Search Results

Search found 9771 results on 391 pages for 'equivalence classes'.

Page 285/391 | < Previous Page | 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292  | Next Page >

• What do you do when you encounter an idiotic interview question?

  - by Senthil

  I was interviewing with a "too proud of my java skills"-looking person. He asked me "What is your knowledge on Java IO classes.. say.. hash maps?" He asked me to write a piece of java code on paper - instantiate a class and call one of the instance's methods. When I was done, he said my program wouldn't run. After 5 minutes of serious thinking, I gave up and asked why. He said I didn't write a main function so it wouldn't run. ON PAPER. [I am too furious to continue with the stupidity...] Believe me it wasn't trick questions or a psychic or anger management evaluation thing. I can tell from his face, he was proud of these questions. That "developer" was supposed to "judge" the candidates. I can think of several things: Hit him with a chair (which I so desperately wanted to) and walk out. Simply walk out. Ridicule him saying he didn't make sense. Politely let him know that he didn't make sense and go on to try and answer the questions. Don't tell him anything, but simply go on to try and answer the questions. So far, I have tried just 4 and 5. It hasn't helped. Unfortunately many candidates seem to do the same and remain polite but this lets these kind of "developers" just keep ascending up the corporate ladder, gradually getting the capacity to pi** off more and more people. How do you handle these interviewers without bursting your veins? What is the proper way to handle this, yet maintain your reputation if other potential employers were to ever get to know what happened here? Is there anything you can do or should you even try to fix this? P.S. Let me admit that my anger has been amplified many times by the facts: He was smiling like you wouldn't believe. I got so many (20 or so) calls from that company the day before, asking me to come to the interview, that I couldn't do any work that day. I wasted a paid day off.

  Read the article

• Physics/Graphics Components

  - by Brett Powell

  I have spent the last 48 hours reading up on Object Component systems, and feel I am ready enough to start implementing it. I got the base Object and Component classes created, but now that I need to start creating the actual components I am a bit confused. When I think of them in terms of HealthComponent or something that would basically just be a property, it makes perfect sense. When it is something more general as a Physics/Graphics component, I get a bit confused. My Object class looks like this so far (If you notice any changes I should make please let me know, still new to this)... typedef unsigned int ID; class GameObject { public: GameObject(ID id, Ogre::String name = ""); ~GameObject(); ID &getID(); Ogre::String &getName(); virtual void update() = 0; // Component Functions void addComponent(Component *component); void removeComponent(Ogre::String familyName); template<typename T> T* getComponent(Ogre::String familyName) { return dynamic_cast<T*>(m_components[familyName]); } protected: // Properties ID m_ID; Ogre::String m_Name; float m_flVelocity; Ogre::Vector3 m_vecPosition; // Components std::map<std::string,Component*> m_components; std::map<std::string,Component*>::iterator m_componentItr; }; Now the problem I am running into is what would the general population put into Components such as Physics/Graphics? For Ogre (my rendering engine) the visible Objects will consist of multiple Ogre::SceneNode (possibly multiple) to attach it to the scene, Ogre::Entity (possibly multiple) to show the visible meshes, and so on. Would it be best to just add multiple GraphicComponent's to the Object and let each GraphicComponent handle one SceneNode/Entity or is the idea to have one of each Component needed? For Physics I am even more confused. I suppose maybe creating a RigidBody and keeping track of mass/interia/etc. would make sense. But I am having trouble thinking of how to actually putting specifics into a Component. Once I get a couple of these "Required" components done, I think it will make a lot more sense. As of right now though I am still a bit stumped.

  Read the article

• Teacher demands excessive/unjustified use of Design Patterns

  - by SoboLAN

  I study computer science and I have a class called "Programming Techniques". Its purpose is to teach (us) good object oriented design principles. During the semester we have homeworks, programs that we must write to demonstrate what we've learned. The lab assistant demands for each of these homeworks that specific design patterns should be used. For example, the current homework is an application used for processing customer orders. We are demanded to use either "Factory Method" or "Abstract Factory" design patterns for this. It gets even worse: at the end of the semester we must write a program (something more complex) that must use at least one creational pattern, at least one structural pattern and at least one behavioural pattern. Is it normal to demand this ? I mean, forcing us to design our programs in such a way that a specific design pattern makes sense is just beyond what I consider ok. If I'm a car mechanic and have a huge tool box, then I will use a certain tool from that box if and when the situation demands it. Not more, not less. If my design of the application doesn't demand at all the use of "Abstract Factory" (for example), then why should I implement it ? I'm not sure yet if the senior lecturer agrees with what the lab assistant is demanding, but I want to talk to him about it and I need solid arguments to do so. How should I approach this problem with him ? PS: I'm sure there must be a better way to teach us these things. Maybe making us each week read about 3 design patterns and the next week giving us a test with small but specific programming or architectural situations/problems. The goal in that test would be to identify what design patterns would make sense and how they could be implemented. This way, he can see if we understand them. EDIT: These homeworks are not just 100-line programs, they have quite a lot of requirements and are fairly complicated. This is the reason we have about 2 - 3 weeks of deadline for each of them. I agree that practicing this is the best way to learn. But shouldn't smaller programs/applications be used for this ? Something just for demonstrating purposes. Not big programs with lots of requirements/classes/etc.

  Read the article

• Comparison of Extreme Programming (XP) to Traditional Programming Methodologies

  The comparison of extreme programming (XP) to traditional programming methodologies can find similarities between the historic biblical battle between David and Goliath. Goliath of Gath is a Philistine warrior renowned for his size, strength and battle tested skills. Much like Goliath, traditional methodologies are known to be cumbersome due to large amounts of documentation, and time consuming do to the time needed to gather all the information. However, traditional methodologies have been widely accepted by the software development community for years because of its attention to detail regarding project development and maintenance. David is a male Israelite teenager, who was small, fearless, and untrained in any type of formal combat. In a similar fashion, extreme programming focuses more on code over documentation so that time is spent on developing the project and not on cumbersome documentation of a project. Typically, project managers and developers are fearless when they start this type of project because they usually start with little to no documentation, and they expect to be given changes to be implemented at the start of every new project iteration. Because of the lack of need or desire for documentation in extreme programming projects they appear to act as if there is no formal process involved in developing an extreme programming project.  This is a misnomer, because of the consistent development iterations and interaction with clients and users the quickly takes form because each iteration allows the project to be refined as the customer needs and desires change. Ravikant Agarwal and David Umphress documented a new approach to extreme programming called personal extreme programming (PXP) at the ACM Southeast Regional Conference in 2008. PXP is the application of extreme programming core concepts in a single developer team environment.  PXP focuses on how to adjust the main concepts and practices of extreme programming that is typically centered in a group environment and how they can be altered to be beneficial for a single developer environment. Suzanne Smith and Sara Stoecklin are both advocates of extreme programming according to the Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges and in fact they feel that it should receive more attention in introductory programming classes to allow students to better understand the software development process. Reasons why extreme programming is a good thing: Developers get to do more of what they love, Develop. Traditional software development methodologies tend to  add additional demands on a project by requiring all requirements and project specifications to be fully defined prior to the start of the implementation phase of a project. A standard 40 hour work week. With limiting the work week to only 40 hours prevents developers from getting burned out on projects.

  Read the article

• Best practices for logging and tracing in .NET

  - by Levidad

  I've been reading a lot about tracing and logging, trying to find some golden rule for best practices in the matter, but there isn't any. People say that good programmers produce good tracing, but put it that way and it has to come from experience. I've also read similar questions in here and through the internet and they are not really the same thing I am asking or do not have a satisfying answer, maybe because the questions lack some detail. So, folks say that tracing should sort of replicate the experience of debugging the application in cases where you can't attach a debugger. It should provide enough context so that you can see which path is taken at each control point in the application. Going deeper, you can even distinguish between tracing and event logging, in that "event logging is different from tracing in that it captures major states rather than detailed flow of control". Now, say I want to do my tracing and logging using only the standard .NET classes, those in the System.Diagnostics namespace. I figured that the TraceSource class is better for the job than the static Trace class, because I want to differentiate among the trace levels and using the TraceSource class I can pass in a parameter informing the event type, while using the Trace class I must use Trace.WriteLineIf and then verify things like SourceSwitch.TraceInformation and SourceSwitch.TraceErrors, and it doesn't even have properties like TraceVerbose or TraceStart. With all that in mind, would you consider a good practice to do as follows: Trace a "Start" event when begining a method, which should represent a single logical operation or a pipeline, along with a string representation of the parameter values passed in to the method. Trace an "Information" event when inserting an item into the database. Trace an "Information" event when taking one path or another in an important if/else statement. Trace a "Critical" or "Error" in a catch block depending on weather this is a recoverable error. Trace a "Stop" event when finishing the execution of the method. And also, please clarify when best to trace Verbose and Warning event types. If you have examples of code with nice trace/logging and are willing to share, that would be excelent. Note: I've found some good information here, but still not what I am looking for: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ff714589.aspx Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• How to sort a ListView control by a column in Visual C#

  - by bconlon

  Microsoft provide an article of the same name (previously published as Q319401) and it shows a nice class 'ListViewColumnSorter ' for sorting a standard ListView when the user clicks the column header. This is very useful for String values, however for Numeric or DateTime data it gives odd results. E.g. 100 would come before 99 in an ascending sort as the string compare sees 1 < 9. So my challenge was to allow other types to be sorted. This turned out to be fairly simple as I just needed to create an inner class in ListViewColumnSorter which extends the .Net CaseInsensitiveComparer class, and then use this as the ObjectCompare member's type. Note: Ideally we would be able to use IComparer as the member's type, but the Compare method is not virtual in CaseInsensitiveComparer , so we have to create an exact type: public class ListViewColumnSorter : IComparer {     private CaseInsensitiveComparer ObjectCompare;     private MyComparer ObjectCompare;     ... rest of Microsofts class implementation... } Here is my private inner comparer class, note the 'new int Compare' as Compare is not virtual, and also note we pass the values to the base compare as the correct type (e.g. Decimal, DateTime) so they compare correctly: private class MyComparer : CaseInsensitiveComparer {     public new int Compare(object x, object y)     {         try         {             string s1 = x.ToString();             string s2 = y.ToString();               // check for a numeric column             decimal n1, n2 = 0;             if (Decimal.TryParse(s1, out n1) && Decimal.TryParse(s2, out n2))                 return base.Compare(n1, n2);             else             {                 // check for a date column                 DateTime d1, d2;                 if (DateTime.TryParse(s1, out d1) && DateTime.TryParse(s2, out d2))                     return base.Compare(d1, d2);             }         }         catch (ArgumentException) { }           // just use base string compare         return base.Compare(x, y);     } } You could extend this for other types, even custom classes as long as they support ICompare. Microsoft also have another article How to: Sort a GridView Column When a Header Is Clicked that shows this for WPF, which looks conceptually very similar. I need to test it out to see if it handles non-string types. #

  Read the article

• What are the software design essentials? [closed]

  - by Craig Schwarze

  I've decided to create a 1 page "cheat sheet" of essential software design principles for my programmers. It doesn't explain the principles in any great depth, but is simply there as a reference and a reminder. Here's what I've come up with - I would welcome your comments. What have I left out? What have I explained poorly? What is there that shouldn't be? Basic Design Principles The Principle of Least Surprise – your solution should be obvious, predictable and consistent. Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) - the simplest solution is usually the best one. You Ain’t Gonna Need It (YAGNI) - create a solution for the current problem rather than what might happen in the future. Don’t Repeat Yourself (DRY) - rigorously remove duplication from your design and code. Advanced Design Principles Program to an interface, not an implementation – Don’t declare variables to be of a particular concrete class. Rather, declare them to an interface, and instantiate them using a creational pattern. Favour composition over inheritance – Don’t overuse inheritance. In most cases, rich behaviour is best added by instantiating objects, rather than inheriting from classes. Strive for loosely coupled designs – Minimise the interdependencies between objects. They should be able to interact with minimal knowledge of each other via small, tightly defined interfaces. Principle of Least Knowledge – Also called the “Law of Demeter”, and is colloquially summarised as “Only talk to your friends”. Specifically, a method in an object should only invoke methods on the object itself, objects passed as a parameter to the method, any object the method creates, any components of the object. SOLID Design Principles Single Responsibility Principle – Each class should have one well defined purpose, and only one reason to change. This reduces the fragility of your code, and makes it much more maintainable. Open/Close Principle – A class should be open to extension, but closed to modification. In practice, this means extracting the code that is most likely to change to another class, and then injecting it as required via an appropriate pattern. Liskov Substitution Principle – Subtypes must be substitutable for their base types. Essentially, get your inheritance right. In the classic example, type square should not inherit from type rectangle, as they have different properties (you can independently set the sides of a rectangle). Instead, both should inherit from type shape. Interface Segregation Principle – Clients should not be forced to depend upon methods they do not use. Don’t have fat interfaces, rather split them up into smaller, behaviour centric interfaces. Dependency Inversion Principle – There are two parts to this principle: High-level modules should not depend on low-level modules. Both should depend on abstractions. Abstractions should not depend on details. Details should depend on abstractions. In modern development, this is often handled by an IoC (Inversion of Control) container.

  Read the article

• Is there a language or design pattern that allows the *removal* of object behavior or properties in a class hierarchy?

  - by Sebastien Diot

  A well-know shortcoming of traditional class hierarchies is that they are bad when it comes to model the real world. As an example, trying to represent animals species with classes. There are actually several problems when doing that, but one that I never saw a solution to is when a sub-class "looses" a behavior or properties that was defined in a super-class, like a penguin not being able to fly (there are probably better examples, but that's the first one that comes to my mind, having seen "Madagascar 2" recently). On the one hand, you don't want to define for every property and behavior some flag that specifies if it is at all present, and check it every time before accessing that behavior or property. You would just like to say that birds can fly, simply and clearly, in the Bird class. But then it would be nice if one could define "exceptions" afterward, without having to use some horrible hacks everywhere. This often happens when a system has been productive for a while. You suddenly find an "exception" that doesn't fit in the original design at all, and you don't want to change a large portion of your code to accommodate it. So, is there some language or design patterns that can cleanly handle this problem, without requiring major changes to the "super-class", and all the code that uses it? Even if a solution only handle a specific case, several solutions might together form a complete strategy. [EDIT] Forgot about the Liskov Substitution Principle. That is why you can't do it. Assuming you define "traits/interfaces" for all major "feature groups", you can freely implement traits in different branches of the hierarchy, like the Flying trait could be implemented by Birds, and some special kind of squirrels and fish. So my question could amount to "How could I un-implement a trait?" If your super-class is a Java Serializable, you have to be one too, even if there is no way for you to serialize your state, for example if you contained a "Socket". So one way to do it is to always define all your traits in pair from the start: Flying and NotFlying (which would throw UnsupportedOperationExceiption, if not checked against). The Not-trait would not define any new interface, and could be simply checked for. Sounds like a "cheap" solution, in particular if used from the start.

  Read the article

• Looking for tips on managing complexity with SCM repositories

  - by Philip Regan

  I am a solo developer in my department and I have a lot of individual projects, all created and managed by me. I started using SVN at ProjectLocker via Versions on the Mac a couple years ago when the variety of projects started getting unwieldy. Scenario 1: Now I have a process that is of reasonable complexity it can be broken up into multiple smaller applications and they all share files. In one phase, there is a single shared file—a constants file—that is shared between a Cocoa app and an iPhone app framework. In the second phase, the iPhone app framework will be used to create individual apps of the same ilk—controller classes and what not will all be the same—but with different content in each. The problem that I am running across is that the file in the first phase is in one repository with the application that started it, and the app framework is in a second, separate repository. Scenario 2: I have another application framework that partially relies on code from an open source project. This is all internal, non-commerical work, but again, the application framework is going to be used to create a variety of unique products and processes. So, now I have an internally managed repository and an externally managed one out of my control. I make little changes to the open source code to meet the needs of my framework when there is an update I download, but I never commit back into the external repository (though, now that I think about it, I don't think I'm committing it to mine either. Oops). The Problem I have all of this set up on my production Mac quite nicely, but duplicating and subsequently maintaining that environment on my laptop has been challenging. For Scenario 1, I've thought of merging these two projects together into the same repository because they are, for all intents and purposes inextricably linked. But, Scenario 2, I think I'm stuck just managing files as best I can. The Question I'm wondering if anyone has any tips on how to manage either of these situations, as well as other complex SCM scenarios when it comes to linking various files from various repositories together. My familiarity with SVN only comes from my work with Versions. It's been great, but I'm a little out of my depth here.

  Read the article

• links for 2011-02-10

  - by Bob Rhubart

  Manish Devgan: Extending WebCenter Spaces Using JDeveloper In addition to being able to customize WebCenter Spaces using the browser-based tools, you can now also customize and “extend” WebCenter Spaces in many ways in JDeveloper.  (tags: oracle enterprise2.0 webcenter jdeveloper) Oracle University: New Personalized Training Catalog "Searching for training classes just got easier with Oracle University's new Personalized Training Catalog. View upcoming course schedules for the topics that you select in your preferred locations. Browse courses when you need to or request your personalized catalog to be emailed to you." (tags: oracle oracleuniversity) René van Wijk: Hibernate and Coherence « Middleware Magic "A major justification for the claim that applications using an object/relational persistence layer are expected to outperform applications built using direct JDBC is the potential for caching." - René van Wijk (tags: oracle coherence middleware) Sten Vesterli on Fusion Applications: " It’s (almost) here!" Speaking of Fusion Applications, Oracle ACE Director Sten Vesterli says: "The usability revolution has finally caught up with enterprise applications; they will no longer be built based on the capabilities of the database, but on the needs of users." (tags: oracle otn oracleace fusionapplications) The Myth of Oracle Fusion | The ORACLE-BASE Blog "I can totally understand when people on the outside of our little goldfish bowl have a really bad and confused impression of anything containing the term “Fusion”, because it does have a very long and sordid history." Oracle ACE Director Tim Hall (tags: oracle otn oracleace fusionapplications) The Other Side of XBRL (Enterprise Performance Management Blog) With the United States SEC's mandate for XBRL filings entering its third year, and impacting over 7000 additional companies in 2011, there's a lot of buzz in the industry about how companies should address the new reporting requirements. (tags: oracle xbrl compliance) Database Vault integration available (The Shorten Spot) Anthony Shorten shares information on the Database Vault solution included in the Oracle Utilities Application Framework. (tags: oracle database) SOASuite 11.1.1.4 : Error Logging into BPM11g Composer? (Angelo Santagata's Blog) Angelo Santagata shares simple solutions to a few minor SOA Suite 11.1.1.4 issues. (tags: oracle soa soasuite bpm) Thierry Vergult: No electricity, but the application is up "Dakar is having more troubles then normal with electricity. Never thought that the SaaS model would be that useful when the light goes out. And the extra battery in the office dies, and the router goes down. But you still can access the application over your smartphone and finish your payroll run." (tags: oracle cloud saas)

  Read the article

• Separating a "wad of stuff" utility project into individual components with "optional" dependencies

  - by romkyns

  Over the years of using C#/.NET for a bunch of in-house projects, we've had one library grow organically into one huge wad of stuff. It's called "Util", and I'm sure many of you have seen one of these beasts in your careers. Many parts of this library are very much standalone, and could be split up into separate projects (which we'd like to open-source). But there is one major problem that needs to be solved before these can be released as separate libraries. Basically, there are lots and lots of cases of what I might call "optional dependencies" between these libraries. To explain this better, consider some of the modules that are good candidates to become stand-alone libraries. CommandLineParser is for parsing command lines. XmlClassify is for serializing classes to XML. PostBuildCheck performs checks on the compiled assembly and reports a compilation error if they fail. ConsoleColoredString is a library for colored string literals. Lingo is for translating user interfaces. Each of those libraries can be used completely stand-alone, but if they are used together then there are useful extra features to be had. For example, both CommandLineParser and XmlClassify expose post-build checking functionality, which requires PostBuildCheck. Similarly, the CommandLineParser allows option documentation to be provided using the colored string literals, requiring ConsoleColoredString, and it supports translatable documentation via Lingo. So the key distinction is that these are optional features. One can use a command line parser with plain, uncolored strings, without translating the documentation or performing any post-build checks. Or one could make the documentation translatable but still uncolored. Or both colored and translatable. Etc. Looking through this "Util" library, I see that almost all potentially separable libraries have such optional features that tie them to other libraries. If I were to actually require those libraries as dependencies then this wad of stuff isn't really untangled at all: you'd still basically require all the libraries if you want to use just one. Are there any established approaches to managing such optional dependencies in .NET?

  Read the article

• Selectively Exposing Functionallity in .Net

  - by David V. Corbin

  Any developer should be aware of the principles of encapsulation, cross-tier isolation, and cross-functional separation of concerns. However, it seems the few take the time to consider the adage of "minimal yet complete"1 when developing the software. Consider the exposure of "business objects" to the user interface. Some common situations occur: Accessing a given element requires a compound set of calls that do not "make sense" to the User Interface. More information than absolutely required is exposed to the user interface It would be much cleaner if a custom interface was provided that exposed exactly (and only) the information that is required by the consumer. Achieving this using conventional techniques would require the creation (and maintenance!) of custom classes to filter and transpose the information into the ideal format. Determining the ROI on this approach can be very difficult to ascertain, and as a result it is often ignored completely. There is another approach, which is largely made practical by virtual of the Action and Func delegates. From a callers point of view, the following two samples can be used interchangeably:     interface ISomeInterface     {         void SampleMethod1(string param);         string SamepleMethod2(string param);     }       class ISomeInterface     {         public Action<string> SampleMethod1 {get; }         public Func<string,string> SamepleMethod2 {get; }     }   The capabilities this simple changes enable are significant (and remember it does not cange the syntax at the call site): The delegates can be initialized to directly call the proper method of any target class. The delegates can be dynamically updated based on the current state. The "interface" can NOT be cast to the concrete class (which often exposes more functionallity). This patterns By limiting the interface to the exact functionallity required, the reduced surface area will typically result in lower development, testing and maintenance costs. We are currently in the process of posting a project on CodePlex which illustrates this (and many other) techniques which have proven helpful in creating robust yet flexible solutions that are highly efficient2 and maintainable. This post will be updated as soon as the project is published. 1) Credit: Scott  Meyers, Effective C++, Addison-Wesley 1992 2) For those who read my previous post on performance it should be noted that the use of delegates is on the same order of magnitude (actually a tiny amount faster) as conventional interfaces.

  Read the article

• Javascript Implementation Patterns for Server-side MVC Websites

  - by tmo256

  I'm looking for information on common patterns for initializing and executing Javascript page by page in a "traditional" server-side MVC website architecture. A few months ago, my development team began, but abandoned, a major re-architecture of our company's primary web app, including a full front-end redesign. In the process, there was some debate about the architecture of the Javascript in the current version of the site, and whether it fit into a clear, modern design pattern. Now I've returned to the process of overhauling the front end of this and several other MVC websites (Ruby on Rails and MVC.net) to implement a responsive framework (Bootstrap), and in the process will again need to review then revamp and update a lot of Javascript. These web applications are NOT single-page Javascript applications (in fact, we are ripping out a lot of Ajax) or designed to require a Javascript MVC pattern; these apps are basically brochure, catalog and administrative sites that follow a server-side MVC pattern. The vast majority of the Javascript required is behavioral, pre-built plugins (JQuery and Bootstrap, et al) that execute on specific DOM nodes. I'm going to give a very brief (as brief as I can be) run-down of the current architecture only in order to illustrate the scope and type of paradigm I'm talking about. Hopefully, it will help you understand the nature of the patterns I'm looking for, but I'm not looking for commentary on the specifics of this code. What I've done in the past is relatively straight-forward and easy to maintain, but, as mentioned above, some of the other developers don't like the current architecture. Currently, on document ready, I execute whatever global Javascript needs to occur on every page, and then call a page-specific init function to initialize node-specific functionality, retrieving the init method from a JS object. On each page load, something like this will happen: $(document).ready(function(){ $('header').menuAction(); App.pages.executePage('home','show'); //dynamic from framework request object }); And the main App javascript is like App = { usefulGlobalVar: 0, pages: { executePage: function(action, controller) { // if exists, App.pages[action][controller].init() }, home: { show: { init: function() { $('#tabs').tabs(); //et. al }, normalizeName: function() { // dom-specific utility function that // doesn't require a full-blown component/class/module } }, edit: ... }, user_profile: ... } } Any common features and functionality requiring modularization or compotentizing is done as needed with prototyping. For common implementation of plugins, I often extend JQuery, so I can easily initialize a plugin with the same options throughout the site. For example, $('[data-tabs]').myTabs() with this code in a utility javascript file: (function($) { $.fn.myTabs = function() { this.tabs( { //...common options }); }; }) Pointers to articles, books or other discussions would be most welcome. Again, I am looking for a site-wide implementation pattern, NOT a JS MVC framework or general how-tos on creating JS classes or components. Thanks for your help!

  Read the article

• Commit Review Questions

  - by Wes McClure

  Note: in this article when I refer to a commit, I mean the commit you plan to share with the rest of the team, if you have local commits that you plan to amend/combine, I am referring to the final result. In time you will find these easier to do as you develop, however, all of these are valuable before checking in!  The pre commit review is a nice time to polish what might have been several hours of intense work, during which these things were the last things on your mind!  If you are concerned about losing your work in the process of responding to these questions, first do a check-in and amend it as you go (assuming you are using a tool such as git that supports this), rolling the result into one nice commit for everyone else.  Did you review your commit, change by change, with a diff utility? If not, this is a list of reasons why you might want to start! Did you test your changes? If the test is valuable to be automated, is it? If it’s a manual testing scenario, did you at least try the basics manually? Are the additions/changes formatted consistently with the rest of the project? Lots of automated tools can help here, don’t try to manually format the code, that’s a waste of time and as a human you will fail repeatedly. Are these consistent: tabs versus spaces, indentation, spacing, braces, line breaks, etc Resharper is a great example of a tool that can automate this for you (.net) Are naming conventions respected? Did you accidently use abbreviations, unless you have a good reason to use them? Does capitalization match the conventions in the project/language? Are files partitioned? Sometimes we add new code in existing files in a pinch, it’s a good idea to split these out if they don’t belong ie: are new classes defined in new files, if this is something your project values? Is there commented out code? If you are removing an existing feature, get rid of it, that is why we have VCS If it’s not done yet, then why are you checking it in? Perhaps a stash commit (git)? Did you leave debug or unnecessary changes? Do you understand all of the changes? http://geekswithblogs.net/wesm/archive/2012/04/11/programming-doesnrsquot-have-to-be-magic.aspx Are there spelling mistakes? Including your commit message! Is your commit message concise? Is there follow up work? Are there tasks you didn’t write down that you need to follow up with? Are readability or reorganization changes needed? This might be amended into the final commit, or it might be future work that needs added to the backlog. Are there other things your team values that you should review?

  Read the article

• How do I calculate the boundary of the game window after transforming the view?

  - by Cypher

  My Camera class handles zoom, rotation, and of course panning. It's invoked through SpriteBatch.Begin, like so many other XNA 2D camera classes. It calculates the view Matrix like so: public Matrix GetViewMatrix() { return Matrix.Identity * Matrix.CreateTranslation(new Vector3(-this.Spatial.Position, 0.0f)) * Matrix.CreateTranslation(-( this.viewport.Width / 2 ), -( this.viewport.Height / 2 ), 0.0f) * Matrix.CreateRotationZ(this.Rotation) * Matrix.CreateScale(this.Scale, this.Scale, 1.0f) * Matrix.CreateTranslation(this.viewport.Width * 0.5f, this.viewport.Height * 0.5f, 0.0f); } I was having a minor issue with performance, which after doing some profiling, led me to apply a culling feature to my rendering system. It used to, before I implemented the camera's zoom feature, simply grab the camera's boundaries and cull any game objects that did not intersect with the camera. However, after giving the camera the ability to zoom, that no longer works. The reason why is visible in the screenshot below. The navy blue rectangle represents the camera's boundaries when zoomed out all the way (Camera.Scale = 0.5f). So, when zoomed out, game objects are culled before they reach the boundaries of the window. The camera's width and height are determined by the Viewport properties of the same name (maybe this is my mistake? I wasn't expecting the camera to "resize" like this). What I'm trying to calculate is a Rectangle that defines the boundaries of the screen, as indicated by my awesome blue arrows, even after the camera is rotated, scaled, or panned. Here is how I've more recently found out how not to do it: public Rectangle CullingRegion { get { Rectangle region = Rectangle.Empty; Vector2 size = this.Spatial.Size; size *= 1 / this.Scale; Vector2 position = this.Spatial.Position; position = Vector2.Transform(position, this.Inverse); region.X = (int)position.X; region.Y = (int)position.Y; region.Width = (int)size.X; region.Height = (int)size.Y; return region; } } It seems to calculate the right size, but when I render this region, it moves around which will obviously cause problems. It needs to be "static", so to speak. It's also obscenely slow, which causes more of a problem than it solves. What am I missing?

  Read the article

• An update on using Rosetta Stone: Studio now isn't very useful and is not great value as an add-on option

  - by Greg Low

  I had a surprisingly large number of responses from my previous posting about learning Chinese. An update for those considering Rosetta Stone (www.rosettastone.com) for Chinese, Spanish or any other language that they offer:I had to renew my "Studio" subscription today and it's now a much worse deal than it was.It's now $75 for 6 months for Studio sessions. Online classes used to be 45 mins. Recently they reduced them to 20 mins. Given how often people have connection issues, etc. that 20 mins can disappear very quickly.They've also reduced the number you can attend. You used to be able to have 2 scheduled at any point in time. Now they limit you to 2 "group sessions" per month during the period. (You can pay for additional private sessions). The combination of these two changes now makes it much less useful. Two x 20 min sessions per month is an almost meaningless amount of practice. They also now automatically change you to auto-renew when you subscribe. They tell you where to remove this auto-renewal but the first 4 or 5 times that I went into that screen, no such option appeared. Later, an option did appear and I used it.Overall, things just aren't what they used to be at Rosetta Stone. It's now pretty hard to recommend the Studio option where it was a no-brainer before.FURTHER UPDATE: <sigh>Even after I renewed, I could not even connect to their "new" service. Although the system processed the renewal, it still tells me it's expired. My online chat person "Siva S" tells me that the problem is that I've purchased all 5 levels of the program. I can't wait till they explain to me how making an extra purchase from them stops me from logging on. Siva told me that they had "renewed" the program. I'd have to speak to Customer Care; they aren't available and then disconnected himself. Impressive (not).Their website is now full of issues too. It insists that my billing address is in the USA, even though it pretends to accept changes to it.Overall, it's gone from something that could be recommended (with some limitations) to now being an app to avoid. That's a pity as I liked much of it before.

  Read the article

• What do you think of the EntLib 5.0 configuration tool?

  Hello again! Its been a while, I know. Ive been busy over the last few months with several projects, some of them software related, and one of them human my son Jesse was born on 26 February 2010. Fun times! Meanwhile, back in Redmond, the p&p team has been busy working on Enterprise Library 5.0 see Grigoris announcement for details on the beta. Theres a ton of new stuff in this release, but theres one big new feature that hasnt received a lot of attention that Im keen to hear your perspectives on. The change is the biggest overhaul to the configuration tool since Enterprise Library was launched. If you havent yet grabbed the EntLib 5.0 beta, heres a before and after shot of the config tool: Enterprise Library 4.1 config tool Enterprise Library 5.0 (beta 1) config tool The tool has been rebuilt from the ground up in response to some feedback and usability studies from the previous version of the tool. But is this a step in the right direction? Id love to hear what you think. If youve downloaded EntLib 5.0 and tried out the tool, please share your thoughts on: First impressions. Is the tool easy to understand? Easy to find what youre looking for? Easy to read existing configuration? Pretty? Ease of use for real life tasks. Rather than make up your own tasks, here are a few sample scenarios you might want to try: Configure the data access block with a SQL Server connection called Audit that points to a database called Audit on a server called DB Configure the logging block so that any log entries in the Audit category are written to both the Event Log and the Audit database (see above) Configure the validation block with a ruleset called Email Address that uses an appropriate regular expression for e-mail addresses Configure the policy injection block such that any calls to classes in the MyCompany.Security namespace are logged before and after the call using the Audit category (see above) Comparison with the old config tool. What do you like better in the new tool? What did you like better in the old tool? How do you rate your level of expertise using the old tool? Keep in mind that I no longer work in the p&p team, so I cant say how any of this feedback will be used (although Im sure the team is listening!). However since Ive invested so much time in Enterprise Library, both in leading the team and using the product on real projects Im very interested to hear what you all think of the tools new direction.Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

  Read the article

• TypeScript first impressions

  - by Bertrand Le Roy

  Anders published a video of his new project today, which aims at creating a superset of JavaScript, that compiles down to regular current JavaScript. Anders is a tremendously clever guy, and it always shows in his work. There is much to like in the enterprise (good code completion, refactoring and adoption of the module pattern instead of namespaces to name three), but a few things made me rise an eyebrow. First, there is no mention of CoffeeScript or Dart, but he does talk briefly about Script# and GWT. This is probably because the target audience seems to be the same as the audience for the latter two, i.e. developers who are more comfortable with statically-typed languages such as C# and Java than dynamic languages such as JavaScript. I don’t think he’s aiming at JavaScript developers. Classes and interfaces, although well executed, are not especially appealing. Second, as any code generation tool (and this is true of CoffeeScript as well), you’d better like the generated code. I didn’t, unfortunately. The code that I saw is not the code I would have written. What’s more, I didn’t always find the TypeScript code especially more expressive than what it gets compiled to. I also have a few questions. Is it possible to duck-type interfaces? For example, if I have an IPoint2D interface with x and y coordinates, can I pass any object that has x and y into a function that expects IPoint2D or do I need to necessarily create a class that implements that interface, and new up an instance that explicitly declares its contract? The appeal of dynamic languages is the ability to make objects as you go. This needs to be kept intact. More technical: why are generated variables and functions prefixed with _ rather than the $ that the EcmaScript spec recommends for machine-generated variables? In conclusion, while this is a good contribution to the set of ideas around JavaScript evolution, I don’t expect a lot of adoption outside of the devoted Microsoft developers, but maybe some influence on the language itself. But I’m often wrong. I would certainly not use it because I disagree with the central motivation for doing this: Anders explicitly says he built this because “writing application-scale JavaScript is hard”. I would restate that “writing application-scale JavaScript is hard for people who are used to statically-typed languages”. The community has built a set of good practices over the last few years that do scale quite well, and many people are successfully developing and maintaining impressive applications directly in JavaScript. You can play with TypeScript here: http://www.typescriptlang.org

  Read the article

• Is there a better term than "smoothness" or "granularity" to describe this language feature?

  - by Chris

  One of the best things about programming is the abundance of different languages. There are general purpose languages like C++ and Java, as well as little languages like XSLT and AWK. When comparing languages, people often use things like speed, power, expressiveness, and portability as the important distinguishing features. There is one characteristic of languages I consider to be important that, so far, I haven't heard [or been able to come up with] a good term for: how well a language scales from writing tiny programs to writing huge programs. Some languages make it easy and painless to write programs that only require a few lines of code, e.g. task automation. But those languages often don't have enough power to solve large problems, e.g. GUI programming. Conversely, languages that are powerful enough for big problems often require far too much overhead for small problems. This characteristic is important because problems that look small at first frequently grow in scope in unexpected ways. If a programmer chooses a language appropriate only for small tasks, scope changes can require rewriting code from scratch in a new language. And if the programmer chooses a language with lots of overhead and friction to solve a problem that stays small, it will be harder for other people to use and understand than necessary. Rewriting code that works fine is the single most wasteful thing a programmer can do with their time, but using a bazooka to kill a mosquito instead of a flyswatter isn't good either. Here are some of the ways this characteristic presents itself. Can be used interactively - there is some environment where programmers can enter commands one by one Requires no more than one file - neither project files nor makefiles are required for running in batch mode Can easily split code across multiple files - files can refeence each other, or there is some support for modules Has good support for data structures - supports structures like arrays, lists, and especially classes Supports a wide variety of features - features like networking, serialization, XML, and database connectivity are supported by standard libraries Here's my take on how C#, Python, and shell scripting measure up. Python scores highest. Feature C# Python shell scripting --------------- --------- --------- --------------- Interactive poor strong strong One file poor strong strong Multiple files strong strong moderate Data structures strong strong poor Features strong strong strong Is there a term that captures this idea? If not, what term should I use? Here are some candidates. Scalability - already used to decribe language performance, so it's not a good idea to overload it in the context of language syntax Granularity - expresses the idea of being good just for big tasks versus being good for big and small tasks, but doesn't express anything about data structures Smoothness - expresses the idea of low friction, but doesn't express anything about strength of data structures or features Note: Some of these properties are more correctly described as belonging to a compiler or IDE than the language itself. Please consider these tools collectively as the language environment. My question is about how easy or difficult languages are to use, which depends on the environment as well as the language.

  Read the article

• Why I Love Microsoft Development

  - by Brian Lanham

  I've been writing software for a while and recently had an opportunity to broaden my horizons and start developing for iOS. We decided to leverage, as much as possible, our existing skills and use MonoTouch and MonoDevelop by Novell.    For those of you who do not know, Mono is a .NET port originally designed for Linux but adapted for other platforms as well. MonoTouch is a port specifically for building iOS applications using the .NET framework. MonoDroid is a port (in CTP-esque release) for Android.   A MISSING COMPONENT - VISUAL DESIGNER   MonoDevelop lacks one very significant component compared with other tools I am using: NO VISUAL DESIGNER. Instead of using an integrated visual designer, MonoDevelop shells to the Mac OS "Interface Builder".  Since MonoDevelop lets me have a "Visual Studio-esque" feel *and* I get to use C#, AND it's FREE, I am gladly willing to overlook this.  In fact, it's not even a question.  Free?  Sure, I'll take it with no Visual Designer.   In my experiences I've grown from UNIX and DOS to .NET development through many steps. Java/JSP/Servlets; Windows; Web; etc. I've been doing .NET for quite a few years and I guess I just got "comfortable" with the tools.   WHY AM I NOT GETTING IT?   Interface Builder (IB) is amazingly confusing for me. I had the opportunity to speak at the Northern VA Code Camp on 12/11/2010. My presentation was "Getting Started with iOS Development using MonoTouch and C#".    At the visual design part of the presentation, I asked one of the 3 or 4 Mac developers in the room about my confusion with the IB. I don't understand why the "Classes" list includes objects. I don't understand what "File's Owner" is. And, most importantly, WHAT THE HECK IS AN OUTLET AND WHY IS IT NECESSARY?!?!?"   His response to these question (especially Outlets): "They did it wrong."   I'm accustom to a visual designer that creates variables for graphical widgets for me. Not IB. Instead, I have to create "Outlets" manually. I still do not understand why and, the explanation from a seasoned Mac developer is that it's wrong. (He received nods of confirmation from the other Mac devs in the room.)   I LOVE MS DEV   I love development for Microsoft platforms using Microsoft development tools. I love Windows 7. I love Visual Studio 2010. I love SQL Server. Azure, Entity Framework, Active Directory, Office, WCF/WF/WPF, etc. are all designed with integration in mind. They are also all designed with developers in mind.   Steve Ballmer recently ranted "It's the developers!" That's why it is relatively quick to build apps using MS tools. Clearly, MS knows that while we usually enjoy building technology solutions, we are here to make money. And we need tools that accelerate our time to market without compromising the power and quality of our solutions.   So, yeah, I am sucking up I guess. But I love Microsoft Development. Thank you, Microsoft, for providing the plethora of great development tools.    P.S. (but please slow down a bit…I'm having trouble keeping up!)

  Read the article

• What source code organization approach helps improve modularity and API/Implementation separation?

  - by Berin Loritsch

  Few languages are as restrictive as Java with file naming standards and project structure. In that language, the file name must match the public class declared in the file, and the file must live in a directory structure matching the class package. I have mixed feelings about that approach. While I never have to guess where a file lives, there's still a lot of empty directories and artificial constraints. There's several languages that define everything about a class in one file, at least by convention. C#, Python (I think), Ruby, Erlang, etc. The commonality in most these languages is that they are object oriented, although that statement can probably be rebuffed (there is one non-OO language in the list already). Finally, there's quite a few languages mostly in the C family that have a separate header and implementation file. For C I think this makes sense, because it is one of the few ways to separate the API interface from implementations. With C it seems that feature is used to promote modularity. Yet, with C++ the way header and implementation files are split seems rather forced. You don't get the same clean API separation that you do with C, and you are forced to include some private details in the header you would rather keep only in the implementation. There's quite a few languages that have a concept that overlaps with interfaces like Java, C#, Go, etc. Some languages use what feels like a hack to provide the same concept like C# using pure virtual abstract classes. Still others don't really have an interface concept and rely on "duck" typing--for example Ruby. Ruby has modules, but those are more along the lines of mixing in behaviors to a class than they are for defining how to interact with a class. In OO terms, interfaces are a powerful way to provide separation between an API client and an API implementation. So to hurry up and ask the question, from a personal experience point of view: Does separation of header and implementation help you write more modular code, or does it get in the way? (it helps to specify the language you are referring to) Does the strict file name to class name scheme of Java help maintainability, or is it unnecessary structure for structure's sake? What would you propose to promote good API/Implementation separation and project maintenance, how would you prefer to do it?

  Read the article

• Suggestions for connecting .NET WPF GUI with Java SE Server

  - by Sam Goldberg

  BACKGROUND We are building a Java (SE) trading application which will be monitoring market data and sending trade messages based on the market data, and also on user defined configuration parameters. We are planning to provide the user with a thin client, built in .NET (WPF) for managing the parameters, controlling the server behavior, and viewing the current state of the trading. The client doesn't need real-time updates; it will instead update the view once every few seconds (or whatever interval is configured by the user). The client has about 6 different operations it needs to perform with the server, for example: CRUD with configuration parameters query subset of the data receive updates of current positions from server It is possible that most of the different operations (except for receiving data) are just different flavors of managing the configuration parameters, but it's too early in our analysis for us to be sure. To connect the client with the server, we have been considering using: SOAP Web Service RESTful service building a custom TCP/IP based API (text or xml) (least preferred - but we use this approach with other applications we have) As best as I understand, pros and cons of the different web service flavors are: SOAP pro: totally automated in .NET (and Java), modifying server side interface require no code changes in communication layer, just running refresh on Web Service reference to regenerate the classes. con: more overhead in the communication layer sending more text, etc. We're not using J2EE container so maybe doesn't work so well with J2SE REST pro: lighter weight, less data. Has good .NET and Java support. (I don't have any real experience with this, so don't know what other benefits it has.) con: client will not be automatically aware if there are any new operations or properties added (?), so communication layer needs to be updated by developer if server interface changes. con: (both approaches) Server cannot really push updates to the client at regular intervals (?) (However, we won't mind if client polls the server to get updates.) QUESTION What are your opinions on the above options or suggestions for other ways to connect the 2 parts? (Ideally, we don't want to put much work into the communication layer, because it's not the significant part of the application so the more off-the-shelf and automated the better.)

  Read the article

• How and when to ask for a pay raise?

  - by Nico

  When should one ask for a pay raise? Will I know when the time is right for a pay raise? or should I just think "I deserve a pay raise for X and Y." When would be a moment to ask for a pay grade? For instance, if you are in a company that outsources to others, could it be the right moment to ask when they move you to a different physical workplace? Maybe a few weeks/months after you started working as a consultant at the client? Should you ask for one after engaging new technologies or something you've never worked with before? In short, should you ask for a raise for a "business motive" (they move you, they assign you new responsibilities), a "professional motive" (you are required to learn new languages or technologies), or a "personal motive" (you are having twins, your mother died and you need to arrange the funeral), or are all of the above potentially valid motives? How should one ask for it? Asking for a pay raise can be difficult for some people, how you deal with this? Do you just walk up to your manager and tell him "I need more money", "I think I deserve a pay raise"? Do you suggest you might have other offers on the table? Couldn't this be counterproductive if you actually really want to stay in the company you are in (because you like the environment, made a few friends, and like all the features they give you besides your pay grade; say: free sodas, parties, after-offices that happen pretty often, a ps3 you can grab when you are tired or want to chill out, courses, english classes, football games, etc, etc. [these would be my reasons not to leave]). I mean, how would you ask for a pay raise, effectively, but without pretending to threaten to leave the company if you don't get it? Because you don't actually want to. How would you deal with their answer? If they tell you they don't think you deserve a raise, would you ask for their reasons, would you get furious and trash the room? If they give you their reasons why they think you don't deserve a pay raise yet, would you discuss this with them or just take their opinion as factual? What if they ask you how much more you think you deserve to be being paid? Should you have thought this before-hand, or expect them to set the new grade? If they do agree to a pay raise, should you expect extra work to be thrown your way, or should everything remain the same, except your pay grade?

  Read the article

• TomEE Integration in NetBeans Next

  - by Geertjan

  At JavaOne 2013, there was a lot of buzz around the TomEE server, e.g., many Tweets, nice party, and a new TomEE consulting company. For those tracking TomEE developments, it is interesting to note that recently the NetBeans IDE development builds have had added to them... TomEE support. Note: The TomEE support described here is not in NetBeans IDE 7.4, but in development builds for the next release of NetBeans IDE.For example, with NetBeans IDE development builds you're able to: register TomEE as a server in the Services window (TomEE has several distributions, e.g., one can use the "with JAX-RS" one, for example) create a Java EE 6 web project (e.g., Maven based) against this server create JPA entities from database create JAX-RS classes from JPA entities create JSF pages from JPA entities the IDE lets you create a new data source for TomEE and deploy it to the server the IDE figures out the components that are already packaged in TomEE, and the fact that (unlike with regular Tomcat), it does not need to package any components such as JSF implementation, persistence provider, or JAX-RS runtime, so that the resulting WAR file is very small the IDE can also do "deploy on save" with TomEE, so that your development cycle is very fast Adam Bien blogged about how he set up TomEE sometime ago, here. The official support in NetBeans IDE will be much more tightly integrated, simplifying the steps Adam describes. For example, the IDE does step 2 from Adam's blog for you, i.e., it sets up TomEE deployment roles. Moreover, it knows about all the technologies included in TomEE so that it can optimize the packaging; it knows about TomEE's persistence setup; it can work with TomEE data sources, etc. Below you see a Maven-based Java EE 6 PrimeFaces application (all entities and JSF pages generated from a database) deployed to TomEE in NetBeans IDE: And here's the management console for configuring and finetuning TomEE in NetBeans IDE: When I tried out the NetBeans IDE development build and TomEE, to see how everything fits together, I was surprised at how fast TomEE started up. Not sure what they did to it, but seems like a server on steroids. And setting it up in NetBeans IDE was trivial. Add the simple set up of TomEE in NetBeans IDE to the many benefits that the widely praised out of the box NetBeans Maven tools make possible, together with the fact that not one single plugin had to be installed to get everything you see described here up and running... and you have a really powerful combination of dev tools, all for free.

  Read the article

• Ideas for attack damage algorithm (language irrelevant)

  - by Dillon

  I am working on a game and I need ideas for the damage that will be done to the enemy when your player attacks. The total amount of health that the enemy has is called enemyHealth, and has a value of 1000. You start off with a weapon that does 40 points of damage (may be changed.) The player has an attack stat that you can increase, called playerAttack. This value starts off at 1, and has a possible max value of 100 after you level it up many times and make it farther into the game. The amount of damage that the weapon does is cut and dry, and subtracts 40 points from the total 1000 points of health every time the enemy is hit. But what the playerAttack does is add to that value with a percentage. Here is the algorithm I have now. (I've taken out all of the gui, classes, etc. and given the variables very forward names) double totalDamage = weaponDamage + (weaponDamage*(playerAttack*.05)) enemyHealth -= (int)totalDamage; This seemed to work great for the most part. So I statrted testing some values... //enemyHealth ALWAYS starts at 1000 weaponDamage = 50; playerAttack = 30; If I set these values, the amount of damage done on the enemy is 125. Seemed like a good number, so I wanted to see what would happen if the players attack was maxed out, but with the weakest starting weapon. weaponDamage = 50; playerAttack = 100; the totalDamage ends up being 300, which would kill an enemy in just a few hits. Even with your attack that high, I wouldn't want the weakest weapon to be able to kill the enemy that fast. I thought about adding defense, but I feel the game will lose consistency and become unbalanced in the long run. Possibly a well designed algorithm for a weapon decrease modifier would work for lower level weapons or something like that. Just need a break from trying to figure out the best way to go about this, and maybe someone that has experience with games and keeping the leveling consistent could give me some ideas/pointers.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292  | Next Page >