Search Results

Search found 2466 results on 99 pages for 'ea organization'.

Page 5/99 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• What You Said: How You Sync and Organize Your Bookmarks

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  Earlier this week we asked you to share your favorite techniques for synchronizing and organizing your browser bookmarks. Now we’re back to highlight the most popular techniques, tricks, and services. By far and away, Xmarks was the most frequently mentioned service. For the unfamiliar, Xmarks is a bookmark syncing service that is packed with features. Not only does Xmarks sync bookmarks between browsers and/or computers it also supports iOS, Android, and BlackBerry (mobile integration requires an upgrade to the premium account). In addition to syncing the bookmarks it also integrates with your search results so you can see how other Xmarks users have ranked sites within your search results. Steve-O-Rama highlights one of the many benefits of Xmarks: Xmarks seems to do the job for me. I’ve got a handful of machines, each with three or four browsers; over the years, I’ve accumulated thousands of bookmarks, stretching across many areas of interest. Trying to keep them all straight had been quite a struggle until Xmarks came along. I freaked out when the company was acquired by LastPass, but was subsequently relieved when they continued the free service. Xmarks has a very nice web interface to access, export, search, organize, and do many other things with your bookmarks. In this way, even if I’m on the go, I can access every bookmark I’ve made. Even so, I still make occasional local backups, directly from the browsers to a network folder. Delicious bookmarks, another veteran of the bookmark syncing services, had a fair number of supporters among the HTG readership. Use Amazon’s Barcode Scanner to Easily Buy Anything from Your Phone How To Migrate Windows 7 to a Solid State Drive Follow How-To Geek on Google+

  Read the article

• What tool do you use to organise your tasks?

  - by Gearóid

  Hi, I've been a web developer for four years now and I've yet to come across a nice piece of software that allows me to manage my day to day tasks well. In theory, I should be able to just pull up a textfile and write: write test scripts check code into svn remember to go home But obviously this isnt very usable. I've tried stuff like Ta-da List but it feels quite limited. JIRA is great for bug tracking but what if I have to remember to go to the bank at 2pm. Is there anything piece of software out there that helps organise programmers? I'm really interested in hearing what you guys have to say on this one. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Organazing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

  - by OnesimusUnbound

  As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application ptoject folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three teir, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

  Read the article

• Static teams or dynamic teams?

  - by Richard DesLonde

  Is it better to assemble permanent teams of developers within the company that always work together, from project to project, or is it better to have dynamic teams that assemble for a project, and then dissasemble afterwards? My inclination is to treat the entire company as a "platoon" and to assemble "fireteams" for individual projects, choosing from the "platoon" those developers best suited for the project.

  Read the article

• How can I optimize my development machines files/dirs?

  - by LuxuryMode

  Like any programmer, I've got a lot of stuff on my machine. Some of that stuff is projects of my own, some are projects I'm working on for my employer, others are open-source tools and projects, etc. Currently, I have my files organized as follows: /Code --/development (things I'm sort of hacking on plus maybe libraries used in other projects) --/scala (organized by language...why? I don't know!) --/android --/ruby --/employer_name -- /mobile --/android --/ios --/open-source (basically my forks that I'm pushing commits back upstream from) --/some-awesome-oss-project --/another-awesome-one --/tools random IDE settings sprinkled in here plus some other apps As you can see, things are kind of a mess here. How can I keep things organized in some sort of coherent fashion?

  Read the article

• Layout of mathematical views (iOS)

  - by William Jockusch

  I am trying to figure out the right way to encapsulate graphical information about mathematical objects. It is not simple. For example, a matrix can include square brackets around its entries, or not. Some things carry down to sub-objects -- for example, a matrix might track the font size to be used by its entries. Similarly, the font color and the background color would carry down to the entries. Other things do not carry down. For example, the entries of the matrix do not need to know whether or not the matrix has those square brackets. Based on all of the above, I need to calculate sizes for everything, then frames. All of this can depend on the properties stored above. The size of a matrix depends on the sizes of its entries, and also on whether or not it has those brackets. What I am having a hard time with is not the individual ways to calculate sensible frames for this or that. It is the overall organizational structure of the whole thing. How can I keep track of it all without going crazy. One particular obstacle is worth mentioning -- for reasons I don't want to go into here, I need to calculate the sizes and frames for everything before I instantiate any actual views. So, for example, if I have a Matrix object, I need to calculate its size before I make a MatrixView. If I have an equation, I need to calculate the size of the view for the equation before I create the actual view. So I clearly need separate objects for those calculations. But I can't figure out a sensible class structure for those objects. If I put them all into a single class, I get some advantages because copying then becomes easy. But I also end up with a bloated class that contains info that is irrelevant for some objects -- such as whether or not to include those brackets around the matrix. But if I use a lot of different classes, copying properties becomes a real pain. If it matters, this is all in Objective C, for an iOS environment. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• How do you organize your projects?

  - by Sergio

  Do you have any particular style of organizing projects? For example, currently I'm creating a project for a couple of schools here in Bolivia, this is how I organized it: TutoMentor (Solution) TutoMentor.UI (Winforms project) TutoMentor.Data (Class library project) How exactly do you organize your project? Do you have an example of something you organized and are proud of? Can you share a screenshot of the Solution pane? In the UI area of my application, I'm having trouble deciding on a good schema to organize different forms and where they belong. Edit: What about organizing different forms in the .UI project? Where/how should I group different form? Putting them all in root level of the project is a bad idea.

  Read the article

• Is individual code ownership important?

  - by Jim Puls

  I'm in the midst of an argument with some coworkers over whether team ownership of the entire codebase is better than individual ownership of components of it. I'm a huge proponent of assigning every member of the team a roughly equal share of the codebase. It lets people take pride in their creation, gives the bug screeners an obvious first place to assign incoming tickets, and helps to alleviate "broken window syndrome". It also concentrates knowledge of specific functionality with one (or two) team members making bug fixes much easier. Most of all, it puts the final say on major decisions with one person who has a lot of input instead of with a committee. I'm not advocating for requiring permission if somebody else wants to change your code; maybe have the code review always be to the owner, sure. Nor am I suggesting building knowledge silos: there should be nothing exclusive about this ownership. But when suggesting this to my coworkers, I got a ton of pushback, certainly much more than I expected. So I ask the community: what are your opinions on working with a team on a large codebase? Is there something I'm missing about vigilantly maintaining collective ownership?

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC 3 (C#) Software Architecture

  - by ryanzec

  I am starting on a relatively large and ambitious ASP.NET MVC 3 project and just thinking about the best way to organize my code. The project is basically going to be a general management system that will be capable of supporting any type management system whether it be a blogging system, cms, reservation system, wikis, forums, project management system, etc…, each of them being just a separate 'module'. You can read more about it on my blog posted here : http://www.ryanzec.com/index.php/blog/details/8 (forgive me, the style of the site kinda sucks). For those who don't want to read the long blog post the basic idea is that the core system itself is nothing more than a users system with an admin interface to manage the users system. Then you just add on module as you need them and the module I will be creating is a simple blog post to test it out before I move on to the big module which is a project management system. Now I am just trying to think of the best way to structure this so that it is easy for users to add in there own modules but easy for me to update to core system without worrying about the user modifying the core code. I think the ideal way would be to have a number of core projects that user is specifically told not to modify otherwise the system may become unstable and future updates would not work. When the user wants to add in there own modules, they would just add in a new project (or multiple projects). The thing is I am not sure that it is even possible to use multiple projects all with their own controllers, razor view template, css, javascript, etc... in one web application. Ideally each module would have some of it own razor view templates, css, javascript, image files and also need access to some of the core razor view templates, css, javascript, image files which would is in a separate project. It is possible to have 1 web application run off of controllers, razor view templates, css, javascript, image files that are store in multiple projects? Is there a better was to structure this to allow the user to easily add in module with having to modify the core code?

  Read the article

• Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

  - by Bob Horn

  Disclaimer: The intent of this question isn't to discern what is better for the individual developer, but for the system as a whole. I've worked in environments where small teams managed certain areas. For example, there would be a small team for every one of these functions: UI Framework code Business/application logic Database I've also worked on teams where the developers were responsible for all of these areas and more (QA, analsyt, etc...). My current environment promotes agile development (specifically scrum) and everyone has their hands in every area mentioned above. While there are pros and cons to each approach, I'd be curious to know if there are more pros and cons than I list below, and also what the generally feeling is about which approach is better. Devs Do It All Pros 1. Developers may be more well-rounded 2. Developers know more of the system Cons 1. Everyone has their hands in all areas, increasing the probability of creating less-than-optimal results in that area 2. It can take longer to do something with which you are unfamiliar (jack of all trades, master of none) Devs Specialize Pros 1. Developers can create policies and procedures for their area of expertise and more easily enforce them 2. Developers have more of a chance to become deeply knowledgeable about their specific area and make it the best it can be 3. Other developers don't cross boundaries and degrade another area Cons 1. As one colleague put it: "Why would you want to pigeon-hole yourself like that?" (Meaning some developers won't get a chance to work in certain areas.) It's easy to say how wonderful agile is, and that we should do it all, but I'm somewhat of a fan of having areas of expertise. Without that expertise, I've seen code degrade, database schemas become difficult to manage, hack UI code, etc... Let's face it, some people make careers out of doing just UI work, or just database work. It's not that easy to just fill in and do as good of a job as an expert in that area.

  Read the article

• What is a good way to share internal helpers?

  - by toplel32

  All my projects share the same base library that I have build up over quite some time. It contains utilities and static helper classes to assist them where .NET doesn't exactly offer what I want. Originally all the helpers were written mainly to serve an internal purpose and it has to stay that way, but sometimes they prove very useful to other assemblies. Now making them public in a reliable way is more complicated than most would think, for example all methods that assume nullable types must now contain argument checking while not charging internal utilities with the price of doing so. The price might be negligible, but it is far from right. While refactoring, I have revised this case multiple times and I've come up with the following solutions so far: Have an internal and public class for each helper The internal class contains the actual code while the public class serves as an access point which does argument checking. Cons: The internal class requires a prefix to avoid ambiguity (the best presentation should be reserved for public types) It isn't possible to discriminate methods that don't need argument checking   Have one class that contains both internal and public members (as conventionally implemented in .NET framework). At first, this might sound like the best possible solution, but it has the same first unpleasant con as solution 1. Cons: Internal methods require a prefix to avoid ambiguity   Have an internal class which is implemented by the public class that overrides any members that require argument checking. Cons: Is non-static, atleast one instantiation is required. This doesn't really fit into the helper class idea, since it generally consists of independent fragments of code, it should not require instantiation. Non-static methods are also slower by a negligible degree, which doesn't really justify this option either. There is one general and unavoidable consequence, alot of maintenance is necessary because every internal member will require a public counterpart. A note on solution 1: The first consequence can be avoided by putting both classes in different namespaces, for example you can have the real helper in the root namespace and the public helper in a namespace called "Helpers".

  Read the article

• Is individual code ownership important?

  - by Jim Puls

  I'm in the midst of an argument with some coworkers over whether team ownership of the entire codebase is better than individual ownership of components of it. I'm a huge proponent of assigning every member of the team a roughly equal share of the codebase. It lets people take pride in their creation, gives the bug screeners an obvious first place to assign incoming tickets, and helps to alleviate "broken window syndrome". It also concentrates knowledge of specific functionality with one (or two) team members making bug fixes much easier. Most of all, it puts the final say on major decisions with one person who has a lot of input instead of with a committee. I'm not advocating for requiring permission if somebody else wants to change your code; maybe have the code review always be to the owner, sure. Nor am I suggesting building knowledge silos: there should be nothing exclusive about this ownership. But when suggesting this to my coworkers, I got a ton of pushback, certainly much more than I expected. So I ask the community: what are your opinions on working with a team on a large codebase? Is there something I'm missing about vigilantly maintaining collective ownership?

  Read the article

• Software/Application needed to store and organize random content [on hold]

  - by Rami.Shareef

  I have the need to store random contents (on my local hard drive/ laptop hard drive) for personal use so I can look these contents up later on when I need them. What I mean by random content is one of the following: Some sort of code Random fact Css / html / Javascript tips Or anything I might find interesting and want to keep for future reference I want to look up these entries by tags, the software should give me the ability to associate every entry with one tag or more. I have been having difficult time find applications offer this functionality, it is like a local database with search ability and easy data-entry methods. I can build one, but I don't have the time to invest in doing so. Can you refer me to any application/software that can do that, it would be great. It does not matter if it is paid or free.

  Read the article

• Should accessible members of an internal class be internal too?

  - by Jeff Mercado

  I'm designing a set of APIs for some applications I'm working on. I want to keep the code style consistent in all the classes I write but I've found that there are a few inconsistencies that I'm introducing and I don't know what the best way to resolve them is. My example here is specific to C# but this would apply to any language with similar mechanisms. There are a few classes that I need for implementation purposes that I don't necessarily want to expose in the API so I make them internal whereever needed. Generally what I would do is design the class as I normally would (e.g., make members public/protected/private where necessary) and change the visibility level of the class itself to internal. So I might have a few classes that look like this: internal interface IMyItem { ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set); } internal class _SmallItem : IMyItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _SmallItem(/* small item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set) { /* ... */ } } internal abstract class _CompositeItem: IMyItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _CompositeItem(/* composite item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public abstract object UsefulInformation { get; } protected void HelperMethod(/* parameters */) { /* ... */ } } internal class _BigItem : _CompositeItem { private readonly /* parameters */; public _BigItem(/* big item parameters */) { /* ... */ } public override object UsefulInformation { get { /* ... */ } } public ItemSet AddTo(ItemSet set) { /* ... */ } } In another generated class (part of a parser/scanner), there is a structure that contains fields for all possible values it can represent. The class generated is internal too but I have control over the visibility of the members and decided to make them internal as well. internal partial struct ValueType { internal string String; internal ItemSet ItemSet; internal IMyItem MyItem; } internal class TokenValue { internal static int EQ(ItemSetScanner scanner) { /* ... */ } internal static int NAME(ItemSetScanner scanner, string value) { /* ... */ } internal static int VALUE(ItemSetScanner scanner, string value) { /* ... */ } //... } To me, this feels odd because the first set of classes, I didn't necessarily have to make some members public, they very well could have been made internal. internal members of an internal type can only be accessed internally anyway so why make them public? I just don't like the idea that the way I write my classes has to change drastically (i.e., change all uses of public to internal) just because the class is internal. Any thoughts on what I should do here? It makes sense to me that I might want to make some members of a class declared public, internal. But it's less clear to me when the class is declared internal.

  Read the article

• Roll Your Own Flexi-Ties to Secure and Store Frequently Used Cables

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  If you’re looking for an easy way to hang up or tidy frequently used cables, these DIY soft ties are durable, resuable, and easy to make. Soft ties ties are metal wire ties coated in rubber; people use them for everything from securing computer cables to shaping garden plants. Instructables user Bobzjr wanted a lot of them but couldn’t find anyone that sold bulk roles of the soft tie material. To that end he did a little exploring at the hardware store and found the perfect combination of wire and rubber to roll his own. Hit up the link below for more information on his DIY soft tie project. Roll Your Own Flexi-Ties (Soft Twist Ties) [Instructables] How To Properly Scan a Photograph (And Get An Even Better Image) The HTG Guide to Hiding Your Data in a TrueCrypt Hidden Volume Make Your Own Windows 8 Start Button with Zero Memory Usage

  Read the article

• How to become more productive in design and programming

  - by aurel

  Usually whenever I see tutorial videos (apart from the main subject) I learn a lot from their working habits, for example; they way they have set up their folders, what shotcuts they use. The best example was (long time a go) I say a jquery video, and half way through the author said something like “by the way you could have a code library” – that’s the only thing I remember from that video (but the author said it as something he assumed people know about) So I was wondering if someone knows any tip or any website which goes other how other professionals work, how they have set up their programming habits to help them not waste time in repetitive tasks.

  Read the article

• What is an effective way to organize tasks for a new project?

  - by Dulan

  Is there a practical solution to organizing the initial tasks for a new project? To elaborate, imagine the features/stories/goals are laid out for a project. How might one go about organizing those into sane tasks for the first few versions? The scenario I typically have in mind has the features listed as a high-level reference for what the end user-experience should involve. The tasks for constructing such features are then broken down into chunks (such as "create interface for X component"). Such a task is not necessarily "tied" to only that feature and may be useful when building subsequent features. Is breaking features down into small, code-able solutions valid? Or should they be slightly removed from any specific implementation? I do not expect that there is one "right" answer to this question, but I am looking for a fairly pragmatic and unobtrusive approach. As a note, I'm looking for solutions that are independent of any tools or "systems" used for managing the tasks themselves.

  Read the article

• Ask the Readers: How Do You Organize a Messy Music Collection?

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  What do you do when you’re faced with a massive pile of MP3s with mismatched tags, poor directory structure, or worse? This week we want to hear your best tips and tricks for getting out from under a mismanaged music collection. Whether iTunes went nuts and poorly tagged your existing collection on import, it was never very tidy to begin with, or you’ve got a hot mess of mismashed music from your internet travels, we want to hear how you’ve rectified the situation. What tools, tips, and tricks do you use to turn your messy pile of MP3s into a neatly organized music collection? Sound off in the comments and check back on Friday for the What You Said roundup! How to Sync Your Media Across Your Entire House with XBMC How to Own Your Own Website (Even If You Can’t Build One) Pt 2 How to Own Your Own Website (Even If You Can’t Build One) Pt 1

  Read the article

• Effective way of keeping past projects with their working development environment?

  - by Korey Hinton

  I find that whenever I want to go run a past project, it will take a long time before I can find it and before I have everything set-up again for it to be able to run. For example, I have python projects I created in Linux, and it depends on software packages that are easily installed in Linux, yet I no longer have the Linux VM I was using. And some of my other projects depend on other variables like web server configuration, PATH variables, sdk, IDE, OS version, device, etc. Does someone have an effective way of handling this issue? As of now I have only concerned myself with keeping the source code backed up yet it is difficult re-establish the working development environment and it is also difficult to keep the working development environment around as well.

  Read the article

• Updating and organizing class diagrams in a growing C++ project

  - by vanna

  I am working on a C++ project that is getting bigger and bigger. I do a lot of UML so it is not really hard to explain my work to co-workers. Lately though I implemented a lot of new features and I gave up updating by hand my Dia UML diagrams. I once used the class diagram of Visual Studio, which is my IDE but didn't get clear results. I need to show my work on a regular basis and I would like to be as clear as possible. Is there any tool that could generate a sort of organized map of my work (namespaces, classes, interactions, etc.) ?

  Read the article

• Using nested public classes to organize constants

  - by FrustratedWithFormsDesigner

  I'm working on an application with many constants. At the last code review it came up that the constants are too scattered and should all be organized into a single "master" constants file. The disagreement is about how to organize them. The majority feel that using the constant name should be good enough, but this will lead to code that looks like this: public static final String CREDITCARD_ACTION_SUBMITDATA = "6767"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_CARDHOLDER_NAME = "3959854"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_EXPIRY_MONTH = "3524"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_ACCOUNT_ID = "3524"; ... public static final String BANKPAYMENT_UIFIELDID_ACCOUNT_ID = "9987"; I find this type of naming convention to be cumbersome. I thought it might be easier to use public nested class, and have something like this: public class IntegrationSystemConstants { public class CreditCard { public static final String UI_EXPIRY_MONTH = "3524"; public static final String UI_ACCOUNT_ID = "3524"; ... } public class BankAccount { public static final String UI_ACCOUNT_ID = "9987"; ... } } This idea wasn't well received because it was "too complicated" (I didn't get much detail as to why this might be too complicated). I think this creates a better division between groups of related constants and the auto-complete makes it easier to find these as well. I've never seen this done though, so I'm wondering if this is an accepted practice or if there's better reasons that it shouldn't be done.

  Read the article

• Software architecture map to aid cross team communication?

  - by locster

  I work in a company where multiple teams each work on different parts of a software product in a vaguely agile/scrum manner. Mostly the organisation works well but there have been instances where a team may make a change without realising its impact on other teams. Where dependence is known communication has been good, and where dependence is suspected then 'broadcast' emails and informal conversations have also worked well. But there exists a sub-set of tasks that fall between the cracks. Broadcast emails are likely not the solution as they would become too numerous such that the email signal/noise ratio would fall. I'm contemplating a solution that involves a sort of map of the software, which details all of the various parts of the system and loosely tries to place interacting and dependent parts near to each other. Each developer then updates their position on the map (today I'm working on X and Y), and therefore if two or more developers happen to be co-located (or proximate) on the map then we can see this each day and this could form the trigger for further discussion on possible overlap and conflict. Is such a method out there and in use? If so what is it and does it work? Otherwise, do you think such a scheme has merit?

  Read the article

• Is there such thing like a "refactoring/maintainability group" role in software companies?

  - by dukeofgaming

  So, I work in a company that does embedded software development, other groups focus in the core development of different products' software and my department (which is in another geographical location) which is located at the factory has to deal with software development as well, but across all products, so that we can also fix things quicker when the lines go down due to software problems with the product. In other words, we are generalists while other groups specialize on each product. Thing is, it is kind of hard to get involved in core development when you are distributed geographically (well, I know it really isn't that hard, but there might be unintended cultural/political barriers when it comes to the discipline of collaborating remotely). So I figured that, since we are currently just putting fires out and somewhat being idle/sub-utilized (even though we are a new department, or maybe that is the reason), I thought that a good role for us could be detecting areas of opportunity of refactoring and rearchitecting code and all other implementations that might have to do with stewarding maintainability and modularity. Other groups aren't focused on this because they don't have the time and they have aggressive deadlines, which damage the quality of the code (eternal story of software projects) The thing is that I want my group/department to be recognized by management and other groups with this role officially, and I'm having trouble to come up with a good definition/identity of our group for this matter. So my question is: is this role something that already exists?, or am I the first one to make something like this up?

  Read the article

• How can I optimize my development machine's files and directories? [closed]

  - by LuxuryMode

  Like any programmer, I've got a lot of stuff on my machine. Some of that stuff is projects of my own, some are projects I'm working on for my employer, others are open-source tools and projects, etc. Currently, I have my files organized as follows: /Code --/development (things I'm sort of hacking on plus maybe libraries used in other projects) --/scala (organized by language...why? I don't know!) --/android --/ruby --/employer_name -- /mobile --/android --/ios --/open-source (basically my forks that I'm pushing commits back upstream from) --/some-awesome-oss-project --/another-awesome-one --/tools random IDE settings sprinkled in here plus some other apps As you can see, things are kind of a mess here. How can I keep things organized in some sort of coherent fashion?

  Read the article

• Web App for storing and organize programming information?

  - by Fabzter

  So, I've found myself, after several years of coding (I consider myself a coder, rather than a programmer) full of links and loose snippets and coding tips, all dispersed across the web. In such way it is barely usable, even when every bit is important or interesting. I thought of simply storing the links in delicious or something alike, but it's not really the links I want to keep, I just need the succinth info. So I was thinking to use some web app, something like a wiki, maybe much more simple, so I could access it though my mobile if I need it. I could code it, but as I stated it before, I'm more of a code monkey, and I'm sure my solution would be far from decent... Can anyone give me recommendations on this?

  Read the article

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