Search Results

Search found 17770 results on 711 pages for 'repository design'.

Page 41/711 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

• How to decide whether to implement an operation as Entity operation vs Service operation in Domain Driven Design?

  - by Louis Rhys

  I am reading Evans's Domain Driven Design. The book says that there are entity and there are services. If I were to implement an operation, how to decide whether I should add it as a method on an entity or do it in a service class? e.g. myEntity.DoStuff() or myService.DoStuffOn(myEntity)? Does it depend on whether other entities are involved? If it involves other entities, implement as service operation? But entities can have associations and can traverse it from there too right? Does it depend on stateless or not? But service can also access entities' variable, right? Like in do stuff myService.DoStuffOn, it can have code like if(myEntity.IsX) doSomething(); Which means that it will depend on the state? Or does it depend on complexity? How do you define complex operations?

  Read the article

• Safe project development - free repositories

  - by friko

  Some time ago we started a private hobby project. We made a project on javaforge.com, created an svn repository and started developing our app. Right now we are really far with our project, but somehow we never worried if our project is really safe on such free development tool like javaforge ? I mean, what if our project would earn some money and the source code become valuable ? Could it be stolen or could somebody take it over ? We want to be sure that we are not wasting our time and want to be really sure about our project safety. Is it possible to safely develop a project in such free repository ? We would like also to start using redmine, so if you know any safe place for moving our project, please take this under consideration. Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

• Is there a good design pattern for this messaging class?

  - by salonMonsters

  Is there a good design pattern for this? I want to create a messaging class. The class will be passed: the type of message (eg. signup, signup confirmation, password reminder etc) the client's id The class needs to then look up the client's messaging preferences in the db (whether they want communication by email, sms or both) Then depending on the client's preference it will format the message for the medium (short version for sms, long form for email) and send it through our mail or sms provider's API. Because the fact that we want to be able to change out email and sms providers if need be I wondered if the Command Pattern would be a good choice.

  Read the article

• How would you design an application with many target platforms and devices?

  - by Pierre 303

  I'm in a very beginning of the design phase of an application that will have to run in the following platforms/devices: Desktop: Windows, Linux & Mac Mobile: Android, iPhone/iPad & Windows Phone 7 Web: Silverlight I will use C# on Mono and I want to maximize code re-usability. Except for the desktop (I'll use WinForms/GTK#), my concern is related to many different GUI that I will face. What would be your approach? Obviously, the views will be different, but what about the controllers, data access, utility classes, etc. Is it really acceptable to share everything but the views?

  Read the article

• Is it possible to design a multiplayer game which can be played from different devices?

  - by user9820

  I want to design a online multiplayer game for all gaming devices e.g. Desktop PC, internet browser, android phones, android tablets, iphone, ipad, XBOX 360 etc. Now my main requirement is that, I want all devices can be used to play the game in multiplayer mode toghether i.e. One player can be connected using PC another using android phone and other may be with iphone or ipad. My doubts are - How to make all devices to connect to common game server? What will be the logic for graphics and texture because all devices screen will be of different aspect ratio?

  Read the article

• Are the technologies used in an application part of the architecture, or do they represent implementation/detailed design details?

  - by m3th0dman

  When designing and writing documentation for a project an architecture needs to be clearly defined: what are the high-level modules of the system, what are their responsibilities, how do they communicate with each other, what protocols are used etc. But in this list, should the concrete technologies be specified or this is actually an implementation detail and need to be specified at a lower level? For example, consider a distributed application that has two modules which communicate asynchronously via AMQP protocol, mediated by a message broker. The fact that these modules use the Spring AMQP library for sending and receiving messages is a fact that needs to be specified in the architecture or is a lower-level detailed design/implementation detail?

  Read the article

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

  - by Elijah

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

  Read the article

• If all variables are a subset of the superkey, is the database design 5NF? [migrated]

  - by Lukazoid

  I have a table called LogMessages, which has the following columns: Level A numeric value which represents Trace, Debug, Info, Warning, Error or Fatal Time A UTC time Message Foreign key to a Messages table Source Foreign key to a Sources table User Foreign key to a Users table From what I can see, all of these columns are a part of the super key; if any single value differs to an existing row, a new row can be created. My question is, does this design comply to fifth normal form? I am unsure as some groups of data will be repeating, however I don't believe this violates 5NF? (correct me if I'm wrong)

  Read the article

• What design pattern do you use to support graceful fallback on old platforms?

