Search Results

Search found 22569 results on 903 pages for 'win32 process'.

Page 693/903 | < Previous Page | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >

  • Java @Contented annotation to help reduce false sharing

    - by Dave
    See this posting by Aleksey Shipilev for details -- @Contended is something we've wanted for a long time. The JVM provides automatic layout and placement of fields. Usually it'll (a) sort fields by descending size to improve footprint, and (b) pack reference fields so the garbage collector can process a contiguous run of reference fields when tracing. @Contended gives the program a way to provide more explicit guidance with respect to concurrency and false sharing. Using this facility we can sequester hot frequently written shared fields away from other mostly read-only or cold fields. The simple rule is that read-sharing is cheap, and write-sharing is very expensive. We can also pack fields together that tend to be written together by the same thread at about the same time. More generally, we're trying to influence relative field placement to minimize coherency misses. Fields that are accessed closely together in time should be placed proximally in space to promote cache locality. That is, temporal locality should condition spatial locality. Fields accessed together in time should be nearby in space. That having been said, we have to be careful to avoid false sharing and excessive invalidation from coherence traffic. As such, we try to cluster or otherwise sequester fields that tend to written at approximately the same time by the same thread onto the same cache line. Note that there's a tension at play: if we try too hard to minimize single-threaded capacity misses then we can end up with excessive coherency misses running in a parallel environment. Theres no single optimal layout for both single-thread and multithreaded environments. And the ideal layout problem itself is NP-hard. Ideally, a JVM would employ hardware monitoring facilities to detect sharing behavior and change the layout on the fly. That's a bit difficult as we don't yet have the right plumbing to provide efficient and expedient information to the JVM. Hint: we need to disintermediate the OS and hypervisor. Another challenge is that raw field offsets are used in the unsafe facility, so we'd need to address that issue, possibly with an extra level of indirection. Finally, I'd like to be able to pack final fields together as well, as those are known to be read-only.

    Read the article

  • Is is possible to get a patch included in the current release? If so, how?

    - by Oli
    So a while back I reported a bug in Compiz's Place Window plugin. It's a fairly major regression for people affected by it: mainly those using Gnome-Fallback, judging by the reports. A patch surfaced a short time later. I created a PPA for testing and everybody involved so far is reporting the issues are fixed. It even fixes another bug. I've done testing with a standard Unity desktop and can say (for my testing) no adverse effects were visible. I want to get this pushed to Ubuntu right now for two main reasons: I'm selfish. I don't want to need to update my PPA every time a new version of Compiz is pushed to 12.04. I don't want Ubuntu users seeing their windows flying around because of a silly little bug. I want this patch pushed to Ubuntu's version of Compiz as soon as possible, so we can mark these bugs fixed and move on with our lives. Whose leg do I have to hump to get this pulled into Ubuntu right now? I don't maintain this project and it's an upstream thing but it's fairly integral to Ubuntu. I could go to Compiz but I imagine that if they accept the patch, it'll be months (at least a release) before it's anywhere near Ubuntu. And when I do find the right person, how can I make the process as slick as possible for them? I want them to see my request, go "Yup, that all looks great, done" and that be it. I don't want seventeen rounds of emails addressing aspects of the patch. More importantly, I don't want to waste their time either. And what do I have to provide them? My packaging skills are... lamentable. This was my first attempt at patching a package for redistribution so I've probably made every single packaging error known to man. Will they be happy with the original patch (so they can apply it themselves) or should I repackage things so the diff/changelog is a little cleaner (it took me a few goes and the versioning is all over the place). Note: This question is about Compiz but I'd prefer if answers could address other styles of package too so we have an authoritative and comprehensive thread of how to get things fixed.

    Read the article

  • Specifying and applying broad changes to a program

    - by Victor Nicollet
    How do you handle incomplete feature requests, when the ones asking for the feature cannot possibly write a complete request? Consider an imaginary situation. You are a tech lead working on a piece of software that revolves around managing profiles (maybe they're contacts in a CRM-type application, or employees in an HR application), with many operations being directly or indirectly performed on those profiles — edit fields, add comments, attach documents, send e-mail... The higher-ups decide that a lock functionality should be added whereby a profile can be locked to prevent anyone else from doing any operations on it until it's unlocked — this feature would be used by security agents to prevent anyone from touching a profile pending a security audit. Obviously, such a feature interacts with many other existing features related to profiles. For example: Can one add a comment to a locked profile? Can one see e-mails that were sent by the system to the owner of a locked profile? Can one see who recently edited a locked profile? If an e-mail was in the process of being sent when the lock happened, is the e-mail sending canceled, delayed or performed as if nothing happened? If I just changed a profile and click the "cancel" link on the confirmation, does the lock prevent the cancel or does it still go through? In all of these cases, how do I tell the user that a lock is in place? Depending on the software, there could be hundreds of such interactions, and each interaction requires a decision — is the lock going to apply and if it does, how will it be displayed to the user? And the higher-ups asking for the feature probably only see a small fraction of these, so you will probably have a lot of questions coming up while you are working on the feature. How would you and your team handle this? Would you expect the higher-ups to come up with a complete description of all cases where the lock should apply (and how), and treat all other cases as if the lock did not exist? Would you try to determine all potential interactions based on existing specifications and code, list them and ask the higher-ups to make a decision on all those where the decision is not obvious? Would you just start working and ask questions as they come up? Would you try to change their minds and settle on a more easily described feature with similar effects? The information about existing features is, as I understand it, in the code — how do you bridge the gap between the decision-makers and that information they cannot access?

