Search Results

Search found 23484 results on 940 pages for 'evidence based'.

Page 4/940 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Cloud based backup solutions based on open standards?

    - by Rick
    I am looking for a solution to backup and consolidate important media from a couple Windows laptops and Mac laptop. I would like a solutions that based on open standards, so my data isn't trapped by proprietary formats and proprietary protocols. I would like the ability to switch clients or change providers in the future. For example, something like Jungle Disk plus S3 sounds like a great option. However, I am having trouble confirming how or if this can be setup meeting this criteria. Are there any real or de-facto standards for treating S3 as a filesystem? If so, what Windows and Mac clients support these standards?

    Read the article

  • Cloud based backup solutions based on open standards?

    - by Rick
    I am looking for a solution to backup and consolidate important media from a couple Windows laptops and Mac laptop. I would like a solutions that based on open standards, so my data isn't trapped by proprietary formats and proprietary protocols. I would like the ability to switch clients or change providers in the future. For example, something like Jungle Disk plus S3 sounds like a great option. However, I am having trouble confirming how or if this can be setup meeting this criteria. Are there any real or de-facto standards for treating S3 as a filesystem? If so, what Windows and Mac clients support these standards?

    Read the article

  • Should components have sub-components in a component-based system like Artemis?

    - by Daniel Ingraham
    I am designing a game using Artemis, although this is more of philosophical question about component-based design in general. Let's say I have non-primitive data which applies to a given component (a Component "animal" may have qualities such as "teeth" or "diet"). There are three ways to approach this in data-driven design, as I see it: 1) Generate classes for these qualities using "traditional" OOP. I imagine this has negative implications for performance, as systems then must be made aware of these qualities in order to process them. It also seems counter to the overall philosophy of data-driven design. 2) Include these qualities as sub-components. This seems off, in that we are now confusing the role of components with that of entities. Moreover out of the box Artemis isn't capable of mapping these subcomponents onto their parent components. 3) Add "teeth", "diet", etc. as components to the overall entity alongside "animal". While this feels odd hierarchically, it may simply be a peculiarity of component-based systems. I suspect 3 is the correct way to think about things, but I was curious about other ideas.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Is chess-like AI really inapplicable in turn-based strategy games?

    - by Joh
    Obviously, trying to apply the min-max algorithm on the complete tree of moves works only for small games (I apologize to all chess enthusiasts, by "small" I do not mean "simplistic"). For typical turn-based strategy games where the board is often wider than 100 tiles and all pieces in a side can move simultaneously, the min-max algorithm is inapplicable. I was wondering if a partial min-max algorithm which limits itself to N board configurations at each depth couldn't be good enough? Using a genetic algorithm, it might be possible to find a number of board configurations that are good wrt to the evaluation function. Hopefully, these configurations might also be good wrt to long-term goals. I would be surprised if this hasn't been thought of before and tried. Has it? How does it work?

    Read the article

  • Google Cloud Messaging (GCM) for turn-based mobile multiplayer server?

    - by Chris
    I'm designing a multiplayer turn-based game for Android (over 3g). I'm thinking the clients will send data to a central server over a socket or http, and receive data via GCM push messaging. I'd like to know if anyone has practical experience with GCM for pushing 'real-time' turn data to game clients. What kind of performance and limitations does it have? I'm also considering using a RESTful approach with GAE or Amazon EC2. Any advice about these approaches is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to set up different documentroot for ip based requests, and different for domain based requests

    - by Carlos
    My problem is simply that I have a domain, let's say example.com, and my server's ip address is e.g. 192.168.0.1. I want to set up 2 different virtual hosts, so when user enters ip address (192.168.0.1) in his browser, he will see content from here: /var/www/staging But if user will type example.com, he will see content from here: /var/www I think it's possible but I was playing around with it and couldn't make it work. Also I don't want to make simple redirection. I know I can, but I need both of my apps (live & staging) working in root on the same server. I can't buy second domain, and I can't associate new ip address.

    Read the article

  • Docs for OpenSSH CA-based certificate based authentication

    - by Zoredache
    OpenSSH 5.4 added a new method for certificate authentication (changes). * Add support for certificate authentication of users and hosts using a new, minimal OpenSSH certificate format (not X.509). Certificates contain a public key, identity information and some validity constraints and are signed with a standard SSH public key using ssh-keygen(1). CA keys may be marked as trusted in authorized_keys or via a TrustedUserCAKeys option in sshd_config(5) (for user authentication), or in known_hosts (for host authentication). Documentation for certificate support may be found in ssh-keygen(1), sshd(8) and ssh(1) and a description of the protocol extensions in PROTOCOL.certkeys. Is there any guides or documentation beyond what is mentioned in the ssh-keygen man-page? The man page covers how to generate certificate and use them, but it doesn't really seem to provide much information about the certificate authority setup. For example, can I sign the keys with an intermediate CA, and have the server trust the parent CA? This comment about the new feature seems to mean that I could setup my servers to trust the CA, then setup a method to sign keys, and then users would not have to publish their individual keys on the server. This also seems to support key expiration, which is great since getting rid of old/invalid keys is more difficult then it should be. But I am hoping to find some more documentation about describe the total configuration CA, SSH server, and SSH client settings needed to make this work.

    Read the article

  • Transitioning from desktop app written in C++ to a web-based app

    - by Karim
    We have a mature Windows desktop application written in C++. The application's GUI sits on top of a windows DLL that does most of the work for the GUI (it's kind of the engine). It, too, is written in C++. We are considering transitioning the Windows app to be a web-based app for various reasons. What I would like to avoid is having to writing the CGI for this web-based app in C++. That is, I would rather have the power of a 4G language like Python or a .NET language for creating the web-based version of this app. So, the question is: given that I need to use a C++ DLL on the backend to do the work of the app what technology stack would you recommend for sitting between the user's browser and are C++ dll? We can assume that the web server will be Windows. Some options: Write a COM layer on top of the windows DLL which can then be access via .NET and use ASP.NET for the UI Access the export DLL interface directly from .NET and use ASP.NET for the UI. Write a custom Python library that wraps the windows DLL so that the rest of the code can be written. Write the CGI using C++ and a C++-based MVC framework like Wt Concerns: I would rather not use C++ for the web framework if it can be avoided - I think languages like Python and C# are simply more powerful and efficient in terms of development time. I'm concerned that my mixing managed and unmanaged code with one of the .NET solutions I'm asking for lots of little problems that are hard to debug (purely anecdotal evidence for that) Same is true for using a Python layer. Anything that's slightly off the beaten path like that worries me in that I don't have much evidence one way or the other if this is a viable long term solution.

    Read the article

  • How to implement behavior in a component-based game architecture?

    - by ghostonline
    I am starting to implement player and enemy AI in a game, but I am confused about how to best implement this in a component-based game architecture. Say I have a following player character that can be stationary, running and swinging a sword. A player can transit to the swing sword state from both the stationary and running state, but then the swing must be completed before the player can resume standing or running around. During the swing, the player cannot walk around. As I see it, I have two implementation approaches: Create a single AI-component containing all player logic (either decoupled from the actual component or embedded as a PlayerAIComponent). I can easily how to enforce the state restrictions without creating coupling between individual components making up the player entity. However, the AI-component cannot be broken up. If I have, for example, an enemy that can only stand and walk around or only walks around and occasionally swing a sword, I have to create new AI-components. Break the behavior up in components, each identifying a specific state. I then get a StandComponent, WalkComponent and SwingComponent. To enforce the transition rules, I have to couple each component. SwingComponent must disable StandComponent and WalkComponent for the duration of the swing. When I have an enemy that only stands around, swinging a sword occasionally, I have to make sure SwingComponent only disables WalkComponent if it is present. Although this allows for better mix-and-matching components, it can lead to a maintainability nightmare as each time a dependency is added, the existing components must be updated to play nicely with the new requirements the dependency places on the character. The ideal situation would be that a designer can build new enemies/players by dragging components into a container, without having to touch a single line of engine or script code. Although I am not sure script coding can be avoided, I want to keep it as simple as possible. Summing it all up: Should I lob all AI logic into one component or break up each logic state into separate components to create entity variants more easily?

    Read the article

  • How should I structure the implementation of turn-based board game rules?

    - by Setzer22
    I'm trying to create a turn-based strategy game on a tilemap. I'm using design by component so far, but I can't find a nice way to fit components into the part I want to ask. I'm struggling with the "game rules" logic. That is, the code that displays the menu, allows the player to select units, and command them, then tells the unit game objects what to do given the player input. The best way I could thing of handling this was using a big state machine, so everything that could be done in a "turn" is handled by this state machine, and the update code of this state machine does different things depending on the state. However, this approach leads to a large amount of code (anything not model-related) going into a big class. Of course I can subdivide this big class into more classes, but it doesn't feel modular and upgradable enough. I'd like to know of better systems to handle this in order to be able to upgrade the game with new rules without having a monstruous if/else chain (or switch / case, for that matter). Any ideas? What specific design pattern other than MVC should I be using?

    Read the article

  • Documenting a policy based design

    - by academicRobot
    I'm re-working some prototype code into a policy based design in C++, and I'm wondering what the best practice is for documenting the design. My current plan is to document: Policy hierarchy Overview of each policy Description of each type/value/function in each policy I was thinking of putting this into a doxygen module, but this looks like it will be a bit awkward since formatting will have to be done by hand without code to base the doc on (that is, documenting the policies rather than the implementation of the policies). So my questions are: Are there other aspects of the design that should be documented? Are there any tricks to doing this efficiently in doxygen? Is there a tool other than doxygen thats better suited to this? What are some examples of well documented policy based design? This is my first serious attempt at policy based design. I think I have a working grasp of the principles, but whatever naivety I expose in this question is fair game for an answer too.

    Read the article

  • Web based interface for open SSL client certificates

    - by Felix
    Hi there! We are currently developing a apache2-based web application and want to invite some beta testers to give it a try. To be on the safe side, access should be provided by individual browser certificates (.p12) which are issued using a (fake) CA. Our users should be passing a complete register/login process and some of them will be granted administrative privileges within the application. That's why a preceding simple web-based authentication won't be sufficient. Atm, I using a serverside shellscript to generate the certificates each time. Do you know about a small, web-based tool to simplify the process of generating / revoking those certificates? Maybe an overview of the CA's index.txt plus the option to revoke a cert and a link to download them directly?

    Read the article

  • How to implement a component based system for items in a web game.

    - by Landstander
    Reading several other questions and answers on using a component based system to define items I want to use one for the items and spells in a web game written in PHP. I'm just stuck on the implementation. I'm going to use a DB schema suggested in this series (part 5 describes the schema); http://t-machine.org/index.php/2007/09/03/entity-systems-are-the-future-of-mmog-development-part-1/ This means I'll have an items table with generic item properties, a table listing all of the components for an item and finally records in each component table used to make up the item. Assuming I can select the first two together in a single query, I'm still going to do N queries for each component type. I'm kind of fine with this because I can cache the data into memcache and check there first before doing any queries. I'll need to build up the items on every request they are used in so the implementation needs to be on the lean side even if they're pulled from memcache. But right there is where I feel confident about implementing a component system for my items ends. I figure I'd need to bring attributes and behaviors into the container from each component it uses. I'm just not sure how to do that effectively and not end up writing a lot of specialized code to deal with each component. For example an AttackComponent might need to know how to filter targets inside of a battle context and also maybe provide an attack behavior. That same item might also have a UsableComponent which allows the item to be used and apply some effect onto a different set of targets filtered differently from the same battle context. Then not every part of an item is an active part, an AttributeBonusComponent might need to only kick in when the item is in an equipped state or when displaying the item details page. Ultimately, how should I bring all of the components together into the container so when I use an item as a weapon I get the correct list of targets? Know when a weapon can also be used as an item? Or to apply the bonuses the item provides to a character object? I feel like I've gone too far down the rabbit hole and I can't grasp onto the simple solution in front of me. (If that makes any sense at all.) Likewise if I were to implement the best answer from here I feel like I'd have a lot of the same questions. How to model multiple "uses" (e.g. weapon) for usable-inventory/object/items (e.g. katana) within a relational database.

    Read the article

  • Non-English-based programming languages

    - by Jaime Soto
    The University of Antioquia in Colombia teaches its introductory programming courses in Lexico, a Spanish-based, object-oriented .NET language. The intent is to teach programming concepts in the students' native language before introducing English-based mainstream languages. There are many other Non-English-based programming languages and there is even a related question in Stack Overflow. I have several questions regarding these languages: Has anyone on this site learned to program using a non-English-based language? If so, how difficult was the transition to the first English-based language? Is there any research-based evidence that non-English speakers learn programming faster/better using languages with keywords in their native language instead of English-based languages?

    Read the article

  • Recommended Model Based Testing Tools

    - by ModelTester
    Does anyone have any suggestions on what Model Based Testing Tools to use? Is Spec Explorer/SPEC# worth it's weight in tester training? What I have traditionally done is create a Visio Model where I call out the states and associated variables, outputs and expected results from each state. Then in a completely disconnected way, I data drive my test scripts with those variables based on that model. But, they are not connected. I want a way to create a model, associate the variables in a business friendly way, that will then build the data parameters for the scripts. I can't be the first person to need this. Is there a tool out there that will do basically that? Short of developing it myself.

    Read the article

  • Coarse classing based on weight of evidence in r

    - by user3619169
    How can we use weight of evidence for binning continuous data in R. For e.g. I have a data: Recency 364 91 692 13 126 4 40 93 13 33 262 12 136 21 88 16 4 19 24 89 36 5 274 125 740 6 13 715 591 443 104 853 260 125 62 357 559 155 163 16 433 91 1380 96 374 130 574 101 5 11 34 401 13 215 168 So, what should be the command to bin this variable in different groups, based on Weight of evidence, or you can say coarse classing. Output I want is: Group I: Recency <200 Group I: Recency 200-400 Group I: Recency 400 Thanks

    Read the article

  • IntelliSense based snippet handling with Visual Studio 2010 SDK MEF Based text editor

    - by Nicolai Ustinov
    Using the new Visual Studio 2010 SDK developing against the MEF based editor structure there's a question: How can I use the MEF editor interfaces to handle snippet behavior in IntelliSense? The ICompletionSession itself is not a problem (e.g. get the available snippets) rather filling the snippet, handling the subsequently expected actions like tab, enter behavior, text replacement, etc. Is there any way to do that without a language service? Checking the built-in behavior in Visual Studio base editor implementation they built the MEF interfaces on top of a set of language service based objects.

    Read the article

  • Permission based Authorization vs. Role based Authorization - Best Practices - 11g

    - by Prakash Yamuna
    In previous blog posts here and here I have alluded to the support in OWSM for Permission based authorization and Role based authorization support. Recently I was having a conversation with an internal team in Oracle looking to use OWSM for their Web Services security needs and one of the topics was around - When to use permission based authorization vs. role based authorization? As in most scenarios the answer is it depends! There are trade-offs involved in using the two approaches and you need to understand the trade-offs and you need to understand which trade-offs are better for your scenario. Role based Authorization: Simple to use. Just create a new custom OWSM policy and specify the role in the policy (using EM Fusion Middleware Control). Inconsistent if you have multiple type of resources in an application (ex: EJBs, Web Apps, Web Services) - ex: the model for securing EJBs with roles or the model for securing Web App roles - is inconsistent. Since the model is inconsistent, tooling is also fairly inconsistent. Achieving this use-case using JDeveloper is slightly complex - since JDeveloper does not directly support creating OWSM custom policies. Permission based Authorization: More complex. You need to attach both an OWSM policy and create OPSS Permission authorization policies. (Note: OWSM leverages OPSS Permission based Authorization support). More appropriate if you have multiple type of resources in an application (ex: EJBs, Web Apps, Web Services) and want a consistent authorization model. Consistent Tooling for managing authorization across different resources (ex: EM Fusion Middleware Control). Better Lifecycle support in terms of T2P, etc. Achieving this use-case using JDeveloper is slightly complex - since JDeveloper does not directly support creating/editing OPSS Permission based authorization policies.

    Read the article

  • Invoking a WCF service using claims based authentication

    - by ashwnacharya
    I have a WCF service deployed in a server machine. We are using claims based authentication to authenticate the WCF service caller. The WCF service is restricted by using IIS Authorization rules. How do I programmatically invoke the WCF service using .NET? The client app uses a proxy generated using SVCUtil. calling the service reads the credentials from a configuration file (not the app.config file, in fact the client application does not have a *.config file).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >