Search Results

Search found 5751 results on 231 pages for 'analysis patterns'.

Page 43/231 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

• Name for this antipattern? Fields as local variables

  - by JSB????

  In some code I'm reviewing, I'm seeing stuff that's the moral equivalent of the following: public class Foo { private Bar bar; public MethodA() { bar = new Bar(); bar.A(); bar = null; } public MethodB() { bar = new Bar(); bar.B(); bar = null; } } The field bar here is logically a local variable, as its value is never intended to persist across method calls. However, since many of the methods in Foo need an object of type Bar, the original code author has just made a field of type Bar. This is obviously bad, right? Is there a name for this antipattern?

  Read the article

• When designing an application around Model-View-Controller (MVC), what is in your toolbox?

  - by ericgorr

  There are a lot of great explanations for what the Model-View-Controller design pattern is, but I am having trouble finding good resources showing how to use it in practice. So, when you are starting a new application (doesn't matter what it is), what is in your toolbox? For example, it was suggested that using UML collaboration diagrams ( http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/umlCollaborationDiagrams.pdf ) can be useful when designing an application around MVC, although, I am not certain exactly how or why this might be the case...? So, what is in your toolbox for MVC?

  Read the article

• How can I refactor my code to use fewer singletons?

  - by fish

  I started a component based, networked game (so far only working on the server). I know why singletons can be bad, but I can't think of another way to implement the same thing. So far I have: A GameState singleton (for managing the global state of the game, i.e. pre-game, running, exiting). A World singleton, which is the root entity for my entity graph An EntityFactory A ComponentFactory I'm thinking about adding a "MessageDispatcher" so individual components can subscribe to network messages. The factories do not have state, so I suppose they aren't so bad. However, the others do have global state, which is asking for trouble. How can I refactor my code so it uses fewer singletons?

  Read the article

• Creating a Predicate Builder extension method

  - by Rippo

  I have a Kendo UI Grid that I am currently allowing filtering on multiple columns. I am wondering if there is a an alternative approach removing the outer switch statement? Basically I want to able to create an extension method so I can filter on a IQueryable<T> and I want to drop the outer case statement so I don't have to switch column names. private static IQueryable<Contact> FilterContactList(FilterDescriptor filter, IQueryable<Contact> contactList) { switch (filter.Member) { case "Name": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).Contains( filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname == filter.Value.ToString() || w.Lastname == filter.Value.ToString() || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname) == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; case "Company": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.Contains(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; } return contactList; } Some additional information, I am using NHibernate Linq. Also another problem is that the "Name" column on my grid is actually "Firstname" + " " + "LastName" on my contact entity. We can also assume that all filterable columns will be strings.

  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

• In some games, we just let the main() loop be the Player object or Table object?

  - by ????

  I was thinking that let's say if there is a game of Blackjack or MasterMind, then we should have a class called Dealer or ComputerPal, which is how the computer interact with us (as a dealer for Blackjack or as the person giving hints for MasterMind). And then there should be a Player object, and the way to play one game is aPlayer.playGame but I noticed that a book was just using the main() loop to act as the player (or as the Controller of the game), calling the Dealer methods to dealer the cards, ask for player's action, etc... 1) Is this just a lazy way to model all the proper objects? 2) If more objects are to be added, who should call the aDealer.dealCards and then ask for aPlayer.askForAction? (because it is strange to let the Player handle all the logical steps). Should there be a Table object that handle all these logic and then to play one round of game, use aTable.playGame? What is a good object design for such game?

  Read the article

• Hide or Show singleton?

  - by Sinker

  Singleton is a common pattern implemented in both native libraries of .NET and Java. You will see it as such: C#: MyClass.Instance Java: MyClass.getInstance() The question is: when writing APIs, is it better to expose the singleton through a property or getter, or should I hide it as much as possible? Here are the alternatives for illustrative purposes: Exposed(C#): private static MyClass instance; public static MyClass Instance { get { if (instance == null) instance = new MyClass(); return instance; } } public void PerformOperation() { ... } Hidden (C#): private static MyClass instance; public static void PerformOperation() { if (instance == null) { instance = new MyClass(); } ... } EDIT: There seems to be a number of detractors of the Singleton design. Great! Please tell me why and what is the better alternative. Here is my scenario: My whole application utilises one logger (log4net/log4j). Whenever, the program has something to log, it utilises the Logger class (e.g. Logger.Instance.Warn(...) or Logger.Instance.Error(...) etc. Should I use Logger.Warn(...) or Logger.Warn(...) instead? If you have an alternative to singletons that addresses my concern, then please write an answer for it. Thank you :)

  Read the article

• Legal Applications of Metamorphic Code

  - by V_P

  Firstly, I would like to state that I already understand the 'vx' applications for Metamorphic code. I am not here to ask a question related to any of those topics as that would be inappropriate in this context. I would like to know if anyone has ever used 'Metamorphic' code in practice, for purposes other than those previously stated, if so, what was the reasoning for using said concept. In essence I am trying to discover a purpose for this concept, if any, other than circumventing anti-virus scanners and the like.

  Read the article

• How to elegantly work with a lot of print functions?

  - by user1824372

  I'm working on a Python project that is executed on a terminal (or console) for which I am planning to implement a GUI. I did not major in CS so I really have no idea how to effectively design a terminal GUI such that: the user interface looks good in GUI, it is directed to a certain widget, let's say, a text label, or a bottom bar, or a hide-able frame. Do you have any suggestions? Currently, I am using the print function to provide essential information on STDOUT during execution, so a lot of print calls are distributed here and there in the code. I'm thinking of using macro-like variables such as 'FILE_NOT_EXISTS_MESSAGE' for printing, and all of them and their values would be defined in one file. Is that a standard way to do this? Should I introduce a logging system? In summary, I'm looking for a pattern for handling console output that is effective and adaptable.

  Read the article

• What is the correct pattern to use in this case?

  - by nulliusinverba

  I'm sure this scenario has arisen before, and I want to know what experience has taught to be the best solution. I have a number of classes that are all of a kind. Say all the objects are "Content". They may be "Article", or "Book" for example. The reason I want the "Content" abstraction is because I want to define a number of behaviours for all "Content" objects and not have to build a new DB Table and 10 classes of essentially the same code for each type of "Content". For example, to attach a "Tag" or a "Premise" to a content object would be much nicer if, say, I just had two columns one for ContentID and one for TagID. A solution I've played around with is to have a Content table with a unique ID, and then to have foreign key references on all the other tables (Book, Article, etc). This has actually proven quite solid, but I'm just not sure about it. Do you know how to call this described pattern?

  Read the article

• Does C++ support subtyping?

  - by the_naive

  I know it might be a silly question to ask, but I didn't quite get an a absolute clear answer on this matter, so I thought I'd put it here. Does c++ support the subtyping in the sense that it fulfills Liskov's principle fully? I understand how parametric polymorphism, inclusion polymorphism(subclassing and overriding) work in c++ but I'm not entirely sure or understand if subtyping exists in the context of C++. Could you please explain?

  Read the article

• Why using Fragments?

  - by ahmed_khan_89

  I have read the documentation and some other questions' threads about this topic and I don't really feel convinced; I don't see clearly the limits of use of this technique. Fragments are now seen as a Best Practice; every Activity should be basically a support for one or more Fragments and not call a layout directly. Fragments are created in order to: allow the Activity to use many fragments, to change between them, to reuse these units... == the Fragment is totally dependent to the Context of an activity , so if I need something generic that I can reuse and handle in many Activities, I can create my own custom layouts or Views ... I will not care about this additional Complexity Developing Layer that fragments would add. a better handling to different resolution == OK for tablets/phones in case of long process that we can show two (or more) fragments in the same Activity in Tablets, and one by one in phones. But why would I use fragments always ? handling callbacks to navigate between Fragments (i.e: if the user is Logged-in I show a fragment else I show another fragment). === Just try to see how many bugs facebook SDK Log-in have because of this, to understand that it is really (?) ... considering that an Android Application is based on Activities... Adding another life cycles in the Activity would be better to design an Application... I mean the modules, the scenarios, the data management and the connectivity would be better designed, in that way. === This is an answer of someone who's used to see the Android SDK and Android Framework with a Fragments vision. I don't think it's wrong, but I am not sure it will give good results... And it is really abstract... ==== Why would I complicate my life, coding more, in using them always? else, why is it a best practice if it's just a tool for some cases? what are these cases?

  Read the article

• What is the preferred pattern when attaching a 'runtime object'?

  - by sebf

  In my application I have the following: public class NeatObject { /* lots of static data, and configuration flags */ } public class NeatObjectConsumer { void DoCleverStuffWithObjectOnGPU(NeatObject obj); } Where NeatObject and its consumer are used to control the GPU. The idea being that, the configuration of an instance of NeatObject and its members, define how the consumer instance behaves. The object can be passed around, edited, and most importantly serialised/deserialised by the application, with and without knowledge of NeatObjectConsumer, then provided back to the consumer to do something else. The purpose of this seperation is: The consumer manages hardware resources, which change depending on the computer, and even on the execution of the application, making preserving the state of an object which does everything difficult. Avoids circular references if the assembly that contains the consumer needs to reference one that only needs to know about NeatObject. However, there is a complication in that the consumer creates hardware resources and needs to associate them with NeatObject. These don't need to be preserved, but still need to be retrieved. DoCleverStuffWithObjectOnGPU() will be called many, many times during execution and so any bottleneck is a concern, therefore I would like to avoid dictionary lookups. What is the preferred method of attaching this information to NeatObject? By preferred, I mean intuitive - other coders can see immediately what is going on - and robust - method doesn't invite playing with the resources or present them in such a way as to make them easily corruptible. Essentially, I want to add my own metadata - how should I do it? Try to use 'actual metadata' functionality like Reflection? A member of the type of an abstract class? Unmanaged pointers? If you took on a project that used this pattern, what would you have liked the previous developer to do?

  Read the article

• Testing complex compositions

  - by phlipsy

  I have a rather large collection of classes which check and mutate a given data structure. They can be composed via the composition pattern into arbitrarily complex tree-like structures. The final product contains a lot of these composed structures. My question is now: How can I test those? Albeit it is easy to test every single unit of these compositions, it is rather expensive to test the whole compositions in the following sense: Testing the correct layout of the composition-tree results in a huge number of test cases Changes in the compositions result in a very laborious review of every single test case What is the general guideline here?

  Read the article

• Is this a valid implementation of the repository pattern?

  - by user1578653

  I've been reading up about the repository pattern, with a view to implementing it in my own application. Almost all examples I've found on the internet use some kind of existing framework rather than showing how to implement it 'from scratch'. Here's my first thoughts of how I might implement it - I was wondering if anyone could advise me on whether this is correct? I have two tables, named CONTAINERS and BITS. Each CONTAINER can contain any number of BITs. I represent them as two classes: class Container{ private $bits; private $id; //...and a property for each column in the table... public function __construct(){ $this->bits = array(); } public function addBit($bit){ $this->bits[] = $bit; } //...getters and setters... } class Bit{ //some properties, methods etc... } Each class will have a property for each column in its respective table. I then have a couple of 'repositories' which handle things to do with saving/retrieving these objects from the database: //repository to control saving/retrieving Containers from the database class ContainerRepository{ //inject the bit repository for use later public function __construct($bitRepo){ $this->bitRepo = $bitRepo; } public function getById($id){ //talk directly to Oracle here to all column data into the object //get all the bits in the container $bits = $this->bitRepo->getByContainerId($id); foreach($bits as $bit){ $container->addBit($bit); } //return an instance of Container } public function persist($container){ //talk directly to Oracle here to save it to the database //if its ID is NULL, create a new container in database, otherwise update the existing one //use BitRepository to save each of the Bits inside the Container $bitRepo = $this->bitRepo; foreach($container->bits as $bit){ $bitRepo->persist($bit); } } } //repository to control saving/retrieving Bits from the database class BitRepository{ public function getById($id){} public function getByContainerId($containerId){} public function persist($bit){} } Therefore, the code I would use to get an instance of Container from the database would be: $bitRepo = new BitRepository(); $containerRepo = new ContainerRepository($bitRepo); $container = $containerRepo->getById($id); Or to create a new one and save to the database: $bitRepo = new BitRepository(); $containerRepo = new ContainerRepository($bitRepo); $container = new Container(); $container->setSomeProperty(1); $bit = new Bit(); $container->addBit($bit); $containerRepo->persist($container); Can someone advise me as to whether I have implemented this pattern correctly? Thanks!

  Read the article

• IXRepository and test problems

  - by Ridermansb

  Recently had a doubt about how and where to test repository methods. Let the following situation: I have an interface IRepository like this: public interface IRepository<T> where T: class, IEntity { IQueryable<T> Query(Expression<Func<T, bool>> expression); // ... Omitted } And a generic implementation of IRepository public class Repository<T> : IRepository<T> where T : class, IEntity { public IQueryable<T> Query(Expression<Func<T, bool>> expression) { return All().Where(expression).AsQueryable(); } } This is an implementation base that can be used by any repository. It contains the basic implementation of my ORM. Some repositories have specific filters, in which case we will IEmployeeRepository with a specific filter: public interface IEmployeeRepository : IRepository<Employee> { IQueryable<Employee> GetInactiveEmployees(); } And the implementation of IEmployeeRepository: public class EmployeeRepository : Repository<Employee>, IEmployeeRepository // TODO: I have a dependency with ORM at this point in Repository<Employee>. How to solve? How to test the GetInactiveEmployees method { public IQueryable<Employee> GetInactiveEmployees() { return Query(p => p.Status != StatusEmployeeEnum.Active || p.StartDate < DateTime.Now); } } Questions Is right to inherit Repository<Employee>? The goal is to reuse code once all implementing IRepository already been made. If EmployeeRepository inherit only IEmployeeRepository, I have to literally copy and paste the code of Repository<T>. In our example, in EmployeeRepository : Repository<Employee> our Repository lies in our ORM layer. We have a dependency here with our ORM impossible to perform some unit test. How to create a unit test to ensure that the filter GetInactiveEmployees return all Employees in which the Status != Active and StartDate < DateTime.Now. I can not create a Fake/Mock of IEmployeeRepository because I would be testing? Need to test the actual implementation of GetInactiveEmployees. The complete code can be found on Github

  Read the article

• design for interruptable operations

  - by tpaksu

  I couldn't find a better topic but here it is; 1) When user clicks a button, code starts t work, 2) When another button is clicked, it would stop doing whatever it does and start to run the second button's code, 3) Or with not user interaction, an electrical power down detected from a connected device, so our software would cancel the current event and start doing the power down procedure. How is this design mostly applied to code? I mean "stop what you are doing" part? If you would say events, event handlers etc. how do you bind a condition to the event? and how do you tell the program without using laddered if's to end it's process? method1(); if (powerdown) return; method2(); if (powerdown) return; etc.

  Read the article

• Business Layer Design in J2EE Project

  - by user63157

  Currently the project on which I am working is being developed with Spring, Hibernate and struts. The business layer consists of simple java beans with no behavior in them only properties and getter and setter methods, the services are written on them which operates on them and call DAO layer methods and all. My questions is that is it object oriented way of designing or simply the procedure way in which the data and the functions on which they operate are not together. Please provide your thoughts and inputs on how the business logic is design and implemented in j2ee application, is the domain model contains business methods or are they simply dumb objects which have only data and services written on to them.

  Read the article

• If an entity is composed, is it still a god object?

  - by Telastyn

  I am working on a system to configure hardware. Unfortunately, there is tons of variety in the hardware, which means there's a wide variety of capabilities and configurations depending on what specific hardware the software connects to. To deal with this, we're using a Component Based Entity design where the "hardware" class itself is a very thin container for components that are composed at runtime based on what capabilities/configuration are available. This works great, and the design itself has worked well elsewhere (particularly in games). The problem is that all this software does is configure the hardware. As such, almost all of the code is a component of the hardware instance. While the consumer only ever works against the strongly typed interfaces for the components, it could be argued that the class that represents an instance of the hardware is a God Object. If you want to do anything to/with the hardware, you query an interface and work with it. So, even if the components of an object are modular and decoupled well, is their container a God Object and the downsides associated with the anti-pattern?

  Read the article

• Separating Db from business with Inherited classes using multiple views

  - by catalinux

  I have a software that has a car model that will be used in different views (listing, ads, detail page, carousel, up sell widget,etc). class CarModel extends DbModel{ } I look for a "nice way" (a combination of flexible, easy to maintain,etc) to have this used in views. I'm thinking at two different ways Having object views for each context CarViewBase{ var car;// of type CarModel function constructor(args){ //will instantienta internal variable car based on args } function getThumb(){ } function getTitle(){ } } CarListingView extends CarViewBase{ function getListing(){ } } CarAdsView extends CarViewBase{ //the busines rule changes for ads widget function getThumb(){ } } Extending directly the CarModel The challenges comes when My Car Model might need an abstract factory. Let's say I have a field on my car object that states the type of the car : a truck, or a bike, or van. How would affect that my object view? Let's say that getTitle() rule would be different for each type of it. How would you do it?

  Read the article

• is it valid that a state machine can have more than one possible state for some transition?

  - by shankbond

  I have a requirement for a workflow which I am trying to model as a state machine, I see that there is more than one outcome of a given transition(or activity). Is it valid for a state machine to have more than one possible states, but only one state will be true at a given time? Note: This is my first attempt to model a state machine. Eg. might be: s1-t1-s2 s1-t1-s3 s1-t1-s4 where s1, s2, s3, s4 are states and t1 is transition/activity. A fictitious real world example might be: For a human, there can be two states: hungry, not hungry A basket can have only one item from: apple, orange. So, to model it we will have: hungry-pick from basket-apple found hungry-pick from basket-orange found apple found-eat-not hungry orange found-take juice out of it and then drink- not hungry

  Read the article

• How to create a manager class without global variables nor singletons?

  - by Omega

  I would like to implement some kind of manager class in my application. It will be in charge of loading textures, processing them, distributing them etc... At first, I wanted to make a global variable that simply contains an instance of my manager class. I found this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4646577/global-variables-in-java. However, the users there seem to recommend to never use global variables. Fine then, I once heard about Singletons, so I though I could use that instead. I mean, creating just one instance of my manager class sounds good. However, I found this other question: When is Singleton appropriate?, which basically tells me that Singletons are, in most scenarios, some kind of anti-pattern. Now I am a bit lost - what other approach can I take to create my manager class, whose only requirement is to be accessible from anywhere?

  Read the article

• Which order to define getters and setters in? [closed]

  - by N.N.

  Is there a best practice for the order to define getters and setters in? There seems to be two practices: getter/setter pairs first getters, then setters (or the other way around) To illuminate the difference here is a Java example of getter/setter pairs: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } And here is a Java example of first getters, then setters: public class Foo { private int var1, var2, var3; public int getVar1() { return var1; } public int getVar2() { return var2; } public int getVar3() { return var3; } public void setVar1(int var1) { this.var1 = var1; } public void setVar2(int var2) { this.var2 = var2; } public void setVar3(int var3) { this.var3 = var3; } } I think the latter type of ordering is clearer both in code and in class diagrams but I do not know if that is enough to rule out the other type of ordering.

  Read the article

• What design pattern (in python) to use for properly seperate runtime infos with core code?

  - by user1824372

  I am not sure if this is a clear question. I work on a python project that is based on terminal(console), for which I am planning to implement a GUI. I am not major in CS so I really have no idea about how to effectively design a message system such that: in console, it provide nice look info when runtime. in GUI, it is directed to a certain widget, let's say, a text label, or a bottom bar, or a hide-able frame. Do you have any suggestions? Currently, I am using print function to provide essential informations on stdout during runtime. So a lot of print .... are distributed here and there among the code. I am thinking to use macro-like variables such as 'FILE_NOT_EXTIS_MESSAGE' for printing, and define the variables in one file. Is this a standard way that people always do? How about I introduce a logging system? In sum, I am ask for a pattern that people are commonly using for handling of screen output information with high effectiveness and adaptivity.

  Read the article

• Lost in Translation – Common Mistakes Interpreting Patterns – Mark Simpson, Griffiths-Waite @ SOA, Cloud & Service Technology Symposium 2012

  - by JuergenKress

  ORACLE PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT FOR EXCLUSIVE ORACLE DISCOUNT, ENTER PROMO CODE: DJMXZ370 For details please visit the registration page International SOA, Cloud + Service Technology Symposium is a yearly event that features the top experts and authors from around the world, providing a series of keynotes, talks, demonstrations, and panels, as well as training and certification workshops - all dedicated to empowering IT professionals to realize modern service technologies and practices in the real world. Click here for a two-page printable conference overview (PDF). Speaker: Mark Simpson, Griffiths-Waite Mark has been specialising in Oracle technology for 13 years, the last 10 of these with Griffiths Waite. Mark leads our SOA technology practice (covering SOA, Business Process Management and Enterprise Architecture). He is a much sought after presenter on the Oracle and SOA conference circuits, and a respected authority on these technologies. Mark has advised a host of UK leading organisations on the deployment of BPM / SOA solutions. Working closely with Oracle US Product Development Mark has contributed to Oracle's SOA Methodology and Oracle's SOA Maturity Model. Lost in Translation – Common Mistakes Interpreting Patterns Learn how small misinterpretations of high-level design patterns can have large and costly project ramifications. Good SOA design benefits from the use of a reference architecture and standardised design patterns. However both of these concepts give an abstracted view of the intended solution, which needs to be interpreted to become realised. A reference implementation is important to demonstrate how key design guidelines can be implemented in the toolset of choice, but the main success factor is how these are used through the build and post live phases of the project. This session will introduce practical design patterns with supporting implementation examples that, if used correctly, will give long term benefit. We will highlight implementations where misinterpretations or misalignment from pattern aims have led to issues post implementation. The session will add depth to the pattern discussions you are already having enabling confidence in proceeding to the next level of realisation whilst considering how they may be implemented within your solution and chosen toolset. September 25, 2012 - 13:55 KEYNOTES & SPEAKERS More than 80 international subject matter experts will be speaking at the Symposium. Below are confirmed keynotes and speakers so far. Over 50% of the agenda has not yet been finalized. Many more speakers to come. View the partial program calendars on the Conference Agenda page. CONFERENCE THEMES & TRACKS Cloud Computing Architecture & Patterns New SOA & Service-Orientation Practices & Models Emerging Service Technology Innovation Service Modeling & Analysis Techniques Service Infrastructure & Virtualization Cloud-based Enterprise Architecture Business Planning for Cloud Computing Projects Real World Case Studies Semantic Web Technologies (with & without the Cloud) Governance Frameworks for SOA and/or Cloud Computing Projects Service Engineering & Service Programming Techniques Interactive Services & the Human Factor New REST & Web Services Tools & Techniques Oracle Specialized SOA & BPM Partners Oracle Specialized partners have proven their skills by certifications and customer references. To find a local Specialized partner please visit http://solutions.oracle.com 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 Mix Forum Technorati Tags: Mark Simpson,Griffiths Waite,SOA Patterns,SOA Symposium,Thomas Erl,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >