Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns and practices'.

Page 64/348 | < Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >

• Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 Released

  - by Sherry LaMonica-Oracle

  Oracle R Distribution version 3.1.1 has been released to Oracle's public yum today. R-3.1.1 (code name "Sock it to Me") is an update to R-3.1.0 that consists mainly of bug fixes. It also includes enhancements related to accessing package help files, improved accuracy when importing data with large integers, and better integration with RStudio graphics. The full list of new features and bug fixes is listed in the NEWS file.To install Oracle R Distribution using yum, follow the instructions in the Oracle R Enterprise Installation and Administration Guide.Installing using yum will resolve any operating system dependencies automatically. As such, we recommend using yum to install Oracle R Distribution. However, if yum is not available, you can install Oracle R Distribution RPMs directly using RPM commands.For Oracle Linux 5, the Oracle R Distribution RPMs are available in the Enterprise Linux Add-Ons repository:  R-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm   R-core-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  R-devel-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-devel-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-static-3.1.1-1.el5.x86_64.rpm For Oracle Linux 6, the Oracle R Distribution RPMs are available in the Oracle Linux Add-Ons repository:  R-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  R-core-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  R-devel-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-devel-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm  libRmath-static-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpmFor example, this command installs the R 3.1.1 RPM on Oracle Linux x86-64 version 6:  rpm -i R-3.1.1-1.el6.x86_64.rpm To complete the Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 installation, repeat this command for each of the 6 RPMs, resolving dependencies as required. Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 is not yet officially certified with Oracle R Enterprise. Refer to Table 1-2 in the Oracle R Enterprise Installation Guide for supported configurations of Oracle R Enterprise components, or check this blog for updates. The Oracle R Distribution 3.1.1 binaries for Windows, AIX, Solaris SPARC and Solaris x86 will be available on OSS, Oracle's Open Source Software portal, in the coming weeks.

  Read the article

• Should all, none, or some overridden methods call Super?

  - by JoJo

  When designing a class, how do you decide when all overridden methods should call super or when none of the overridden methods should call super? Also, is it considered bad practice if your code logic requires a mixture of supered and non-supered methods like the Javascript example below? ChildClass = new Class.create(ParentClass, { /** * @Override */ initialize: function($super) { $super(); this.foo = 99; }, /** * @Override */ methodOne: function($super) { $super(); this.foo++; }, /** * @Override */ methodTwo: function($super) { this.foo--; } }); After delving into the iPhone and Android SDKs, I noticed that super must be called on every overridden method, or else the program will crash because something wouldn't get initialized. When deriving from a template/delegate, none of the methods are supered (obviously). So what exactly are these "je ne sais quoi" qualities that determine whether a all, none, or some overriden methods should call super?

  Read the article

• Using the @ in SQL Azure Connections

  - by BuckWoody

  The other day I was working with a client on an application they were changing to a hybrid architecture – some data on-premise and other data in SQL Azure and Windows Azure Blob storage. I had them make a couple of corrections - the first was that all communications to SQL Azure need to be encrypted. It’s a simple addition to the connection string, depending on the library you use. Which brought up another interesting point. They had been using something that looked like this, using the .NET provider: Server=tcp:[serverName].database.windows.net;Database=myDataBase; User ID=LoginName;Password=myPassword; Trusted_Connection=False;Encrypt=True; This includes most of the formatting needed for SQL Azure. It specifies TCP as the transport mechanism, the database name is included, Trusted_Connection is off, and encryption is on. But it needed one more change: Server=tcp:[serverName].database.windows.net;Database=myDataBase; User ID=[LoginName]@[serverName];Password=myPassword; Trusted_Connection=False;Encrypt=True; Notice the difference? It’s the User ID parameter. It includes the @ symbol and the name of the server – not the whole DNS name, just the server name itself. The developers were a bit surprised, since it had been working with the first format that just used the user name. Why did both work, and why is one better than the other? It has to do with the connection library you use. For most libraries, the user name is enough. But for some libraries (subject to change so I don’t list them here) the server name parameter isn’t sent in the way the load balancer understands, so you need to include the server name right in the login, so the system can parse it correctly. Keep in mind, the string limit for that is 128 characters – so take the @ symbol and the server name into consideration for user names. The user connection info is detailed here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee336268.aspx Upshot? Include the @servername on your connection string just to be safe. And plan for that extra space…  

  Read the article

• Quick Tip - Speed a Slow Restore from the Transaction Log

  - by KKline

  Here's a quick tip for you: During some restore operations on Microsoft SQL Server, the transaction log redo step might be taking an unusually long time. Depending somewhat on the version and edition of SQL Server you've installed, you may be able to increase performance by tinkering with the readahead performance for the redo operations. To do this, you should use the MAXTRANSFERSIZE parameter of the RESTORE statement. For example, if you set MAXTRANSFERSIZE=1048576, it'll use 1MB buffers. If you...(read more)

  Read the article

• Design pattern: static function call with input/output containers?

  - by Pavlo Dyban

  I work for a company in software research department. We use algorithms from our real software and wrap them so that we can use them for prototyping. Every time an algorithm interface changes, we need to adapt our wrappers respectively. Recently all algorithms have been refactored in such a manner that instead of accepting many different inputs and returning outputs via referenced parameters, they now accept one input data container and one output data container (the latter is passed by reference). Algorithm interface is limited to a static function call like that: class MyAlgorithm{ static bool calculate(MyAlgorithmInput input, MyAlgorithmOutput &output); } This is actually a very powerful design, though I have never seen it in a C++ programming environment before. Changes in the number of parameters and their data types are now encapsulated and they don't change the algorithm callback. In the latest algorithm which I have developed I used the same scheme. Now I want to know if this is a popular design pattern and what it is called.

  Read the article

• Is there really anything to gain with complex design? [duplicate]

  - by SB2055

  This question already has an answer here: What is enterprise software, exactly? 8 answers I've been working for a consulting firm for some time, with clients of various sizes, and I've seen web applications ranging in complexity from really simple: MVC Service Layer EF DB To really complex: MVC UoW DI / IoC Repository Service UI Tests Unit Tests Integration Tests But on both ends of the spectrum, the quality requirements are about the same. In simple projects, new devs / consultants can hop on, make changes, and contribute immediately, without having to wade through 6 layers of abstraction to understand what's going on, or risking misunderstanding some complex abstraction and costing down the line. In all cases, there was never a need to actually make code swappable or reusable - and the tests were never actually maintained past the first iteration because requirements changed, it was too time-consuming, deadlines, business pressure, etc etc. So if - in the end - testing and interfaces aren't used rapid development (read: cost-savings) is a priority the project's requirements will be changing a lot while in development ...would it be wrong to recommend a super-simple architecture, even to solve a complex problem, for an enterprise client? Is it complexity that defines enterprise solutions, or is it the reliability, # concurrent users, ease-of-maintenance, or all of the above? I know this is a very vague question, and any answer wouldn't apply to all cases, but I'm interested in hearing from devs / consultants that have been in the business for a while and that have worked with these varying degrees of complexity, to hear if the cool-but-expensive abstractions are worth the overall cost, at least while the project is in development.

  Read the article

• Reflective practice in programming using keystroke playback

  - by Graham

  I'm thinking of applying Reflective Practice to improving my programming skills. To that end, I want to be able to watch myself writing code. In general, what is a good method for applying Reflective Practice to the craft of programming? In particular, if it's a good idea, is there an editor that records keystrokes then plays them back at a later time - possibly running the keys together without delays, or replaying at a 2x/4x/8x accelerated rate? Screencasting with RecordMyDesktop is an option, but has downsides of waiting for encoding and ending up with a big video file instead of a list of keystrokes.

  Read the article

• How can i manage my personal notes , code snippets files in one place online [closed]

  - by user1758043

  Whenever i work on any project , then i have so much notes , diagrams files , image s, brainstorming ideas which i want to keep. i want to put them in one place so that i can see the history of my work. Is there any toll whichere i can store this online. my company is using confluence but thats costly for me. I want something for single user but online in clou where i can store Notes Code snippets Diagrams , flowchart Attah files , images Books marks , sites

  Read the article

• Building a complete program?

  - by Bob

  Reading books, watching videos, and reviewing tutorials is all very easy. Taking notes and actually learning the material may be slightly harder, but even then, anyone with a decent brain and a fair amount of interest, it's easy enough (not to mention, fun). The thing is, it doesn't really prepare you to write a full program or website. Let's say you're those teens (only in highschool, no true (college level) computer science or programming courses, and no real world experience), and you come out with Groupon. Or even Mark Zuckerburg, sure he was a genius, and he was a very capable programmer... but how? How do you recommend that people who are not necessarily new to programming, but new to programming real applications and real programmers go about developing it? What is the "development process" - especially for single programmers (or maybe 2-3 teens)? Also, as far as web development goes, what is the process? Was something like Facebook or Groupon written with a framework (like CodeIgniter or Zend for PHP)? Or do they develop their own frameworks? I'm not asking how to come up with a great idea, but how to implement great ideas in an effective way? Does anyone have advice? I've read a couple of books on both C and C++ (primarily the C Programming Language and the C++ Programming Language) and taken AP Computer Science (as well as read a few additional books on Java and OOP). I also have read a few tutorials on PHP (and CodeIgniter) and Python. But I'm still in highschool, and I'm technically not even old enough to work at an internship for a few more months.

  Read the article

• Should a primary key be immutable?

  - by Vincent Malgrat

  A recent question on stackoverflow provoked a discussion about the immutability of primary keys. I had thought that it was a kind of rule that primary keys should be immutable. If there is a chance that some day a primary key would be updated, I thought you should use a surrogate key. However it is not in the SQL standard and some RDBMS' "cascade update" feature allows a primary key to change. So my question is: is it still a bad practice to have a primary key that may change ? What are the cons, if any, of having a mutable primary key ?

  Read the article

• Can the following Domain Entity contain logic for creating/deleting other entities?

  - by user702769

  a) As far as I understand it, in most cases Domain Model DM doesn't contain code for creating/deleting domain entities, but instead it is the job of layers ( ie service layer or UI layer ) on top of DM to create/delete domain entities? b) Domain entities are modelled after real world entities. Assuming particular real world entity being abstracted does have the functionality of creating/deleting other real world entities, then I assume the domain entity abstracting this real world entity could also contain logic for creating/deleting other entities? class RobotDestroyerCreator { ... void heavyThinking() { ... if(...) unitOfWork.registerDelete(robot); ... if(...) { var robotNew = new Robot(...); unitOfWork.registerNew(robotNew); { ... } } Thank you

  Read the article

• What is MVC, really?

  - by NickC

  As a serious programmer, how do you answer the question What is MVC? In my mind, MVC is sort of a nebulous topic — and because of that, if your audience is a learner, then you're free to describe it in general terms that are unlikely to be controversial. However, if you are speaking to a knowledgeable audience, especially an interviewer, I have a hard time thinking of a direction to take that doesn't risk a reaction of "well that's not right!...". We all have different real-world experience, and I haven't truly met the same MVC implementation pattern twice. Specifically, there seem to be disagreements regarding strictness, component definition, separation of parts (what piece fits where), etc. So, how should I explain MVC in a way that is correct, concise, and uncontroversial?

  Read the article

• Can a candidate be judged by asking to write a complex program on "paper"?

  - by iammilind

  Sometime back in an interview, I was asked to write following program: In a keypad of a mobile phone, there is a mapping between number and characters. e.g. 0 & 1 corresponds to nothing; 2 corresponds to 'a','b','c'; 3 corresponds to 'd','e','f'; ...; 9 corresponds to 'w','x','y','z'. User should input any number (e.g. 23, 389423, 927348923747293) and I should store all the combinations of these character mapping into some data structure. For example, if user enters "23" then possible character combinations are: ad, ae, af, bd, be, bf, cd, ce, cf or if user enters, "4676972" then it can be, gmpmwpa, gmpmwpb, ..., hnroxrc, ..., iosozrc Interviewer told that people have written code for this within 20-30 mins!! Also he insisted I have to write on paper. If I am writing a code then my tendency is as of I am writing production code, even though it may not be expected from me. So, I always try to think all the aspects like, optimization, readability, maintainability, extensible and so on. Considering all these, I felt that I should be writing on PC and it needs decent 2 hours. Finally after 25 mins, I was able to come up with just the concept and some shattered pieces of code (not to mention of my rejection). My question is not the answer for the above program. I want to know that is this a right way to judge the caliber of a person ? Am I wrong / too slow in the estimates ? Am I too idealistic ?

  Read the article

• Using allocators for different systems

  - by chadb

  I am going over the memory architecture for my game and even though I know my memory budgets may not be final, I at the point where I can start using them in a general sense. I know that I will need several allocators (for systems such as audio, rendering, etc) but I am unsure of how they will be accessed. I do not use singletons, so I can't just have something such as AudioManager::GetInstance().get_allocator(). Instead, I need to find a different method of usage but I am not sure of how. How can I store and call my allocators needed for several different systems over engine in an efficient manner?

  Read the article

• What do you think about RefactoringManifesto.org?

  - by Gan

  Quite some time ago, on December 19 2010, a site called RefactoringManifesto.org was launched. The site is to voice concerns about refactoring. It lists ten main points as shown below (head over the website to see more details): Make your products live longer! Design should be simple so that it is easy to refactor. Refactoring is not rewriting. What doesn't kill it makes it stronger. Refactoring is a creative challenge. Refactoring survives fashion. To refactor is to discover. Refactoring is about independence. You can refactor anything, even total crap. Refactor – even in bad times! What do you think about this? Would you sign the manifesto? If not, why?

  Read the article

• How to determine if class meets single responsibility principle ?

  - by user1483278

  Single Responsibility Principle is based on high cohesion principle. The difference between the two is that highly cohesive classes feature a set of responsibilities that are strongly related, while classes adhering to SRP have just one responsibility. But how do we determine whether particular class features a set of responsibilities and is thus just highly cohesive, or whether it has only one responsibility and is thus adhering to SRP? Namely, isn't it more or less subjective, since some may find class very granular ( and as such will consider a class as adhering to SRP ), while others may find it not granular enough?

  Read the article

• A better alternative to incompatible implementations for the same interface?

  - by glenatron

  I am working on a piece of code which performs a set task in several parallel environments where the behaviour of the different components in the task are similar but quite different. This means that my implementations are quite different but they are all based on the relationships between the same interfaces, something like this: IDataReader -> ContinuousDataReader -> ChunkedDataReader IDataProcessor -> ContinuousDataProcessor -> ChunkedDataProcessor IDataWriter -> ContinuousDataWriter -> ChunkedDataWriter So that in either environment we have an IDataReader, IDataProcessor and IDataWriter and then we can use Dependency Injection to ensure that we have the correct one of each for the current environment, so if we are working with data in chunks we use the ChunkedDataReader, ChunkedDataProcessor and ChunkedDataWriter and if we have continuous data we have the continuous versions. However the behaviour of these classes is quite different internally and one could certainly not go from a ContinuousDataReader to the ChunkedDataReader even though they are both IDataProcessors. This feels to me as though it is incorrect ( possibly an LSP violation? ) and certainly not a theoretically correct way of working. It is almost as though the "real" interface here is the combination of all three classes. Unfortunately in the project I am working on with the deadlines we are working to, we're pretty much stuck with this design, but if we had a little more elbow room, what would be a better design approach in this kind of scenario?

  Read the article

• Sucking Less Every Year ?

  - by AdityaGameProgrammer

  Sucking Less Every Year A trail of thought that had been on my mind for a while Quoting directly from the post I've often thought that sucking less every year is how humble programmers improve. You should be unhappy with code you wrote a year ago. If you aren't, that means either A) you haven't learned anything in a year, B) your code can't be improved, or C) you never revisit old code. All of these are the kiss of death for software developers. How often does this happen or not happen to you? How long before you see an actual improvement in your coding ? month, year? Do you ever revisit Your old code? How often does your old code plague you? or how often do you have to deal with your technical debt. It is definitely very painful to fix old bugs n dirty code that we may have done to quickly meet a deadline and those quick fixes ,some cases we may have to rewrite most of the application/code. No arguments about that. Some of the developers i had come across argued that they were already at the evolved stage where their coding doesn't need improvement or cant get improved anymore. Does this happen? If so how many years into coding on a particular language does one expect this to happen?

  Read the article

• Learning by doing (and programming by trial and error)

  - by AlexBottoni

  How do you learn a new platform/toolkit while producing working code and keeping your codebase clean? When I know what I can do with the underlying platform and toolkit, I usually do this: I create a new branch (with GIT, in my case) I write a few unit tests (with JUnit, for example) I write my code until it passes my tests So far, so good. The problem is that very often I do not know what I can do with the toolkit because it is brand new to me. I work as a consulant so I cannot have my preferred language/platform/toolkit. I have to cope with whatever the customer uses for the task at hand. Most often, I have to deal (often in a hurry) with a large toolkit that I know very little so I'm forced to "learn by doing" (actually, programming by "trial and error") and this makes me anxious. Please note that, at some point in the learning process, usually I already have: read one or more five-stars books followed one or more web tutorials (writing working code a line at a time) created a couple of small experimental projects with my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA, at the moment. I use Eclipse, Netbeans and others, as well.) Despite all my efforts, at this point usually I can just have a coarse understanding of the platform/toolkit I have to use. I cannot yet grasp each and every detail. This means that each and every new feature that involves some data preparation and some non-trivial algorithm is a pain to implement and requires a lot of trial-and-error. Unfortunately, working by trial-and-error is neither safe nor easy. Actually, this is the phase that makes me most anxious: experimenting with a new toolkit while producing working code and keeping my codebase clean. Usually, at this stage I cannot use the Eclipse Scrapbook because the code I have to write is already too large and complex for this small tool. In the same way, I cannot use any more an indipendent small project for my experiments because I need to try the new code in place. I can just write my code in place and rely on GIT for a safe bail-out. This makes me anxious because this kind of intertwined, half-ripe code can rapidly become incredibly hard to manage. How do you face this phase of the development process? How do you learn-by-doing without making a mess of your codebase? Any tips&tricks, best practice or something like that?

  Read the article

• Is the "One Description Table to rule them all" approch good?

  - by DavRob60

  Long ago, I worked (as a client) with a software which use a centralized table for it's codified element. Here, as far as I remember, how the table look like : Table_Name (PK) Field_Name (PK) Code (PK) Sort_Order Description So, instead of creating a table every time they need a codified field, they where just adding row in this table with the new Table_Name and Field_Name. I'm sometime tempted to use this pattern in some database I design, but I have resisted to this as from now, I think there's something wrong with this, but I cannot put the finger on it. It is just because you land with some of the structure logic within the Data or something else?

  Read the article

• Is using Javascript/JQuery for layout and style bad practice?

  - by Renesis

  Many, but not all, HTML layout problems can be solved with CSS alone. For those that can't, JQuery (on document load) has become very popular.* As a result of its ease, many developers are quick to use JQuery or Javascript for layout and style — even without understanding whether or not the problem can be solved with CSS alone. This is illustrated by responses to questions like this one. Is this bad practice? What are the arguments for/against? Should someone who sees this in practice attempt to persuade those developers otherwise? If so, what are the best responses to arguments in favor of JQuery saying it's "so easy"? * Example: Layouts that wish to use vertical layout flow of some kind often run into dead ends with CSS alone — this would include layouts similar to Pinterest, though I'm not sure that's actually impossible with CSS.

  Read the article

• How bad would be to focus on iOS/Android development for an indie developer?

  - by kender

  After some time developing games for others I'm thinking of moving towards my own productions. My background is 10+ years of software development, with last 2 years spent on the iOS development (Objective-C and CoronaSDK). With my current experience in Corona I can quickly develop for iOS and Android systems. And this is something that I'm probably gonna do with several of the game ideas I have, at least for the prototype part. But - I'm wondering if it's not a bad idea to focus on those 2 systems only. After all there are other mobile platforms, there are PCs, Macs and Linux boxes... All of them having gamers using them. I was wondering if it wasn't a good idea to try some other SDK, giving me more flexibility when it comes to platform-independance. There's Unity3D (I think I can develop a 2D game in it though), there's MoAI from what I checked. I see a few options, not sure which one is best as I have little experience in this field (publishing own games): Stick with CoronaSDK for the whole time, release for iOS and Android platforms, screw other mobile devices and PCs, Use Corona for prototyping, then when the idea goes more into the "production" phase rewrite it in MoAI or Unity3D for more platforms support, Start with one of those 2 SDKs right now (which means the prototype phase will be delayed a bit, but after that I can jump right into real coding). Any clues here, what to do?

  Read the article

• Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

  - by Bob Horn

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

  Read the article

• ASP.NET design not SOLID

  - by w0051977

  SOLID principles are described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID_%28object-oriented_design%29 I am developing a large ASP.NET app. The previous developer created a few very large classes each with lots of different purposes. It is very difficult to maintain and extend. The classes are deployed to the web server along with the code behind files etc. I want to share a small amount of the app with another application. I am considering moving all of the classes of the ASP.NET web app to a DLL, so the small subset of functionality can be shared. I realise it would be better to only share the classes which contain code to be shared but because of the dependencies this is proving to be very difficult e.g. class A contains code that should be shared, however class A contains references to classes B, C, D, E, F, G etc, so class A cannot be shared on its own. I am planning to refactor the code in the future. As a temporary solution I am planning to convert all the classes into a single class library. Is this a bad idea and if so, is there an alternative? as I don't have time to refactor at the moment.

  Read the article

• How do I reuse a state machine in a slightly different way?

  - by JoJo

  Problem I have a big state machine. The design requirements of the project have changed such that I need to re-use this state machine in another place. All the states remain the same in this new place, but a few states run slightly different stuff. What design pattern allows me to reuse this state machine? Motivation I am building a video player. It is modeled by a state machine with these states: stopped, loading, playing, paused, crashed, and some more... This video player needs to be used on two web pages. When the player crashes on the first page, it should show an error message below. If the player crashes on the second page, the error message should appear in the center of the video and pulsate a few times.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >