Search Results

Search found 9254 results on 371 pages for 'approach'.

Page 47/371 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

• Unity gizmos vs. referenced game objects

  - by DuckMaestro

  I'm designing a Unity script that I intend to be highly reusable and as easy as possible to setup within the editor. To this end, a number of properties of this script really need some kind of visual representation on screen. It is an unresolved question to me whether the design of the script should require references to placeholder game objects, OR just Vector3's and float's that have associated gizmos drawn for them. Normally a gizmo would be a natural choice, except that Unity gizmos are not directly manipulable (as far as I can tell). Because of this shortcoming I'm having to consider whether depending on references to placeholder game objects is a more designer-friendly approach ultimately, in spite of the extra setup required, and that it might be counter-intuitive when the placeholder game objects disappear at run-time (which my script would do). Is there a community standard or preference here in this case? Can a Unity-experienced game programmer / designer speak to which approach they feel is more intuitive or more convenient to setup, when using a 3rd party script? Or is this just splitting hairs as long as I ship an example prefab with my script?

  Read the article

• How to define implementation details?

  - by woni

  In our project, an assembly combines logic for the IoC-Container, the project internals and the communication layer. The current version evolved to have only internal classes in addin assemblies. My main problem with this approach is, that the entry point is only available over the IoC-Container. It is not possible to use anything else than reflection to initialize the assembly. Everything behind the IoC-Interface is defined as implementation detail and therefore not intended for usages outside. It is well known that you should not test implementation detail (such as private and internal methods), because they should be tested through the public interface. It is also well known, that your tests should not use the IoC-Container to setup the SUTs, because that would result in too much dependencies. So we are using the InternalsVisibleTo-Attribute to make internals visible to our test assemblies and test the so called implementation details. I recognized that one problem could be the mixup between different concerns in that assembly, changing this would make this discussion useless, because classes have to be defined public. Ignoring my concerns with this, isn't the need to test a class enough reason to make it public, the usages of InternalsVisibleTo seems unintended, and a little bit "hacky". The approach to test only against the publicly available IoC-Container is too costly and would result in integration style tests. The pros of using internals are, that the usages are well known and do not have to be implemented like a public method would have to be (documentation, completeness, versioning,...). Is there a solution, to not test against internals, but keep their advantages over public classes, or do we have to redefine what an implementation detail is.

  Read the article

• Differentiating between user script input formats

  - by KChaloux

  I have a .NET project at work that provides a couple of (Iron)Python scripts to the customers, to allow them to customize the output of the program. The application generates code for certain machines, and supports a couple of different formats. Until recently, we only provided a script for one format. We're expanding upon that to include support for the others. If the user is using a script, they select their input script before generating the output code. A script designed for Format1 output is going to cause errors if they're trying to generate Format2 output. I need to deal with this. One option would just be to let the customers use common sense, and if they load the wrong script it will just fail, or worse, produce inaccurate data. I'm inclined to provide a little more protection than that. At the moment I'm considering putting a shebang-style comment line at the top of the script, ala: # OUTPUT - Format1 If the user tries to run a Format2 process with a Format1 script, it will warn them. Alternatively I could create different file extensions for the input scripts that vary by type. The file-type comment approach helps prevent the script from actually loading improperly, at the cost of failing to warn the user until they've already selected it, via a dialog box. Using different file extensions would allow me to cut down on visual clutter when providing a File Dialog, but doesn't actually stop them from loading the wrong script. So I'm really not sure if the right approach is to just leave it alone, or provide some safeguards.

  Read the article

• MongoDB: Replicate data in documents vs. “join”

  - by JavierCane

  Disclaimer: This is a question derived from this one. What do you think about the following example of use case? I have a table containing orders. These orders has a lot of related information needed by my current queries (think about the products; the buyer information; the region, country and state of the sale point; and so on) In order to think with a de-normalized approach, I don't have to put identifiers of these related items in my main orders collection. Instead, I have to repeat all the information for each order (ie: I will repeat the buyer's name, surname, etc. for each of its orders). Assuming the previous premise, I'm committing to maintain all the data related to an order without a lot of updates (because if I modify the buyer's name, I'll have to iterate through all orders updating the ones made by the same buyer, and as MongoDB blocks at a document level on updates, I would be blocking the entire order at the update moment). I'll have to replicate all the products' related data? (ie: category, maker and optional attributes like color, size…) What if a new feature is requested and I've to make a lot of queries with the products "as the entry point of the query"? (ie: reports showing the products' sales performance grouping by region, country, or whatever) Is it fair enough to apply the $unwind operation to my orders original collection? (What about the performance?) I should have to do another collection with these queries in mind and replicate again all the products' information (and their orders)? Wouldn't be better to store a product_id in the original orders collection in order to be more tolerable to requirements change? (What about emulating JOINs?) The optimal approach would be a mixed solution with a RDBMS system like MySQL in order to retrieve the complete data? I mean: store products, users, and location identifiers in the orders collection and have queries in MySQL like getAllUsersDataByIds in which I would perform a SELECT * FROM users WHERE user_id IN ( :identifiers_retrieved_from_the_mongodb_query )

  Read the article

• Static / Shared Helper Functions vs Built-In Methods

  - by Nathan

  This is a simple question but a design consideration that I often run across in my day to day development work. Lets say that you have a class that represents some kinds of collection. Public Class ModifiedCustomerOrders Public Property Orders as List(Of ModifiedOrders) End Class Within this class you do all kinds of important work, such as combining many different information sources and, eventually, build the Modified Customer Orders. Now, you have different processes that consume this class, each of which needs a slightly different slice of the ModifiedCustomerOrders items. To enable this, you want to add filtering functionality. How do you go about this? Do you: Add Filtering calls to the ModifiedCustomerOrders class so that you can say: MyOrdersClass.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a Static / Shared "tooling" class that allows you to call: OrdersFilters.RemoveCanceledOrders(MyOrders) Create an extension method to accomplish the same feat as #2 but with less typing: MyOrders.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a "Service" method that handles the getting of Orders as appropriate to the calling function, while using one of the previous approaches "under the hood". OrdersService.GetOrdersForProcessA() Others? I tend to prefer the tooling / extension method approaches as they make testing a little bit simpler. Although I dependency inject all my sourcing data into the ModifiedCustomerOrders, having it as part of the class makes it a little bit more complicated to test. Typically, I choose to use extension methods where I am doing parameterless transformations / filters. As they get more complex, I will move it into a static class instead. Thoughts on this approach? How would you approach it?

  Read the article

• Call DB Stored Procedure using @NamedStoredProcedureQuery Injection

  - by anwilson

  Oracle Database Stored Procedure can be called from EJB business layer to perform complex DB specific operations. This approach will avoid overhead from frequent network hits which could impact end-user result. DB Stored Procedure can be invoked from EJB Session Bean business logic using org.eclipse.persistence.queries.StoredProcedureCall API. Using this approach requires more coding to handle the Session and Arguments of the Stored Procedure, thereby increasing effort on maintenance. EJB 3.0 introduces @NamedStoredProcedureQuery Injection to call Database Stored Procedure as NamedQueries. This blog will take you through the steps to call Oracle Database Stored Procedure using @NamedStoredProcedureQuery.EMP_SAL_INCREMENT procedure available in HR schema will be used in this sample.Create Entity from EMPLOYEES table.Add @NamedStoredProcedureQuery above @NamedQueries to Employees.java with definition as given below - @NamedStoredProcedureQuery(name="Employees.increaseEmpSal", procedureName = "EMP_SAL_INCREMENT", resultClass=void.class, resultSetMapping = "", returnsResultSet = false, parameters = { @StoredProcedureParameter(name = "EMP_ID", queryParameter = "EMPID"), @StoredProcedureParameter(name = "SAL_INCR", queryParameter = "SALINCR")} ) Observe how Stored Procedure's arguments are handled easily in  @NamedStoredProcedureQuery using @StoredProcedureParameter.Expose Entity Bean by creating a Session Facade.Business method need to be added to Session Bean to access the Stored Procedure exposed as NamedQuery. public void salaryRaise(Long empId, Long salIncrease) throws Exception { try{ Query query = em.createNamedQuery("Employees.increaseEmpSal"); query.setParameter("EMPID", empId); query.setParameter("SALINCR", salIncrease); query.executeUpdate(); } catch(Exception ex){ throw ex; } } Expose business method through Session Bean Remote Interface. void salaryRaise(Long empId, Long salIncrease) throws Exception; Session Bean Client is required to invoke the method exposed through remote interface.Call exposed method in Session Bean Client main method. final Context context = getInitialContext(); SessionEJB sessionEJB = (SessionEJB)context.lookup("Your-JNDI-lookup"); sessionEJB.salaryRaise(new Long(200), new Long(1000)); Deploy Session BeanRun Session Bean Client.Salary of Employee with Id 200 will be increased by 1000.

  Read the article

• Search multiple tables

  - by gilden

  I have developed a web application that is used mainly for archiving all sorts of textual material (documents, references to articles, books, magazines etc.). There can be any given number of archive tables in my system, each with its own schema. The schema can be changed by a moderator through the application (imagine something similar to a really dumbed down version of phpMyAdmin). Users can search for anything from all of the tables. By using FULLTEXT indexes together with substring searching (fields which do not support FULLTEXT indexing) the script inserts the results of a search to a single table and by ordering these results by the similarity measure I can fairly easily return the paginated results. However, this approach has a few problems: substring searching can only count exact results the 50% rule applies to all tables separately and thus, mysql may not return important matches or too naively discards common words. is quite expensive in terms of query numbers and execution time (not an issue right now as there's not a lot of data yet in the tables). normalized data is not even searched for (I have different tables for categories, languages and file attatchments). My planned solution Create a single table having columns similar to id, table_id, row_id, data Every time a new row is created/modified/deleted in any of the data tables this central table also gets updated with the data column containing a concatenation of all the fields in a row. I could then create a single index for Sphinx and use it for doing searches instead. Are there any more efficient solutions or best practises how to approach this? Thanks.

  Read the article

• What is the standard technique for shifting the frames of a sprite according to user input?

  - by virtual__

  From my own experience, I developed two techniques for changing the sprites of a character that's reacting to user input -- this in the context of a classic 2D platformer. The first one is to store all character's pixmaps in a list, putting the index of the currently used pixmap in an ordinary variable. This way, every time the player presses a key -- say the right arrow for moving the character forward -- the graphics engine sees what's the next pixmap to draw, draws it, and increments the index counter. That's a pretty common approach I believe, the problem is that in this case the animation's quality depends not only on the number of sprites available but also on how often your engine listens to user input. The second technique is to actually play an animation every key press event. For this you can use any sort of animation framework you want. It's only necessary to set the timer, the animation steps and to call the animation's play() method on your key press event handler. The problem with that approach is that is lacks responsiveness, since the character won't react to any input while the current animation is still being played. What I want to know is whether you are using one of these techniques -- or something similar -- in your games, or whether there's a standard method for animating sprites out there that's widely known by everybody but me.

  Read the article

• Should we hire a new developer now, or wait until the code is refactored to make it suitable for a team environment?

  - by w0051977

  I support and develop a large system that uses various technologies e.g. c++,.net,vb6 etc. I am a sole developer. I am debating whether now is the right time to approach my manager (who is not a developer) to ask if another developer can be recruited. I don't have any experience working in software teams. I have always been a sole developer. The concerns I have are: There is still a lot to do. Training another developer would take time and distract me from my duties. The company does not invest heavily in tools e.g. source control The code in this system needs to be refactored to introduce concepts such as interfaces, polymorphism etc, which are supported by methodologies such as Agile (I inherited the system about 12 months ago). I am gradually trying to refactor the code. I believe I have two options: Approach my manager now Wait until I have had time to refactor the code so it is more suitable for a team environment. Which option is best? I am hoping to hear from other developers who have been in my situation.

  Read the article

• Approaches for a clickable map of nations (such as a Risk game) with Spritekit

  - by Vukovitch

  I would like to create a political map where each country is clickable by tapping but I'm not sure the best way to determine which nation was selected. Imagine Risk where each country can be individually clicked to bring up additional information. My current approach is to make a sprite for each nation where every image is the size of the screen The images are mostly transparent except for the country, that way when all of the images are displayed the countries are in the correct place relative to one another. To determine if a click occurs on an individual country I look to see if the tapped location is a non transparent pixel and check that the sprite's name is one of the countries. Additionally the nation needs to glow or something when tapped as an indicator, however my current solution is yet another sprite that is displayed. This seems like a terrible approach and I was wondering what other solutions might achieve the same results. I'm pretty new to SpriteKit so I'm not entirely sure. The other idea I had was creating a single texture where each country is a different shade of gray, then when I get the tap location I do a lookup on the color at that location and get the corresponding country. However, I'm not sure how to create a hilight or glowing country effect with that method.

  Read the article

• Tips on how to notify a user of new features in your game (Android)

  - by brent777

  I have noticed a problem when releasing new features for a game that I wrote for Android and published on Google Play Store. Because my game is "stage-based" - and not a game like Hay Day, for example, where users will just go into the game every day since it can't really be finished - my users are not aware of new features that I release for the game. For example, if I publish a new version of my game and it contains a couple new stages, most of their devices will just auto-update the game and they don't even notice this and think to check out what's new. So this is why an approach like popping open a dialog that showcases the new feature(s) when they open the game for the first time after the update was done is not really sufficient. I am looking for some tips on an approach that will draw my users back into the game and then they could read more detail about new features on such a dialog. I was thinking of something like a notification that tells them to check out the new features after an update is done but I am not sure if this is a good idea. Any suggestions to help me solve this problem would be awesome.

  Read the article

• Is the addition of a duration to a date-time defined in ISO 8601?

  - by Benjamin

  I've writing a date-time library, and need to implement the addition of a duration to a date-time. If I add a 1 month duration: P1M to the 31st March 2012: 2012-03-31, does the standard define what the result is? Because the resulting date (31st April) does not exist, there are at least two options: Fall back to the last day of the resulting month. This is the approach currently taken by the ThreeTen API, the (alpha) reference implementation of JSR-310: ZonedDateTime date = ZonedDateTime.parse("2012-03-31T00:00:00Z"); Period duration = Period.parse("P1M"); System.out.println(date.plus(duration).toString()); // 2012-04-30T00:00Z Carry the extra day to the next month. This is the approach taken by the DateTime class in PHP: $date = new DateTime('2012-03-31T00:00:00Z'); $duration = new DateInterval('P1M'); echo $date->add($duration)->format('c'); // 2012-05-01T00:00:00+00:00 I'm surprised that two date-time libraries contradict on this point, so I'm wondering whether the standard defines the result of this operation?

  Read the article

• Should I always encapsulate an internal data structure entirely?

  - by Prog

  Please consider this class: class ClassA{ private Thing[] things; // stores data // stuff omitted public Thing[] getThings(){ return things; } } This class exposes the array it uses to store data, to any client code interested. I did this in an app I'm working on. I had a ChordProgression class that stores a sequence of Chords (and does some other things). It had a Chord[] getChords() method that returned the array of chords. When the data structure had to change (from an array to an ArrayList), all client code broke. This made me think - maybe the following approach is better: class ClassA{ private Thing[] things; // stores data // stuff omitted public Thing[] getThing(int index){ return things[index]; } public int getDataSize(){ return things.length; } public void setThing(int index, Thing thing){ things[index] = thing; } } Instead of exposing the data structure itself, all of the operations offered by the data structure are now offered directly by the class enclosing it, using public methods that delegate to the data structure. When the data structure changes, only these methods have to change - but after they do, all client code still works. Note that collections more complex than arrays might require the enclosing class to implement even more than three methods just to access the internal data structure. Is this approach common? What do you think of this? What downsides does it have other? Is it reasonable to have the enclosing class implement at least three public methods just to delegate to the inner data structure?

  Read the article

• Are there any good resources for refactoring existing C# code to use LINQ while keeping your tests passing?

  - by Paddyslacker

  I've been teaching myself a little LINQ and an exercise I thought would be useful was to take my existing Project Euler C# code, which I built using Test Driven Development and gradually convert it to LINQ. I realise that LINQ is not always the best solution for all of the Project Euler problems, but I don't want to get into that here. I'm wondering whether or not it's feasible to refactor "traditional" OO C# code to use LINQ and functional programming syntax whilst keeping all of your tests passing. I can't find a way to make the tiny steps I'm used to making using TDD when converting to LINQ and this is a roadblock for me. I seem to have to make large changes to come up with a single function that I then replace whole chunks of my code with. I realise I could write this from scratch in LINQ, but in the real world, I'd like to be able to replace parts of my existing C# code to take advantage of LINQ where appropriate. Has anyone been successful with this approach? What resources did you find useful for refactoring existing C# code to use LINQ whilst taking a Test Driven Development approach?

  Read the article

• Avoiding bloated Domain Objects

  - by djcredo

  We're trying to move data from our bloated Service layer into our Domain layer using a DDD approach. We currently have a lot of business logic in our services, which is spread out all over the place and doesn't benefit from inheritance. We have a central Domain class which is the focus of most of our work - a Trade. The Trade object will know how to price itself, how to estimate risk, validate itself, etc. We can then replace conditionals with polymorphism. Eg: SimpleTrade will price itself one way, but ComplexTrade will price itself another. However, we are worried that this will bloat the Trade class(s). It really should be in charge of its own processing but the class size is going to increase exponentially as more features are added. So we have choices: Put processing logic in Trade class. Processing logic is now polymorphic based on the type of the trade, but Trade class is now has multiple responsibilites (pricing, risk, etc) and is large Put processing logic into other class such as TradePricingService. No longer polymorphic with the Trade inheritance tree, but classes are smaller and easier to test. What would be the suggested approach?

  Read the article

• Structuring Access Control In Hierarchical Object Graph

  - by SB2055

  I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. Thoughts I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

  Read the article

• Best way to solve the game 'bricolage'

  - by maggie

  I am trying to solve the following game http://www.hacker.org/brick/ using some kind of AI. The target of this game is to finally clear the board by clicking on groups of at least 3 bricks of the same color and removing them. If a group is disappearing the remaining bricks above will fall down or be moved left if a column got no bricks left. The higher the level - more colors and larger board. I already guessed that a pure bruteforce approach wont scale nice for higher levels. So i tried to implement a monte carlo like approach which worked ok for the first levels. But i am still not confident i will make the maximum level of 1052 with this. Currently i am stuck @~ level 100 :) The finding of the solution takes too much time... Hoping that there is a better way to do this i read some stuff about neural networks but i am really at the beginning of this. Before becoming obsessed by ANNs i want to be sure it is the right way for my problem. So my question is: Does it make any sense to apply an ANN to this game? Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Need some critique on .NET/WCF SOA architecture plan

  - by user998101

  I am working on a refactoring of some services and would appreciate some critique on my general approach. I am working with three back-end data systems and need to expose an authenticated front-end API over http binding, JSON, and REST for internal apps as well as 3rd party integration. I've got a rough idea below that's a hybrid of what I have and where I intend to wind up. I intend to build guidance extensions to support this architecture so that devs can build this out quickly. Here's the current idea for our structure: Front-end WCF routing service (spread across multiple IIS servers via hardware load balancer) Load balancing of services behind routing is handled within routing service, probably round-robin One of the services will be a token Multiple bindings per-service exposed to address JSON, REST, and whatever else comes up later All in/out is handled via POCO DTOs Use unity to scan for what services are available and expose them The front-end services behind the routing service do nothing more than expose the API and do conversion of DTO<-Entity Unity inject service implementation to allow mocking automapper for DTO/Entity conversion Invoke WF services where response required immediately Queue to ESB for async WF -- ESB will invoke WF later Business logic WF layer Expose same api as front-end services Implement business logic Wrap transaction context where needed Call out to composite/atomic services Composite/Atomic Services Exposed as WCF One service per back-end system Standard atomic CRUD operations plus composite operations Supports transaction context The questions I have are: Are the separation of concerns outlined above beneficial? Current thought is each layer below is its own project, except the backend stuff, where each system gets one project. The project has a servicehost and all the services are under a services folder. Interfaces live in a separate project at each layer. DTO and Entities are in two separate projects under a shared folder. I am currently planning to build dedicated services for shared functionality such as logging and overload things like tracelistener to call those services. Is this a valid approach? Any other suggestions/comments?

  Read the article

• Best setup/workflow for distributed team to integrated DSVC with fragmented huge .NET site?

  - by lazfish

  So we have a team with 2 developers one manager. The dev server sits in a home office and the live server sits in a rack somewhere handled by the larger part of my company. We have freedom to do as we please but I want to incorporate Kiln DSVC and FogBugz for us with some standard procedures to make sense of our decisions/designs/goals. Our main product is web-based training through our .NET site with many videos etc, and we also do mobile apps for multiple platforms. Our code-base is a 15 yr old fragmented mess. The approach has been rogue .asp/.aspx pages with some class management implemented in the last 6 years. We still mix our html/vb/js all on the same file when we add a feature/page to our site. We do not separate the business logic from the rest of the code. Wiring anything up in VS for Intelli-sense or testing or any other benefit is more frustrating than it is worth, because of having to manually rejigger everything back to one file. How do other teams approach this? I noticed when I did wire everything up for VS it wants to make a class for all functions. Do people normally compile DLLs for page-specific functions that won't be reusable? What approaches make sense for getting our practices under control while still being able to fix old anti-patterns and outdated code and still moving towards a logical structure for future devs to build on?

  Read the article

• On Developing Web Services with Global State

  - by user74418

  I'm new to web programming. I'm more experienced and comfortable with client-side code. Recently, I've been dabbling in web programming through Python's Google App Engine. I ran into some difficulty while trying to write some simple apps for the purposes of learning, mainly involving how to maintain some kind of consistent universally-accessible state for the application. I tried to write a simple queueing management system, the kind you would expect to be used in a small clinic, or at a cafeteria. Typically, this is done with hardware. You take a number from a ticketing machine, and when your number is displayed or called you approach the counter for service. Alternatively, you could be given a small pager, which will beep or vibrate when it is your turn to receive service. The former is somewhat better in that you have an idea of how many people are still ahead of you in the queue. In this situation, the global state is the last number in queue, which needs to be updated whenever a request is made to the server. I'm not sure how to best to store and maintain this value in a GAE context. The solution I thought of was to keep the value in the Datastore, attempt to query it during a ticket request, update the value, and then re-store it with put. My problem is that I haven't figured out how to lock the resource so that other requests do not check the value while it is in the middle of being updated. I am concerned that I may end up ticket requests that have the same queue number. Also, the whole solution feels awkward to me. I was wondering if there was a more natural way to accomplish this without having to go through the Datastore. Can anyone with more experience in this domain provide some advice on how to approach the design of the above application?

  Read the article

• decouple software components via nameconvention

  - by csteinmueller

  I'm currently evaluating alternatives to refactor a drivermanagement. In my multitier architecture I have Baseclass DAL.Device //my entity Interfaces BL.IDriver //handles the dataprocessing between application and device BL.IDriverCreator //creates an IDriver from a Device BL.IDriverFactory //handles the driver creation requests Every specialization of Device has a corresponding IDriver implementation and a corresponding IDriverCreator implementation. At the moment the mapping is fix via a type check within the business layer / DriverFactory. That means every new driver needs a) changing code within the DriverFactory and b) referencing the new IDriver implementation / assembly. On a customers point of view that means, every new driver, used or not, needs a complex revalidation of their hardware environment, because it's a critical process. My first inspiration was to use a caliburn micro like nameconvention see Caliburn.Micro: Xaml Made Easy BL.RestDriver BL.RestDriverCreator DAL.RestDevice After receiving the RestDevicewithin the IDriverFactory I can load all driver dlls via reflection and do a namesplitting/comparing (extracting the xx from xxDriverCreator and xxDevice) Another idea would be a custom attribute (which also leads to comparing strings). My question: is that a good approach above layer borders? If not, what would be a good approach?

  Read the article

• What's a good algorithm for a random, uneven distribution of a fixed amount of a resource?

  - by NickC

  Problem I have X, a positive integer, of some resource, R. There are N potential targets. I want to distribute all of R to the N targets in some "interesting" way. "Interesting" means: Some targets may not get any R. It should rarely be near even (with a majority of target getting near X/N of the resource). There should be at least a small chance of one target getting all of R. Bad solutions The naive approach would be to pick a random target and give one R to it and repeat X times. This would result in too even of an approach. The next idea is to pick a random number between 1 and X and give it to a random target. This results in too large of a number (at least X/2 on average) being given to one target. Question This algorithm will be used frequently and I want the distribution to be interesting and uneven so that the surprise doesn't wear off for users. Is there a good algorithm for something in between these two approaches, that fits the definition of interesting above?

  Read the article

• High-level strategy for distinguishing a regular string from invalid JSON (ie. JSON-like string detection)

  - by Jonline

  Disclaimer On Absence of Code: I have no code to post because I haven't started writing; was looking for more theoretical guidance as I doubt I'll have trouble coding it but am pretty befuddled on what approach(es) would yield best results. I'm not seeking any code, either, though; just direction. Dilemma I'm toying with adding a "magic method"-style feature to a UI I'm building for a client, and it would require intelligently detecting whether or not a string was meant to be JSON as against a simple string. I had considered these general ideas: Look for a sort of arbitrarily-determined acceptable ratio of the frequency of JSON-like syntax (ie. regex to find strings separated by colons; look for colons between curly-braces, etc.) to the number of quote-encapsulated strings + nulls, bools and ints/floats. But the smaller the data set, the more fickle this would get look for key identifiers like opening and closing curly braces... not sure if there even are more easy identifiers, and this doesn't appeal anyway because it's so prescriptive about the kinds of mistakes it could find try incrementally parsing chunks, as those between curly braces, and seeing what proportion of these fractional statements turn out to be valid JSON; this seems like it would suffer less than (1) from smaller datasets, but would probably be much more processing-intensive, and very susceptible to a missing or inverted brace Just curious if the computational folks or algorithm pros out there had any approaches in mind that my semantics-oriented brain might have missed. PS: It occurs to me that natural language processing, about which I am totally ignorant, might be a cool approach; but, if NLP is a good strategy here, it sort of doesn't matter because I have zero experience with it and don't have time to learn & then implement/ this feature isn't worth it to the client.

  Read the article

• Localization of Database Strings in .Net

  - by Aligned

  I have several database tables that have a description column that I need to display in the UI. .Net has .resx files that will help with the translation of the strings, when the Thread.CurrentCulture.UICulture is set, but I needed a custom approach for the strings that are stored in the database and not in the .resx files. Here’s my approach: 1. Create a resource file for each database table and put them in the /Resources/Database/ directory. 2. Create a method in LocalizationHelpers (GetLocalizedString) that will get the string from the table for English (which should be cached to avoid unneeded service/database calls) or the resx when not English. 3. All database tables need to have a ResxKey field that matches the key in the resx file. 4. By convention the resx file will have the same name as the database table, and the key the same as the database ResxKey.   - if there are multiple columns that need translation, then one ResxKey will be used and Name or Description appended. Here’s the method I’m using to pull the string: public static string GetLocalizedString(string resourceName, string resourceKey) { if (executingAssembly == null) { executingAssembly = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly(); } ResourceManager manager = new ResourceManager(resourceName, executingAssembly); return manager.GetString(resourceKey); }

  Read the article

• "Do it right, against customer's wishes" - how is it called?

  - by SF.

  We know the optimal situation of negotiating corrections of specifications with the customer, getting the specs to do what the client wanted, not what they said or thought they wanted. That's negotiating, explaining. Sometimes, we're unable to convince the client. We're forced to produce broken as designed. This, called "demonology" by merit of mages summoning demons and demons fulfilling their wishes very literally, causing the mage's demise as result, is another approach that will leave the customer very dissatisfied once they realize their error, and of course try to pin the blame on the developer. Now I just faced a very different approach: the customer created simple specs that fail to account for some critical caveat, and is completely unwilling to fix them, admit the obvious errors and accept suggested corrections. The product made to these specs will be critically broken, and possibly might cost human lives. Still, it's too late to drop the contract entirely. The contract has punitive clauses for that, ones we can't really accept. The boss' decision? We do the work right and lie to the customer that we did it according to the specs. The algorithms in question are hidden deep enough under the surface, the product will do the work just fine, won't fail in the caveat situation, and unless someone digs too deep, they will never discover we didn't break it as requested. Is there some common name for this tactics of execution of specs?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >