Search Results

Search found 21160 results on 847 pages for 'vs 2010'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 327/847 | < Previous Page | 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334  | Next Page >

  • Trial vs free with limited functionality

    - by Morten K
    Hi everyone, Not a programming question as such, but a bit more business oriented question about software product development. We have just released a small app, and is offering a free, fully functional trial which lasts for 15 days. I have the gut feeling however, that to reach any kind of penetration on the web, we'd need to offer a version which is free forever, but then has a few limitations in terms of functionality (still quite usable, but not full-throttle). For example, the Roboform browser plugin is somewhat similar in purpose to ours. Not functionality wise, but it's basically a little util that saves time and removes some repetitive-action pain. They offer a free version with limitations and then a pro version for around 30 USD. Roboform has gotten very much attention over the years, and I can't help to think that this is because they have a product which is obviously good, but also free, thus adoption becomes much higher than if they had only offered a 15 day trial. I am wondering if any of you have experience in a similar scenario? Or any thoughts on the two models? Again, I know it's not directly programming related, but it's still a question I feel best answered by a community of developers.

    Read the article

  • Android vs iPhone

    - by Moshe
    I know iPhone development fairly well. From personal experience, how hard would it be for me to get into Android. I am concerned less about code than I am about distribution of my software, given the fragmentation of the Android OS on compatible devices.

    Read the article

  • typeof === "undefined" vs. != null

    - by Thor Thurn
    I often see JavaScript code which checks for undefined parameters etc. this way: if (typeof input !== "undefined") { // do stuff } This seems kind of wasteful, since it involves both a type lookup and a string comparison, not to mention its verbosity. It's needed because 'undefined' could be renamed, though. My question is: How is that code any better than this approach: if (input != null) { // do stuff } As far as I know, you can't redefine null, so it's not going to break unexpectedly. And, because of the type-coercion of the != operator, this checks for both undefined and null... which is often exactly what you want (e.g. for optional function parameters). Yet this form does not seem widespread, and it even causes JSLint to yell at you for using the evil != operator. Why is this considered bad style?

    Read the article

  • Autorelease vs. Release

    - by Sheehan Alam
    Given the two scenarios, which code is best practice and why? Autorelease loginButton = [[[UIBarButtonItem alloc] initWithTitle:@"Login" style:UIBarButtonItemStylePlain target:self action:@selector(loginButtonClicked:)] autorelease]; self.navigationItem.rightBarButtonItem = loginButton; or Release loginButton = [[UIBarButtonItem alloc] initWithTitle:@"Login" style:UIBarButtonItemStylePlain target:self action:@selector(loginButtonClicked:)]; self.navigationItem.rightBarButtonItem = loginButton; [loginButton release];

    Read the article

  • Confused about "override" vs. "new" in C#

    - by iTayb
    I'm having the following classes: class Base { public virtual void Print() { Console.WriteLine("Base"); } } class Der1 : Base { public new virtual void Print() { Console.WriteLine("Der1"); } } class Der2 : Der1 { public override void Print() { Console.WriteLine("Der2"); } } This is my main method: Base b = new Der2(); Der1 d1 = new Der2(); Der2 d2 = new Der2(); b.Print(); d1.Print(); d2.Print(); The output is Base, Der2, Der2. As far as I know, Override won't let previous method to run, even if the pointer is pointing to them. So the first line should output Der2 as well. However Base came out. How is it possible? How the override didn't work there?

    Read the article

  • help with installing clamav for remote apache server vs WAMP localserver

    - by Scarface
    Hey guys, I have never installed an extension before so I am not really sure where to start. I want to do 2 things: install clamav virus scanner http://sourceforge.net/projects/php-clamav/ on my remote server which is a linux apache setup using cpanel as a gui. install clamav on my localserver on my home computer which operates on windows and has WAMP server installed for server-side activity What is the difference between the two installation methods? What is required for each installation? If anyone can point me in the right direction in any way, I would really appreciate it. Even if it is just an article or tutorial on how to get started.

    Read the article

  • gnuplot - multiple lines with different x ranges

    - by Aly
    Hi, I am using gnuplot to try and plot several lines but each have different x ranges. I am running the following script: # gnuplot script for 'omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat' plot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:2 with lines title '1' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:3 with lines title '2' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:4 with lines title '3' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:5 with lines title '4' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:6 with lines title '5' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:7 with lines title '6' replot "omarConf2EvONLY-vs-everyone-gta-lag-lpas-omarConf1-random-tag-tpas.dat" using 1:8 with lines title '7' set terminal png size 800,600 set output "omar_vs_everyone-EVONLY.png" replot and the .dat file is just a file with columns such as: 1 0.5 0.5 0.1 2 0.6 1.3 0.8 3 0.7 0.32 4 0.7 0.35 5 1.3 4.32 6 1.67 notice that the columns have different lengths as each line has different x ranges. The problem I have is that it plots funny as shown below:

