dr dot - Page 35 - Developer IT

Apress "Pro DLR in .NET 4' - ISBN 978-1-430203066-3 - Initial comments

- by TATWORTH

The dynamic language runtime (DLR) is a radical development of Dot Net. In some ways it is like the Laser was 40 years, a solution looking for a problem. At the moment the DLR supports languages such as Iron Ruby and Iron Python, together with dynamic extensions for C# and VB.NET. Where DLR will also score is the ability to write your own Dot Net language for specialist areas. So how does this book fare in introducing the DLR? It is a book that will require careful study and perhaps reading several times before fully understanding the subject. You will need to spend time trying out the sample code. So who would I recommend this book to? I recommend it to C# development teams for their library. I recommend it to individuals who not only know C# but have a good history of learning other computer languages. It is not a book that can just be "dipped into", but will require one or more reads from start to finish. This is no reflection on the skill of the author but of the newness of the material.

Read the article

Today's Links (6/23/2011)

- by Bob Rhubart

Lydia Smyers interviews Justin "Mr. OTN" Kestelyn on the Oracle ACE Program Justin Kestelyn describes the Oracle ACE program, what it means to the developer community, and how to get involved. Incremental Essbase Metadata Imports Now Possible with OBIEE 11g | Mark Rittman "So, how does this work, and how easy is it to implement?" asks Oracle ACE Director Mark Rittman, and then he dives in to find out. ORACLENERD: The Podcast Oracle ACE Chet "ORACLENERD" Justice recounts his brush with stardom on Christian Screen's The Art of Business Intelligence podcast. Bay Area Coherence Special Interest Group Next Meeting July 21, 2011 | Cristóbal Soto Soto shares information on next month's Bay Area Coherence SIG shindig. New Cloud Security Book: Securing the Cloud by Vic Winkler | Dr Cloud's Flying Software Circus "Securing the Cloud is the most useful and informative about all aspects of cloud security," says Harry "Dr. Cloud" Foxwell. Oracle MDM Maturity Model | David Butler "The model covers maturity levels around five key areas: Profiling data sources; Defining a data strategy; Defining a data consolidation plan; Data maintenance; and Data utilization," says Butler. Integrating Strategic Planning for Cloud and SOA | David Sprott "Full blown Cloud adoption implies mature and sophisticated SOA implementation and impacts many business processes," says Sprott.

Read the article

Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion

- by user2158382

I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

Read the article

Java Management Extensions with Oracle WebLogic Server 12c–Webcast Nocember 13th 2012

- by JuergenKress

Date: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 Time: 10:00 AM PST You’re responsible for evaluating technologies to monitor and configure Oracle WebLogic Server. This Webcast will help you get a complete picture of what Oracle WebLogic Server 12c with Java Management Extensions (JMX) can do for you. Dr. Frank Munz will explain the development of JMX with Spring and compare it to Java EE. A new feature of Oracle WebLogic Server 12c, the RESTful Management API, will also be examined. Learn how JMX in Oracle WebLogic Server 12c is: Highly efficient. It uses WebLogic Scripting Tool (WLST) instead of a client JMX program written in Java, resulting in little overhead. Effective. It bundles optimized tools such as WLST and WebLogic Diagnostic Framework to eliminate the requirement for Java programming on the client side. Compliant. It is fully standard-compliant but also works with open source clients and frameworks. Register for the Webcast today. Speakers: Dr. Frank Munz, Oracle Technologist of the Year Dave Cabelus, Senior Principal Product Manager, Oracle WebLogic Partner Community For regular information become a member in the WebLogic Partner Community please visit: http://www.oracle.com/partners/goto/wls-emea ( OPN account required). If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. BlogTwitterLinkedInMixForumWiki Technorati Tags: Java,Frank Munz,WebLogic Community,Oracle,OPN,Jürgen Kress

Read the article

Trouble with SAT style vector projection in C#/XNA

- by ssb

Simply put I'm having a hard time working out how to work with XNA's Vector2 types while maintaining spatial considerations. I'm working with separating axis theorem and trying to project vectors onto an arbitrary axis to check if those projections overlap, but the severe lack of XNA-specific help online combined with pseudo code everywhere that omits key parts of the algorithm, googling has left me little help. I'm aware of HOW to project a vector, but the way that I know of doing it involves the two vectors starting from the same point. Particularly here: http://www.metanetsoftware.com/technique/tutorialA.html So let's say I have a simple rectangle, and I store each of its corners in a list of Vector2s. How would I go about projecting that onto an arbitrary axis? The crux of my problem is that taking the dot product of say, a vector2 of (1, 0) and a vector2 of (50, 50) won't get me the dot product I'm looking for.. or will it? Because that (50, 50) won't be the vector of the polygon's vertex but from whatever XNA calculates. It's getting the calculation from the right starting point that's throwing me off. I'm sorry if this is unclear, but my brain is fried from trying to think about this. I need a better understanding of how XNA calculates Vector2s as actual vectors and not just as random points.

Read the article

How to apply verification and validation on the following example

- by user970696

I have been following verification and validation questions here with my colleagues, yet we are unable to see the slight differences, probably caused by language barrier in technical English. An example: Requirement specification User wants to control the lights in 4 rooms by remote command sent from the UI for each room separately. Functional specification The UI will contain 4 checkboxes labelled according to rooms they control. When a checkbox is checked, the signal is sent to corresponding light. A green dot appears next to the checkbox When a checkbox is unchecked, the signal (turn off) is sent to corresponding light. A red dot appears next to the checkbox. Let me start with what I learned here: Verification, according to many great answers here, ensures that product reflects specified requirements - as functional spec is done by a producer based on requirements from customer, this one will be verified for completeness, correctness). Then design document will be checked against functional spec (it should design 4 checkboxes..), and the source code against design (is there a code for 4 checkboxes, functions to send the signals etc. - is it traceable to requirements). Okay, product is built and we need to test it, validate. Here comes our understanding trouble - validation should ensure the product meets requirements for its specific intended use which is basically business requirement (does it work? can I control the lights from the UI?) but testers will definitely work with the functional spec, making sure the checkboxes are there, working, labelled, etc. They are basically checking whether the requirements in functional spec were met in the final product, isn't that verification? (should not be, lets stick to ISO 12207 that only validation is the actual testing)

Read the article

Law of Demeter confusion [duplicate]

- by user2158382

This question already has an answer here: Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion 4 answers I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

Read the article

HLSL What you get when you subtract world position from InvertViewProjection.Transform?

- by cubrman

In one of NVIDIA's Vertex shaders (the metal one) I found the following code: // transform object normals, tangents, & binormals to world-space: float4x4 WorldITXf : WorldInverseTranspose < string UIWidget="None"; >; // provide tranform from "view" or "eye" coords back to world-space: float4x4 ViewIXf : ViewInverse < string UIWidget="None"; >; ... float4 Po = float4(IN.Position.xyz,1); // homogeneous location coordinates float4 Pw = mul(Po,WorldXf); // convert to "world" space OUT.WorldView = normalize(ViewIXf[3].xyz - Pw.xyz); The term OUT.WorldView is subsequently used in a Pixel Shader to compute lighting: float3 Ln = normalize(IN.LightVec.xyz); float3 Nn = normalize(IN.WorldNormal); float3 Vn = normalize(IN.WorldView); float3 Hn = normalize(Vn + Ln); float4 litV = lit(dot(Ln,Nn),dot(Hn,Nn),SpecExpon); DiffuseContrib = litV.y * Kd * LightColor + AmbiColor; SpecularContrib = litV.z * LightColor; Can anyone tell me what exactly is WorldView here? And why do they add it to the normal?

Read the article

Rails: The Law of Demeter [duplicate]

- by user2158382

This question already has an answer here: Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion 4 answers I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

Read the article

Points around a circumference C#

- by Lautaro

Im trying to get a list of vectors that go around a circle, but i keep getting the circle to go around several times. I want one circel and the dots to be placed along its circumference. I want the first dot to start at 0 and the last dot to end just before 360. Also i need to be able to calculate the spacing by the ammount of points. List<Vector2> pointsInPath = new List<Vector2>(); private int ammountOfPoints = 5; private int blobbSize = 200; private Vector2 topLeft = new Vector2(100, 100); private Vector2 blobbCenter; private int endAngle = 50; private int angleIncrementation; public Blobb() { blobbCenter = new Vector2(blobbSize / 2, blobbSize / 2) + topLeft; angleIncrementation = endAngle / ammountOfPoints; for (int i = 0; i < ammountOfPoints; i++) { pointsInPath.Add(getPointByAngle(i * angleIncrementation, 100, blobbCenter)); // pointsInPath.Add(getPointByAngle(i * angleIncrementation, blobbSize / 2, blobbCenter)); } } private Vector2 getPointByAngle(float angle, float distance, Vector2 centre) { return new Vector2((float)(distance * Math.Cos(angle) ), (float)(distance * Math.Sin(angle))) + centre ; }

Read the article

Laser range finder, what language to use? Beginner advice

- by DrOnline

I hope this is the right place. I am a programming beginner, and I want to make a laser range finder, and I need advice about how to proceed etc. In a few weeks I will get a lot of dirt cheap 3-5V lasers and some cheap usb webcams. I will point the laser and webcam in parallel, and somehow use trigonometry and programming to determined distance. I have seen online that others made done it this way, I have purposefully not looked at the details too much because I want to develop it on my own, and learn, but I know the general outline. I have a general idea of how to proceed. The program loads in a picture from the webcam, and I dunno how images work really, but I imagine there is a format that is basically an array of RGB values.. is this right? I will load in the red values, and find the most red one. I know the height difference between the laser and the cam. I know the center dot in the image, I know the redmost dot. I'm sure there's some way to figure out some range there. TO THE POINT: 1) Is my reasoning sound thus far, especially in terms of image analysis? I don't need complete solutions, just general points 2) What I need to figure out, is what platform to use. I have an arduino... apparently, I've read it's too weak to process images. Read that online. I know some C I know some Python I have Matlab. Which is the best option? I do not need high sampling rates, I have not decided on whether it should be automated or whether I should make a GUI with a button to press for samples. I will keep it simple and expand I think. I also do not need it to be super accurate, I'm just having fun here. Advice!

Search Results

Search found 4216 results on 169 pages for 'dr dot'.

Page 35/169 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 | Next Page >

- by TATWORTH

- by Bob Rhubart

- by user2158382

- by JuergenKress

- by ssb

- by user970696

- by user2158382

- by cubrman

- by user2158382

- by Lautaro

- by DrOnline

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 | Next Page >