    Read the article

  • PASS: FY10 Actuals Posted

    - by Bill Graziano
    Earlier this year we published preliminary fiscal year 2010 financials to the Governance page on the PASS web site.  Please remember that FY10 runs from July 1st, 2009 through June 30th, 2010 and includes the November 2009 Summit.  We do our fiscal year this way so that the Summit falls earlier in the fiscal year.  The financials we had posted were P&L numbers at the portfolio level.  Prior to this we had posted our detailed budget but only posted the auditors report at the end of each year.  Today we updated our published financials to include: Pre-audit actuals from FY10 at the same level as our budget.  The document has both actuals and budget for FY10 side by side.  This is over 20 pages of detailed financial information covering hundreds of line-items. A letter describing key differences between our budget and actuals.  I walked through each line item where the difference was greater than $25,000 and explained what happened and why. We updated the financial graph going back to 2003 to include FY10. This update should “close the loop” on our financials.  You can now start with the published budget and compare it to the finished financials at the same level of detail.  We also plan to publish the auditor’s report when that is completed -- as we do every year. Overall I’m very happy with how FY10 turned out.  Keep in mind that this was the November 2009 Summit so we were still facing economic challenges.  With all that we were roughly break-even showing a $15,000 profit on $3.9 million of revenue.  I didn’t find anything shocking in reviewing our actual vs. budget but there were a few things that needed explanation.  You can see those in the letter on the governance page. Please keep in mind that these are the actuals from our operating financials.  The auditor may have us make adjustments for depreciation or other financial transactions.  We may also account for certain transactions differently for tax purposes than we do for financial reporting purposes.  I feel these financial statements give you the clearest picture of how our organization spends its money. We were late publishing these this year.  We were working through some tax issues and that delayed our ability to file our final tax forms which delayed this process.  In hindsight I should have published these documents as soon as we had them and not waited for the tax issues.  We’ll do this better in the future. And on a final note, you don’t need to login to view these documents.  If you have any questions you can post them here.  If we get more than a few questions we may see about creating some forums for financial issues on the PASS web site.

    Read the article

  • RadioButtons and Lambda Expressions

    - by MightyZot
    Radio buttons operate in groups. They are used to present mutually exclusive lists of options. Since I started programming in Windows 20 years ago, I have always been frustrated about how they are implemented. To make them operate as a group, you put your radio buttons in a group box. Conversely, to group radio buttons in HTML, you simply give them all the same name. Radio buttons with the same name or ID in HTML operate as one mutually exclusive group of options. In C#, all your radio buttons must have unique names and you use group boxes to group them. I’m in the process of converting some old code to C# and I’m tasked with creating a user control with groups of radio buttons on it. I started out writing the traditional switch…case statements to check the appropriate radio button based upon value, loops to uncheck them all, etc. Then it occurred to me that I could stick the radio buttons in a Dictionary or List and use Lambda expressions to make my code a lot more maintainable. So, here is what I ended up with: Here is a dictionary that contains my list of radio buttons and their values. I used their values as the keys, so that I can select them by value. Now, instead of using loops and switch…case statements to control the radio buttons, I use the lambda syntax and extension methods. Selecting a Radio Button by Value This code is inside of a property accessor, so “value” represents the value passed into the property accessor. The “First” extension method uses the delegate represented by the lambda expression to select the radio button (actually KeyValuePair) that represents the passed in value. Finally, the resulting checkbox is checked. Since the radio buttons are in the same group, they function as a group, the appropriate radio button is selected while the others are unselected. Reading the Value This is the get accessor for the property that returns the value of the checked radio button. Now, if you’re using binding, this code is likely not necessary; however, I didn’t want to use binding in this case, so I think this is a good alternative to the traditional loops and switch…case statements.

    Read the article

  • Legal concerns with orchestrating a music submission contest

    - by Amplify91
    My team and I are getting pretty far along in the development of our latest game and have been thinking about audio. We decided to host an audio submission contest where we will offer a little cash and some equity stake in the game as prizes. We are also giving away copies of the game to participants. We hope not only to find audio for our game, but to meet some cool sound artists and promote the game a bit through the process. First of all, is this even a good idea? What are some potential dangers in doing this? Will it even be well received among artists? Secondly, I wrote up some Terms and Conditions in my best legal-speak to try to protect us and clarify how the contest will be run. Are these sufficient to make sure everyone involved is treated fairly and is legally protected? They are as follows: All submissions (The Submission) must be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-3.0) By applying a CC-BY-3.0 license, you (The Submitter) expressly give Detour Games (and all members wherein) permission to copy, distribute, transmit, modify, adapt, and make commercial use of The Submission. The Submitter must own all rights to The Submission and be within their rights to license it as specified and submit it. The Submitter claims responsibility for the legality of The Submission. If The Submission is found to infringe on the rights of a person or entity other than those of The Submitter, Detour Games will not be held liable as all responsibility and liability for the legality of The Submission is that of The Submitter's. No more than two free copies of The Game per submitter. All flat cash prizes will only be disbursed pending the success of our first $5,000 Kickstarter campaign. These prizes will be disbursed 30 days after Detour Games receives the Kickstarter funds. All equity prizes (percentage of profits) are defined as the given percent of total profits after costs for a period of one year (12 months) after the release of RAW. These prizes will be disbursed semi-annually. All prize money will be disbursed through either an electronic fund transfer through a service such as PayPal or by a mailed money order. It is The Submitter's responsibility to cooperate with Detour Games in the disbursement of the funds. Detour Games reserves the right to change these Terms and Conditions at any time without notice. By participating in the contest, The Submitter agrees to and accepts all terms and conditions listed. What else could I do (legally) to protect everyone involved?

    Read the article

  • Upgrading Oracle Enterprise Manager: 12c to 12c Release 2

    - by jorge_neidisch
    1 - Download the OEM 12c R2. It can be downloaded here: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oem/grid-control/downloads/index.html  Note: it is a set of three huge zips. 2 - Unzip the archives 3 - Create a directory (as the oem-owner user) where the upgraded Middleware should be installed. For instance: $ mkdir /u01/app/oracle/Middleware12cR2 4 - Back up OMS (Middleware home and inventory), Management Repository and Software Library. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E24628_01/doc.121/e24473/ha_backup_recover.htm#EMADM10740 5 - Ensure that the Management tables don't have snapshots:  SQL> select master , log_table from all_mview_logs where log_owner='<EM_REPOS_USER>If there are snapshots drop them:  SQL> Drop snapshot log on <master> 6 - Copy emkey  from existing OMS:  $ <OMS_HOME>/bin/emctl config emkey -copy_to_repos [-sysman_pwd <sysman_pwd>]To verify whether the emkey is copied, run the following command: $ <OMS_HOME>/bin/emctl status emkeyIf the emkey is copied, then you will see the following message:The EMKey  is configured properly, but is not secure.Secure the EMKey by running "emctl config emkey -remove_from_repos". 7 - Stop the OMS and the Agent $ <OMS_HOME>/bin/emctl stop oms $ <AGENT_HOME>/bin/emctl stop agent 8 - from the unzipped directory, run $ ./runInstaller 8a - Follow the wizard: Email / MOS; Software Updates: disable or leave empty. 8b - Follow the wizard:  Installation type: Upgrade -> One System Upgrade. 8c - Installation Details: Middleware home location: enter the directory created in step 3. 8d - Enter the DB Connections Details. Credentials for SYS and SYSMAN. 8e - Dialog comes: Stop the Job Gathering: click 'Yes'. 8f- Warning comes: click 'OK'. 8g - Select the plugins to deploy along with the upgrade process 8h- Extend Weblogic: enter the password (recommended, the same password for the SYSMAN user). A new directory will be created, recommended: /u01/app/oracle/Middleware12cR2/gc_inst 8i - Let the upgrade proceed by clicking 'Install'. 8j - Run the following script (as root) and finish the 'installation':  $ /u01/app/oracle/Middleware12R2/oms/allroot.sh 9 - Turn on the Agent:  $ <AGENT_HOME>/bin/emctl start agent  Note that the $AGENT_HOME might be located in the old Middleware directory:  $ /u01/app/oracle/Middleware/agent/agent_inst/bin/emctl start agent 10 - go to the EM UI. Select the WebLogic Target and choose the option "Refresh WebLogic Domain" from the menu. 11 - Update the Agents: Setup -> Manage Cloud Control -> Upgrade Agents -> Add (+) Note that the agents may take long to show up. ... and that's it! Or that should be it !

    Read the article

  • How quickly to leave contract-to-hire gig where you don't want to be hired? [closed]

    - by nono
    So you move to a big new city with tons of software development opportunity, having taken a six month contract-to-hire job. The company treats you really well and has a good team and work environment. However, the recruiter assured you when offering the gig that it would be a good position in which you can advance your learning from more senior developers (a primary concern of yours) but you're starting to realize that a job recruiter isn't going to understand that the team in question isn't very up on modern software practices (you start to sympathize with this guy and read his post over and over again: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1586166/career-killer-nhibernate-oop-design-patterns-domain-driven-design-test-driv) and that much of the company's software is very old and very very poorly architected, and the company (like so many others) seems to be only concerned with continually extending the software without investing in any structural improvements. You're absolutely dismayed at how long it takes your team (including) to fulfill simple feature requests (maybe 500-1000% longer than with better designed software that you've worked on in the past), but no one else there seems to think anything of it. You find that the work and the company's business are intensely uninteresting to you, but due to the convoluted design of their various software systems, fulfilling the work will require as much mental engagement as any other development position. You feel a bit naive about not having asked the right questions during your interview process, and for not having anticipated that your team at your former podunk company might possibly be light-years ahead of any team in Big Shiny City, but you know you don't want to stay at this place, and (were it not for your personal, after-hours studying and personal programming efforts) fear that you might actually give a worse interview after completing your 6 months than you did when you started at the place. You read about how hard of a time local companies are having filling their positions with qualified software development candidates. You read all sorts of fabulous sounding job postings online and feel like you're really missing out. In spite of the comfortable environment you feel like you would willingly accept a somewhat more demanding or aggressive lifestyle to feel like you are learning and progressing and producing something meaningful. My questions are: how quickly do you leave and how do you go about giving a polite reason for departing? The contract is written to allow them to "can" you and to allow you to leave with 2 weeks notice. Do you ethically owe the 6 months? Upon taking the position, the company told you they were not interested in candidates who were intending to only stay for 6 months and then leave (you were not intending to bail after 6 months, at that time), so perhaps they might be fine if you split now, knowing that you don't want to stick around for the full time hire?

    Read the article

  • Creating a Yes/No MessageBox in a NuGet install/uninstall script

    - by ParadigmShift
    Sometimes getting a little feedback during the install/uninstall process of a NuGet package could be really useful. Instead of accounting for all possible ways to install your NuGet package for every user, you can simplify the installation by clarifying with the user what they want. This example shows how to generate a windows yes/no message box to get input from the user in the PowerShell install or uninstall script. We’ll use the prompt on the uninstall to confirm if the user wants to delete a custom setting that the initial install placed in their configuration.  Obviously you could use the prompt in any way you want. The objects of the message box are generated similar to the controls in the code behind of a WinForm. At the beginning of your script enter this: param($installPath, $toolsPath, $package, $project)   # Set up path variables $solutionDir = Get-SolutionDir $projectName = (Get-Project).ProjectName $projectPath = Join-Path $solutionDir $projectName   ################################################################################################ # WinForm generation for prompt ################################################################################################ function Ask-Delete-Custom-Settings { [void][reflection.assembly]::loadwithpartialname("System.Windows.Forms") [Void][reflection.assembly]::loadwithpartialname("System.Drawing")   $title = "Package Uninstall" $message = "Delete the customized settings?" #Create form and controls $form1 = New-Object System.Windows.Forms.Form $label1 = New-Object System.Windows.Forms.Label $btnYes = New-Object System.Windows.Forms.Button $btnNo = New-Object System.Windows.Forms.Button   #Set properties of controls and form ############ # label1 # ############ $label1.Location = New-Object System.Drawing.Point(12,9) $label1.Name = "label1" $label1.Size = New-Object System.Drawing.Size(254,17) $label1.TabIndex = 0 $label1.Text = $message   ############# # btnYes # ############# $btnYes.Location = New-Object System.Drawing.Point(156,45) $btnYes.Name = "btnYes" $btnYes.Size = New-Object System.Drawing.Size(48,25) $btnYes.TabIndex = 1 $btnYes.Text = "Yes"   ########### # btnNo # ########### $btnNo.Location = New-Object System.Drawing.Point(210,45) $btnNo.Name = "btnNo" $btnNo.Size = New-Object System.Drawing.Size(48,25) $btnNo.TabIndex = 2 $btnNo.Text = "No"   ########### # form1 # ########### $form1.ClientSize = New-Object System.Drawing.Size(281,86) $form1.Controls.Add($label1) $form1.Controls.Add($btnYes) $form1.Controls.Add($btnNo) $form1.Name = "Form1" $form1.Text = $title #Event Handler $btnYes.add_Click({btnYes_Click}) $btnNo.add_Click({btnNo_Click}) return $form1.ShowDialog() } function btnYes_Click { #6 = Yes $form1.DialogResult = 6 } function btnNo_Click { #7 = No $form1.DialogResult = 7 } ################################################################################################ This has also wired up the click events to the form.  This is all it takes to create the message box. Now we have to actually use the message box and get the user’s response or this is all pointless.  We’ll then delete the section of the application/web configuration called <Custom.Settings> [xml] $configXmlContent = Get-Content $configFile   Write-Host "Please respond to the question in the Dialog Box." $dialogResult = Ask-Delete-Custom-Settings #6 = Yes #7 = No Write-Host "dialogResult = $dialogResult" if ($dialogResult.ToString() -eq "Yes") { Write-Host "Deleting customized settings" $customSettingsNode = $configXmlContent.configuration.Item("Custom.Settings") $configXmlContent.configuration.RemoveChild($customSettingsNode) $configXmlContent.Save($configFile) } if ($dialogResult.ToString() -eq "No") { Write-Host "Do not delete customized settings" } The part where I check if ($dialog.Result.ToString() –eq “Yes”) could just as easily check the value for either 6 or 7 (Yes or No).  I just personally decided I liked this way better.   Shahzad Qureshi is a Software Engineer and Consultant in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA His certifications include: Microsoft Certified System Engineer 3CX Certified Partner Global Information Assurance Certification – Secure Software Programmer – .NET He is the owner of Utah VoIP Store at http://www.utahvoipstore.com/ and SWS Development at http://www.swsdev.com/ and publishes windows apps under the name Blue Voice.

    Read the article

  • Access to Salesforce.com Data Through Tableau Desktop

    - by dataintegration
    This article will explain how to connect to any of the RSSBus OData Connectors with Tableau's business intelligence tool. While the example uses the Salesforce Connector, the same process can be followed for any of the OData Connectors. Step 1: Download and install both the Salesforce Connector from RSSBus and Tableau Desktop from Tableau. Step 2: Next you will want to configure the Salesforce Connector to connect with your Salesforce.com account. If you browse to the Help tab in the Salesforce Connector application, there is a link to the Getting Started Guide which will walk you through setting up the Salesforce Connector. Step 3: Once you have successfully configured the Salesforce Connector application, you will want to open Tableau and select the Connect to data option at the top left of the window. Step 4: Here you will click on the option labeled OData under the section labeled On a server. Step 5: A new pop up will appear. The box under Step 1 of the pop-up must contain the OData URL of the Salesforce Connector table. You can find this by clicking on the Settings tab of the Salesforce Connector. Once you have found the OData entry URL, you will need to append the table name that you want Tableau to connect with to the OData entry URL. In this example, we will connect to the Account table. Thus, the URL we enter will be: http://localhost:8181/sfconnector/data/conn/odata.rsc/Account. You will also need to add authentication options in this step. To do this, select the Use a Username and Password option in Step 2 of the pop-up and enter the Username and Password of the user who has access to the Salesforce Connector. When you are done, click the Connect button in Step 3 of the pop-up. Step 6: When the connection to the Salesforce Connector is successful, give the connection a name and click the OK button. Step 7: The table columns will be listed on the left side under the Dimensions section of the workspace. Step 8: To view your Salesforce.com data, you can right click under the table name in the Data section at the top left of the dashboard and select the View Data option. Your Saleforce.com data will appear in Tableau.

    Read the article

  • Why are MVC & TDD not employed more in game architecture?

    - by secoif
    I will preface this by saying I haven't looked a huge amount of game source, nor built much in the way of games. But coming from trying to employ 'enterprise' coding practices in web apps, looking at game source code seriously hurts my head: "What is this view logic doing in with business logic? this needs refactoring... so does this, refactor, refactorrr" This worries me as I'm about to start a game project, and I'm not sure whether trying to mvc/tdd the dev process is going to hinder us or help us, as I don't see many game examples that use this or much push for better architectural practices it in the community. The following is an extract from a great article on prototyping games, though to me it seemed exactly the attitude many game devs seem to use when writing production game code: Mistake #4: Building a system, not a game ...if you ever find yourself working on something that isn’t directly moving your forward, stop right there. As programmers, we have a tendency to try to generalize our code, and make it elegant and be able to handle every situation. We find that an itch terribly hard not scratch, but we need to learn how. It took me many years to realize that it’s not about the code, it’s about the game you ship in the end. Don’t write an elegant game component system, skip the editor completely and hardwire the state in code, avoid the data-driven, self-parsing, XML craziness, and just code the damned thing. ... Just get stuff on the screen as quickly as you can. And don’t ever, ever, use the argument “if we take some extra time and do this the right way, we can reuse it in the game”. EVER. is it because games are (mostly) visually oriented so it makes sense that the code will be weighted heavily in the view, thus any benefits from moving stuff out to models/controllers, is fairly minimal, so why bother? I've heard the argument that MVC introduces a performance overhead, but this seems to me to be a premature optimisation, and that there'd more important performance issues to tackle before you worry about MVC overheads (eg render pipeline, AI algorithms, datastructure traversal, etc). Same thing regarding TDD. It's not often I see games employing test cases, but perhaps this is due to the design issues above (mixed view/business) and the fact that it's difficult to test visual components, or components that rely on probablistic results (eg operate within physics simulations). Perhaps I'm just looking at the wrong source code, but why do we not see more of these 'enterprise' practices employed in game design? Are games really so different in their requirements, or is a people/culture issue (ie game devs come from a different background and thus have different coding habits)?

    Read the article

  • Is it appropriate to try to control the order of finalization?

    - by Strilanc
    I'm writing a class which is roughly analogous to a CancellationToken, except it has a third state for "never going to be cancelled". At the moment I'm trying to decide what to do if the 'source' of the token is garbage collected without ever being set. It seems that, intuitively, the source should transition the associated token to the 'never cancelled' state when it is about to be collected. However, this could trigger callbacks who were only kept alive by their linkage from the token. That means what those callbacks reference might now in the process of finalization. Calling them would be bad. In order to "fix" this, I wrote this class: public sealed class GCRoot { private static readonly GCRoot MainRoot = new GCRoot(); private GCRoot _next; private GCRoot _prev; private object _value; private GCRoot() { this._next = this._prev = this; } private GCRoot(GCRoot prev, object value) { this._value = value; this._prev = prev; this._next = prev._next; _prev._next = this; _next._prev = this; } public static GCRoot Root(object value) { return new GCRoot(MainRoot, value); } public void Unroot() { lock (MainRoot) { _next._prev = _prev; _prev._next = _next; this._next = this._prev = this; } } } intending to use it like this: Source() { ... _root = GCRoot.Root(callbacks); } void TransitionToNeverCancelled() { _root.Unlink(); ... } ~Source() { TransitionToNeverCancelled(); } but now I'm troubled. This seems to open the possibility for memory leaks, without actually fixing all cases of sources in limbo. Like, if a source is closed over in one of its own callbacks, then it is rooted by the callback root and so can never be collected. Presumably I should just let my sources be collected without a peep. Or maybe not? Is it ever appropriate to try to control the order of finalization, or is it a giant warning sign?

    Read the article

  • "Expecting A Different Result?" (2 of 3 in 'No Customer Left Behind' Series)

    - by Kathryn Perry
    A guest post by David Vap, Group Vice President, Oracle Applications Product Development Many companies already have some type of customer experience initiative in process or one that could be framed as such. The challenge is that the initiatives too often are started in a department silo, don't have the right level of executive sponsorship, or have been initiated without the necessary insight and strategic business alignment. You can't keep doing the same things, give it a customer experience name, and expect a different result. You can't continue to just compete on price or features - that is not sustainable in commoditized markets. And ultimately, investing in technology alone doesn't solve customer experience problems; it just adds to the complexity of them. You need a customer experience strategy and approach on how to execute a customer-centric worldview within your business. To develop this, you must take an outside in journey on how your customers are interacting with your business to establish a benchmark of your customers' experiences. Then you must get cross-functional alignment on what you are trying to achieve, near, mid, and long term. Your execution of that strategy should be based on a customer experience approach: Understand your customer: You need to capture the insights across interactions, channels (including social), and personas to better understand whom to serve, how to serve them, and when to serve them. Not all experiences or customers are equal, so leverage this insight to understand the strategic business objectives you need to address. Then determine which experiences can be improved immediately and which over time to get the result you need. Empower your ecosystem: You need to align your front-line employees with your strategy and give them the power, insight, and tools that allow them to cultivate a culture around strengthening the relationships with your customers. You also need to provide the transparency, access, and collaboration that enable your customers and partners to self serve and self solve and to share with ease. Adapt your business: You need to enable the discipline of agility within your organization and infrastructure so that you can innovate, tailor, and personalize experiences. This needs to be done both reactively from insight and proactively in real time so you can stay ahead of shifting market trends and evolving consumer behaviors. No longer will the old approaches provide the same returns. To compete, differentiate, and win in a world where the customer has the power, you must execute a strategy that is sure to deliver a better brand experience for your customers. Note: This is Part 2 in a three-part series. Part 1 is here. Stop back for Part 3 on November 28.

    Read the article

  • PHP - Internal APIs/Libraries - What makes sense?

    - by Mark Locker
    I've been having a discussion lately with some colleagues about the best way to approach a new project, and thought it'd be interesting to get some external thoughts thrown into the mix. Basically, we're redeveloping a fairly large site (written in PHP) and have differing opinions on how the platform should be setup. Requirements: The platform will need to support multiple internal websites, as well as external (non-PHP) projects which at the moment consist of a mobile app and a toolbar. We have no plans/need in the foreseeable future to open up an API externally (for use in products other than our own). My opinion: We should have a library of well documented native model classes which can be shared between projects. These models will represent everything in our database and can take advantage of object orientated features such as inheritance, traits, magic methods, etc. etc. As well as employing ORM. We can then add an API layer on top of these models which can basically accept requests and route them to the appropriate methods, translating the response so that it can be used platform independently. This routing for each method can be setup as and when it's required. Their opinion: We should have a single HTTP API which is used by all projects (internal PHP ones or otherwise). My thoughts: To me, there are a number of issues with using the sole HTTP API approach: It will be very expensive performance wise. One page request will result in several additional http requests (which although local, are still ones that Apache will need to handle). You'll lose all of the best features PHP has for OO development. From simple inheritance, to employing the likes of ORM which can save you writing a lot of code. For internal projects, the actual process makes me cringe. To get a users name, for example, a request would go out of our box, over the LAN, back in, then run through a script which calls a method, JSON encodes the output and feeds that back. That would then need to be JSON decoded, and be presented as an array ready to use. Working with arrays, as appose to objects, makes me sad in a modern PHP framework. Their thoughts (and my responses): Having one method of doing thing keeps things simple. - You'd only do things differently if you were using a different language anyway. It will become robust. - Seeing as the API will run off the library of models, I think my option would be just as robust. What do you think? I'd be really interested to hear the thoughts of others on this, especially as opinions on both sides are not founded on any past experience.

    Read the article

  • Deploying, but without those pesky test files!

    - by Chris Skardon
    Silverlight testing is great, we all know that (don’t we??), we’re expected to do it as part of the development process, but once we’ve got an awesome application written and we come to deploy it, we don’t want the test files going out with it… You might be like me, have the files in a Web project – let’s face it, that’s how we’re pushed into doing it… So let’s stick with it! Now. I’m deploying via the wonders of the Web Deployment shizzle, but this also applies to the classic ‘installer’ project as well.. Baaaasically, we’re going to use the ‘Debug’ / ‘Release’ configurations to include given files. ?? OK, you know in the top of your visual studio editor, you (usually) have a drop down which predominantly reads ‘Debug’? Those are ‘configurations’. Mostly we don’t bother changing it, primarily due to laziness, but also the fact that we generally don’t see ‘Release’ as actually doing anything other than making it harder to find problems :) Well today my friends we’re going to change that bad boy… The next few steps are just helping you set up a new ‘Debug’ configuration, but you can just switch to the ‘Release’ configuration and skip to the end… First let’s go to the Configuration Manager. There are multiple ways, through the ‘Build’ menu (at the bottom), or via the drop down which currently has ‘Debug’ in it :) Got it? Select ‘New’ from the ‘Active solution configuration’ drop down: Create a new configuration, kind of like the picture below shows (or for those graphically challenged – Name: DebugWithNoTests, and Copy settings from: ‘Debug’, ensuring the ‘Create new project configurations’ checkbox is checked). Press OK. VS will do some shizzle, and in the Configuration manager, you will see pretty much exactly what you did before, only with ‘Debug’ replaced with ‘DebugWithNoTests’. Turn off the build options for the test projects. We won’t need them.. IF you skipped down from the top, this is where you’ll be wanting to stop!!! Close and now we’re one notepad step away from achieving our goals. Yes, I said notepad. You can’t do what we’re going to do in VS. (Pity). Go to the folder where your web project is, and right click on the ‘.csproj’ file. Now open it with notepad. Head on down to the ‘<Content Include’ bits, they’ll look like this: <ItemGroup> <Content Include="ClientBin\Tests.xap" /> ... </ItemGroup> Take this and modify each of the files you don’t want deployed and change to: <Content Include="ClientBin\Tests.xap" Condition="'$(Configuration)' == 'Debug'" /> Once you’ve got that sorted publish your project, once with the Debug configuration selected, and another with any other configuration (‘Release’, ‘DebugWithNoTests’ etc).. No files! Huzzah!

    Read the article

  • Hierachies....from the Top Down

    - by Joe G
    I've been struggling with how to write on the topic of the importance of hierarchy design.  It's not so much that hierarchies haven't always been important, it's more of that with Fusion, the timing of when the hierarchies are designed should take a higher priority.    I will attempt to explain..... When I was implementing applications, back in the day, we had the list of detailed account values to enter with the obvious parent accounts. Then, after the setup was complete and things were functioning, the reporting phase started.  Users explained the elements that they want on the reports, what totals should be included, and how things should be compared.  Frequently, there was at least one calculation that became a nightmare either because it was based on very specific things that didn't relate to anything else or because it was "hardcoded" so that when something changed, someone need to "fix" the report. With Fusion, the process changes slightly.  You still want to enter all of the detailed accounts, but before you start adding parent values, you should investigate the reporting requirements from the top-down.  It's better to build hierarchies based on the reporting requirements than it is to build reports based on random hierarchies. Build reports based on hierarchies that resemble the reports themselves, and maintain the hierarchies without rework of the reports. For example, if you look at an income statement, you may have line items for Material Costs, Employee Costs, Travel & Entertainment, and Total Operating Expenses.  In your hierarchy, you have detail values that roll up to Material Costs, Employee Costs, and Travel & Entertainment which roll up to Total Operating Expenses. Balances are stored automatically in the cube for each of these.  When you define the report, you pick each of these members - no calculations required.  If a new detail value is added, you simply add it to the hierarchy, and there is no need to modify the report. I realize that there are always exceptions that require special handling, but I am confident that you will end up with much fewer exceptions if you make reporting a priority and design your hierarchies from the top-down.

    Read the article

  • Simulate 'Shock absorbtion' with tire rubber in PhysX (2.8.x)

    - by Mungoid
    This is a kinda tricky question and I fear there is no easy enough solution, but I figured I'd hit SE up before giving up on it and just doing what I can. A machine I am working on has no suspension or shocks or springs of any sort in the real machine, so you would think that when it drives over bumps, it would shake like crazy but because its tires (6 of them) are quite large they seem to absorb a lot of shock from the bumps. Part of this is because the machine is around 30k lbs and it just smashes/compresses any bumps in the ground down (This is another issue im still working on) and the other part is that the tires seem to have a lot of flex to them with a lot of air as well. So my current task is to simulate shock absorption in physx without visibly separating the tires from the spindle/axle.. I have been messing with all kinds of NxMaterial, NxSpring, Joints, etc. and have had no luck getting this to work. The main problem is that the spindle attached to the tire is directly in the center and the axle is basically solidly attached to the chassis, so if i give it any spring or suspension travel, that spindle on the tires will move upwards or downwards, looking very odd because now its not any longer in the center of the tire. I tried giving it a higher restitution but that just makes it bouncy without any shock absorption. Another avenue I am messing with is to actively smooth the terrain in front of the tires so that before it hits a bumpy patch, that patch is smoothed and it doesn't bounce. The only issue with this is that it is pretty expensive to do with 6 tires, high tesselation of the terrain and other complex things going on at the same time in this simulation. I am still working on this but I am hoping to mix and match a few different aspects to get the best possible outcome. This is a bit of a complex issue so I'm not expecting anyone to have a definitive answer, just hoping someone may think of something I haven't =-) -Side note: Yes i know PhysX 2.8.x is quite outdated but we have to stick with it for this implementation. We are in the process of going to another physics engine but it is out of scope to apply that engine to this project.

    Read the article

  • I'm graduating with a Computer Science degree but I don't feel like I know how to program.

    - by wp123
    I'm graduating with a Computer Science degree but I see websites like Stack Overflow and search engines like Google and don't know where I'd even begin to write something like that. During one summer I did have the opportunity to work as a iPhone developer, but I felt like I was mostly gluing together libraries that other people had written with little understanding of the mechanics happening beneath the hood. I'm trying to improve my knowledge by studying algorithms, but it is a long and painful process. I find algorithms difficult and at the rate I am learning a decade will have passed before I will master the material in the book. Given my current situation, I've spent a month looking for work but my skills (C, Python, Objective-C) are relatively shallow and are not so desirable in the local market, where C#, Java, and web development are much higher in demand. That is not to say that C and Python opportunities do not exist but they tend to demand 3+ years of experience I do not have. My GPA is OK (3.0) but it's not high enough to apply to the large companies like IBM or return for graduate studies. Basically I'm graduating with a Computer Science degree but I don't feel like I've learned how to program. I thought that joining a company and programming full-time would give me a chance to develop my skills and learn from those more experienced than myself, but I'm struggling to find work and am starting to get really frustrated. I am going to cast my net wider and look beyond the city I've grown up in, but what have other people in similar situation tried to do? I've worked hard but don't have the confidence to go out on my own and write my own app. (That is, become an indie developer in the iPhone app market.) If nothing turns up I will need to consider upgrading and learning more popular skills or try something marginally related like IT, but given all the effort I've put in that feels like copping out. EDIT: Thank you for all the advice. I think I was premature because of unrealistic expectations but the comments have given me a dose of reality. I will persevere and continue to code. I have a project in mind, although well beyond my current capabilities it will challenge me to hone my craft and prove my worth to myself (and potential employers). Had I known there was a career overflow I would have posted there instead. Thanks again!

    Read the article

  • How to be successfull at BDD Specifications Workshops?

    - by sigo
    Today we tried to introduce BDD in our software development process by having a specification workshop. For this workshop we had 2 developers, 1 tester and 1 business analyst. The workshop lasted 1h30 and by the end of it we managed to figure out some BDD scenarios for our new feature. We tried to focus on finding the scenarios that we could miss, and the difficult ones. At the end of the workshop some people were actually unhappy with the workshop. One developer felt he wasted his time as he was used to be given out the scenarios directly by the business analyst and review them with her. The business analyst didn't feel confident with our scenario coverage (Had a feeling that we could have missed out other important stuff) but more importantly felt that this workshop was also a waste of time as she could have figured out all these scenarios by herself and in a shorter period of time. So my question is how that kind of workshop can actually work. In the theory, given you have a new feature to develop, you put the tree 'amigos' (dev/tester/ba) in the same room so that they can collaborate together on writing the differents requirements for the new feature using examples. I can see all the benefits from that. Specially in term of knowledge sharing and common product/end goal/done vision. But in practice, we still think it is more cost effective to first have a BA to work on his own on the examples and only then to have the scenarios to be reviewed/reworked by the 3 'amigos'. By having the BA to work on his own, we actually feel more confident that we are less going to miss out stuff + we still get to review the scenarios afterward to double check. We don't think than simple brainstorming/deliberate discovery is actually enought to seriously cover all the requirement for a feature. The business analyst is actually the best person for that kind of stuff. The thing we just do is to review what she wrote and see if then we have a common understanding (which could then lead to rewrite some of her scenarios or add new ones she could have missed). This workshop lasted 1h30, and by the end of it, we didn't feel confident enought about wha we did...sure we could have spent more time on it but honestly most people get exhausted after 1h30 of brainstorming. So how can you get that to work effectively in practice ?

    Read the article

  • Rebuilding a Mac Mini (early 2009)

    - by Kelly Jones
    This weekend I decided to rebuild the family’s Mac Mini.  It’s the early 2009 model and I hadn’t done it since we got it in March of 2009.  Even worse, I had done the import data step (or whatever Apple calls it) which brought over all of the data files and apps from our previous Mac.  AND that install goes back to before 2005, as far as I can remember.  SO, to say that “cruft” had built up in the operating system, is probably a bit of an understatement. The rebuild went pretty smoothly, especially since I had a couple of spare hard drives.  I hooked up a spare USB drive and formatted it for use with the Mac.  I then used Carbon Copy to clone the internal hard drive onto the USB drive.  (Carbon Copy is a great little app that I used several years ago and I was happy to see it was not only still around, but updated as well.) Once I had my backup, I shut down the Mac and replaced the internal hard drive.  I had purchased the hard drive last fall to use with my work laptop, but I got a new work laptop (with awesome dual SSDs) so I wasn’t using it anymore.  The replacement drive (Seagate Momentus 7200.4 ST9500420AS 500GB 7200 RPM 2.5" SATA 3.0Gb/s Internal Notebook Hard Drive) has more than double the original’s capacity and is also faster.  I’ll have to keep an eye on the temperature, since that 7200 drive will run hotter. Opening the Mac Mini is not for the easily intimidated!  That cool little case is quite the pain to open.  Luckily, OWC put a video together here.  After replacing the drive, I then installed a clean copy of OS 10.5 using the DVDs that came with the Mac.  After the OS, it was time to reinstall the apps.  I downloaded some of the freeware, just to make sure I had the latest versions.  For the rest, I just copied from the backup cloned drive to the new drive.  (I love the way most Mac apps are written – with almost everything contained within a “package” that I can just copy from one drive to another.  MUCH better than the Windows way of using shared DLLs and the registry to store critical pieces that the app needs in order to run!) The whole process took longer than I would have preferred, but it was long overdue.  It definitely “feels” faster, especially boot time and application launches.

    Read the article

  • while(true) and loop-breaking - anti-pattern?

    - by KeithS
    Consider the following code: public void doSomething(int input) { while(true) { TransformInSomeWay(input); if(ProcessingComplete(input)) break; DoSomethingElseTo(input); } } Assume that this process involves a finite but input-dependent number of steps; the loop is designed to terminate on its own as a result of the algorithm, and is not designed to run indefinitely (until cancelled by an outside event). Because the test to see if the loop should end is in the middle of a logical set of steps, the while loop itself currently doesn't check anything meaningful; the check is instead performed at the "proper" place within the conceptual algorithm. I was told that this is bad code, because it is more bug-prone due to the ending condition not being checked by the loop structure. It's more difficult to figure out how you'd exit the loop, and could invite bugs as the breaking condition might be bypassed or omitted accidentally given future changes. Now, the code could be structured as follows: public void doSomething(int input) { TransformInSomeWay(input); while(!ProcessingComplete(input)) { DoSomethingElseTo(input); TransformInSomeWay(input); } } However, this duplicates a call to a method in code, violating DRY; if TransformInSomeWay were later replaced with some other method, both calls would have to be found and changed (and the fact that there are two may be less obvious in a more complex piece of code). You could also write it like: public void doSomething(int input) { var complete = false; while(!complete) { TransformInSomeWay(input); complete = ProcessingComplete(input); if(!complete) { DoSomethingElseTo(input); } } } ... but you now have a variable whose only purpose is to shift the condition-checking to the loop structure, and also has to be checked multiple times to provide the same behavior as the original logic. For my part, I say that given the algorithm this code implements in the real world, the original code is the most readable. If you were going through it yourself, this is the way you'd think about it, and so it would be intuitive to people familiar with the algorithm. So, which is "better"? is it better to give the responsibility of condition checking to the while loop by structuring the logic around the loop? Or is it better to structure the logic in a "natural" way as indicated by requirements or a conceptual description of the algorithm, even though that may mean bypassing the loop's built-in capabilities?

    Read the article

  • OSB unit testing, part 1 by Qualogy

    - by JuergenKress
    First you need to implement the simple bpel process like this : In my current project, I inherited a lot of OSB components that have been developed by (former) team members, but they all lack unit tests. This is a situation I really dislike, since this makes it much harder to refactor or bug-fix the existing code base. So, for all newly created components (and components I have to bug-fix) I strive to add unit tests. Of course, the unit tests will be created using my favourite testing tool: soapUI ! Unit of test The unit test should be created for the service composition, which in OSB terms should be the proxy service combination with its business service. Now, since you do not want to rely on any other services, you should provide mock services for all services invoked from your Component-Under-Test. In a previous article, I wrote about mocking your services in soapUI. While this approach would also be valid here, creating a mock service (and certainly deploying it on a separate WebServer) does violate one of the core principles of unit testing: to make your unit tests as self-contained as possible, i.e. not depending on any external components. In this article, I will show you how to achieve this by simply providing a mock response inside your unit test. Scenario The scenario I implement for testing is a simple currency converter; the external request consists of a from and a to currency, and an amount (in currency from). The service will perform an exchange rate lookup using the WebServiceX CurrencyConverter and return a response to the caller consisting of both the source and target currencies and amounts. For the purpose of unit testing, I will implement a mock response for the exchange rate lookup. Read the complete article here. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Wiki Technorati Tags: Qualogy,OSB,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • Are there any good Java/JVM libraries for my Expression Tree architecture?

    - by Snuggy
    My team and I are developing an enterprise-level application and I have devised an architecture for it that's best described as an "Expression Tree". The basic idea is that the leaf nodes of the tree are very simple expressions (perhaps simple values or strings). Nodes closer to the trunk will get more and more complex, taking the simpler nodes as their inputs and returning more complex results for their parents. Looking at it the other way, the application performs some task, and for this it creates a root expression. The root expression divides its input into smaller units and creates child expressions, which when evaluated it can use to build it's own result. The subdividing process continues until the simplest leaf nodes. There are two very important aspects of this architecture: It must be possible to manipulate nodes of the tree after it is built. The nodes may be given new input values to work with and any change in result for that node needs to be propagated back up the tree to the root node. The application must make best use of available processors and ultimately be scalable to other computers in a grid or in the cloud. Nodes in the tree will often be updating concurrently and notifying other interested nodes in the tree when they get a new value. Unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to discuss my actual application, but to aid understanding a little bit, you might imagine a kind of spreadsheet application being implemented with a similar architecture, where changes to cells in the table are propagated all over the place to other cells that need the result. The spreadsheet could get so massive that applying multi-core multi-computer distributed system to solve it would be of benefit. I've got my prototype "Expression Engine" working nicely on a single multi-core PC but I've started to run into a few concurrency issues (as expected because I haven't been taking too much care so far) so it's now time to start thinking about migrating the Engine to a more robust library, and that leads to a number of related questions: Is there any precedent for my "Expression Tree" architecture that I could research? What programming concepts should I consider. I realise this approach has many similarities to a functional programming style, and I'm already aware of the concepts of using futures and actors. Are there any others? Are there any languages or libraries that I should study? This question is inspired by my accidental discovery of Scala and the Akka library (which has good support for Actors, Futures, Distributed workloads etc.) and I'm wondering if there is anything else I should be looking at as well?

    Read the article

  • git workflow for separating commits

    - by gman
    Best practices with git (or any VCS for that matter) is supposed to be to have each commit do the smallest change possible. But, that doesn't match how I work at all. For example I recently I needed to add some code that checked if the version of a plugin to my system matched the versions the system supports. If not print a warning that the plugin probably requires a newer version of the system. While writing that code I decided I wanted the warnings to be colorized. I already had code that colorized error message so I edited that code. That code was in the startup module of one entry to the system. The plugin checking code was in another path that didn't use that entry point so I moved the colorization code into a separate module so both entry points could use it. On top of that, in order to test my plugin checking code works I need to go edit UI/UX code to make sure it tells the user "You need to upgrade". When all is said and done I've edited 10 files, changed dependencies, the 2 entry points are now both dependant on the colorization code, etc etc. Being lazy I'd probably just git add . && git commit -a the whole thing. Spending 10-15 minutes trying to manipulate all those changes into 3 to 6 smaller commits seems frustrating which brings up the question Are there workflows that work for you or that make this process easier? I don't think I can some how magically always modify stuff in the perfect order since I don't know that order until after I start modifying and seeing what comes up. I know I can git add --interactive etc but it seems, at least for me, kind of hard to know what I'm grabbing exactly the correct changes so that each commit is actually going to work. Also, since the changes are sitting in the current directory it doesn't seem like it would be easy to run tests on each commit to make sure it's going to work short of stashing all the changes. And then, if it were to stash and then run the tests, if I missed a few lines or accidentally added a few too many lines I have no idea how I'd easily recover from that. (as in either grab the missing lines from the stash and then put the rest back or take the few extra lines I shouldn't have grabbed and shove them into the stash for the next commit. Thoughts? Suggestions? PS: I hope this is an appropriate question. The help says development methodologies and processes

    Read the article

  • ETPM Forms Accelerator

    - by MHundal
    The ETPM Forms Accelerator provides a template that can be used to enter data related to Registration and Tax Forms.  The Forms Accelerator includes a worksheet for each portion related to forms development (Form Type, Form Section, Form Lines and Form Rules).  The Forms Accelerator provides the details that must be defined in ETPM.  This allows for taking an existing form and translating the details of that form into the spreadsheet.  The spreadsheet can then be used to define the details in the system.  In addition, each of the items to be defined is explained it detail - what the field expects and based on the input, how it impacts the field and form definition.   This is a living document - as there is feedback provided, the document will be updated.  The goal of this accelerator is to be an aide in the Forms Development process.  We encourage feedback to help improve the document.  The document is for ETPM 2.3.1.  Implementations using older version of ETPM will find that some of the field definition options may not exist their current system.   The spreadsheet attached contains the following Worksheets: Instructions:  High-level overview for the different worksheets provided. Form Type:  The fields to be populated when defining the Form Type for a Registration or Tax Form Form Section:  The fields to be populated when creating a Form Section.  The number of sections will differ based on the the form being implemented. Form Lines:  The fields to be populated when creating different Form Lines. The number of lines per section will differ based on the form being implemented. Form Rules:  Based on the form, allows for documenting the Form Rules to be configured based on form instructions and Form Lines. Right click on the link and select the "Save Link As" option.  ETPM Forms Accelerator.xls Please provide feedback to [email protected]. You feedback is encouraged and appreciated.  

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >