Search Results

Search found 43110 results on 1725 pages for 'noob question'.

Page 267/1725 | < Previous Page | 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274  | Next Page >

  • Using a permutation table for simplex noise without storing it

    - by J. C. Leitão
    Generating Simplex noise requires a permutation table for randomisation (e.g. see this question or this example). In some applications, we need to persist the state of the permutation table. This can be done by creating the table, e.g. using def permutation_table(seed): table_size = 2**10 # arbitrary for this question l = range(1, table_size + 1) random.seed(seed) # ensures the same shuffle for a given seed random.shuffle(l) return l + l # see shared link why l + l; is a detail and storing it. Can we avoid storing the full table by generating the required elements every time they are required? Specifically, currently I store the table and call it using table[i] (table is a list). Can I avoid storing it by having a function that computes the element i, e.g. get_table_element(seed, i). I'm aware that cryptography already solved this problem using block cyphers, however, I found it too complex to go deep and implement a block cypher. Does anyone knows a simple implementation of a block cypher to this problem?

    Read the article

  • Zoom Layer centered on a Sprite

    - by clops
    I am in process of developing a small game where a space-ship travels through a layer (doh!), in some situations the spaceship comes close to an enemy space ship, and the whole layer is zoomed in on the two with the zoom level being dependent on the distance between the ship and the enemy. All of this works fine. The main question, however, is how do I keep the zoom being centered on the center point between the two space-ships and make sure that the two are not off-screen? Currently I control the zooming in the GameLayer object through the update method, here is the code (there is no layer repositioning here yet): -(void) prepareLayerZoomBetweenSpaceship{ CGPoint mainSpaceShipPosition = [mainSpaceShip position]; CGPoint enemySpaceShipPosition = [enemySpaceShip position]; float distance = powf(mainSpaceShipPosition.x - enemySpaceShipPosition.x, 2) + powf(mainSpaceShipPosition.y - enemySpaceShipPosition.y,2); distance = sqrtf(distance); /* Distance > 250 --> no zoom Distance < 100 --> maximum zoom */ float myZoomLevel = 0.5f; if(distance < 100){ //maximum zoom in myZoomLevel = 1.0f; }else if(distance > 250){ myZoomLevel = 0.5f; }else{ myZoomLevel = 1.0f - (distance-100)*0.0033f; } [self zoomTo:myZoomLevel]; } -(void) zoomTo:(float)zoom { if(zoom > 1){ zoom = 1; } // Set the scale. if(self.scale != zoom){ self.scale = zoom; } } Basically my question is: How do I zoom the layer and center it exactly between the two ships? I guess this is like a pinch zoom with two fingers!

    Read the article

  • Managing constant buffers without FX interface

    - by xcrypt
    I am aware that there is a sample on working without FX in the samplebrowser, and I already checked that one. However, some questions arise: In the sample: D3DXMATRIXA16 mWorldViewProj; D3DXMATRIXA16 mWorld; D3DXMATRIXA16 mView; D3DXMATRIXA16 mProj; mWorld = g_World; mView = g_View; mProj = g_Projection; mWorldViewProj = mWorld * mView * mProj; VS_CONSTANT_BUFFER* pConstData; g_pConstantBuffer10->Map( D3D10_MAP_WRITE_DISCARD, NULL, ( void** )&pConstData ); pConstData->mWorldViewProj = mWorldViewProj; pConstData->fTime = fBoundedTime; g_pConstantBuffer10->Unmap(); They are copying their D3DXMATRIX'es to D3DXMATRIXA16. Checked on msdn, these new matrices are 16 byte aligned and optimised for intel pentium 4. So as my first question: 1) Is it necessary to copy matrices to D3DXMATRIXA16 before sending them to the constant buffer? And if no, why don't we just use D3DXMATRIXA16 all the time? I have another question about managing multiple constant buffers within one shader. Suppose that, within your shader, you have multiple constant buffers that need to be updated at different times: cbuffer cbNeverChanges { matrix View; }; cbuffer cbChangeOnResize { matrix Projection; }; cbuffer cbChangesEveryFrame { matrix World; float4 vMeshColor; }; Then how would I set these buffers all at different times? g_pd3dDevice->VSSetConstantBuffers( 0, 1, &g_pConstantBuffer10 ); gives me the possibility to set multiple buffers, but that is within one call. 2) Is that okay even if my constant buffers are updated at different times? And do I suppose I have to make sure the constantbuffers are in the same position in the array as the order they appear in the shader?

    Read the article

  • Lubuntu: How do I arrange windows with keyboard shortcuts?

    - by iveand
    I have been testing with Lubuntu and have found it really pleasant. However, I cannot find an answer for one essential (for me) feature: being able to arrange windows with keyboard shortcuts. In Ubuntu this is done with the "Grid" plugin in "compizconfig-settings-manager". Unity uses this as well for window arranging. I am not interested in the "drag to the left to take up 1/2 the screen", but rather just the "hit some key combo" to put the active window to the left 1/2 of the screen, for example. I found this entry in "askubuntu" asking a very similar question: Is there a way to make Openbox behave like the Compiz Grid plugin? But it seems the "answer to this question", namely pyTile (http://sourceforge.net/projects/pytile/), doesn't do what I would like it to do. I don't want to tile all current windows, I want to resize one window at a time as I specify (left, right, top, center, bottom, 1/2, 2/3, 1/3, etc.). And I would prefer to do so with the keyboard. I think it possible to install compiz in Lubuntu, but this seems like "overkill" for this one feature (Grid keyboard shortcuts). Any help out there? It would REALLY MAKE MY DAY!!!

    Read the article

  • Is realtime validation of username good or bad?

    - by iamserious
    I have a simple form for the user to sign up to my site; with email, username and password fields. We are now trying to implement an ajax validation so the user doesn't have to post the form to find out if the username is already taken. I can do this either on keyup event or on text blur event. My question is, which of these is really the best way to do? Keyup From the user POV, it would be good if the validation is done as and when they are typing, (on key up event) - of course, I am waiting for half a second to see if the user stops typing before firing off the request, and user can make any adjustments immediately. But this means I am sending way more requests than if I validated the username on Blur event. Blur The number of requests will be much lower when the validation is done on blur event, But this means the user has to actually go away from the textbox, look at the validation result, and if necessary go back to it to make any changes and repeat the whole process until he gets it right. I had a quick look at google, tumblr, twitter and no one actually does username validations on keyup events, (heck, tubmlr waits for the form to be posted) but I can swear I have seen keyup validations in a lot of places too. So, coming back to the question, will keyup validations be too many for server, is it an unnecessary overhead? or is it worth taking these hits to give user a better experience? ps: all my regex validations etc are already done on javascript and only when it passes all these other criteria does it send a request to server to check if a username already exists. (And the server is doing a select count(1) from user where username = '' - nothing substantial, but still enough to occupy some resource) pps: I'm on asp.net, MS SQL stack., if that matters.

    Read the article

  • What's the proper term for a function inverse to a constructor? Deconstructor, destructor, or something else?

    - by Petr Pudlák
    Edit: I'm rephrasing the question a bit. Apparently I caused some confusion because I didn't realize that the term destructor is used in OOP for something quite different - it's a function invoked when an object is being destroyed. In functional programming we (try to) avoid mutable state so there is no such equivalent to it. (I added the proper tag to the question.) Instead, I've seen that the record field for unwrapping a value (especially for single-valued data types such as newtypes) is sometimes called destructor or perhaps deconstructor. For example, let's have (in Haskell): newtype Wrap = Wrap { unwrap :: Int } Here Wrap is the constructor and unwrap is what? I've seen both, for example: ... Most often, one supplies smart constructors and destructors for these to ease working with them. ... at Haskell wiki, or ... The general theme here is to fuse constructor - deconstructor pairs like ... at Haskell wikibook (here it's probably meant in a bit more general sense). The questions are: How do we call unwrap in functional programming? Deconstructor? Destructor? Or by some other term? And to clarify, is this terminology applicable to other functional languages, or is it used just in the Has

    Read the article

  • Developing wheel reinventing tendencies into a skill as opposed to reluctantly learning wheel-finding skills? [duplicate]

    - by Korey Hinton
    This question already has an answer here: Is reinventing the wheel really all that bad? 20 answers I am more of a high-level wheel reinventor. I definitely prefer to make use of existing API features built into a language and popular third-party frameworks that I know can solve the problem, however when I have a particular problem that I feel capable of solving within a reasonable time I am very reluctant to find someone else's solution. Here are a few reasons why I reinvent: It takes time to learn a new API API restrictions might exist that I don't know about Avoiding re-work of unfamiliar code I am conflicted between doing what I know and shifting to a new technique I don't feel comfortable with. On one hand I feel like following my instincts and getting really good at solving problems, especially ones that I would never challenge myself with if all I did was try to find answers. And on the other hand I feel like I might be missing out on important skills like saving time by finding the right framework and expanding my knowledge by learning how to use a new framework. I guess my question comes down to this: My current attitude is to stick to the built-in API and APIs I know well* and to not spend my time searching github for a solution to a problem I know I can solve myself within a reasonable amount of time. Is that a reasonable balance for a successful programmer? *Obviously I will still look around for new frameworks that save time and solve/simplify difficult problems.

    Read the article

  • Failed Project: When to call it?

    - by Dan Ray
    A few months ago my company found itself with its hands around a white-hot emergency of a project, and my entire team of six pulled basically a five week "crunch week". In the 48 hours before go-live, I worked 41 of them, two back to back all-nighters. Deep in the middle of that, I posted what has been my most successful question to date. During all that time there was never any talk of "failure". It was always "get it done, regardless of the pain." Now that the thing is over and we as an organization have had some time to sit back and take stock of what we learned, one question has occurred to me. I can't say I've ever taken part in a project that I'd say had "failed". Plenty that were late or over budget, some disastrously so, but I've always ended up delivering SOMETHING. Yet I hear about "failed IT projects" all the time. I'm wondering about people's experience with that. What were the parameters that defined "failure"? What was the context? In our case, we are a software shop with external clients. Does a project that's internal to a large corporation have more space to "fail"? When do you make that call? What happens when you do? I'm not at all convinced that doing what we did is a smart business move. It wasn't my call (I'm just a code monkey) but I'm wondering if it might have been better to cut our losses, say we're not delivering, and move on. I don't just say that due to the sting of the long hours--the company royally lost its shirt on the project, plus the intangible costs to the company in terms of employee morale and loyalty were large. Factor that against the PR hit of failing to deliver a high profile project like this one was... and I don't know what the right answer is.

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on type aliases/synonyms?

    - by Rei Miyasaka
    I'm going to try my best to frame this question in a way that doesn't result in a language war or list, because I think there could be a good, technical answer to this question. Different languages support type aliases to varying degrees. C# allows type aliases to be declared at the beginning of each code file, and they're valid only throughout that file. Languages like ML/Haskell use type aliases probably as much as they use type definitions. C/C++ are sort of a Wild West, with typedef and #define often being used seemingly interchangeably to alias types. The upsides of type aliasing don't invoke too much dispute: It makes it convenient to define composite types that are described naturally by the language, e.g. type Coordinate = float * float or type String = [Char]. Long names can be shortened: using DSBA = System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepBoundaryAttribute. In languages like ML or Haskell, where function parameters often don't have names, type aliases provide a semblance of self-documentation. The downside is a bit more iffy: aliases can proliferate, making it difficult to read and understand code or to learn a platform. The Win32 API is a good example, with its DWORD = int and its HINSTANCE = HANDLE = void* and its LPHANDLE = HANDLE FAR* and such. In all of these cases it hardly makes any sense to distinguish between a HANDLE and a void pointer or a DWORD and an integer etc.. Setting aside the philosophical debate of whether a king should give complete freedom to their subjects and let them be responsible for themselves or whether they should have all of their questionable actions intervened, could there be a happy medium that would allow the benefits of type aliasing while mitigating the risk of its abuse? As an example, the issue of long names can be solved by good autocomplete features. Visual Studio 2010 for instance will alllow you to type DSBA in order to refer Intellisense to System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepBoundaryAttribute. Could there be other features that would provide the other benefits of type aliasing more safely?

    Read the article

  • Are Intel compilers really better than the Microsoft ones?

    - by Rocket Surgeon
    Years ago, I was surprised when I discovered that Intel sells Visual Studio compatible compilers. I tried it in particular for C/C++ as well as fantastic diagnostic tools. But the code was simply not that computationally intensive to notice the difference. The only impression was: did Intel really do it for me just now, wow, amazing tools with nanoseconds resolution, unbelievable. But the trial ended and the team never seriously considered a purchase. From your experience, if license cost does not matter, which vendor is the winner? It is not a broad or vague question or attemt to spark a holy war. This sort of question is about two very visible tools. Nobody likes when tools have any mysteries or surprises. And choices between best and best are always the pain. I also understand the grass is always greener argument. I want to hear all "what ifs" stories. What if Intel just locally optimizes it for the chip stepping of the month, and not every hardware target will actually work as well as Microsoft compiled? What if AMD hardware is the target and everything will slow down for no reason? Or on the other hand, what if Intel's hardware has so many unnoticable opportunities, that Microsoft compiler writers are too slow to adopt and never implement it in the compiler? What if both are the same exactly, actually a single codebase just wrapped into two different boxes and licensed to both vendors by some third-party shop? And so on. But someone knows some answers.

    Read the article

  • You are or will be a laid off programmer - what do you do a year ago, right now, tomorrow, and next week?

    - by Adam Davis
    Many programmers, software engineers, and other technology professionals are out of work, facing layoffs, or are unprepared for layoffs though they feel secure right now. What should every programmer do right now (even if secure in their current job) to prepare them for layoffs down the road? If your boss came to your cubicle while you read this and laid you off: What would you do immediately after? What would you do tomorrow? What would you do next week? It obvious that one should always have an up to date resume, always get recommendations from people when they see you at your best (not when you're looking for a new job), etc. What are the things, step by step, that every programmer should do (or should consider doing) long before they are laid off, when they're laid off, and shortly after being laid off? This is a question with many possible facets. While I want to encourage discussion to center around programming career based answers, please reconsider before downvoting someone because they're thinking in terms of how they're going to prevent going into debt. Bonus catch-22 type question: You can study a new language or technology while out of work, but most places want you to have more than 1-2 months experience in a working environment, not just from a learning exercise. Is it worthwhile to place a priority on new (ideally in demand) skills, or should you instead hone existing skills?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Why don't windows of the same application behave as they should?

    - by Yuttadhammo
    Somewhere along the upgrade path, Unity has developed some strange logic behind window layering. First, before Oneiric, there was a way to see all the windows of an application - I think it was when you click on the icon in the launcher. Now, clicking on the icon often does nothing. Suppose I have two terminals open, one behind this Firefox window, and one in front of it. Clicking on the launcher does nothing - the only way to find the second terminal, afaics, is to move the Firefox window or use the task switcher. Secondly, once I have both terminals on top, then I decide to close one of them, suddenly they both disappear (the second one, for some reason, has gone into hiding behind the Firefox window). Third (though I can't pin it down now), sometimes when a window is on top, focus is still on a window in back; I click on the top x to close the window in front, only to find I've closed an important window in the back. (Update: this question details the problem) I can't really believe these are bugs, since they seem too obvious to not have been fixed by now. My question is, am I missing something? Some compiz option I can set to make it act like it used to? Or is this really how Unity is supposed to act?

    Read the article

  • Does unit testing lead to premature generalization (specifically in the context of C++)?

    - by Martin
    Preliminary notes I'll not go into the distinction of the different kinds of test there are, there are already a few questions on these sites regarding that. I'll take what's there and that says: unit testing in the sense of "testing the smallest isolatable unit of an application" from which this question actually derives The isolation problem What is the smallest isolatable unit of a program. Well, as I see it, it (highly?) depends on what language you are coding in. Micheal Feathers talks about the concept of a seam: [WEwLC, p31] A seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your program without editing in that place. And without going into the details, I understand a seam -- in the context of unit testing -- to be a place in a program where your "test" can interface with your "unit". Examples Unit test -- especially in C++ -- require from the code under test to add more seams that would be strictly called for for a given problem. Example: Adding a virtual interface where non-virtual implementation would have been sufficient Splitting -- generalizing(?) -- a (smallish) class further "just" to facilitate adding a test. Splitting a single-executable project into seemingly "independent" libs, "just" to facilitate compiling them independently for the tests. The question I'll try a few versions that hopefully ask about the same point: Is the way that Unit Tests require one to structure an application's code "only" beneficial for the unit tests or is it actually beneficial to the applications structure. Is the generalization code need to exhibit to be unit-testable useful for anything but the unit tests? Does adding unit tests force one to generalize unnecessarily? Is the shape unit tests force on code "always" also a good shape for the code in general as seen from the problem domain? I remember a rule of thumb that said don't generalize until you need to / until there's a second place that uses the code. With Unit Tests, there's always a second place that uses the code -- namely the unit test. So is this reason enough to generalize?

    Read the article

  • How to be hired as a remote programmer abroad and not to be an entrepreneur?

    - by user592704
    The question is quite interesting as for me because I watched jobs adds and mostly they all: A) Require being located the same country a vacancy is B) Employers don't want to hire foreign programmers if they don't have H1B or something C) As a rule, most adds provide 6 month contract position I can keep adding the list for long time describing some job adds specifications, anyway, as a rule, most positions require non-employee cooperation status. I don't have a company for such kind of "making projects by a client order" so it is quite complicated; So I was trying, just, as for a statistics, to find out is there a way to be hired abroad as a remote programmer as if I get hired in my native city? The thing is not about being hired where I can be hired "because I am located this or that place" but the thing is about a possibility (not to relocate) which actually should provide nowadays technologies especially for IT specialists in many different fields; So the question is it possible to work any country in remote mode as if I am working in my own place? What do I need for that? Can you advice some useful web sites in this direction? If you can share your own experience I'd love to listen to. Any useful advices are much appreciated

    Read the article

  • What stops HTML5 and JS apps to perform as good as native apps?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    From what I understand, HTML is a mark-up language, so is the content of XAML, XIB and whatever Android uses and other native UI development frameworks. JavaScript is a programming language used along with it to handle client side scripting which will include things like event handling, client side validations and anything else C#,Java,Objective-C or C++ do in various such frameworks. There are MVC/MVVM patterns available in form frameworks like Sencha's, Angular etc. We have localStorage in form of both sqlite and key-value store as other frameworks have and you have API specification for almost everything that it missing. Whenever a native UI frameworks has to render UI , it has to parse a similar the markup and render the UI. Question break-down What stops from doing the same in HTML and JS itself ? Instead of having a web-control or browser as a layer in between why can't HTML(along with CSS) and JS be made to perform the same way ? Even if there is a layer,so does .net runtime and JVM are in other cases where C++,C are not being used. So Lets take the case of Android, like Dalvik, why Can't Chromium be another option(along with dalvik and NDK) where HTML does what android markup does and JavaScript is used to do what Java does ? So the Question is, Even if current implementations aren't as good, but theoretically is it possible to get HTML5 based applications to work as other native apps specially on mobile ?

    Read the article

  • When must I turn my business idea into a formal Company? [closed]

    - by Sony Santos
    I'm a programmer, I have an idea, I know how to implement it, it will be a website, and that site will be my business. My question is very basic: where in timeline must I register my business as an official Company (ie, according Government laws)? Here there are some options to debate or to help answer me: Now - or as soon as I have the idea; When looking for investors (e.g., when a prototype or business plan is ready); When implementing the website; At site's launch; I must launch the website as a personal informal business and, when the business gets success and turns into a more solid and self-running one, only then I must formalize it; It doesn't matter; I can create the company when I want. Nobody talks about that. If I just have an idea, must I run into an office to create a Company? I don't think so. When I'll look for investors, the Company must to pre-exist? Or will the Company be formed with the investor? I'm looking for a generic, country-independent answer, but may the answer for your country can be useful to me. I'm Brazilian, and I believe that the country doesn't matter to this question. (Sorry if this is off-topic, but I coudn't find a batter stackexchange site to ask this.)

    Read the article

  • Smooth waypoint traversing

    - by TheBroodian
    There are a dozen ways I could word this question, but to keep my thoughts in line, I'm phrasing it in line with my problem at hand. So I'm creating a floating platform that I would like to be able to simply travel from one designated point to another, and then return back to the first, and just pass between the two in a straight line. However, just to make it a little more interesting, I want to add a few rules to the platform. I'm coding it to travel multiples of whole tile values of world data. So if the platform is not stationary, then it will travel at least one whole tile width or tile height. Within one tile length, I would like it to accelerate from a stop to a given max speed. Upon reaching one tile length's distance, I would like it to slow to a stop at given tile coordinate and then repeat the process in reverse. The first two parts aren't too difficult, essentially I'm having trouble with the third part. I would like the platform to stop exactly at a tile coordinate, but being as I'm working with acceleration, it would seem easy to simply begin applying acceleration in the opposite direction to a value storing the platform's current speed once it reaches one tile's length of distance (assuming that the tile is traveling more than one tile-length, but to keep things simple, let's just assume it is)- but then the question is what would the correct value be for acceleration to increment from to produce this effect? How would I find that value?

    Read the article

  • Keep getting smbd errors, but apport asks questions I can't answer

    - by Steve Kroon
    What I want to know below is where to bug report the poor series of questions I'm being asked... Every time I reboot (at least), I get a crash dialog ("Sorry, Ubuntu 12.04 has experienced an internal error"). Clicking on show details shows the problem is with smbd, but the rest of the trace does not appear. When I wish to continue to send a bug report, I am told I will be asked a series of questions in a window titled "Apport". The first question asks: How would you best describe your setup? -I am running a Windows File Server -I am connecting to a Windows File Server. Since I am doing both, I have no idea which to choose. In any case, selecting one leads to the next question: Did this used to work properly with a previous release? -No -Yes But I never tried to use Samba in a previous release, so I can't seriously answer this. After picking an option here, I get more questions in a similar vein. Surely there should be "I don't know/I haven't tried" options, even if they simply mean you can't submit a useful bug report.

    Read the article

  • Do you leverage the benefits of the open-closed principle?

    - by Kaleb Pederson
    The open-closed principle (OCP) states that an object should be open for extension but closed for modification. I believe I understand it and use it in conjunction with SRP to create classes that do only one thing. And, I try to create many small methods that make it possible to extract out all the behavior controls into methods that may be extended or overridden in some subclass. Thus, I end up with classes that have many extension points, be it through: dependency injection and composition, events, delegation, etc. Consider the following a simple, extendable class: class PaycheckCalculator { // ... protected decimal GetOvertimeFactor() { return 2.0M; } } Now say, for example, that the OvertimeFactor changes to 1.5. Since the above class was designed to be extended, I can easily subclass and return a different OvertimeFactor. But... despite the class being designed for extension and adhering to OCP, I'll modify the single method in question, rather than subclassing and overridding the method in question and then re-wiring my objects in my IoC container. As a result I've violated part of what OCP attempts to accomplish. It feels like I'm just being lazy because the above is a bit easier. Am I misunderstanding OCP? Should I really be doing something different? Do you leverage the benefits of OCP differently? Update: based on the answers it looks like this contrived example is a poor one for a number of different reasons. The main intent of the example was to demonstrate that the class was designed to be extended by providing methods that when overridden would alter the behavior of public methods without the need for changing internal or private code. Still, I definitely misunderstood OCP.

    Read the article

  • Is an app that does nothing but link to a web site functional enough to meet Apple's iOS guidelines?

    - by Pointy
    I don't hang out on Programmers enough to know whether this question is "ok", so my apologies if not. I tried to make the title obvious so at least it can be closed quickly :-) The question is simple. My employer wants "home screen presence" (or at least the possibility thereof) on iOS devices (also Android but I'm mostly interested in Apple at the moment). Our actual application will be a pure web-delivered mobile-friendly application, so what we want on the homescreen is basically something that just acts as a link to bring up Safari (or Chrome now I guess; not important). I'm presuming that that's more-or-less possible; if not then that would be interesting too. I know that the Apple guidelines are such that low-functionality apps are generally rejected out of hand. There are a lot of existing apps that seem (to me) less functional than a link to something useful, but I'm not Apple of course. Because this seems like a not-too-weird situation, I'm hoping that somebody knows it's either definitely OK (maybe because there are many such apps) or definitely not OK. Note that I know about things like PhoneGap and I don't want that, at least not at the moment.

    Read the article

  • Recommend a CMS and extension to build an Event Manager [closed]

    - by Haris
    I posted this question on SO but good friends there told me that SE is the better place for these kind of questions and the post was locked there by community. Hence, posting the question here as well: I have a lead to build an event manager solution in LAMP with following functionality: It should handle events by country, city, locality in city, type of event, venue type etc. following are a few user features: to see details of city, venue, event, performer etc. to purchase tickets and reserve tables. to search for events by city, venue, type, performer etc. to manage favorite venues and performers, save events etc. the venues should be able to add their events I plan to use a CMS (Joomla, Drupal etc.) with some ready made extension that provides most of the functionality or provide framework to build upon. Could you guys suggest me a CMS and an extension to build this. I know it is possible to do this in both Joomla or Drupal. What I am looking is the extension that is closest to my requirements whether it is done in Joomla or Drupal, or as a matter of fact any other CMS. Thanks in anticipation!

    Read the article

  • Does the term "Learning Curve" include the knowing of the gotchas?

    - by voroninp
    When you learn new technology you spend time understanding its concepts and tools. But when technology meets real life strange and not pleasant things happen. Reuqirements are often far from ideal and differ from 'classic' scenario. And soon I find myself bending the technology to my real needs. At this point I begin to know bugs of the system or that is is not so flexible as it seemed at the very begining. And this 'fighting' with technology consumes a great part of the time while developing. What is more depressing is that the bunch of such gotchas and workarounds are not concentrated at one place (book, site, etc.) And before you really confront it you cannot really ask the correct question because you do not even suspect the reason for the problem to occur (unknown-unknown). So my question consiststs of three: 1) Do you really manage (and how) to predict possible future problems? 2) How much time do you spend for finding the workaround/fix/solution before you leave it and switch to other problems. 3) What are the criteria for you to think about yourself as experienced in the tecnology. Do you take these gotchas into account?

    Read the article

  • What do you wish language designers paid attention to?

    - by Berin Loritsch
    The purpose of this question is not to assemble a laundry list of programming language features that you can't live without, or wish was in your main language of choice. The purpose of this question is to bring to light corners of languge design most language designers might not think about. So, instead of thinking about language feature X, think a little more philisophically. One of my biases, and perhaps it might be controversial, is that the softer side of engineering--the whys and what fors--are many times more important than the more concrete side. For example, Ruby was designed with a stated goal of improving developer happiness. While your opinions may be mixed on whether it delivered or not, the fact that was a goal means that some of the choices in language design were influenced by that philosophy. Please do not post: Syntax flame wars (I could care less whether you use whitespace [Python], keywords [Ruby], or curly braces [Java, C/C++, et. al.] to denote program blocks). That's just an implementation detail. "Any language that doesn't have feature X doesn't deserve to exist" type comments. There is at least one reason for all programming languages to exist--good or bad. Please do post: Philisophical ideas that language designers seem to miss. Technical concepts that seem to be poorly implemented more often than not. Please do provide an example of the pain it causes and if you have any ideas of how you would prefer it to function. Things you wish were in the platform's common library but seldom are. One the same token, things that usually are in a common library that you wish were not. Conceptual features such as built in test/assertion/contract/error handling support that you wish all programming languages would implement properly--and define properly. My hope is that this will be a fun and stimulating topic.

    Read the article

  • Tips about how to spread Object Oriented practices

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

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274  | Next Page >