Search Results

Search found 12107 results on 485 pages for 'pinned objects'.

Page 293/485 | < Previous Page | 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300  | Next Page >

  • How to handle the different frame rate on different devices?

    - by Fenwick
    I am not quite sure how frame per second works on a web page. I have a Canvas game that involves in moving an image from point A to B, and measuring the time elapsed. The code can be as simple as: var timeStamp = Date.now(); function update(){ obj.y += obj.speed; text = "Time: "+ (Date.now() - timeStamp) + "ms"; } The function update() is called every frame. The problem is that the time elapsed is different from device to device. It is pretty short on my PC, but get longer on my iPad, and is much longer on my cell phone. I thought it is because the FPS is smaller on mobile devices, so instead of calling update() every frame, I call it every 1ms by using a setInterval. But this does not solve the problem. In my understanding, the function for setInterval is invoked based on the increment in system time, other than frame rate, so it should fix the problem. Am I missing anything here? If the setInterval function is called based on FPS, is there any way to get around with the FPS difference across devices? On a side note, I have sort of a "water simulator" on the same canvas. It involves in redrawing about 60 objects which can be 600x600 pixels for every frame, so it could be a frame rate killer. I am using Phaser.js but not really using much of its functionalities, if that helps.

    Read the article

  • Being stupid to get better productivity?

    - by loki2302
    I've spent a lot of time reading different books about "good design", "design patterns", etc. I'm a big fan of the SOLID approach and every time I need to write a simple piece of code, I think about the future. So, if implementing a new feature or a bug fix requires just adding three lines of code like this: if(xxx) { doSomething(); } It doesn't mean I'll do it this way. If I feel like this piece of code is likely to become larger in the nearest future, I'll think of adding abstractions, moving this functionality somewhere else and so on. The goal I'm pursuing is keeping average complexity the same as it was before my changes. I believe, that from the code standpoint, it's quite a good idea - my code is never long enough, and it's quite easy to understand the meanings for different entities, like classes, methods, and relations between classes and objects. The problem is, it takes too much time, and I often feel like it would be better if I just implemented that feature "as is". It's just about "three lines of code" vs. "new interface + two classes to implement that interface". From a product standpoint (when we're talking about the result), the things I do are quite senseless. I know that if we're going to work on the next version, having good code is really great. But on the other side, the time you've spent to make your code "good" may have been spent for implementing a couple of useful features. I often feel very unsatisfied with my results - good code that only can do A is worse than bad code that can do A, B, C, and D. Are there any books, articles, blogs, or your ideas that may help with developing one's "being stupid" approach?

    Read the article

  • C++ and SDL Trouble Creating a STL Vector of a Game Object

    - by Jackson Blades
    I am trying to create a Space Invaders clone using C++ and SDL. The problem I am having is in trying to create Waves of Enemies. I am trying to model this by making my Waves a vector of 8 Enemy objects. My Enemy constructor takes two arguments, an x and y offset. My Wave constructor also takes two arguments, an x and y offset. What I am trying to do is have my Wave constructor initialize a vector of Enemies, and have each enemy given a different x offset so that they are spaced out appropriately. Enemy::Enemy(int x, int y) { box.x = x; box.y = y; box.w = ENEMY_WIDTH; box.h = ENEMY_HEIGHT; xVel = ENEMY_WIDTH / 2; } Wave::Wave(int x, int y) { box.x = x; box.y = y; box.w = WAVE_WIDTH; box.y = WAVE_HEIGHT; xVel = (-1)*ENEMY_WIDTH; yVel = 0; std::vector<Enemy> enemyWave; for (int i = 0; i < enemyWave.size(); i++) { Enemy temp(box.x + ((ENEMY_WIDTH + 16) * i), box.y); enemyWave.push_back(temp); } } I guess what I am asking is if there is a cleaner, more elegant way to do this sort of initialization with vectors, or if this is right at all. Any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with circular references?

    - by dash-tom-bang
    I was involved in a programming discussion today where I made some statements that basically assumed axiomatically that circular references (between modules, classes, whatever) are generally bad. Once I got through with my pitch, my coworker asked, "what's wrong with circular references?" I've got strong feelings on this, but it's hard for me to verbalize concisely and concretely. Any explanation that I may come up with tends to rely on other items that I too consider axioms ("can't use in isolation, so can't test", "unknown/undefined behavior as state mutates in the participating objects", etc.), but I'd love to hear a concise reason for why circular references are bad that don't take the kinds of leaps of faith that my own brain does, having spent many hours over the years untangling them to understand, fix, and extend various bits of code. Edit: I am not asking about homogenous circular references, like those in a doubly-linked list or pointer-to-parent. This question is really asking about "larger scope" circular references, like libA calling libB which calls back to libA. Substitute 'module' for 'lib' if you like. Thanks for all of the answers so far!

    Read the article

  • How to make the members of my Data Access Layer object aware of their siblings

    - by Graham
    My team currently has a project with a data access object composed like so: public abstract class DataProvider { public CustomerRepository CustomerRepo { get; private set; } public InvoiceRepository InvoiceRepo { get; private set; } public InventoryRepository InventoryRepo { get; private set; } // couple more like the above } We have non-abstract classes that inherit from DataProvider, and the type of "CustomerRepo" that gets instantiated is controlled by that child class. public class FloridaDataProvider { public FloridaDataProvider() { CustomerRepo = new FloridaCustomerRepo(); // derived from base CustomerRepository InvoiceRepo = new InvoiceRespository(); InventoryRepo = new InventoryRepository(); } } Our problem is that some of the methods inside a given repo really would benefit from having access to the other repo's. Like, a method inside InventoryRepository needs to get to Customer data to do some determinations, so I need to pass in a reference to a CustomerRepository object. Whats the best way for these "sibling" repos to be aware of each other and have the ability to call each other's methods as-needed? Virtually all the other repos would benefit from having the CustomerRepo, for example, because it is where names/phones/etc are selected from, and these data elements need to be added to the various objects that are returned out of the other repos. I can't just new-up a plain "CustomerRepository" object inside a method within a different repo, because it might not be the base CustomerRepository that actually needs to run.

    Read the article

  • The idea of functionN in Scala / Functionaljava

    - by Luke Murphy
    From brain driven development It turns out, that every Function you’ll ever define in Scala, will become an instance of an Implementation which will feature a certain Function Trait. There is a whole bunch of that Function Traits, ranging from Function1 up to Function22. Since Functions are Objects in Scala and Scala is a statically typed language, it has to provide an appropriate type for every Function which comes with a different number of arguments. If you define a Function with two arguments, the compiler picks Function2 as the underlying type. Also, from Michael Froh's blog You need to make FunctionN classes for each number of parameters that you want? Yes, but you define the classes once and then you use them forever, or ideally they're already defined in a library (e.g. Functional Java defines classes F, F2, ..., F8, and the Scala standard library defines classes Function1, ..., Function22) So we have a list of function traits (Scala), and a list of interfaces (Functional-java) to enable us to have first class funtions. I am trying to understand exactly why this is the case. I know, in Java for example, when I write a method say, public int add(int a, int b){ return a + b; } That I cannot go ahead and write add(3,4,5); ( error would be something like : method add cannot be applied to give types ) We simply have to define an interface/trait for functions with different parameters, because of static typing?

    Read the article

  • PhysX Capsule Character Controller floating above ground

    - by Jannie
    I am using PhysX Version 3.0.2 in the simulation package I'm working on, and I've encountered some bizarre behavior with the capsule character controller. When I set the controller's height and radius to the appropriate values (r = 0.25, h = 1.86)it behaves correctly (moving along the ground, colliding with other objects, and so on) except that the capsule itself is floating above the ground. The actor will then bump his head when trying to get through a door, since the capsule is the correct height but also floating above the ground. This image should illustrate what I'm going on about: One can clearly see that the rest of the scene has their collision bodies wrapped correctly, it's just the capsule that's going wrong! The stop-gap I've implemented is creating a smaller capsule and giving it an offset, but I need to implement ray-picking for the controller next so the capsule has to surround the character model properly. Here's my character creation code (with height = 1.86f and radius = 0.25f): NxController* D3DPhysXManager::CreateCharacterController( std::string l_stdsControllerName, float l_fHeight, float l_fRadius, D3DXVECTOR3 l_v3Position ) { NxCapsuleControllerDesc l_CapsuleControllerDescription; l_CapsuleControllerDescription.height = l_fHeight; l_CapsuleControllerDescription.radius = l_fRadius; l_CapsuleControllerDescription.position.set( l_v3Position.x, l_v3Position.y, l_v3Position.z ); l_CapsuleControllerDescription.callback = &this->m_ControllerHitReport; NxController* l_pController = this->m_pControllerManager->createController( this->m_pScene, l_CapsuleControllerDescription ); this->m_pControllerMap.insert( l_ControllerValuePair( l_stdsControllerName, l_pController ) ); return l_pController; } Any help at all would be appreciated, I just can't figure this one out! P.S. I've found a couple of (rather old) threads describing the same issue, but it seems they couldn't find a solution either. Here are the links: http://forum-archive.developer.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=6409 http://forum-archive.developer.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=3272 http://www.ogre3d.org/addonforums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23003

    Read the article

  • Good design for class with similar constructors

    - by RustyTheBoyRobot
    I was reading this question and thought that good points were made, but most of the solutions involved renaming one of the methods. I am refactoring some poorly written code and I've run into this situation: public class Entity { public Entity(String uniqueIdentifier, boolean isSerialNumber) { if (isSerialNumber) { this.serialNumber = uniqueIdentifier; //Lookup other data } else { this.primaryKey = uniqueIdentifier; // Lookup other data with different query } } } The obvious design flaw is that someone needed two different ways to create the object, but couldn't overload the constructor since both identifiers were of the same type (String). Thus they added a flag to differentiate. So, my question is this: when this situation arises, what are good designs for differentiating between these two ways of instantiating an object? My First Thoughts You could create two different static methods to create your object. The method names could be different. This is weak because static methods don't get inherited. You could create different objects to force the types to be different (i.e., make a PrimaryKey class and a SerialNumber class). I like this because it seems to be a better design, but it also is a pain to refactor if serialNumber is a String everywhere else.

    Read the article

  • Must all AI states be able to react to any event?

    - by Prog
    FSMs implemented with the State design pattern are a common way to design AI agents. I am familiar with the State design pattern and know how to implement it. How is this used in games to design AI agents? Consider a simplified class Monster, representing an AI agent: class Monster { State state; // other fields omitted public void update(){ // called every game-loop cycle state.execute(this); } public void setState(State state){ this.state = state; } // irrelevant stuff omitted } There are several State subclasses implementing execute() differently. So far, classic State pattern. AI agents are subject to environmental effects and other objects communicating with them. For example, an AI agent might tell another AI agent to attack (i.e. agent.attack()). Or a fireball might tell an AI agent to fall down. This means that the agent must have methods such as attack() and fallDown(), or commonly some message receiving mechanism to understand such messages. With an FSM, the current State of the agent should be the one taking care of such method calls - i.e. the agent delegates to the current state upon every event. Is this correct? If correct, how is this done? Are all states obligated by their superclass to implement methods such as attack(), fallDown() etc., so the agent can always delegate to them on almost every event? Or is it done in some other way?

    Read the article

  • Traverse tree with results. Maybe type in Java?

    - by Angelo.Hannes
    I need to check a tree's node state. It can either be OK or NOT_OK. But that state is dependent on its children. So for a node to be OK, every of its children needs to be OK. If one or more of its children is NOT_OK the whole node is NOT_OK. To determine the state of a node I need to aggregate some properties of the node. So I thought of two possible implementations. And they are more or less covered in this question: Why is Option/Maybe considered a good idea and checked exceptions are not? Exception I could pass the properties up the recursion path, and throw an exception if something went wrong. Maybe I implement an Maybe type and let it either hold an error or the aggregated properties. Maybe it is more an Either. I tend towards the last option. And I'm thinking of an enum with two objects. Where I can additionally set those aggregated properties. Am I on the right track? I'm not familiar with the new JDK8 functional stuff. But I'm stuck on JDK7 anyway, so please focus on JDK7.

    Read the article

  • Access Control Service: Programmatically Accessing Identity Provider Information and Redirect URLs

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    In my last post I showed you that different redirect URLs trigger different response behaviors in ACS. Where did I actually get these URLs from? The answer is simple – I asked ACS ;) ACS publishes a JSON encoded feed that contains information about all registered identity providers, their display names, logos and URLs. With that information you can easily write a discovery client which, at the very heart, does this: public void GetAsync(string protocol) {     var url = string.Format( "https://{0}.{1}/v2/metadata/IdentityProviders.js?protocol={2}&realm={3}&version=1.0",         AcsNamespace,         "accesscontrol.windows.net",         protocol,         Realm);     _client.DownloadStringAsync(new Uri(url)); } The protocol can be one of these two values: wsfederation or javascriptnotify. Based on that value, the returned JSON will contain the URLs for either the redirect or notify method. Now with the help of some JSON serializer you can turn that information into CLR objects and display them in some sort of selection dialog. The next post will have a demo and source code.

    Read the article

  • How do I drag my widgets without dragging other widgets?

    - by Cypher
    I have a bunch of drag-able widgets on screen. When I am dragging one of the widgets around, if I drag the mouse over another widget, that widget then gets "snagged" and is also dragged around. While this is kind of a neat thing and I can think of a few game ideas based on that alone, that was not intended. :-P Background Info I have a Widget class that is the basis for my user interface controls. It has a bunch of properties that define it's size, position, image information, etc. It also defines some events, OnMouseOver, OnMouseOut, OnMouseClick, etc. All of the event handler functions are virtual, so that child objects can override them and make use of their implementation without duplicating code. Widgets are not aware of each other. They cannot tell each other, "Hey, I'm dragging so bugger off!" Source Code Here's where the widget gets updated (every frame): public virtual void Update( MouseComponent mouse, KeyboardComponent keyboard ) { // update position if the widget is being dragged if ( this.IsDragging ) { this.Left -= (int)( mouse.LastPosition.X - mouse.Position.X ); this.Top -= (int)( mouse.LastPosition.Y - mouse.Position.Y ); } ... // define and throw other events if ( !this.WasMouseOver && this.IsMouseOver && mouse.IsButtonDown( MouseButton.Left ) ) { this.IsMouseDown = true; this.MouseDown( mouse, new EventArgs() ); } ... // define and throw other events } And here's the OnMouseDown event where the IsDraggable property gets set: public virtual void OnMouseDown( object sender, EventArgs args ) { if ( this.IsDraggable ) { this.IsDragging = true; } } Problem Looking at the source code, it's obvious why this is happening. The OnMouseDown event gets fired whenever the mouse is hovered over the Widget and when the left mouse button is "down" (but not necessarily in that order!). That means that even if I hold the mouse down somewhere else on screen, and simply move it over anything that IsDraggable, it will "hook" onto the mouse and go for a ride. So, now that it's obvious that I'm Doing It Wrong™, how do I do this correctly?

    Read the article

  • Using visitor pattern with large object hierarchy

    - by T. Fabre
    Context I've been using with a hierarchy of objects (an expression tree) a "pseudo" visitor pattern (pseudo, as in it does not use double dispatch) : public interface MyInterface { void Accept(SomeClass operationClass); } public class MyImpl : MyInterface { public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } } This design was, however questionnable, pretty comfortable since the number of implementations of MyInterface is significant (~50 or more) and I didn't need to add extra operations. Each implementation is unique (it's a different expression or operator), and some are composites (ie, operator nodes that will contain other operator/leaf nodes). Traversal is currently performed by calling the Accept operation on the root node of the tree, which in turns calls Accept on each of its child nodes, which in turn... and so on... But the time has come where I need to add a new operation, such as pretty printing : public class MyImpl : MyInterface { // Property does not come from MyInterface public string SomeProperty { get; set; } public void Accept(SomeClass operationClass) { operationClass.DoSomething(); operationClass.DoSomethingElse(); // ... and so on ... } public void Accept(SomePrettyPrinter printer) { printer.PrettyPrint(this.SomeProperty); } } I basically see two options : Keep the same design, adding a new method for my operation to each derived class, at the expense of maintainibility (not an option, IMHO) Use the "true" Visitor pattern, at the expense of extensibility (not an option, as I expect to have more implementations coming along the way...), with about 50+ overloads of the Visit method, each one matching a specific implementation ? Question Would you recommand using the Visitor pattern ? Is there any other pattern that could help solve this issue ?

    Read the article

  • Single-Click Checkbox in RadGridView

    - by Anthony Trudeau
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/tonyt/archive/2014/06/05/156809.aspxThe Telerik RadGridView for WPF is a flexible visual control for displaying and manipulating tables of data. It’s not without it’s quirks though. I ran into one of those quirks recently. The behavior of the RadGridView requires that you first activate the cell for editing. That enables the editing controls underneath. Although that provides better editing capabilities, it also can be unintuitive. In my case I don’t want my users to have to click a checkbox value twice in order to change the value. This can be solved easily by setting the EditTriggers and AutoSelectOnEdit properties to CellClick and True respectively. Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end there. You would think you could set those properties in a style with a TargetType of GridViewCheckBoxColumn. You’d be wrong. <!-- This works --> <telerik:GridViewCheckBoxColumn Header="Flag #1"       DataMemberBinding="{Binding Flag1}"       EditTriggers="CellClick" AutoSelectOnEdit="True"/> <!-- This doesn’t work --> <Style TargetType="{x:Type telerik:GridViewCheckBoxColumn}">       <Setter Property="EditTriggers" Value="CellClick" />       <Setter Property="AutoSelectOnEdit" Value="True" /> </Style> Telerik told me that is the correct, expected behavior, because the columns in the RadGridView are not visual elements. Their explanation is that the Style property comes from the base class FrameworkContentElement, but the column objects aren’t visual elements. That may be an implementation truth, but that doesn’t make the behavior correct or expected. It’s unintuitive that the GridViewCheckBoxColumn exposes a Style property that cannot be used properly, but there it is. At least there’s a way to get the desired effect.

    Read the article

  • Faster 2D Collision detection

    - by eShredder
    Recently I've been working on a fast-paced 2d shooter and I came across a mighty problem. Collision detection. Sure, it is working, but it is very slow. My goal is: Have lots of enemies on screen and have them to not touch each other. All of the enemies are chasing the player entity. Most of them have the same speed so sooner or later they all end up taking the same space while chasing the player. This really drops the fun factor since, for the player, it looks like you are being chased by one enemy only. To prevent them to take the same space I added a collision detection (a very basic 2D detection, the only method I know of) which is. Enemy class update method Loop through all enemies (continue; if the loop points at this object) If enemy object intersects with this object Push enemy object away from this enemy object This works fine. As long as I only have <200 enemy entities that is. When I get closer to 300-350 enemy entities my frame rate begins to drop heavily. First I thought it was bad rendering so I removed their draw call. This did not help at all so of course I realised it was the update method. The only heavy part in their update method is this each-enemy-loops-through-every-enemy part. When I get closer to 300 enemies the game does a 90000 (300x300) step itteration. My my~ I'm sure there must be another way to aproach this collision detection. Though I have no idea how. The pages I find is about how to actually do the collision between two objects or how to check collision between an object and a tile. I already know those two things. tl;dr? How do I aproach collision detection between LOTS of entities? Quick edit: If it is to any help, I'm using C# XNA.

    Read the article

  • XNA - Obtaining depth from the scene's render target?

    - by user1423893
    I'm currently rendering my scene to a render target so it can be used for rendering methods such as post processing and order independent transparency. rtScene = new RenderTarget2D( GraphicsDevice, GraphicsDevice.PresentationParameters.BackBufferWidth, GraphicsDevice.PresentationParameters.BackBufferHeight, false, SurfaceFormat.Rgba64, DepthFormat.Depth24Stencil8, // Requires a depth format for objects to be drawn correctly (e.g. wireframe model surrounding model) 0, RenderTargetUsage.PreserveContents ); I am required to use RenderTargetUsage.PreserveContents so that the same render target can be rendered to multiple times, once for each of the draw methods below. DrawBackground DrawDeferred DrawForward DrawTransparent The problem is that DrawTransparent requires a copy of the scene's depth as a texture. Is there any way to obtain this from the scene render target above (rtScene)? I can't have more than one render target with RenderTargetUsage.PreserveContents as this causes problems on hardware such as the XBOX 360, so rendering the depth to a separate render target at the same time as I render the scene isn't possible as far as I can tell. Would I be able to get around this problem by "Ping-Ponging" two render targets (using the more compatible RenderTargetUsage.DiscardContents) and using the result for the depth texture?

    Read the article

  • FP for simulation and modelling

    - by heaptobesquare
    I'm about to start a simulation/modelling project. I already know that OOP is used for this kind of projects. However, studying Haskell made me consider using the FP paradigm for modelling a system of components. Let me elaborate: Let's say I have a component of type A, characterised by a set of data (a parameter like temperature or pressure,a PDE and some boundary conditions,etc.) and a component of type B, characterised by a different set of data(different or same parameter, different PDE and boundary conditions). Let's also assume that the functions/methods that are going to be applied on each component are the same (a Galerkin method for example). If I were to use an OOP approach, I would create two objects that would encapsulate each type's data, the methods for solving the PDE(inheritance would be used here for code reuse) and the solution to the PDE. On the other hand, if I were to use an FP approach, each component would be broken down to data parts and the functions that would act upon the data in order to get the solution for the PDE. This approach seems simpler to me assuming that linear operations on data would be trivial and that the parameters are constant. What if the parameters are not constant(for example, temperature increases suddenly and therefore cannot be immutable)? In OOP, the object's (mutable) state can be used. I know that Haskell has Monads for that. To conclude, would implementing the FP approach be actually simpler,less time consuming and easier to manage (add a different type of component or new method to solve the pde) compared to the OOP one? I come from a C++/Fortran background, plus I'm not a professional programmer, so correct me on anything that I've got wrong.

    Read the article

  • Failing Screen Resize Method

    - by StrongJoshua
    So I want my game to draw to a specific "optimal" size and then be stretched to fit screens that are a different size. I'm using LibGDX and figured that I could just draw everything to a FrameBuffer and then resize that buffer to the appropriate size when drawing it to the actual display. However, my method does not work, it just results in a black screen with the top right quarter of the screen white.Intermediary is the FBO, interMatrix is a Matrix4 object, and camera is an OrthographicCamera. @Override public void render() { // update actors currentStage.act(); //render to intermediary buffer batch.setProjectionMatrix(interMatrix); intermediary.begin(); batch.begin(); currentStage.draw(); batch.flush(); intermediary.end(); //resize to actual width and height Sprite s = new Sprite(intermediary.getColorBufferTexture()); s.flip(true, false); batch.setProjectionMatrix(camera.combined); batch.draw(s.getTexture(), 0, 0, width, height); batch.end(); } These are the constructors for the above mentioned objects (GAME_WIDTH and HEIGHT are the "optimal" settings, width and height are the actual sizes, which are the same when running on desktop). intermediary = new FrameBuffer(Format.RGBA8888, GAME_WIDTH, GAME_HEIGHT, false); interMatrix = new Matrix4(); camera = new OrthographicCamera(width, height); interMatrix.setToOrtho2D(0, 0, GAME_WIDTH, GAME_HEIGHT); Is there a better way of doing this or can is this a viable option and how do I fix what I have?

    Read the article

  • Calculating distance from viewer to object in a shader

    - by Jay
    Good morning, I'm working through creating the spherical billboards technique outlined in this paper. I'm trying to create a shader that calculates the distance from the camera to all objects in the scene and stores the results in a texture. I keep getting either a completely black or white texture. Here are my questions: I assume the position that's automatically sent to the vertex shader from ogre is in object space? The gpu interpolates the output position from the vertex shader when it sends it to the fragment shader. Does it do the same for my depth calculation or do I need to move that calculation to the fragment shader? Is there a way to debug shaders? I have no errors but I'm not sure I'm getting my parameters passed into the shaders correctly. Here's my shader code: void DepthVertexShader( float4 position : POSITION, uniform float4x4 worldViewProjMatrix, uniform float3 eyePosition, out float4 outPosition : POSITION, out float Depth ) { // position is in object space // outPosition is in camera space outPosition = mul( worldViewProjMatrix, position ); // calculate distance from camera to vertex Depth = length( eyePosition - position ); } void DepthFragmentShader( float Depth : TEXCOORD0, uniform float fNear, uniform float fFar, out float4 outColor : COLOR ) { // clamp output using clip planes float fColor = 1.0 - smoothstep( fNear, fFar, Depth ); outColor = float4( fColor, fColor, fColor, 1.0 ); } fNear is the near clip plane for the scene fFar is the far clip plane for the scene

    Read the article

  • Skip CodedUI Tests, use Selenium for Web Automation

    - by Aligned
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2013/10/31/skip-codedui-tests-use-selenium-for-web-automation.aspxI recently joined a team that was using Agile Methodologies to create a new product. They have a working beta product after 10 or so 2 week sprints and already had UI’s that had changed several times as they went through iterations of their UI. As a result, the QA team was falling behind with automated tests and I was tasked to help them catch up and expand their tests. The project is a website. I heard many complaints about how hard it is to work with CodedUI (writing our own code, not relying on the recorder as we wanted re-usable and more maintainable code) then it took me 4+ hours to fix one issue. It was hard to traverse the key and debugging the objects with breakpoints… I said out loud “there has to be a better way or a framework the uses jQuery to run through the tests.” Plus it seemed really slow (wait… finding the object … wait… start putting in text…). Plus some tests would randomly fail on the test agents (using the test settings and an automated build, they are run on VMs using Microsoft test agents). Enough complaining. Selenium to the rescue (mostly). The lead QA guy decided to try it out and we haven’t turned back. We are now running tests in Chrome and Firefox and they run a lot faster. We had IE running to, but some of the tests were running fine locally, but hanging on the test agents. I’ll add some hints and lessons learned in a later post.

    Read the article

  • POLL: How do you build your interfaces in xcode for iphone/coco-touch applications?

    - by LolaRun
    Hi all, It's been 2 months i'm using xcode and building iphone apps, and i'm finding it really hard to grasp the good design for the applications. I always face problems like you can't put your tabbarcontroller in another custom viewcontroller sort of a thing? or other problems... That 'sometimes' - of course - would work if you did the creation of the views/viewcontrollers programmatically. so I don't know if i should start writing the creation of my objects or use interface builder. This is why i'm asking this poll question, to see what's the most accepted way among other developers. I'm not going to answer my question, so the votes would not increase my reputation and risk my poll being closed soon. I prefer that the first two readers of this question should answer by 'using IB' and the second one 'programmatically' and the rest would vote up or down for these two answers. And don't vote my question either, i just need to know, and maybe someone else wants to know. so the longer this question lives the better. and gaining nothing from it concerning reputation would help that cause. thank you all for your cooperation. and go ahead and answer Peace

    Read the article

  • Design in "mixed" languages: object oriented design or functional programming?

    - by dema80
    In the past few years, the languages I like to use are becoming more and more "functional". I now use languages that are a sort of "hybrid": C#, F#, Scala. I like to design my application using classes that correspond to the domain objects, and use functional features where this makes coding easier, more coincise and safer (especially when operating on collections or when passing functions). However the two worlds "clash" when coming to design patterns. The specific example I faced recently is the Observer pattern. I want a producer to notify some other code (the "consumers/observers", say a DB storage, a logger, and so on) when an item is created or changed. I initially did it "functionally" like this: producer.foo(item => { updateItemInDb(item); insertLog(item) }) // calls the function passed as argument as an item is processed But I'm now wondering if I should use a more "OO" approach: interface IItemObserver { onNotify(Item) } class DBObserver : IItemObserver ... class LogObserver: IItemObserver ... producer.addObserver(new DBObserver) producer.addObserver(new LogObserver) producer.foo() //calls observer in a loop Which are the pro and con of the two approach? I once heard a FP guru say that design patterns are there only because of the limitations of the language, and that's why there are so few in functional languages. Maybe this could be an example of it? EDIT: In my particular scenario I don't need it, but.. how would you implement removal and addition of "observers" in the functional way? (I.e. how would you implement all the functionalities in the pattern?) Just passing a new function, for example?

    Read the article

  • A few questions about how JavaScript works

    - by KayoticSully
    I originally posted on Stack Overflow and was told I might get some better answers here. I have been looking deeply into JavaScript lately to fully understand the language and have a few nagging questions that I can not seem to find answers to (Specifically dealing with Object Oriented programming. I know JavaScript is meant to be used in an OOP manner I just want to understand it for the sake of completeness). Assuming the following code: function TestObject() { this.fA = function() { // do stuff } this.fB = testB; function testB() { // do stuff } } TestObject.prototype = { fC : function { // do stuff } } What is the difference between functions fA and fB? Do they behave exactly the same in scope and potential ability? Is it just convention or is one way technically better or proper? If there is only ever going to be one instance of an object at any given time, would adding a function to the prototype such as fC even be worthwhile? Is there any benefit to doing so? Is the prototype only really useful when dealing with many instances of an object or inheritance? And what is technically the "proper" way to add methods to the prototype the way I have above or calling TestObject.prototype.functionName = function(){} every time? I am looking to keep my JavaScript code as clean and readable as possible but am also very interested in what the proper conventions for Objects are in the language. I come from a Java and PHP background and am trying to not make any assumptions about how JavaScript works since I know it is very different being prototype based. Also are there any definitive JavaScript style guides or documentation about how JavaScript operates at a low level? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • AI agents with FSM: a question regarding this

    - by Prog
    Finite State Machines implemented with the State design pattern are a common way to design AI agents. I am familiar with the State design pattern and know how to implement it. However I have a question regarding how this is used in games to design AI agents. Please consider a class Monster that represents an AI agent. Simplified it looks like this: class Monster{ State state; // other fields omitted public void update(){ // called every game-loop cycle state.execute(this); } public void setState(State state){ this.state = state; } // irrelevant stuff omitted } There are several State subclasses that implement execute() differently. So far classic State pattern. Here's my question: AI agents are subject to environmental effects and other objects communicating with them. For example an AI agent might tell another AI agent to attack (i.e. agent.attack()). Or a fireball might tell an AI agent to fall down. This means that the agent must have methods such as attack() and fallDown(), or commonly some message receiving mechanism to understand such messages. My question is divided to two parts: 1- Please say if this is correct: With an FSM, the current State of the agent should be the one taking care of such method calls - i.e. the agent delegates to the current state upon every event. Correct? Or wrong? 2- If correct, than how is this done? Are all states obligated by their superclass) to implement methods such as attack(), fallDown() etc., so the agent can always delegate to them on almost every event? Or is it done in some other way?

    Read the article

  • Scene transitions

    - by Mars
    It's my first time working with actual scenes/states, aka DrawableGameComponents, which work separate from one another. I'm now wondering what's the best way to make transitions between them, and how to affect them from other scenes. Lets say I wanted to "push" one screen to the right, with another one coming in at the same time. Naturally I'd have to keep drawing both, until the transition is complete. And I'd have to adjust the coordinates I'm drawing at while doing it. Is there a way around specifically handling this special case in every single scene? Or of I wanted to fade one into the other. Basically the question stays the same, how would you do that without having to handle it in every single scene? While writing this I'm realizing it will be the same thing for all kinds of transitions. Maybe a central Draw method in the manager could be a solution, where parameters and effects are applied when necessary. But this wouldn't work if objects that are drawn have their own method, and aren't drawn within the scene, or if an effect has to be applied to the whole scene. That means, maybe scenes have to be drawn to their own rendertarget? That way one call to the base class after the normal drawing could be enough, to apply the effects, while drawing it to the main render target. But I once heard there are problems when switching from target to target, back and forth. So is that even a viable option? As you can see, I have some basic ideas how it might work... but nothing specific. I'd like to learn what's the common way to achieve such things, a general way to apply all kinds of transitions.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300  | Next Page >