  - by JoJo

  Let's say I need to add a drop shadow behind a box. Some old platforms do not support drop shadows, so I have to fake it by putting an image behind the box. Here's the pseudo code of how I'm currently handling this fallback: if (dropShadowsAreSupported) { box.addDropShadow("black"); } else { box.putImageBehindIt("gaussianBlur.png"); } Is this the right way to handle it? It seems too amateur to me. Is there a better design pattern?

  Read the article

• Is there a name for this use of the State design pattern?

  - by Chris C

  I'm looking to see if there is a particular name for this style of programming a certain kind of behavior into a program. Said program runs in real time, in an update loop, and the program uses the State design pattern to do some work, but it's the specific way it does the work that I want to know about. Here's how it's used. - Object Foo constructed, with concrete StateA object in it - First loop runs --- Foo.Run function calls StateA.Bar --- in StateA.Bar replace Foo's state to StateB - Second loop runs --- Foo.Run calls StateB.Bar - Third loop runs --- Foo.Run calls StateB.Bar - Fourth loop --- etc. So in short, Foo doesn't have an explicit Initialize function. It will just have Run, but Run will do something unique in the first frame to initialize something for Foo and then replace it with a different action that will repeat in all the frames following it- thus not needing to check if Foo's already initialized. It's just a "press start and go" action. What would you call implementing this type of behavior?

  Read the article

• Setting Up Local Repository with TortoiseSVN in Windows

  - by Teno

  I'm trying to set up a local repository so that all commitments are copied to the local destination, not a remote server. I followed this tutorial. What I did. Created a folder named "SVN_Repo" under C:\Documents and Settings[user-name]\My Documents\ Right clicked on the folder and chose TortoiseSVN -> Create repository here Clicked OK in the pop up dialog asking whether to create a directory structure. Created a folder named Repos for the local destination, under E:\ Right clicked on the SVN_Repo folder and chose SVN Checkout... Typed file:///E:\repos in the URL of repository field and clicked the OK button. What I got: Checkout from file:///E:/repos, revision HEAD, Fully recursive, Externals included Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'file:///E:/repos' Unable to open an ra_local session to URL Unable to open repository 'file:///E:/repos' I must be doing something wrong. Could somebody point it out? Thanks.

  Read the article

• How are design-by-contract and property-based testing (QuickCheck) related?

  - by Todd Owen

  Is their only similarity the fact that they are not xUnit (or more precisely, not based on enumerating specific test cases), or is it deeper than that? Property-based testing (using QuickCheck, ScalaCheck, etc) seem well-suited to a functional programming style where side-effects are avoided. On the other hand, Design by Contract (as implemented in Eiffel) is more suited to OOP languages: you can express post-conditions about the effects of methods, not just their return values. But both of them involve testing assertions that are true in general (rather than assertions that should be true for a specific test case). And both can be tested using randomly generated inputs (with QuickCheck this is the only way, whereas with Eiffel I believe it is an optional feature of the AutoTest tool). Is there an umbrella term to encompass both approaches? Or am I imagining a relationship that doesn't really exist.

  Read the article

• How to get BURG on 12.10 (Quantal Quetzal)

  - by Warpspace

  I've been using BURG for years to get rid of the eye sore that is the standard GRUB interface. When I upgraded to Quantal, the repository does not contain the updated information. I.e. after I add sudo add-apt-repository ppa:n-muench/burg sudo apt-get update I get the annoying response W: Failed to fetch http://ppa.launchpad.net/n-muench/burg/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/binary-amd64/Packages 404 Not Found It's been like this for a month, contrary to various websites which say it works. Is BURG being maintained? Have they created a better alternative (such as integration with GRUB, like it should have been in the first place). How do I get a decent-looking bootloader?

  Read the article

• Main class passes dbConn obj to all its services, I need to change the dbConn for one of its services. - suggestion for design pattern

  - by tech_learner

  There is this main class and there are several services ( which uses db connection to retrieve data ) These services are initialized in the main class db properties are obtained from the property file and then dbconnection is opened by calling a method dbOpen() written in the main class and the resultant connection object is set to the service objects by iterating through the list of services and by calling setConnection method on the service note: that the services are instantiated in the main class and the main class is not a superclass for services. I also need to mention that there is this recycle db connection scenario only main class is aware of. /** connects to DB, optionally recycling existing connection), * throws RuntimeException if unable to connect */ private void connectDb(boolean recycle) { try { if (recycle) { log.status( log.getSB().append("Recycling DB Connection") ); closeDb(); } openDb(); for ( int i = 0 ; i < service.length ; i++ ) { service[i].setConnection(db); } } One of the service needs to use a different database, what is the best design pattern to use?

  Read the article

• How far can you get in iOS without learning PhotoShop or another graphic design program? [on hold]

  - by Aerovistae

  I'm in the process of learning iOS, and I'm coming from a web dev background where CSS controls 70-90% of the UI, and Python/C++ desktop dev where there are highly customizable UI toolkits for most things. I'm trying to figure out how people make good-looking apps without graphic design skills. You always hear about some 8 year old or 14 year old who made a successful app. So I assume that even if the required code was relatively basic, the app must have looked good if it was a success. But I find it really unlikely that these kids have advanced PhotoShop skills as well as having learned iOS programming at such a young age. Frankly, the same goes for most independent app developers....as they say, unicorns don't exist. So what's the deal? Can you make a good-looking, market quality app without those skills? What are the limitations?

  Read the article

• Are there any resources for motion-planning puzzle design?

  - by Salano Software

  Some background: I'm poking at a set of puzzles along the lines of Rush Hour/Sokoban/etc; for want of a better description, call them 'motion planning' puzzles - the player has to figure out the correct sequence of moves to achieve a particular configuration. (It's the sort of puzzle that's generically PSPACE-complete if that actually helps anyone's mental image). While I have a few straightforward 'building blocks' that I can use for puzzle crafting and I have a few basic examples put together, I'm trying to figure out how to avoid too much sameness over a large swath of these kinds of puzzles, and I'm also trying to figure out how to make puzzles that have more of a feel of logical solution than trial-and-error. Does anyone know of good resources out there for designing instances of this sort of puzzle once the core puzzle rules are in place? Most of what I've found on puzzle design only covers creating the puzzle rules, not building interesting puzzles out of a set of rules.

  Read the article

• Design application to send messages by marking circle on the map where you want to send message

  - by jhamb

  This is question asked to me by an interviewer, in which a map of world is given, and for those country you want to send message, just marked circle on that area, and just send to all the people comes in that area. Question visual link is : Design this application The approach that I told him: Firstly build whole person's data (contacts , place information and all) Then where you mark on the map, just build a cluster of that country using Hadoop and fire the message to all the person's contact comes in that cluster. So help me for better understandings of this problem, and if have another good approach (all back-end ad front-end) , then please tell me or discuss here with me. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• "Never do in code what you can get the SQL server to do well for you" - Is this a recipe for a bad design?

  - by PhonicUK

  It's an idea I've heard repeated in a handful of places. Some more or less acknowledging that once trying to solve a problem purely in SQL exceeds a certain level of complexity you should indeed be handling it in code. The logic behind the idea is that for the large majority of cases, the database engine will do a better job at finding the most efficient way of completing your task than you could in code. Especially when it comes to things like making the results conditional on operations performed on the data. Arguably with modern engines effectively JIT'ing + caching the compiled version of your query it'd make sense on the surface. The question is whether or not leveraging your database engine in this way is inherently bad design practice (and why). The lines become blurred further when all the logic exists inside the database and you're just hitting it via an ORM.

  Read the article

• Software Design and documentation – what do people use that has proved valuable?

  - by eddyparkinson

  When creating software, what do you use to design, document and visualize. Looking for evidence/examples. e.g. Use cases, Pseudo code, Gantt chats, PERT charts, DFD, decision trees, decision tables (Answers maybe used to help teach students) What do you use to help with creating software. Also why; when has it proved valuable? --- Edit -- Proved valuable: The pattern so far suggests that the style of UML tool used is linked to an objective. e.g. "get it straight in MY head", explain to business mangers, quality control.

  Read the article

• Best design to create dynamic set of questions(controls ) in silverlight web application?

  - by Sukesh

  I have around 15 templates (this will grow) and each template will have around 10-15 questions. Each question can have answers in different format like text box, list box, dropdown, radio button etc. I need to show one template in a page, at a time based on the input I am getting. What would be the best design approach for this? Put questions data in database and Create dynamic control? Putting in xml and display using xslt? Creating static set of templates? Or any other approach? I don't have too much time to do this. I am going to use Silverlight for this.

  Read the article

• Is there really anything to gain with complex design? [duplicate]

  - by SB2055

  This question already has an answer here: What is enterprise software, exactly? 8 answers I've been working for a consulting firm for some time, with clients of various sizes, and I've seen web applications ranging in complexity from really simple: MVC Service Layer EF DB To really complex: MVC UoW DI / IoC Repository Service UI Tests Unit Tests Integration Tests But on both ends of the spectrum, the quality requirements are about the same. In simple projects, new devs / consultants can hop on, make changes, and contribute immediately, without having to wade through 6 layers of abstraction to understand what's going on, or risking misunderstanding some complex abstraction and costing down the line. In all cases, there was never a need to actually make code swappable or reusable - and the tests were never actually maintained past the first iteration because requirements changed, it was too time-consuming, deadlines, business pressure, etc etc. So if - in the end - testing and interfaces aren't used rapid development (read: cost-savings) is a priority the project's requirements will be changing a lot while in development ...would it be wrong to recommend a super-simple architecture, even to solve a complex problem, for an enterprise client? Is it complexity that defines enterprise solutions, or is it the reliability, # concurrent users, ease-of-maintenance, or all of the above? I know this is a very vague question, and any answer wouldn't apply to all cases, but I'm interested in hearing from devs / consultants that have been in the business for a while and that have worked with these varying degrees of complexity, to hear if the cool-but-expensive abstractions are worth the overall cost, at least while the project is in development.

  Read the article

• Tablet design guide, Endeca patterns now available

  - by JuergenKress

  UX Direct, an Oracle program that offers consultants, partners, and customers the same scientifically proven and reusable user experience best practices that Oracle uses to build Oracle Applications, recently added links to a new design guide for creating tablet-based solutions for enterprise applications, and to the recently published Endeca User Interface Design Pattern Library. The tablet design guide is available from the UX Direct Home page. Tap the button under “Latest patterns & tools” for “Oracle Applications UX Tablet Guide.” It provides basic help for designers, developers, and project managers trying to approach tablet design and testing from an enterprise point of view. To hear what developers are saying about it, follow the links from this post on the User Experience Assistance blog. The newly released Endeca User Interface Design Pattern Library is also available from the UX Direct Home page and from a post on the User Experience Assistance blog. It describes principled ways to solve common user interface (UI) design problems related to search, faceted navigation, and discovery. The link between Simplified UI and Oracle UX strategy, plus content you can share on the cloud, ADf, tailoring, and more Simplified User Interface in Oracle Fusion Applications Fronts Oracle Cloud Offerings This new article on Simplified UI has just been posted on Usable Apps. Learn about the three themes - simplicity, mobility, and extensibility – that Simplified UI embodies. These same principles are guiding the development of the next generation of the Oracle user experience. Oracle's Applications User Experience Strategy: One Cloud User Experience, with Optimized UIs Where and How You Want This podcast from Misha Vaughan, Director, User Experience, is now available on the Oracle University Knowledge Center. It is available for partners and Oracle employees at this iLearning Link. Oracle Partner Builds User Experience That Hits Right Note for New Employees This new article on the Usable Apps website explores the experience of consultants at IntraSee as they implement a PeopleSoft onboarding process for Invesco, a global asset management company. The Feng Shui of Fusion This article in Oracle Scene is from Grant Ronald, Director of Product Management, on the Tools of Fusion: Oracle JDeveloper and Oracle ADF. Hands-On Workshop with Fusion Applications and ADF UX Desktop Design Patterns This post on the Voice of User Experience, or VoX, blog from Misha Vaughan describes a new kind of workshop for partners and a handful of internal Oracle sales folks on extending Oracle Fusion Applications and building custom applications with Application Development Framework (ADF) while maintaining the Oracle user experience. To learn more about the content that was delivered during this three-day workshop, visit the Usable Apps blog. Recent posts from a new blog series take a look at several of the topics discussed during the workshop. Applications User Experience Fundamentals Visual Design for any Enterprise User Interface / Art School in a Box Wireframing / Blueprinting Usable Applications Concepts. Tailoring videos This blog post from Richard Bingham, Applications Architect, on the Fusion Applications Developer Relations blog provides links to several videos that show many customization and development tasks using the Oracle Fusion Applications platform. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Wiki Mix Forum Technorati Tags: UX,Architecture,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

  Read the article

• Flow-Design Cheat Sheet &ndash; Part II, Translation

  - by Ralf Westphal

  In my previous post I summarized the notation for Flow-Design (FD) diagrams. Now is the time to show you how to translate those diagrams into code. Hopefully you feel how different this is from UML. UML leaves you alone with your sequence diagram or component diagram or activity diagram. They leave it to you how to translate your elaborate design into code. Or maybe UML thinks it´s so easy no further explanations are needed? I don´t know. I just know that, as soon as people stop designing with UML and start coding, things end up to be very different from the design. And that´s bad. That degrades graphical designs to just time waste on paper (or some designer). I even believe that´s the reason why most programmers view textual source code as the only and single source of truth. Design and code usually do not match. FD is trying to change that. It wants to make true design a first class method in every developers toolchest. For that the first prerequisite is to be able to easily translate any design into code. Mechanically, without thinking. Even a compiler could do it :-) (More of that in some other article.) Translating to Methods The first translation I want to show you is for small designs. When you start using FD you should translate your diagrams like this. Functional units become methods. That´s it. An input-pin becomes a method parameter, an output-pin becomes a return value: The above is a part. But a board can be translated likewise and calls the nested FUs in order: In any case be sure to keep the board method clear of any and all business logic. It should not contain any control structures like if, switch, or a loop. Boards do just one thing: calling nested functional units in proper sequence. What about multiple input-pins? Try to avoid them. Replace them with a join returning a tuple: What about multiple output-pins? Try to avoid them. Or return a tuple. Or use out-parameters: But as I said, this simple translation is for simple designs only. Splits and joins are easily done with method translation: All pretty straightforward, isn´t it. But what about wires, named pins, entry points, explicit dependencies? I suggest you don´t use this kind of translation when your designs need these features. Translating to methods is for small scale designs like you might do once you´re working on the implementation of a part of a larger design. Or maybe for a code kata you´re doing in your local coding dojo. Instead of doing TDD try doing FD and translate your design into methods. You´ll see that way it´s much easier to work collaboratively on designs, remember them more easily, keep them clean, and lessen the need for refactoring. Translating to Events [coming soon]

  Read the article

• Managing a file-based public maven repository

  - by Roland Ewald

  I am looking for an easy way to manage a public file-based Maven repository. While we are using the open-source version of Artifactory internally, we now want to put a file-based repository of our published artifacts (and their dependencies) on a separate machine that is publicly available. There are several ways how to do this, but none of them seems ideal: Use Maven Dependency plugin: if it is configured correctly and executed with the goal dependency:copy-dependencies for the release-module of our project, it creates a local repository structure that is fine, but this structure does not contain the meta-data.xml files, nor the hash-sums. Use Artifactory to export repo: AFAIK Artifactory only allows to export a repository as a whole. This would include the non-published modules from our project (which would then need to be deleted manually). Also, all dependencies are sitting in another repository, so this needs to be done twice, and many dependencies are not even required by a published artifact (only by artifacts that are still for internal use only). Nevertheless, this method would also include the meta-data.xml files and the hash-sums for all files. To set up an initial version of the repository, I used a mixture of both methods: I first created the Maven repository for all required dependencies via dependency:copy-dependencies and then wrote a script to cherry-pick the meta-data.xml files (etc.) from Artifactory. This is terribly cumbersome, isn't there a better way to solve this? Maybe there is another Maven 3 - plugin that I am unaware of, or some other command-line tool that does the job? I basically just need a simple way to create a Maven repository that contains all artifacts a given artifact depends on (and no more), and also contains all meta-data expected in a remote repository. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Component based game engine design

  - by a_m0d

  I have been looking at game engine design (specifically focused on 2d game engines, but also applicable to 3d games), and am interested in some information on how to go about it. I have heard that many engines are moving to a component based design nowadays rather than the traditional deep-object hierarchy. Do you know of any good links with information on how these sorts of designs are often implemented? I have seen evolve your hierarchy, but I can't really find many more with detailed information (most of them just seem to say "use components rather than a hierarchy" but I have found that it takes a bit of effort to switch my thinking between the two models). Any good links or information on this would be appreciated, and even books, although links and detailed answers here would be preferred.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >