Search Results

Search found 11972 results on 479 pages for 'writing'.

Page 334/479 | < Previous Page | 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341  | Next Page >

• From Co-op to fulltime help with salary negotation [closed]

  - by Peter

  Hey I'm a coop student that worked at a particular medium size printing company for 8 months. I had a good time it was lax, sometimes insufficiently challenging but none the less I learned a whole lot. I stuck with them for another 5 months (including this month) at the same rate I was paid then, doing testing work, tool development, taking care of emergencies when the lead developers were away, and other smaller projects and now bigger projects and problem handling (bad printer output etc.). I know their website inside out (ecommerce), and I know their printing software inside out and have made many changes to them both without a hitch. I have also done a lot of refactoring of the existing code base which as far as Im concerned, I believe am the only one to do those sorts of restructuring even though there is constant talk about it. I guess the unit testing paid off and lets me see the value in modularity if even a tad more. Never the less I have faith in my skill and the restructuring I did turned out better than I had imagined . Now the problem is that I finish school next month and so I asked for a full time spot the month after. They have been expanding and have hired a new guy a few months after my coop spot, and just now they hired a new guy to deal with the CRM application. The lead developer who wrote all of the software had left 5 months ago so it was up to all of us to learn what he had done over 4 years (including db, networking). So now I'm afraid that if I assert myself for a salary similar to the other guys, which I believe I am certainly on par with, that I would be seen as ingrateful. It's hard to flip a switch and say, hey double my pay, although when I'm working with their bread and butter (printers) and writing new features, refactoring the whole application for extensibility. I love it regardless of pay. I also feel maybe I'm replaceeble, although nobody knows the website better than myself and the lead web dev (not by a long shot), and nobody knows the printer software/drivers better than myself. I just thought they would have brought up a raise earlier on, and now it feels like they don't value my work. I'm also tired of worrying about it. I think my question is, well what do I do next?

  Read the article

• Write and fprintf for file I/O

  - by Darryl Gove

  fprintf() does buffered I/O, where as write() does unbuffered I/O. So once the write() completes, the data is in the file, whereas, for fprintf() it may take a while for the file to get updated to reflect the output. This results in a significant performance difference - the write works at disk speed. The following is a program to test this: #include <fcntl.h #include <unistd.h #include <stdio.h #include <stdlib.h #include <errno.h #include <stdio.h #include <sys/time.h #include <sys/types.h #include <sys/stat.h static double s_time; void starttime() { s_time=1.0*gethrtime(); } void endtime(long its) { double e_time=1.0*gethrtime(); printf("Time per iteration %5.2f MB/s\n", (1.0*its)/(e_time-s_time*1.0)*1000); s_time=1.0*gethrtime(); } #define SIZE 10*1024*1024 void test_write() { starttime(); int file = open("./test.dat",O_WRONLY|O_CREAT,S_IWGRP|S_IWOTH|S_IWUSR); for (int i=0; i<SIZE; i++) { write(file,"a",1); } close(file); endtime(SIZE); } void test_fprintf() { starttime(); FILE* file = fopen("./test.dat","w"); for (int i=0; i<SIZE; i++) { fprintf(file,"a"); } fclose(file); endtime(SIZE); } void test_flush() { starttime(); FILE* file = fopen("./test.dat","w"); for (int i=0; i<SIZE; i++) { fprintf(file,"a"); fflush(file); } fclose(file); endtime(SIZE); } int main() { test_write(); test_fprintf(); test_flush(); } Compiling and running I get 0.2MB/s for write() and 6MB/s for fprintf(). A large difference. There's three tests in this example, the third test uses fprintf() and fflush(). This is equivalent to write() both in performance and in functionality. Which leads to the suggestion that fprintf() (and other buffering I/O functions) are the fastest way of writing to files, and that fflush() should be used to enforce synchronisation of the file contents.

  Read the article

• How do I know if I am using Scrum methodologies?

  - by Jake

  When I first started at my current job, my purpose was to rewrite a massive excel-VBA workbook-application to C# Winforms because it was thought that the new C# app will fix all existing problems and have all the new features for a perfect world. If it were a direct port, in theory it would be easy as i just need to go through all the formulas, conditional formatting, validations, VBA etc. to understand it. However, that was not the case. Many of the new features are tightly dependant on business logic which I am unfamiliar with. As a solo programmer, the first year was spent solely on deciphering the excel workbook and writing the C# app. In theory, I had the business people to "help" me specify requirements, how GUI looks and work, and testing of the app etc; but in practice it is like a contant tsunami of feature creep. At the beginning of the second year I managed to convince the management that this is not going anywhere. I made them start from scratch with the excel-VBA. I have this "issue log" saved on the network, each time they found something they didn't like about the excel-VBA app, they will write it in there. I check the log daily and consolidate issues (in my mind) mainly into 2 groups: (1) requires massive change. (2) can be fixed in current version. For massive change issues, I make a copy of the latest excel-VBA and give it a new version number, then work on it whenever I can. For current version fixes, I make the changes in a few days to a week, and then immediately release it. I also ensure I update the same change in any in-progress massive change future versions. This has gone on for about 4 months and I feel it works great. I made many releases and solved many real issues, also understood the business logic more and more. However, my boss (non-IT trained) thinks what I am doing are just adhoc changes and that i am not looking at the "bigger picture". I am struggling to convince my boss that this works. So I hope to formalise my approach and maybe borrow a buzzword to confuse him. Incidentally, I read about Agile and SCRUM, about backlog and sprints. But it's all very vague to me still. QUESTION (finally): I want to tell him that this is SCRUM! But I want to hold my breath first and ask whether my current approach is considered SCRUM or SCRUM-like? How can I make it more SCRUM-like? Note that I have only myself, there's no project leader or teams.

  Read the article

• RTS Game Style Application [closed]

  - by Daniel Wynand van Wyk

  My question may seem somewhat odd, but I hope that my specifications will clarify EXACTLY what it is that I am after. I need some help choosing the right tooling for a particular endeavour. My background is in desktop application development and large back-end systems. I have worked primarily on the Microsoft stack using C# and the .Net framework. My goal is to develop a 2D, RTS style, interactive office simulation. The simulation will model various office spaces, office equipment, employees and their interactions with one another. The idea is to abstract the concept of an office completely. Under the hood the application will do many things that are nothing like a game. This includes P2P networking, VPN tunnelling, streaming video, instant messaging, document collaboration, remote screen sharing, file-sharing, virus scanning, VOIP, document scanning, faxing, emailing, distributed computing, content management and much more! A somewhat similar thing has been attempted by IBM, where they created a virtual office in second life. If their attempt was a game, the game-play would be notably horrible, to say the least! The users/players will drive and control my application through the various objects modelled in the simulation. A single application capable of performing all of these various tasks would be a nightmare to navigate for even the most expert user. Using the concept of a game, I can easily separate functionality by assigning them to objects that relate 1-1 with their real world counter-parts. This can greatly simplify computing for novice users, with many added benefits in terms of visibility, transparency of process and centralized configuration. My hope is to make complex computing tasks accessible to all kinds of users and to greatly reduce the cognitive load associated with using the many different utilities and applications inside office settings. The complexity is therefore limited to the complexity of the space in which you find yourself. I want the application to target as many platforms as possible and run on computers that have no accelerated graphics capabilities. The simulation won't contain any of the fancy eye-candy you find in modern games, to the contrary, my "game" will purposefully be clean and simple. The closest thing I could imagine would be an old game like "Theme Hospital" or the first instalment of "The Sims". All the content will be pre-created and not user-generated like Second Life. New functionality will be added via a plugin system. Given my background and nature of my "game", I would like to spend most of my time writing code that does not have to do with the simulated office, as the "game" is really just a glorified application menu. I have done much reading about existing engines, frameworks and tools. I need the help of an experienced game developer who has tried and tested various products over the years who can guide me in the right direction given my very particular needs. I would appreciate any help I can get!

  Read the article

• How to be successful at BDD Specifications Workshops?

  - by sigo

  Today we tried to introduce BDD in our software development process by having a specification workshop. For this workshop we had 2 developers, 1 tester and 1 business analyst. The workshop lasted 1h30 and by the end of it we managed to figure out some BDD scenarios for our new feature. We tried to focus on finding the scenarios that we could miss, and the difficult ones. At the end of the workshop some people were actually unhappy with the workshop. One developer felt he wasted his time as he was used to be given out the scenarios directly by the business analyst and review them with her. The business analyst didn't feel confident with our scenario coverage (Had a feeling that we could have missed out other important stuff) but more importantly felt that this workshop was also a waste of time as she could have figured out all these scenarios by herself and in a shorter period of time. So my question is how that kind of workshop can actually work. In the theory, given you have a new feature to develop, you put the tree 'amigos' (dev/tester/ba) in the same room so that they can collaborate together on writing the differents requirements for the new feature using examples. I can see all the benefits from that. Specially in term of knowledge sharing and common product/end goal/done vision. But in practice, we still think it is more cost effective to first have a BA to work on his own on the examples and only then to have the scenarios to be reviewed/reworked by the 3 'amigos'. By having the BA to work on his own, we actually feel more confident that we are less going to miss out stuff + we still get to review the scenarios afterward to double check. We don't think than simple brainstorming/deliberate discovery is actually enought to seriously cover all the requirement for a feature. The business analyst is actually the best person for that kind of stuff. The thing we just do is to review what she wrote and see if then we have a common understanding (which could then lead to rewrite some of her scenarios or add new ones she could have missed). This workshop lasted 1h30, and by the end of it, we didn't feel confident enought about wha we did...sure we could have spent more time on it but honestly most people get exhausted after 1h30 of brainstorming. So how can you get that to work effectively in practice ?

  Read the article

• Learning by doing (and programming by trial and error)

  - by AlexBottoni

  How do you learn a new platform/toolkit while producing working code and keeping your codebase clean? When I know what I can do with the underlying platform and toolkit, I usually do this: I create a new branch (with GIT, in my case) I write a few unit tests (with JUnit, for example) I write my code until it passes my tests So far, so good. The problem is that very often I do not know what I can do with the toolkit because it is brand new to me. I work as a consulant so I cannot have my preferred language/platform/toolkit. I have to cope with whatever the customer uses for the task at hand. Most often, I have to deal (often in a hurry) with a large toolkit that I know very little so I'm forced to "learn by doing" (actually, programming by "trial and error") and this makes me anxious. Please note that, at some point in the learning process, usually I already have: read one or more five-stars books followed one or more web tutorials (writing working code a line at a time) created a couple of small experimental projects with my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA, at the moment. I use Eclipse, Netbeans and others, as well.) Despite all my efforts, at this point usually I can just have a coarse understanding of the platform/toolkit I have to use. I cannot yet grasp each and every detail. This means that each and every new feature that involves some data preparation and some non-trivial algorithm is a pain to implement and requires a lot of trial-and-error. Unfortunately, working by trial-and-error is neither safe nor easy. Actually, this is the phase that makes me most anxious: experimenting with a new toolkit while producing working code and keeping my codebase clean. Usually, at this stage I cannot use the Eclipse Scrapbook because the code I have to write is already too large and complex for this small tool. In the same way, I cannot use any more an indipendent small project for my experiments because I need to try the new code in place. I can just write my code in place and rely on GIT for a safe bail-out. This makes me anxious because this kind of intertwined, half-ripe code can rapidly become incredibly hard to manage. How do you face this phase of the development process? How do you learn-by-doing without making a mess of your codebase? Any tips&tricks, best practice or something like that?

  Read the article

• Looking for recommendations for a server-side newsletter program

  - by Sparky672

  Hello- I'm currently using a server-side SQL based mailing list program called Php-List on multiple sites and it works fairly well. But installation and setup is quite cumbersome, quirky and the interface is not well organized... neither is the code... with pieces all over the place in random fashion. Customizing the "look & feel" and full site integration are both tedious and painful. Upgrading the version is made more complex since multiple edits need to be manually transferred each time. Also, probably due to a poor English translation, descriptions and instructions within certain areas of the user interface are contradictory and unclear. You just have to play with it and remember what you did last time it worked. It's supposed to be so my customers can send out their own newsletters... after supplying a written tutorial, about half of them seem to stumble through it okay and the other half just hire me to do it for them. So not quite easy enough for most average people to use. I'm looking for something that's as easy for them as using a blog or discussion forum. It also must be easier to set up and integrate into a site than Php-List. I have no problem getting dirty and writing CSS or HTML by hand. Nor do I have any problem editing the program code. Perhaps what I'm looking for is a solution that is more organized, a better GUI, and template or "skin" based. Therefore, if I spend many hours customizing a skin, I can simply update the program and re-use my custom skin without having to reproduce the tedious setup over and over. (I currently maintain a list of about 25 things I must manually edit or add to multiple files in multiple directories each time I install or upgrade Php-List) A great example of what I'm looking for is very much like WordPress or phpBB. They're both easy to install and customize yet powerful and packed full of features. They're also VERY well organized making customization less painful. So enough yammering for now... anyone know of something, besides Php-List, with many of the same features as Php-List; maintaining a mailing list with a server-side database, custom sign-up pages, automatic opt-in opt-out, allowing custom HTML newsletter templates, etc? Thank-you!

  Read the article

• JavaOne Session Report - Java ME SDK 3.2

  - by Janice J. Heiss

  Oracle Product Manager for Java ME SDK, Sungmoon Cho, presented a session, "Developing Java Mobile and Embedded Applications with Java ME SDK 3.2,” wherein he covered the basic new features of the Java ME Platform SDK 3.2, a state-of-the-art toolbox for developing mobile and embedded applications. The session began with a summary of the four main components of Java ME SDK. A device emulator allows developers to quickly run and test applications before commercialization. It supports CLDC/MIDP CLDC/IMP.NG and CLC/AGUI. A development environment assists writing, running debugging and deploying and enables on-device debugging. Samples provide developers with useful codes and frameworks. IDE Plugins – NetBeans and Eclipse – equip developers with CPU Profiler, Memory Monitor, Network Monitor, and Device Selector. This means that manual integration is no longer necessary. Cho then talked about the Java ME SDK’s on-device tooling architecture: * Java ME SDK provides an architecture ideal for on-device-debugging.* Device Manager plays the central role by managing different devices whether it is the emulator or a device that Oracle provides or recommends or a third party device as long as the devices have a Java Runtime that supports the protocol that is designated.* The Emulator provides an accurate emulation, since it uses the same code base used in Oracle’s Java ME runtime.* The Universal Emulator Interface (UEI) makes it easy for IDEs to detect the platform.He then focused on the Java ME SDK release highlights, which include: * Implementation and support for the new Oracle® Java Wireless Client 3.2 runtime and the Oracle® Java ME Embedded runtime. A full emulation for the runtime is provided.* Support for JSR 228, the Information Module Profile-Next Generation API (IMP-NG). This is a new profile for embedded devices. * A new Custom Device Skin Creator.* An Eclipse plugin for CLDC/MIDP.* Profiling, Network monitoring, and Memory monitoring are now integrated with the NetBeans profiling tools.* Java ME SDK Update CenterCho summarized the main features: IDE Integration (NetBeans and Eclipse) enables developers to write, run, profile, and debug their applications on their favorite IDE. CPU ProfilerThis enables developers to more quickly detect the hot spot and where CPU time is being used. They can double click the method to jump directly into the source code.Memory Monitor Developers can monitor objects and memory usage in real time.Debugger on the Emulator and DeviceDevelopers can run their applications step by step, and inspect the variables to pinpoint the problem. The debugging can take place either on the emulator or the device.Embedded Application DevelopmentIMP-NG, Device Access, Logging, and AMS API Support are now available.On-Device ToolingConnect your device to your computer, and run and debug the application right on your device.Custom Device Skin CreatorDefine your own device and test on an environment that is closest to your target device. The informative session concluded with a demo that showed more concretely how to apply the new features in Java ME SDK 3.2.

  Read the article

• Documenting sp_ssiscatalog

  - by jamiet

  What is the best way to document an API? Moreover, what is the best way to document a T-SQL API? Before I try to answer those questions I should explain what I mean by “a T-SQL API”. I think of an API as being a collection of well-defined, known, code modules that provide some notion of a service to whomever uses it; in T-SQL terms I tend to think of a collection of stored procedures and functions as a form of API. Its a loose definition, I admit, and in SQL Server circles we don’t tend to think of stored procedures collectively as an API but if you think about it that’s exactly what they are. The question of how to document a T-SQL API came to my mind as I worked on sp_ssiscatalog. How could I make it easy for people to learn about the capabilities of sp_ssiscatalog without forcing them to dig through the code and find out for themselves? My opening gambit was to write documentation pages on the wiki at http://ssisreportingpack.codeplex.com. That’s kinda useful but it does suffer the disadvantage that someone using sp_ssiscatalog needs to go visit a webpage to read it – I want the documentation to be available wherever the user is using sp_ssiscatalog. Moreover, maintaining the wiki is a real PITA. Intellisense works up to a point, I guess: but that only shows whatever SQL Server knows about the various parameters, which isn’t all that much! I wanted a better way for my API users to learn about its capabilities and so I hit upon the idea of simply using PRINT statements within the code itself to inform the user what options are available; hence I added such PRINT statements in the latest check-in. Now when you execute (for example): EXEC sp_ssiscatalog @operation_type='execs' you can hit F6 a few times to view the messages pane and you shall see something like this: Notice that I’m returning information about all the parameters that can be used to affect the results that just got returned. I really do think this will be very useful to anyone using sp_ssiscatalog; I myself am always forgetting what the parameters are and I wrote the damn thing so I can’t really expect anyone else to remember them. I have not yet made available a release that has these changes in it but when I do I’ll blog about it right here. At the time of writing the latest available release of sp_ssiscatalog is DB v1.0.1.0 but if you want to the latest and greatest simply download it straight from source. Feedback is welcome as always. @Jamiet

  Read the article

• Is my JavaScript/jQuery methodology good? [migrated]

  - by absentx

  I am seeking critique on what has become my normal methodology of writing JavaScript code. I have become heavily reliant on the jQuery library, but I think this has helped me learn the native language better also. Anyway, please critique the following style of JavaScript coding... Buried are a lot of questions of scope; if you could point out the strengths and weaknesses of this style I would appreciate it. var critique ={ start: function(){ globalness = 'GLOBAL-GLOBAL'; //Available to all critique's methods var notglobalness = 'LOCAL-LOCAL'; // Only available to critiques start method //Am I using the "method" teminology properly here?? $('#stuff').on('click','a.closer-target',function(){ $target = $(this); if($target.hasClass('active')){ $target.removeClass('active'); } else{ $target.addClass('active'); critique.madness($target); } }) console.log(notglobalness+': at least I am useful at home'); console.log('note here that: '+notglobalness+' is no longer available after this point, lets continue on:'); critique.madness(notglobalness); }, madness: function($e){ //Do a bunch of awesomeness with $e, //but continue to keep it seperate because you think its best to keep things isolated. //Send to the next function when complete here console.log('Here is globalness, which is still available from the start method of critique!! ' + globalness); console.log('Let us see if the globalness carries on to a new var object!!'); console.log('The locally isolated variable of NOTGLOBALNESS is available here, because it was passed to this method. Let us show it:'+$e); carryOn.start(); } } //end critique var carryOn={ start: function(){ console.log('any chance critique.globalness will work here??? lets see: ' +globalness); console.log('it absolutely does'); } } $(document).ready(critique.start); (I always struggle with which of the Stack Exchange sites is best to post "questions of theory" like this, but I think Programmers is the best, if not, as usual a mod will move it, etc...)

  Read the article

• More elegant way to avoid hard coding the format of a a CSV file?

  - by dsollen

  I know this is trivial issue, but I just feel this can be more elegant. So I need to write/read data files for my program, lets say they are CSV for now. I can implement the format as I see fit, but I may have need to change that format later. The simply thing to do is something like out.write(For.getValue()+","+bar.getMinValue()+","+fi.toString()); This is easy to write, but obviously is guilty of hard coding and the general 'magic number' issue. The format is hard-coded, requires parsing of the code to figure out the file format, and changing the format requires changing multiple methods. I could instead have my constants specifying the location that I want each variable to be saved in the CSV file to remove some of the 'magic numbers'; then save/load into the an array at the location specified by the constants: int FOO_LOCATION=0; int BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION=1; int FI_LOCATION=2 int NUM_ARGUMENTS=3; String[] outputArguments=new String[NUM_ARGUMENTS]; outputArguments[FOO_LOCATION] = foo.getValue(); outputArgumetns[BAR_MIN_VAL_LOCATION] = bar.getMinValue(); outptArguments[FI_LOCATOIN==fi.toString(); writeAsCSV(outputArguments); But this is...extremely verbose and still a bit ugly. It makes it easy to see the format of existing CSV and to swap the location of variables within the file easily. However, if I decide to add an extra value to the csv I need to not only add a new constant, but also modify the read and write methods to add the logic that actually saves/reads the argument from the array; I still have to hunt down every method using these variables and change them by hand! If I use Java enums I can clean this up slightly, but the real issue is still present. Short of some sort of functional programming (and java's inner classes are too ugly to be considered functional) I still have no obvious way of clearly expressing what variable is associated with each constant short of writing (and maintaining) it in the read/write methods. For instance I still need to write somewhere that the FOO_LOCATION specifies the location of foo.getValue(). It seems as if there should be a prettier, easier to maintain, manner for approaching this? Incidentally, I'm working in java at the moment, however, I am interested conceptually about the design approach regardless of language. Some library in java that does all the work for me is definitely welcome (though it may prove more hassle to get permission to add it to the codebase then to just write something by hand quickly), but what I'm really asking is more about how to write elegant code if you had to do this by hand.

  Read the article

• Why Java's JMF doesn't work in Linux?

  - by Visruth CV

  I got to do some image processing program in java using Linux. I chose to use the JMF for my camera (a webcam) access. But my program is not able to access the camera. But, the jmf works well in Windows. I downloaded jmf from oracle.com and I tried to install it in 'Ubuntu 10.10-the Maverick-released in October 2010 and supported until April 2012'. The downloaded file was a .bin file. I got the below output (last part of the output) when I tried the command provided by oracle /bin/sh ./jmf-2_1_1e-linux-i586.bin. For inquiries please contact: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 4150 Network Circle, Santa Clara, California 95054. LFI# 129621/Form ID#011801 Do you agree to the above license terms? [yes or no] yes Permit recording from an applet? (see readme.html) [yes or no] yes Permit writing local files from an applet? (recommend no, see readme.html) [yes or no] yes Unpacking... tail: cannot open `+309' for reading: No such file or directory Extracting... ./install.sfx.4140: 1: cannot open ==: No such file ./install.sfx.4140: 1: ==: not found ./install.sfx.4140: 3: Syntax error: ")" unexpected chmod: cannot access `JMF-2.1.1e/bin/jmstudio': No such file or directory chmod: cannot access `JMF-2.1.1e/bin/jmfregistry': No such file or directory chmod: cannot access `JMF-2.1.1e/bin/jmfinit': No such file or directory ./jmf-2_1_1e-linux-i586.bin: 305: JMF-2.1.1e/bin/jmfinit: not found /bin/cp: cannot stat `JMF-2.1.1e/lib/jmf.properties': No such file or directory Done. When try the same command again, getting nothing in the terminal (console). visruth@laptop:~/Desktop/mobileapps$ /bin/sh ./jmf-2_1_1e-linux-i586.bin visruth@laptop:~/Desktop/mobileapps$ Now, I'm not sure that whether it is properly installed or not.Whatever, I'm not getting camera access in my programme. I checked out the driver of the camera, it is available in the os itself I think because other softwares are able to access the camera (web cam). I tried it on both desktop and laptop, but no effect... Is there any solution for the problem?

  Read the article

• Problem creating levels using inherited classes/polymorphism

  - by Adam

  I'm trying to write my level classes by having a base class that each level class inherits from...The base class uses pure virtual functions. My base class is only going to be used as a vector that'll have the inherited level classes pushed onto it...This is what my code looks like at the moment, I've tried various things and get the same result (segmentation fault). //level.h class Level { protected: Mix_Music *music; SDL_Surface *background; SDL_Surface *background2; vector<Enemy> enemy; bool loaded; int time; public: Level(); virtual ~Level(); int bgX, bgY; int bg2X, bg2Y; int width, height; virtual void load(); virtual void unload(); virtual void update(); virtual void draw(); }; //level.cpp Level::Level() { bgX = 0; bgY = 0; bg2X = 0; bg2Y = 0; width = 2048; height = 480; loaded = false; time = 0; } Level::~Level() { } //virtual functions are empty... I'm not sure exactly what I'm supposed to include in the inherited class structure, but this is what I have at the moment... //level1.h class Level1: public Level { public: Level1(); ~Level1(); void load(); void unload(); void update(); void draw(); }; //level1.cpp Level1::Level1() { } Level1::~Level1() { enemy.clear(); Mix_FreeMusic(music); SDL_FreeSurface(background); SDL_FreeSurface(background2); music = NULL; background = NULL; background2 = NULL; Mix_CloseAudio(); } void Level1::load() { music = Mix_LoadMUS("music/song1.xm"); background = loadImage("image/background.png"); background2 = loadImage("image/background2.png"); Mix_OpenAudio(48000, MIX_DEFAULT_FORMAT, 2, 4096); Mix_PlayMusic(music, -1); } void Level1::unload() { } //functions have level-specific code in them... Right now for testing purposes, I just have the main loop call Level1 level1; and use the functions, but when I run the game I get a segmentation fault. This is the first time I've tried writing inherited classes, so I know I'm doing something wrong, but I can't seem to figure out what exactly.

  Read the article

• Upgrades from Beta or CTP SQL Server Software is NOT Supported

  - by BuckWoody

  As of this writing, SQL Server 2008 R2 has released, and just like every release, I get e-mails and calls from folks with this question: “Can I upgrade from Customer Technical Preview (CTP) x or Beta #x or Release Candidate (RC) to the “Released to Manufacturing” (RTM) version?” No. Right up until the last minute, things are changing in the code – and you want that to happen. Our internal testing runs right up until the second we lock down for release, and we watch the CTP/RC/Beta reports to make sure there are no show-stoppers, and fix what we find. And it’s not just “big” changes you need to worry about – a simple change in one line of code can have a massive effect. I know, I know – you’ve possibly upgraded an RC or CTP to the RTM version and it worked “just fine”. But hear this tale: I’ve dealt with someone who faced this exact situation in SQL Server 2008. They upgraded (which is clearly prohibited in the documentation) from a CTP to the RTM version over a year ago. Everything was working fine. But then…one day they had an issue. Couldn’t fix it themselves, we took a look, days went by, and we finally had to call in the big guns for support. Turns out, the upgrade was the problem. So we had to come up with some elaborate schemes to get the system migrated over while they were in production. This was painful for everyone involved. So the answer is still no. Just don’t do it. There is one caveat to this story – if you are a “TAP” customer (you’ll know if you are), we help you move from the CTP products to RTM, but that’s a special case that we track carefully and send along special instructions and tools to help you along. That level of effort isn’t possible on a large scale, so it’s not just a magic tool that we run to upgrade from CTP to RTM. So again, unless you’re a TAP customer, it’s a no-no. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

  Read the article

• Remote Graphics Diagnostics with Windows RT 8.1 and Visual Studio 2013

  - by Michael B. McLaughlin

  Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/mikebmcl/archive/2013/11/12/remote-graphics-diagnostics-with-windows-rt-8.1-and-visual-studio.aspxThis blog post is a brief follow up to my What’s New in Graphics and Game Development in Visual Studio 2013 post on the MVP Award blog. While writing that post I was testing out various features to try to make sure everything worked as expected. I had some trouble getting Remote Graphics Diagnostics (a/k/a remote graphics debugging) working on my first generation Surface RT (upgraded to Windows RT 8.1). It was more strange since I could use remote debugging when doing CPU debugging; it was just graphics debugging that was causing trouble. After some discussions with the great folks who work on the graphics tools in Visual Studio, they were able to repro the problem and recommend a solution. My Surface RT needed the ARM Kits policy installed on it. Once I followed the instructions on the previous link, I could successfully use Remote Graphics Diagnostics on my Surface RT. Please note that this requires Windows RT 8.1 RTM (i.e. not Preview) and that Remote Graphics Diagnostics on ARM only works when you are using Visual Studio 2013 as it is a new feature (it should work just fine using the Express for Windows version). Also, when I installed the ARM Kits policy I needed to do two things to get it to work properly. First, when following the “How to install the Kits policy” instructions, I needed to copy the SecureBoot folder into Program Files on my Surface RT (specifically, I copied the SecureBoot folder to “C:\Program Files\Windows Kits\8.1\bin\arm\” on my Surface RT, creating any necessary directories). It may work if it’s in any system folder; I didn’t test any others after I got it working. I had initially put it in my Downloads folder and tried installing it from there. When the machine restarted it displayed a worrisome error message. I repeatedly pressed the button that would allow me to retry and eventually the machine rebooted and managed to recover itself to its previous state. Second, I needed to install it as an Administrator. The instructions say that this might be necessary. For me it was. This is a Remote Graphics Diagnostics is a great new feature in Visual Studio 2013 so I definitely encourage all of you to check it out!

  Read the article

• Can you work for the big (Google, Microsoft, Facebook etc.) without getting too much involved?

  - by Developer Art

  Having seen people talking about interviewing and working for the big companies, I keep wondering how much are you expected to actually get involved in there. 1) That's because I keep seeing folks from Google and Microsoft and others writing in forums, blogging, tweeting, speaking at conferences and seemingly doing this on the 24/7/365 basis from their office, apartment, hotel and even plane. Are you really expected to commit that much if you come to work for them? Do they want you to think about your work while you're eating, sleeping, taking a shower, making love and so on? Can you in fact "switch off" at five and go home forgetting everything? Perhaps you have a hobby, family life, kids, friends, personal projects anyone? Is it so that if you work for the big then you're expected not to have any life outside of the company? You can't develop own projects, have own clients and just have another life? 2) One other thing is the work contracts the big use. I've heard for instance that when you join Microsoft you need to provide a list of projects you're currently working on and after that anything new you'll come up with during your employment automatically belongs to the company. Are all of the big doing this? Can you deny signing a contract until such clause is removed or with the big it is "take it or leave it" because the legal department won't accept any change? Can you make them write the contract in that manner that they step away from anything you've developed in your private time? Of all the big I have only been at SAP during my internship. Lately while browsing through the old papers I've found my old contact which stipulated they owned everything I developed or invented during my employment, which I would never have signed these days. On a side note I don't think I would return to SAP since I remember most people there were clueless and provided the impression they were simply sitting out their years waiting for the retirement. But anyway, what do the other big put in their contracts? How far do you get involved when you go working for the big? Or perhaps fully committed with your body and soul? P.S. I'm not planning to join any of them I'm just curious.

  Read the article

• RadioButtons and Lambda Expressions

  - by MightyZot

  Radio buttons operate in groups. They are used to present mutually exclusive lists of options. Since I started programming in Windows 20 years ago, I have always been frustrated about how they are implemented. To make them operate as a group, you put your radio buttons in a group box. Conversely, to group radio buttons in HTML, you simply give them all the same name. Radio buttons with the same name or ID in HTML operate as one mutually exclusive group of options. In C#, all your radio buttons must have unique names and you use group boxes to group them. I’m in the process of converting some old code to C# and I’m tasked with creating a user control with groups of radio buttons on it. I started out writing the traditional switch…case statements to check the appropriate radio button based upon value, loops to uncheck them all, etc. Then it occurred to me that I could stick the radio buttons in a Dictionary or List and use Lambda expressions to make my code a lot more maintainable. So, here is what I ended up with: Here is a dictionary that contains my list of radio buttons and their values. I used their values as the keys, so that I can select them by value. Now, instead of using loops and switch…case statements to control the radio buttons, I use the lambda syntax and extension methods. Selecting a Radio Button by Value This code is inside of a property accessor, so “value” represents the value passed into the property accessor. The “First” extension method uses the delegate represented by the lambda expression to select the radio button (actually KeyValuePair) that represents the passed in value. Finally, the resulting checkbox is checked. Since the radio buttons are in the same group, they function as a group, the appropriate radio button is selected while the others are unselected. Reading the Value This is the get accessor for the property that returns the value of the checked radio button. Now, if you’re using binding, this code is likely not necessary; however, I didn’t want to use binding in this case, so I think this is a good alternative to the traditional loops and switch…case statements.

  Read the article

• Criteria for a programming language to be considered "mature"

  - by Giorgio

  I was recently reading an answer to this question, and I was struck by the statement "The language is mature". So I was wondering what we actually mean when we say that "A programming language is mature"? Normally, a programming language is initially developed out of a need, e.g. Try out / implement a new programming paradigm or a new combination of features that cannot be found in existing languages. Try to solve a problem or overcome a limitation of an existing language. Create a language for teaching programming. Create a language that solves a particular class of problems (e.g. concurrency). Create a language and an API for a special application field, e.g. the web (in this case the language might reuse a well-known paradigm, but the whole API must be new). Create a language to push your competitor out of the market (in this case the creator might want the new language to be very similar to an existing one, in order to attract developers to the new programming language and platform). Regardless of what the original motivation and scenario in which a language has been created, eventually some languages are considered mature. In my intuition, this means that the language has achieved (at least one of) its goals, e.g. "We can now use language X as a reliable tool for writing web applications." This is however a bit vague, so I wanted to ask what you consider the most important criteria (if any) that are applied when saying that a language is mature. IMPORTANT NOTE This question is (on purpose) language-agnostic because I am only interested in general criteria. Please write only language-agnostic answers and comments! I am not asking whether any specific "language X is mature" or "which programming languages can be considered mature", or whether "language X is more mature than language Y": please avoid posting any opinions or reference about any specific languages because these are out of the scope of this question. EDIT To make the question more precise, by criteria I mean such things as "tool support", "adoption by the industry", "stability", "rich API", "large user community", "successful application record", "standardization", "clean and uniform semantics", and so on.

  Read the article

• Why are MVC & TDD not employed more in game architecture?

  - by secoif

  I will preface this by saying I haven't looked a huge amount of game source, nor built much in the way of games. But coming from trying to employ 'enterprise' coding practices in web apps, looking at game source code seriously hurts my head: "What is this view logic doing in with business logic? this needs refactoring... so does this, refactor, refactorrr" This worries me as I'm about to start a game project, and I'm not sure whether trying to mvc/tdd the dev process is going to hinder us or help us, as I don't see many game examples that use this or much push for better architectural practices it in the community. The following is an extract from a great article on prototyping games, though to me it seemed exactly the attitude many game devs seem to use when writing production game code: Mistake #4: Building a system, not a game ...if you ever find yourself working on something that isn’t directly moving your forward, stop right there. As programmers, we have a tendency to try to generalize our code, and make it elegant and be able to handle every situation. We find that an itch terribly hard not scratch, but we need to learn how. It took me many years to realize that it’s not about the code, it’s about the game you ship in the end. Don’t write an elegant game component system, skip the editor completely and hardwire the state in code, avoid the data-driven, self-parsing, XML craziness, and just code the damned thing. ... Just get stuff on the screen as quickly as you can. And don’t ever, ever, use the argument “if we take some extra time and do this the right way, we can reuse it in the game”. EVER. is it because games are (mostly) visually oriented so it makes sense that the code will be weighted heavily in the view, thus any benefits from moving stuff out to models/controllers, is fairly minimal, so why bother? I've heard the argument that MVC introduces a performance overhead, but this seems to me to be a premature optimisation, and that there'd more important performance issues to tackle before you worry about MVC overheads (eg render pipeline, AI algorithms, datastructure traversal, etc). Same thing regarding TDD. It's not often I see games employing test cases, but perhaps this is due to the design issues above (mixed view/business) and the fact that it's difficult to test visual components, or components that rely on probablistic results (eg operate within physics simulations). Perhaps I'm just looking at the wrong source code, but why do we not see more of these 'enterprise' practices employed in game design? Are games really so different in their requirements, or is a people/culture issue (ie game devs come from a different background and thus have different coding habits)?

  Read the article

• What is the most appropriate testing method in this scenario?

  - by Daniel Bruce

  I'm writing some Objective-C apps (for OS X/iOS) and I'm currently implementing a service to be shared across them. The service is intended to be fairly self-contained. For the current functionality I'm envisioning there will be only one method that clients will call to do a fairly complicated series of steps both using private methods on the class, and passing data through a bunch of "data mangling classes" to arrive at an end result. The gist of the code is to fetch a log of changes, stored in a service-internal data store, that has occurred since a particular time, simplify the log to only include the last applicable change for each object, attach the serialized values for the affected objects and return this all to the client. My question then is, how do I unit-test this entry point method? Obviously, each class would have thorough unit tests to ensure that their functionality works as expected, but the entry point seems harder to "disconnect" from the rest of the world. I would rather not send in each of these internal classes IoC-style, because they're small and are only made classes to satisfy the single-responsibility principle. I see a couple possibilities: Create a "private" interface header for the tests with methods that call the internal classes and test each of these methods separately. Then, to test the entry point, make a partial mock of the service class with these private methods mocked out and just test that the methods are called with the right arguments. Write a series of fatter tests for the entry point without mocking out anything, testing the entire functionality in one go. This looks, to me, more like "integration testing" and seems brittle, but it does satisfy the "only test via the public interface" principle. Write a factory that returns these internal services and take that in the initializer, then write a factory that returns mocked versions of them to use in tests. This has the downside of making the construction of the service annoying, and leaks internal details to the client. Write a "private" initializer that take these services as extra parameters, use that to provide mocked services, and have the public initializer back-end to this one. This would ensure that the client code still sees the easy/pretty initializer and no internals are leaked. I'm sure there's more ways to solve this problem that I haven't thought of yet, but my question is: what's the most appropriate approach according to unit testing best practices? Especially considering I would prefer to write this test-first, meaning I should preferably only create these services as the code indicates a need for them.

  Read the article

• Is it appropriate to try to control the order of finalization?

  - by Strilanc

  I'm writing a class which is roughly analogous to a CancellationToken, except it has a third state for "never going to be cancelled". At the moment I'm trying to decide what to do if the 'source' of the token is garbage collected without ever being set. It seems that, intuitively, the source should transition the associated token to the 'never cancelled' state when it is about to be collected. However, this could trigger callbacks who were only kept alive by their linkage from the token. That means what those callbacks reference might now in the process of finalization. Calling them would be bad. In order to "fix" this, I wrote this class: public sealed class GCRoot { private static readonly GCRoot MainRoot = new GCRoot(); private GCRoot _next; private GCRoot _prev; private object _value; private GCRoot() { this._next = this._prev = this; } private GCRoot(GCRoot prev, object value) { this._value = value; this._prev = prev; this._next = prev._next; _prev._next = this; _next._prev = this; } public static GCRoot Root(object value) { return new GCRoot(MainRoot, value); } public void Unroot() { lock (MainRoot) { _next._prev = _prev; _prev._next = _next; this._next = this._prev = this; } } } intending to use it like this: Source() { ... _root = GCRoot.Root(callbacks); } void TransitionToNeverCancelled() { _root.Unlink(); ... } ~Source() { TransitionToNeverCancelled(); } but now I'm troubled. This seems to open the possibility for memory leaks, without actually fixing all cases of sources in limbo. Like, if a source is closed over in one of its own callbacks, then it is rooted by the callback root and so can never be collected. Presumably I should just let my sources be collected without a peep. Or maybe not? Is it ever appropriate to try to control the order of finalization, or is it a giant warning sign?

  Read the article

• How to refactor a method which breaks "The law of Demeter" principle?

  - by dreza

  I often find myself breaking this principle (not intentially, just through bad design). However recently I've seen a bit of code that I'm not sure of the best approach. I have a number of classes. For simplicity I've taken out the bulk of the classes methods etc public class Paddock { public SoilType Soil { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around paddock information } public class SoilType { public SoilDrainageType Drainage { get; private set; } // a whole bunch of other properties around soil types } public class SoilDrainageType { // a whole bunch of public properties that expose soil drainage values public double GetProportionOfDrainage(SoilType soil, double blockRatio) { // This method does a number of calculations using public properties // exposed off SoilType as well as the blockRatio value in some conditions } } In the code I have seen in a number of places calls like so paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); or within the block object itself in places it's Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.Soil, this.GetBlockRatio()); Upon reading this seems to break "The Law of Demeter" in that I'm chaining together these properties to access the method I want. So my thought in order to adjust this was to create public methods on SoilType and Paddock that contains wrappers i.e. on paddock it would be public class Paddock { public double GetProportionOfDrainage() { return Soil.GetProportionOfDrainage(this.GetBlockRatio()); } } on the SoilType it would be public class SoilType { public double GetProportionOfDrainage(double blockRatio) { return Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(this, blockRatio); } } so now calls where it used would be simply // used outside of paddock class where we can access instances of Paddock paddock.GetProportionofDrainage() or this.GetProportionOfDrainage(); // if used within Paddock class This seemed like a nice alternative. However now I have a concern over how would I enforce this usage and stop anyone else from writing code such as paddock.Soil.Drainage.GetProportionOfDrainage(paddock.Soil, paddock.GetBlockRatio()); rather than just paddock.GetProportionOfDrainage(); I need the properties to remain public at this stage as they are too ingrained in usage throughout the code block. However I don't really want a mixture of accessing the method on DrainageType directly as that seems to defeat the purpose altogether. What would be the appropiate design approach in this situation? I can provide more information as required to better help in answers. Is my thoughts on refactoring this even appropiate or should is it best to leave it as is and use the property chaining to access the method as and when required?

  Read the article

• What will be the better way for data retrieval on application that needs to handle limited amount of data.?

  - by Milanix

  This is not really a coding question since, I am not adding any code in here. Since, adding my code snippets itself would make this question really long. Instead, I am pretty interested in knowing a better ways for data retrieval on application that needs to handle limited amount of data which isn't updated regularly. Let's take this example: I am writing an application which gets a schedule as an XML from server. I have written a logic in order to parse XML version and update database only if the version is newer than the local version. Although the update is checked automatically/manually on daily basis based on user preference, the actual version update happens only once per few months or so. Since, this is done by some other authority which doesn't provide API but, rather inform publicly on their changes. The actual XML contains a "(n number of groups)(days in a week) (n number of schedule)" . The group is usually 6 and the number of schedule is usually 2. So basically there would usually be only around 100 strings. Now although I have used SQLite at the moment. I want to know how to make update on database. Should I show progress dialog that the application is updating and exit the app when it's done? Since, my updates are infrequent i don't think this will really harm user experience but, is there any better ways to do it? Because I don't want update to be made when user is searching which is done using database. This will cause an database already open exception. Atleast I have faced this problem before. Is it better to rather parse XML every time when user wants to view certain things or to use SQLite? Since, I make lots of use of adapter in my app to create lists, will that degrade the performance? It would really be a great help if anyone can give me better overview about it. Or may be counter argument against each. Many thanks!

  Read the article

• PHP - Internal APIs/Libraries - What makes sense?

  - by Mark Locker

  I've been having a discussion lately with some colleagues about the best way to approach a new project, and thought it'd be interesting to get some external thoughts thrown into the mix. Basically, we're redeveloping a fairly large site (written in PHP) and have differing opinions on how the platform should be setup. Requirements: The platform will need to support multiple internal websites, as well as external (non-PHP) projects which at the moment consist of a mobile app and a toolbar. We have no plans/need in the foreseeable future to open up an API externally (for use in products other than our own). My opinion: We should have a library of well documented native model classes which can be shared between projects. These models will represent everything in our database and can take advantage of object orientated features such as inheritance, traits, magic methods, etc. etc. As well as employing ORM. We can then add an API layer on top of these models which can basically accept requests and route them to the appropriate methods, translating the response so that it can be used platform independently. This routing for each method can be setup as and when it's required. Their opinion: We should have a single HTTP API which is used by all projects (internal PHP ones or otherwise). My thoughts: To me, there are a number of issues with using the sole HTTP API approach: It will be very expensive performance wise. One page request will result in several additional http requests (which although local, are still ones that Apache will need to handle). You'll lose all of the best features PHP has for OO development. From simple inheritance, to employing the likes of ORM which can save you writing a lot of code. For internal projects, the actual process makes me cringe. To get a users name, for example, a request would go out of our box, over the LAN, back in, then run through a script which calls a method, JSON encodes the output and feeds that back. That would then need to be JSON decoded, and be presented as an array ready to use. Working with arrays, as appose to objects, makes me sad in a modern PHP framework. Their thoughts (and my responses): Having one method of doing thing keeps things simple. - You'd only do things differently if you were using a different language anyway. It will become robust. - Seeing as the API will run off the library of models, I think my option would be just as robust. What do you think? I'd be really interested to hear the thoughts of others on this, especially as opinions on both sides are not founded on any past experience.

  Read the article

• How to write comments to explain the "why" behind the callback function when the function and parameter names are insufficient for that?

  - by snowmantw

  How should I approach writing comments for callback functions? I want to explain the "why" behind the function when the function and parameter names are insufficient to explain what's going on. I have always wonder why comments like this can be so ordinary in documents of libraries in dynamic languages: /** * cb: callback // where's the arguments & effects? */ func foo( cb ) Maybe the common attitude is "you can look into source code on your own after all" which pushes people into leaving minimalist comments like this. But it seems like there should be a better way to comment callback functions. I've tried to comment callbacks in Haskell way: /** * cb: Int -> Char */ func foo(cb) And to be fair, it's usually neat enough. But it gets into trouble when I need to pass some complex structure. The problem being partly due to the lack of type system: /** * cb: Int -> { err: String -> (), success: () -> Char } // too long... */ func foo(cb) Or I have tried this too: /** * cb: Int -> { err: String -> (), * success: () -> Char } // better ? */ func bar(cb) The problem is that you may put the structure in somewhere else, but you must give it a name to reference it. But then when you name a structure you're about to use immediately looks so redundant: // Somewhere else... // ResultCallback: { err: String -> (), success: () -> Char } /** * cb: Int -> ResultCallback // better ?? */ func foo(cb) And it bothers me if I follow the Java-doc like commenting style since it still seems incomplete. The comments don't tell you anything that you couldn't immediately see from looking at the function. /** * @param cb {Function} yeah, it's a function, but you told me nothing about it... * @param err {Function} where should I put this callback's argument ?? * Not to mention the err's own arguments... */ func foo(cb) These examples are JavaScript like with generic functions and parameter names, but I've encountered similar problems in other dynamic languages which allow complex callbacks.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341  | Next Page >