Search Results

Search found 6569 results on 263 pages for 'specification pattern'.

Page 36/263 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

  • Using a nHibernate wrapper with fluent nHibernate

    - by alex
    Is it possible to use something like this wrapper with fluent configuration? http://jeffreypalermo.com/blog/use-this-nhibernate-wrapper-to-keep-your-repository-classes-simple/ If so, where would I add the fluent config? Also, would this be suited to use in both asp.net and windows applications? I'm planning to use the repository pattern, using this to create my nHibernate session?

    Read the article

  • Finding patterns in source code

    - by trex279
    If I wanted to learn about pattern recognition in general what would be a good place to start (recommend a book)? Also, does anybody have any experience/knowledge on how to go about applying these algorithms to find abstraction patterns in programs? (repeated code, chunks of code that do the same thing, but in slightly different ways, etc.) Thanks Edit: I don't mind mathematically intensive books. In fact, that would be a good thing.

    Read the article

  • Regular expressions and matching question marks in URLs

    - by James P.
    I'm having trouble finding a regular expression that matches the following String. Korben;http://feeds.feedburner.com/KorbensBlog-UpgradeYourMind?format=xml;1 One problem is escaping the question mark. Java's pattern matcher doesn't seem to accept \? as a valid escape sequence but it also fails to work with the tester at myregexp.com. Here's what I have so far: ([a-zA-Z0-9])+;http://([a-zA-Z0-9./-]+);[0-9]+ Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • get Generic CRUD operation in EF

    - by kathy
    Hello, Is there any way or design pattern can I use to get Generic CRUD operations? Because I’m working on n-tire application using EF in the data layer and I don’t want to use CRUD Functions in Every Entities. Your help would be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Finding a small image in a bigger one

    - by tur1ng
    Given an image with a large dimension ( 1.000 x 1.000). What is a good approach to find a small image (e.g. 50 x 50) in the big one? The smaller image can be rotated and differ in the size, but only with a 1:1 ratio. It's not related to any programming language - I'm just interested in pattern recognition. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • What kind of events should be created for a CRUD application?

    - by Mohit Deshpande
    I have an application that is centered around a database (ORM is LINQ-SQL) that has a table called Assignment. I am using the repository pattern to manipulate the database. My application is basically going to perform CRUD operations. I am new to delegates and events and I am asking you what events I should create (like maybe AssignmentCreating, AssignmentCreated) and what kind of delegate to use (like maybe a custom delegate or just an EventHandler)?

    Read the article

  • How to map a Entity Data Model conceptual model property to a storage model column using the "Serial

    - by codekaizen
    I have a conceptual model in EDM where one of the entities has a property which is essentially a big value object whose properties aren't really useful as columns in the datamodel. I'd like to apply the Serialized LOB pattern to it so that I can fit it into a 192 byte binary column. How do I map this in the EDM v4? Is it even possible at this time? Actually, is it possible in any ORM?

    Read the article

  • Elegent way to collapse or expand sub-sequences of a list in Python?

    - by forgot
    I want to collapse or expand sub-sequences of a list e.g. ['A', 'B', 'D', 'E', 'H'] -> ['AB', 'DE', 'H'] and vice versa currently I wrote some ugly code like: while True: for i, x in enumerate(s): if x == 'A' and s[i+1] == 'B': s[i:i+2] = 'AB' break else: break For people who asking 'why do that thing': Actually I'm working on a optimizing compiler and this is the peephole part. Writing pattern matching is a little annoying.

    Read the article

  • How much to put in a Repository class?

    - by chobo
    When using the repository pattern is it recommended to have one Repository class for each database table? Would I also map one service layer class to one repository class. I'm having a hard time trying to understand how much stuff one repository or service layer class should have. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • patterns in case statement in bash scripting

    - by Ramiro Rela
    The man says that case statements use "filename expansion pattern matching". I usually want to have short names for some parameters, so I go: case $1 in req|reqs|requirements) TASK="Functional Requirements";; met|meet|meetings) TASK="Meetings with the client";; esac logTimeSpentIn "$TASK" I tried patterns like "req*" or "me{e,}t" which I understand would expand correctly to match those values in the context of filename expansion, but it doesn't work. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • « Le rejet des DRM risque de cloisonner le Web » pour le PDG du W3C, qui trouve que la spécification EME est un juste compromis

    Le W3C étudie une norme pour la lecture du contenu protégé dans le HTML5 qualifiée de « contraire à l'éthique » par un membre du consortiumDes développeurs de Google, Microsoft et Netflix ont proposé une nouvelle norme pour le HTML5.Le futur standard du Web HTML5 qui est de plus en plus utilisé au détriment des technologies comme Flash ou Silverlight souffre encore de quelques manquements par rapport à celles-ci. C'est le cas par exemple pour la lecture du contenu vidéo protégé.Une nouvelle proposition a été faite au W3C par David Dorwin (Google), Adrian Bateman (Microsoft) et Mark Watson (Netflix) pour permettre au HTML5 de lire du contenu protégé DRM (Digital rights management ).Bapti...

    Read the article

  • What do you think of the following job specification?

    - by m.edmondson
    Just received this out of the blue from a recruiter - a number of things stand out to me: PERSON PROFILE Hard working - with a stay until the job in done mentality Thrive on the pressure of tight weekly development deadlines Good attention to detail to ensure bug free development Ability to test all development work from user's perpective Ability to think like a user as well as a developer Good communication skills to understand new funcationality and bugs Flexibility to contribute outside main responsbilities when needed. BENEFITS Salary dependant on skills Contributary Pension with 4% contribution from employer (after 1 year of service) Private Healthcase (after 1 year of service) 20 days holiday + 3-4 days holiday between Christmas and New year - 1 day extra holiday available each quarter you don't have a day off sick (and an additional day if you are not off sick for the whole year ). Would you want to work here? From what I can see they want a work-a-holic who will crawl out of his death bed in order to not lose holiday entitlement.

    Read the article

  • How do I convince my team that a requirements specification is unnecessary if we adopt user-stories?

    - by Nupul
    We are planning to adopt user-stories to capture stakeholder 'intent' in a lightweight fashion rather than a heavy SRS (software requirements specifications). However, it seems that though they understand the value of stories, there is still a desire to 'convert' the stories into an SRS-like language with all the attributes, priorities, input, outputs, source, destination etc. User-stories 'eliminate' the need for a formal SRS like artifact to begin with so what's the point in having an SRS? How should I convince my team (who are all very qualified CS folks by the way - both by education and practice) that the SRS would be 'eliminated' if we adopted user-stories for capturing the functional requirements of the system? (NFRs etc can be captured too, but that's not the intent of the question). So here's my 'work-flow' argument: Capture initial requirements as user-stories and later elaborate them to use-cases (which are required to be documented at a low level i.e. describing interactions with the UI prototypes/mockups and are a deliverable post deployment). Thus going from user-stories to use-cases rather than user-stories to SRS to use-cases. How are you all currently capturing user-stories at your workplace (if at all) and how do you suggest I 'make a case' for absence of SRS in presence of user-stories?

    Read the article

  • How does Trash Can works? Where can i find official specification / documentation / reference about it?

    - by MestreLion
    When trying to manage trash can from mounted NTFS volumes, I ended up reading FreeDesktop.org's reference on it. Poking around and doing some tests, I realized Ubuntu/Gnome does not follow the specs 100%. Here's why: For non-/ partitions, it always use <driveroot>/.Trash-<uid>, It never used <driveroot>/.Trash/<uid>, even when i created it in advance. While this works, its annoying: if i have 15 users, i end up with 15 /.Trash-xxx folders in my drive, while the other approach would still give a single folder (with 15 sub-folders). That "pollution" in my drives is very unpleasant. And specs say "If an $topdir/.Trash directory is absent, an $topdir/.Trash-$uid directory is to be used". Well, it IS present, so why it never uses it? root trash does not work, at least not out of the box. Open nautilus as root and click on trash, it gives error. Try to delete any file, it says "it cant move to trash". Ok, i know this can be fixed by creating /root/.local/share. But specs says "A “home trash” directory SHOULD be automatically created for any new user. If this directory is needed for a trashing operation but does not exist, the implementation SHOULD automatically create it, without any warnings or delays.". Why error then? Bug? Why do i must change /etc/fstab entries for mounted volumes, adding options like uid and guid, if the volumes are already mounted as RW for everyone? These are just some examples of deviation from standard. So, the question is: "If Ubuntu does not adhere 100% to the spec, HOW exactly does the trash work? WHERE can i find technical reference about Ubuntu's implementation of the trash?" By the way: if Ubuntu does happen to follow specs, please tell me what am i doing wrong, specially regarding the /.Trash-<uid> vs /.Trash/<uid> issue. Thanks! EDIT: Some more info: If a given fs has no support for sticky bit (VFAT, NTFS), it probably dont have for permitions either (at least VFAT surely doesnt). So what prevents one user for purging / restoring other users ./Trash-xxx ? If one can read/write his own Trash, he can also do the same for the whole drive, including other's trashes, isnt it? Or does Gnome has any "extra" protection on ./Trash-xxx folders on VFAT/NTFS fs? If Linux can "emulate" file permitions on NTFS mounting by editing /fstab uid and gid options, can it also "emulate" the sticky bit? I would really want to use /.Trash/xxx format... For the root issue: for the / partition, i can trash as root, and it goes to /root/.local/shate/Trash. But if i click on Nautilus "Trash" (as root), i get an error. Dont you? So files are correctly trashed, but i cant access it. All i can do is manually "purge" them (by deleting files on /root/.local/shate/Trash), but restoring would be very tricky (opening info files and manually moving, etc) For non-/ partitions (or at least for VFAT/NTFS), I can not even trash as root: it does not create a ./Trash-0 folder, it simply says "Cannot trash, want to permantly delete?" Why? About fstab: i use it for a permanent mount for my NTFS partitions. I have several, and if not "pre-mounted" they really cluttter desktop and/or Nautilus. Id rather have it pre mounted, integrated in my fs, in mounts like /data , /windows/xp , /windows/vista , and so on, and leave /media and its "mount/unmount" flexibility just for truly removable drives Si, if Ubuntu/Gnome truly follow the spec, is there any way to fix the root issues and to "emulate" the sticky bit for (at least) my fstab'ed NTFS fixed partitions?

    Read the article

  • How does the Trash Can work, and where can I find official documentation, reference, or specification for it?

    - by MestreLion
    When trying to manage trash can from mounted NTFS volumes, I ended up reading FreeDesktop.org's reference on it. Poking around and doing some tests, I realized Ubuntu/Gnome does not follow the specs 100%. Here's why: For non-/ partitions, it always uses <driveroot>/.Trash-<uid>, It never used <driveroot>/.Trash/<uid>, even when i created it in advance. While this works, it's annoying: if I have 15 users, I end up with 15 /.Trash-xxx folders in my drive, while the other approach would still give a single folder (with 15 sub-folders). That "pollution" in my drives is very unpleasant. And specs say "If an $topdir/.Trash directory is absent, an $topdir/.Trash-$uid directory is to be used". Well, it IS present, so why does it never use it? root trash does not work, at least not out of the box. Open nautilus as root and click on trash; it gives an error. Try to delete any file, it says "it can't move to trash". Ok, I know this can be fixed by creating /root/.local/share. But specs says "A “home trash” directory SHOULD be automatically created for any new user. If this directory is needed for a trashing operation but does not exist, the implementation SHOULD automatically create it, without any warnings or delays.". Why the error then? Bug? Why must I change /etc/fstab entries for mounted volumes, adding options like uid and guid, if the volumes are already mounted as RW for everyone? These are just some examples of deviation from the standard. So, the question is: "If Ubuntu does not adhere 100% to the spec, HOW exactly does the trash work? WHERE can i find a technical reference for Ubuntu's implementation of the trash?" By the way: if Ubuntu does happen to follow specs, please tell me what I am doing wrong, especially regarding the /.Trash-<uid> vs /.Trash/<uid> issue. Thanks! EDIT: Some more info: If a given fs has no support for the sticky bit (VFAT, NTFS), it probably doesn't have for permissions either (at least VFAT surely doesn't). So what prevents one user from purging / restoring other users' ./Trash-xxx ? If one can read/write his own Trash, one can do the same for the whole drive, including other's trashes, correct? Or does Gnome have some kind of "extra" protection on ./Trash-xxx folders on VFAT/NTFS fs? If Linux can "emulate" file permissions on NTFS mounting by editing /fstab uid and gid options, can it also "emulate" the sticky bit? I would really prefer to use /.Trash/xxx format... For the root issue: for the / partition, I can use trash as root, and it goes to /root/.local/shate/Trash. But if I click on Nautilus "Trash" (as root), I get an error. Don't you? So files are correctly trashed, but I can't access it. All I can do is manually "purge" them (by deleting files on /root/.local/shate/Trash), but restoring would be very tricky (opening info files and manually moving, etc.). For non-/ partitions (or at least for VFAT/NTFS), I can not even use trash as root: it does not create a ./Trash-0 folder, it simply says "Cannot trash, want to permanently delete?" Why? About fstab: i use it for a permanent mount for my NTFS partitions. I have several, and if not "pre-mounted" they really clutter the desktop and/or Nautilus. I'd rather have it pre-mounted, integrated in my fs, in mounts like /data , /windows/xp , /windows/vista , and so on, and leave /media and its "mount/unmount" flexibility just for truly removable drives. So, if Ubuntu/Gnome truly follows the spec, is there any way to fix the root issues and to "emulate" the sticky bit for (at least) my fstab'ed NTFS fixed partitions?

    Read the article

  • New iPad vs. iPad 2–Side by side comparison of hardware specification [Infographic]

    - by Gopinath
    Apple released the 3rd generation of iPad on March 7th with spectacular hardware and software specs. The new iPad is the most advanced tablet available in the market with not much of competition. The closest competitor to the new iPad is not from Android or RIM or Amazon as they are no where close to the standards of the new iPad . But the competitor is none other than previous generation of iPad 2. In order to help you decide which Apple tablet suits your requirements here is an infographic comparing the iPad  with iPad 2

    Read the article

  • What is the best HTML specification to be used as of Q1 2011?

    - by Rob McKinnon
    While developing a web application, what is the best spec to use? HTML4.01 HTML5 XHTML trans XHTML1.1 I was taught to use XHTML1.0 strict in uni and to avoid applet/iframe/tables(except in forms). I noticed that some deprecated tags are available in HTML5. Is it safe to code in HTML5? If so should I use target='', and the aforementioned tags? I have noticed that there are many alternatives to choose from including canvas, object. I have no preference, although Iframe tags are being dispensed from sources like Facebook/Google/etc. What would be the best avenue to take for Spec as of now(Feb 2011)?

    Read the article

  • Eclipse Kepler apporte le support de Java EE 7, sortie simultanée entre la spécification et l'environnement de développement de la fondation Eclipse

    Une nouvelle version d'Eclipse est disponible. Elle porte le nom de Kepler. Cette version marque la fin officielle du support de la branche 3.x d'Eclipse par la Fondation. Elle continue donc sur la lancée de Juno.Des informations supplémentaires sur les nouveautés de cette version sont disponibles à cette adresse : notes pour la version 4.3.Le projet Kepler se compose de 72 projets (114 en comptant les sous-projets), pour un total d'environ 58 millions de lignes de code par 428 committers. 5 projets ont rejoint le « simulatenous release train » : EMF Diff/merge, Sphinx, Stardust, Hudson et Maven integration pour WTP (Web Tools P...

    Read the article

  • C++14 : le draft final a été publié, découvrez son contenu et ce qu'apporte la nouvelle spécification

    C++14 : le draft final a été publié Découvrez son contenu Le draft final de la nouvelle version du C++14 est publié. La seconde bonne nouvelle, c'est que les compilateurs les plus utilisés supportent déjà cette nouvelle version. Voici ce qu'elle nous apporte : N3323 - Correction de certaines conversions contextuelles du C++ : améliorations du comportement de conversion à un unique opérateur, alors que la conversion d'une valeur de la classe vers le type spécifié par le contexte est possible...

    Read the article

  • How do I create midi data to trigger an Ultrabeat pattern in Logic?

    - by user289581
    I've made some Ultrabeat patterns but I can't figure out how to trigger them. I make the pattern on C-1, then I go back to the arrange window and hit record and then hit C1 on my keyboard, and it doesn't play the pattern, it just plays a single note. I have Pattern Mode enabled on Ultrabeat and I'm using a one-shot trigger but I can't seem to trigger my pattern to play at all. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • The long road to bug-free software

    - by Tony Davis
    The past decade has seen a burgeoning interest in functional programming languages such as Haskell or, in the Microsoft world, F#. Though still on the periphery of mainstream programming, functional programming concepts are gradually seeping into the imperative C# language (for example, Lambda expressions have their root in functional programming). One of the more interesting concepts from functional programming languages is the use of formal methods, the lofty ideal behind which is bug-free software. The idea is that we write a specification that describes exactly how our function (say) should behave. We then prove that our function conforms to it, and in doing so have proved beyond any doubt that it is free from bugs. All programmers already use one form of specification, specifically their programming language's type system. If a value has a specific type then, in a type-safe language, the compiler guarantees that value cannot be an instance of a different type. Many extensions to existing type systems, such as generics in Java and .NET, extend the range of programs that can be type-checked. Unfortunately, type systems can only prevent some bugs. To take a classic problem of retrieving an index value from an array, since the type system doesn't specify the length of the array, the compiler has no way of knowing that a request for the "value of index 4" from an array of only two elements is "unsafe". We restore safety via exception handling, but the ideal type system will prevent us from doing anything that is unsafe in the first place and this is where we start to borrow ideas from a language such as Haskell, with its concept of "dependent types". If the type of an array includes its length, we can ensure that any index accesses into the array are valid. The problem is that we now need to carry around the length of arrays and the values of indices throughout our code so that it can be type-checked. In general, writing the specification to prove a positive property, even for a problem very amenable to specification, such as a simple sorting algorithm, turns out to be very hard and the specification will be different for every program. Extend this to writing a specification for, say, Microsoft Word and we can see that the specification would end up being no simpler, and therefore no less buggy, than the implementation. Fortunately, it is easier to write a specification that proves that a program doesn't have certain, specific and undesirable properties, such as infinite loops or accesses to the wrong bit of memory. If we can write the specifications to prove that a program is immune to such problems, we could reuse them in many places. The problem is the lack of specification "provers" that can do this without a lot of manual intervention (i.e. hints from the programmer). All this might feel a very long way off, but computing power and our understanding of the theory of "provers" advances quickly, and Microsoft is doing some of it already. Via their Terminator research project they have started to prove that their device drivers will always terminate, and in so doing have suddenly eliminated a vast range of possible bugs. This is a huge step forward from saying, "we've tested it lots and it seems fine". What do you think? What might be good targets for specification and verification? SQL could be one: the cost of a bug in SQL Server is quite high given how many important systems rely on it, so there's a good incentive to eliminate bugs, even at high initial cost. [Many thanks to Mike Williamson for guidance and useful conversations during the writing of this piece] Cheers, Tony.

    Read the article

  • The long road to bug-free software

    - by Tony Davis
    The past decade has seen a burgeoning interest in functional programming languages such as Haskell or, in the Microsoft world, F#. Though still on the periphery of mainstream programming, functional programming concepts are gradually seeping into the imperative C# language (for example, Lambda expressions have their root in functional programming). One of the more interesting concepts from functional programming languages is the use of formal methods, the lofty ideal behind which is bug-free software. The idea is that we write a specification that describes exactly how our function (say) should behave. We then prove that our function conforms to it, and in doing so have proved beyond any doubt that it is free from bugs. All programmers already use one form of specification, specifically their programming language's type system. If a value has a specific type then, in a type-safe language, the compiler guarantees that value cannot be an instance of a different type. Many extensions to existing type systems, such as generics in Java and .NET, extend the range of programs that can be type-checked. Unfortunately, type systems can only prevent some bugs. To take a classic problem of retrieving an index value from an array, since the type system doesn't specify the length of the array, the compiler has no way of knowing that a request for the "value of index 4" from an array of only two elements is "unsafe". We restore safety via exception handling, but the ideal type system will prevent us from doing anything that is unsafe in the first place and this is where we start to borrow ideas from a language such as Haskell, with its concept of "dependent types". If the type of an array includes its length, we can ensure that any index accesses into the array are valid. The problem is that we now need to carry around the length of arrays and the values of indices throughout our code so that it can be type-checked. In general, writing the specification to prove a positive property, even for a problem very amenable to specification, such as a simple sorting algorithm, turns out to be very hard and the specification will be different for every program. Extend this to writing a specification for, say, Microsoft Word and we can see that the specification would end up being no simpler, and therefore no less buggy, than the implementation. Fortunately, it is easier to write a specification that proves that a program doesn't have certain, specific and undesirable properties, such as infinite loops or accesses to the wrong bit of memory. If we can write the specifications to prove that a program is immune to such problems, we could reuse them in many places. The problem is the lack of specification "provers" that can do this without a lot of manual intervention (i.e. hints from the programmer). All this might feel a very long way off, but computing power and our understanding of the theory of "provers" advances quickly, and Microsoft is doing some of it already. Via their Terminator research project they have started to prove that their device drivers will always terminate, and in so doing have suddenly eliminated a vast range of possible bugs. This is a huge step forward from saying, "we've tested it lots and it seems fine". What do you think? What might be good targets for specification and verification? SQL could be one: the cost of a bug in SQL Server is quite high given how many important systems rely on it, so there's a good incentive to eliminate bugs, even at high initial cost. [Many thanks to Mike Williamson for guidance and useful conversations during the writing of this piece] Cheers, Tony.

    Read the article

  • Using Repository and Unit of Work patterns with Entity Framework 4.0 and MVC 2

    - by Mr. D
    Hi, I'm following this article Using Repository and Unit of Work patterns with Entity Framework 4.0. I'm tying to implement the Repository and Unit of work pattern, using Asp.Net MVC 2 and Entity Framework 4. Please let me know if I'm doing it right... In the Models folder: Northwind.edmx Products.cs (POCO class) ProductRepository.cs (Did my product query) IProductRepository.cs NorthwindContext.cs IUnitOfWork.cs In the Controller folder: ProductController.cs (Retrieve from ProductRepository.cs and Pass it to the view) When I run the application, I'm getting error message: Mapping and metadata information could not be found for EntityType 'NorthwindMvcPoco.Models.Category'. I don't know what I'm doing wrong. I search through whole web and I couldn't resolve this issue. Please help me.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >