Search Results

Search found 289 results on 12 pages for 'maintainability'.

Page 7/12 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to implement behavior in a component-based game architecture?

    - by ghostonline
    I am starting to implement player and enemy AI in a game, but I am confused about how to best implement this in a component-based game architecture. Say I have a following player character that can be stationary, running and swinging a sword. A player can transit to the swing sword state from both the stationary and running state, but then the swing must be completed before the player can resume standing or running around. During the swing, the player cannot walk around. As I see it, I have two implementation approaches: Create a single AI-component containing all player logic (either decoupled from the actual component or embedded as a PlayerAIComponent). I can easily how to enforce the state restrictions without creating coupling between individual components making up the player entity. However, the AI-component cannot be broken up. If I have, for example, an enemy that can only stand and walk around or only walks around and occasionally swing a sword, I have to create new AI-components. Break the behavior up in components, each identifying a specific state. I then get a StandComponent, WalkComponent and SwingComponent. To enforce the transition rules, I have to couple each component. SwingComponent must disable StandComponent and WalkComponent for the duration of the swing. When I have an enemy that only stands around, swinging a sword occasionally, I have to make sure SwingComponent only disables WalkComponent if it is present. Although this allows for better mix-and-matching components, it can lead to a maintainability nightmare as each time a dependency is added, the existing components must be updated to play nicely with the new requirements the dependency places on the character. The ideal situation would be that a designer can build new enemies/players by dragging components into a container, without having to touch a single line of engine or script code. Although I am not sure script coding can be avoided, I want to keep it as simple as possible. Summing it all up: Should I lob all AI logic into one component or break up each logic state into separate components to create entity variants more easily?

    Read the article

  • How to implement Restricted access to application features

    - by DroidUser
    I'm currently developing a web application, that provides some 'service' to the user. The user will have to select a 'plan' according to which she/he will be allowed to perform application specific actions but up to a limit defined by the plan. A Plan will also limit access to certain features, which will not be available at all for some plans. As an example : say there are 3 plans, 2 actions throughout the application users in plan-1 can perform action-1 3 times, and they can't perform action-2 at all users in plan-2 can perform action-1 10 times, action-2 5 times users in plan-3 can perform action-1 20 times, action-2 10 times So i'm looking for the best way to get this done, and my main concerns besides implementing it, are the following(in no particular order) maintainability/changeability : the number of plans, and type of features/actions will change in the final product industry standard/best practice : for future readiness!! efficiency : ofcourse, i want fast code!! I have never done anything like this before, so i have no clue about how do i go about implementing these functionalities. Any tips/guides/patterns/resources/examples? I did read a little about ACL, RBAC, are they the patterns that i need to follow? Really any sort of feedback will help.

    Read the article

  • Writing generic code when your target is a C compiler

    - by enobayram
    I need to write some algorithms for a PIC micro controller. AFAIK, the official tools support either assembler or a subset of C. My goal is to write the algorithms in a generic and reusable way without losing any runtime or memory performance. And if possible, I would like to do this without increasing the development time much and compromising the readability and maintainability much either. What I mean by generic and reusable is that I don't want to commit to types, array sizes, number of bits in a bit field etc. All these specifications, IMHO, point to C++ templates, but there's no compiler for it for my target. C macro metaprogramming is another option, but, again my opinion, that greatly reduces readability and increases development time. I believe what I'm looking for is a decent C++ to C translator, but I'd like to hear anything else that satisfies the above requirements. Maybe a translator from another high-level language to C that produces very efficient code, maybe something else. Please note that I have nothing against C, I just wish templates were available in it.

    Read the article

  • Bikeshedding: Placeholders in strings

    - by dotancohen
    I find that I sometimes use placeholders in strings, like this: $ cat example-apache <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName ##DOMAIN_NAME## ServerAlias www.##DOMAIN_NAME## DocumentRoot /var/www/##DOMAIN_NAME##/public_html </VirtualHost> Now I am sure that it is a minor issue if the placeholder is ##DOMAIN_NAME##, !!DOMAIN_NAME!!, {{DOMAIN_NAME}}, or some other variant. However, I now need to standardize with other developers on a project, and we all have a vested interest in having our own placeholder format made standard in the organization. Are there any good reasons for choosing any of these, or others? I am trying to quantify these considerations: Aesthetics and usability. For example, __dict__ may be hard to read as we don't know how many underscores are in there. Compatibility. Will some language try to do something funny with {} syntax in a string (such as PHP does with "Welcome to {$siteName} today!")? Actually, I know that PHP and Python won't, but others? Will a C++ preprocessor choke on ## format? If I need to store the value in some SQL engine, will it not consider something a comment? Any other pitfalls to be wary of? Maintainability. Will the new guy mistake ##SOME_PLACEHOLDER## as a language construct? The unknown. Surely the wise folk here will think of other aspects of this decision that I have not thought of. I might be bikeshedding this, but if there are real issues that might be lurking then I would certainly like to know about them before mandating that our developers adhere to a potentially-problematic convention.

    Read the article

  • Placeholders in strings

    - by dotancohen
    I find that I sometimes use placeholders in strings, like this: $ cat example-apache <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName ##DOMAIN_NAME## ServerAlias www.##DOMAIN_NAME## DocumentRoot /var/www/##DOMAIN_NAME##/public_html </VirtualHost> Now I am sure that it is a minor issue if the placeholder is ##DOMAIN_NAME##, !!DOMAIN_NAME!!, {{DOMAIN_NAME}}, or some other variant. However, I now need to standardize with other developers on a project, and we all have a vested interest in having our own placeholder format made standard in the organization. Are there any good reasons for choosing any of these, or others? I am trying to quantify these considerations: Aesthetics and usability. For example, __dict__ may be hard to read as we don't know how many underscores are in there. Compatibility. Will some language try to do something funny with {} syntax in a string (such as PHP does with "Welcome to {$siteName} today!")? Actually, I know that PHP and Python won't, but others? Will a C++ preprocessor choke on ## format? If I need to store the value in some SQL engine, will it not consider something a comment? Any other pitfalls to be wary of? Maintainability. Will the new guy mistake ##SOME_PLACEHOLDER## as a language construct? The unknown. Surely the wise folk here will think of other aspects of this decision that I have not thought of. I might be bikeshedding this, but if there are real issues that might be lurking then I would certainly like to know about them before mandating that our developers adhere to a potentially-problematic convention.

    Read the article

  • Coco/R vs. ANTLR

    - by Eamon Nerbonne
    I'm evaluating using Coco/R vs. ANTLR for use in a C# project as part of what's essentially a scriptable mail-merge functionality. To parse the (simple) scripts, I'll need a parser. I've focussed on Coco/R and ANTLR because both seem fairly mature and well-maintained and capable of generating decent C# parsers. Neither seem to be trivial to use either, however, and simplicity is something I'd appreciate - particularly maintainability by others. Does anyone have any recommendations to make? What are the pros/cons of either for a parsing a small language - or am I looking into the wrong things entirely? How well do these integrate into a typical continuous integration setup? What are the pitfalls? Related: Well, many questions, such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

    Read the article

  • Is there any killer application for Ontology/semantics/OWL/RDF yet?

    - by narnirajesh
    Hi Guys, I got interested in semantic technologies after reading a lot of books, blogs and articles on the net saying that it would make data machine-understandable, allow intelligent agents make great reasoning, automated & dynamic service composition etc.. I am still reading the same stuff from 2 years. The number of articles/blogs/semantic-conferences have increased considerably. But I am still unable to see any killer-application. Why is it so? Or is there some application/product (commercial/open-source) already existing, which actually is doing all that being boasted of? To put it more precisely, is there any product that leverages semantic technologies (esp RDF/OWL/SPARQL) and is delivering functionality/performance/maintainability, which would not have been possible with the existing (no-semantic) technologies? Some product that is completely dependent on semantic technologies and really adds value to the customers and generating revenues?

    Read the article

  • Java: where should I put anonymous listener logic code?

    - by tulskiy
    Hi, we had a debate at work about what is the best practice for using listeners in java: whether listener logic should stay in the anonymous class, or it should be in a separate method, for example: button.addActionListener(new ActionListener() { public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) { // code here } }); or button.addActionListener(new ActionListener() { public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) { buttonPressed(); } }); private void buttonPressed() { // code here } which is the recommended way in terms of readability and maintainability? I prefer to keep the code inside the listener and only if gets too large, make it an inner class. Here I assume that the code is not duplicated anywhere else. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidlines?

    - by SiegeX
    Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Must have JavaScript pro developer tools, libs, utilities and workshop configuration.

    - by WooYek
    This is a followup question to the Pro JavaScript programmer interview questions (with answers). What is considered professional and industrial standard for a professional browser side Java Script developer when it comes to his workshop configuration, and maybe from-concept-to-shipment process? What are the most popular IDE's, utilities and probably libraries, not limited to the free ones. These that can help cut development time (eg. IDE), help with achieve better quality (eg. unit testing tools), reliability and maintainability. I'm looking for a baseline to which I could compare potential candidates based on their ability to keep their tools sharp and workshop efficient (pro's should invest time&money in good tools, right?).

    Read the article

  • LazyList<T> vs System.Lazy<List<T>> in ASP.NET MVC 2?

    - by FreshCode
    In Rob Conery's Storefront series, Rob makes extensive use of the LazyList<..> construct to pull data from IQueryables. How does this differ from the System.Lazy<...> construct now available in .NET 4.0 (and perhaps earlier)? More depth based on DoctaJones' great answer: Would you recommend one over the other if I wanted to operate on IQueryable as a List<T>? I'm assuming that since Lazy<T> is in the framework now, it is a safer bet for future support and maintainability? If I want to use a strong type instead of an anonymous (var) type would the following statements be functionally equivalent? Lazy<List<Products>> Products = new Lazy<List<Product>>(); LazyList<Product> = new LazyList<Product>();

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to post data from web browser to server?

    - by Kronass
    Hi, I want to know what is the best way to send data from web browser to server using post method. I've seen a practice where they wrap all the elements data in XML, convert it into Base64 string and then post it to the server (via Ajax or hidden field). this way will not work if the Javascript is disabled, any how if I ignored this. is it a good practice to wrap elements into XML (or create my custom wrapper in general) and post them to server saying it will enhance the maintainability of the code or just stick with the classical way and no need to add unnecessary text in the post.

    Read the article

  • Looking for the most painless non-RDBMS storage method in C#

    - by NateD
    I'm writing a simple program that will run entirely client-side. (Desktop programming? do people still do that?) and I need a simple way to store trivial amounts of data in a structured form, but really don't see any need to use a database system. What's more, some of the data needs to be serialized and passed around to different users, like some kind of "file" or perhaps a "document". (has anyone ever done that before?) So, I've looked at using .Net DataSets, LINQ, direct XML manipulation, and they all seem like they would get the job done, but I would like to know before I dive into any of them if there's one method that is generally regarded as easier to code than others. As I said, the amount of data to be stored is trivial, even if one hundred people all used the same machine we're not talking about more than 10 MB, so performance is not as large a concern as is codeability/maintainability. Thank you all in advance!

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for 'C' Project architecture guidelines?

    - by SiegeX
    Now that I got my head wrapped around the 'C' language to a point where I feel proficient enough to write clean code, I'd like to focus my attention on project architecture guidelines. I'm looking for a good resource that coves the following topics: How to create an interface that promotes code maintainability and is extensible for future upgrades. Library creation guidelines. Example, when should I consider using static vs dynamic libraries. How to properly design an ABI to cope with either one. Header files: what to partition out and when. Examples on when to use 1:1 vs 1:many .h to .c Anything you feel I missed but is important when attempting to architect a new C project. Ideally, I'd like to see some example projects ranging from small to large and see how the architecture changes depending on project size, function or customer. What resource(s) would you recommend for such topics?

    Read the article

  • Choosing MooTools over Google closure?

    - by Shekhar
    I am in a process to select javascript library for our new web application. This app is not very UI heavy but has forms, reports, search, calendars, tabs and target multiple countries like most web apps. We are a tiny team. Biggest concern is maintainability and readability of the code. We are Python programmers. After evaluating many other javascript frameworks we have narrowed down to mootools and google-closure. We loved mootools syntax. It took us no time to learn. It's like Python. On other hand we were stumped seeing private/public in google closure. It's tempting to go for mootools however, I would love to hear from you about specific advantages these frameworks offer over each other.

    Read the article

  • A Question About the Expressive Power of Higher-Order Logical Reasoning Formalisms.

    - by Bubba88
    Hi! I do not really know if this is scientifically proven, but I've read in a book (It was a relatively modern AI book by Peter Norvig) that secon-order logical programming could be more expressive than existing first-order languages. The question is: Is it statistically/symbolically proven that higher-order predicate logics exceed first-order predicates in their expressive power? Or they just bring the modularity/convenience/maintainability to your knowledge bases? Additionally: If there is some kind of firm direction in which I could go seeking more expressive power than I have (I mean exactly the descriptive potential of the symbols I write in given semantics/syntax) - then I would be glad to hear just almost everything :) Thank you.

    Read the article

  • What parallel programming model do you recommend today to take advantage of the manycore processors

    - by Doctor J
    If you were writing a new application from scratch today, and wanted it to scale to all the cores you could throw at it tomorrow, what parallel programming model/system/language/library would you choose? Why? I am particularly interested in answers along these axes: Programmer productivity / ease of use (can mortals successfully use it?) Target application domain (what problems is it (not) good at?) Concurrency style (does it support tasks, pipelines, data parallelism, messages...?) Maintainability / future-proofing (will anybody still be using it in 20 years?) Performance (how does it scale on what kinds of hardware?) I am being deliberately vauge on the nature of the application in anticipation of getting good general answers useful for a variety of applications.

    Read the article

  • pros and cons of TryCatch versus TryParse

    - by Vijesh
    What are the pros and cons of using either of the following approaches to pulling out a double from an object? Beyond just personal preferences, issues I'm looking for feedback on include ease of debugging, performance, maintainability etc. public static double GetDouble(object input, double defaultVal) { try { return Convert.ToDouble(input); } catch { return defaultVal; } } public static double GetDouble(object input, double defaultVal) { double returnVal; if (double.TryParse(input.ToString(), out returnVal)) { return returnVal; } else { return defaultVal; } }

    Read the article

  • Java multiline string

    - by skiphoppy
    Coming from Perl, I sure am missing the "here-document" means of creating a multi-line string in source code: $string = <<"EOF" # create a three line string text text text EOF In Java I have to have cumbersome quotes and plus signs on every line as I concatenate my multiline string from scratch. What are some better alternatives? Define my string in a properties file? Edit: Two answers say StringBuilder.append() is preferable to the plus notation. Could anyone elaborate as to why they think so? It doesn't look more preferable to me at all. I'm looking for away around the fact that multiline strings are not a first-class language construct, which means I definitely don't want to replace a first-class language construct (string concatenation with plus) with method calls. Edit: To clarify my question further, I'm not concerned about performance at all. I'm concerned about maintainability and design issues.

    Read the article

  • Enumerating all combinations of lists of different types

    - by jball
    Given two IEnumberables of different types, what is the best practice (considering readability and maintainability) for iterating over both lists to perform an action on all possible combinations? My initial solution was to use nested foreach loops, iterating over the first IEnumerable, and then within that loop, iterating over the second IEnumerable and passing the value from the outer and the current loop into the target method. Eg.: enum ParamOne { First, Second, Etc } List<int> paramTwo = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3 }; void LoopExample() { foreach (ParamOne alpha in Enum.GetValues(typeof(ParamOne))) { foreach (int beta in paramTwo) { DoSomething(alpha, beta); } } } I tried to restructure it with LINQ, but ended up with something that had no obvious advantages and seemed less intuitive. A search here shows lots of questions about nesting foreachs to iterate over child properties, but I couldn't find anything about iterating over two distinct lists.

    Read the article

  • What JavaScript framework to choose? JQuery+JQueryUI, Dojo or ExtJS?

    - by Ivan
    I am choosing a JavaScript Framework to master and use extensively in all my future projects (mostly working with relational DATA, web services via AJAX and implementing complex rich client UIs). Now I am choosing between JQuery+JQueryUI, Dojo and ExtJS. What should I choose? 1st priority is power and functionality, 2nd priority is beauty and maintainability of code and ease of use, 3rd priority is flexibility and modularity, 4th priority is speed and size. IE compatibility hardly matters, I'd like it to be modern, legacy-free and standard-conformant.

    Read the article

  • P/Invoke or C++/CLI for wrapping a C library

    - by Ian G
    Have a moderate size (40-odd function) C API that needs to be called from a C# project. The functions logically break up to form a few classes that will be API presented to the rest of the project. Are there any objective reasons to prefer P/Invoke or C++/CLI for the interoperability underneath that API, in terms of robustness, maintainability, deployment, ...? The issues I could think of that might be, but aren't problematic are: C++/CLI will require an separate assembly, the P/Invoke classes can be in the main assembly. (We've already got multiple assemblies and there'll be the C dlls anyway so not a major issue). Performance doesn't seem differ noticeable between the two methods. Issues that I'm not sure about are: My feeling is C++/CLI will be easier to debug if there's inter-op problem, is this true? Language familiarity enough people know C# and C++ but knowledge of details of C++/CLI are rarer here. Anything else?

    Read the article

  • Usability: Save changes using "Apply" button or after every single change?

    - by mr.b
    I am interested in hearing opinions and experiences of fellow developers on topic of designing user interface, usability AND maintainability-wise. Common approach is to allow users to tweak options and after form gets "dirty", enable "Apply" button, and user has possibility to back out by pressing cancel. This is most common approach on Windows platform (I believe MS usability guidelines say to do so as well). Another way is to apply changes after every single change has been made to options. Example, user checks some checkbox, and change is applied. User changes value of some text box, and change is applied after box looses focus, etc. You get the point. This approach is most common on Mac OSX. Regardless of my personal opinion (which is that Apple is better at usability, but software I usually write targets Windows users), what do you people think?

    Read the article

  • Quality Design for Asynchronous WCF Services Calls in a Middle-Tier and Returning Data to UI Tier

    - by Perplexed
    I have a WPF application with a group of asynchronous WCF service calls all mashed into the code behind, complete with event handlers and everything, that I have to refactor to productionize and maintain. I want to separate concerns here for maintainability and all the other good reasons to do this, but I'm not sure exactly how to achieve this. Anybody have any good ideas on how to do this, or at least some links to put me in the right direction? My thinking: Create an "infrastructure" layer and reference the services there. Move the asynchronous event handlers into this layer. When an update is called, I will bubble up my own event with my own derivation of the EventArgs class that contains the data the UI will need. I'll have a fairly coupled hooking of the UI to the infrastructure layer as it will consume events I fire off upon completion of an asynchronous data call.

    Read the article

  • How to use autoconf with C++0x features

    - by themis
    What are the best practices for using autoconf in conjunction with shared_ptr and other TR1/BOOST C++0x templates so as to maximize portability and maintainability? With autoconf I can determine whether shared_ptr is available as std::tr1::shared_ptr and/or boost::shared_ptr. Given that the same feature has two different names, I have the following questions: In the code, how should shared_ptr be referenced? Should std::tr1::shared_ptr be preferred over boost::shared_ptr? For the first, the code is currently using preprocessor conditionals allowing non-qualified references to shared_ptr, a la #if HAVE_STD_TR1_SHARED_PTR using std::tr1::shared_ptr; #elif HAVE_BOOST_SHARED_PTR using boost::shared_ptr; #else #error "No definition for shared_ptr found" #endif Second, the code uses std::tr1:: over boost:: to minimize dependencies on external libraries (even if the the libraries are widely used). Are these two solutions common? Are there better ones?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >