Search Results

Search found 18314 results on 733 pages for 'document architecture'.

Page 66/733 | < Previous Page | 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73  | Next Page >

  • Several classes need to access the same data, where should the data be declared?

    - by Juicy
    I have a basic 2D tower defense game in C++. Each map is a separate class which inherits from GameState. The map delegates the logic and drawing code to each object in the game and sets data such as the map path. In pseudo-code the logic section might look something like this: update(): for each creep in creeps: creep.update() for each tower in towers: tower.update() for each missile in missiles: missile.update() The objects (creeps, towers and missiles) are stored in vector-of-pointers. The towers must have access to the vector-of-creeps and the vector-of-missiles to create new missiles and identify targets. The question is: where do I declare the vectors? Should they be members of the Map class, and passed as arguments to the tower.update() function? Or declared globally? Or are there other solutions I'm missing entirely?

    Read the article

  • Getting into the details of game engine programming

    - by Darkslash
    I am interested in learning game programming, but I really have an interest in the lower level engineering in games. I have OpenGL experience, and I am really interested in learning more about implementing AI, Physics, etc. I have a computer science degree, so I really like getting into technical stuff. Many times when I ask about this sort of thing, I get a lot of "Use an engine", "Use Unity3d", "Why waste your time writing code that already exists", etc, etc. My idea was to use simpler libraries such as SFML or XNA so that I could learn how to implement the more complex systems. The thing is, although I do want to write games, I want to learn things that using something like Unity simply doesn't teach you. My goal is not to make a current generation quality 3D game to sell, I just want to make some cool smaller games and learn all I can about the programming side of game development. Is this something that people just do not do anymore? It seems like everywhere I turn people are using Unity or UDK or GameMaker. I fully understand why you would use a tool like these, but I cant see how they would suit my purposes. So where does someone like myself turn? Am I trying to learn something that people just do not bother doing anymore? Is the innovation in this area gone and just all about gameplay now? I'm sorry if this question seems silly, but I am genuinely interested in knowing more about this and meeting more people who are interested in this sort of thing.

    Read the article

  • Users can benefit from Session Tracking

    I use to work for a large Dental Plan marketing website a few years ago and they had a large customer-driven website that sold Dental Plans to consumers. Their website started tracking users as soon as they hit their web servers, and then they logged everything they could about the user. There are a lot of benefits for using session tracking for both the user and the website. Users can benefit from session tracking due to the fact that a website can retain pertaining information for the user so that they do not have to re-enter the same information repeatedly. In addition, websites can hold specific items in a cart for each user so that they can pay for all of their  items at once when they are ready to complete their purchases. Websites can also benefit from session tracking because they can determine where a specific user came from and which advertising partner gave them a sale. This information is very useful when deciding on where to spend an advertising budget. There is only one real disadvantage when it comes to session tracking, Users can not really control what is actually tracked by a website. Yes, they can disable cookies and this will help, but that means that no tracking can be done at all. Most sites require users to have cookies enabled in order for users to make purchases or login to their accounts.

    Read the article

  • Include in service layer all the application's functions or only the reusable ones?

    - by BornToCode
    Background: I need to build a main application with some operations (CRUD and more) (-in winforms), I need to make another application which will re-use some of the functions of the main application (-in webforms). I understood that using service layer is the best approach here. If I understood correctly the service should be calling the function on the BL layer (correct me if I'm wrong) The dilemma: In my main winform UI - should I call the functions from the BL, or from the service? (please explain why) Should I create a service for every single function on the BL even if I need some of the functions only in one UI? for example - should I create services for all the CRUD operations, even though I need to re-use only update operation in the webform? YOUR HELP IS MUCH APPRECIATED

    Read the article

  • How is it possible to write the compiler of a programming language with that language itself [closed]

    - by tugberk
    Possible Duplicate: How could the first C++ compiler be written in C++? You probably heard that Microsoft released a new language called TypeScript which is a the typed superset of JavaScript. The most interesting thing that makes me wonder is the fact that its compiler writen in TypeScript itself. Call me ignorant but I really couldn't figure out in my head how that is possible. This is just like chicken and egg problem in my head because there is no compiler to compile TypeScript's compiler in the first place. How is it possible to write a compiler of the compiler of a programming language with that language?

    Read the article

  • Is there such thing like a "refactoring/maintainability group" role in software companies?

    - by dukeofgaming
    So, I work in a company that does embedded software development, other groups focus in the core development of different products' software and my department (which is in another geographical location) which is located at the factory has to deal with software development as well, but across all products, so that we can also fix things quicker when the lines go down due to software problems with the product. In other words, we are generalists while other groups specialize on each product. Thing is, it is kind of hard to get involved in core development when you are distributed geographically (well, I know it really isn't that hard, but there might be unintended cultural/political barriers when it comes to the discipline of collaborating remotely). So I figured that, since we are currently just putting fires out and somewhat being idle/sub-utilized (even though we are a new department, or maybe that is the reason), I thought that a good role for us could be detecting areas of opportunity of refactoring and rearchitecting code and all other implementations that might have to do with stewarding maintainability and modularity. Other groups aren't focused on this because they don't have the time and they have aggressive deadlines, which damage the quality of the code (eternal story of software projects) The thing is that I want my group/department to be recognized by management and other groups with this role officially, and I'm having trouble to come up with a good definition/identity of our group for this matter. So my question is: is this role something that already exists?, or am I the first one to make something like this up?

    Read the article

  • If I am developing a hosted payments page, what should the infrastructure look like?

    - by marcamillion
    If I am not storing credit card info, do I have to be concerned with PCI-compliance? I will be using a payment processor with a bank in my country. Literally just taking the credit card info and passing it to the gateway and processor. I would love to get an idea of the various technologies I might need to consider from an software architectural point of view. What are the best practices in terms of accepting credit cards and reducing fraud risk on my end? I will be creating the app in Rails.

    Read the article

  • Preferred way for dealing with customer-defined data in enterprise application

    - by Axarydax
    Let's say that we have a small enterprise web (intranet) application for managing data for car dealers. It has screens for managing customers, inventory, orders, warranties and workshops. This application is installed at 10 customer sites for different car dealers. First version of this application was created without any way to provide for customer-specific data. For example, if dealer A wanted to be able to attach a photo to a customer, dealer B wanted to add e-mail contact to each workshop, and dealer C wanted to attach multiple PDF reports to a warranty, each and every feature like this was added to the application, so all of the customers received everything on new update. However, this will inevitably lead to conflicts as the number of customers grow as their usage patterns are unique, and if, for instance, a specific dealer requested to have an ability to attach (for some reason) a color of inventory item (and be able to search by this color) as a required item, others really wouldn't need this feature, and definitely will not want it to be a required item. Or, one dealer would like to manage e-mail contacts for their employees on a separate screen of the application. I imagine that a solution for this is to use a kind of plugin system, where we would have a core of the application that provides for standard features like customers, inventory, etc, and all of the customer's installed plugins. There would be different kinds of plugins - standalone screens like e-mail contacts for employees, with their own logic, and customer plugin which would extend or decorate inventory items (like photo or color). Inventory (customer,order,...) plugins would require to have installation procedure, hooks for plugging into the item editor, item displayer, item filtering for searching, backup hook and such. Is this the right way to solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • What are some ways of making manageable complex AI?

    - by Tetrad
    In the past I've used simple systems like finite state machines (FSMs) or hierarchical FSMs to control AI behavior. For any complex system, this pattern falls apart very quickly. I've heard about behavior trees and it seems like that's the next obvious step, but haven't seen a working implementation or really tried going down that route yet. Are there any other patterns to making manageable yet complex AI behaviors?

    Read the article

  • Advice and resources on collaborative environments

    - by Tjaart
    I need some advice on collaborative software environments. More specifically, I am looking for books and reference materials that can aid me in understanding team and code structures and the interactions thereof. In other words books, blogs or white papers explaining: Different strategies for structuring teams that share common code between each other but have distinct individual functions? To summarise my question I would like to know what would be a good source of knowledge if I were to set up teams in an organisation that shared code but each unit still remained autonomous. I have done some research on this subject and explored: code review tools, distributed VCS, continuous integration tools, Unit testing automation. The tough part about implementing these tools are to determine where a good place would be to start, which tools are low hanging fruit, which tools or methods provide higher success rates. If someone asks me about code quality reference I point them to Code Complete. I am looking for an equivalent guide on software team structures and tools to make this equation work better. I realise that this question is quite vague but it arose as "we need to share code between teams without breaking each others stuff and causing management headaches and reams of red tape" The answer is definitely not simple and requires changes on many levels, hence the question. If the question is too vague please vote to close or delete. I would accept any good starting point as an answer.

    Read the article

  • Making efficeint voxel engines using "chunks"

    - by Wardy
    Concept I'm currently looking in to how voxel engines work with a view to possibly making one myself. I see a lot of stuff like this ... https://sites.google.com/site/letsmakeavoxelengine/home/chunks ... which talks about how to go about reducing the draw calls. What I can't seem to understand is how it actually saves draw call counts on the basis of the logic being something like this ... Without chunks foreach voxel in myvoxels DrawIfVisible() With Chunks foreach chunk in mychunks DrawIfVisible() which then does ... foreach voxel in myvoxels DrawIfVisible() So surely you saved nothing ?!?! You still make a draw call for each visible voxel do you not? A visible voxel needs a draw call in either scenario. The only real saving I can see is that the logic that evaluates a chunk will be able to determine if a large number of voxels are visible or not effectively saving a bit of "is this chunk visible" cpu time. But it's the draw calls that interest me ... The fewer of those, the faster the application. EDIT: In case it makes any difference I will probably be using XNA (DX not OpenGL) for my engine so don't consider my choice of example in the link above my choice of technology. But this question is such that I doubt it would matter.

    Read the article

  • Creating an Interface To a Language's Standard Library?

    - by Nathan Arthur
    In the process of learning test-driven development, I've been introduced to dependency injection and the use of interfaces, and have started using these concepts in my own PHP code in order to make it more testable. There have been times when I've needed to test code that was doing things like calling the PHP time() function. In order to make these tests predictable, it seemed logical to create an interface to the standard PHP functions I use so that I can mock them out in my tests. Is this good software design? What are the pros and cons of doing this? I've found myself groaning at how quickly my PHP interface can stick its fingers into everything I do. Is there a better way to make code that relies on PHP-accessed state and functions more testable?

    Read the article

  • Motivation for service layer (instead of just copying dlls)?

    - by BornToCode
    I'm creating an application which has 2 different UIs so I'm making it with a service layer which I understood is appropriate for such case. However I found myself just creating web methods for every single method I have in the BL layer, so the services basically built from methods that looks like this: return customers_bl.Get_Customer_Prices(customer_id); I understood that a main point of the service layer is to prevent duplication of code so I asked myself - well, why not just import the BL.dll (and the DAL.dll) to the other UI, and whenever making a change re-copy the dll files, it might not be so 'neat', but is the all purpose of the service layer to prevent this? {I know something is wrong in my approach, I'm probably missing the importance of service layer, I'd like to get more motivation to create another layer, especially because as it is I found that many of my BL functions ALREADY looks like: return customers_dal.Get_Customer_Prices(cust_id) which led me to ask: was it really necessary to create the BL just because on several functions I actually have LOGIC inside the BL?} so I'm looking for more motivation to creating ONE MORE layer, I'm sure it's not just to make it more convenient that I won't have to re-copy the dlls on changes? Am I grasping it wrong? Any simple guidelines on how to design service layer (corresponding to all the BL layer functions or not? any simple example?) any enlightenment on the subject?

    Read the article

  • How to implement a component based system for items in a web game.

    - by Landstander
    Reading several other questions and answers on using a component based system to define items I want to use one for the items and spells in a web game written in PHP. I'm just stuck on the implementation. I'm going to use a DB schema suggested in this series (part 5 describes the schema); http://t-machine.org/index.php/2007/09/03/entity-systems-are-the-future-of-mmog-development-part-1/ This means I'll have an items table with generic item properties, a table listing all of the components for an item and finally records in each component table used to make up the item. Assuming I can select the first two together in a single query, I'm still going to do N queries for each component type. I'm kind of fine with this because I can cache the data into memcache and check there first before doing any queries. I'll need to build up the items on every request they are used in so the implementation needs to be on the lean side even if they're pulled from memcache. But right there is where I feel confident about implementing a component system for my items ends. I figure I'd need to bring attributes and behaviors into the container from each component it uses. I'm just not sure how to do that effectively and not end up writing a lot of specialized code to deal with each component. For example an AttackComponent might need to know how to filter targets inside of a battle context and also maybe provide an attack behavior. That same item might also have a UsableComponent which allows the item to be used and apply some effect onto a different set of targets filtered differently from the same battle context. Then not every part of an item is an active part, an AttributeBonusComponent might need to only kick in when the item is in an equipped state or when displaying the item details page. Ultimately, how should I bring all of the components together into the container so when I use an item as a weapon I get the correct list of targets? Know when a weapon can also be used as an item? Or to apply the bonuses the item provides to a character object? I feel like I've gone too far down the rabbit hole and I can't grasp onto the simple solution in front of me. (If that makes any sense at all.) Likewise if I were to implement the best answer from here I feel like I'd have a lot of the same questions. How to model multiple "uses" (e.g. weapon) for usable-inventory/object/items (e.g. katana) within a relational database.

    Read the article

  • Circular class dependency

    - by shad0w
    Is it bad design to have 2 classes which need each other? I'm writing a small game in which I have a GameEngine class which has got a few GameState objects. To access several rendering methods, these GameState objects also need to know the GameEngine class - so it's a circular dependency. Would you call this bad design? I am just asking, because I am not quite sure and at this time I am still able to refactor these things.

    Read the article

  • Which version management design methodology to be used in a Dependent System nodes?

    - by actiononmail
    This is my first question so please indicate if my question is too vague and not understandable. My question is more related to High Level Design. We have a system (specifically an ATCA Chassis) configured in a Star Topology, having Master Node (MN) and other sub-ordinate nodes(SN). All nodes are connected via Ethernet and shall run on Linux OS with other proprietary applications. I have to build a recovery Framework Design so that any software entity, whether its Linux, Ramdisk or application can be rollback to previous good versions if something bad happens. Thus I think of maintaining a State Version Matrix over MN, where each State(1,2....n) represents Good Kernel, Ramdisk and application versions for each SN. It may happen that one SN version can dependent on other SN's version. Please see following diagram:- So I am in dilemma whether to use Package Management Methodology used by Debian Distributions (Like Ubuntu) or GIT repository methodology; in order to do a Rollback to previous good versions on either one SN or on all the dependent SNs. The method should also be easier for upgrading SNs along with MNs. Some of the features which I am trying to achieve:- 1) Upgrade of even single software entity is achievable without hindering others. 2) Dependency checks must be done before applying rollback or upgrade on each of the SN 3) User Prompt should be given in case dependency fails.If User still go for rollback, all the SNs should get notification to rollback there own releases (if required). 4) The binaries should be distributed on SNs accordingly so that recovery process is faster; rather fetching every time from MN. 5) Release Patches from developer for bug fixes, feature enhancement can be applied on running system. 6) Each version can be easily tracked and distinguishable. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Handling (many) multiple projects in Git in an enterprise environment

    - by Michael K
    One of the advantages of older version control systems such as CVS and SVN in enterprise development is that anyone can connect to source control and see all the projects that the company has. This can make it easier to get a high level view of what kid of development is happening outside your sprint and also keeps everything in one place and easy to find. However, distributed version control systems (Git, specifically) use the repository as their base unit. They work best with one project (or several closely related projects) per repository. This makes repository management more difficult in most enterprise environments where it is not unusual to have more than 25-50 projects to support. As far as I have been able to determine, you have to keep a list somewhere else of all the repos you have. There is software available, like GitHub, that help, but that still is an extra step beyond a single connection string and listing the contents of the repository. What is the best way to deal with the complexity of multiple repositories?

    Read the article

  • Core i7 with 4GB - go 64 bit or stay 32bit..?

    - by tommed
    I have a Core i7 laptop with 4gb ram. In windows, the disadvantage of using the 32bit OS would be that a single app could not use more than 2gb of ram (+ the 2gb shared kernel-space memory) except when setting a boot switch which reduces the amount of shared kernel memory, then it's 3GB max per app. What disadvantages/limitations would I have in Ubuntu for sticking to the 32bit OS? (If any?) - As I only have 4GB of ram, I can't see why I need to use the 64bit version?

    Read the article

  • When to unload graphics object from main memory?

    - by piotrek
    I writing my resource mangaer, and I consider about how it can work for graphics objects (like textures, meshes). I think about this : I want to load texture (in pseudocode): Texture t = resMgr.GetTex("image.png"); and GetTex make something like this: load texture from disk to main memory create texture object (load it to gpu memory) unload texture from main memory I consider about 3 step, does game engines that you know unload meshes/textures after load them into gpu memory ?

    Read the article

  • 2d, Top-down map with different levels

    - by Ktash
    So, I'm creating a 2d, top down, sprite based (tiled) game, and right now I'm working on maps (well, a map editor at the moment, but it will be creating my maps, so basically the same thing). The scenario So, I'm thinking about efficiency and creating a map in pieces. In each piece, I plan on having 'layers'. Basically, I plan on rendering it down to a 'below hero' level, and an 'above hero' level, with the hero rendered in between obviously. There will likely also be a 'on level with hero' layer, but I'm not quite there yet. Not even worrying about events or interaction yet. Just looking to get a hero on the screen. Now for movement, I obviously need to know what tiles can be moved and in what direction. My plan at the moment is each tile getting 8 bits (4 'can enter in direction' bits, 4 'can leave in direction'). This will allow me to limit movement and even allow one way directional movement. The dilemma This works great for a lot of scenarios. It will allow me to store a map in essentially 3 layers, a string, and gives me flexibility going forward. However, I can't create maps that themselves have layers. A good example is a bridge where the user can go under or over the bridge without invalid moves being allowed. I can't create a platform and allow movement underneath. These are things I would like to be able to include in my game. My idea In theory, I could allow multiple hero layers and then allow multiple sets of 'below' and 'above' layers (or sandwich layers). But this complicates my system, and makes movement between maps potentially tricky (If the hero is on the third layer at the edge of a map, but that corresponds to the second layer on the other map, how can I allow or disallow movement). My question Is there a better way to manage multiple maps with multiple levels like this where a users level may be 'connected' on different levels on different maps? Or even... Am I doing this the hard way? Is there a more standard way to handle top-down 2d tiled maps that I am just not aware of? Things to note or that might be helpful This will be done in Javascript (transferred around in JSON) State will need to be transferred quickly, so a map-id and x/y/direction should be enough to get me a boolean 'can move' value Maps will not be standard sized (though they will be in a certain number of tiles) Making an editor tool so that I can have others help, so something that I can create in a tool would be helpful 'Teleportation' locations will likely need to exist to get into building maps and to and from different map sets (which will not necessarily be connected), but have not been created yet (lumping in with events at the moment).

    Read the article

  • Architecting persistence (and other internal systems). Interfaces, composition, pure inheritance or centralization?

    - by Vandell
    Suppose that you need to implement persistence, I think that you're generally limited to four options (correct me if I'm wrong, please) Each persistant class: Should implement an interface (IPersistent) Contains a 'persist-me' object that is a specialized object (or class) that's made only to be used the class that contains it. Inherit from Persistent (a base class) Or you can create a gigantic class (or package) called Database and make your persistence logic there. What are the advantages and problems that can come from each of one? In a small (5kloc) and algorithmically (or organisationally) simple app what is probably the best option?

    Read the article

  • How should game objects be aware of each other?

    - by Jefffrey
    I find it hard to find a way to organize game objects so that they are polymorphic but at the same time not polymorphic. Here's an example: assuming that we want all our objects to update() and draw(). In order to do that we need to define a base class GameObject which have those two virtual pure methods and let polymorphism kicks in: class World { private: std::vector<GameObject*> objects; public: // ... update() { for (auto& o : objects) o->update(); for (auto& o : objects) o->draw(window); } }; The update method is supposed to take care of whatever state the specific class object needs to update. The fact is that each objects needs to know about the world around them. For example: A mine needs to know if someone is colliding with it A soldier should know if another team's soldier is in proximity A zombie should know where the closest brain, within a radius, is For passive interactions (like the first one) I was thinking that the collision detection could delegate what to do in specific cases of collisions to the object itself with a on_collide(GameObject*). Most of the the other informations (like the other two examples) could just be queried by the game world passed to the update method. Now the world does not distinguish objects based on their type (it stores all object in a single polymorphic container), so what in fact it will return with an ideal world.entities_in(center, radius) is a container of GameObject*. But of course the soldier does not want to attack other soldiers from his team and a zombie doesn't case about other zombies. So we need to distinguish the behavior. A solution could be the following: void TeamASoldier::update(const World& world) { auto list = world.entities_in(position, eye_sight); for (const auto& e : list) if (auto enemy = dynamic_cast<TeamBSoldier*>(e)) // shoot towards enemy } void Zombie::update(const World& world) { auto list = world.entities_in(position, eye_sight); for (const auto& e : list) if (auto enemy = dynamic_cast<Human*>(e)) // go and eat brain } but of course the number of dynamic_cast<> per frame could be horribly high, and we all know how slow dynamic_cast can be. The same problem also applies to the on_collide(GameObject*) delegate that we discussed earlier. So what it the ideal way to organize the code so that objects can be aware of other objects and be able to ignore them or take actions based on their type?

    Read the article

  • Any good stories or blog posts of a startup's server/stack evolving as they got bigger? [closed]

    - by user72245
    I know lots of startups often go for practical, simple, efficient. So maybe tossing a Ruby program on a basic Apache server. Get some users up and running, etc. Then Ruby starts to not be fast enough, so they throw more servers at the problem? And load balancing or something? And then when stuff gets REALLY crazy, language changes, etc? I'm looking for someone who has cleanly and simply told their own company's story like this. Are there any good ones?

    Read the article

  • Any recommended books/resources on component-based design?

    - by user1163640
    I come from a background with heavy use of the classical object-oriented paradigm for software development. The company I am a part of switched to Unity not too long ago, and we're all very excited to get started using it However, one aspect that have sparked my interested, and which I think will become a very important part of our future development, is Unity's approach to component-based design with scripting; with less focus on typical hierarchical aspect. Question I was wondering if anyone could recommend any good books on this subject? I have had trouble finding any books or books with reliable reviews, and was wondering if anyone more experienced here had something to say on the issue? Any other kind of resource would be excellent too, I'm just interested in getting to learn everything I can about it. This is not meant as a discussion about best books or resources on the topic, but simply a question regarding any resources that any of you find useful. Thank you all for your time!

    Read the article

  • Is it dangerous for me to give some of my Model classes Control-like methods?

    - by Pureferret
    In my personal project I have tried to stick to MVC, but I've also been made aware that sticking to MVC too tightly can be a bad thing as it makes writing awkward and forces the flow of the program in odd ways (i.e. some simple functions can be performed by something that normally wouldn't, and avoid MVC related overheads). So I'm beginning to feel justified in this compromise: I have some 'manager programs' that 'own' data and have some way to manipulate it, as such I think they'd count as both part of the model, and part of the control, and to me this feels more natural than keepingthem separate. For instance: One of my Managers is the PlayerCharacterManager that has these methods: void buySkill(PlayerCharacter playerCharacter, Skill skill); void changeName(); void changeRole(); void restatCharacter(); void addCharacterToGame(); void createNewCharacter(); PlayerCharacter getPlayerCharacter(); List<PlayerCharacter> getPlayersCharacter(Player player); List<PlayerCharacter> getAllCharacters(); I hope the mothod names are transparent enough that they don't all need explaining. I've called it a manager because it will help manage all of the PlayerCharacter 'model' objects the code creates, and create and keep a map of these. I may also get it to store other information in the future. I plan to have another two similar classes for this sort of control, but I will orchestrate when and how this happens, and what to do with the returned data via a pure controller class. This splitting up control between informed managers and the controller, as opposed to operating just through a controller seems like it will simplify my code and make it flow more. My question is, is this a dangerous choice, in terms of making the code harder to follow/test/fix? Is this somethign established as good or bad or neutral? I oculdn't find anything similar except the idea of Actors but that's not quite why I'm trying to do. Edit: Perhaps an example is needed; I'm using the Controller to update the view and access the data, so when I click the 'Add new character to a player button' it'll call methods in the controller that then go and tell the PlayerCharacterManager class to create a new character instance, it'll call the PlayerManager class to add that new character to the player-character map, and then it'll add this information to the database, and tell the view to update any GUIs effected. That is the sort of 'control sequence' I'm hoping to create with these manager classes.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73  | Next Page >