    Read the article

  • casting vs using the 'as' keyword in the CLR

    - by Frank V
    I'm learning about design patterns and because of that I've ended using a lot of interfaces. One of my "goals" is to program to an interface, not an implementation. What I've found is that I'm doing a lot of casting or object type conversion. What I'd like to know is if there is a difference between these two methods of conversion: public interface IMyInterface { void AMethod(); } public class MyClass : IMyInterface { public void AMethod() { //Do work } // other helper methods.... } public class Implementation { IMyInterface _MyObj; MyClass _myCls1; MyClass _myCls2; public Implementation() { _MyObj = new MyClass(); // What is the difference here: _myCls1 = (MyClass)_MyObj; _myCls2 = (_MyObj as MyClass); } } If there is a difference, is there a cost difference or how does this affect my program? Hopefully this makes sense. Sorry for the bad example; it is all I could think of... Update: What is "in general" the preferred method? (I had a question similar to this posted in the 'answers'. I moved it up here at the suggestion of Michael Haren. Also, I want to thank everyone who's provided insight and perspective on my question.

    Read the article

  • NSNotifications vs delegate for multiple instances of same protocol

    - by Brent Traut
    I could use some architectural advice. I've run into the following problem a few times now and I've never found a truly elegant way to solve it. The issue, described at the highest level possible:I have a parent class that would like to act as the delegate for multiple children (all using the same protocol), but when the children call methods on the parent, the parent no longer knows which child is making the call. I would like to use loose coupling (delegates/protocols or notifications) rather than direct calls. I don't need multiple handlers, so notifications seem like they might be overkill. To illustrate the problem, let me try a super-simplified example: I start with a parent view controller (and corresponding view). I create three child views and insert each of them into the parent view. I would like the parent view controller to be notified whenever the user touches one of the children. There are a few options to notify the parent: Define a protocol. The parent implements the protocol and sets itself as the delegate to each of the children. When the user touches a child view, its view controller calls its delegate (the parent). In this case, the parent is notified that a view is touched, but it doesn't know which one. Not good enough. Same as #1, but define the methods in the protocol to also pass some sort of identifier. When the child tells its delegate that it was touched, it also passes a pointer to itself. This way, the parent know exactly which view was touched. It just seems really strange for an object to pass a reference to itself. Use NSNotifications. The parent defines a separate method for each of the three children and then subscribes to the "viewWasTouched" notification for each of the three children as the notification sender. The children don't need to attach themselves to the user dictionary, but they do need to send the notification with a pointer to themselves as the scope. Same as #4, but rather than using separate methods, the parent could just use one with a switch case or other branching along with the notification's sender to determine which path to take. Create multiple man-in-the-middle classes that act as the delegates to the child views and then call methods on the parent either with a pointer to the child or with some other differentiating factor. This approach doesn't seem scalable. Are any of these approaches considered best practice? I can't say for sure, but it feels like I'm missing something more obvious/elegant.

    Read the article

  • Anonymous users support vs Google bot

    - by Andy
    I have a User class in my web app that represents a user currently logged in. Every time a user vists a page, a User instance is populated based on authentication data supplied in cookies. A User instance is created even if an anonymous user logs in - and a corresponding new record is created in the User table in the database. This approach allows me to save some state info for the current user regardless of its type. The problem however with this approach is the Google bot, and other non-human web organisms crawling my pages. Every time a bot starts to walk around the site, thousands of useless records will be created in the database, each of them only to be used for a single page. Question: what is the best trade off? How to support anonymous users, save their state, and don't get too much overhead because of cookieless bots?

    Read the article

  • Debug vs Trace in C#

    - by koumides
    All, As I understand statements like Debug.WriteLine() will not stay in the code in the Release build. On the other hand Trace.WriteLine() will stay in the code in the Release build. What is controling this behaviour? Does the C# compiler ignores everything from the System.Diagnostics.Debug class when the DEBUG is defined? I am just trying to understand the internals of C# and just curious. Thanks, MK

    Read the article

  • Factory vs instance constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • Real pagination vs Next and Previous buttons

    - by Pablo
    By real pagination i mean something like this when in page 3: <<Previous 1 | 2 | {3} | 4 | 5 |...| 15 | Next>> By Next and Previous buttons i mean something like this when in page 3: <<previous Next>> Performance wise im sure the Previous and Next Buttons are better since unlike the real pagination it doesn't require over-querying the database. By over-querying the database i mean getting more information from the database than what you will need to display on the page. My theory is that the Previous and Next Buttons can drastically increase a site performance as it only requires the exact information you will need to display on a page, please correct me if im wrong on this. so, do users really have preference when it comes to this two options? is it just a Developer preference and its convenience? Which one do you prefer? why? *Note: Previous and Next Buttons are usually labeled Newer and older.

    Read the article

  • "Too many indexes on table" error when creating relationships in Microsoft Access 2010.

    - by avianattackarmada
    I have tblUsers which has a primary key of UserID. UserID is used as a foreign key in many tables. Within a table, it is used as a foreign key for multiple fields (e.g. ObserverID, RecorderID, CheckerID). I have successfully added relationships (with in the the MS Access 'Relationship' view), where I have table aliases to do the multiple relationships per table: *tblUser.UserID - 1 to many - tblResight.ObserverID *tblUser_1.UserID - 1 to many - tblResight.CheckerID After creating about 25 relationships with enforcement of referential integrity, when I try to add an additional one, I get the following error: "The operation failed. There are too many indexes on table 'tblUsers.' Delete some of the indexes on the table and try the operation again." I ran the code I found here and it returned that I have 6 indexes on tblUsers. I know there is a limit of 32 indexes per table. Am I using the relationship GUI wrong? Does access create an index for the enforcement of referential integrity any time I create a relationship (especially indexes that wouldn't turn up when I ran the script)? I'm kind of baffled, any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Sbyte[] vs byte[][] using methods

    - by blgnklc
    It is written byte[][] getImagesForFields(java.lang.String[] fieldnames) Gets an array of images for the given fields. On the other hand, as long as I use the method in the web application project built on asp.net 2.o using c#; the provided web method declared above, returns sbyte; Have a look my code below; formClearanceService.openSession(imageServiceUser); formClearanceService.prepareInstance(formId); byte[][] fieldImagesList = formClearanceService.getImagesForFields(fieldNames); formClearanceService.closeSession(); thus I get the following error: Cannot implicitly convert type 'sbyte[]' to 'byte[][]' So now, 1- should I ask the web service provider what is going on? or 2- any other way that can use the sbyte as I was suppose to use byte[][] like following using: byte[] ssss = fieldImagesList [0]..

    Read the article

  • C++ Array vs vector

    - by blue_river
    when using C++ vector, time spent is 718 milliseconds, while when I use Array, time is almost 0 milliseconds. Why so much performance difference? int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { const int size = 10000; clock_t start, end; start = clock(); vector<int> v(size*size); for(int i = 0; i < size; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < size; j++) { v[i*size+j] = 1; } } end = clock(); cout<< (end - start) <<" milliseconds."<<endl; // 718 milliseconds int f = 0; start = clock(); int arr[size*size]; for(int i = 0; i < size; i++) { for(int j = 0; j < size; j++) { arr[i*size+j] = 1; } } end = clock(); cout<< ( end - start) <<" milliseconds."<<endl; // 0 milliseconds return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Domain object validation vs view model validation

    - by Brendan Vogt
    I am using ASP.NET MVC 3 and I am using FluentValidation to validate my view models. I am just a little concerned that I might not be on the correct track. As far as what I know, model validation should be done on the domain object. Now with MVC you might have multiple view models that are similar that needs validation. What happens if a property from a domain object occurs in more than one view model? Now you are validating the same property twice, and they might not even be in sync. So if I have a User domain object then I would like to do validation on this object. Now what happens if I have UserAViewModel and UserBViewModel, so now it is multiple validations that needs to be done. The scenario above is just an example, so please don't critise on it.

    Read the article

  • C++ STL Map vs Vector speed

    - by sub
    In the interpreter for my experimental programming language I have a symbol table. Each symbol consists of a name and a value (the value can be e.g.: of type string, int, function, etc.). At first I represented the table with a vector and iterated through the symbols checking if the given symbol name fitted. Then I though using a map, in my case map<string,symbol>, would be better than iterating through the vector all the time but: It's a bit hard to explain this part but I'll try. If a variable is retrieved the first time in a program in my language, of course its position in the symbol table has to be found (using vector now). If I would iterate through the vector every time the line gets executed (think of a loop), it would be terribly slow (as it currently is, nearly as slow as microsoft's batch). So I could use a map to retrieve the variable: SymbolTable[ myVar.Name ] But think of the following: If the variable, still using vector, is found the first time, I can store its exact integer position in the vector with it. That means: The next time it is needed, my interpreter knows that it has been "cached" and doesn't search the symbol table for it but does something like SymbolTable.at( myVar.CachedPosition ). Now my (rather hard?) question: Should I use a vector for the symbol table together with caching the position of the variable in the vector? Should I rather use a map? Why? How fast is the [] operator? Should I use something completely different?

    Read the article

  • iPhone SDK development obj-C vs interface builder

    - by Amy
    I'm new to the iOS platform. I'm not clear on the purpose of the interface builder. It looks like I can avoid using it entirely and just write all the code in objective c. am I right? is there anything that IB can do but obj-c cannot? It reminds me of visual basic 6.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334  | Next Page >