Search Results

Search found 21023 results on 841 pages for 'computer architecture'.

Page 47/841 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • UML Diagrams of Multi-Threaded Applications

    - by PersonalNexus
    For single-threaded applications I like to use class diagrams to get an overview of the architecture of that application. This type of diagram, however, hasn’t been very helpful when trying to understand heavily multi-threaded/concurrent applications, for instance because different instances of a class "live" on different threads (meaning accessing an instance is save only from the one thread it lives on). Consequently, associations between classes don’t necessarily mean that I can call methods on those objects, but instead I have to make that call on the target object's thread. Most literature I have dug up on the topic such as Designing Concurrent, Distributed, and Real-Time Applications with UML by Hassan Gomaa had some nice ideas, such as drawing thread boundaries into object diagrams, but overall seemed a bit too academic and wordy to be really useful. I don’t want to use these diagrams as a high-level view of the problem domain, but rather as a detailed description of my classes/objects, their interactions and the limitations due to thread-boundaries I mentioned above. I would therefore like to know: What types of diagrams have you found to be most helpful in understanding multi-threaded applications? Are there any extensions to classic UML that take into account the peculiarities of multi-threaded applications, e.g. through annotations illustrating that some objects might live in a certain thread while others have no thread-affinity; some fields of an object may be read from any thread, but written to only from one; some methods are synchronous and return a result while others are asynchronous that get requests queued up and return results for instance via a callback on a different thread.

    Read the article

  • Processing component pools problem - Entity Subsystem

    - by mani3xis
    Architecture description I'm creating (designing) an entity system and I ran into many problems. I'm trying to keep it Data-Oriented and efficient as much as possible. My components are POD structures (array of bytes to be precise) allocated in homogeneous pools. Each pool has a ComponentDescriptor - it just contains component name, field types and field names. Entity is just a pointer to array of components (where address acts like an entity ID). EntityPrototype contains entity name and array of component names. Finally Subsystem (System or Processor) which works on component pools. Actual problem The problem is that some components dependents on others (Model, Sprite, PhysicalBody, Animation depends on Transform component) which makes a lot of problems when it comes to processing them. For example, lets define some entities using [S]prite, [P]hysicalBody and [H]ealth: Tank: Transform, Sprite, PhysicalBody BgTree: Transform, Sprite House: Transform, Sprite, Health and create 4 Tanks, 5 BgTrees and 2 Houses and my pools will look like: TTTTTTTTTTT // Transform pool SSSSSSSSSSS // Sprite pool PPPP // PhysicalBody pool HH // Health component There is no way to process them using indices. I spend 3 days working on it and I still don't have any ideas. In previous designs TransformComponent was bound to the entity - but it wasn't a good idea. Can you give me some advices how to process them? Or maybe I should change the overall design? Maybe I should create pools of entites (pools of component pools) - but I guess it will be a nightmare for CPU caches. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How should I host our scalable worker processes?

    - by Pieter Breed
    We are designing a new architecture for an enterprise business. The principles we've followed so far is not to develop what you can (possible buy and) deploy, ie, don't reinvent any wheels. In this way we've decided on CQRS, RabbitMQ, Riak and a bunch of other things. We still need to write /some/ business code though and these will be in the form of worker processes, which will consume commands from a message queue and after any side-effects, produce events onto another message queue. The idea behind this is that via the competing-consumers design we will have a scalable design right out of the box. One option is of writing a management infrastructure that will know how to: deploy code instantiate processes kill processes update configuration etc IE provide fault tolerance and scalability. Also, this is exactly what something like GAE and Heroku does for you, but in a public setting and in our organization, public is bad. My question is, is there an out-of-the-box solution that we can use to host our consumers in? Like a private cloud or private platform-as-a-service. Private Heroku or GAE. Is there some kind of software or software product with which we can do all of these things and thereby get scalability and fault tolerance over our consumers?

    Read the article

  • CQRS applicability when some commands need to block the UI

    - by regularfry
    I am working on an app which I would dearly love to transition from a fairly traditional layered architecture to CQRS, for a number of reasons, not least fo which is that having a robust event log will make adding a couple of feature requests I can see barrelling towards me trivial to accomodate. Now, I have a conceptual problem: of around 40 commands the user can initiate, there are three which the user needs to be sure have successfully completed before the UI lets them do anything else. Everything else fits into the "submit a request, query for success later" model, except for these three commands. How is this handled in CQRS-land? Do I separate the three blocking commands to effectively a third service, so I have Commands, Queries, and BlockingCommands? Do I have a two-stage event processor with an in-request blocking first stage which only gets used for the blocking commands? Does the existence of these three commands mean that the whole idea of applying CQRS is invalid? Should I just pretend they aren't blocking and poll for success in the UI? I'm sure this must come up on other projects, how is it usually handled?

    Read the article

  • Tips about how to spread Object Oriented practices

    - by Augusto
    I work for a medium company that has around 250 developers. Unfortunately, lots of them are stuck in a procedural way of thinking and some teams constantly deliver big Transactional Script applications, when in fact the application contains rich logic. They also fail to manage the design dependencies, and end up with services which depend on another large number of services (a clean example of Big Ball of Mud). My question is: Can you suggest how to spread this type of knowledge? I know that the surface of the problem is that these applications have a poor architecture and design. Another issue is that there are some developers who are against writing any kind of test. A few things I'm doing to change this (but I'm either failing or the change is too small are) Running presentations about design principles (SOLID, clean code, etc). Workshops about TDD and BDD. Coaching teams (this includes using sonar, findbugs, jdepend and other tools). IDE & Refactoring talks. A few things I'm thinking to do in the future (but I'm concern that they might not be good) Form a team of OO evangelists, who disseminate an OO way of thinking in differet teams (these people would need to change teams every few months). Running design review sessions, to criticise the design and suggest improvements (even if the improvements are not done because of time constraints, I think this might be useful) . Something I found with the teams I coach, is that as soon as I leave them, they revert back to the old practices. I know I don't spend a lot of time with them, usually just one month. So whatever I'm doing, it doesn't stick. I'm sorry this question is spattered with frustration, but the alterative to write this was to hit my head on the wall until I pass out.

    Read the article

  • Loadbalancing Questions

    - by Van Holtz
    I have been learning networking for about 4 months. Wrote a single standalone Multiplayer server and succeeded with authoritative approach. Now I want to extend it by splitting the single server into clusters to allow even more players to log in to avoid latency issues. Now I have protyped the Loadbalancing server and its running pretty good so far. This is my architecture, I have a master server which acts as a proxy, every sub servers(chat, login, game) connect to the master server as well as all the clients. when a client connects, Client Request: Send Request - MS(Master) - Decides which SS(SubServer) to forward to - Forwards Request to SS - SS - Analyze Message - Send Response to MS - Decides which Client to forward to - Forwards Response to Client Well, it looks like its going through lots of stages. it takes double the time to process the message than a single server approach. i feel like my model isnt the best or i may be wrong. is there any better model or the one they use in professional games? I still want a Master-SubServer approach. I just want to clarify that I'm going in the right direction before writing all my codes. Thanks for any answer :)

    Read the article

  • How do you keep SOA DRY?

    - by TaylorOtwell
    In our organization, we've shifted to a more "service oriented architecture". To give an example, let's assume we need to retrieve a "Quote" object. This quote has a shipper, a consignee, phone numbers, contacts, email addresses, and other location information. In other words, a Quote object is made up of many other objects. So, it seems like it would make sense to make a "Quote Retrieval Service". In our situation, we've accomplished this by creating a .NET solution and writing the service. The service API looks something like this (in pseudo-code): Function GetQuote(String ID) Returns Quote So, so far so good. Now, when this service is consumed, to keep things "de-coupled", we are creating essentially a duplicate of the Quote object and mapping from the QuoteService version of the Quote into the consumer's version of the Quote. In many cases, these classes will have the exact same properties. So, if the Quote service is consumed by 5 other applications, we would have 6 definitions of what a "Quote" is. One for each consumer, and one for the service. This feels wrong. I thought code was supposed to be DRY, but it seems like our method of SOA is forcing us to create tons of duplicated class definitions. What are we doing wrong, or is the code duplication just a "necessary evil" of SOA?

    Read the article

  • Avoid overwriting all the methods in the child class

    - by Heckel
    The context I am making a game in C++ using SFML. I have a class that controls what is displayed on the screen (manager on the image below). It has a list of all the things to draw like images, text, etc. To be able to store them in one list I created a Drawable class from which all the other drawable class inherit. The image below represents how I would organize each class. Drawable has a virtual method Draw that will be called by the manager. Image and Text overwrite this method. My problem is that I would like Image::draw method to work for Circle, Polygon, etc. since sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inherit from sf::Shape. I thought of two ways to do that. My first idea would be for Image to have a pointer on sf::Shape, and the subclasses would make it point onto their sf::CircleShape or sf::ConvexShape classes (Like on the image below). In the Polygon constructor I would write something like ptr_shape = &polygon_shape; This doesn't look very elegant because I have two variables that are, in fact, just one. My second idea is to store the sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inside the ptr_shape like ptr_shape = new sf::ConvexShape(...); and to use a function that is only in ConvexShape I would cast it like so ((sf::ConvexShape*)ptr_shape)->convex_method(); But that doesn't look very elegant either. I am not even sure I am allowed to do that. My question I added details about the whole thing because I thought that maybe my whole architecture was wrong. I would like to know how I could design my program to be safe without overwriting all the Image methods. I apologize if this question has already been asked; I have no idea what to google.

    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

  • Example: Cross Cutting Concerns of an Application

    A little while ago I was given an opportunity to design and implement a new system that sent data via an HTTP Post method and then processed the results that were returned so that they could be inserted in to a database. My system had eight core concerns that it needed to fulfill. Eight Core Concerns Database Access Data Entities Worker Result Processing Process Flow Manager Email/Notification Error Handling Logging Of these eight, five were actually cross cutting concerns. 5 Cross Cutting Concerns Database Access Data Entities Email/Notification Error Handling Logging These five cross cutting concerns were determined after I created an aspect oriented model to help identity the system components that could be factored out into separate components.  These separated components would then be included in the system so that they could be used by various other components.  These five components allow all of the other components to access the database, store data, send notifications, handle errors, and log all system events.  Thus, these components are used to share unique aspects to the system via their implementation. The use of Aspect oriented architecture greatly helped me define what components I needed to create and what each of those components could do.  It also showed how all of the other aspects depended on each other so that each component did not have to re-implement code that was already created in the existing system.

    Read the article

  • Should one use a separate database for application data and user data?

    - by trycatch
    I’ve been working on a project for a little while and I’m unsure which is the better architecture. I’m interested in the consensus. The answer to me seems fairly obvious but something about it is digging at me and I can't pick out what. The TL;DR is: how do you handle a program with application data and user data in the same DB which needs to be able to receive updates to the application data periodically? One database for user data and one for application, or both in one? The detailed version is.. if an application has a database which needs to maintain application data AND user data, and the user data all references application data, it feels more natural to me to store them in the same database. But if there exists a need to be able to update the application data within this database periodically, should this be stripped into two databases so that one can simply download the updated application data database file as an update and replace the old one? Or should they remain as one database, and the application data be updated via a script which inserts the new data into the existing database? The second sounds clearly preferable to me... but for some reason just doesn’t feel right, and I can't pick out quite why.

    Read the article

  • Use a SQL Database for a Desktop Game

    - by sharethis
    Developing a Game Engine I am planning a computer game and its engine. There will be a 3 dimensional world with first person view and it will be single player for now. The programming language is C++ and it uses OpenGL. Data Centered Design Decision My design decision is to use a data centered architecture where there is a global event manager and a global data manager. There are many components like physics, input, sound, renderer, ai, ... Each component can trigger and listen to events. Moreover, each component can read, edit, create and remove data. The question is about the data manager. Whether to Use a Relational Database Should I use a SQL Database, e.g. SQLite or MySQL, to store the game data? This contains virtually all game content like items, characters, inventories, ... Except of meshes and textures which are even more performance related, so I will keep them in memory. Is a SQL database fast enough to use it for realtime reading and writing game informations, like the position of a moving character? I also need to care about cross-platform compatibility. Aside from keeping everything in memory, what alternatives do I have? Advantages Would Be The advantages of using a relational database like MySQL would be the data orientated structure which allows fast computation. I would not need objects for representing entities. I could easily query data of objects near the player needed for rendering. And I don't have to take care about data of objects far away. Moreover there would be no need for savegames since the hole game state is saved in the database. Last but not least, expanding the game to an online game would be relative easy because there already is a place where the hole game state is stored.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid the GameManager god object?

    - by lorancou
    I just read an answer to a question about structuring game code. It made me wonder about the ubiquitous GameManager class, and how it often becomes an issue in a production environment. Let me describe this. First, there's prototyping. Nobody cares about writing great code, we just try to get something running to see if the gameplay adds up. Then there's a greenlight, and in an effort to clean things up, somebody writes a GameManager. Probably to hold a bunch of GameStates, maybe to store a few GameObjects, nothing big, really. A cute, little, manager. In the peaceful realm of pre-production, the game is shaping up nicely. Coders have proper nights of sleep and plenty of ideas to architecture the thing with Great Design Patterns. Then production starts and soon, of course, there is crunch time. Balanced diet is long gone, the bug tracker is cracking with issues, people are stressed and the game has to be released yesterday. At that point, usually, the GameManager is a real big mess (to stay polite). The reason for that is simple. After all, when writing a game, well... all the source code is actually here to manage the game. It's easy to just add this little extra feature or bugfix in the GameManager, where everything else is already stored anyway. When time becomes an issue, no way to write a separate class, or to split this giant manager into sub-managers. Of course this is a classical anti-pattern: the god object. It's a bad thing, a pain to merge, a pain to maintain, a pain to understand, a pain to transform. What would you suggest to prevent this from happening?

    Read the article

  • MVVM and service pattern

    - by alfa-alfa
    I'm building a WPF application using the MVVM pattern. Right now, my viewmodels calls the service layer to retrieve models (how is not relevant to the viewmodel) and convert them to viewmodels. I'm using constructor injection to pass the service required to the viewmodel. It's easily testable and works well for viewmodels with few dependencies, but as soon as I try to create viewModels for complex models, I have a constructor with a LOT of services injected in it (one to retrieve each dependencies and a list of all available values to bind to an itemsSource for example). I'm wondering how to handle multiple services like that and still have a viewmodel that I can unit test easily. I'm thinking of a few solutions: Creating a services singleton (IServices) containing all the available services as interfaces. Example: Services.Current.XXXService.Retrieve(), Services.Current.YYYService.Retrieve(). That way, I don't have a huge constructor with a ton of services parameters in them. Creating a facade for the services used by the viewModel and passing this object in the ctor of my viewmodel. But then, I'll have to create a facade for each of my complexe viewmodels, and it might be a bit much... What do you think is the "right" way to implement this kind of architecture ?

    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

  • Implementing Explosions

    - by Xkynar
    I want to add explosions to my 2D game, but im having a hard time with the architecture. Several game elements might be responsible for explosions, like, lets say, explosive barrels and bullets (and there might be chain reactions with close barrels). The only options i can come up with are: 1 - Having an array of explosions and treat them as a game element as important as any other Pros: Having a single array which is updated and drawn with all the other game element arrays makes it more organized and simple to update, and the explosive barrels at a first glance would be easy to create, simply by passing the explosion array as a pointer to each explosive barrel constructor Cons: It might be hard for the bullets to add an explosion to the vector, since bullets are shot by a Weapon class which is located in every mob, so lets say, if i create a new enemy and add it to the enemy array, that enemy will have a weapon and functions to be able to use it, and if i want the weapon (rocket launcher in this case) to have access to the explosions array to be able to add a new one, id have to pass the explosion array as a pointer to the enemy, which would then pass it to the weapon, which would pass it to the bullets (ugly chain). Another problem I can think of is a little more weird: If im checking the collisions between explosions and barrels (so i create a chain reaction) and i detect an explosion colliding with a barrel, if i add a new explosion while im iterating the explosions java will trow an exception. So this is kinda annoying, i cant iterate through the explosions and add a new explosion, i must do it in another way... The other way which isnt really well thought yet is to just add an explosive component to every element that might explode so that when it dies, it explodes or something, but i dont have good ways on implementing this theory either Honestly i dont like either the solutions so id like to know how is it usually done by actual game developers, sorry if my problem seems trivial and dumb.

    Read the article

  • What is the most effective approach to learn an unfamiliar complex program? [closed]

    - by bdroc
    Possible Duplicate: How do you dive into large code bases? I have quite a bit of experience with different programming languages and writing small and functional programs for a variety of purposes. My coding skills aren't what I have a problem with. In fact, I've written a decent web application from scratch for my startup. However, I have trouble jumping into unfamiliar applications. What's the most effective way to approach learning a new program's structure and/or architecture so that I can start attacking the code effectively? Are there useful tools for their respective languages (Python and Java are my two primary languages)? Should I be starting with just looking at function names or documentation? How do you veterans approach this problem? I find this has to be with minimal help from coworkers or contributors who are already familiar with the application and have better things to do than help me. I'd love to practice this skill in an open source project so any suggestions for starting points (maybe mildly complex) would be great too!

    Read the article

  • How do OSes work on multiple CPUs? [on hold]

    - by user3691093
    Assumption: "OS es (atleast in some part) should be written in assembly.Assembly programs are CPU specefic." If so how can one os run on different CPUs ? For example: how is that I can load Ubuntu on different systems having different CPUs (like intel i3,i5,i7, amd a8,a6,etc) from the same bootable disk? Does the disk contain seporate assembly programs for each CPU? Are these CPUs 'similar' enough to run the same assembly program? Is my assumption wrong? Something else.... Thanks for responding. I tried to find out in what way are the CPUs that I mentioned 'similar'. I came across the concepts of Instruction Set Architecture and Microarchitecture of CPUs.A CPU will understand a program if it is combatible with its ISA. Even if CPUs are 'wired up' differently (different microarchitecture) , as long as the ISA implemented on top is same ,the program will work. ARM and x86 have different ISA ( that why there are 2 windows 8 versions, right?). And if an app program is written in an HLL with compilers for both platforms we will saved from wasting time writing 2 programs. Did I understand anything wrong? Are there programs that can take a compiled program as input and produce a program executable on another CPU as output? Is it possible? (Virtualisation?) 32 bit windows programs do install on 64 bit windows ,dont they? Arent 64 bit CPUs 'differerent' from 32 bit CPUs? They do get seporate OS versions, right? Is this backward combatibility achieved using programes mentioned in (3) ?

    Read the article

  • In SAP Functional a good career path ???

    - by Sam Ahmed
    Hi My name is Sam and I am 23 right know.I have graduated a year back in the domain of computer science.I am currently working as SAP SD consultant and have a project under my belt. Currently working in SAP seems price less as people are dieing for it but at the same time I have really strong academics and many people are forcing me to apply for masters abroad for which I have to leave this job.This decision seems to be really tough. This decision of moving to SAP sometimes makes me happy as it is valuable and on the other hand my technical skills are completey dieing. Most of my accomplishers in my family dont encourage me to be in SAP especially in USA and consider it as a mediocre career. Was my decision right or should I move back to technical and go for MS???

    Read the article

  • Going into Web Development without a C.S. Degree - Suggestions

    - by Klaint Cokeman
    I plan on seeking a career in web development and I'm about two semesters away from graduating with a CIS degree. Although I'm very satisfied with my choice of degree, I'm concerned that I may be lacking knowledge in a few areas because of not majoring in computer science. The programming side of things is no problem for me, I'm just wondering to what extent data structures/theory/etc. might benefit me to learn over spending more time with hands-on programming... and also what aspects of C.S. would be most appropriate to look into you would think would be most applicable to web development. In short, I'd like to expand my horizons a little bit. I'd very much appreciate and advice/suggestions/book or tutorial recommendations, etc. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Which Free Online Antivirus Scanner is the Best? [Comparison Test and Results]

    - by Asian Angel
    There are times when an online or supplementary scanner can be very useful when cleaning up an infected computer or just to get a second opinion on the security of your system. With this purpose in mind, the good folks over at the 7 Tutorials blog decided to do a test using the ten most popular online security scanners to see what worked the best and what did not. The following scanners were used for the test: Bitdefender QuickScan, BullGuard Online Scanner, Comodo Cloud Scanner, ESET Free Online Scanner, F-Secure Online Scanner, Kaspersky Security Scan, McAfee Security Scan Plus, Norton Security Scan, Panda ActiveScan and Trend Micro HouseCall. Are there any online or supplementary scanners that you use and depend on? Do you agree or disagree with the results? Let us know in the comments! Test Comparison – What is the Best Free Online Antivirus Scanner? [7 Tutorials] HTG Explains: Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting How to Convert News Feeds to Ebooks with Calibre How To Customize Your Wallpaper with Google Image Searches, RSS Feeds, and More

    Read the article

  • The History Of Operating Systems [Infographic]

    - by ETC
    Earlier this week we shared a history of operating system names with you. This infographic complements that with a timeline of quotes and facts from the annals of computer history. Hit up the link below to check out the full infographic. The History Of Operating Systems [MakeUseOf] Latest Features How-To Geek ETC Have You Ever Wondered How Your Operating System Got Its Name? Should You Delete Windows 7 Service Pack Backup Files to Save Space? What Can Super Mario Teach Us About Graphics Technology? Windows 7 Service Pack 1 is Released: But Should You Install It? How To Make Hundreds of Complex Photo Edits in Seconds With Photoshop Actions How to Enable User-Specific Wireless Networks in Windows 7 The History Of Operating Systems [Infographic] DriveSafe.ly Reads Your Text Messages Aloud The Likability of Angry Birds [Infographic] Dim an Overly Bright Alarm Clock with a Binder Divider Preliminary List of Keyboard Shortcuts for Unity Now Available Bring a Touch of the Wild West to Your Desktop with the Rango Theme for Windows 7

    Read the article

  • This Week in Geek History: Zelda Turns 25, Birth of the Printing Press, and the Unveiling of ENIAC

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Every week we bring you interesting highlights from the history of geekdom. This week we take a look at The Legend of Zelda’s 25th anniversary, the Gutenberg press, and the unveiling of primitive super computer ENIAC. Latest Features How-To Geek ETC Should You Delete Windows 7 Service Pack Backup Files to Save Space? What Can Super Mario Teach Us About Graphics Technology? Windows 7 Service Pack 1 is Released: But Should You Install It? How To Make Hundreds of Complex Photo Edits in Seconds With Photoshop Actions How to Enable User-Specific Wireless Networks in Windows 7 How to Use Google Chrome as Your Default PDF Reader (the Easy Way) Reclaim Vertical UI Space by Moving Your Tabs to the Side in Firefox Wind and Water: Puzzle Battles – An Awesome Game for Linux and Windows How Star Wars Changed the World [Infographic] Tabs Visual Manager Adds Thumbnailed Tab Switching to Chrome Daisies and Rye Swaying in the Summer Wind Wallpaper Read On Phone Pushes Data from Your Desktop to the Appropriate Android App

    Read the article

  • How do you develop web applications? [closed]

    - by ck3g
    How do you and/or your team develop your web applications? Language, framework or platform doesn't matter. I would like to know about the structure of your environment. For example: Using IDE on workstation and project files on remote host accessing via sftp. Files are saved instantly on remote host; All files are local and are uploaded on remote host during saving; Files are local, web server is running on local computer and is tested at local host. etc. You could write down also about the benefits of your approach, this will be useful for me. Thanks upd: Here must be a question and here it is: which is the best approach by your opinion?

    Read the article

  • Best way to store a large amount of game objects and update the ones onscreen

    - by user3002473
    Good afternoon guys! I'm a young beginner game developer working on my first large scale game project and I've run into a situation where I'm not quite sure what the best solution may be (if there is a lone solution). The question may be vague (if anyone can think of a better title after having read the question, please edit it) or broad but I'm not quite sure what to do and I thought it would help just to discuss the problem with people more educated in the field. Before we get started, here are some of the questions I've looked at for help in the past: Best way to keep track of game objects Elegant way to simulate large amounts of entities within a game world What is the most efficient container to store dynamic game objects in? I've also read articles about different data structures commonly used in games to store game objects such as this one about slot maps, but none of them are really what I'm looking for. Also, if it helps at all I'm using Python 3 to design the game. It has to be Python 3, if I could I would use C++ or Unityscript or something else, but I'm restricted to having to use Python 3. My game will be a form of side scroller shooter game. In said game the player will traverse large rooms with large amounts of enemies and other game objects to update (think some of the larger areas in Cave Story or Iji). The player obviously can't see the entire room all at once, so there is a viewport that follows the player around and renders only a selection of the room and the game objects that it contains. This is not a foreign concept. The part that's getting me confused has to do with how certain game objects are updated. Some of them are to be updated constantly, regardless of whether or not they can be seen. Other objects however are only to be updated when they are onscreen (for example, an enemy would only be updated to react to the player when it is onscreen or when it is in a certain range of the screen). Another problem is that game objects have to be easily referable by other game objects; something that happens in the player's update() method may affect another object in the world. Collision detection in games is always a serious problem. I need a way of containing the game objects such that it minimizes the number of cases when testing for collisions against one another. The final problem is that of creating and destroying game objects. I think this problem is pretty self explanatory. To store the game objects then I've considered a number of different methods. The original method I had was to simply store all the objects in a hash table by an id. This method was simple, and decently fast as it allows all the objects to be looked up in O(1) complexity, and also allows them to be deleted fairly easily. Hash collisions would not be a major problem; I wasn't originally planning on using computer generated ids to store the game objects I was going to rely on them all using ids given to them by the game designer (such names would be strings like 'Player' or 'EnemyWeapon4'), and even if I did use computer generated ids, if I used a decent hashing algorithm then the chances of collisions would be around 1 in 4 billion. The problem with using a hash table however is that it is inefficient in checking to see what objects are in range of the viewport. Considering the fact that certain game objects move (as well as the viewport itself), the only solution I could think of in order to only update objects that are in the viewport would be to iterate through every object in the hash table and check if it is in the viewport or not, updating only the ones that are in the valid area. This would be incredibly slow in scenarios where the amount of game objects exceeds 500, or even 200. The second solution was to store everything in a 2-d list. The world is partitioned up into cells (a tilemap essentially), where each cell or tile is the same size and is square. Each cell would contain a list of the game objects that are currently occupying it (each game object would be inserted into a cell depending on the center of the object's collision mask). A 2-d list would allow me to take the top-left and bottom-right corners of the viewport and easily grab a rectangular area of the grid containing only the cells containing entities that are in valid range to be updated. This method also solves the problem of collision detection; when I take an entity I can find the cell that it is currently in, then check only against entities in it's cell and the 8 cells around it. One problem with this system however is that it prohibits easy lookup of game objects. One solution I had would be to simultaneously keep a hash table that would contain all the positions of the objects in the 2-d list indexed by the id of said object. The major problem with a 2-d list is that it would need to be rebuilt every single game frame (along with the hash table of object positions), which may be a serious detriment to game speed. Both systems have ups and downs and seem to solve some of each other's problems, however using them both together doesn't seem like the best solution either. If anyone has any thoughts, ideas, suggestions, comments, opinions or solutions on new data structures or better implementations of the existing data structures I have in mind, please post, any and all criticism and help is welcome. Thanks in advance! EDIT: Please don't close the question because it has a bad title, I'm just bad with names!

    Read the article

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