Search Results

Search found 31582 results on 1264 pages for 'software design'.

Page 361/1264 | < Previous Page | 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368  | Next Page >

  • Pros and Cons on where to place business logic: app level or DB

    - by Juri
    Hi, I always again encounter discussions about where to place the business logic: inside a business layer in the application code or down in the DB in terms of stored procedures. Personally I'd tend to the 1st approach, but I'd like to hear some opinions from your part first, without influencing you with my personal views. I know there doesn't exist a one-size-fits-all solution and it often depends on many factors, but we can discuss about that. Btw, we are in the context of web applications and our current approach is to have UI layer which accepts UI input and does a first, client-side validation Business layer with a number of service-classes which contains the business logic including validation for user input (server-side) Data Access Layer which calls stored procedures from the DB for doing persistency/read operations Many people however tend to move the business layer stuff (especially regarding the validation) down to the DB in terms of stored procedures. What do you think about it? I'd like to discuss.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET sets of technologies/components

    - by Maxim Gueivandov
    Just a question of pure curiosity. It happens that development teams tend to stick to the same technological set(s) for some time, for various reasons (obviously, the lack of time, money, necessity and/or willingless to adopt new technologies). So, what are your usual sets of technologies/components to build an ASP.NET application (e.g., WebForms / MVC, Automapper, NInject, NHibernate / LinqToSql, JQuery / ASP.NET Ajax, ...) or architectural frameworks (Arch#, Catharsis, ...) and in which context do you use them (site size, speed/availability requirements, etc.)?

    Read the article

  • Architectural decision : QT or Eclipse Platform ?

    - by umanga
    We are in the process of designing a tool to be used with HDEM(High Definition Electron Microscope).We get stacks of 2D images from HDEM and first step is 'detecting borders' on the sections.After detecting edges of 2D slices ,next step is construct the 3D model using these 2D slices. This 'border detecting' algorithm(s) is/are implemented by one of professor and he has used and suggests to use C.(to gain high performance and probably will parallelise in future) We have to develop comprehensive UI ,3D viewer ,2D editor...etc and use this algorithm. Application should support usual features like project save/open.Undo,Redo...etc Our technology decisions are: A) Build entire platform from the scratch using QT. B) Use Eclipse Platform Our concerns are, if we choose A) we can easily integrate the 'border detecting' algorithm(s) because the development environment is C/C++ But we have to implement the basic features from the scratch. If we choose B) we get basic features from the Eclipse platform , but integrating C libraries going to be a tedious task. Any suggestions on this?

    Read the article

  • is there evidence that offshoring is causing developer salaries to go down? [closed]

    - by jcollum
    I realize this is a controversial and political topic. I'm trying to decide if offshoring is something that is effecting our industry in any substantial way or if it's just some bugaboo. I've read various posts on SO about it, but none addressed the idea of evidence for offshoring. Studies, papers, opinions of people who know about such things etc. I hear a lot about offshoring and its effect on our job market. However it all seems to be hearsay and conjecture. It does seem like some people are genuinely worried about it. This offshoring thing has been going on for quite some time, should be enough time for some real data to come out. If I had to pick a number I'd say it started during the dotcom boom -- a time when the need for developers far outweighed the local talent pool. We're now in a time when the talent pool is expensive and corporate wallets are tight, seems like an ideal time to find a good cheap developer in some other country. But is that actually happening? From reading some posts here on SO, I've concluded that offshoring is a really tough thing to do right. There are a lot of companies who think (or say) they can do it right, but some small percentage of them are actually able to pull it off. Is offshoring affecting the job market in any measurable way? Is offshoring measurable at all? Do we need to stop worrying about this?

    Read the article

  • Game AI: Pattern for implementing Sense-Think-Act components?

    - by Rosarch
    I'm developing a game. Each entity in the game is a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. (Or inheritants thereof.) For NPCs, the GameObjectController is split into: IThinkNPC: reads current state and makes a decision about what to do IActNPC: updates state based on what needs to be done ISenseNPC: reads current state to answer world queries (eg "am I being in the shadows?") My question: Is this ok for the ISenseNPC interface? public interface ISenseNPC { // ... /// <summary> /// True if `dest` is a safe point to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="dest"></param> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <param name="range"></param> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeToRetreat(Vector2 dest, float angleToThreat, float range); /// <summary> /// Finds a new location to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <returns></returns> Vector2 newRetreatDest(float angleToThreat); /// <summary> /// Returns the closest LightSource that illuminates the NPC. /// Null if the NPC is not illuminated. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> ILightSource ClosestIlluminatingLight(); /// <summary> /// True if the NPC is sufficiently far away from target. /// Assumes that target is the only entity it could ever run from. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeFromTarget(); } None of the methods take any parameters. Instead, the implementation is expected to maintain a reference to the relevant GameObjectController and read that. However, I'm now trying to write unit tests for this. Obviously, it's necessary to use mocking, since I can't pass arguments directly. The way I'm doing it feels really brittle - what if another implementation comes along that uses the world query utilities in a different way? Really, I'm not testing the interface, I'm testing the implementation. Poor. The reason I used this pattern in the first place was to keep IThinkNPC implementation code clean: public BehaviorState RetreatTransition(BehaviorState currentBehavior) { if (sense.IsCollidingWithTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "is colliding with target"); return BehaviorState.ATTACK; } if (sense.IsSafeFromTarget() && sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() == null) { return BehaviorState.WANDER; } if (sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() != null && sense.SeesTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "collides with target"); return BehaviorState.CHASE; } return currentBehavior; } Perhaps the cleanliness isn't worth it, however. So, if ISenseNPC takes all the params it needs every time, I could make it static. Is there any problem with that?

    Read the article

  • Many-To-Many dimensional model

    - by Mevdiven
    Folks, I have a dimension table called DIM_FILE which holds information of the files we received from customers. Each file has detail records which constitutes my FACT table, CUST_DETAIL. In the main process, file is gone through several stages and each stage tags a status to it. Long in a short, I have many-to-many relationship. Any ideas around star schema dimensional modeling. A customer record only belong to a single file and a file can have multiple statuses. FACT ---- CustID FileID AmountDue DIM_FILE -------- FileID FileName DateReceived FILE_STATUS ----------- FileID StatusDateTime StatusCode

    Read the article

  • What Are Basic Tools For A New Project?

    - by Morgan Cheng
    For a long time, I thought that to start a new project we only need 3 basic tools. 1) A Build System (e.g. Maven & CruiseControl) 2) A Version Control System (e.g. CVS & SVN & GIT) 3) A Bug Tracking System (e.g. Bugzilla) Yesterday, a senior guy told me that we need at least one thing more. That is KPI(Key Performance Index). Without KPI, it is impossible to measure whether the project is progressing well or not. KPI is kind of SOFT tool compared to Maven/SVN/Bugzilla. I believe since I missed SOFT tools, there must be some other kind of tools I missed. So, anybody get some ideas what other basic tools necessary for a new project?

    Read the article

  • Natural vs surrogate keys on support tables

    - by Bugeo
    I have read many articles about the battle between natural versus surrogate primary keys. I agree in the use of surrogate keys to identify records of tables whose contents are created by the user. But in the case of supporting tables what should I use? For example, in a hypothetical table "orderStates". If you use a natural key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} If I use a surrogate key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: 1 CODE: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: 2 CODE: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: 3 CODE: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} Now let's take an example: a user enters a new order. In the case in which use natural keys, in the code I can write this: newOrder.StateOrderId = "NEW"; With the surrogate keys instead every time I have an additional step. stateOrderId_NEW = .... I retrieve the id corresponding to the recod code "NEW" newOrder.StateOrderId = stateOrderId_NEW; The same will happen every time I have to move the order in a new status. So, in this case, what are the reason to chose one key type vs the other one?

    Read the article

  • Using Doctrine to abstract CRUD operations

    - by TomWilsonFL
    This has bothered me for quite a while, but now it is necessity that I find the answer. We are working on quite a large project using CodeIgniter plus Doctrine. Our application has a front end and also an admin area for the company to check/change/delete data. When we designed the front end, we simply consumed most of the Doctrine code right in the controller: //In semi-pseudocode function register() { $data = get_post_data(); if (count($data) && isValid($data)) { $U = new User(); $U->fromArray($data); $U->save(); $C = new Customer(); $C->fromArray($data); $C->user_id = $U->id; $C->save(); redirect_to_next_step(); } } Obviously when we went to do the admin views code duplication began and considering we were in a "get it DONE" mode so it now stinks with code bloat. I have moved a lot of functionality (business logic) into the model using model methods, but the basic CRUD does not fit there. I was going to attempt to place the CRUD into static methods, i.e. Customer::save($array) [would perform both insert and update depending on if prikey is present in array], Customer::delete($id), Customer::getObj($id = false) [if false, get all data]. This is going to become painful though for 32 model objects (and growing). Also, at times models need to interact (as the interaction above between user data and customer data), which can't be done in a static method without breaking encapsulation. I envision adding another layer to this (exposing web services), so knowing there are going to be 3 "controllers" at some point I need to encapsulate this CRUD somewhere (obviously), but are static methods the way to go, or is there another road? Your input is much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Google Calendar like interface

    - by John Virgolino
    I need to write an application that essentially functions like a week-view of a calendar, columns for the days and then rows for appointments. Where the height of the appointment box visually represents time. In my case, I just don't want the time of day as the vertical axis, I just want hours or mins. The Google AJAX approach is very clean and easy to use and would be perfect, I think, but my major knowledge comes in ASP.Net and Windows Forms (.Net). I don't want to reinvent the wheel, but I find my mind is stuck on this problem and that I would have to create an interface from scratch for this. I have checked out the Infragistics product (used it for other projects) and read up a lot on the Google API's including their Ajax toolkit. I haven't done Java, however learning a language is not my issue, it's learning the particulars that will help me reach my goal that I feel will take most of the time. Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill? Is this really a lot easier than I think? This is starting to sound like a Dear Abby post - I'll stop now. Any advice or insight would be great! Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • What's the standard way to organize the contents of Java packages -- specifically the location of in

    - by RenderIn
    I suppose this could go for many OO languages. I'm building my domain objects and am not sure where the best place is for the interfaces & abstract classes. If I have a pets package with various implementations of the APet abstract class: should it live side-by-side with them or in the parent package? How about interfaces? It seems like they almost have to live above the implementations in the parent package, since there could potentially be other subpackages which implement it, while there seems to be a stronger correlation between one abstract class and a subpackage. e.g. com.foo com.foo.IConsumer (interface) com.foo.APet (abstract) com.foo.pets.Dog extends APet implements IConsumer OR com.foo com.foo.IConsumer (interface) com.foo.pets.APet (abstract) com.foo.pets.Dog extends APet implements IConsumer or something else?

    Read the article

  • Practical rules for premature optimization

    - by DougW
    It seems that the phrase "Premature Optimization" is the buzz-word of the day. For some reason, iphone programmers in particular seem to think of avoiding premature optimization as a pro-active goal, rather than the natural result of simply avoiding distraction. The problem is, the term is beginning to be applied more and more to cases that are completely inappropriate. For example, I've seen a growing number of people say not to worry about the complexity of an algorithm, because that's premature optimization (eg http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2190275/help-sorting-an-nsarray-across-two-properties-with-nssortdescriptor/2191720#2191720). Frankly, I think this is just laziness, and appalling to disciplined computer science. But it has occurred to me that maybe considering the complexity and performance of algorithms is going the way of assembly loop unrolling, and other optimization techniques that are now considered unnecessary. What do you think? Are we at the point now where deciding between an O(n^n) and O(n!) complexity algorithm is irrelevant? What about O(n) vs O(n*n)? What do you consider "premature optimization"? What practical rules do you use to consciously or unconsciously avoid it? This is a bit vague, but I'm curious to hear other peoples' opinions on the topic.

    Read the article

  • Elegant way of parsing Data files for Simulation

    - by sc_ray
    I am working on this project where I need to read in a lot of data from .dat files and use the data to perform simulations. The data in my .dat file looks as follows: DeviceID InteractingDeviceID InteractionStartTime InteractionEndTime 1 2 1101 1105 1,2 1101 and 1105 are tab delimited and it means Device 1 interacted with Device 2 at 1101 ms and ended the interaction at 1105ms. I have a trace data sets that compile thousands of such interactions and my job is to analyze these interactions. The first step is to parse the file. The language of choice is C++. The approach I was thinking of taking was to read the file, for every line that's read create a Device Object. This Device object will contain the property DeviceId and an array/vector of structs, that will contain a list of all the devices the given DeviceId interacted with over the course of the simulation.The struct will contain the Interacting Device Id, Interaction Start Time and Interaction End Time. I have a two fold question here: Is my approach correct? If I am on the right track, how do I rapidly parse these tab delimited data files and create Device objects without excessive memory overhead using C++? A push in the right direction will be much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Domain model: should things like Logging, Audit, Persistence be in it

    - by hom.tanks
    I'm having a hard time convincing our architect that a Domain model should only have the essential elements of the business domain on it. Things like the fact that a class is persistable, that it needs logging and auditing and that it has a RESTful URI should not drive the domain model. They can be added later on, by using interfaces. Ours is a healthcare information management system. At the very coarse level, its a system where users login and access their healthcare information. They can share this information with others and be custodian for others' information (think Roles). But because of a few sound bytes that caught on early like "Everything should be a REST resource" the model now has a top level class called Resource that every other class extends from. I'm trying to make him see that the domain model should have well defined concepts like User Account, HealthDocument, UserRole etc which are distinct entities of the business , with specific associations between them. Clubbing everything under Resource class lets our model be inflexible besides being potentially incorrect. But he wants me to show him why its a bad idea to do it his way. I don't know how to articulate that properly but all my OO instincts tell me that its just not right. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Is MVVM killing silverlight development?

    - by DeanMc
    This is a question I have had rattling around in my head for some time. I had a chat with a guy the other night who told me he would not be using the navigational framework because he could not figure out how it works with MVVM. As much as I tried to explain that patterns should be taken with a pinch of salt he would not listen. My point is this, patterns are great when they solve some problem. Sometimes only part of the pattern solves a particular problem while the other parts of it cause different problems. The goal of any developer is to build a solid application using a combination of patterns know how and foresight. I feel MVVM is becoming the one pattern to rule them all. As it is not directly supported by .Net some fancy business is needed to make it work. I feel that people are missing the point of the pattern, which is loosely coupled, testable code and instead jumping through hoops and missing out on great experiences trying to follow MVVM to the letter. MVVM is great but I wish it came with a warning or disclaimer for newbies as my fear is people will shy away from silverlight development for fear of being smacked with the mvvm stick. EDIT: Can I just add as an edit, I use and agree with MVVM as a pattern I know when it is and isn't feasible in my projects. My issue is with the encompassing nature it is taking, as if it HAS to be used as part of development. It is being used as an integral feature and not a pattern, which it is.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for an in memory database vs thread safe data structures

    - by yx
    TLDR: What are the pros/cons of using an in-memory database vs locks and concurrent data structures? I am currently working on an application that has many (possibly remote) displays that collect live data from multiple data sources and renders them on screen in real time. One of the other developers have suggested the use of an in memory database instead of doing it the standard way our other systems behaves, which is to use concurrent hashmaps, queues, arrays, and other objects to store the graphical objects and handling them safely with locks if necessary. His argument is that the DB will lessen the need to worry about concurrency since it will handle read/write locks automatically, and also the DB will offer an easier way to structure the data into as many tables as we need instead of having create hashmaps of hashmaps of lists, etc and keeping track of it all. I do not have much DB experience myself so I am asking fellow SO users what experiences they have had and what are the pros & cons of inserting the DB into the system?

    Read the article

  • Class hierarchy problem (with generic's variance!)

    - by devoured elysium
    The problem: class StatesChain : IState, IHasStateList { private TasksChain tasks = new TasksChain(); ... public IList<IState> States { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } } IList<ITask> IHasTasksCollection.Tasks { get { return _taskChain.Tasks; } <-- ERROR! You can't do this in C#! I want to return an IList<ITask> from an IList<IStates>. } } Assuming the IList returned will be read-only, I know that what I'm trying to achieve is safe (or is it not?). Is there any way I can accomplish what I'm trying? I wouldn't want to try to implement myself the TasksChain algorithm (again!), as it would be error prone and would lead to code duplication. Maybe I could just define an abstract Chain and then implement both TasksChain and StatesChain from there? Or maybe implementing a Chain<T> class? How would you approach this situation? The Details: I have defined an ITask interface: public interface ITask { bool Run(); ITask FailureTask { get; } } and a IState interface that inherits from ITask: public interface IState : ITask { IState FailureState { get; } } I have also defined an IHasTasksList interface: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> Tasks { get; } } and an IHasStatesList: interface IHasTasksList { List<Tasks> States { get; } } Now, I have defined a TasksChain, that is a class that has some code logic that will manipulate a chain of tasks (beware that TasksChain is itself a kind of ITask!): class TasksChain : ITask, IHasTasksList { IList<ITask> tasks = new List<ITask>(); ... public List<ITask> Tasks { get { return _tasks; } } ... } I am implementing a State the following way: public class State : IState { private readonly TaskChain _taskChain = new TaskChain(); public State(Precondition precondition, Execution execution) { _taskChain.Tasks.Add(precondition); _taskChain.Tasks.Add(execution); } public bool Run() { return _taskChain.Run(); } public IState FailureState { get { return (IState)_taskChain.Tasks[0].FailureTask; } } ITask ITask.FailureTask { get { return FailureState; } } } which, as you can see, makes use of explicit interface implementations to "hide" FailureTask and instead show FailureState property. The problem comes from the fact that I also want to define a StatesChain, that inherits both from IState and IHasStateList (and that also imples ITask and IHasTaskList, implemented as explicit interfaces) and I want it to also hide IHasTaskList's Tasks and only show IHasStateList's States. (What is contained in "The problem" section should really be after this, but I thought puting it first would be way more reader friendly). (pff..long text) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Use of (non) qualified names

    - by AProgrammer
    If I want to use the name baz defined in package foo|bar|quz, I've several choices: provide fbq as a short name for foo|bar|quz and use fbq|baz use foo|bar|quz|baz import baz from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz (or an alias given in the import process) import all public symbols from foo|bar|quz|baz and then use baz For the languages I know, my perception is that the best practice is to use the first two ways (I'll use one or the other depending on the specific package full name and the number of symbols I need from it). I'd use the third only in a language which doesn't provide the first and hunt for supporting tools to write the import statements. And in my opinion the fourth should be reserved to package designed with than import in mind, for instance if all exported symbols start with a prefix or contains the name of the package. My questions: what is in your opinion the best practice for your favorite languages? what would you suggest in a new language? what would you suggest in an old language adding such a feature?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368  | Next Page >