Search Results

Search found 5589 results on 224 pages for 'rules and constraints'.

Page 51/224 | < Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >

• SQL Server Indexed Views

  Views can be an effective tool for speeding up your selects and simplifying complex queries. Learn what indexed views are, where you might want to use them, how to create them, and what constraints exist with their use.

  Read the article

• SQL Server Indexed Views

  Views can be an effective tool for speeding up your selects and simplifying complex queries. Learn what indexed views are, where you might want to use them, how to create them, and what constraints exist with their use.

  Read the article

• Temporary Object Caching Explained

  - by Paul White

  SQL Server 2005 onward caches temporary tables and table variables referenced in stored procedures for reuse, reducing contention on tempdb allocation structures and catalogue tables.  A number of things can prevent this caching (none of which are allowed when working with table variables): Named constraints (bad idea anyway, since concurrent executions can cause a name collision) DDL after creation (though what is considered DDL is interesting) Creation using dynamic SQL Table created in a...(read more)

  Read the article

• Technology Insights

  - by GavinPayneUK

  In my day job I speak to both technical and business people about the subjects which matter to them the most, in depths of detail which please them the most.  This allows me to ensure the technical people work in a way that meets the client’s business goals.   Sadly, I sometimes meet technical people who due to time constraints or lack of opportunity rarely get to do anything but focus on the bits, bytes, parameters and switches which they need to manage in order to make the “machine do...(read more)

  Read the article

• Multiple Tomcat vulnerabilities in Oracle Health Sciences LabPas

  - by RitwikGhoshal

  CVE DescriptionCVSSv2 Base ScoreComponentProduct and Resolution CVE-2012-2733 Improper Input Validation vulnerability 5.0 Apache Tomcat Oracle Health Sciences LabPas upgrade to Apache Tomcat v6.0.36 CVE-2012-3439 DIGEST authentication implementation issues 5.0 CVE-2012-3546 Security constraints bypass vulnerability 5.5 CVE-2012-4431 CSRF prevention filter bypass vulnerability 4.3 CVE-2012-4534 Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability 4.3 This notification describes vulnerabilities fixed in third-party components that are included in Oracle's product distributions.Information about vulnerabilities affecting Oracle products can be found on Oracle Critical Patch Updates and Security Alerts page.

  Read the article

• How to avoid oscillation by async event based systems?

  - by inf3rno

  Imagine a system where there are data sources which need to be kept in sync. A simple example is model - view data binding by MVC. Now I intend to describe these kind of systems with data sources and hubs. Data sources are publishing and subscribing for events and hubs are relaying events to data sources. By handling an event a data source will change it state described in the event. By publishing an event the data source puts its current state to the event, so other data sources can use that information to change their state accordingly. The only problem with this system, that events can be reflected from the hub or from the other data sources, and that can put the system into an infinite oscillation (by async or infinite loop by sync). For example A -- data source B -- data source H -- hub A -> H -> A -- reflection from the hub A -> H -> B -> H -> A -- reflection from another data source By sync it is relatively easy to solve this issue. You can compare the current state with the event, and if they are equal, you don't change the state and raise the same event again. By async I could not find a solution yet. The state comparison does not work by async event handling because there is eventual consistency, and new events can be published in an inconsistent state causing the same oscillation. For example: A(*->x) -> H -> B(y->x) -- can go parallel with B(*->y) -> H -> A(x->y) -- so first A changes to x state while B changes to y state -- then B changes to x state while A changes to y state -- and so on for eternity... What do you think is there an algorithm to solve this problem? If there is a solution, is it possible to extend it to prevent oscillation caused by multiple hubs, multiple different events, etc... ? update: I don't think I can make this work without a lot of effort. I think this problem is just the same as we have by syncing multiple databases in a distributed system. So I think what I really need is constraints if I want to prevent this problem in an automatic way. What constraints do you suggest?

  Read the article

• Is there any kind of established architecture for browser based games?

  - by black_puppydog

  I am beginning the development of a broser based game in which players take certain actions at any point in time. Big parts of gameplay will be happening in real life and just have to be entered into the system. I believe a good kind of comparison might be a platform for managing fantasy football, although I have virtually no experience playing that, so please correct me if I am mistaken here. The point is that some events happen in the program (i.e. on the server, out of reach for the players) like pulling new results from some datasource, starting of a new round by a game master and such. Other events happen in real life (two players closing a deal on the transfer of some team member or whatnot - again: have never played fantasy football) and have to be entered into the system. The first part is pretty easy since the game masters will be "staff" and thus can be trusted to a certain degree to not mess with the system. But the second part bothers me quite a lot, especially since the actions may involve multiple steps and interactions with different players, like registering a deal with the system that then has to be approved by the other party or denied and passed on to a game master to decide. I would of course like to separate the game logic as far as possible from the presentation and basic form validation but am unsure how to do this in a clean fashion. Of course I could (and will) put some effort into making my own architectural decisions and prototype different ideas. But I am bound to make some stupid mistakes at some point, so I would like to avoid some of that by getting a little "book smart" beforehand. So the question is: Is there any kind of architectural works that I can read up on? Papers, blogs, maybe design documents or even source code? Writing this down this seems more like a business application with business rules, workflows and such... Any good entry points for that? EDIT: After reading the first answers I am under the impression of having made a mistake when including the "MMO" part into the title. The game will not be all fancy (i.e. 3D or such) on the client side and the logic will completely exist on the server. That is, apart from basic form validation for the user which will also be mirrored on the server side. So the target toolset will be HTML5, JavaScript, probably JQuery(UI). My question is more related to the software architecture/design of a system that enforces certain rules. Separation of ruleset and presentation One problem I am having is that I want to separate the game rules from the presentation. The first step would be to make an own module for the game "engine" that only exposes an interface that allows all actions to be taken in a clean way. If an action fails with regard to some pre/post condition, the engine throws an exception which is then presented to the user like "you cannot sell something you do not own" or "after that you would end up in a situation which is not a valid game state." The problem here is that I would like to be able to not even present invalid action in the first place or grey out the corresponding UI elements. Changing and tweaking the ruleset Another big thing is the ruleset. It will probably evolve over time and most definitely must be tweaked. What's more, it should be possible (to a certain extent) to build a ruleset that fits a specific game round, i.e. choosing different kinds of behaviours in different aspects of the game. This would do something like "we play it with extension A today but we throw out extension B." For me, this screams "Architectural/Design pattern" but I have no idea on who might have published on something like this, not even what to google for.

  Read the article

• SQLServerCentral Best Practices Clinic: Part 1

  We exposed the SQLServerCentral cluster for monitoring with SQL Monitor. Just like other companies, we have constraints on resources, and we have more work that needs to be done. Help us configure SQLServerCentral’s database servers with your suggestions on what is the highest priority for a website database back end. NEW! SQL Monitor 2.0Monitor SQL Server Central's servers withRed Gate's new SQL Monitor.No installation required. Find out more.

  Read the article

• Restricting URL w.r.t HTTP method and setting different authentication mechanism for each

  - by user31745

  I shall start with an example. I want to restrict to POST requests only for http://path/to/logical/abc.xml and restrict to GET only for http://path/to/logical/def.xml. How do I put constraints like this as the paths are logical and location directive is not supported in .htaccess? The actual problem is to set different authentication type(basic, digest) on diff logical file.for eg. for abc.xml I want to authenticate for Basic type of authentication and def.xml with digest.

  Read the article

• What are the difference between: agent, actor, dataflow based programming?

  - by inf3rno

  What are the difference between the following terms? agent-based programming agent-based programming with microagents actor-based programming actor-based programming with lightweight actors dataflow based programming It is hard to find comparing articles and they are very similar. Afaik they have different constraints and they are implemented on a different abstraction level, but I need some reassurance...

  Read the article

• 8 key points to securing your SaaS applications

  This article lists the technical and functional specifications allowing you to attain both strength and flexibility for your SaaS application. It will help you conceptualize the security of your application, taking into account important constraints from the beginning of your project. You will thus be able to cover short terms needs, while at the same time anticipation any future evolutions necessary to the development of your business.

  Read the article

• Looking for jobs after a project ending badly

  - by Anonymous

  My company just canceled the project I was working on because they were dissatisfied with how it was going. I was quite disappointed with it because I thought the project was going well and I had already explained the limitations that the software would have due to the time constraints. I have decided that I will now look for a new job, but I am worried the project ending badly may give me some difficulties. Any advice on how I can minimise the difficulties this causes me without being dishonest?

  Read the article

• How can I implement a matchmaker?

  - by csiz

  I'm making a multiplayer game, where players are separated in to rooms that would ideally have about 20 players. So I need a few pointers on an algorithm to distribute the players in to these rooms. A few more constraints: When a players gets in to a room, he should stay there until he decides to exit (the room itself changes levels) There may be more room servers, every server should create more rooms until near full capacity There's a central server that manages all the room servers, and directs the players towards their room

  Read the article

• What's the recommended implemenation for hashing OLE Variants?

  - by Barry Kelly

  OLE Variants, as used by older versions of Visual Basic and pervasively in COM Automation, can store lots of different types: basic types like integers and floats, more complicated types like strings and arrays, and all the way up to IDispatch implementations and pointers in the form of ByRef variants. Variants are also weakly typed: they convert the value to another type without warning depending on which operator you apply and what the current types are of the values passed to the operator. For example, comparing two variants, one containing the integer 1 and another containing the string "1", for equality will return True. So assuming that I'm working with variants at the underlying data level (e.g. VARIANT in C++ or TVarData in Delphi - i.e. the big union of different possible values), how should I hash variants consistently so that they obey the right rules? Rules: Variants that hash unequally should compare as unequal, both in sorting and direct equality Variants that compare as equal for both sorting and direct equality should hash as equal It's OK if I have to use different sorting and direct comparison rules in order to make the hashing fit. The way I'm currently working is I'm normalizing the variants to strings (if they fit), and treating them as strings, otherwise I'm working with the variant data as if it was an opaque blob, and hashing and comparing its raw bytes. That has some limitations, of course: numbers 1..10 sort as [1, 10, 2, ... 9] etc. This is mildly annoying, but it is consistent and it is very little work. However, I do wonder if there is an accepted practice for this problem.

  Read the article

• Need help regarding one LALR(1) parsing.

  - by AppleGrew

  I am trying to parse a context-free language, called Context Free Art. I have created its parser in Javascript using a YACC-like JS LALR(1) parser generator JSCC. Take the example of following CFA (Context Free Art) code. This code is a valid CFA. startshape A rule A { CIRCLE { s 1} } Notice the A and s in above. s is a command to scale the CIRCLE, but A is just a name of this rule. In the language's grammar I have set s as token SCALE and A comes under token STRING (I have a regular expression to match string and it is at the bottom of of all tokens). This works fine, but in the below case it breaks. startshape s rule s { CIRCLE { s 1} } This too is a perfectly valid code, but since my parser marks s after rule as SCALE token so it errors out saying that it was expecting STRING. Now my question is, if there is any way to re-write the production rules of the parser to account for this? The related production rule is:- rule: RULE STRING '{' buncha_replacements '}' [* rule(%2, 1) *] | RULE STRING RATIONAL '{' buncha_replacements '}' [* rule(%2, 1*%3) *] ; One simple solution I can think of is create a copy of above rule with STRING replaced by SCALE, but this is just one of the many similar rules which would need such fixing. Furthermore there are many other terminals which can get matched to STRING. So that means way too many rules!

  Read the article

• How do you build a Windows Workflow Project with NAnt 0.90?

  - by LockeCJ

  I'm trying to build a Windows Workflow (WF) project using NAnt, but it doesn;t seem to be able to build the ".xoml" and ".rules" files. Here is the code of the csc task that I'm using: <csc debug="${build.Debug}" warninglevel="${build.WarningLevel}" target="library" output="${path::combine(build.OutputDir,assembly.Name+'.dll')}" verbose="${build.Verbose}" doc="${path::combine(build.OutputDir,assembly.Name+'.xml')}"> <sources basedir="${assembly.BaseDir}"> <include name="**/*.cs" /> <include name="**/*.xoml" /> <include name="**/*.rules" /> </sources> <resources basedir="${assembly.BaseDir}"> <include name="**/*.xsd" /> <include name="**/*.resx" /> </resources> <references> ... </references> </csc> Here's the output: Compiling 21 files to 'c:\Output\MyWorkFlowProject.dll'. [csc] c:\Projects\MyWorkFlowProject\AProcessFlow.xoml(1,1): error CS0116: A namespace does not directly contain members such as fields or methods [csc] c:\Projects\MyWorkFlowProject\BProcessFlow.xoml(1,1): error CS0116: A namespace does not directly contain members such as fields or methods [csc] c:\Projects\MyWorkFlowProject\CProcessFlow.rules(1,1): error CS0116: A namespace does not directly contain members such as fields or methods [csc] c:\Projects\MyWorkFlowProject\CProcessFlow.xoml(1,1): error CS0116: A namespace does not directly contain members such as fields or methods

  Read the article

• Asp.Net MVC2 Clientside Validation problem with controls with prefixes

  - by alexander

  The problem is: when I put 2 controls of the same type on a page I need to specify different prefixes for binding. In this case the validation rules generated right after the form are incorrect. So how to get client validation work for the case?: the page contains: <% Html.RenderPartial(ViewLocations.Shared.PhoneEditPartial, new PhoneViewModel { Phone = person.PhonePhone, Prefix = "PhonePhone" }); Html.RenderPartial(ViewLocations.Shared.PhoneEditPartial, new PhoneViewModel { Phone = person.FaxPhone, Prefix = "FaxPhone" }); %> the control ViewUserControl<PhoneViewModel>: <%= Html.TextBox(Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode"), Model.Phone.CountryCode) %> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("Phone.CountryCode", new { id = Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode"), name = Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode") })%> where Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode") just returns "FaxPhone.CountryCode" or "PhonePhone.CountryCode" depending on prefix And here is the validation rules generated after the form. They are duplicated for the field name "Phone.CountryCode". While the desired result is 2 rules (required, number) for each of the FieldNames "FaxPhone.CountryCode", "PhonePhone.CountryCode" The question is somewhat duplicate of http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2675606/asp-net-mvc2-clientside-validation-and-duplicate-ids-problem but the advise to manually generate ids doesn't helps.

  Read the article

• Calling blockUI and unblockUI in combination with jQuery validator plugin

  - by Tim Stewart

  I have a very complex form with the validation working correctly. However, since it can take awhile for the validation to complete, I'd like to use blockUI to be called when I click the form's submit button to prevent confusion and double-submissions. I can't quite figure out how to do this. My code looks like this: $("#credential").validate({ rules: { EngId: { required: true } ClientAccount: { required: true } ... } and I'm calling the validation with several buttons (using their click function) depending on selections in the form, often disabling some of the rules: $("#buttonname").click(function() { $("#fieldname").rules("remove"); ... $("#credential").submit(); }); What I can't figure out is where the blockui and unblockui calls would go so that when the user clicks the button, before validation starts, blockui does its magic, and if the validation finds a problem, unblockui is called and enables the form again. I'm pretty new to Jquery and I can't find any examples that I've been able to implement successfully. I would appreciate any help anyone could give (please excuse if this has been covered before).

  Read the article

• SQL Server CLR stored procedures in data processing tasks - good or evil?

  - by Gart

  In short - is it a good design solution to implement most of the business logic in CLR stored procedures? I have read much about them recently but I can't figure out when they should be used, what are the best practices, are they good enough or not. For example, my business application needs to parse a large fixed-length text file, extract some numbers from each line in the file, according to these numbers apply some complex business rules (involving regex matching, pattern matching against data from many tables in the database and such), and as a result of this calculation update records in the database. There is also a GUI for the user to select the file, view the results, etc. This application seems to be a good candidate to implement the classic 3-tier architecture: the Data Layer, the Logic Layer, and the GUI layer. The Data Layer would access the database The Logic Layer would run as a WCF service and implement the business rules, interacting with the Data Layer The GUI Layer would be a means of communication between the Logic Layer and the User. Now, thinking of this design, I can see that most of the business rules may be implemented in a SQL CLR and stored in SQL Server. I might store all my raw data in the database, run the processing there, and get the results. I see some advantages and disadvantages of this solution: Pros: The business logic runs close to the data, meaning less network traffic. Process all data at once, possibly utilizing parallelizm and optimal execution plan. Cons: Scattering of the business logic: some part is here, some part is there. Questionable design solution, may encounter unknown problems. Difficult to implement a progress indicator for the processing task. I would like to hear all your opinions about SQL CLR. Does anybody use it in production? Are there any problems with such design? Is it a good thing?

  Read the article

• Validation in n-tier asp.net mvc applications

  - by sTodorov

  Dear Stack Overflow gurus, I am looking for some practical/theoretical information regarding best practices for validation in asp.net mvc n-tier applications. I am working on a .Net application divided into the following layers: UI - Mvc3 BLL layer - all business rules. Decoupled from data access and UI layers through interfaces DAL layer - Data access with the repository pattern, EF4 and pocos Now, I am looking for a nice, clean and transparent way to specify my validation rules. Here are some thoughts on the matter so far: UI validation should only be responsible for user input and its validity. BLL validation should be handling the validity of the data regarding the application business rules. My main concern is how to bind the BLL and UI validation in the most efficient way. One think I am would like to avoid is having the UI check in a collection of validation and adding manually errors to the ModelState. Furthermore, I do not want to pass the ModelState to the BLL to be populated in there. I will appreciate any thoughts on the matter. P.S. Should this question be marked as a discussion ?

  Read the article

• Specification Pattern and Boolean Operator Precedence

  - by Anders Nielsen

  In our project, we have implemented the Specification Pattern with boolean operators (see DDD p 274), like so: public abstract class Rule { public Rule and(Rule rule) { return new AndRule(this, rule); } public Rule or(Rule rule) { return new OrRule(this, rule); } public Rule not() { return new NotRule(this); } public abstract boolean isSatisfied(T obj); } class AndRule extends Rule { private Rule one; private Rule two; AndRule(Rule one, Rule two) { this.one = one; this.two = two; } public boolean isSatisfied(T obj) { return one.isSatisfied(obj) && two.isSatisfied(obj); } } class OrRule extends Rule { private Rule one; private Rule two; OrRule(Rule one, Rule two) { this.one = one; this.two = two; } public boolean isSatisfied(T obj) { return one.isSatisfied(obj) || two.isSatisfied(obj); } } class NotRule extends Rule { private Rule rule; NotRule(Rule obj) { this.rule = obj; } public boolean isSatisfied(T obj) { return !rule.isSatisfied(obj); } } Which permits a nice expressiveness of the rules using method-chaining, but it doesn't support the standard operator precedence rules of which can lead to subtle errors. The following rules are not equivalent: Rule<Car> isNiceCar = isRed.and(isConvertible).or(isFerrari); Rule<Car> isNiceCar2 = isFerrari.or(isRed).and(isConvertible); The rule isNiceCar2 is not satisfied if the car is not a convertible, which can be confusing since if they were booleans isRed && isConvertible || isFerrari would be equivalent to isFerrari || isRed && isConvertible I realize that they would be equivalent if we rewrote isNiceCar2 to be isFerrari.or(isRed.and(isConvertible)), but both are syntactically correct. The best solution we can come up with, is to outlaw the method-chaining, and use constructors instead: OR(isFerrari, AND(isConvertible, isRed)) Does anyone have a better suggestion?

  Read the article

• SQL Server 2008: CASE vs IF-ELSE-IF vs GOTO

  - by Saharsh Shah

  I have some rules in my application and I have written the business logic of that rules in my procedure. At the time of creation of procedure I came to know that CASE statement won't work in my scenario. So I have tried two ways to perform same operations (using IF-ELSE-IF or GOTO) shown as below. Method 1 Using IF-ELSE-IF conditions: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT; IF (@V_RuleId = 1) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 2) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 3) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 19) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 20) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Method 2 Using GOTO statement: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT, @V_Temp VARCHAR(100); SET @V_Temp = 'GOTO RULE' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @V_RuleId); EXECUTE sp_executesql @V_Temp; RULE1: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE2: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE3: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ RULE19: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE20: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Today I have 20 rules. It can be increase to any number in future. If I can able to use CASE statement then I have not any problem with performance, but I can't do that so I am worried about the performance of my procedure. Also one thing to be noticed that this procedure will execute very frequently by application. My questions are: Is there any way to use CASE statement in my procedure? If not, which method is best to use in my procedure to improve the performance of my code? Thanks in advance...

  Read the article

• Advice on designing and building distributed application to track vehicles

  - by dario-g

  I'm working on application for tracking vehicles. There will be about 10k or more vehicles. Each will be sending ~250bytes in each minute. Data contains gps location and everything from CAN Bus (every data that we can read from vehicle computer and dashboard). Data are sent by GSM/GPRS (using UDP protocol). Estimated rows with this data per day is ~2000k. I see there 3 main blocks. 1. Multithreaded Socket Server (MSS) - I have it. MSS stores received data to the queue (using NServiceBus). 2. Rule Processor Server (RPS) - this is core of this system. This block is responsible for parsing received data, storing in the database, processing rules, sending messages to Notifier Server (this will be sending e-mails/sms texts). Rule example. As I said between received bytes there will be information about current speed. When speed will be above 120 then: show alert in web application for specified users, send e-mail, send sms text. (There can be more than one instance of RPS). 3. Web application - allows reporting and defining rules by users, monitoring alerts, etc. I'm looking for advice how to design communication between RPS and Web application. Some questions: - Should Web application and RPS have separated databases or one central database will be enough? I have one domain model in web application. If there will be one central database then can I use the same model (objects) on RPS? So, how to send changed rules to RPS? I try to decouple this blocks as much as possible. I'm planning to create different instance of application for each client (each client will have separated database). One client will be have 10k vehicles, others only 100 vehicles.

  Read the article

• Issue editing class style properties using js - issue is with IE

  - by Nick

  I have a function to edit the style properties of a class Unfortunately IE does not seem to like it but it does not give me an error. Does anyone know what the issue is? Thanks in advance function myRemoveElement(id) { var Node = document.getElementById(id); Node.parentNode.removeChild(Node); } function boolyChangeFoo(width1, width2, width3, width4) { if(typeof style == 'undefined') { var append = true; myStyle = document.createElement('style'); } else { while (myStyle.hasChildNodes()) { myStyle.removeChild(myStyle.firstChild); } } if (document.getElementById('my_custom_styles')) { myRemoveElement('my_custom_styles'); } var head = document.getElementById('myltd_popup_1'); var rules = document.createTextNode('.my_price_comp_inner { width: ' + width1 + '}' + '.merch_coupons_summary { width: ' + width2 + '}' + '.merch_coupons_data { width: ' + width3 + '}' + '.my_coupon_prod_item { width: ' + width4 + '}' ); myStyle.setAttribute('type','text/css'); myStyle.setAttribute('id', 'my_custom_styles'); if(myStyle.styleSheet) { myStyle.styleSheet.cssText = rules.nodeValue; } else { myStyle.appendChild(rules); } //alert(myStyle); if(append === true) head.appendChild(myStyle); }

  Read the article

• How large a role does subjectiveness play in programming?

  - by Bob

  I often read about the importance of readability and maintainability. Or, I read very strong opinions about which syntax features are bad or good. Or discussions about the values of certain paradigms, like OOP. Aside from that, this same question floats about in my mind whenever I read debates on SO or Meta about subjective questions. Or read questions about best practices and sometimes find myself or others disagreeing. What role does subjectiveness play within the programming realm? Sometimes I think it plays a large role. Software developers are engineers in a way, but also people. A large part of programming is dealing with code that's human readable. This is very different from Math or Physics or other disciplines with very exact and structured rules. Here the exact structure and rules are largely up in the air, changeable on a whim, and hence the amount of languages in existence. And one person may find one language very readable, and another person may find their own language the most comforting. The same with practices. One person may not like certain accepted practices. I myself find splitting classes into different files very unreadable, for instance. But, I can't say rules haven't helped in general. Certain practices have and do make life easier. And new languages have given rise to syntax and structure that make life easier. There's certainly been a progression towards code that is easier to read and maintain even given a largely diverse group of people. So maybe these things aren't as subjective as I thought. It reminds me, in a way, of UI design. Certainly it's subjective, but then there's an entire discipline involved in crafting good UI and it tends to work. Is there something non-subjective about the ideas behind maintainability, readability, and other best practices? Is there something tangible to grasp when one develops a new language or thinks of new practices?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >