Search Results

Search found 29201 results on 1169 pages for 'game development'.

Page 52/1169 | < Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >

  • Scripting Languages vs. Compiled Languages for web development

    - by Austin Hyde
    Though I come from a purely PHP background on the web development side of programming, I have also spent much time with C# and C++ on the desktop. I don't really want to spark any flame wars, but: When should you use scripting languages over compiled languages for website development? (and vice versa) Just to clarify, for the sake of this question, I define a "scripting language" to mean an interpreted language like PHP, Python, or Ruby, and a "compiled language" to mean a strongly typed, compiled language like C#, C++, Java, or VB.

    Read the article

  • SSL with Visual Studio Development Server

    - by Nissan Fan
    Is it possible to use SSL with Visual Studio Development Server (a.k.a. Web Application project)? I don't want to have to deploy IIS locally if possible. I'm running Windows 7. NOTE: I've seen this (http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/354576/add-https-support-to-visual-studio-asp-net-development-server) but I was still hoping there was a workaround.

    Read the article

  • Debugging an httpmodule on the asp.net development server

    - by Caveatrob
    Hi, I want to integrate some http modules in my asp.net application (v 3.5, visual studio 2008) and I'm not sure how to debug or use such modules while debugging in the asp.net development server that fires when I run the web app. Do I need to include the module source in the solution or can I just drop the DLL into BIN? I'm from the 1.1 world and am not yet used to the asp.net development server.

    Read the article

  • Least intrusive antivirus software for development PC?

    - by poppavein
    What is the least intrusive and most effective antivirus software for a Windows PC that is used for software development (lots of small files and lots of disk I/O)? The software should support running from the command line so that virus scan be included into the build process. Edit: I understand that prevention techniques work better than any antivirus, but the employer demands that commercial AV software be used in the development environment (looking a replacement for horrible Symantec Antivirus).

    Read the article

  • How to update Xcode to install "UNIX Development Support"

    - by Oscar Reyes
    I installed Xcode a long time ago. Apparently I didn't check back then the "UNIX Developemtn Support" checkbox. Now I want to have them bu when I click on the installation this is what appears: The UNIX Development Support check box is disabled Q. ¿How can I install the UNIX Development Support? Is there a way to run some script that creates all the needed links from /Developer/ to /usr/bin ? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Java development in Ubuntu

    - by Veera
    I'm a newbie to Linux systems and recently I started using Ubuntu 10.04. When I do java development in Windows, I usually keep my project files under some drive (D: for example) and under my development folder, such as D:\projects\myproj. But I'm bit confused with Ubuntu's folder structure. So, I just want to know how do you organize your projects in Ubuntu? Under which folder do we keep our projects file?

    Read the article

  • Web Development Designing Method

    - by Raj
    HI can any one tell me which web development method is currently use. and can anyone also tell me related article or any other guide for it, am working on web development project in asp.net and Sql server (Clothing Website) as it is my first project after finishing my studies and i don't have much idea, which process should i have to follow

    Read the article

  • iPhone/Android app development tutorials?

    - by Decipher
    Hi, I'm looking at jumping on the band-wagon and knock out a couple iPhone and Android apps. I'm not a complete beginner as I have programmed in quite a few languages, with my current focus on PHP and Drupal development, but I have not developed for either the iPhone or Android before. I have downloaded the respective SDKs, but I was hoping to find some good quality tutorials that with step-by-step guides getting your development environment up and building your first app.

    Read the article

  • emacs setup for web development

    - by fig-gnuton
    What should a complete emacs setup have if you want to use it for web development? This SO question is about using emacs for Rails, however it mostly leaves out things like HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. This emacs wiki page has suggestions for emulating aspects of TextMate, but isn't specific to web development.

    Read the article

  • XML\Jquery create listings based on user selection

    - by Sirius Mane
    Alright, so what I need to try and accomplish is having a static web page that will display information pulled from an XML document and render it to the screen without refreshing. Basic AJAX stuff I guess. The trick is, as I'm trying to think this through I keep coming into 'logical' barriers mentally. Objectives: -Have a chart which displays baseball team names, wins, losses, ties. In my XML doc there is a 'pending' status, so games not completed should not be displayed.(Need help here) -Have a selection list which allows you to select a team which is populated from XML doc. (done) -Upon selecting a particular team from the aforementioned selection list the page should display in a separate area all of the planned games for that team. Including pending. Basically all of the games associated with that team and the dates (which is included in the XML file). (Need help here) What I have so far: HTML\JS <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="stylesheet" href="batty.css" type="text/css" /> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> <title>Little Batty League</title> <script type="text/javascript" src="library.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="jquery.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> var IE = window.ActiveXObject ? true: false; var MOZ = document.implementation.createDocument ? true: false; $(document).ready(function(){ $.ajax({ type: "GET", url: "schedule.xml", dataType: "xml", success: function(xml) { var select = $('#mySelect'); $(xml).find('Teams').each(function(){ var title = $(this).find('Team').text(); select.append("<option/><option class='ddheader'>"+title+"</option>"); }); select.children(":first").text("please make a selection").attr("selected",true); } }); }); </script> </script> </head> <body onLoad="init()"> <!-- container start --> <div id="container"> <!-- banner start --> <div id="banner"> <img src="images/mascot.jpg" width="324" height="112" alt="Mascot" /> <!-- buttons start --> <table width="900" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td><div class="menuButton"><a href="index.html">Home</a></div></td> <td><div class="menuButton"><a href="schedule.html">Schedule</a></div></td> <td><div class="menuButton"><a href="contact.html">Contact</a></div></td> <td><div class="menuButton"><a href="about.html">About</a></div></td> </tr> </table> <!-- buttons end --> </div> <!-- banner end --> <!-- content start --> <div id="content"> <br /> <form> <select id="mySelect"> <option>please make a selection</option> </select> </form> </div> <!-- content end --> <!-- footer start --> <div id="footer"> &copy; 2012 Batty League </div> <!-- footer end --> </div> <!-- container end --> </body> </html> And the XML is: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <Schedule season="1"> <Teams> <Team>Bluejays</Team> </Teams> <Teams> <Team>Chickens</Team> </Teams> <Teams> <Team>Lions</Team> </Teams> <Teams> <Team>Pixies</Team> </Teams> <Teams> <Team>Zombies</Team> </Teams> <Teams> <Team>Wombats</Team> </Teams> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Chickens</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Bluejays</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-10T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Pending"> <Home_Team>Bluejays </Home_Team> <Away_Team>Chickens</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-11T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Bluejays</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Lions</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-18T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Lions</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Bluejays</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-19T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Bluejays</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Pixies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-21T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Pixies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Bluejays</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-23T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Bluejays</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Zombies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-25T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Pending"> <Home_Team>Zombies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Bluejays</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-27T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Pending"> <Home_Team>Bluejays</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Wombats</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-28T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Wombats</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Bluejays</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-30T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Chickens</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Lions</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-31T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Lions</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Chickens</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-04T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Chickens</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Pixies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-05T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Pixies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Chickens</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-07T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Chickens</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Zombies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-08T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Zombies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Chickens</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-10T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Lions</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Pixies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-12T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Pixies </Home_Team> <Away_Team>Lions</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-14T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Lions</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Zombies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-15T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Zombies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Lions</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-16T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Lions</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Wombats</Away_Team> <Date>2012-01-23T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Wombats</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Lions</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-24T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Pending"> <Home_Team>Pixies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Zombies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-25T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Pending"> <Home_Team>Zombies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Pixies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-26T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Pixies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Wombats</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-27T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Wombats</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Pixies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-28T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Zombies</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Wombats</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-04T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Wombats</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Zombies</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-05T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Wombats</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Chickens</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-07T09:00:00</Date> </Game> <Game status="Played"> <Home_Team>Chickens</Home_Team> <Away_Team>Wombats</Away_Team> <Date>2012-02-08T09:00:00</Date> </Game> </Schedule> If anybody can point me to Jquery code\modules that would greatly help me with this I'd be appreciate. Any help right now would be great, I'm just banging my head against a wall. I'm trying to avoid using XSLT transforms because I absolutely despise XML and I'm not good with it. So I'd -like- to just use Javascript\PHP\etc with only a sprinkling of the necessary XML where possible..

    Read the article

  • A way of doing real-world test-driven development (and some thoughts about it)

    - by Thomas Weller
    Lately, I exchanged some arguments with Derick Bailey about some details of the red-green-refactor cycle of the Test-driven development process. In short, the issue revolved around the fact that it’s not enough to have a test red or green, but it’s also important to have it red or green for the right reasons. While for me, it’s sufficient to initially have a NotImplementedException in place, Derick argues that this is not totally correct (see these two posts: Red/Green/Refactor, For The Right Reasons and Red For The Right Reason: Fail By Assertion, Not By Anything Else). And he’s right. But on the other hand, I had no idea how his insights could have any practical consequence for my own individual interpretation of the red-green-refactor cycle (which is not really red-green-refactor, at least not in its pure sense, see the rest of this article). This made me think deeply for some days now. In the end I found out that the ‘right reason’ changes in my understanding depending on what development phase I’m in. To make this clear (at least I hope it becomes clear…) I started to describe my way of working in some detail, and then something strange happened: The scope of the article slightly shifted from focusing ‘only’ on the ‘right reason’ issue to something more general, which you might describe as something like  'Doing real-world TDD in .NET , with massive use of third-party add-ins’. This is because I feel that there is a more general statement about Test-driven development to make:  It’s high time to speak about the ‘How’ of TDD, not always only the ‘Why’. Much has been said about this, and me myself also contributed to that (see here: TDD is not about testing, it's about how we develop software). But always justifying what you do is very unsatisfying in the long run, it is inherently defensive, and it costs time and effort that could be used for better and more important things. And frankly: I’m somewhat sick and tired of repeating time and again that the test-driven way of software development is highly preferable for many reasons - I don’t want to spent my time exclusively on stating the obvious… So, again, let’s say it clearly: TDD is programming, and programming is TDD. Other ways of programming (code-first, sometimes called cowboy-coding) are exceptional and need justification. – I know that there are many people out there who will disagree with this radical statement, and I also know that it’s not a description of the real world but more of a mission statement or something. But nevertheless I’m absolutely sure that in some years this statement will be nothing but a platitude. Side note: Some parts of this post read as if I were paid by Jetbrains (the manufacturer of the ReSharper add-in – R#), but I swear I’m not. Rather I think that Visual Studio is just not production-complete without it, and I wouldn’t even consider to do professional work without having this add-in installed... The three parts of a software component Before I go into some details, I first should describe my understanding of what belongs to a software component (assembly, type, or method) during the production process (i.e. the coding phase). Roughly, I come up with the three parts shown below:   First, we need to have some initial sort of requirement. This can be a multi-page formal document, a vague idea in some programmer’s brain of what might be needed, or anything in between. In either way, there has to be some sort of requirement, be it explicit or not. – At the C# micro-level, the best way that I found to formulate that is to define interfaces for just about everything, even for internal classes, and to provide them with exhaustive xml comments. The next step then is to re-formulate these requirements in an executable form. This is specific to the respective programming language. - For C#/.NET, the Gallio framework (which includes MbUnit) in conjunction with the ReSharper add-in for Visual Studio is my toolset of choice. The third part then finally is the production code itself. It’s development is entirely driven by the requirements and their executable formulation. This is the delivery, the two other parts are ‘only’ there to make its production possible, to give it a decent quality and reliability, and to significantly reduce related costs down the maintenance timeline. So while the first two parts are not really relevant for the customer, they are very important for the developer. The customer (or in Scrum terms: the Product Owner) is not interested at all in how  the product is developed, he is only interested in the fact that it is developed as cost-effective as possible, and that it meets his functional and non-functional requirements. The rest is solely a matter of the developer’s craftsmanship, and this is what I want to talk about during the remainder of this article… An example To demonstrate my way of doing real-world TDD, I decided to show the development of a (very) simple Calculator component. The example is deliberately trivial and silly, as examples always are. I am totally aware of the fact that real life is never that simple, but I only want to show some development principles here… The requirement As already said above, I start with writing down some words on the initial requirement, and I normally use interfaces for that, even for internal classes - the typical question “intf or not” doesn’t even come to mind. I need them for my usual workflow and using them automatically produces high componentized and testable code anyway. To think about their usage in every single situation would slow down the production process unnecessarily. So this is what I begin with: namespace Calculator {     /// <summary>     /// Defines a very simple calculator component for demo purposes.     /// </summary>     public interface ICalculator     {         /// <summary>         /// Gets the result of the last successful operation.         /// </summary>         /// <value>The last result.</value>         /// <remarks>         /// Will be <see langword="null" /> before the first successful operation.         /// </remarks>         double? LastResult { get; }       } // interface ICalculator   } // namespace Calculator So, I’m not beginning with a test, but with a sort of code declaration - and still I insist on being 100% test-driven. There are three important things here: Starting this way gives me a method signature, which allows to use IntelliSense and AutoCompletion and thus eliminates the danger of typos - one of the most regular, annoying, time-consuming, and therefore expensive sources of error in the development process. In my understanding, the interface definition as a whole is more of a readable requirement document and technical documentation than anything else. So this is at least as much about documentation than about coding. The documentation must completely describe the behavior of the documented element. I normally use an IoC container or some sort of self-written provider-like model in my architecture. In either case, I need my components defined via service interfaces anyway. - I will use the LinFu IoC framework here, for no other reason as that is is very simple to use. The ‘Red’ (pt. 1)   First I create a folder for the project’s third-party libraries and put the LinFu.Core dll there. Then I set up a test project (via a Gallio project template), and add references to the Calculator project and the LinFu dll. Finally I’m ready to write the first test, which will look like the following: namespace Calculator.Test {     [TestFixture]     public class CalculatorTest     {         private readonly ServiceContainer container = new ServiceContainer();           [Test]         public void CalculatorLastResultIsInitiallyNull()         {             ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();               Assert.IsNull(calculator.LastResult);         }       } // class CalculatorTest   } // namespace Calculator.Test       This is basically the executable formulation of what the interface definition states (part of). Side note: There’s one principle of TDD that is just plain wrong in my eyes: I’m talking about the Red is 'does not compile' thing. How could a compiler error ever be interpreted as a valid test outcome? I never understood that, it just makes no sense to me. (Or, in Derick’s terms: this reason is as wrong as a reason ever could be…) A compiler error tells me: Your code is incorrect, but nothing more.  Instead, the ‘Red’ part of the red-green-refactor cycle has a clearly defined meaning to me: It means that the test works as intended and fails only if its assumptions are not met for some reason. Back to our Calculator. When I execute the above test with R#, the Gallio plugin will give me this output: So this tells me that the test is red for the wrong reason: There’s no implementation that the IoC-container could load, of course. So let’s fix that. With R#, this is very easy: First, create an ICalculator - derived type:        Next, implement the interface members: And finally, move the new class to its own file: So far my ‘work’ was six mouse clicks long, the only thing that’s left to do manually here, is to add the Ioc-specific wiring-declaration and also to make the respective class non-public, which I regularly do to force my components to communicate exclusively via interfaces: This is what my Calculator class looks like as of now: using System; using LinFu.IoC.Configuration;   namespace Calculator {     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         public double? LastResult         {             get             {                 throw new NotImplementedException();             }         }     } } Back to the test fixture, we have to put our IoC container to work: [TestFixture] public class CalculatorTest {     #region Fields       private readonly ServiceContainer container = new ServiceContainer();       #endregion // Fields       #region Setup/TearDown       [FixtureSetUp]     public void FixtureSetUp()     {        container.LoadFrom(AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory, "Calculator.dll");     }       ... Because I have a R# live template defined for the setup/teardown method skeleton as well, the only manual coding here again is the IoC-specific stuff: two lines, not more… The ‘Red’ (pt. 2) Now, the execution of the above test gives the following result: This time, the test outcome tells me that the method under test is called. And this is the point, where Derick and I seem to have somewhat different views on the subject: Of course, the test still is worthless regarding the red/green outcome (or: it’s still red for the wrong reasons, in that it gives a false negative). But as far as I am concerned, I’m not really interested in the test outcome at this point of the red-green-refactor cycle. Rather, I only want to assert that my test actually calls the right method. If that’s the case, I will happily go on to the ‘Green’ part… The ‘Green’ Making the test green is quite trivial. Just make LastResult an automatic property:     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         public double? LastResult { get; private set; }     }         One more round… Now on to something slightly more demanding (cough…). Let’s state that our Calculator exposes an Add() method:         ...   /// <summary>         /// Adds the specified operands.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="operand1">The operand1.</param>         /// <param name="operand2">The operand2.</param>         /// <returns>The result of the additon.</returns>         /// <exception cref="ArgumentException">         /// Argument <paramref name="operand1"/> is &lt; 0.<br/>         /// -- or --<br/>         /// Argument <paramref name="operand2"/> is &lt; 0.         /// </exception>         double Add(double operand1, double operand2);       } // interface ICalculator A remark: I sometimes hear the complaint that xml comment stuff like the above is hard to read. That’s certainly true, but irrelevant to me, because I read xml code comments with the CR_Documentor tool window. And using that, it looks like this:   Apart from that, I’m heavily using xml code comments (see e.g. here for a detailed guide) because there is the possibility of automating help generation with nightly CI builds (using MS Sandcastle and the Sandcastle Help File Builder), and then publishing the results to some intranet location.  This way, a team always has first class, up-to-date technical documentation at hand about the current codebase. (And, also very important for speeding up things and avoiding typos: You have IntelliSense/AutoCompletion and R# support, and the comments are subject to compiler checking…).     Back to our Calculator again: Two more R# – clicks implement the Add() skeleton:         ...           public double Add(double operand1, double operand2)         {             throw new NotImplementedException();         }       } // class Calculator As we have stated in the interface definition (which actually serves as our requirement document!), the operands are not allowed to be negative. So let’s start implementing that. Here’s the test: [Test] [Row(-0.5, 2)] public void AddThrowsOnNegativeOperands(double operand1, double operand2) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => calculator.Add(operand1, operand2)); } As you can see, I’m using a data-driven unit test method here, mainly for these two reasons: Because I know that I will have to do the same test for the second operand in a few seconds, I save myself from implementing another test method for this purpose. Rather, I only will have to add another Row attribute to the existing one. From the test report below, you can see that the argument values are explicitly printed out. This can be a valuable documentation feature even when everything is green: One can quickly review what values were tested exactly - the complete Gallio HTML-report (as it will be produced by the Continuous Integration runs) shows these values in a quite clear format (see below for an example). Back to our Calculator development again, this is what the test result tells us at the moment: So we’re red again, because there is not yet an implementation… Next we go on and implement the necessary parameter verification to become green again, and then we do the same thing for the second operand. To make a long story short, here’s the test and the method implementation at the end of the second cycle: // in CalculatorTest:   [Test] [Row(-0.5, 2)] [Row(295, -123)] public void AddThrowsOnNegativeOperands(double operand1, double operand2) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => calculator.Add(operand1, operand2)); }   // in Calculator: public double Add(double operand1, double operand2) {     if (operand1 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");     }     if (operand2 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");     }     throw new NotImplementedException(); } So far, we have sheltered our method from unwanted input, and now we can safely operate on the parameters without further caring about their validity (this is my interpretation of the Fail Fast principle, which is regarded here in more detail). Now we can think about the method’s successful outcomes. First let’s write another test for that: [Test] [Row(1, 1, 2)] public void TestAdd(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Add(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); } Again, I’m regularly using row based test methods for these kinds of unit tests. The above shown pattern proved to be extremely helpful for my development work, I call it the Defined-Input/Expected-Output test idiom: You define your input arguments together with the expected method result. There are two major benefits from that way of testing: In the course of refining a method, it’s very likely to come up with additional test cases. In our case, we might add tests for some edge cases like ‘one of the operands is zero’ or ‘the sum of the two operands causes an overflow’, or maybe there’s an external test protocol that has to be fulfilled (e.g. an ISO norm for medical software), and this results in the need of testing against additional values. In all these scenarios we only have to add another Row attribute to the test. Remember that the argument values are written to the test report, so as a side-effect this produces valuable documentation. (This can become especially important if the fulfillment of some sort of external requirements has to be proven). So your test method might look something like that in the end: [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 2)] [Row(0, 999999999, 999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, double.MaxValue)] public void TestAdd(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Add(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); } And this will produce the following HTML report (with Gallio):   Not bad for the amount of work we invested in it, huh? - There might be scenarios where reports like that can be useful for demonstration purposes during a Scrum sprint review… The last requirement to fulfill is that the LastResult property is expected to store the result of the last operation. I don’t show this here, it’s trivial enough and brings nothing new… And finally: Refactor (for the right reasons) To demonstrate my way of going through the refactoring portion of the red-green-refactor cycle, I added another method to our Calculator component, namely Subtract(). Here’s the code (tests and production): // CalculatorTest.cs:   [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 0)] [Row(0, 999999999, -999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, -double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, -double.MaxValue)] public void TestSubtract(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Subtract(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); }   [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 0)] [Row(0, 999999999, -999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, -double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, -double.MaxValue)] public void TestSubtractGivesExpectedLastResult(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       calculator.Subtract(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, calculator.LastResult); }   ...   // ICalculator.cs: /// <summary> /// Subtracts the specified operands. /// </summary> /// <param name="operand1">The operand1.</param> /// <param name="operand2">The operand2.</param> /// <returns>The result of the subtraction.</returns> /// <exception cref="ArgumentException"> /// Argument <paramref name="operand1"/> is &lt; 0.<br/> /// -- or --<br/> /// Argument <paramref name="operand2"/> is &lt; 0. /// </exception> double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2);   ...   // Calculator.cs:   public double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2) {     if (operand1 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");     }       if (operand2 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");     }       return (this.LastResult = operand1 - operand2).Value; }   Obviously, the argument validation stuff that was produced during the red-green part of our cycle duplicates the code from the previous Add() method. So, to avoid code duplication and minimize the number of code lines of the production code, we do an Extract Method refactoring. One more time, this is only a matter of a few mouse clicks (and giving the new method a name) with R#: Having done that, our production code finally looks like that: using System; using LinFu.IoC.Configuration;   namespace Calculator {     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         #region ICalculator           public double? LastResult { get; private set; }           public double Add(double operand1, double operand2)         {             ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(operand1, operand2);               return (this.LastResult = operand1 + operand2).Value;         }           public double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2)         {             ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(operand1, operand2);               return (this.LastResult = operand1 - operand2).Value;         }           #endregion // ICalculator           #region Implementation (Helper)           private static void ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(double operand1, double operand2)         {             if (operand1 < 0.0)             {                 throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");             }               if (operand2 < 0.0)             {                 throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");             }         }           #endregion // Implementation (Helper)       } // class Calculator   } // namespace Calculator But is the above worth the effort at all? It’s obviously trivial and not very impressive. All our tests were green (for the right reasons), and refactoring the code did not change anything. It’s not immediately clear how this refactoring work adds value to the project. Derick puts it like this: STOP! Hold on a second… before you go any further and before you even think about refactoring what you just wrote to make your test pass, you need to understand something: if your done with your requirements after making the test green, you are not required to refactor the code. I know… I’m speaking heresy, here. Toss me to the wolves, I’ve gone over to the dark side! Seriously, though… if your test is passing for the right reasons, and you do not need to write any test or any more code for you class at this point, what value does refactoring add? Derick immediately answers his own question: So why should you follow the refactor portion of red/green/refactor? When you have added code that makes the system less readable, less understandable, less expressive of the domain or concern’s intentions, less architecturally sound, less DRY, etc, then you should refactor it. I couldn’t state it more precise. From my personal perspective, I’d add the following: You have to keep in mind that real-world software systems are usually quite large and there are dozens or even hundreds of occasions where micro-refactorings like the above can be applied. It’s the sum of them all that counts. And to have a good overall quality of the system (e.g. in terms of the Code Duplication Percentage metric) you have to be pedantic on the individual, seemingly trivial cases. My job regularly requires the reading and understanding of ‘foreign’ code. So code quality/readability really makes a HUGE difference for me – sometimes it can be even the difference between project success and failure… Conclusions The above described development process emerged over the years, and there were mainly two things that guided its evolution (you might call it eternal principles, personal beliefs, or anything in between): Test-driven development is the normal, natural way of writing software, code-first is exceptional. So ‘doing TDD or not’ is not a question. And good, stable code can only reliably be produced by doing TDD (yes, I know: many will strongly disagree here again, but I’ve never seen high-quality code – and high-quality code is code that stood the test of time and causes low maintenance costs – that was produced code-first…) It’s the production code that pays our bills in the end. (Though I have seen customers these days who demand an acceptance test battery as part of the final delivery. Things seem to go into the right direction…). The test code serves ‘only’ to make the production code work. But it’s the number of delivered features which solely counts at the end of the day - no matter how much test code you wrote or how good it is. With these two things in mind, I tried to optimize my coding process for coding speed – or, in business terms: productivity - without sacrificing the principles of TDD (more than I’d do either way…).  As a result, I consider a ratio of about 3-5/1 for test code vs. production code as normal and desirable. In other words: roughly 60-80% of my code is test code (This might sound heavy, but that is mainly due to the fact that software development standards only begin to evolve. The entire software development profession is very young, historically seen; only at the very beginning, and there are no viable standards yet. If you think about software development as a kind of casting process, where the test code is the mold and the resulting production code is the final product, then the above ratio sounds no longer extraordinary…) Although the above might look like very much unnecessary work at first sight, it’s not. With the aid of the mentioned add-ins, doing all the above is a matter of minutes, sometimes seconds (while writing this post took hours and days…). The most important thing is to have the right tools at hand. Slow developer machines or the lack of a tool or something like that - for ‘saving’ a few 100 bucks -  is just not acceptable and a very bad decision in business terms (though I quite some times have seen and heard that…). Production of high-quality products needs the usage of high-quality tools. This is a platitude that every craftsman knows… The here described round-trip will take me about five to ten minutes in my real-world development practice. I guess it’s about 30% more time compared to developing the ‘traditional’ (code-first) way. But the so manufactured ‘product’ is of much higher quality and massively reduces maintenance costs, which is by far the single biggest cost factor, as I showed in this previous post: It's the maintenance, stupid! (or: Something is rotten in developerland.). In the end, this is a highly cost-effective way of software development… But on the other hand, there clearly is a trade-off here: coding speed vs. code quality/later maintenance costs. The here described development method might be a perfect fit for the overwhelming majority of software projects, but there certainly are some scenarios where it’s not - e.g. if time-to-market is crucial for a software project. So this is a business decision in the end. It’s just that you have to know what you’re doing and what consequences this might have… Some last words First, I’d like to thank Derick Bailey again. His two aforementioned posts (which I strongly recommend for reading) inspired me to think deeply about my own personal way of doing TDD and to clarify my thoughts about it. I wouldn’t have done that without this inspiration. I really enjoy that kind of discussions… I agree with him in all respects. But I don’t know (yet?) how to bring his insights into the described production process without slowing things down. The above described method proved to be very “good enough” in my practical experience. But of course, I’m open to suggestions here… My rationale for now is: If the test is initially red during the red-green-refactor cycle, the ‘right reason’ is: it actually calls the right method, but this method is not yet operational. Later on, when the cycle is finished and the tests become part of the regular, automated Continuous Integration process, ‘red’ certainly must occur for the ‘right reason’: in this phase, ‘red’ MUST mean nothing but an unfulfilled assertion - Fail By Assertion, Not By Anything Else!

    Read the article

  • Agile Development Requires Agile Support

    - by Matt Watson
    Agile developmentAgile development has become the standard methodology for application development. The days of long term planning with giant Gantt waterfall charts and detailed requirements is fading away. For years the product planning process frustrated product owners and businesses because no matter the plan, nothing ever went to plan. Agile development throws the detailed planning out the window and instead focuses on giving developers some basic requirements and pointing them in the right direction. Constant collaboration via quick iterations with the end users, product owners, and the development team helps ensure the project is done correctly.  The various agile development methodologies have helped greatly with creating products faster, but not without causing new problems. Complicated application deployments now occur weekly or monthly. Most of the products are web-based and deployed as a software service model. System performance and availability of these apps becomes mission critical. This is all much different from the old process of mailing new releases of client-server apps on CD once per quarter or year.The steady stream of new products and product enhancements puts a lot of pressure on IT operations to keep up with the software deployments and adding infrastructure capacity. The problem is most operations teams still move slowly thanks to change orders, documentation, procedures, testing and other processes. Operations can slow the process down and push back on the development team in some organizations. The DevOps movement is trying to solve some of these problems by integrating the development and operations teams more together. Rapid change introduces new problemsThe rapid product change ultimately creates some application problems along the way. Higher rates of change increase the likelihood of new application defects. Delivering applications as a software service also means that scalability of applications is critical. Development teams struggle to keep up with application defects and scalability concerns in their applications. Fixing application problems is a never ending job for agile development teams. Fixing problems before your customers do and fixing them quickly is critical. Most companies really struggle with this due to the divide between the development and operations groups. Fixing application problems typically requires querying databases, looking at log files, reviewing config files, reviewing error logs and other similar tasks. It becomes difficult to work on new features when your lead developers are working on defects from the last product version. Developers need more visibilityThe problem is most developers are not given access to see server and application information in the production environments. The operations team doesn’t trust giving all the developers the keys to the kingdom to log in to production and poke around the servers. The challenge is either give them no access, or potentially too much access. Those with access can still waste time figuring out the location of the application and how to connect to it over VPN. In addition, reproducing problems in test environments takes too much time and isn't always possible. System administrators spend a lot of time helping developers track down server information. Most companies give key developers access to all of the production resources so they can help resolve application defects. The problem is only those key people have access and they become a bottleneck. They end up spending 25-50% of their time on a daily basis trying to solve application issues because they are the only ones with access. These key employees’ time is best spent on strategic new projects, not addressing application defects. This job should fall to entry level developers, provided they have access to all the information they need to troubleshoot the problems.The solution to agile application support is giving all the developers limited access to the production environment and all the server information they need to see. Some companies create their own solutions internally to collect log files, centralize errors or other things to address the problem. Some developers even have access to server monitoring or other tools. But they key is giving them access to everything they need so they can see the full picture and giving access to the whole team. Giving access to everyone scales up the application support team and creates collaboration around providing improved application support.Stackify enables agile application supportStackify has created a solution that can give all developers a secure and read only view of the entire production server environment without console or remote desktop access.They provide a web application that provides real time visibility to the important information that developers need to see. An application centric view enables them to see all of their apps across multiple datacenters and environments. They don’t need to know where the application is deployed, just the name of the application to find it and dig in to see more. All your developers can see server health, application health, log files, config files, windows event viewer, deployment history, application notes, and much more. They can receive email and text alerts when problems arise and even safely query your production databases.Stackify enables companies that do agile development to scale up their application support team by getting more team members involved. The lead developers can spend more time on new projects. Application issues can be fixed quicker than ever. Operations can spend less time helping developers collect server information. Agile application support starts with Stackify. Visit Stackify.com to learn more.

    Read the article

  • C# in vedio game industry?

    - by kasparov
    Other than Indie game development, C# is also used for in house tool development at large studios. I have two questions -: 1) Is microsoft planning to release a native C# compiler sharing the backend code generator with the C++ compiler? http://www.compilerjobs.com/db/jobs_view.php?editid1=648 2) If microsoft IS planning a native C# compiler, then can C# replace C++ as the industry standard in AAA vedio games?

    Read the article

  • xml file save/read error (making a highscore system for XNA game)

    - by Eddy
    i get an error after i write player name to the file for second or third time (An unhandled exception of type 'System.InvalidOperationException' occurred in System.Xml.dll Additional information: There is an error in XML document (18, 17).) (in highscores load method In data = (HighScoreData)serializer.Deserialize(stream); it stops) the problem is that some how it adds additional "" at the end of my .dat file could anyone tell me how to fix this? the file before save looks: <?xml version="1.0"?> <HighScoreData xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <PlayerName> <string>neil</string> <string>shawn</string> <string>mark</string> <string>cindy</string> <string>sam</string> </PlayerName> <Score> <int>200</int> <int>180</int> <int>150</int> <int>100</int> <int>50</int> </Score> <Count>5</Count> </HighScoreData> the file after save looks: <?xml version="1.0"?> <HighScoreData xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <PlayerName> <string>Nick</string> <string>Nick</string> <string>neil</string> <string>shawn</string> <string>mark</string> </PlayerName> <Score> <int>210</int> <int>210</int> <int>200</int> <int>180</int> <int>150</int> </Score> <Count>5</Count> </HighScoreData>> the part of my code that does all of save load to xml is: DECLARATIONS PART [Serializable] public struct HighScoreData { public string[] PlayerName; public int[] Score; public int Count; public HighScoreData(int count) { PlayerName = new string[count]; Score = new int[count]; Count = count; } } IAsyncResult result = null; bool inputName; HighScoreData data; int Score = 0; public string NAME; public string HighScoresFilename = "highscores.dat"; Game1 constructor public Game1() { graphics = new GraphicsDeviceManager(this); Content.RootDirectory = "Content"; Width = graphics.PreferredBackBufferWidth = 960; Height = graphics.PreferredBackBufferHeight =640; GamerServicesComponent GSC = new GamerServicesComponent(this); Components.Add(GSC); } Inicialize function (end of it) protected override void Initialize() { //other game code base.Initialize(); string fullpath =Path.Combine(HighScoresFilename); if (!File.Exists(fullpath)) { //If the file doesn't exist, make a fake one... // Create the data to save data = new HighScoreData(5); data.PlayerName[0] = "neil"; data.Score[0] = 200; data.PlayerName[1] = "shawn"; data.Score[1] = 180; data.PlayerName[2] = "mark"; data.Score[2] = 150; data.PlayerName[3] = "cindy"; data.Score[3] = 100; data.PlayerName[4] = "sam"; data.Score[4] = 50; SaveHighScores(data, HighScoresFilename); } } all methods for loading saving and output public static void SaveHighScores(HighScoreData data, string filename) { // Get the path of the save game string fullpath = Path.Combine("highscores.dat"); // Open the file, creating it if necessary FileStream stream = File.Open(fullpath, FileMode.OpenOrCreate); try { // Convert the object to XML data and put it in the stream XmlSerializer serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(HighScoreData)); serializer.Serialize(stream, data); } finally { // Close the file stream.Close(); } } /* Load highscores */ public static HighScoreData LoadHighScores(string filename) { HighScoreData data; // Get the path of the save game string fullpath = Path.Combine("highscores.dat"); // Open the file FileStream stream = File.Open(fullpath, FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.Read); try { // Read the data from the file XmlSerializer serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(HighScoreData)); data = (HighScoreData)serializer.Deserialize(stream);//this is the line // where program gives an error } finally { // Close the file stream.Close(); } return (data); } /* Save player highscore when game ends */ private void SaveHighScore() { // Create the data to saved HighScoreData data = LoadHighScores(HighScoresFilename); int scoreIndex = -1; for (int i = 0; i < data.Count ; i++) { if (Score > data.Score[i]) { scoreIndex = i; break; } } if (scoreIndex > -1) { //New high score found ... do swaps for (int i = data.Count - 1; i > scoreIndex; i--) { data.PlayerName[i] = data.PlayerName[i - 1]; data.Score[i] = data.Score[i - 1]; } data.PlayerName[scoreIndex] = NAME; //Retrieve User Name Here data.Score[scoreIndex] = Score; // Retrieve score here SaveHighScores(data, HighScoresFilename); } } /* Iterate through data if highscore is called and make the string to be saved*/ public string makeHighScoreString() { // Create the data to save HighScoreData data2 = LoadHighScores(HighScoresFilename); // Create scoreBoardString string scoreBoardString = "Highscores:\n\n"; for (int i = 0; i<5;i++) { scoreBoardString = scoreBoardString + data2.PlayerName[i] + "-" + data2.Score[i] + "\n"; } return scoreBoardString; } when ill make this work i will start this code when i call game over (now i start it when i press some buttons, so i could test it faster) public void InputYourName() { if (result == null && !Guide.IsVisible) { string title = "Name"; string description = "Write your name in order to save your Score"; string defaultText = "Nick"; PlayerIndex playerIndex = new PlayerIndex(); result= Guide.BeginShowKeyboardInput(playerIndex, title, description, defaultText, null, null); // NAME = result.ToString(); } if (result != null && result.IsCompleted) { NAME = Guide.EndShowKeyboardInput(result); result = null; inputName = false; SaveHighScore(); } } this where i call output to the screen (ill call this in highscores meniu section when i am done with debugging) spriteBatch.DrawString(Font1, "" + makeHighScoreString(),new Vector2(500,200), Color.White); }

    Read the article

  • Android game development in c++

    - by kamziro
    So being a primarily c/c++ developer, I've always thought that the only option for mobile game development for me was using iOS, which allows for c/c++ (and minimising objective C). I heard from a friend though, that android has a native development toolkit which allows for c++ code to work on android. Has anyone used this, and if so, how do you find it? I mean, will it "just work" like iOS, or are there more considerations that need to be taken care of due to the wide variety of android devices available?

    Read the article

  • How do I get into Facebook game development?

    - by Ben Zeigler
    I have some ideas that I think might make interesting games for a Facebook-like platform, in that they are social and casual. Does anyone have advice on how to get into Facebook development from a background in traditional C++ game development? Is there anything special that differentiates developing facebook games from developing other web-based games, such as API intricacies and so forth? To start with this will probably be hobbyist level instead of some sort of professional enterprise, anything I need to know about making indie-level facebook games?

    Read the article

  • Android game development in c++

    - by kamziro
    So being a primarily c/c++ developer, I've always thought that the only option for mobile game development for me was using iOS, which allows for c/c++ (and minimising objective C). I heard from a friend though, that android has a native development toolkit which allows for c++ code to work on android. Has anyone used this, and if so, how do you find it? I mean, will it "just work" like iOS, or are there more considerations that need to be taken care of due to the wide variety of android devices available?

    Read the article

  • SDL side-scroller scrolls inconsistantly

    - by SDLFunTimes
    So I'm working on an upgrade from my previous project (that I posted here for code review) this time implementing a repeating background (like what is used on cartoons) so that SDL doesn't have to load really big images for a level. There's a strange inconsistency in the program, however: the first time the user scrolls all the way to the right 2 less panels are shown than is specified. Going backwards (left) the correct number of panels is shown (that is the panels repeat the number of times specified in the code). After that it appears that going right again (once all the way at the left) the correct number of panels is shown and same going backwards. Here's some selected code and here's a .zip of all my code constructor: Game::Game(SDL_Event* event, SDL_Surface* scr, int level_w, int w, int h, int bpp) { this->event = event; this->bpp = bpp; level_width = level_w; screen = scr; w_width = w; w_height = h; //load images and set rects background = format_surface("background.jpg"); person = format_surface("person.png"); background_rect_left = background->clip_rect; background_rect_right = background->clip_rect; current_background_piece = 1; //we are displaying the first clip rect_in_view = &background_rect_right; other_rect = &background_rect_left; person_rect = person->clip_rect; background_rect_left.x = 0; background_rect_left.y = 0; background_rect_right.x = background->w; background_rect_right.y = 0; person_rect.y = background_rect_left.h - person_rect.h; person_rect.x = 0; } and here's the move method which is probably causing all the trouble: void Game::move(SDLKey direction) { if(direction == SDLK_RIGHT) { if(move_screen(direction)) { if(!background_reached_right()) { //move background right background_rect_left.x += movement_increment; background_rect_right.x += movement_increment; if(rect_in_view->x >= 0) { //move the other rect in to fill the empty space SDL_Rect* temp; other_rect->x = -w_width + rect_in_view->x; temp = rect_in_view; rect_in_view = other_rect; other_rect = temp; current_background_piece++; std::cout << current_background_piece << std::endl; } if(background_overshoots_right()) { //sees if this next blit is past the surface //this is used only for re-aligning the rects when //the end of the screen is reached background_rect_left.x = 0; background_rect_right.x = w_width; } } } else { //move the person instead person_rect.x += movement_increment; if(get_person_right_side() > w_width) { //person went too far right person_rect.x = w_width - person_rect.w; } } } else if(direction == SDLK_LEFT) { if(move_screen(direction)) { if(!background_reached_left()) { //moves background left background_rect_left.x -= movement_increment; background_rect_right.x -= movement_increment; if(rect_in_view->x <= -w_width) { //swap the rect in view SDL_Rect* temp; rect_in_view->x = w_width; temp = rect_in_view; rect_in_view = other_rect; other_rect = temp; current_background_piece--; std::cout << current_background_piece << std::endl; } if(background_overshoots_left()) { background_rect_left.x = 0; background_rect_right.x = w_width; } } } else { //move the person instead person_rect.x -= movement_increment; if(person_rect.x < 0) { //person went too far left person_rect.x = 0; } } } } without the rest of the code this doesn't make too much sense. Since there is too much of it I'll upload it here for testing. Anyway does anyone know how I could fix this inconsistency?

    Read the article

  • Java 2D Game Frameworks

    - by Software Monkey
    I have been looking at frameworks for writing 2D games in Java - part of a growing desire to rediscover my roots in writing those simple but addictive video games. I have googled and found some possibilities, but it's hard to judge which is best without investing significant time in each. Does anyone out there have any recommendations from experience, preferably with a list of pro's and con's for the framework. NOTE: I am not looking so much for comparisons between frameworks but, rather, feedback on any given framework from actually having used it firsthand, or knowing someone who has. The other possibility I am considering is rolling my own, but would rather not. EDIT: I am targeting Java on the Desktop, and expect capable machines, though not state of the art. Some of the 2D engines I have found: Free PulpCore (License: BSD) Slick2D (License: BSD) GTGE - Golden T Game Engine JGame GAGE - Genuine Advantage Gaming Engine GameFrame for Java Basilisk (2D and 3D) Free for non-commercial use Genuts EasyWay - a high-level 2D engine

    Read the article

  • Design: an array of "enemy" objects for game AI

    - by Meko
    Hi..I made shoot em up like game.But I have only one ememy which fallows me on screen.But I want to make lots of enemys like each 10 second they will across on screen together 5 or 10 enemys. ArrayList<Enemies> enemy = new ArrayList<Enemies>(); for (Enemies e : enemy) { e.draw(g); } is it good creating array list and then showing on screen? And Do I have to make some planing movements thoose enemies in my code ? I want that they vill appear not on same pozition.Like First 5 enemies will come top of screen then the other 5 or 10 enemies will come from left side.. so on.What is best solution for this?

    Read the article

  • Social Game Mechanics in Django

    - by oliland
    I want users to receive 'points' for completing various tasks in my application - ranging from tasks such as tagging objects to making friends. I havn't yet found a Django application that simplifies this. At the moment I'm thinking that the best way to accumulate points is that each user action creates the equivalent of a "stream item", and the points are calculated through counting the value of each action published to their stream. Obviously social game mechanics is a huge area with a lot of research going on at the moment. But from a development perspective what's the easiest way to get started? Am I on the wrong track or are there better / simpler ways?

    Read the article

  • why do game engines prefer static libraries over dynamic link libraries

    - by numerical25
    I've been reading a few gaming books. And they always prefer to create the engine as a static library over dynamic link. I am new to c++ so I am not highly knowledge when it comes to static libraries and dynamic link libraries. All I know is static libraries increase the size of your program, where DLL link libraries are loaded as you need them within your program. [edit] I've played games where it almost seemed they used DLL's to load in sound, lighting, and what not all individually. as the level was loading up. cause you don't necessarily need that when your at the game menu.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >