Search Results

Search found 17770 results on 711 pages for 'repository design'.

Page 56/711 | < Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >

• Java: design for using many executors services and only few threads

  - by Guillaume

  I need to run in parallel multiple threads to perform some tests. My 'test engine' will have n tests to perform, each one doing k sub-tests. Each test result is stored for a later usage. So I have n*k processes that can be ran concurrently. I'm trying to figure how to use the java concurrent tools efficiently. Right now I have an executor service at test level and n executor service at sub test level. I create my list of Callables for the test level. Each test callable will then create another list of callables for the subtest level. When invoked a test callable will subsequently invoke all subtest callables test 1 subtest a1 subtest ...1 subtest k1 test n subtest a2 subtest ...2 subtest k2 call sequence: test manager create test 1 callable test1 callable create subtest a1 to k1 testn callable create subtest an to kn test manager invoke all test callables test1 callable invoke all subtest a1 to k1 testn callable invoke all subtest an to kn This is working fine, but I have a lot of new treads that are created. I can not share executor service since I need to call 'shutdown' on the executors. My idea to fix this problem is to provide the same fixed size thread pool to each executor service. Do you think it is a good design ? Do I miss something more appropriate/simple for doing this ?

  Read the article

• SQL Databases and table design/organization

  - by John McMullen

  (NOOB disclaimer) I'm working on a system (a type of map), that is accessed mostly via 3 fields: ID (auto incremented), X coordinate, and Y coordinate. As it is right now, i have all data on the map, stored in 1 table. Whenever the map display is loaded it simply queries the database for contents in x and y, and the DB gives the data (other fields in the same entry). If an item on the map is doing something, it has a flag saying its doing something, and then has an ID of the action in another table holding that type of 'actions'. Essentially, for all map data, its stored in 1 table. All actions of a certain type are stored in their own table. I'm a noob, and i'm wondering what the most effective/efficient structure for such a design? (a map that has items, and each item has stats/actions). I'm using PHP atm, using standard SQL queries to get my data. Should i split up the tables so that there are only x number of entries on a table? (coord range limits)? Should it just keep growing and growing? There's a lot of queries to the table... so just tryin to see what is best :/

  Read the article

• C++ design related question

  - by Kotti

  Hi! Here is the question's plot: suppose I have some abstract classes for objects, let's call it Object. It's definition would include 2D position and dimensions. Let it also have some virtual void Render(Backend& backend) const = 0 method used for rendering. Now I specialize my inheritance tree and add Rectangle and Ellipse class. Guess they won't have their own properties, but they will have their own virtual void Render method. Let's say I implemented these methods, so that Render for Rectangle actually draws some rectangle, and the same for ellipse. Now, I add some object called Plane, which is defined as class Plane : public Rectangle and has a private member of std::vector<Object*> plane_objects; Right after that I add a method to add some object to my plane. And here comes the question. If I design this method as void AddObject(Object& object) I would face trouble like I won't be able to call virtual functions, because I would have to do something like plane_objects.push_back(new Object(object)); and this should be push_back(new Rectangle(object)) for rectangles and new Circle(...) for circles. If I implement this method as void AddObject(Object* object), it looks good, but then somewhere else this means making call like plane.AddObject(new Rectangle(params)); and this is generally a mess because then it's not clear which part of my program should free the allocated memory. ["when destroying the plane? why? are we sure that calls to AddObject were only done as AddObject(new something).] I guess the problems caused by using the second approach could be solved using smart pointers, but I am sure there have to be something better. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• What design pattern to use for one big method calling many private methods

  - by Jeune

  I have a class that has a big method that calls on a lot of private methods. I think I want to extract those private methods into their own classes for one because they contain business logic and I think they should be public so they can be unit tested. Here's a sample of the code: public void handleRow(Object arg0) { if (continueRunning){ hashData=(HashMap<String, Object>)arg0; Long stdReportId = null; Date effDate=null; if (stdReportIds!=null){ stdReportId = stdReportIds[index]; } if (effDates!=null){ effDate = effDates[index]; } initAndPutPriceBrackets(hashData, stdReportId, effDate); putBrand(hashData,stdReportId,formHandlerFor==0?true:useLiveForFirst); putMultiLangDescriptions(hashData,stdReportId); index++; if (stdReportIds!=null && stdReportIds[0].equals(stdReportIds[1])){ continueRunning=false; } if (formHandlerFor==REPORTS){ putBeginDate(hashData,effDate,custId); } //handle logic that is related to pricemaps. lstOfData.add(hashData); } } What design pattern should I apply to this problem?

  Read the article

• Design by contracts and constructors

  - by devoured elysium

  I am implementing my own ArrayList for school purposes, but to spice up things a bit I'm trying to use C# 4.0 Code Contracts. All was fine until I needed to add Contracts to the constructors. Should I add Contract.Ensures() in the empty parameter constructor? public ArrayList(int capacity) { Contract.Requires(capacity > 0); Contract.Ensures(Size == capacity); _array = new T[capacity]; } public ArrayList() : this(32) { Contract.Ensures(Size == 32); } I'd say yes, each method should have a well defined contract. On the other hand, why put it if it's just delegating work to the "main" constructor? Logicwise, I wouldn't need to. The only point I see where it'd be useful to explicitly define the contract in both constructors is if in the future we have Intelisense support for contracts. Would that happen, it'd be useful to be explicit about which contracts each method has, as that'd appear in Intelisense. Also, are there any books around that go a bit deeper on the principles and usage of Design by Contracts? One thing is having knowledge of the syntax of how to use Contracts in a language (C#, in this case), other is knowing how and when to use it. I read several tutorials and Jon Skeet's C# in Depth article about it, but I'd like to go a bit deeper if possible. Thanks

  Read the article

• Design an Application That Stores and Processes Files

  - by phasetwenty

  I'm tasked with writing an application that acts as a central storage point for files (usually document formats) as provided by other applications. It also needs to take commands like "file 395 needs a copy in X format", at which point some work is offloaded to a 3rd party application. I'm having trouble coming up with a strategy for this. I'd like to keep the design as simple as possible, so I'd like to avoid big extra frameworks or techniques like threads for as long as it makes sense. The clients are expected to be web applications (for example, one is a django application that receives files from our customers; the others are not yet implemented). The platform it will be running on is likely going to be Python on Linux, unless I have a strong argument to use something else. In the beginning I thought I could fit the information I wanted to communicate in the filenames, and let my application parse the filename to figure out what it needed to do, but this is proving too inflexible with the amount of information I'm realizing I need to make available. Another idea is to pair FTP with a database used as a communication medium (client uploads a file and updates the database with a command as a row in a table) but I don't like this idea because adding commands (a known change) looks like it will require adding code as well as changing database schemas. It will also muddy up the interface my clients will have to use. I looked into Pyro to let applications communicate more directly but I don't like the idea of running an extra nameserver for this one purpose. I also don't see a good way to do file transfer within this framework. What I'm looking for is techniques and/or technologies applicable to my problem. At the simplest level, I need the ability to accept files and messages with them.

  Read the article

• is this a design pattern?

  - by Michel

  Hi all, i have to build some financial data report, and for making the calculation, there are a lot of 'if then' situations: if it's a large client, subtract 10%, if it's postal code equals '10101', add 10%, if the day is on a saturday, make a difficult calculation etc. so i once read about this kind of example, and what they did was (hope i remember well) create a class with some base info and make it possible to add all kinds of calculationobjects to it. So to put what i remembered in pseudo code Basecalc bc = new baseCalc(); //put the info in the bc so other objects can do their if bc.Add(new Largecustomercalc()); bc.Add(new PostalcodeCalc()); bc.add(new WeekdayCalc()); the the bc would run the Calc() methods of all of the added Calc objects. As i type this i think all the Calc objects must be able to see the Basecalc properties to correctly perform their calculation logic. So all the if's are in the different Calc objects and not ALL in the Basecalc. does this make sense? I was wondering if this is some kind of design pattern?

  Read the article

• java : how to handle the design when template methods throw exception when overrided method not throw

  - by jiafu

  when coding. try to solve the puzzle: how to design the class/methods when InputStreamDigestComputor throw IOException? It seems we can't use this degisn structure due to the template method throw exception but overrided method not throw it. but if change the overrided method to throw it, will cause other subclass both throw it. So can any good suggestion for this case? abstract class DigestComputor{ String compute(DigestAlgorithm algorithm){ MessageDigest instance; try { instance = MessageDigest.getInstance(algorithm.toString()); updateMessageDigest(instance); return hex(instance.digest()); } catch (NoSuchAlgorithmException e) { LOG.error(e.getMessage(), e); throw new UnsupportedOperationException(e.getMessage(), e); } } abstract void updateMessageDigest(MessageDigest instance); } class ByteBufferDigestComputor extends DigestComputor{ private final ByteBuffer byteBuffer; public ByteBufferDigestComputor(ByteBuffer byteBuffer) { super(); this.byteBuffer = byteBuffer; } @Override void updateMessageDigest(MessageDigest instance) { instance.update(byteBuffer); } } class InputStreamDigestComputor extends DigestComputor{ // this place has error. due to exception. if I change the overrided method to throw it. evey caller will handle the exception. but @Override void updateMessageDigest(MessageDigest instance) { throw new IOException(); } }

  Read the article

• C++ socket protocol design issue (ring inclusion)

  - by Martin Lauridsen

  So I have these two classes, mpqs_client and client_protocol. The mpqs_client class handles a Boost socket connection to a server (sending and receiving messages with some specific format. Upon receiving a message, it calls a static method, parse_message(..), in the class client_protocol, and this method should analyse the message received and perform some corresponding action. Given some specific input, the parse_message method needs to send some data back to the server. As mentioned, this happens through the class mpqs_client. So I could, from mpqs_client, pass "this" to parse_message(..) in client_protocol. However, this leads to a two-way association relationship between the two classes. Something which I reckon is not desireable. Also, to implement this, I would need to include the other in each one, and this gives me a terrible pain. I am thinking this is more of a design issue. What is the best solution here? Code is posted below. Class mpqs_client: #include "mpqs_client.h" mpqs_client::mpqs_client(boost::asio::io_service& io_service, tcp::resolver::iterator endpoint_iterator) : io_service_(io_service), socket_(io_service) { ... } ... void mpqs_client::write(const network_message& msg) { io_service_.post(boost::bind(&mpqs_client::do_write, this, msg)); } Class client_protocol: #include "../network_message.hpp" #include "../protocol_consts.h" class client_protocol { public: static void parse_message(network_message& msg, mpqs_sieve **instance_, mpqs_client &client_) { ... switch (type) { case MPQS_DATA: ... break; case POLYNOMIAL_DATA: ... break; default: break; } }

  Read the article

• Rationale of C# iterators design (comparing to C++)

  - by macias

  I found similar topic: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/56347/iterators-in-c-stl-vs-java-is-there-a-conceptual-difference Which basically deals with Java iterator (which is similar to C#) being unable to going backward. So here I would like to focus on limits -- in C++ iterator does not know its limit, you have by yourself compare the given iterator with the limit. In C# iterator knows more -- you can tell without comparing to any external reference, if the iterator is valid or not. I prefer C++ way, because once having iterator you can set any iterator as a limit. In other words if you would like to get only few elements instead of entire collection, you don't have to alter the iterator (in C++). For me it is more "pure" (clear). But of course MS knew this and C++ while designing C#. So what are the advantages of C# way? Which approach is more powerful (which leads to more elegant functions based on iterators). What do I miss? If you have thoughts on C# vs. C++ iterators design other than their limits (boundaries), please also answer. Note: (just in case) please, keep the discussion strictly technical. No C++/C# flamewar.

  Read the article

• GridView edit problem If primary key is editable (design problem)

  - by Nassign

  I would like to ask about the design of table based on it's editability in a Grid View. Let me explain. For example, I have a table named ProductCustomerRel. Method 1 CustomerCode varchar PK ProductCode varchar PK StoreCode varchar PK Quantity int Note text So the combination of the CustomerCode, StoreCode and ProductCode must be unique. The record is displayed on a gridview. The requirement is that you can edit the customer, product and storecode but when the data is saved, the PK constraint must still persist. The problem here is it would be natural for a grid to be able to edit the 3 primary key, you can only achieve the update operation of the grid view by first deleting the row and then inserting the row with the updated data. An alternative to this is to just update the table and add a SeqNo, and just enforce the unique constraint of the 3 columns when inserting and updating in the grid view. Method 2 SeqNo int PK CustomerCode varchar ProductCode varchar StoreCode varchar Quantity int Note text My question is which of the two method is better? or is there another way to do this?

  Read the article

• Design issue when having classes implement different interfaces to restrict client actions

  - by devoured elysium

  Let's say I'm defining a game class that implements two different views: interface IPlayerView { void play(); } interface IDealerView { void deal(); } The view that a game sees when playing the game, and a view that the dealer sees when dealing the game (this is, a player can't make dealer actions and a dealer can't make player actions). The game definition is as following: class Game : IPlayerView, IDealerView { void play() { ... } void deal() { ... } } Now assume I want to make it possible for the players to play the game, but not to deal it. My original idea was that instead of having public Game GetGame() { ... } I'd have something like public IPlayerView GetGame() { ... } But after some tests I realized that if I later try this code, it works: IDealerView dealerView = (IDealerView)GameClass.GetGame(); this works as lets the user act as the dealer. Am I worrying to much? How do you usually deal with this patterns? I could instead make two different classes, maybe a "main" class, the dealer class, that would act as factory of player classes. That way I could control exactly what I would like to pass on the the public. On the other hand, that turns everything a bit more complex than with this original design. Thanks

  Read the article

• database design - empty fields

  - by imanc

  Hey, I am currently debating an issue with a guy on my dev team. He believes that empty fields are bad news. For instance, if we have a customer details table that stores data for customers from different countries, and each country has a slightly different address configuration - plus 1-2 extra fields, e.g. French customer details may also store details for entry code, and floor/level plus title fields (madamme, etc.). South Africa would have a security number. And so on. Given that we're talking about minor variances my idea is to put all of the fields into the table and use what is needed on each form. My colleague believes we should have a separate table with extra data. E.g. customer_info_fr. But this seams to totally defeat the purpose of a combined table in the first place. His argument is that empty fields / columns is bad - but I'm struggling to find justification in terms of database design principles for or against this argument and preferred solutions. Another option is a separate mini EAV table that stores extra data with parent_id, key, val fields. Or to serialise extra data into an extra_data column in the main customer_data table. I think I am confused because what I'm discussing is not covered by 3NF which is what I would typically use as a reference for how to structure data. So my question specifically: - if you have slight variances in data for each record (1-2 different fields for instance) what is the best way to proceed?

  Read the article

• database table design

  - by e.b.white

  I design the tables as below for the system which looks like a package delivering system For example, after user received the package, postman should record in system, and the state(history table) is "delivered",and operator is this postman, the current state(state table) is of course "delivered" history table: +---------------+--------------------------+ | Field | Desc | +---------------+--------------------------+ | id | PRIMARY KEY | +---------------+--------------------------+ | package_id | package_tacking_id | +---------------+--------------------------+ | state | package_state | +---------------+--------------------------+ | operators | operators | +---------------+--------------------------+ | create_time| create_time | +---------------+--------------------------+ state table: +---------------+--------------------------+ | Field | Desc | +---------------+--------------------------+ | id | PRIMARY KEY | +---------------+--------------------------+ | package_id | package_tacking_id | +---------------+--------------------------+ | state | latest_package_state | +---------------+--------------------------+ Above is just the basic information to record, some other information( like invoice, destination,...) should be recored as well. But there are different service types like s1 and s2, for s1 it is not needed to record invoice but s1 need, and maybe s1 need some other information to record (like the tel of end user). After all, at delivering way stations there are additional information to record, and for different service type the information type is different. My question is: 1. For different service type, shall I need to declare different tables(option A) or just one big table which can record all information for all types(option B)? 2. If option A, since the basic information above is MUST, how can prevent from declaring there duplicate fields in different tables?

  Read the article

• Windows Form UserControl design time properties

  - by Raffaeu

  I am struggling with a UserControl. I have a UserControl that represent a Pager and it has a Presenter object property exposed in this way: [Browsable(false)] [DesignSerializationAttribute(DesignSerializationAttribute.Hidden)] public object Presenter { get; set; } The code itself works as I can drag and drop a control into a Windows From without having Visual Studio initializing this property. Now, because in the Load event of this control I call a method of the Presenter that at run-time is null ... I have introduced this additional code: public override void OnLoad(...) { if (this.DesignMode) { base.OnLoad(e); return; } presenter.OnViewReady(); } Now, every time I open a Window that contains this UserControl, Visual Studio modifies the Windows designer code. So, as soon as I open it, VS ask me if I want to save it ... and of course, if I add a control to the Window, it doesn't keep the changes ... As soon as I remove the UserControl Pager the problem disappears ... How should I tackle that in the proper way? I just don't want that the presenter property is initialized at design time as it is injected at runtime ...

  Read the article

• Design Pattern for Changing Object

  - by user210757

  Is there a Design Pattern for supporting different permutations object? Version 1 public class myOjbect { public string field1 { get; set; } /* requirements: max length 20 */ public int field2 { get; set; } . . . public decimal field200 { get; set; } } Version 2 public class myObject { public string field1 { get; set; } /* requirements: max length 40 */ public int field2 { get; set; } . . . public double field200 { get; set; } /* changed data types */ . . ./* 10 new properties */ public double field210 { get; set; } } of course I could just have separate objects, but thought there might be a good pattern for this sort of thing.

  Read the article

• Design pattern for loading multiple message types

  - by lukem00

  As I was looking through SO I came across a question about handling multiple message types. My concern is - how do I load such a message in a neat way? I decided to have a separate class with a method which loads one message each time it's invoked. This method should create a new instance of a concrete message type (say AlphaMessage, BetaMessage, GammaMessage, etc.) and return it as a Message. class MessageLoader { public Message Load() { // ... } } The code inside the method is something which looks really awful to me and I would very much like to refactor it/get rid of it: Message msg = Message.Load(...); // load yourself from whatever source if (msg.Type == MessageType.Alpha) return new AlphaMessage(msg); if (msg.Type == MessageType.Beta) return new BetaMessage(msg); // ... In fact, if the whole design looks just too messy and you guys have a better solution, I'm ready to restructure the whole thing. If my description is too chaotic, please let me know what it's missing and I shall edit the question. Thank you all.

  Read the article

• Design Advice Needed For Synonyms Database

  - by James J

  I'm planning to put together a database that can be used to query synonyms of words. The database will end up huge, so the idea is to keep things running fast. I've been thinking about how to do this, but my database design skills are not up to scratch these days. My initial idea was to have each word stored in one table, and then another table with a 1 to many relationship where each word can be linked to another word and that table can be queried. The application I'm developing allows users to highlight a word, and then type in, or select some synonyms from the database for that word. The application learns from the user input so if someone highlights "car" and types in "motor" the database would be updated to link the relationship if it don't exist already. What I don't want to happen is for a user to type in the word "shop" and link it to the word car. So I'm thinking I will need to add some sort of weight to each relationship. Eventually the synonyms the users enter will be used so they can auto select common synonyms used with a certain word. The lower weight words will not be displayed so shop could never be a synonym of car unless it had a very high weight, and chances are nobody is going to do that. Does the above sound right? Can you offer any suggestions or improvements?

  Read the article

• Should an event-sourced aggregate root have query access to the event sourcing repository?

  - by JD Courtoy

  I'm working on an event-sourced CQRS implementation, using DDD in the application / domain layer. I have an object model that looks like this: public class Person : AggregateRootBase { private Guid? _bookingId; public Person(Identification identification) { Apply(new PersonCreatedEvent(identification)); } public Booking CreateBooking() { // Enforce Person invariants var booking = new Booking(); Apply(new PersonBookedEvent(booking.Id)); return booking; } public void Release() { // Enforce Person invariants // Should we load the booking here from the aggregate repository? // We need to ensure that booking is released as well. var booking = BookingRepository.Load(_bookingId); booking.Release(); Apply(new PersonReleasedEvent(_bookingId)); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonBookedEvent @event) { _bookingId = @event.BookingId; } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonReleasedEvent @event) { _bookingId = null; } } public class Booking : AggregateRootBase { private DateTime _bookingDate; private DateTime? _releaseDate; public Booking() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingCreatedEvent()); } public void Release() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingReleasedEvent()); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingCreatedEvent @event) { _bookingDate = SystemTime.Now(); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingReleasedEvent @event) { _releaseDate = SystemTime.Now(); } // Some other business activities unrelated to a person } With my understanding of DDD so far, both Person and Booking are seperate aggregate roots for two reasons: There are times when business components will pull Booking objects separately from the database. (ie, a person that has been released has a previous booking modified due to incorrect information). There should not be locking contention between Person and Booking whenever a Booking needs to be updated. One other business requirement is that a Booking can never occur for a Person more than once at a time. Due to this, I'm concerned about querying the query database on the read side as there could potentially be some inconsistency there (due to using CQRS and having an eventually consistent read database). Should the aggregate roots be allowed to query the event-sourced backing store for objects (lazy-loading them as needed)? Are there any other avenues of implementation that would make more sense?

  Read the article

• Should an event-sourced aggregate root have access to the event sourcing repository?

  - by JD Courtoy

  I'm working on an event-sourced CQRS implementation, using DDD in the application / domain layer. I have an object model that looks like this: public class Person : AggregateRootBase { private Guid? _bookingId; public Person(Identification identification) { Apply(new PersonCreatedEvent(identification)); } public Booking CreateBooking() { // Enforce Person invariants var booking = new Booking(); Apply(new PersonBookedEvent(booking.Id)); return booking; } public void Release() { // Enforce Person invariants // Should we load the booking here from the aggregate repository? // We need to ensure that booking is released as well. var booking = BookingRepository.Load(_bookingId); booking.Release(); Apply(new PersonReleasedEvent(_bookingId)); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonBookedEvent @event) { _bookingId = @event.BookingId; } [EventHandler] public void Handle(PersonReleasedEvent @event) { _bookingId = null; } } public class Booking : AggregateRootBase { private DateTime _bookingDate; private DateTime? _releaseDate; public Booking() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingCreatedEvent()); } public void Release() { //Enforce invariants Apply(new BookingReleasedEvent()); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingCreatedEvent @event) { _bookingDate = SystemTime.Now(); } [EventHandler] public void Handle(BookingReleasedEvent @event) { _releaseDate = SystemTime.Now(); } // Some other business activities unrelated to a person } With my understanding of DDD so far, both Person and Booking are seperate aggregate roots for two reasons: There are times when business components will pull Booking objects separately from the database. (ie, a person that has been released has a previous booking modified due to incorrect information). There should not be locking contention between Person and Booking whenever a Booking needs to be updated. One other business requirement is that a Booking can never occur for a Person more than once at a time. Due to this, I'm concerned about querying the query database on the read side as there could potentially be some inconsistency there (due to using CQRS and having an eventually consistent read database). Should the aggregate roots be allowed to query the event-sourced backing store by id for objects (lazy-loading them as needed)? Are there any other avenues of implementation that would make more sense?

  Read the article

• Using an Apt Repository for Paid Software Updates

  - by Scott Warren

  I'm trying to determine a way to distribute software updates for a hosted/on-site web application that may have weekly and/or monthly updates. I don't want the customers who use the on-site product to have to worry about updating it manually I just want it to download and install automatically ala Google Chrome. I'm planning on providing an OVF file with Ubuntu and the software installed and configured. My first thought on how to distributed software is to create six Apt repositories/channels (not sure which would be better at this point) that will be accessed through SSH using keys so if a customer doesn't renew their subscription we can disable their account: Beta - Used internally on test data to check the package for major defects. Internal - Used internally on live data to check the package for defects (dog fooding stage). External 1 - Deployed to 1% of our user base (randomly selected) to check for defects. External 9 - Deployed to 9% of our user base (ramdonly selected) to check for defects. External 90 - Deployed to the remaining 90% of users. Hosted - Deployed to the hosted environment. It will take a sign off at each stage to move into the next repository in case problems are reported. My questions to the community are: Has anyone tried something like this before? Can anyone see a downside to this type of a procedure? Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• Integrating different branches from external sources into a single Mercurial repository

  - by dukeofgaming

  I'm currently working in a company using Perforce and am making way for distributed version control with Mercurial. I've had success importing Perforce history using the perfarce (quite a suitable name, I laugh every time I see/say it) however, this only works with a single branch at a time. Here's how my P4 integration setup works: In perforce, create a "client", which is kind of a description of what you will be constantly updating/checking-out. This can only address one branch at a time (trunk or other). Once you do this, run hg clone p4://<server>/<client_name> Go to .hg/hgrc and put the perforce path line: perforce = p4://<server>/<client_name> Work normally with the code under mercurial, do hg pull perforce to sync up, hg push to export a changelist What I'd like to be able to do is have a perforce path per branch and have everything work in the same repository. Now, pushing is not a problem, however, if I pull the history from another branch it would end up at the default branch. I'd like to be able to do something like hg pull perforce-R5 and have it land in mercurial's R5 branch. Even if I have no merging history, it would be sweet enough to be able to preserve it. There are also other plugins for CVCSs that let you integrate mercurial, but AFAIK the subversion one has the same problem. I don't think there is a straight-through way of doing this, but as long as I could automate the process with some hooks and scripts in a single Mercurial machine, that would be good enough.

  Read the article

• update manager in ubuntu 12.10 can't access repository, but software center can

  - by user103597

  For some reason, whenever I try to search for updates with Ubuntu 12.10's update manager, I always get this error: Failed to download repository information, followed by the following details: W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/Release.gpg Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/i18n/Translation-en Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/i18n/Translation-en_CA Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/source/Sources Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/binary-amd64/Packages Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , W:Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/binary-i386/Packages Unable to connect to extras.ubuntu.com:http: , E:Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead. Initially I thought that for whatever reason the repositories were down, so I switched from the Canada server to the main server. I still got the same error. I also tried installing some things from the ubuntu software center. Funny thing is, that worked fine and I was able to successfully download and install software from the software center, so it seems that only update manager can't access the repositories. I have searched for and found similar cases (relating to ubuntu 12.10), but most of those cases involved ppa's, and I don't use any ppa's. Help would be appreciated. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Mercurial: Problem converting Windows cvs repository to mercurial

  - by jalperin

  I’m trying to convert an existing Windows CVS repository to Mercurial and getting the following response and error: C:\Windows\system32>hg convert c:\users\jeff\webs\shelter-cvs\shelter assuming destination shelter-hg initializing destination shelter-hg repository connecting to :local:c:\cvs abort: unexpected response from CVS server (expected "Valid-requests", but got 'E cvs [server aborted]: c:\\cvs: no such repository\n') Here’s the background: The repository was created with TortoiseCVS so I believe it’s actually cvsnt. I can properly checkout from the repository using either the command line or the TortoiseCVS gui, so I think it is set up correctly. I'm trying to convert a working copy, not the repository itself I’m running Windows 7, 64-bit I’ve installed TortoiseHG and enabled the convert extension.

  Read the article

• Objective-C wrapper API design methodology

  - by Wade Williams

  I know there's no one answer to this question, but I'd like to get people's thoughts on how they would approach the situation. I'm writing an Objective-C wrapper to a C library. My goals are: 1) The wrapper use Objective-C objects. For example, if the C API defines a parameter such as char *name, the Objective-C API should use name:(NSString *). 2) The client using the Objective-C wrapper should not have to have knowledge of the inner-workings of the C library. Speed is not really any issue. That's all easy with simple parameters. It's certainly no problem to take in an NSString and convert it to a C string to pass it to the C library. My indecision comes in when complex structures are involved. Let's say you have: struct flow { long direction; long speed; long disruption; long start; long stop; } flow_t; And then your C API call is: void setFlows(flow_t inFlows[4]); So, some of the choices are: 1) expose the flow_t structure to the client and have the Objective-C API take an array of those structures 2) build an NSArray of four NSDictionaries containing the properties and pass that as a parameter 3) create an NSArray of four "Flow" objects containing the structure's properties and pass that as a parameter My analysis of the approaches: Approach 1: Easiest. However, it doesn't meet the design goals Approach 2: For some reason, this seems to me to be the most "Objective-C" way of doing it. However, each element of the NSDictionary would have to be wrapped in an NSNumber. Now it seems like we're doing an awful lot just to pass the equivalent of a struct. Approach 3: Seems the cleanest to me from an object-oriented standpoint and the extra encapsulation could come in handy later. However, like #2, it now seems like we're doing an awful lot (creating an array, creating and initializing objects) just to pass a struct. So, the question is, how would you approach this situation? Are there other choices I'm not considering? Are there additional advantages or disadvantages to the approaches I've presented that I'm not considering?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >