Search Results

Search found 385 results on 16 pages for 'reasoning'.

Page 3/16 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Which linux distro to use? Hyper-V hosting.

  - by TomTom

  Not a linux geek I am looking for a recommendation which Linux distro to use for a hyper-v based hosting envfironment (so access to the enlightment part easily is important). I Would also love to have something that alloows me to split operating system read only files and user files easily without too much tinkering onto two discs, so that the boot disc can be read only. (reasoning: This would allow me to set up a read only disc that is shared between multiple server instances, with the server disc only containing basically the user files)

  Read the article

• SQL server in VMware

  - by UndertheFold

  Please provide your tips and best practices for virtualizing SQL Server in VMWare ESX I am interested in advanced configurations and settings. Please provide reasoning behind your recommendations Edit: Just to clarify, I already have over 70 Virtual SQL servers in separate clusters using an ISCSI equallogic San - What I am really looking for are those advanced configurations like: How you configured your disks / RDM's Do you make use of settings like Mem.ShareScanGHz - http://communities.vmware.com/thread/143828 - that are not well documented

  Read the article

• What should be tested in Javascript?

  - by Nathan Hoad

  At work, we've just started on a heavily Javascript based application (actually using Coffeescript, but still), of which I've been implementing an automated test system using JsTestDriver and fabric. We've never written something with this much Javascript, so up until now we've never done any Javascript testing. I'm unsure what exactly we should be testing in our unit tests. We've written JQuery plugins for various things, so it's quite obvious that they should be verified for correctness as much as possible with JsTestDriver, but everyone else in my team seems to think that we should be testing the page level Javascript as well. I don't think we should be testing page level Javascript as unit tests, but instead using a system like Selenium to verify everything works as expected. My main reasoning for this is that at the moment, page level Javascript tests are guaranteed to fail through JsTestDriver, because they're trying to access elements on the DOM that can't possibly exist. So, what should be unit tested in Javascript?

  Read the article

• Copyright notices/disclaimers in source files

  - by mojuba

  It's a common practice to place copyright notices, various legal disclaimers and sometimes even full license agreements in each source file of an open-source project. Is this really necessary for a (1) open-source project and (2) closed-source project? What are you trying to achieve or prevent by putting these notices in source files? I understand it's a legal question and I doubt we can get a fully competent answer here at programmers.SO (it's for programmers, isn't it?) What would also be interesting to hear is, when you put legal stuff in your source files, is it because "everyone does it" or you got legal advice? What was the reasoning?

  Read the article

• Why does my domain not show up in Google anymore?

  - by Earlz

  So I have had a website since about 2006. It's http://earlz.biz.tm . Recently I've noticed that no results will show up for it in google. I do have a secondary domain(that I plan on getting rid of) pointing to it but I don't understand why google would suddenly not show my site. I believe it was showing up a few months ago and my website is hardly ever down, like one or two days I believe has been the most it's been down in a row in this time period. Is there something wrong with my DNS or other configuration that would make google not index me? For reference I've tried: earlz.biz.tm site:earlz.biz.tm and the heading from my site "Earlz.biz.tm -- The reasoning is bacon" A few show up with the therusticstone.com domain(the one I plan to point somewhere else) but none show up directly linking to earlz.biz.tm.

  Read the article

• Scripting a sophisticated RTS AI with Lua

  - by T. Webster

  I'm planning to develop a somewhat sophisticated RTS AI (eg see BWAPI). have experience programming, but none in game development, so it seems easiest to start by scripting the AI of an existing game I've played, Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War (2004). As far as I can tell, the game AI is scripted with some variant of Lua (by the file extension .ai or .scar). The online documentation is sparse and the community isn't active anymore. I'd like to get some idea of the difficulty of this undertaking. Is it practical with a scripting language like Lua to develop a RTS AI that includes FSMs, decision trees, case-based reasoning, and transposition tables? If someone has any experience scripting Dawn of War, that would also help.

  Read the article

• Which useful alternative control structures do you know?

  - by bigown

  Similar question was closed on SO. Sometimes when we're programming, we find that some particular control structure would be very useful to us, but is not directly available in our programming language. What alternative control structures do you think are a useful way of organizing computation? The goal here is to get new ways of thinking about structuring code, in order to improve chunking and reasoning. You can create a wishful syntax/semantic not available now or cite a less known control structure on an existent programming language. Answers should give ideas for a new programming language or enhancing an actual language. Think of this as brainstorming, so post something you think is a crazy idea but it can be viable in some scenario. It's about imperative programming.

  Read the article

• AI Game Programming : Bayesian Networks, how to make efficient?

  - by Mahbubur R Aaman

  We know that AI is one of the most important part of Game Programming. Bayesian networks is one of the core part of AI at Game Programming. Bayesian networks are graphs that compactly represent the relationship between random variables for a given problem. These graphs aid in performing reasoning or decision making in the face of uncertainty. Here me, utilizing the monte carlo method and genetic algorithms. But tooks much time and sometimes crashes due to memory. Is there any way to implement efficiently?

  Read the article

• Why is there a "new" keyword in Go?

  - by dystroy

  I'm still puzzled as why we have new in Go. &Thing{} is as clear and concise as new(Thing) to Go coders and it uses only constructs you often use elsewhere. It's also more extensible as you might change it to &Thing{3} or &Thing{Feets:7}. In my opinion, having a supplementary keyword is costly, it makes the language more complex and adds to what you must know. And it might mask to newcomers what's behind instantiating a struct. It also makes one more reserved word. So what's the reasoning behind new ? Is it something useful ? Should we use it ?

  Read the article

• Clean Code says to avoid protected variables

  - by Matsemann

  I have a question to a statement in Clean Code. I don't fully understand the reasoning to why we should avoid protected variables. It's from the chapter about Formatting, section about Vertical Distance: Concepts that are closely related should be kept vertically close to each other. Clearly this rule doesn't work for concepts that belong in separate files. But then closely related concepts should not be separated into different files unless you have a very good reason. Indeed, this is one of the reasons that protected variables should be avoided.

  Read the article

• HTML coding style: attribute starts on a new line

  - by Matty

  sublvl's front end developer seems to have a strange coding style that I've never seen before. Every time they begin a new element, immediately after the element name they insert a line break. The first thing that appears on the next line is the first attribute of the element. For example: id="player-container"><div id="player-bar"><div id="player-controls-wrapper"><div id="player-controls"><div id ="player-controls-buttons"> <a The above code was found here. I've never seen this kind of coding style before. What's going on here? Is this just a quirky style or is there some reasoning behind it?

  Read the article

• Testing loses its effectiveness if all programmers don't use them

  - by Jeff O

  Let's assume you are convinced that the extra time spent unit testing has merit and improves production. Does that still hold up when everyone working on the same code doesn't use them? This question makes me wonder if fixing tests that everyone doesn't use is a waste of time. If you correct a test so the new code will pass, you're assuming the new code is correct. The person updating the test better have a firm understanding of the reasoning behind the code change and decide if the test or the new code needs to be fixed. This much inconsistency in a team when it comes to testing is probably an indication of other problems as well. There is a certain amount of risk involved that someone else on the team will alter code that is covered by testing. Is this the point where testing becomes counter-productive?

  Read the article

• Managing Eclipse projects in source control

  - by Matt Phillips

  I've been using eclipse for a long time to do development. One of the problems I've come across when working on other people's projects is if they come from source control, some of the eclipse project files "default.properties" and other xml config files are missing. Its usually a big pain in the butt to get the project running in eclipse. I understand the reasoning to not have certain files tracked because they may be full of specific stuff to a certain eclipse install. How do all of you manage that?

  Read the article

• Single IBAction for multiple UIButtons versus single IBAction for single UIButton

  - by Miraaj

  While using story-board there are two different approaches which my team mates follow: Approach 1: To bind unique action with each button, ie: Done button - binded to - doneButtonAction Cancel button - binded to - cancelButtonAction OR Approach 2: To bind single action to multiple buttons, ie: Done button - binded to - commonButtonAction Cancel button - binded to - commonButtonAction Then in commonButtonAction they prefer to use switch case like this: - (IBAction)commonButtonAction:(id)sender { UIButton *button = (UIButton *)sender; switch (button.tag) { case 201: // done button [self doneButtonAction:sender]; break; case 202: // cancel button [self cancelButtonAction:sender]; break; default: break; } } - (void)cancelButtonAction:(id)sender { // no interesting stuff, simple dismiss of view :-( } - (void)doneButtonAction:(id)sender { // some interesting stuff ;-) } Reasoning which they give to follow approach 2 is - in each view controller during code walk through anyone can easily identify where to find code related to button actions. While others discard this idea because they say that adding an extra switch case is unnecessary and is not a common practice. What are your views?

  Read the article

• Stored procedure Naming conventions?

  - by Chris

  One of our senior developers has stated that we should be using a naming convention for stored procedures with an "objectVerb" style of naming such as ("MemberGetById") instead of a "verbObject" type of naming ("GetMemberByID"). The reasoning for this standard is that all related stored procedures would be grouped together by object rather than by the action. While I see the logic for this way of naming things, this is the first time that I have seen stored procedures named this way. My opinion of the naming convention is that the name can not be read naturally and takes some time to determine what the words are saying and what the procedure might do. What are your takes on this? Which way is the more common way of naming a stored proc, and does a what types of stored proc naming conventions have you used or go by?

  Read the article

• Why not AJAX'ify entire websites?

  - by Anonymous -

  Is there any solid reasoning as to why sites shouldn't be developed with ajax functionality that loads major parts of each part (assuming there are elements like the header, navigation etc that remain the same)? Surely it would be less resource-intensive since the server wouldn't have to serve content that appears on every page, benefiting both the host and end-user. Answer the question taking into consideration: The sites javascript behaviour degrades gracefully in every instance For my question I'm talking about new sites where this behaviour could be implemented rather from the off, so it doesn't technically cost any money - we're not returning to a finished product to implement it.

  Read the article

• Mobile Identity Management at SuperValu

  - by Tanu Sood

  While organizations are fast embracing BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) culture to attract and retain best talent, improve productivity, bring agility and drive down costs, SuperValu coined their own term (and trend): TYDH – Take Your Device Home. Yes, SuperValu, a Minn based, 18,000 employees strong, food retailer handed out 2,200 iPads to store directors at locations across the country. The motivation behind this reverse trend? Phillip Black, Director of Identity & Access Management at SuperValu, shared the reasoning behind this trend in his talk at last week’s Oracle OpenWorld 2012. "It gives them productivity tools to better manage their store," says Black. Intrigued? Find out more in this recently published news article. And learn more about Oracle Identity Management 11gR2 mobile- and social- ready sign-on features today. Additional Resources: Press Release: Oracle announces Identity Management 11g Release 2 On-Demand webcast: Identity Management 11gR2 Launch Oracle Magazine: Security on the Move Website: Oracle Identity Management Blog Post: Mobile and Social Sign-on with Oracle Access Management

  Read the article

• Why is prefixing column names considered bad practice?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  According to a popular SO post is it considered a bad practice to prefix table names. At my company every column is prefixed by a table name. This is difficult for me to read. I'm not sure the reason, but this naming is actually the company standard. I can't stand the naming convention, but I have no documentation to back up my reasoning. All I know is that reading AdventureWorks is much simpler. In this our company DB you will see a table, Person and it might have column name: Person_First_Name or maybe even Person_Person_First_Name (don't ask me why you see person 2x) Why is it considered a bad practice to pre-fix column names? Are underscores considered evil in SQL as well? Note: I own Pro SQL Server 2008 - Relation Database design and implementation. References to that book are welcome.

  Read the article

• Some Insight on the Field of Knowledge Representations

  - by picmate

  I started following an MS in computer sciences after about two years of work for a software company. I worked primarily in data warehousing and business intelligence related software development during my previous occupation. There is a high chance for me to select a research in knowledge representations, ontologies and reasoning, as there are no other research available in any other interesting fields, such as pattern recognition and navigation. I developed an interest towards knowledge representation with what I learnt from the courses I am taking currently. But I do not have a deep understanding of it in terms of which areas such a field would have an impact in a real life scenario, and how it will help me when I am hunting for a job in the near future. Some thought about this would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Why is there a "new" in Go?

  - by dystroy

  I'm still puzzled as why we have new in Go. When you want to instantiate a struct, you do t := Thing{} and, obviously, you can get a pointer to a new instance by doing t := &Thing{} But there's also this possibility : t := new(Thing) This last one seems a little alien to me. &Thing{} is as clear and concise as new(Thing) and it uses only constructs you often use elsewhere. It's also more extensible as you might change it to &Thing{3} or &Thing{Feets:7}. In my opinion, having a supplementary keyword is costly, it makes the language more complex and adds to what you must know. And it might mask to newcomers what's behind instantiating a struct. It also makes one more reserved word. So what's the reasoning behind new ? Is it something useful ? Should we use it ?

  Read the article

• Is it good to buy multiple domains for competitive reasons?

  - by lowestofthekeys

  I am attempting to convince the higher ups at my company that spending $55 to renew one domain for a year is bad when they end up having 3-4 domains names for one website. They're reasoning for doing so is to keep these domains names out of the hands of the competition. For example, the company name is Pie Consulting & Engineering. They want to buy up pieforensicconsulting.com to keep it out of the hands of a competitor (we also do forensic engineering). Could a competitor use that domain in any kind of diabolical way? I mean I figure if someone is typing in pieforensiconsulting into the url field, they know what they're looking for and if it redirects to another company, they're not just going to stay on the site.

  Read the article

• Pattern for performing game actions

  - by Arkiliknam

  Is there a generally accepted pattern for performing various actions within a game? A way a player can perform actions and also that an AI might perform actions, such as move, attack, self-destruct, etc. I currently have an abstract BaseAction which uses .NET generics to specify the different objects that get returned by the various actions. This is all implemented in a pattern similar to the Command, where each action is responsible for itself and does all that it needs. My reasoning for being abstract is so that I may have a single ActionHandler, and AI can just queue up different action implementing the baseAction. And the reason it is generic is so that the different actions can return result information relevant to the action (as different actions can have totally different outcomes in the game), along with some common beforeAction and afterAction implementations. So... is there a more accepted way of doing this, or does this sound alright?

  Read the article

• MVC, when to separate controllers?

  - by Rodolfo

  I'm starting with MVC and have a newbie question. What would be the logic criteria to define what a controller should encompass? For example, say a website has a 'help' section. In there, there are several options like: 'about us', 'return instructions', 'contact us', 'employment opportunities'. Each would then be accessed like 'mysite.com/help/aboutus', 'mysite.com/help/returns', 'mysite.com/help/contactus', etc. My question is, should I have a 'help' controller that has 'about us', 'returns', 'contact us', 'employment' as actions with their respective view, or should each of those be a different controller-action-view set? What should be the line of reasoning to determine when to separate controllers?

  Read the article

• Is writing comments inside methods not a good practice?

  - by Srini Kandula

  A friend told me that writing comments inside methods is not good. He said that we should have comments only for the method definitions(javadocs) but not inside the method body. It seems he read in a book that having comments inside the code means there is a problem in the code. I don't quite understand his reasoning. I think writing comments inside the method body is good and it helps other developers to understand it better and faster. Please provide your comments.

  Read the article

• Is Ubuntu MAAS free? Will it remain like that?

  - by Bruno Pereira

  Ubuntu MAAS, very cool, awesome in fact, looks like a unique tool for several jobs. It looks free, but part of its documentation starts already with clauses that would scare anyone with interest in it: Documentation is copy righted by Canonical; Documentation must be used only for non-commercial purposes; If documentation is distributed within the non-commercial clause you must retain copyright; It just sounds a lot for a guide on how to install MAAS + Juju + Openstack and that scares me a bit. Under what license is Ubuntu MAAS distributed and what would be the reasoning for being so worried about copyrighting a guide like that so heavily? Is Ubuntu MAAS free? Will it continue like that?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >