Search Results

Search found 44734 results on 1790 pages for 'model based design'.

Page 34/1790 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • Automapper use in a MVVM application

    - by Echiban
    I am building a MVVM application. The model / entity (I am using NHibernate) is already done, and I am thinking of using AutoMapper to map between the ViewModel and Model. However this clause scares the jebus out of me: (from http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/jimmy_bogard/archive/2009/01/22/automapper-the-object-object-mapper.aspx) Blockquote AutoMapper enforces that for each type map (source/destination pair), all of the properties on the destination type are matched up with something on the source type To me, the logical choice is to map from model to viewmodel, (and I'll let viewmodel manually assign to model), but the quote basically kills the idea since the viewmodel will definitely have properties that don't exist on the model. How have you been using Automapper in a MVVM app? Please help!

    Read the article

  • How to store the path of a game pawn in a turn based game ?

    - by panzerschreck
    Hello, I have a square grid, for a turn based game ( grid is similar to the chess board ), but the moves in the games are different based on whether you have lapped your opponent pawn at least once or not. i.e if you have not lapped (beaten any of the opponents pawns) in the outer most grid as below if you have lapped your opponent pawn once at least, then you get to reach home,this way.Any player having all his pawns reaching "home" first wins. The ones in yellow are safe-houses, i.e both the opponent pawn and the player's pawn get to stay in the same grid, this is not considered to be lapping ( the opponent ).The lapped pawn will return to its start point. Now the question is, what is the effective way to store the paths for the all the pawns.we will have 4 pawns for the player and 4 opponent pawns. Is there any pattern to store such static information, in a elegant way ? Thanks for your time

    Read the article

  • iphone app with role based login?

    - by chaitanya
    Can iPhone apps have role based login? In my application I have to display the content according to the role of the user (employee, visitor). Till now I havent seen any app with role based login for iphone. Can I develop role based login? is there any restriction from apple side for these kind of logins to approve the app?

    Read the article

  • Options for keeping models and the UI in sync (in a desktop application context)

    - by Benju
    In my experience I have only had 2 patterns work for large-scale desktop application development when trying to keep the model and UI in sync. 1-An eventbus approach via a shared eventbus command objects are fired (ie:UserDemographicsUpdatedEvent) and have various parts of the UI update if they are bound to the same user object updated in this event. 2-Attempt to bind the UI directly to the model adding listeners to the model itself as needed. I find this approach rather clunky as it pollutes the domain model. Does anybody have other suggestions? In a web application with something like JSP binding to the model is easy as you ussually only care about the state of the model at the time your request comes in, not so in a desktop type application. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Making a Web Gui to design a Garden Layout

    - by paddydub
    I would like to design a web page Gui where users can design a simple interactive garden. The user would pick a template design and receive price estimates based on the design template and the dimensions entered. I'd like the user to be able to move items such as plants, stones and be able to adjust the dimensions of the grass, paving. I'm thinking i could make it using flash but I would like to know there are any other ways I could use to implement this?

    Read the article

  • What design pattern will you choose ?

    - by MemoryLeak
    I want to design a class, which contains a procedure to achieve a goal. And it must follow some order to make sure the last method, let's say "ExecuteIt", to behave correctly. in such a case, what design patter will you use ? which can make sure that the user must call the public method according some ordering. If you really don't know what I am saying, then can you share me some concept of choosing a design patter, or what will you consider while design a class?

    Read the article

  • How to study design patterns?

    - by Alien01
    I have read around 4-5 books on design patterns, but still I dont feel I have come closer to intermediate level in design patterns? How should I go studying design patterns? Is there any best book for design pattern? I know this will come only with experience but there must be some way to master these?

    Read the article

  • Game planning and software design? I feel that UML is not convenient

    - by user1542
    In my university, they always emphasize and hype about UML design and stuff, in which I feel it is not going to work well with game structure design. Now, I just want a professional advice on how should I begin my game designing? The story is I have some skill in programming and have done many minor game such as getting some 2D platformer working to some extend. The problems that I find about my program is the poor quality design. After coding for a while, things start to break down due to poor planning (When I add new feature, it tends to make me have to recode the whole program). However, to plan everything out without a single design flaw is a bit too ideal. Therefore, any advice to how should I plan my game? How should I put it into visible pictures, so that me and my friends are able to overview the designs? I planned to start coding a game with my friend. This is going to be my first teamwork, so any professional advices would be a pleasure. Is there any other alternatives than UML? Another question is how does "prototyping" normally looks like?

    Read the article

  • Need design ideas generators.

    - by Clubspy
    Hello guys I am a web developer and sometimes I have to do some design myself for my customers but design actually is not my best thing to do. I am looking for a program that can help me getting fast and reliable design ideas but I am not looking for code generator like Artisteer. Actually design is a hard task and my designs always look ugly and messy.

    Read the article

  • Design to distribute work when generating task oriented input for legacy dos application?

    - by TheDeeno
    I'm attempting to automate a really old dos application. I've decided the best way to do this is via input redirection. The legacy app (menu driven) has many tasks within tasks with branching logic. In order to easily understand and reuse the input for these tasks, I'd like to break them into bit size pieces. Since I'll need to start a fresh app on each run, repeating a context to consume a bit might be messy. I'd like to create an object model that: allows me to concentrate on the task at hand allows me to reuse common tasks from different start points prevents me from calling a task from the wrong start point To be more explicit, given I have the following task hierarchy: START A A1 A1a A1b A2 A2a B B1 B1a I'd like an object model that lets me generate an input file for task "A1b" buy using building blocks like: START -> do_A, do_A1, do_A1b but prevents me from: START -> do_A1 // because I'm assuming a different call chain from above This will help me write "do_A1b" because I can always assume the same starting context and will simplify writing "do_A1a" because it has THE SAME starting context. What patterns will help me out here? I'm using ruby at the moment so if dynamic language features can help, I'm game.

    Read the article

  • Why represent shopping carts and order invoices differently in a domain model?

    - by Todd
    I've built some shopping cart systems in the past, but I always designed them such that the final order invoice is just a shopping cart that has been marked as "purchased". All the logic for adding/removing/changing items in a cart is also the logic for the order. All data is stored in the same tables in the database. But it seems this is not the proper way to design an e-commerce site.. Can someone explain the benefit of separating the shopping cart from invoices in the domain model? It seems to me this would lead to a lot of duplicated code, an extra set of tables in the database, and make it harder to maintain in the event the system need to start accommodating more complicated orders (like specifying selected options for an item which may or may not change the price/availability/shipping time of the order). I'm assuming I just haven't seen the light, as every book and other example I see seems to separate these two seemingly similar concerns -- but I can't find any explanation as to the benefit of doing such! It's also the case in the systems that I design that changes are often made after the initial order is confirmed. It's not uncommon for items to be removed, replaced, or added afterwards (but prior to fulfillment).

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for opening the Rails toolbox to design a challenge game?

    - by keruilin
    How would you suggest designing a challenge system as part of a food-eating game so that it's automated as possible? All RoR tools, design patterns and logic are at your disposal (e.g., admin consoles, crontab, arch, etc.). Prize goes to whoever can suggest the simplest and most-automated design! Here are the requirements: User has many challenges. Badge has many challenges. (A unique badge is awarded for each challenge won.) Only one challenge can run at a time. Each challenge has a limited number of days that it runs. For example, one challenge can run 3 days, while another runs 7 days. Challenges can be seasonal. For example, "Eat 13 Pumpkins" only runs during the Fall. New challenges are added to the game on an ongoing basis. For example, a new challenge every week. Each challenge has a certain probability of being selected to run. For example, "Eat 10 Pies" challenge has 10% chance of being selected to run. As each new challenge is added to the database, I want the probabilities of running to change dynamically. I want to avoid the scenario where I'm manually updating a database field just to change the probability from 10% to 5%, for example. Challenges act like Easter eggs. Challenge icons pop-up at different places on the webpage. User is awarded a badge for successfully completing a challenge, but only when it's active. There is some wait time between each challenge. Between 1 and 7 days. Which wait time is random, but the probability of the wait time being short is high and the probability of it being a long wait time is low.

    Read the article

  • What makes my code DDD (domain-driven design) qualified?

    - by oykuo
    Hi All, I'm new to DDD and am thinking about using this design technique in my project. However, what strikes me about DDD is that how basic the idea is. Unlike other design techniques such as MVC and TDD, it doesn't seems to contain any ground breaking ideas. For example, I'm sure some of you will have the same feeling that the idea of root aggregates and repositories are nothing new because when you are was writing MVC web applications you have to have one single master object (i.e. the root aggregate) that contain other minor objects (i.e. value objects and entities) in the model layer in order to send data to a strongly typed view. To me, the only new idea in DDD is probably the "Smart" entities (i.e. you are supposed to have business rules on root aggregates) Separation between value object, root aggregate and entities. Can anyone tell me if I have missed out anything here? If that's all there is to DDD, if I update one of my existing MVC application with the above 2 new ideas, can I claim it's an TDD, MVC and DDD applcation?

    Read the article

  • Should I refer to browser-based games as HTML5 games or Javascript games?

    - by Bane
    First of all, I know that there are alternatives to both HTML5 and Javascript, but I worded the question so generally ("browser-based") because if I had said "HTML5" or "Javascript" games that would already imply an answer to the question. When writing wiki posts or discussing, I usually call these games "HTML5/Javascript" games. They are written in Javascript, using the new HTML5 technology. What is the proper way to call them: HTML5 or Javascript games? I see that most people opt for HTML5, why?

    Read the article

  • How accurate is "Business logic should be in a service, not in a model"?

    - by Jeroen Vannevel
    Situation Earlier this evening I gave an answer to a question on StackOverflow. The question: Editing of an existing object should be done in repository layer or in service? For example if I have a User that has debt. I want to change his debt. Should I do it in UserRepository or in service for example BuyingService by getting an object, editing it and saving it ? My answer: You should leave the responsibility of mutating an object to that same object and use the repository to retrieve this object. Example situation: class User { private int debt; // debt in cents private string name; // getters public void makePayment(int cents){ debt -= cents; } } class UserRepository { public User GetUserByName(string name){ // Get appropriate user from database } } A comment I received: Business logic should really be in a service. Not in a model. What does the internet say? So, this got me searching since I've never really (consciously) used a service layer. I started reading up on the Service Layer pattern and the Unit Of Work pattern but so far I can't say I'm convinced a service layer has to be used. Take for example this article by Martin Fowler on the anti-pattern of an Anemic Domain Model: There are objects, many named after the nouns in the domain space, and these objects are connected with the rich relationships and structure that true domain models have. The catch comes when you look at the behavior, and you realize that there is hardly any behavior on these objects, making them little more than bags of getters and setters. Indeed often these models come with design rules that say that you are not to put any domain logic in the the domain objects. Instead there are a set of service objects which capture all the domain logic. These services live on top of the domain model and use the domain model for data. (...) The logic that should be in a domain object is domain logic - validations, calculations, business rules - whatever you like to call it. To me, this seemed exactly what the situation was about: I advocated the manipulation of an object's data by introducing methods inside that class that do just that. However I realize that this should be a given either way, and it probably has more to do with how these methods are invoked (using a repository). I also had the feeling that in that article (see below), a Service Layer is more considered as a façade that delegates work to the underlying model, than an actual work-intensive layer. Application Layer [his name for Service Layer]: Defines the jobs the software is supposed to do and directs the expressive domain objects to work out problems. The tasks this layer is responsible for are meaningful to the business or necessary for interaction with the application layers of other systems. This layer is kept thin. It does not contain business rules or knowledge, but only coordinates tasks and delegates work to collaborations of domain objects in the next layer down. It does not have state reflecting the business situation, but it can have state that reflects the progress of a task for the user or the program. Which is reinforced here: Service interfaces. Services expose a service interface to which all inbound messages are sent. You can think of a service interface as a façade that exposes the business logic implemented in the application (typically, logic in the business layer) to potential consumers. And here: The service layer should be devoid of any application or business logic and should focus primarily on a few concerns. It should wrap Business Layer calls, translate your Domain in a common language that your clients can understand, and handle the communication medium between server and requesting client. This is a serious contrast to other resources that talk about the Service Layer: The service layer should consist of classes with methods that are units of work with actions that belong in the same transaction. Or the second answer to a question I've already linked: At some point, your application will want some business logic. Also, you might want to validate the input to make sure that there isn't something evil or nonperforming being requested. This logic belongs in your service layer. "Solution"? Following the guidelines in this answer, I came up with the following approach that uses a Service Layer: class UserController : Controller { private UserService _userService; public UserController(UserService userService){ _userService = userService; } public ActionResult MakeHimPay(string username, int amount) { _userService.MakeHimPay(username, amount); return RedirectToAction("ShowUserOverview"); } public ActionResult ShowUserOverview() { return View(); } } class UserService { private IUserRepository _userRepository; public UserService(IUserRepository userRepository) { _userRepository = userRepository; } public void MakeHimPay(username, amount) { _userRepository.GetUserByName(username).makePayment(amount); } } class UserRepository { public User GetUserByName(string name){ // Get appropriate user from database } } class User { private int debt; // debt in cents private string name; // getters public void makePayment(int cents){ debt -= cents; } } Conclusion All together not much has changed here: code from the controller has moved to the service layer (which is a good thing, so there is an upside to this approach). However this doesn't look like it had anything to do with my original answer. I realize design patterns are guidelines, not rules set in stone to be implemented whenever possible. Yet I have not found a definitive explanation of the service layer and how it should be regarded. Is it a means to simply extract logic from the controller and put it inside a service instead? Is it supposed to form a contract between the controller and the domain? Should there be a layer between the domain and the service layer? And, last but not least: following the original comment Business logic should really be in a service. Not in a model. Is this correct? How would I introduce my business logic in a service instead of the model?

    Read the article

  • Register Game Object Components in Game Subsystems? (Component-based Game Object design)

    - by topright
    I'm creating a component-based game object system. Some tips: GameObject is simply a list of Components. There are GameSubsystems. For example, rendering, physics etc. Each GameSubsystem contains pointers to some of Components. GameSubsystem is a very powerful and flexible abstraction: it represents any slice (or aspect) of the game world. There is a need in a mechanism of registering Components in GameSubsystems (when GameObject is created and composed). There are 4 approaches: 1: Chain of responsibility pattern. Every Component is offered to every GameSubsystem. GameSubsystem makes a decision which Components to register (and how to organize them). For example, GameSubsystemRender can register Renderable Components. pro. Components know nothing about how they are used. Low coupling. A. We can add new GameSubsystem. For example, let's add GameSubsystemTitles that registers all ComponentTitle and guarantees that every title is unique and provides interface to quering objects by title. Of course, ComponentTitle should not be rewrited or inherited in this case. B. We can reorganize existing GameSubsystems. For example, GameSubsystemAudio, GameSubsystemRender, GameSubsystemParticleEmmiter can be merged into GameSubsystemSpatial (to place all audio, emmiter, render Components in the same hierarchy and use parent-relative transforms). con. Every-to-every check. Very innefficient. con. Subsystems know about Components. 2: Each Subsystem searches for Components of specific types. pro. Better performance than in Approach 1. con. Subsystems still know about Components. 3: Component registers itself in GameSubsystem(s). We know at compile-time that there is a GameSubsystemRenderer, so let's ComponentImageRender will call something like GameSubsystemRenderer::register(ComponentRenderBase*). pro. Performance. No unnecessary checks as in Approach 1. con. Components are badly coupled with GameSubsystems. 4: Mediator pattern. GameState (that contains GameSubsystems) can implement registerComponent(Component*). pro. Components and GameSubystems know nothing about each other. con. In C++ it would look like ugly and slow typeid-switch. Questions: Which approach is better and mostly used in component-based design? What Practice says? Any suggestions about implementation of Approach 4? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How should I structure my turn based engine to allow flexibility for players/AI and observation?

    - by Reefpirate
    I've just started making a Turn Based Strategy engine in GameMaker's GML language... And I was cruising along nicely until it came time to handle the turn cycle, and determining who is controlling what player, and also how to handle the camera and what is displayed on screen. Here's an outline of the main switch happening in my main game loop at the moment: switch (GameState) { case BEGIN_TURN: // Start of turn operations/routines break; case MID_TURN: switch (PControlledBy[Turn]) { case HUMAN: switch (MidTurnState) { case MT_SELECT: // No units selected, 'idle' UI state break; case MT_MOVE: // Unit selected and attempting to move break; case MT_ATTACK: break; } break; case COMPUTER: // AI ROUTINES GO HERE break; case OBSERVER: // OBSERVER ROUTINES GO HERE break; } break; case END_TURN: // End of turn routines/operations, and move Turn to next player break; } Now, I can see a couple of problems with this set-up already... But I don't have any idea how to go about making it 'right'. Turn is a global variable that stores which player's turn it is, and the BEGIN_TURN and END_TURN states make perfect sense to me... But the MID_TURN state is baffling me because of the things I want to happen here: If there are players controlled by humans, I want the AI to do it's thing on its turn here, but I want to be able to have the camera follow the AI as it makes moves in the human player's vision. If there are no human controlled player's, I'd like to be able to watch two or more AI's battle it out on the map with god-like 'observer' vision. So basically I'm wondering if there are any resources for how to structure a Turn Based Strategy engine? I've found lots of writing about pathfinding and AI, and those are all great... But when it comes to handling the turn structure and the game states I am having trouble finding any resources at all. How should the states be divided to allow flexibility between the players and the controllers (HUMAN, COMPUTER, OBSERVER)? Also, maybe if I'm on the right track I just need some reassurance before I lay down another few hundred lines of code...

    Read the article

  • Software or Photoshop plugins for professional photo album design

    - by Iain Fraser
    I am a graphic designer (among other things) and I'm used to doing magazine advertisements, brochures, posters and that sort of thing. Recently I was approached by a photographer who wants a graphic designer to produce wedding albums for him. I have already done a couple for him but I'm finding it hard to work by just arranging my layouts in Photoshop alone. It's very time consuming, but quite repetitive - especially when you're dealing with common page layouts. I know a lot of photographers use album design software to speed up the process a bit. What's the industry standard in terms of album design software?

    Read the article

  • Question on design of current pagination implementations

    - by Freshblood
    I have checked pagination implementations on asp.net mvc specifically and i really feel that there is something less efficient in implementations. First of all all implementations use pagination values like below. public ActionResult MostPopulars(int pageIndex,int pageSize) { } The thing that i feel wrong is pageIndex and pageSize totally should be member of Pagination class otherwise this way looks so much functional way. Also it simplify unnecesary paramater pass in tiers of application. Second thing is that they use below interface. public interface IPagedList<T> : IList<T> { int PageCount { get; } int TotalItemCount { get; } int PageIndex { get; } int PageNumber { get; } int PageSize { get; } bool HasPreviousPage { get; } bool HasNextPage { get; } bool IsFirstPage { get; } bool IsLastPage { get; } } If i want to routing my pagination to different action so i have to create new view model for encapsulate action name in it or even controller name. Another solution can be that sending this interfaced model to view then specify action and controller hard coded in pager method as parameter but i am losing totally re-usability of my view because it is strictly depends on just one action. Another thing is that they use below code in view Html.Pager(Model.PageSize, Model.PageNumber, Model.TotalItemCount) If the model is IPagedList why they don't provide an overload method like @Html.Pager(Model) or even better one is @Html.Pager(). You know that we know model type in this way. Before i was doing mistake because i was using Model.PageIndex instead of Model.PageNumber. Another big issue is they strongly rely on IQueryable interface. How they know that i use IQueryable in my data layer ? I would expected that they work simply with collections that is keep pagination implementation persistence ignorant. What is wrong about my improvement ideas over their pagination implementations ? What is their reason to not implement their paginations in this way ?

    Read the article

  • Should a view and a model communicate or not?

    - by Stefano Borini
    According to the wikipedia page for the MVC architecture, the view is free to be notified by the model, and is also free to query the model about its current state. However, according to Paul Hegarty's course on iOS 5 at Stanford, lecture 1, page 18 all interaction must go through the controller, with Model and View that are never supposed to know each other. It is not clear to me if Hegarty's statement must be intended as a simplification for the course, but I am tempted to say that he intends the design as such. How do you explain these two opposite points of view ?

    Read the article

  • 3D Model not translating correctly (visually)

    - by ChocoMan
    In my first image, my model displays correctly: But when I move the model's position along the Z-axis (forward) I get this, yet the Y-axis doesnt change. An if I keep going, the model disappears into the ground: Any suggestions as to how I can get the model to translate properly visually? Here is how Im calling the model and the terrain in draw(): cameraPosition = new Vector3(camX, camY, camZ); // Copy any parent transforms. Matrix[] transforms = new Matrix[mShockwave.Bones.Count]; mShockwave.CopyAbsoluteBoneTransformsTo(transforms); Matrix[] ttransforms = new Matrix[terrain.Bones.Count]; terrain.CopyAbsoluteBoneTransformsTo(ttransforms); // Draw the model. A model can have multiple meshes, so loop. foreach (ModelMesh mesh in mShockwave.Meshes) { // This is where the mesh orientation is set, as well // as our camera and projection. foreach (BasicEffect effect in mesh.Effects) { effect.EnableDefaultLighting(); effect.PreferPerPixelLighting = true; effect.World = transforms[mesh.ParentBone.Index] * Matrix.CreateRotationY(modelRotation) * Matrix.CreateTranslation(modelPosition); // Looking at the model (picture shouldnt change other than rotation) effect.View = Matrix.CreateLookAt(cameraPosition, modelPosition, Vector3.Up); effect.Projection = Matrix.CreatePerspectiveFieldOfView( MathHelper.ToRadians(45.0f), aspectRatio, 1.0f, 10000.0f); effect.TextureEnabled = true; } // Draw the mesh, using the effects set above. prepare3d(); mesh.Draw(); } //Terrain test foreach (ModelMesh meshT in terrain.Meshes) { foreach (BasicEffect effect in meshT.Effects) { effect.EnableDefaultLighting(); effect.PreferPerPixelLighting = true; effect.World = ttransforms[meshT.ParentBone.Index] * Matrix.CreateRotationY(0) * Matrix.CreateTranslation(terrainPosition); // Looking at the model (picture shouldnt change other than rotation) effect.View = Matrix.CreateLookAt(cameraPosition, terrainPosition, Vector3.Up); effect.Projection = Matrix.CreatePerspectiveFieldOfView( MathHelper.ToRadians(45.0f), aspectRatio, 1.0f, 10000.0f); effect.TextureEnabled = true; } // Draw the mesh, using the effects set above. prepare3d(); meshT.Draw(); DrawText(); } base.Draw(gameTime); } Im suspecting that there may be something wrong with how I'm handling my camera. The model rotates fine on its Y-axis.

    Read the article

  • Recommended book on Actors concurrency model (patterns, pitfalls, etc.)?

    - by Larry OBrien
    The Actors concurrency model is clearly gaining favor. Is there a good book that presents the patterns and pitfalls of the model? I am thinking about something that would discuss, for instance, the problems of consistency and correctness in the context of hundreds or thousands of independent Actors. It would be okay if it were associated with a specific language (erlang, I would imagine, since that seems universally regarded as the proven implementation of Actors), but I am hoping for something more than an introductory chapter or two. (FWIW, I'm actually most interested in Actors as they are implemented in Scala.)

    Read the article

  • What are the recommended resources for learning about the Actor model of concurrent systems?

    - by Larry OBrien
    The Actor concurrency model is clearly gaining favor. Is there a good book that presents the patterns and pitfalls of the model? I am thinking about something that would discuss, for instance, the problems of consistency and correctness in the context of hundreds or thousands of independent Actors. It would be okay if it were associated with a specific language (Erlang, I would imagine, since that seems universally regarded as the proven implementation of Actors), but I am hoping for something more than an introductory chapter or two. I'm actually most interested in Actors as they are implemented in Scala, if there are any such resources available.

    Read the article

  • Is Domain Driven Design useful / productive for not so complex domains?

    - by Elijah
    When assessing a potential project at work, I suggested that it might be advantageous to use a domain driven design approach to its object model. The project does not have an excessively complex domain, so my coworker threw this at me: It has been said, that DDD is favorable in instances where there is a complex domain model (“...It applies whenever we are operating in a complex, intricate domain” Eric Evans). What I'm lost on is - how you define the complexity of a domain? Can it be defined by the number of aggregate roots in the domain model? Is the complexity of a domain in the interaction of objects? The domain that we are assessing is related online publishing and content management.

    Read the article

  • Design Pattern Books, Papers or Resources for Non-Object Orientated Paradigms?

    - by FinnNk
    After viewing this video on InfoQ about functional design patterns I was wondering what resources are out there on design patterns for non-object orientated paradigms. There are plenty out there for the OO world (GOF, etc, etc) and for architecture (EoEAA, etc, etc) but I'm not aware of what's out there for functional, logic, or other programming paradigms. Is there anything? A comment during the video suggests possibly not - does anyone know better? (By the way, by design patterns I don't mean language features or data structures but higher level approaches to designing an application - as discussed in the linked video)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >