Search Results

Search found 500 results on 20 pages for 'notation'.

Page 5/20 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is there a name for a language feature that allows assignment/creation?

    - by Alex Mcp
    This is a bit hard for me to articulate, but in PHP you can say something like: $myArray['someindex'] = "my string"; and if there is no index named that, it will create/assign the value, and if there IS an index, it will overwrite the existing value. Compare this to Javascript where today I had to do checks like so: if (!myObject[key]) myObject[key] = "value"; I know this may be a bit of a picky point, but is there a name for the ability of PHP (and many other languages) to do these checks on their own as opposed to the more verbose (read: PITA) method of Javascript?

    Read the article

  • Syntax for documenting JSON structure

    - by Roman A. Taycher
    So I'm trying to document the format of the json returned by an api I am writing against and I'd like to know if there is any popular format for the documentation of json structure. Note I'm not trying to to test or validate anything, I'm just using this for documentation. Also some ways to add comments to non-constants(items always returned w/ the same value) would be nice. This the not totally thought out scheme I'm currently using: Plain names refer to identifiers or types. Some types have type-comment Strings that appear to be constant(always returned for that type of request) strings are "str" Constant Numbers would be just the number Constant null is null Booleans are true/false for constant booleans or Boolean otherwise [a,b,c] are lists with 3 items a,b,c [... ...] is a list of repeating elements of some types/constants/patterns {a:A,b:B,c:c} and {... ...} is the same for a dictionary. example: story := [header,footer] header := {"data":realHeader,"kind":"Listing"} realHeader := {"after": null, "before": null, "children": [{"data": realRealHeader, "kind": "t3"}], "modhash": ""} footer := {"data":AlmostComments,"kind":"Listing"} AlmostComments := {"data": {"after": null, "before": null, "children": comments, "modhash": ""}, "kind": "t1"} comments := [...{"data":comment, "kind":"t1"}...] realRealHeader := {"author": string, "clicked": boolean, "created": int, "created_utc": int, "domain": "code.reddit.com", "downs": int, "hidden": boolean, "id": string-id, "is_self": boolean, "levenshtein": null, "likes": null, "media": null, "media_embed": { }, "name": string-id, "num_comments": int, "over_18": false, "permalink": string-urlLinkToStoryStartingFrom/r, "saved": false, "score": int, "selftext": string, "selftext_html": string-html, "subreddit": string-subredditname, "subreddit_id": string-id, "thumbnail": "", "title": string, "ups": int, "url": "http://code.reddit.com/" } comments := { "author": string, "body": string-body_html-wout-html, "body_html": string-html-formated, "created": int, "created_utc": int, "downs": int, "id": string-id, "levenshtein": null, "likes": null, "link_id": string-id, "name": string-id", "parent_id": string-id, "replies": AlmostComments or null, "subreddit": string-subredditname, "subreddit_id": string-id, "ups": int }

    Read the article

  • Is prefixing Windows Forms control names with their type OK?

    - by name
    I have seen many responses that say that prefixing variables with their type is bad, since C# is statically typed and we have Intellisense, but I find that prefixing the names of the controls is useful because I don't need to remember the name of the controls or switch to the designer frequently. For example: btnLoad // Button tbFilePath // TextBox tvFileSystem // TreeView Is this considered bad? If it is, what's the alternative?

    Read the article

  • Is do-notation specific to "base:GHC.Base.Monad"?

    - by yairchu
    The idea that the standard Monad class is flawed and that it should actually extend Functor or Pointed is floating around. I'm not necessarily claiming that it is the right thing to do, but suppose that one was trying to do it: import Prelude hiding (Monad(..)) class Functor m => Monad m where return :: a -> m a join :: m (m a) -> m a join = (>>= id) (>>=) :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b a >>= t = join (fmap t a) (>>) :: m a -> m b -> m b a >> b = a >>= const b So far so good, but then when trying to use do-notation: whileM :: Monad m => m Bool -> m () whileM iteration = do done <- iteration if done then return () else whileM iteration The compiler complains: Could not deduce (base:GHC.Base.Monad m) from the context (Monad m) Question: Does do-notation work only for base:GHC.Base.Monad? Is there a way to make it work with an alternative Monad class? Extra context: What I really want to do is replace base:Control.Arrow.Arrow with a "generalized" Arrow class: {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-} class Category a => Arrow a where type Pair a :: * -> * -> * arr :: (b -> c) -> a b c first :: a b c -> a (Pair a b d) (Pair a c d) second :: a b c -> a (Pair a d b) (Pair a d c) (***) :: a b c -> a b' c' -> a (Pair a b b') (Pair a c c') (&&&) :: a b c -> a b c' -> a b (Pair a c c') And then use the Arrow's proc-notation with my Arrow class, but that fails like in the example above of do-notation and Monad. I'll use mostly Either as my pair type constructor and not the (,) type constructor as with the current Arrow class. This might allow to make the code of my toy RTS game (cabal install DefendTheKind) much prettier.

    Read the article

  • How can I avoid Excel reformatting the scientific notation numbers I enter?

    - by Diomidis Spinellis
    When I enter a number like 8230e12 into a Microsoft Excel 2000 cell, Excel changes the number I entered into 8230000000000000. (This is what I get when I press F2 to edit the cell's contents, not what Excel displays in the cell). How can I force Excel to keep the data in the format I typed it and still be able to format it and use it as a number? Displaying the cell in scientific notation is not enough, because the exponent is not the same one as the one I typed.

    Read the article

  • notation of Path to files/folders/drives that is shared on a network in windows?

    - by claws
    Hello, When some thing shared on network using windows network share option. Some people use path like \\something\something\something$ I'm don't know if this is correct way or not. but as far as I remember there is a dollar sign. Can any one please tell me. What is this notation? Where can I find more details about this? What is samba server/sharing? I don't understand when people use it. Is it something related to Linux? EDIT I'm a programmer. I guess this file sharing on network using windows uses client server architecture. I want to know what is this server on windows called? What protocol does it use? client is of course our windows explorer.exe? Which service in services.msc is responsible for this?

    Read the article

  • What is the pro and cons using Heredoc Notation in your PHP ?

    - by justjoe
    i'm never see something like this before. So, it's confuse me for a while. But now i understand and use it sometimes. So, after brief experience, can anybody tell me What is the pro and cons using Heredoc Notation in your PHP ? $stringval = Personally, How do you use this PHP feature ? is it a bad way of coding or good way ?

    Read the article

  • What is the purpose of "do!" notation in F#?

    - by Yacoder
    I'm a beginner in F#, so it's a simple question and maybe a duplicate, but I couldn't find the answer anywhere... I'm reading this LOGO DSL implementation and I don't understand, what is the meaning of the "do!" notation in here: this.Loaded.Add (fun _ -> async { do! Async.Sleep 200 for cmd in theDrawing do do! this.Execute(cmd) } |> Async.StartImmediate ) Can you help?

    Read the article

  • Is there a literal notation for decimal in IronPython?

    - by jeroenh
    suppose I have the following IronPython script: def Calculate(input): return input * 1.21 When called from C# with a decimal, this function returns a double: var python = Python.CreateRuntime(); dynamic engine = python.UseFile("mypythonscript.py") decimal input = 100M; // input is of type Decimal // next line throws RuntimeBinderException: // "cannot implicitly convert double to decimal" decimal result = engine.Calculate(input); I seem to have two options: First, I could cast at the C# side: seems like a no-go as I might loose precision. decimal result = (decimal)engine.Calculate(input); Second option is to use System.Decimal in the python script: works, but pollutes the script, which should be understandable for my users... import clr import System def CalculateVAT(amount): return amount * System.Decimal(1.21) Is there a way to tell the DLR that the number 1.21 should be interpreted as a Decimal, much like I would use the '1.21M' notation in C#?

    Read the article

  • what is order notation f(n)=O(g(n))?

    - by Lopa
    2 questions: question 1: under what circumstances would this[O(f(n))=O(k.f(n))] be the most appropriate form of time-complexity analysis? question 2: working from mathematical definition of O notation, show that O(f(n))=O(k.f(n)), for positive constant k.? My view: For the first one I think it is average case and worst case form of time-complexity. am i right? and what else do i write in that? for the second one I think we need to define the function mathematically, so is the answer something like because the multiplication by a constant just corresponds to a readjustment of value of the arbitrary constant 'k' in definition of O.

    Read the article

  • In DOM is it OK to use .notation for getting/setting attributes?

    - by Ziggy
    Hi In DOM, is it OK to refer to an element's attributes like this: var universe = document.getElementById('universe'); universe.origin = 'big_bang'; universe.creator = null; universe.style.deterministic = true; ? My deep respect for objects and their privacy, and my sense that things might go terribly wrong if I am not careful, makes me want to do everything more like this: var universe = document.getElementById('universe'); if(universe.hasAttribute('origin')) then universe.origin = 'big_bang'; etc... Is it really necessary to use those accessor methods? Of course it may be more or less necessary depending on how certain I am that the elements I am manipulating will have the attributes I expect them to, but in general do the DOM guys consider it OK to use .notation rather than getters and setters? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to automatically insert a class notation using eclipse templates?

    - by João Paulo G. Piccinini
    Does anybody know how to insert a "@RunWith anotation" above the class signature, using eclipse templates? Ex.: @RunWith(Parameterized.class) public class MyClassTest { ... @Parameters public static Collection<Object[]> parameters() { List<Object[]> list = new ArrayList<Object[]>(); list.add(new Object[] { "mind!", "find!" }); list.add(new Object[] { "misunderstood", "understood" }); return list; } ... } __ Template: // TODO: move this '@RunWith(Parameterized.class)' to class anotation @Parameters public static Collection<Object[]> parameters() { ${type:elemType(collection)}<Object[]> parametersList = new ${type:elemType(collection)}<Object[]>(); ${cursor}// TODO: populate collection return parametersList; } __ Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • When to use memberEnd and when navigableOwnedEnd (in Altova notation) in an UML class diagram?

    - by Ivan
    I've download a trial of Altova UModel and am starting using UML. As a practical beginning I am modelling a personal information manager application, which includes a web bookmark managing. A Bookmark can belong to many (or no) Tags at once and a Tag can contain many (or no if all the bookmarks it contained were deleted) bookmarks. The relation has to be both-way navigable - a user has to be able to see all Bookmarks with a particular Tags ans all Tags of a Bookmark. What is the correct UML relation between Bookmark and Tag classes? As far as I understand UML now, it is an Association (not an Aggregation). But for a 2-way navigable many-to-many relation I can specify ends roles as "memberEnd" or "when navigableOwnedEnd", graphically the connection looks the same in both cases (an arrow) (which as I understand means navigability) but a property appears in the class box in case only when "memberEnd" is used. How should I specif it in the model If I mean both-way navigable many-to-many relation there?

    Read the article

  • Adaptive Case Management Modeling with CMMN by Jessica Ray

    - by JuergenKress
    A new version of Oracle BPM Suite 11.1.1.7 with Adaptive Case Management (ACM) is now available, so what will that mean for requirements gathering? BPM project requirements can be documented using Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN 2.0). For ACM, there is a new notation in the works. It is called Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN). For now, this notation isn’t included as a modeling tool in the new version of Oracle BPM Suite 11.1.1.7 with ACM, but it is possible that a modeling tool could be included in a future release. What is CMMN? CMMN is a standard intended to capture the common elements that Case Management Products use, the same way that BPMN is a standard for BPM products (such as Oracle BPM). CMMN is created by the Object Management Group (OMG) and is still in the beta version. In April 2014, OMG released the second beta version the CMMN 1.0, and the most recent version is available here. CMMN captures some of the elements that are commonly used when talking about ACM such as Cases, Milestones, and Tasks. It also introduces some elements that you may not automatically hear when talking about ACM such as Stages, Events, and Decorators. Here is a quick summary at a few (but not all) of the elements of CMMN taken from the CMMN spec. A Few CMMN Elements Read the complete article here SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Wiki Technorati Tags: Jessica Ray,Avio,Adaptive Case Management,ACM,CMMN,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • Construction Paper, Legos, and Architectural Modeling

    I can remember as a kid playing with construction paper and Legos to explore my imagination. Through my exploration I was able to build airplanes, footballs, guns, and more, out of paper. Additionally I could create entire cities, robots, or anything else I could image out of Legos.  These toys, I now realize were in fact tools that gave me an opportunity to explore my ideas in the physical world through the use of modeling.  My imagination was allowed to run wild as I, unknowingly at the time, made design decisions that directly affected the models I was building from the raw materials.  To prove my point further, I can remember building a paper airplane that seemed to go nowhere when I tried to throw it. So I decided to attach a paper clip to the plane before I decided to throw it the next time to test my concept that by adding more weight to the plane that it would fly better and for longer distances. The paper airplane allowed me to model my design decision through the use of creating an artifact in that I created a paper airplane that was carrying extra weight through the incorporation of the paper clip in to the design. Also, I remember using Legos to build all sorts of creations, and these creations became artifacts of my imagination. As I further and further defined my Lego creations through the process of playing I was able to create elaborate artifacts of my imagination. These artifacts represented design decision I had made in the evolution of my creation through my child like design process. In some form or fashion the artifacts I created as a kid are very similar to the artifacts that I create when I model a software architectural concept or a software design in that the process of making decisions is directly translated in to a tangible model in the form of an architectural model. Architectural models have been defined as artifacts that depict design decisions of a system’s architecture.  The act of creating architectural models is the act of architectural modeling. Furthermore, architectural modeling is the process of creating a physical model based architectural concepts and documenting these design decisions. In the process of creating models, the standard notation used is Architectural modeling notation. This notation is the primary method of capturing the essence of design decisions regarding architecture.  Modeling notations can vary based on the need and intent of a project; typically they range from natural language to a diagram based notation. Currently, Unified Markup Language (UML) is the industry standard in terms of architectural modeling notation  because allows for architectures to be defined through a series of boxes, lines, arrows and other basic symbols that encapsulate design designs in to virtual components, connectors, configurations and interfaces.  Furthermore UML allows for additional break down of models through the use of natural language as to explain each section of the model in plain English. One of the major factors in architectural modeling is to define what is to be modeled. As a basic rule of thumb, I tend to model architecture based on the complexity of systems or sub sub-systems of architecture. Another key factor is the level of detail that is actually needed for a model. For example if I am modeling a system for a CEO to view then the low level details will be omitted. In comparison, if I was modeling a system for another engineer to actually implement I would include as much detailed information as I could to help the engineer implement my design.

    Read the article

  • is the + in += on a Map a prefix operator of =?

    - by Steve
    In the book "Programming in Scala" from Martin Odersky there is a simple example in the first chapter: var capital = Map("US" -> "Washington", "France" -> "Paris") capital += ("Japan" -> "Tokyo") The second line can also be written as capital = capital + ("Japan" -> "Tokyo") I am curious about the += notation. In the class Map, I didn't found a += method. I was able to the same behaviour in an own example like class Foo() { def +(value:String) = { println(value) this } } object Main { def main(args: Array[String]) = { var foo = new Foo() foo = foo + "bar" foo += "bar" } } I am questioning myself, why the += notation is possible. It doesn't work if the method in the class Foo is called test for example. This lead me to the prefix notation. Is the + a prefix notation for the assignment sign (=)? Can somebody explain this behaviour?

    Read the article

  • Please help me give this principle a name

    - by Brent Arias
    As a designer, I like providing interfaces that cater to a power/simplicity balance. For example, I think the LINQ designers followed that principle because they offered both dot-notation and query-notation. The first is more powerful, but the second is easier to read and follow. If you disagree with my assessment of LINQ, please try to see my point anyway; LINQ was just an example, my post is not about LINQ. I call this principle "dial-able power". But I'd like to know what other people call it. Certainly some will say "KISS" is the common term. But I see KISS as a superset, or a "consumerism" practice. Using LINQ as my example again, in my view, a team of programmers who always try to use query notation over dot-notation are practicing KISS. Thus the LINQ designers practiced "dial-able power", whereas the LINQ consumers practice KISS. The two make beautiful music together. I'll give another example. Imagine a C# logging tool that has two signatures allowing two uses: void Write(string message); void Write(Func<string> messageCallback); The purpose of the two signatures is to fulfill these needs: //Every-day "simple" usage, nothing special. myLogger.Write("Something Happened" + error.ToString() ); //This is performance critical, do not call ToString() if logging is //disabled. myLogger.Write( () => { "Something Happened" + error.ToString() }); Having these overloads represents "dial-able power," because the consumer has the choice of a simple interface or a powerful interface. A KISS-loving consumer will use the simpler signature most of the time, and will allow the "busy" looking signature when the power is needed. This also helps self-documentation, because usage of the powerful signature tells the reader that the code is performance critical. If the logger had only the powerful signature, then there would be no "dial-able power." So this comes full-circle. I'm happy to keep my own "dial-able power" coinage if none yet exists, but I can't help think I'm missing an obvious designation for this practice. p.s. Another example that is related, but is not the same as "dial-able power", is Scott Meyer's principle "make interfaces easy to use correctly, and hard to use incorrectly."

    Read the article

  • Is this high coupling?

    - by Bono
    Question I'm currently working a on an assignment for school. The assignment is to create a puzzle/calculator program in which you learn how to work with different datastructures (such as Stacks). We have generate infix math strings suchs as "1 + 2 * 3 - 4" and then turn them in to postfix math strings such as "1 2 + 3 * 4 -". In my book the author creates a special class for converting the infix notation to postfix. I was planning on using this but whilst I was about to implement it I was wondering if the following is what you would call "high coupling". I have read something about this (nothing that is taught in the book or anything) and was wondering about the aspect (since I still have to grasp it). Problem I have created a PuzzleGenerator class which generates the infix notation of the puzzle (or math string, whatever you want to call it) when it's instantiated. I was going to make a method getAnswer() in which I would instantiate the InToPost class (the class from the book) to convert the infix to postfox notation and then calculate the answer. But whilst doing this I thought: "Is using the InToPost class inside this method a form a high coupling, and would it be better to place this in a different method?" (such as a "convertPostfixToInfix" method, inside the PuzzleGenerator class) Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Object-Oriented equivalent of LISP's progn function?

    - by Archer
    I'm currently writing a LISP parser that iterates through some AutoLISP code and does its best to make it a little easier to read (changing prefix notation to infix notation, changing setq assignments to "=" assignments, etc.) for those that aren't used to LISP code/only learned object oriented programming. While writing commands that LISP uses to add to a "library" of LISP commands, I came across the LISP command "progn". The only problem is that it looks like progn is simply executing code in a specific order and sometimes (not usually) assigning the last value to a variable. Am I incorrect in assuming that for translating progn to object-oriented understanding that I can simply forgo the progn function and print the statements that it contains? If not, what would be a good equivalent for progn in an object-oriented language?

    Read the article

  • Would you use UML if it kept stakeholders from requesting changes frequently?

    - by Huperniketes
    As much as programmers hate to document their code/system and draw UML (especially, Sequencing, Activity and State machine diagrams) or other diagramming notation, would you agree to do it if it kept managers from requesting a "minor change" every couple of weeks? IOW, would you put together visual models to document the system if it helped you demonstrate to managers what the effect of changes are and why it takes so long to implement them? (Edited to help programmers understand what type of answer I'm looking for.) 2nd edit: Restating my question again, "Would you be willing to use some diagramming notation, against your better nature as a programmer, if it helped you manage change requests?" This question isn't asking if there might be something wrong with the process. It's a given that there's something wrong with the process. Would you be willing to do more work to improve it?

    Read the article

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