a class, which contains a procedure to achieve a goal. And it must follow some order to make sure the last method, let's say "ExecuteIt", to behave correctly. in such a case, what design patter will you use ? which can make sure that the user must call the public method according some ordering. If you really don't know what I am saying, then can you share me some concept of choosing a design patter, or what will you consider while design a class?

  Read the article

• How to study design patterns?

  - by Alien01

  I have read around 4-5 books on design patterns, but still I dont feel I have come closer to intermediate level in design patterns? How should I go studying design patterns? Is there any best book for design pattern? I know this will come only with experience but there must be some way to master these?

  Read the article

• Game planning and software design? I feel that UML is not convenient

  - by user1542

  In my university, they always emphasize and hype about UML design and stuff, in which I feel it is not going to work well with game structure design. Now, I just want a professional advice on how should I begin my game designing? The story is I have some skill in programming and have done many minor game such as getting some 2D platformer working to some extend. The problems that I find about my program is the poor quality design. After coding for a while, things start to break down due to poor planning (When I add new feature, it tends to make me have to recode the whole program). However, to plan everything out without a single design flaw is a bit too ideal. Therefore, any advice to how should I plan my game? How should I put it into visible pictures, so that me and my friends are able to overview the designs? I planned to start coding a game with my friend. This is going to be my first teamwork, so any professional advices would be a pleasure. Is there any other alternatives than UML? Another question is how does "prototyping" normally looks like?

  Read the article

• Need design ideas generators.

  - by Clubspy

  Hello guys I am a web developer and sometimes I have to do some design myself for my customers but design actually is not my best thing to do. I am looking for a program that can help me getting fast and reliable design ideas but I am not looking for code generator like Artisteer. Actually design is a hard task and my designs always look ugly and messy.

  Read the article

• Suggestions for opening the Rails toolbox to design a challenge game?

  - by keruilin

  How would you suggest designing a challenge system as part of a food-eating game so that it's automated as possible? All RoR tools, design patterns and logic are at your disposal (e.g., admin consoles, crontab, arch, etc.). Prize goes to whoever can suggest the simplest and most-automated design! Here are the requirements: User has many challenges. Badge has many challenges. (A unique badge is awarded for each challenge won.) Only one challenge can run at a time. Each challenge has a limited number of days that it runs. For example, one challenge can run 3 days, while another runs 7 days. Challenges can be seasonal. For example, "Eat 13 Pumpkins" only runs during the Fall. New challenges are added to the game on an ongoing basis. For example, a new challenge every week. Each challenge has a certain probability of being selected to run. For example, "Eat 10 Pies" challenge has 10% chance of being selected to run. As each new challenge is added to the database, I want the probabilities of running to change dynamically. I want to avoid the scenario where I'm manually updating a database field just to change the probability from 10% to 5%, for example. Challenges act like Easter eggs. Challenge icons pop-up at different places on the webpage. User is awarded a badge for successfully completing a challenge, but only when it's active. There is some wait time between each challenge. Between 1 and 7 days. Which wait time is random, but the probability of the wait time being short is high and the probability of it being a long wait time is low.

  Read the article

• What makes my code DDD (domain-driven design) qualified?

  - by oykuo

  Hi All, I'm new to DDD and am thinking about using this design technique in my project. However, what strikes me about DDD is that how basic the idea is. Unlike other design techniques such as MVC and TDD, it doesn't seems to contain any ground breaking ideas. For example, I'm sure some of you will have the same feeling that the idea of root aggregates and repositories are nothing new because when you are was writing MVC web applications you have to have one single master object (i.e. the root aggregate) that contain other minor objects (i.e. value objects and entities) in the model layer in order to send data to a strongly typed view. To me, the only new idea in DDD is probably the "Smart" entities (i.e. you are supposed to have business rules on root aggregates) Separation between value object, root aggregate and entities. Can anyone tell me if I have missed out anything here? If that's all there is to DDD, if I update one of my existing MVC application with the above 2 new ideas, can I claim it's an TDD, MVC and DDD applcation?

  Read the article

• Software or Photoshop plugins for professional photo album design

  - by Iain Fraser

  I am a graphic designer (among other things) and I'm used to doing magazine advertisements, brochures, posters and that sort of thing. Recently I was approached by a photographer who wants a graphic designer to produce wedding albums for him. I have already done a couple for him but I'm finding it hard to work by just arranging my layouts in Photoshop alone. It's very time consuming, but quite repetitive - especially when you're dealing with common page layouts. I know a lot of photographers use album design software to speed up the process a bit. What's the industry standard in terms of album design software?

  Read the article

• Design Pattern Books, Papers or Resources for Non-Object Orientated Paradigms?

  - by FinnNk

  After viewing this video on InfoQ about functional design patterns I was wondering what resources are out there on design patterns for non-object orientated paradigms. There are plenty out there for the OO world (GOF, etc, etc) and for architecture (EoEAA, etc, etc) but I'm not aware of what's out there for functional, logic, or other programming paradigms. Is there anything? A comment during the video suggests possibly not - does anyone know better? (By the way, by design patterns I don't mean language features or data structures but higher level approaches to designing an application - as discussed in the linked video)

  Read the article

• Should I use the factory design pattern for every class?

  - by Frog

  I've been writing a website in PHP. As the code becomes more complex, I keep finding problems that can be solved using the factory design pattern. For example: I've a got a class Page which has subclasses HTMLPage, XMLPage, etc. Depending on some input I need to return an object of either one of these classes. I use the factory design pattern to do this. But as I encounter this problem in more classes, I keep having to change code which still initiates an object using its constructor. So now I'm wondering: is it a good idea to change all code so that it uses the factory design pattern? Or are there big drawbacks? I'm currently in a position to change this, so your answers would be really helpful.

  Read the article

• Is the structure used for these web pages a design pattern?

  - by aspdotnetuser

  I want to know if the structure for an ASP.NET website I'm working on uses a design pattern for it's web pages. If it is a design pattern, what is it called? The web pages have the following structure: UserDetails page (UserDetails.aspx) - includes UserDetailsController.ascx user control. UserDetailsController.ascx includes sub user controls like UserAccountDetails.ascx and UserLoginDetails.ascx etc Each sub user control contains a small amount of code/logic, the 'controller' user controls that host these sub user controls (i.e UserDetailsController.ascx) appear to call the business rules code and pass the data to the sub user controls. Is this a design pattern? What is it called?

  Read the article

• How do you enhance your websites speed without compromising the design and access?

  - by Thorn007

  How do you enhance your websites load speed without killing the design and accessibility? File compression, CDN, Gzip? What are the best tools for doing so? For example, Google has optimized their site without compromising the design. Also, many website can kill the purity of their images with compression. Is there a way, more or lest best practice, to increase speed without compromising the design and accessibility? Note: sorry for being so vague but I don't know how else to phrase this question.

  Read the article

• Where should I ask for feedbacks about web design? [closed]

  - by mariosangiorgio

  Possible Duplicate: Where can I get my website critiqued I am developing my personal website and I'd like to have feedbacks about its design. Is there any site/forum you would recommend me? I know that the best solution would be to hire a professional web designer and have him design my website, but I am also interested in understanding how to improve my design skills. Of course any recommended book, website, resource is more than welcome. I am not posting here the link to my home page because I think this Q/A site is more about web-development in general, but if you'd like to see my personal page and give some feedback I'll link it.

  Read the article

• Do you know any examples of a PAC design pattern?

  - by Matt Farina

  Can anyone point to any websites or web applications that are using the Presentation-Abstraction-Control design pattern rather than MVC? Desktop applications are easy to find like this (e.g.; GIMP) but I'm looking for something on the web.

  Read the article

• When can a design pattern make your software worse?

  - by magol

  When can a design pattern make your software worse? I have seen a program where they used the facade pattern between the GUI and logic. They considered that no objects may be transported over this, so only primitive types were used which made it difficult to code.

  Read the article

• Design of Business Layer

  - by Adil Mughal

  Hi, We are currently revamping our architecture and design of application. We have just completed design of Data Access Layer which is generic in the sense that it works using XML and reflection to persist data. Any ways now we are in the phase of designing business layer. We have read some books related to Enterprise Architecture and Design so we have found that there are few patterns that can be applied on business layer. Table Pattern and Domain Model are example of such patterns. Also we have found Domain Driven Design as well. Earlier we decided to build Entities against table objects. But we found that there is difference in Entities and Value Objects when it comes to DDD. For those of you who have gone through such design. Please guide me related to pattern, practice and sample. Thank you in advance! Also please feel free to discuss if you didn't get any point of mine.

  Read the article

• What design pattern do you use the most?

  - by spoon16

  I'm interested in understanding what design patterns people find themselves using often. Hopefully this list will help other recognize common scenarios and the associated design pattern that can be used to solve them. Please describe a common problem you find yourself solving and the design pattern(s) you use to solve it. Links to blogs or documentation describing the pattern are also appreciated. Edit: Please expand on your answers a bit, I would like this to be a useful reference for someone who wants to learn more about design patterns and is curious on what situations a specific design pattern might be used. Nobody has linked to any "more learning" resources.

  Read the article

• is it good design practice to only have a parameterless base class constructor?

  - by T. Webster

  In base class constructors I always see a parameterless constructor, like so: public abstract BaseClass {... protected BaseClass() { } ...} but is it acceptable design to include a parameter in the base class constructor? public abstract BaseClass {... protected BaseClass(string initObj) { } ...}

  Read the article

• Documenting a policy based design

  - by academicRobot

  I'm re-working some prototype code into a policy based design in C++, and I'm wondering what the best practice is for documenting the design. My current plan is to document: Policy hierarchy Overview of each policy Description of each type/value/function in each policy I was thinking of putting this into a doxygen module, but this looks like it will be a bit awkward since formatting will have to be done by hand without code to base the doc on (that is, documenting the policies rather than the implementation of the policies). So my questions are: Are there other aspects of the design that should be documented? Are there any tricks to doing this efficiently in doxygen? Is there a tool other than doxygen thats better suited to this? What are some examples of well documented policy based design? This is my first serious attempt at policy based design. I think I have a working grasp of the principles, but whatever naivety I expose in this question is fair game for an answer too.

  Read the article

• Analysis and Design for Functional Programming

  - by edalorzo

  How do you deal with analysis and design phases when you plan to develop a system using a functional programming language like Haskell? My background is in imperative/object-oriented programming languages, and therefore, I am used to use case analysis and the use of UML to document the design of program. But the thing is that UML is inherently related to the object-oriented way of doing software. And I am intrigued about what would be the best way to develop documentation and define software designs for a system that is going to be developed using functional programming. Would you still use use case analysis or perhaps structured analysis and design instead? How do software architects define the high-level design of the system so that developers follow it? What do you show to you clients or to new developers when you are supposed to present a design of the solution? How do you document a picture of the whole thing without having first to write it all? Is there anything comparable to UML in the functional world?

  Read the article

• Flow-Design Cheat Sheet &ndash; Part I, Notation

  - by Ralf Westphal

  You want to avoid the pitfalls of object oriented design? Then this is the right place to start. Use Flow-Oriented Analysis (FOA) and –Design (FOD or just FD for Flow-Design) to understand a problem domain and design a software solution. Flow-Orientation as described here is related to Flow-Based Programming, Event-Based Programming, Business Process Modelling, and even Event-Driven Architectures. But even though “thinking in flows” is not new, I found it helpful to deviate from those precursors for several reasons. Some aim at too big systems for the average programmer, some are concerned with only asynchronous processing, some are even not very much concerned with programming at all. What I was looking for was a design method to help in software projects of any size, be they large or tiny, involing synchronous or asynchronous processing, being local or distributed, running on the web or on the desktop or on a smartphone. That´s why I took ideas from all of the above sources and some additional and came up with Event-Based Components which later got repositioned and renamed to Flow-Design. In the meantime this has generated some discussion (in the German developer community) and several teams have started to work with Flow-Design. Also I´ve conducted quite some trainings using Flow-Orientation for design. The results are very promising. Developers find it much easier to design software using Flow-Orientation than OOAD-based object orientation. Since Flow-Orientation is moving fast and is not covered completely by a single source like a book, demand has increased for at least an overview of the current state of its notation. This page is trying to answer this demand by briefly introducing/describing every notational element as well as their translation into C# source code. Take this as a cheat sheet to put next to your whiteboard when designing software. However, please do not expect any explanation as to the reasons behind Flow-Design elements. Details on why Flow-Design at all and why in this specific way you´ll find in the literature covering the topic. Here´s a resource page on Flow-Design/Event-Based Components, if you´re able to read German. Notation Connected Functional Units The basic element of any FOD are functional units (FU): Think of FUs as some kind of software code block processing data. For the moment forget about classes, methods, “components”, assemblies or whatever. See a FU as an abstract piece of code. Software then consists of just collaborating FUs. I´m using circles/ellipses to draw FUs. But if you like, use rectangles. Whatever suites your whiteboard needs best.   The purpose of FUs is to process input and produce output. FUs are transformational. However, FUs are not called and do not call other FUs. There is no dependency between FUs. Data just flows into a FU (input) and out of it (output). From where and where to is of no concern to a FU.   This way FUs can be concatenated in arbitrary ways:   Each FU can accept input from many sources and produce output for many sinks:   Flows Connected FUs form a flow with a start and an end. Data is entering a flow at a source, and it´s leaving it through a sink. Think of sources and sinks as special FUs which conntect wires to the environment of a network of FUs.   Wiring Details Data is flowing into/out of FUs through wires. This is to allude to electrical engineering which since long has been working with composable parts. Wires are attached to FUs usings pins. They are the entry/exit points for the data flowing along the wires. Input-/output pins currently need not be drawn explicitly. This is to keep designing on a whiteboard simple and quick.   Data flowing is of some type, so wires have a type attached to them. And pins have names. If there is only one input pin and output pin on a FU, though, you don´t need to mention them. The default is Process for a single input pin, and Result for a single output pin. But you´re free to give even single pins different names.   There is a shortcut in use to address a certain pin on a destination FU:   The type of the wire is put in parantheses for two reasons. 1. This way a “no-type” wire can be easily denoted, 2. this is a natural way to describe tuples of data.   To describe how much data is flowing, a star can be put next to the wire type:   Nesting – Boards and Parts If more than 5 to 10 FUs need to be put in a flow a FD starts to become hard to understand. To keep diagrams clutter free they can be nested. You can turn any FU into a flow: This leads to Flow-Designs with different levels of abstraction. A in the above illustration is a high level functional unit, A.1 and A.2 are lower level functional units. One of the purposes of Flow-Design is to be able to describe systems on different levels of abstraction and thus make it easier to understand them. Humans use abstraction/decomposition to get a grip on complexity. Flow-Design strives to support this and make levels of abstraction first class citizens for programming. You can read the above illustration like this: Functional units A.1 and A.2 detail what A is supposed to do. The whole of A´s responsibility is decomposed into smaller responsibilities A.1 and A.2. FU A thus does not do anything itself anymore! All A is responsible for is actually accomplished by the collaboration between A.1 and A.2. Since A now is not doing anything anymore except containing A.1 and A.2 functional units are devided into two categories: boards and parts. Boards are just containing other functional units; their sole responsibility is to wire them up. A is a board. Boards thus depend on the functional units nested within them. This dependency is not of a functional nature, though. Boards are not dependent on services provided by nested functional units. They are just concerned with their interface to be able to plug them together. Parts are the workhorses of flows. They contain the real domain logic. They actually transform input into output. However, they do not depend on other functional units. Please note the usage of source and sink in boards. They correspond to input-pins and output-pins of the board.   Implicit Dependencies Nesting functional units leads to a dependency tree. Boards depend on nested functional units, they are the inner nodes of the tree. Parts are independent, they are the leafs: Even though dependencies are the bane of software development, Flow-Design does not usually draw these dependencies. They are implicitly created by visually nesting functional units. And they are harmless. Boards are so simple in their functionality, they are little affected by changes in functional units they are depending on. But functional units are implicitly dependent on more than nested functional units. They are also dependent on the data types of the wires attached to them: This is also natural and thus does not need to be made explicit. And it pertains mainly to parts being dependent. Since boards don´t do anything with regard to a problem domain, they don´t care much about data types. Their infrastructural purpose just needs types of input/output-pins to match.   Explicit Dependencies You could say, Flow-Orientation is about tackling complexity at its root cause: that´s dependencies. “Natural” dependencies are depicted naturally, i.e. implicitly. And whereever possible dependencies are not even created. Functional units don´t know their collaborators within a flow. This is core to Flow-Orientation. That makes for high composability of functional units. A part is as independent of other functional units as a motor is from the rest of the car. And a board is as dependend on nested functional units as a motor is on a spark plug or a crank shaft. With Flow-Design software development moves closer to how hardware is constructed. Implicit dependencies are not enough, though. Sometimes explicit dependencies make designs easier – as counterintuitive this might sound. So FD notation needs a ways to denote explicit dependencies: Data flows along wires. But data does not flow along dependency relations. Instead dependency relations represent service calls. Functional unit C is depending on/calling services on functional unit S. If you want to be more specific, name the services next to the dependency relation: Although you should try to stay clear of explicit dependencies, they are fundamentally ok. See them as a way to add another dimension to a flow. Usually the functionality of the independent FU (“Customer repository” above) is orthogonal to the domain of the flow it is referenced by. If you like emphasize this by using different shapes for dependent and independent FUs like above. Such dependencies can be used to link in resources like databases or shared in-memory state. FUs can not only produce output but also can have side effects. A common pattern for using such explizit dependencies is to hook a GUI into a flow as the source and/or the sink of data: Which can be shortened to: Treat FUs others depend on as boards (with a special non-FD API the dependent part is connected to), but do not embed them in a flow in the diagram they are depended upon.   Attributes of Functional Units Creation and usage of functional units can be modified with attributes. So far the following have shown to be helpful: Singleton: FUs are by default multitons. FUs in the same of different flows with the same name refer to the same functionality, but to different instances. Think of functional units as objects that get instanciated anew whereever they appear in a design. Sometimes though it´s helpful to reuse the same instance of a functional unit; this is always due to valuable state it holds. Signify this by annotating the FU with a “(S)”. Multiton: FUs on which others depend are singletons by default. This is, because they usually are introduced where shared state comes into play. If you want to change them to be a singletons mark them with a “(M)”. Configurable: Some parts need to be configured before the can do they work in a flow. Annotate them with a “(C)” to have them initialized before any data items to be processed by them arrive. Do not assume any order in which FUs are configured. How such configuration is happening is an implementation detail. Entry point: In each design there needs to be a single part where “it all starts”. That´s the entry point for all processing. It´s like Program.Main() in C# programs. Mark the entry point part with an “(E)”. Quite often this will be the GUI part. How the entry point is started is an implementation detail. Just consider it the first FU to start do its job.   Patterns / Standard Parts If more than a single wire is attached to an output-pin that´s called a split (or fork). The same data is flowing on all of the wires. Remember: Flow-Designs are synchronous by default. So a split does not mean data is processed in parallel afterwards. Processing still happens synchronously and thus one branch after another. Do not assume any specific order of the processing on the different branches after the split.   It is common to do a split and let only parts of the original data flow on through the branches. This effectively means a map is needed after a split. This map can be implicit or explicit.   Although FUs can have multiple input-pins it is preferrable in most cases to combine input data from different branches using an explicit join: The default output of a join is a tuple of its input values. The default behavior of a join is to output a value whenever a new input is received. However, to produce its first output a join needs an input for all its input-pins. Other join behaviors can be: reset all inputs after an output only produce output if data arrives on certain input-pins

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >