Search Results

Search found 63 results on 3 pages for 'layering'.

Page 3/3 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 

  • NDepend 4 – First Steps

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Introduction Thanks to Patrick Smacchia I had the chance to test NDepend 4. I can only say: awesome! This will be the first of a series of posts on NDepend, where I will talk about my discoveries. Keep in mind that I am just starting to use it, so more experienced users may find these too basic, I just hope I don’t say anything foolish! I must say that I am in no way affiliated with NDepend and I never actually met Patrick. Installation No installation program – a curious decision, I’m not against it -, just unzip the files to a folder and run the executable. It will optionally register itself with Visual Studio 2008, 2010 and 11 as well as RedGate’s Reflector; also, it automatically looks for updates. NDepend can either be used as a stand-alone program (with or without a GUI) or from within Visual Studio or Reflector. Getting Started One thing that really pleases me is the Getting Started section of the stand-alone, with links to pages on NDepend’s web site, featuring detailed explanations, which usually include screenshots and small videos (<5 minutes). There’s also an How do I with hierarchical navigation that guides us to through the major features so that we can easily find what we want. Usage There are two basic ways to use NDepend: Analyze .NET solutions, projects or assemblies; Compare two versions of the same assembly. I have so far not used NDepend to compare assemblies, so I will first talk about the first option. After selecting a solution and some of its projects, it generates a single HTML page with an highly detailed report of the analysis it produced. This includes some metrics such as number of lines of code, IL instructions, comments, types, methods and properties, the calculation of the cyclomatic complexity, coupling and lots of others indicators, typically grouped by type, namespace and assembly. The HTML also includes some nice diagrams depicting assembly dependencies, type and method relative proportions (according to the number of IL instructions, I guess) and assembly analysis relating to abstractness and stability. Useful, I would say. Then there’s the rules; NDepend tests the target assemblies against a set of more than 120 rules, grouped in categories Code Quality, Object Oriented Design, Design, Architecture and Layering, Dead Code, Visibility, Naming Conventions, Source Files Organization and .NET Framework Usage. The full list can be configured on the application, and an explanation of each rule can be found on the web site. Rules can be validated, violated and violated in a critical manner, and the HTML will contain the violated rules, their queries – more on this later - and results. The HTML uses some nice JavaScript effects, which allow paging and sorting of tables, so its nice to use. Similar to the rules, there are some queries that display results for a number (about 200) questions grouped as Object Oriented Design, API Breaking Changes (for assembly version comparison), Code Diff Summary (also for version comparison) and Dead Code. The difference between queries and rules is that queries are not classified as passes, violated or critically violated, just present results. The queries and rules are expressed through CQLinq, which is a very powerful LINQ derivative specific to code analysis. All of the included rules and queries can be enabled or disabled and new ones can be added, with intellisense to help. Besides the HTML report file, the NDepend application can be used to explore all analysis results, compare different versions of analysis reports and to run custom queries. Comparison to Other Analysis Tools Unlike StyleCop, NDepend only works with assemblies, not source code, so you can’t expect it to be able to enforce brackets placement, for example. It is more similar to FxCop, but you don’t have the option to analyze at the IL level, that is, other that the number of IL instructions and the complexity. What’s Next In the next days I’ll continue my exploration with a real-life test case. References The NDepend web site is http://www.ndepend.com/. Patrick keeps an updated blog on http://codebetter.com/patricksmacchia/ and he regularly monitors StackOverflow for questions tagged NDepend, which you can find on http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ndepend. The default list of CQLinq rules, queries and statistics can be found at http://www.ndepend.com/DefaultRules/webframe.html. The syntax itself is described at http://www.ndepend.com/Doc_CQLinq_Syntax.aspx and its features at http://www.ndepend.com/Doc_CQLinq_Features.aspx.

    Read the article

  • How can we implement change notification propagation for WPF and SL in the MVVM pattern?

    - by Firoso
    Here's an example scenario targetting MVVM WPF/SL development: View data binds to view model Property "Target" "Target" exposes a field of an object called "data" that exists in the local application model, called "Original" when "Original" changes, it should raise notification to the view model and then propogate that change notification to the View. Here are the solutions I've come up with, but I don't like any of them all that much. I'm looking for other ideas, by the time we come up with something rock solid I'm certain Microsoft will have released .NET 5 with WPF/SL extensions for better tools for MVVM development. For now the question is, "What have you done to solve this problem and how has it worked out for you?" Option 1. Proposal: Attach a handler to data's PropertyChanged event that watches for string values of properties it cares about that might have changed, and raises the appropriate notification. Why I don't like it: Changes don't bubble naturally, objects must be explicitly watched, if data changes to a new source, events must be un-registered/registered. Why I kind of like it: I get explicit control over propogation of changes, and I don't have to use any types that belong at a higher level of the application such as dependancy properties. Option 2. Proposal: Attach a handler to data's PropertyChanged event that re-raises the event across all properties using the name property name. Why I don't like it: This is essentially the same as option 1, but less intelligent, and forces me to never change my property names, as they have to be the same as the property names on data Why I kind of like it: It's very easy to set up and I don't have to think about it... Then again if I try to think, and change names to things that make sense, I shoot myself in the foot, and then I have to think about it! Option 3. Proposal: Inherit my view model from dependancy object, and notify binding sources of changes directly. Why I don't like it: I'm not even 100% sure dependancy properties/objects can DO this, it was just a thought to look into. Also I don't personally feel that WPF/SL types like Dep Obj belong at the view model level. Why I kind of like it: IF it has the capability that I'm seeking then it's a good answer! minus that pesky layering issue. Option 4. Proposal: Use a consistant agent messaging system based off of Task Parallels DataFlow Library to propogate everything through linked pipelining. Why I don't like it: I've never tried this, and somehow I think it will be lacking, plus it requires me to think about my code completely differently all the way around. Why I kind of like it: It has the possiblity of allowing me to do some VERY fun manipulations with a push based data model and using ActionBlocks as validation AND setters to then privately change view model properties and explicitly control PropertyChanged notifications.

    Read the article

  • Domain-Driven-Design question

    - by Michael
    Hello everyone, I have a question about DDD. I'm building a application to learn DDD and I have a question about layering. I have an application that works like this: UI layer calls = Application Layer - Domain Layer - Database Here is a small example of how the code looks: //****************UI LAYER************************ //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface and implementation for Shopping Cart service would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); //This is the UI layer, //Calling into Application Layer //to get the shopping cart for a user. //Interface for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll //and implementation for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.Model. IShoppingCart shoppingCart = service.GetShoppingCartByUserName(userName); //Show shopping cart information. //For example, items bought, price, taxes..etc ... //Pressed Purchase button, so even for when //button is pressed. //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory again. IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); service.Purchase(shoppingCart); //**********************Application Layer********************** public class ShoppingCartService : IShoppingCartService { public IShoppingCart GetShoppingCartByUserName(string userName) { //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface for repository would be in MyApp.Infrastructure.dll //but implementation would by in MyApp.Model.dll IShoppingCartRepository repository = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartRepository>(); IShoppingCart shoppingCart = repository.GetShoppingCartByUserName(username); //Do shopping cart logic like calculating taxes and stuff //I would put these in services but not sure? ... return shoppingCart; } public void Purchase(IShoppingCart shoppingCart) { //Do Purchase logic and calling out to repository ... } } I've seem to put most of my business rules in services rather than the models and I'm not sure if this is correct? Also, i'm not completely sure if I have the laying correct? Do I have the right pieces in the correct place? Also should my models leave my domain model? In general I'm I doing this correct according DDD? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • how can i edit the action of the buttons in the dialog box in jquery?

    - by noob
    this code is from the demo of modal confirmation from jquery's site. <script type="text/javascript"> $(function() { $("#dialog").dialog({ bgiframe: true, resizable: false, height:140, modal: true, overlay: { backgroundColor: '#000', opacity: 0.5 }, buttons: { 'Yes': function() { $(this).dialog('close'); }, 'No': function() { $(this).dialog('close'); } } }); }); </script> <div class="demo"> <div id="dialog" title="Empty the recycle bin?"> <p><span class="ui-icon ui-icon-alert" style="float:left; margin:0 7px 20px 0;"></span>These items will be permanently deleted and cannot be recovered. Are you sure?</p> </div> <!-- Sample page content to illustrate the layering of the dialog --> <div class="hiddenInViewSource" style="padding:20px;"> <p>Sed vel diam id libero <a href="http://example.com">rutrum convallis</a>. Donec aliquet leo vel magna. Phasellus rhoncus faucibus ante. Etiam bibendum, enim faucibus aliquet rhoncus, arcu felis ultricies neque, sit amet auctor elit eros a lectus.</p> <form> <input value="text input" /><br /> <input type="checkbox" />checkbox<br /> <input type="radio" />radio<br /> <select> <option>select</option> </select><br /><br /> <textarea>textarea</textarea><br /> </form> </div><!-- End sample page content --> </div><!-- End demo --> <div class="demo-description"> <p>Confirm an action that may be destructive or important. Set the <code>modal</code> option to true, and specify primary and secondary user actions with the <code>buttons</code> option.</p> </div><!-- End demo-description --> can anyone tell me how to edit the action for the buttons? when yes is clicked i want to be redirected to test.php and when i hit no i want to be redirected to another page.

    Read the article

  • Writing the tests for FluentPath

    - by Bertrand Le Roy
    Writing the tests for FluentPath is a challenge. The library is a wrapper around a legacy API (System.IO) that wasn’t designed to be easily testable. If it were more testable, the sensible testing methodology would be to tell System.IO to act against a mock file system, which would enable me to verify that my code is doing the expected file system operations without having to manipulate the actual, physical file system: what we are testing here is FluentPath, not System.IO. Unfortunately, that is not an option as nothing in System.IO enables us to plug a mock file system in. As a consequence, we are left with few options. A few people have suggested me to abstract my calls to System.IO away so that I could tell FluentPath – not System.IO – to use a mock instead of the real thing. That in turn is getting a little silly: FluentPath already is a thin abstraction around System.IO, so layering another abstraction between them would double the test surface while bringing little or no value. I would have to test that new abstraction layer, and that would bring us back to square one. Unless I’m missing something, the only option I have here is to bite the bullet and test against the real file system. Of course, the tests that do that can hardly be called unit tests. They are more integration tests as they don’t only test bits of my code. They really test the successful integration of my code with the underlying System.IO. In order to write such tests, the techniques of BDD work particularly well as they enable you to express scenarios in natural language, from which test code is generated. Integration tests are being better expressed as scenarios orchestrating a few basic behaviors, so this is a nice fit. The Orchard team has been successfully using SpecFlow for integration tests for a while and I thought it was pretty cool so that’s what I decided to use. Consider for example the following scenario: Scenario: Change extension Given a clean test directory When I change the extension of bar\notes.txt to foo Then bar\notes.txt should not exist And bar\notes.foo should exist This is human readable and tells you everything you need to know about what you’re testing, but it is also executable code. What happens when SpecFlow compiles this scenario is that it executes a bunch of regular expressions that identify the known Given (set-up phases), When (actions) and Then (result assertions) to identify the code to run, which is then translated into calls into the appropriate methods. Nothing magical. Here is the code generated by SpecFlow: [NUnit.Framework.TestAttribute()] [NUnit.Framework.DescriptionAttribute("Change extension")] public virtual void ChangeExtension() { TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo scenarioInfo = new TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo("Change extension", ((string[])(null))); #line 6 this.ScenarioSetup(scenarioInfo); #line 7 testRunner.Given("a clean test directory"); #line 8 testRunner.When("I change the extension of " + "bar\\notes.txt to foo"); #line 9 testRunner.Then("bar\\notes.txt should not exist"); #line 10 testRunner.And("bar\\notes.foo should exist"); #line hidden testRunner.CollectScenarioErrors();} The #line directives are there to give clues to the debugger, because yes, you can put breakpoints into a scenario: The way you usually write tests with SpecFlow is that you write the scenario first, let it fail, then write the translation of your Given, When and Then into code if they don’t already exist, which results in running but failing tests, and then you write the code to make your tests pass (you implement the scenario). In the case of FluentPath, I built a simple Given method that builds a simple file hierarchy in a temporary directory that all scenarios are going to work with: [Given("a clean test directory")] public void GivenACleanDirectory() { _path = new Path(SystemIO.Path.GetTempPath()) .CreateSubDirectory("FluentPathSpecs") .MakeCurrent(); _path.GetFileSystemEntries() .Delete(true); _path.CreateFile("foo.txt", "This is a text file named foo."); var bar = _path.CreateSubDirectory("bar"); bar.CreateFile("baz.txt", "bar baz") .SetLastWriteTime(DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(-2)); bar.CreateFile("notes.txt", "This is a text file containing notes."); var barbar = bar.CreateSubDirectory("bar"); barbar.CreateFile("deep.txt", "Deep thoughts"); var sub = _path.CreateSubDirectory("sub"); sub.CreateSubDirectory("subsub"); sub.CreateFile("baz.txt", "sub baz") .SetLastWriteTime(DateTime.Now); sub.CreateFile("binary.bin", new byte[] {0x00, 0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x05, 0xFF}); } Then, to implement the scenario that you can read above, I had to write the following When: [When("I change the extension of (.*) to (.*)")] public void WhenIChangeTheExtension( string path, string newExtension) { var oldPath = Path.Current.Combine(path.Split('\\')); oldPath.Move(p => p.ChangeExtension(newExtension)); } As you can see, the When attribute is specifying the regular expression that will enable the SpecFlow engine to recognize what When method to call and also how to map its parameters. For our scenario, “bar\notes.txt” will get mapped to the path parameter, and “foo” to the newExtension parameter. And of course, the code that verifies the assumptions of the scenario: [Then("(.*) should exist")] public void ThenEntryShouldExist(string path) { Assert.IsTrue(_path.Combine(path.Split('\\')).Exists); } [Then("(.*) should not exist")] public void ThenEntryShouldNotExist(string path) { Assert.IsFalse(_path.Combine(path.Split('\\')).Exists); } These steps should be written with reusability in mind. They are building blocks for your scenarios, not implementation of a specific scenario. Think small and fine-grained. In the case of the above steps, I could reuse each of those steps in other scenarios. Those tests are easy to write and easier to read, which means that they also constitute a form of documentation. Oh, and SpecFlow is just one way to do this. Rob wrote a long time ago about this sort of thing (but using a different framework) and I highly recommend this post if I somehow managed to pique your interest: http://blog.wekeroad.com/blog/make-bdd-your-bff-2/ And this screencast (Rob always makes excellent screencasts): http://blog.wekeroad.com/mvc-storefront/kona-3/ (click the “Download it here” link)

    Read the article

  • Security in Software

    The term security has many meanings based on the context and perspective in which it is used. Security from the perspective of software/system development is the continuous process of maintaining confidentiality, integrity, and availability of a system, sub-system, and system data. This definition at a very high level can be restated as the following: Computer security is a continuous process dealing with confidentiality, integrity, and availability on multiple layers of a system. Key Aspects of Software Security Integrity Confidentiality Availability Integrity within a system is the concept of ensuring only authorized users can only manipulate information through authorized methods and procedures. An example of this can be seen in a simple lead management application.  If the business decided to allow each sales member to only update their own leads in the system and sales managers can update all leads in the system then an integrity violation would occur if a sales member attempted to update someone else’s leads. An integrity violation occurs when a team member attempts to update someone else’s lead because it was not entered by the sales member.  This violates the business rule that leads can only be update by the originating sales member. Confidentiality within a system is the concept of preventing unauthorized access to specific information or tools.  In a perfect world the knowledge of the existence of confidential information/tools would be unknown to all those who do not have access. When this this concept is applied within the context of an application only the authorized information/tools will be available. If we look at the sales lead management system again, leads can only be updated by originating sales members. If we look at this rule then we can say that all sales leads are confidential between the system and the sales person who entered the lead in to the system. The other sales team members would not need to know about the leads let alone need to access it. Availability within a system is the concept of authorized users being able to access the system. A real world example can be seen again from the lead management system. If that system was hosted on a web server then IP restriction can be put in place to limit access to the system based on the requesting IP address. If in this example all of the sales members where accessing the system from the 192.168.1.23 IP address then removing access from all other IPs would be need to ensure that improper access to the system is prevented while approved users can access the system from an authorized location. In essence if the requesting user is not coming from an authorized IP address then the system will appear unavailable to them. This is one way of controlling where a system is accessed. Through the years several design principles have been identified as being beneficial when integrating security aspects into a system. These principles in various combinations allow for a system to achieve the previously defined aspects of security based on generic architectural models. Security Design Principles Least Privilege Fail-Safe Defaults Economy of Mechanism Complete Mediation Open Design Separation Privilege Least Common Mechanism Psychological Acceptability Defense in Depth Least Privilege Design PrincipleThe Least Privilege design principle requires a minimalistic approach to granting user access rights to specific information and tools. Additionally, access rights should be time based as to limit resources access bound to the time needed to complete necessary tasks. The implications of granting access beyond this scope will allow for unnecessary access and the potential for data to be updated out of the approved context. The assigning of access rights will limit system damaging attacks from users whether they are intentional or not. This principle attempts to limit data changes and prevents potential damage from occurring by accident or error by reducing the amount of potential interactions with a resource. Fail-Safe Defaults Design PrincipleThe Fail-Safe Defaults design principle pertains to allowing access to resources based on granted access over access exclusion. This principle is a methodology for allowing resources to be accessed only if explicit access is granted to a user. By default users do not have access to any resources until access has been granted. This approach prevents unauthorized users from gaining access to resource until access is given. Economy of Mechanism Design PrincipleThe Economy of mechanism design principle requires that systems should be designed as simple and small as possible. Design and implementation errors result in unauthorized access to resources that would not be noticed during normal use. Complete Mediation Design PrincipleThe Complete Mediation design principle states that every access to every resource must be validated for authorization. Open Design Design PrincipleThe Open Design Design Principle is a concept that the security of a system and its algorithms should not be dependent on secrecy of its design or implementation Separation Privilege Design PrincipleThe separation privilege design principle requires that all resource approved resource access attempts be granted based on more than a single condition. For example a user should be validated for active status and has access to the specific resource. Least Common Mechanism Design PrincipleThe Least Common Mechanism design principle declares that mechanisms used to access resources should not be shared. Psychological Acceptability Design PrincipleThe Psychological Acceptability design principle refers to security mechanisms not make resources more difficult to access than if the security mechanisms were not present Defense in Depth Design PrincipleThe Defense in Depth design principle is a concept of layering resource access authorization verification in a system reduces the chance of a successful attack. This layered approach to resource authorization requires unauthorized users to circumvent each authorization attempt to gain access to a resource. When designing a system that requires meeting a security quality attribute architects need consider the scope of security needs and the minimum required security qualities. Not every system will need to use all of the basic security design principles but will use one or more in combination based on a company’s and architect’s threshold for system security because the existence of security in an application adds an additional layer to the overall system and can affect performance. That is why the definition of minimum security acceptably is need when a system is design because this quality attributes needs to be factored in with the other system quality attributes so that the system in question adheres to all qualities based on the priorities of the qualities. Resources: Barnum, Sean. Gegick, Michael. (2005). Least Privilege. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from https://buildsecurityin.us-cert.gov/bsi/articles/knowledge/principles/351-BSI.html Saltzer, Jerry. (2011). BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INFORMATION PROTECTION. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  http://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/protection/Basic.html Barnum, Sean. Gegick, Michael. (2005). Defense in Depth. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  https://buildsecurityin.us-cert.gov/bsi/articles/knowledge/principles/347-BSI.html Bertino, Elisa. (2005). Design Principles for Security. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~bhargav/cs526/security-9.pdf

    Read the article

  • Does anyone have database, programming language/framework suggestions for a GUI point of sale system

    - by Jason Down
    Our company has a point of sale system with many extras, such as ordering and receiving functionality, sales and order history etc. Our main issue is that the system was not designed properly from the ground up, so it takes too long to make fixes and handle requests from our customers. Also, the current technology we are using (Progress database, Progress 4GL for the language) incurs quite a bit of licensing expenses on our customers due to mutli-user license fees for database connections etc. After a lot of discussion it is looking like we will probably start over from scratch (while maintaining the current product at least for the time being). We are looking for a couple of things: Create the system with a nice GUI front end (it is currently CHUI and the application was not built in a way that allows us to redesign the front end... no layering or separation of business logic and gui...shudder). Create the system with the ability to modularize different functionality so the product doesn't have to include all features. This would keep the cost down for our current customers that want basic functionality and a lower price tag. The bells and whistles would be available for those that would want them. Use proper design patterns to make the product easy to add or change any part at any time (i.e. change the database or change the front end without needing to rewrite the application or most of it). This is a problem today because the Progress 4GL code is directly compiled against the database. Small changes in the database requires lots of code recompiling. Our new system will be Linux based, with a possibility of a client application providing functionality from one or more windows boxes. So what I'm looking for is any suggestions on which database and/or framework or programming language(s) someone might recommend for this sort of product. Anyone that has experience in this field might be able to point us in the right direction or even have some ideas of what to avoid. We have considered .NET and SQL Express (we don't need an enterprise level DB), but that would limit us to windows (as far as I know anyway). I have heard of Mono for writing .NET code in a Linux environment, but I don't know much about it yet. We've also considered a Java and MySql based implementation. To summarize we are looking to do the following: Keep licensing costs down on the technology we will use to develop the product (Oracle, yikes! MySQL, nice.) Deliver a solution that is easily maintainable and supportable. A solution that has a component capable of running on "old" hardware through a CHUI front end. (some of our customers have 40+ terminals which would be a ton of cash in order to convert over to a PC). Suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks [UPDATE] I should note that we are currently performing a total cost analysis. This question is intended to give us a couple of "educated" options to look into to include in or analysis. Anyone who could share experiences/suggestions about client/server setups would be appreciated (not just those who have experience with point of sale systems... that would just be a bonus).

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC: Moving code from controller action to service layer

    - by DigiMortal
    I fixed one controller action in my application that doesn’t seemed good enough for me. It wasn’t big move I did but worth to show to beginners how nice code you can write when using correct layering in your application. As an example I use code from my posting ASP.NET MVC: How to implement invitation codes support. Problematic controller action Although my controller action works well I don’t like how it looks. It is too much for controller action in my opinion. [HttpPost] public ActionResult GetAccess(string accessCode) {     if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(accessCode.Trim()))     {         ModelState.AddModelError("accessCode", "Insert invitation code!");         return View();     }       Guid accessGuid;       try     {         accessGuid = Guid.Parse(accessCode);     }     catch     {         ModelState.AddModelError("accessCode", "Incorrect format of invitation code!");         return View();                    }       using(var ctx = new EventsEntities())     {         var user = ctx.GetNewUserByAccessCode(accessGuid);         if(user == null)         {             ModelState.AddModelError("accessCode", "Cannot find account with given invitation code!");             return View();         }           user.UserToken = User.Identity.GetUserToken();         ctx.SaveChanges();     }       Session["UserId"] = accessGuid;       return Redirect("~/admin"); } Looking at this code my first idea is that all this access code stuff must be located somewhere else. We have working functionality in wrong place and we should do something about it. Service layer I add layers to my application very carefully because I don’t like to use hand grenade to kill a fly. When I see real need for some layer and it doesn’t add too much complexity I will add new layer. Right now it is good time to add service layer to my small application. After that it is time to move code to service layer and inject service class to controller. public interface IUserService {     bool ClaimAccessCode(string accessCode, string userToken,                          out string errorMessage);       // Other methods of user service } I need this interface when writing unit tests because I need fake service that doesn’t communicate with database and other external sources. public class UserService : IUserService {     private readonly IDataContext _context;       public UserService(IDataContext context)     {         _context = context;     }       public bool ClaimAccessCode(string accessCode, string userToken, out string errorMessage)     {         if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(accessCode.Trim()))         {             errorMessage = "Insert invitation code!";             return false;         }           Guid accessGuid;         if (!Guid.TryParse(accessCode, out accessGuid))         {             errorMessage = "Incorrect format of invitation code!";             return false;         }           var user = _context.GetNewUserByAccessCode(accessGuid);         if (user == null)         {             errorMessage = "Cannot find account with given invitation code!";             return false;         }           user.UserToken = userToken;         _context.SaveChanges();           errorMessage = string.Empty;         return true;     } } Right now I used simple solution for errors and made access code claiming method to follow usual TrySomething() methods pattern. This way I can keep error messages and their retrieval away from controller and in controller I just mediate error message from service to view. Controller Now all the code is moved to service layer and we need also some modifications to controller code so it makes use of users service. I don’t show here DI/IoC details about how to give service instance to controller. GetAccess() action of controller looks like this right now. [HttpPost] public ActionResult GetAccess(string accessCode) {     var userToken = User.Identity.GetUserToken();     string errorMessage;       if (!_userService.ClaimAccessCode(accessCode, userToken,                                       out errorMessage))     {                       ModelState.AddModelError("accessCode", errorMessage);         return View();     }       Session["UserId"] = Guid.Parse(accessCode);     return Redirect("~/admin"); } It’s short and nice now and it deals with web site part of access code claiming. In the case of error user is shown access code claiming view with error message that ClaimAccessCode() method returns as output parameter. If everything goes fine then access code is reserved for current user and user is authenticated. Conclusion When controller action grows big you have to move code to layers it actually belongs. In this posting I showed you how I moved access code claiming functionality from controller action to user service class that belongs to service layer of my application. As the result I have controller action that coordinates the user interaction when going through access code claiming process. Controller communicates with service layer and gets information about how access code claiming succeeded.

    Read the article

  • Why does calling IEnumerable<string>.Count() create an additional assembly dependency ?

    - by Gishu
    Assume this chain of dll references Tests.dll >> Automation.dll >> White.Core.dll with the following line of code in Tests.dll, where everything builds result.MissingPaths Now when I change this to result.MissingPaths.Count() I get the following build error for Tests.dll "White.UIItem is not defined in an assembly that is not referenced. You must add a reference to White.Core.dll." And I don't want to do that because it breaks my layering. Here is the type definition for result, which is in Automation.dll public class HasResult { public HasResult(IEnumerable<string> missingPaths ) { MissingPaths = missingPaths; } public IEnumerable<string> MissingPaths { get; set; } public bool AllExist { get { return !MissingPaths.Any(); } } } Down the call chain the input param to this ctor is created via (The TreeNode class is in White.Core.dll) assetPaths.Where(assetPath => !FindTreeNodeUsingCache(treeHandle, assetPath)); Why does this dependency leak when calling Count() on IEnumerable ? I then suspected that lazy evaluation was causing this (for some reason) - so I slotted in an ToArray() in the above line but didn't work. Update 2011 01 07: Curiouser and Curiouser! it won't build until I add a White.Core reference. So I add a reference and build it (in order to find the elusive dependency source). Open it up in Reflector and the only references listed are Automation, mscorlib, System.core and NUnit. So the compiler threw away the White reference as it was not needed. ILDASM also confirms that there is no White AssemblyRef entry. Any ideas on how to get to the bottom of this thing (primarily for 'now I wanna know why' reasons)? What are the chances that this is an VS2010/MSBuild bug? Update 2011 01 07 #2 As per Shimmy's suggestion, tried calling the method explcitly as an extension method Enumerable.Count(result.MissingPaths) and it stops cribbing (not sure why). However I moved some code around after that and now I'm getting the same issue at a different location using IEnumerable - this time reading and filtering lines out of a file on disk (totally unrelated to White). Seems like it's a 'symptom-fix'. var lines = File.ReadLines(aFilePath).ToArray(); once again, if I remove the ToArray() it compiles again - it seems that any method that causes the enumerable to be evaluated (ToArray, Count, ToList, etc.) causes this. Let me try and get a working tiny-app to demo this issue... Update 2011 01 07 #3 Phew! More information.. It turns out the problem is just in one source file - this file is LINQ-phobic. Any call to an Enumerable extension method has to be explicitly called out. The refactorings that I did caused a new method to be moved into this source file, which had some LINQ :) Still no clue as to why this class dislikes LINQ. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.IO; using System.Linq; using G.S.OurAutomation.Constants; using G.S.OurAutomation.Framework; using NUnit.Framework; namespace G.S.AcceptanceTests { public abstract class ConfigureThingBase : OurTestFixture { .... private static IEnumerable<string> GetExpectedThingsFor(string param) { // even this won't compile - although it compiles fine in an adjoining source file in the same assembly //IEnumerable<string> s = new string[0]; //Console.WriteLine(s.Count()); // this is the line that is now causing a build failure // var expectedInfo = File.ReadLines(someCsvFilePath)) // .Where(line => !line.StartsWith("REM", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)) // .Select(line => line.Replace("%PLACEHOLDER%", param)) // .ToArray(); // Unrolling the LINQ above removes the build error var expectedInfo = Enumerable.ToArray( Enumerable.Select( Enumerable.Where( File.ReadLines(someCsvFilePath)), line => !line.StartsWith("REM", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)), line => line.Replace("%PLACEHOLDER%", param)));

    Read the article

  • Iterate through all form fields within a specified DIV tag.

    - by user344255
    I need to be able to iterate through all the form fields within a specified DIV tag. Basically, any given DIV tag can have multiple form fields (which is easy enough to parse through), but it can also any number of tables or even additional DIV tags (adding additional levels of hierarchical layering). I've written a basic function that goes through each of the direct descendants of the parent node (in this case, the DIV tag) and it clears out its value. This part works fine. The problem is getting it to parse children when children (grandchildren) of their own. It winds up getting caught up in an infinite loop. In this case, I need be able to find all the form fields within DIV tag "panSomePanel", which will include some direct children (txtTextField1), but also some grandchildren who are within nested TABLE objects and/or nested DIV tags (radRadioButton, DESC_txtTextArea). Here is a sample DIV and its contents: <DIV id="panSomePanel"> <INPUT name="txtTextField1" type="text" id="txtTextField1" size="10"/><BR><BR> <TABLE id="tblRadioButtons" border="0"> <TR> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_0" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="1" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_0">Value 1</LABEL> </TD> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_5" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="23" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_5">Value 23</LABEL> </TD> </TR> <TR> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_1" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="2" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_1">Value 2</LABEL> </TD> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_6" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="24" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_6">Value 24</LABEL> </TD> </TR> <TR> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_2" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="3" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_2">Value 3</LABEL> </TD> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_7" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="25" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_7">Value 25</LABEL> </TD> </TR> <TR> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_3" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="21" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_3">Value 21</LABEL> </TD> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_8" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="4" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_8">Value 4</LABEL> </TD> </TR> <TR> <TD> <INPUT id="radRadioButton_4" type="radio" name="radRadioButton" value="22" /><LABEL for="radRadioButton_4">Value 22</LABEL> </TD> </TR> </TABLE> <DIV id="panAnotherPanel"><BR> <TABLE cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" style="display:inline;vertical-align:top;"> <TR> <TD valign="top"> <TEXTAREA name="DESC:txtTextArea" rows="3" cols="48" id="DESC_txtTextArea"></TEXTAREA>&nbsp; </TD> <TD valign="top"><SPAN id="DESC_lblCharCount" style="font-size:8pt;"></SPAN> </TD> </TR> </TABLE> </DIV> </DIV> Here is the function I've written: function clearChildren(node) { var child; if (node.childNodes.length > 0) { child= node.firstChild; } while(child) { if (child.type == "text") { alert(child.id); child.value = ""; } else if (child.type == "checkbox") { child.checked = false; } else if (child.type == "radio") { alert(child.id); child.checked = false; } else if (child.type == "textarea") { child.innerText = ""; } //alert(child.childNodes.length); if (child.childNodes.length > 0) { var grandchild = child.firstChild; while (grandchild) { clearChildren(grandchild); } grandchild = grandchild.nextSibling; } child = child.nextSibling; } }

    Read the article

  • Abstracting functionality

    - by Ralf Westphal
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/theArchitectsNapkin/archive/2014/08/22/abstracting-functionality.aspxWhat is more important than data? Functionality. Yes, I strongly believe we should switch to a functionality over data mindset in programming. Or actually switch back to it. Focus on functionality Functionality once was at the core of software development. Back when algorithms were the first thing you heard about in CS classes. Sure, data structures, too, were important - but always from the point of view of algorithms. (Niklaus Wirth gave one of his books the title “Algorithms + Data Structures” instead of “Data Structures + Algorithms” for a reason.) The reason for the focus on functionality? Firstly, because software was and is about doing stuff. Secondly because sufficient performance was hard to achieve, and only thirdly memory efficiency. But then hardware became more powerful. That gave rise to a new mindset: object orientation. And with it functionality was devalued. Data took over its place as the most important aspect. Now discussions revolved around structures motivated by data relationships. (John Beidler gave his book the title “Data Structures and Algorithms: An Object Oriented Approach” instead of the other way around for a reason.) Sure, this data could be embellished with functionality. But nevertheless functionality was second. When you look at (domain) object models what you mostly find is (domain) data object models. The common object oriented approach is: data aka structure over functionality. This is true even for the most modern modeling approaches like Domain Driven Design. Look at the literature and what you find is recommendations on how to get data structures right: aggregates, entities, value objects. I´m not saying this is what object orientation was invented for. But I´m saying that´s what I happen to see across many teams now some 25 years after object orientation became mainstream through C++, Delphi, and Java. But why should we switch back? Because software development cannot become truly agile with a data focus. The reason for that lies in what customers need first: functionality, behavior, operations. To be clear, that´s not why software is built. The purpose of software is to be more efficient than the alternative. Money mainly is spent to get a certain level of quality (e.g. performance, scalability, security etc.). But without functionality being present, there is nothing to work on the quality of. What customers want is functionality of a certain quality. ASAP. And tomorrow new functionality needs to be added, existing functionality needs to be changed, and quality needs to be increased. No customer ever wanted data or structures. Of course data should be processed. Data is there, data gets generated, transformed, stored. But how the data is structured for this to happen efficiently is of no concern to the customer. Ask a customer (or user) whether she likes the data structured this way or that way. She´ll say, “I don´t care.” But ask a customer (or user) whether he likes the functionality and its quality this way or that way. He´ll say, “I like it” (or “I don´t like it”). Build software incrementally From this very natural focus of customers and users on functionality and its quality follows we should develop software incrementally. That´s what Agility is about. Deliver small increments quickly and often to get frequent feedback. That way less waste is produced, and learning can take place much easier (on the side of the customer as well as on the side of developers). An increment is some added functionality or quality of functionality.[1] So as it turns out, Agility is about functionality over whatever. But software developers’ thinking is still stuck in the object oriented mindset of whatever over functionality. Bummer. I guess that (at least partly) explains why Agility always hits a glass ceiling in projects. It´s a clash of mindsets, of cultures. Driving software development by demanding small increases in functionality runs against thinking about software as growing (data) structures sprinkled with functionality. (Excuse me, if this sounds a bit broad-brush. But you get my point.) The need for abstraction In the end there need to be data structures. Of course. Small and large ones. The phrase functionality over data does not deny that. It´s not functionality instead of data or something. It´s just over, i.e. functionality should be thought of first. It´s a tad more important. It´s what the customer wants. That´s why we need a way to design functionality. Small and large. We need to be able to think about functionality before implementing it. We need to be able to reason about it among team members. We need to be able to communicate our mental models of functionality not just by speaking about them, but also on paper. Otherwise reasoning about it does not scale. We learned thinking about functionality in the small using flow charts, Nassi-Shneiderman diagrams, pseudo code, or UML sequence diagrams. That´s nice and well. But it does not scale. You can use these tools to describe manageable algorithms. But it does not work for the functionality triggered by pressing the “1-Click Order” on an amazon product page for example. There are several reasons for that, I´d say. Firstly, the level of abstraction over code is negligible. It´s essentially non-existent. Drawing a flow chart or writing pseudo code or writing actual code is very, very much alike. All these tools are about control flow like code is.[2] In addition all tools are computationally complete. They are about logic which is expressions and especially control statements. Whatever you code in Java you can fully (!) describe using a flow chart. And then there is no data. They are about control flow and leave out the data altogether. Thus data mostly is assumed to be global. That´s shooting yourself in the foot, as I hope you agree. Even if it´s functionality over data that does not mean “don´t think about data”. Right to the contrary! Functionality only makes sense with regard to data. So data needs to be in the picture right from the start - but it must not dominate the thinking. The above tools fail on this. Bottom line: So far we´re unable to reason in a scalable and abstract manner about functionality. That´s why programmers are so driven to start coding once they are presented with a problem. Programming languages are the only tool they´ve learned to use to reason about functional solutions. Or, well, there might be exceptions. Mathematical notation and SQL may have come to your mind already. Indeed they are tools on a higher level of abstraction than flow charts etc. That´s because they are declarative and not computationally complete. They leave out details - in order to deliver higher efficiency in devising overall solutions. We can easily reason about functionality using mathematics and SQL. That´s great. Except for that they are domain specific languages. They are not general purpose. (And they don´t scale either, I´d say.) Bummer. So to be more precise we need a scalable general purpose tool on a higher than code level of abstraction not neglecting data. Enter: Flow Design. Abstracting functionality using data flows I believe the solution to the problem of abstracting functionality lies in switching from control flow to data flow. Data flow very naturally is not about logic details anymore. There are no expressions and no control statements anymore. There are not even statements anymore. Data flow is declarative by nature. With data flow we get rid of all the limiting traits of former approaches to modeling functionality. In addition, nomen est omen, data flows include data in the functionality picture. With data flows, data is visibly flowing from processing step to processing step. Control is not flowing. Control is wherever it´s needed to process data coming in. That´s a crucial difference and needs some rewiring in your head to be fully appreciated.[2] Since data flows are declarative they are not the right tool to describe algorithms, though, I´d say. With them you don´t design functionality on a low level. During design data flow processing steps are black boxes. They get fleshed out during coding. Data flow design thus is more coarse grained than flow chart design. It starts on a higher level of abstraction - but then is not limited. By nesting data flows indefinitely you can design functionality of any size, without losing sight of your data. Data flows scale very well during design. They can be used on any level of granularity. And they can easily be depicted. Communicating designs using data flows is easy and scales well, too. The result of functional design using data flows is not algorithms (too low level), but processes. Think of data flows as descriptions of industrial production lines. Data as material runs through a number of processing steps to be analyzed, enhances, transformed. On the top level of a data flow design might be just one processing step, e.g. “execute 1-click order”. But below that are arbitrary levels of flows with smaller and smaller steps. That´s not layering as in “layered architecture”, though. Rather it´s a stratified design à la Abelson/Sussman. Refining data flows is not your grandpa´s functional decomposition. That was rooted in control flows. Refining data flows does not suffer from the limits of functional decomposition against which object orientation was supposed to be an antidote. Summary I´ve been working exclusively with data flows for functional design for the past 4 years. It has changed my life as a programmer. What once was difficult is now easy. And, no, I´m not using Clojure or F#. And I´m not a async/parallel execution buff. Designing the functionality of increments using data flows works great with teams. It produces design documentation which can easily be translated into code - in which then the smallest data flow processing steps have to be fleshed out - which is comparatively easy. Using a systematic translation approach code can mirror the data flow design. That way later on the design can easily be reproduced from the code if need be. And finally, data flow designs play well with object orientation. They are a great starting point for class design. But that´s a story for another day. To me data flow design simply is one of the missing links of systematic lightweight software design. There are also other artifacts software development can produce to get feedback, e.g. process descriptions, test cases. But customers can be delighted more easily with code based increments in functionality. ? No, I´m not talking about the endless possibilities this opens for parallel processing. Data flows are useful independently of multi-core processors and Actor-based designs. That´s my whole point here. Data flows are good for reasoning and evolvability. So forget about any special frameworks you might need to reap benefits from data flows. None are necessary. Translating data flow designs even into plain of Java is possible. ?

    Read the article

  • Office 2010: It&rsquo;s not just DOC(X) and XLS(X)

    - by andrewbrust
    Office 2010 has released to manufacturing.  The bits have left the (product team’s) building.  Will you upgrade? This version of Office is officially numbered 14, a designation that correlates with the various releases, through the years, of Microsoft Word.  There were six major versions of Word for DOS, during whose release cycles came three 16-bit Windows versions.  Then, starting with Word 95 and counting through Word 2007, there have been six more versions – all for the 32-bit Windows platform.  Skip version 13 to ward off folksy bad luck (and, perhaps, the bugs that could come with it) and that brings us to version 14, which includes implementations for both 32- and 64-bit Windows platforms.  We’ve come a long way baby.  Or have we? As it does every three years or so, debate will now start to rage on over whether we need a “14th” version the PC platform’s standard word processor, or a “13th” version of the spreadsheet.  If you accept the premise of that question, then you may be on a slippery slope toward answering it in the negative.  Thing is, that premise is valid for certain customers and not others. The Microsoft Office product has morphed from one that offered core word processing, spreadsheet, presentation and email functionality to a suite of applications that provides unique, new value-added features, and even whole applications, in the context of those core services.  The core apps thus grow in mission: Excel is a BI tool.  Word is a collaborative editorial system for the production of publications.  PowerPoint is a media production platform for for live presentations and, increasingly, for delivering more effective presentations online.  Outlook is a time and task management system.  Access is a rich client front-end for data-driven self-service SharePoint applications.  OneNote helps you capture ideas, corral random thoughts in a semi-structured way, and then tie them back to other, more rigidly structured, Office documents. Google Docs and other cloud productivity platforms like Zoho don’t really do these things.  And there is a growing chorus of voices who say that they shouldn’t, because those ancillary capabilities are over-engineered, over-produced and “under-necessary.”  They might say Microsoft is layering on superfluous capabilities to avoid admitting that Office’s core capabilities, the ones people really need, have become commoditized. It’s hard to take sides in that argument, because different people, and the different companies that employ them, have different needs.  For my own needs, it all comes down to three basic questions: will the new version of Office save me time, will it make the mundane parts of my job easier, and will it augment my services to customers?  I need my time back.  I need to spend more of it with my family, and more of it focusing on my own core capabilities rather than the administrative tasks around them.  And I also need my customers to be able to get more value out of the services I provide. Help me triage my inbox, help me get proposals done more quickly and make them easier to read.  Let me get my presentations done faster, make them more effective and make it easier for me to reuse materials from other presentations.  And, since I’m in the BI and data business, help me and my customers manage data and analytics more easily, both on the desktop and online. Those are my criteria.  And, with those in mind, Office 2010 is looking like a worthwhile upgrade.  Perhaps it’s not earth-shattering, but it offers a combination of incremental improvements and a few new major capabilities that I think are quite compelling.  I provide a brief roundup of them here.  It’s admittedly arbitrary and not comprehensive, but I think it tells the Office 2010 story effectively. Across the Suite More than any other, this release of Office aims to give collaboration a real workout.  In certain apps, for the first time, documents can be opened simultaneously by multiple users, with colleagues’ changes appearing in near real-time.  Web-browser-based versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote will be available to extend collaboration to contributors who are off the corporate network. The ribbon user interface is now more pervasive (for example, it appears in OneNote and in Outlook’s main window).  It’s also customizable, allowing users to add, easily, buttons and options of their choosing, into new tabs, or into new groups within existing tabs. Microsoft has also taken the File menu (which was the “Office Button” menu in the 2007 release) and made it into a full-screen “Backstage” view where document-wide operations, like saving, printing and online publishing are performed. And because, more and more, heavily formatted content is cut and pasted between documents and applications, Office 2010 makes it easier to manage the retention or jettisoning of that formatting right as the paste operation is performed.  That’s much nicer than stripping it off, or adding it back, afterwards. And, speaking of pasting, a number of Office apps now make it especially easy to insert screenshots within their documents.  I know that’s useful to me, because I often document or critique applications and need to show them in action.  For the vast majority of users, I expect that this feature will be more useful for capturing snapshots of Web pages, but we’ll have to see whether this feature becomes popular.   Excel At first glance, Excel 2010 looks and acts nearly identically to the 2007 version.  But additional glances are necessary.  It’s important to understand that lots of people in the working world use Excel as more of a database, analytics and mathematical modeling tool than merely as a spreadsheet.  And it’s also important to understand that Excel wasn’t designed to handle such workloads past a certain scale.  That all changes with this release. The first reason things change is that Excel has been tuned for performance.  It’s been optimized for multi-threaded operation; previously lengthy processes have been shortened, especially for large data sets; more rows and columns are allowed and, for the first time, Excel (and the rest of Office) is available in a 64-bit version.  For Excel, this means users can take advantage of more than the 2GB of memory that the 32-bit version is limited to. On the analysis side, Excel 2010 adds Sparklines (tiny charts that fit into a single cell and can therefore be presented down an entire column or across a row) and Slicers (a more user-friendly filter mechanism for PivotTables and charts, which visually indicates what the filtered state of a given data member is).  But most important, Excel 2010 supports the new PowerPIvot add-in which brings true self-service BI to Office.  PowerPivot allows users to import data from almost anywhere, model it, and then analyze it.  Rather than forcing users to build “spreadmarts” or use corporate-built data warehouses, PowerPivot models function as true columnar, in-memory OLAP cubes that can accommodate millions of rows of data and deliver fast drill-down performance. And speaking of OLAP, Excel 2010 now supports an important Analysis Services OLAP feature called write-back.  Write-back is especially useful in financial forecasting scenarios for which Excel is the natural home.  Support for write-back is long overdue, but I’m still glad it’s there, because I had almost given up on it.   PowerPoint This version of PowerPoint marks its progression from a presentation tool to a video and photo editing and production tool.  Whether or not it’s successful in this pursuit, and if offering this is even a sensible goal, is another question. Regardless, the new capabilities are kind of interesting.  A greatly enhanced set of slide transitions with 3D effects; in-product photo and video editing; accommodation of embedded videos from services such as YouTube; and the ability to save a presentation as a video each lay testimony to PowerPoint’s transformation into a media tool and away from a pure presentation tool. These capabilities also recognize the importance of the Web as both a source for materials and a channel for disseminating PowerPoint output. Congruent with that is PowerPoint’s new ability to broadcast a slide presentation, using a quickly-generated public URL, without involving the hassle or expense of a Web meeting service like GoToMeeting or Microsoft’s own LiveMeeting.  Slides presented through this broadcast feature retain full color fidelity and transitions and animations are preserved as well.   Outlook Microsoft’s ubiquitous email/calendar/contact/task management tool gains long overdue speed improvements, especially against POP3 email accounts.  Outlook 2010 also supports multiple Exchange accounts, rather than just one; tighter integration with OneNote; and a new Social Connector providing integration with, and presence information from, online social network services like LinkedIn and Facebook (not to mention Windows Live).  A revamped conversation view now includes messages that are part of a given thread regardless of which folder they may be stored in. I don’t know yet how well the Social Connector will work or whether it will keep Outlook relevant to those who live on Facebook and LinkedIn.  But among the other features, there’s very little not to like.   OneNote To me, OneNote is the part of Office that just keeps getting better.  There is one major caveat to this, which I’ll cover in a moment, but let’s first catalog what new stuff OneNote 2010 brings.  The best part of OneNote, is the way each of its versions have managed hierarchy: Notebooks have sections, sections have pages, pages have sub pages, multiple notes can be contained in either, and each note supports infinite levels of indentation.  None of that is new to 2010, but the new version does make creation of pages and subpages easier and also makes simple work out of promoting and demoting pages from sub page to full page status.  And relationships between pages are quite easy to create now: much like a Wiki, simply typing a page’s name in double-square-brackets (“[[…]]”) creates a link to it. OneNote is also great at integrating content outside of its notebooks.  With a new Dock to Desktop feature, OneNote becomes aware of what window is displayed in the rest of the screen and, if it’s an Office document or a Web page, links the notes you’re typing, at the time, to it.  A single click from your notes later on will bring that same document or Web page back on-screen.  Embedding content from Web pages and elsewhere is also easier.  Using OneNote’s Windows Key+S combination to grab part of the screen now allows you to specify the destination of that bitmap instead of automatically creating a new note in the Unfiled Notes area.  Using the Send to OneNote buttons in Internet Explorer and Outlook result in the same choice. Collaboration gets better too.  Real-time multi-author editing is better accommodated and determining author lineage of particular changes is easily carried out. My one pet peeve with OneNote is the difficulty using it when I’m not one a Windows PC.  OneNote’s main competitor, Evernote, while I believe inferior in terms of features, has client versions for PC, Mac, Windows Mobile, Android, iPhone, iPad and Web browsers.  Since I have an Android phone and an iPad, I am practically forced to use it.  However, the OneNote Web app should help here, as should a forthcoming version of OneNote for Windows Phone 7.  In the mean time, it turns out that using OneNote’s Email Page ribbon button lets you move a OneNote page easily into EverNote (since every EverNote account gets a unique email address for adding notes) and that Evernote’s Email function combined with Outlook’s Send to OneNote button (in the Move group of the ribbon’s Home tab) can achieve the reverse.   Access To me, the big change in Access 2007 was its tight integration with SharePoint lists.  Access 2010 and SharePoint 2010 continue this integration with the introduction of SharePoint’s Access Services.  Much as Excel Services provides a SharePoint-hosted experience for viewing (and now editing) Excel spreadsheet, PivotTable and chart content, Access Services allows for SharePoint browser-hosted editing of Access data within the forms that are built in the Access client itself. To me this makes all kinds of sense.  Although it does beg the question of where to draw the line between Access, InfoPath, SharePoint list maintenance and SharePoint 2010’s new Business Connectivity Services.  Each of these tools provide overlapping data entry and data maintenance functionality. But if you do prefer Access, then you’ll like  things like templates and application parts that make it easier to get off the blank page.  These features help you quickly get tables, forms and reports built out.  To make things look nice, Access even gets its own version of Excel’s Conditional Formatting feature, letting you add data bars and data-driven text formatting.   Word As I said at the beginning of this post, upgrades to Office are about much more than enhancing the suite’s flagship word processing application. So are there any enhancements in Word worth mentioning?  I think so.  The most important one has to be the collaboration features.  Essentially, when a user opens a Word document that is in a SharePoint document library (or Windows Live SkyDrive folder), rather than the whole document being locked, Word has the ability to observe more granular locks on the individual paragraphs being edited.  Word also shows you who’s editing what and its Save function morphs into a sync feature that both saves your changes and loads those made by anyone editing the document concurrently. There’s also a new navigation pane that lets you manage sections in your document in much the same way as you manage slides in a PowerPoint deck.  Using the navigation pane, you can reorder sections, insert new ones, or promote and demote sections in the outline hierarchy.  Not earth shattering, but nice.   Other Apps and Summarized Findings What about InfoPath, Publisher, Visio and Project?  I haven’t looked at them yet.  And for this post, I think that’s fine.  While those apps (and, arguably, Access) cater to specific tasks, I think the apps we’ve looked at in this post service the general purpose needs of most users.  And the theme in those 2010 apps is clear: collaboration is key, the Web and productivity are indivisible, and making data and analytics into a self-service amenity is the way to go.  But perhaps most of all, features are still important, as long as they get you through your day faster, rather than adding complexity for its own sake.  I would argue that this is true for just about every product Microsoft makes: users want utility, not complexity.

    Read the article

  • Create a class that inherets DrawableGameComponent in XNA as a CLASS with custom functions

    - by user3675013
    using Microsoft.Xna.Framework.Graphics; using Microsoft.Xna.Framework.Media; using Microsoft.Xna.Framework; using Microsoft.Xna.Framework.Content; namespace TileEngine { class Renderer : DrawableGameComponent { public Renderer(Game game) : base(game) { } SpriteBatch spriteBatch ; protected override void LoadContent() { base.LoadContent(); } public override void Draw(GameTime gameTime) { base.Draw(gameTime); } public override void Update(GameTime gameTime) { base.Update(gameTime); } public override void Initialize() { base.Initialize(); } public RenderTarget2D new_texture(int width, int height) { Texture2D TEX = new Texture2D(GraphicsDevice, width, height); //create the texture to render to RenderTarget2D Mine = new RenderTarget2D(GraphicsDevice, width, height); GraphicsDevice.SetRenderTarget(Mine); //set the render device to the reference provided //maybe base.draw can be used with spritebatch. Idk. We'll see if the order of operation //works out. Wish I could call base.draw here. return Mine; //I'm hoping that this returns the same instance and not a copy. } public void draw_texture(int width, int height, RenderTarget2D Mine) { GraphicsDevice.SetRenderTarget(null); //Set the renderer to render to the backbuffer again Rectangle drawrect = new Rectangle(0, 0, width, height); //Set the rendering size to what we want spriteBatch.Begin(); //This uses spritebatch to draw the texture directly to the screen spriteBatch.Draw(Mine, drawrect, Color.White); //This uses the color white spriteBatch.End(); //ends the spritebatch //Call base.draw after this since it doesn't seem to recognize inside the function //maybe base.draw can be used with spritebatch. Idk. We'll see if the order of operation //works out. Wish I could call base.draw here. } } } I solved a previous issue where I wasn't allowed to access GraphicsDevice outside the main Default 'main' class Ie "Game" or "Game1" etc. Now I have a new issue. FYi no one told me that it would be possible to use GraphicsDevice References to cause it to not be null by using the drawable class. (hopefully after this last bug is solved it doesn't still return null) Anyways at present the problem is that I can't seem to get it to initialize as an instance in my main program. Ie Renderer tileClipping; and I'm unable to use it such as it is to be noted i haven't even gotten to testing these two steps below but before it compiled but when those functions of this class were called it complained that it can't render to a null device. Which meant that the device wasn't being initialized. I had no idea why. It took me hours to google this. I finally figured out the words I needed.. which were "do my rendering in XNA in a seperate class" now I haven't used the addcomponent function because I don't want it to only run these functions automatically and I want to be able to call the custom ones. In a nutshell what I want is: *access to rendering targets and graphics device OUTSIDE default class *passing of Rendertarget2D (which contain textures and textures should automatically be passed with a rendering target? ) *the device should be passed to this function as well OR the device should be passed to this function as a byproduct of passing the rendertarget (which is automatically associated with the render device it was given originally) *I'm assuming I'm dealing with abstracted pointers here so when I pass a class object or instance, I should be recieving the SAME object , I referenced, and not a copy that has only the lifespan of the function running. *the purpose for all these options: I want to initialize new 2d textures on the fly to customize tileclipping and even the X , y Offsets of where a WHOLE texture will be rendered, and the X and Y offsets of where tiles will be rendered ON that surface. This is why. And I'll be doing region based lighting effects per tile or even per 8X8 pixel spaces.. we'll see I'll also be doing sprite rotations on the whole texture then copying it again to a circular masked texture, and then doing a second copy for only solid tiles for masked rotated collisions on sprites. I'll be checking the masked pixels for my collision, and using raycasting possibly to check for collisions on those areas. The sprite will stay in the center, when this rotation happens. Here is a detailed diagram: http://i.stack.imgur.com/INf9K.gif I'll be using texture2D for steps 4-6 I suppose for steps 1 as well. Now ontop of that, the clipping size (IE the sqaure rendered) will be able to be shrunk or increased, on a per frame basis Therefore I can't use the same static size for my main texture2d and I can't use just the backbuffer Or we get the annoying flicker. Also I will have multiple instances of the renderer class so that I can freely pass textures around as if they are playing cards (in a sense) layering them ontop of eachother, cropping them how i want and such. and then using spritebatch to simply draw them at the locations I want. Hopefully this makes sense, and yes I will be planning on using alpha blending but only after all tiles have been drawn.. The masked collision is important and Yes I am avoiding using math on the tile rendering and instead resorting to image manipulation in video memory which is WHY I need this to work the way I'm intending it to work and not in the default way that XNA seems to handle graphics. Thanks to anyone willing to help. I hate the code form offered, because then I have to rely on static presence of an update function. What if I want to kill that update function or that object, but have it in memory, but just have it temporarily inactive? I'm making the assumption here the update function of one of these gamecomponents is automatic ? Anyways this is as detailed as I can make this post hopefully someone can help me solve the issue. Instead of tell me "derrr don't do it this wayyy" which is what a few people told me (but they don't understand the actual goal I have in mind) I'm trying to create basically a library where I can copy images freely no matter the size, i just have to specify the size in the function then as long as a reference to that object exists it should be kept alive? right? :/ anyways.. Anything else? I Don't know. I understand object oriented coding but I don't understand this XNA It's beggining to feel impossible to do anything custom in it without putting ALL my rendering code into the draw function of the main class tileClipping.new_texture(GraphicsDevice, width, height) tileClipping.Draw_texture(...)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3