Search Results

Search found 15233 results on 610 pages for 'ssis design patterns'.

Page 71/610 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

  • What is the typical example of old school website design ?

    - by Pierre 303
    I want to build a website for a retro thing that was popular in the mid 90s (beginning of the commercial internet). So I want use old designs that was very popular at that time. The first thing that comes to my mind was those "under construction" animated gifs. People often put animated gifs everywhere. But also those awful repeating backgrounds. So yes, I want my website to look exactly like in the mid nineties ;) (please suggest practical and usable features, I guess an Java Applet menu would not work today, or saying on the bottom that this website is optimized for Netscape 3) EDIT: for those that wants to see the result: Retrology

    Read the article

  • What is the typical example of old school website design?

    - by Pierre 303
    I want to build a website for a retro thing that was popular in the mid 90s (beginning of the commercial internet). So I want use old designs that was very popular at that time. The first thing that comes to my mind was those "under construction" animated gifs. People often put animated gifs everywhere. But also those awful repeating backgrounds. So yes, I want my website to look exactly like in the mid nineties ;) (please suggest practical and usable features, I guess an Java Applet menu would not work today, or saying on the bottom that this website is optimized for Netscape 3) EDIT: for those that wants to see the result: Retrology

    Read the article

  • How to make this CSS design of words in headings look clean and well desinged? [closed]

    - by kacalapy
    I am trying to get the lipstick on the pig and not wearing my UI developer hat often is making this impossible. Can someone give me nice alternatives to the code below. this is what i have now. <style> .FirstLetter:first-letter{font-family: arial; font-size: 14pt; font-weight: bold;color:White; background:Blue; border:1px black solid; padding-top:8px; padding-left:8px; padding-bottom:3px;} .Spaced{letter-spacing: 5px;font-family: arial; font-size: 14pt; font-weight: bold;} </style> <div class="FirstLetter Spaced headerFont"> Executive Summary </div> Here is the ugly result of the above code- i am lookign to make the header section look better ONLY that's where the first letter is blue:

    Read the article

  • Is it normal to think about a design problem for days with no code written? [closed]

    - by Kim Jong Woo
    Sometimes I stare blankly into space or sketch ideas and write some pseudo codes on paper. Then I scratch it out and start again, then when I think I have the correct solution for the problem I begin writing the code. Is it normal to think for days without writing any code? Is this a sign that I am approaching the problem entirely wrong? It makes me nervous to not getting any tangible code written in my IDE.

    Read the article

  • Requriing static class setter to be called before Constructor, bad design?

    - by roverred
    I have a class, say Foo, and every instance of Foo will need and contain the same List object, myList. Since every class instance will share the same List Object, I thought it would be good to make myList static and use a static function to set myList before the constructor is called. I was wondering if this was bad, because this requires the setter to be called before the constructor. If the person doesn't, the program will crash. Alternative way would be passing myList every time. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • RESTful API design - should a PUT return related data?

    - by alexmcroberts
    I have an API which allows a user to update their system status; and a separate call to retrieve system status updates from other users. Would it make sense to unify them under a PUT request where a user would request a PUT update with their own status update, and they would receive the status updates of other users? My solution would allow the PUT request to call the GET request method internally. The reason behind this is that when a user updates their system status they should be informed of other users status immediately, and I don't feel that having 2 seperate requests is necessary - and should be optional. I intend to keep the GET request for other users status as a status update for a user is not necessarily required in order to retrieve other users status', but once they update their own status is it vital that they get information about other users.

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice for website design and markup now that mobile browsers are common?

    - by Jonathan Drain
    Back in 2008, smartphones were a small market and it was commonplace for sites to be designed for a fixed width - say, 900px or 960px - with the page centered if the browser window was larger. Many designers said fluid width was better, but since user screens typically varied between 1024x768 and 1920x1080, fluid width allowed longer line length than is optimal for ease of reading, and so many sites (including Stack Exchange) use fixed width. Now that mobile devices are common, what is the the best approach to support both desktop and mobile browsers? Establish a separate mobile site (e.g: mobile.example.com) Serve a different CSS to mobile devices; if so how? Server-side browser sniffing, or a @media rule? Use Javascript or something to adapt the website dynamically to the client? Should all websites be expected to be responsive? Some kind of fluid layout Something else?

    Read the article

  • Language Design: Are languages like phyton and coffescript really more comprehendable?

    - by kittensatplay
    the "Verbally Readable !== Quicker Comprehension" arguement on http://ryanflorence.com/2011/case-against-coffeescript/ is really potent and interesting. i and im sure other would be very interested in evidence arguing against this. there's clear evidence for this and i believe it. ppl naturally think in images, not words, so we should be designing languages dissimilar to human language like english, french, whatever. being "readable" is quicker comprehension. most articles on wikipedia are not readable as they are long, boring, dry, sluggish, very very wordy, and because wikipedia documents a ton of info, is not especially helpful when compared to much more helpful sites with more practical, useful, and relevant info. but languages like phyton and coffescript are "verbally readable" in that they are closer to the english language syntax, and programming firstly and mainly in python, im not so sure this is really a good thing. the second interesting argument is that coffeescript is an intermediator so thereby another step between to ends, which may increase chances of bugs. while coffeescript has other practical benefits, this question is focused specifically on evidence showing support for the counter-case of language "readability"

    Read the article

  • In an online questionnaire, what is a best way to design a database for keeping track of users all attempts?

    - by user1990525
    We have a web app where users can take online exams. Exam admin will create a questionnaire. A questionnaire can have many Questions. Each question is a multiple choice question (MCQ). Lets say an admin creates a questionnaire with 10 questions. Users attempt those questions. Now, unlike real exams users can attempt single questionnaire multiple times. And we have to keep track of his all attempts. e.g. User_id Questionnaire_id question_id answer attempt_date attempt_no 1 1 1 a 1 June 2013 1 1 1 2 b 1 June 2013 1 1 1 1 c 2 June 2013 2 1 1 2 d 2 June 2013 2 Now it can also happen that after user has attempted same questionnare twice, admin can delete a question from same questionnaire, but users attempt history should still have reference to that so that user can see his that question in his attempt history in spite of admin deleting that question. If user now attempts this changed questionnaire he should see only 1 question. User_id Questionnaire_id question_id answer attempt_date attempt_no 1 1 1 a 3 June 2013 3 Also, after this user modified some part of question, users attempt history should show question before modification while any new attempt should show modified question. How do we manage this at the database level? My first gut feeling was that, For deletes, do not do physical delete, just make a question inactive so that history can still keep track of users attempt. For modifications, create versions for questions and each new attempt refres to latest version of each question and history keeping reference to version of question at attempt time.

    Read the article

  • Language Design: Are languages like Python and CoffeeScript really more comprehensible?

    - by kittensatplay
    The "Verbally Readable !== Quicker Comprehension" argument on http://ryanflorence.com/2011/case-against-coffeescript/ is really potent and interesting. I and I'm sure others would be very interested in evidence arguing against this. There's clear evidence for this and I believe it. People naturally think in images, not words, so we should be designing languages that aren't similar to human language like English, French, whatever. Being "readable" is quicker comprehension. Most articles on Wikipedia are not readable as they are long, boring, dry, sluggish and very very wordy. Because Wikipedia documents a ton of info, it is not especially helpful when compared to sites with more practical, useful and relevant info. Languages like Python and CoffeScript are "verbally readable" in that they are closer to English syntax. Having programmed firstly and mainly in Python, I'm not so sure this is really a good thing. The second interesting argument is that CoffeeScript is an intermediator, a step between two ends, which may increase the chance of bugs. While CoffeeScript has other practical benefits, this question specifically requests evidence showing support for the counter-case of language "readability"

    Read the article

  • Are there any good books on how to design software?

    - by nc01
    I've been programming for a while and I think I write clean code. But I do this by hacking away, tinkering and testing things until I feel good about the functionality, and then coming in and refactoring, refactoring, refactoring. I tend to write mostly in PHP, Java, and C. Are there any good books that will help me learn to visualize things better and not code everything as if in an infinite REPL loop? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • In a team practicing Domain Driven Design, should the whole team participate in Stakeholder meetings?

    - by thirdy
    In my experience, a Software Development Team that comprises: 1 Project Manager 1 Tech Lead 1 - 2 Senior Dev 2 - 3 Junior Dev (Fresh grad) Only the Tech Lead & PM (and/or Senor Dev/s) will participate in a meeting with Clients, Domain Experts, Client's technical resource. I can think of the ff potential pitfalls: Important info gets lost Human error (TL/PM might forgot to disseminate info due to pressure or plain human error) Non-verbal info (maybe a presentation using a diagram presented by Domain Expert) Maintaining Ubiquitous language is harder to build since not all team members get to hear the non-dev persons Potential of creative minds are not fully realized (Personally, I am more motivated to think/explore when I am involved with these important meetings) Advantages of this approach: Only one point of contact Less time spent on meetings? Honestly, I am biased & against this approach. I would like to hear your opinions. Is this how you do it in your team? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Requring static class setter to be called before constructor, bad design?

    - by roverred
    I have a class, say Foo, and every instance of Foo will need and contain the same List object, myList. Since every class instance will share the same List Object, I thought it would be good to make myList static and use a static function to set myList before the constructor is called. I was wondering if this was bad, because this requires the setter to be called before the constructor? If the person doesn't, the program will crash. Alternative way would be passing myList every time.

    Read the article

  • Advice on database design / SQL for retrieving data with chronological order

    - by Remnant
    I am creating a database that will help keep track of which employees have been on a certain training course. I would like to get some guidance on the best way to design the database. Specifically, each employee must attend the training course each year and my database needs to keep a history of all the dates on which they have attend the course in the past. The end user will use the software as a planning tool to help them book future course dates for employees. When they select a given employee they will see: (a) Last attendance date (b) Projected future attendance date(i.e. last attendance date + 1 calendar year) In terms of my database, any given employee may have multiple past course attendance dates: EmpName AttandanceDate Joe Bloggs 1st Jan 2007 Joe Bloggs 4th Jan 2008 Joe Bloggs 3rd Jan 2009 Joe Bloggs 8th Jan 2010 My question is what is the best way to set up the database to make it easy to retrieve the most recent course attendance date? In the example above, the most recent would be 8th Jan 2010. Is there a good way to use SQL to sort by date and pick the MAX date? My other idea was to add a column called ‘MostRecent’ and just set this to TRUE. EmpName AttandanceDate MostRecent Joe Bloggs 1st Jan 2007 False Joe Bloggs 4th Jan 2008 False Joe Bloggs 3rd Jan 2009 False Joe Bloggs 8th Jan 2010 True I wondered if this would simplify the SQL i.e. SELECT Joe Bloggs WHERE MostRecent = ‘TRUE’ Also, when the user updates a given employee’s attendance record (i.e. with latest attendance date) I could use SQL to: Search for the employee and set the MostRecent value to FALSE Add a new record with MostRecent set to TRUE? Would anybody recommended either method over the other? Or do you have a completely different way of solving this problem?

    Read the article

  • Object oriented design suggestion

    - by pocoa
    Here is my code: class Soldier { public: Soldier(const string &name, const Gun &gun); string getName(); private: Gun gun; string name; }; class Gun { public: void fire(); void load(int bullets); int getBullets(); private: int bullets; } I need to call all the member functiosn of Gun over a Soldier object. Something like: soldier.gun.fire(); or soldier.getGun().load(15); So which one is a better design? Hiding the gun object as a private member and access it with getGun() function. Or making it a public member? Or I can encapsulate all these functions would make the implementation harder: soldier.loadGun(15); // calls Gun.load() soldier.fire(); // calls Gun.fire() So which one do you think is the best?

    Read the article

  • Autocomplete or Select box? (design problem)

    - by Craig Whitley
    I'm working on a comparison website, so needless to say the search function is the primary feature of the site. I have two input text boxes and a search button. At the moment, the input text boxes use Ajax to query the database and show a drop-down box, but I'm wondering if it would be more intuitive to use a select box instead? The second box is dependant on the first, as when the first is selected theres another ajax query so only the available options for the first selection appear in the autocomplete box. Autocomplete Pros: - "Feels" right? - Looks more appealing than a select box (css design)? Cons: - the user has to be instructed on how to use the search (made to think?) - Only really works off the bat with javascript enabled. - The user may get confused if they type in what they want and no box appears (i.e., no results) Select Box Pros: - Can bring up the list of options / know whats there from the outset. - We use select boxes every day (locations etc.) so we're used to how they work. (more intuitive?) Cons: - Can look a little unaesthetic when theres too many options to choose from. I'm thinking maybe at most around 100 options for my site over time. Any thoughts on how I could go about this would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Design/Architecture Advice Needed

    - by Rachel
    Summary: I have different components on homepage and each components shows some promotion to the user. I have Cart as one Component and depending upon content of the cart promotion are show. I have to track user online activities and send that information to Omniture for Report Generation. Now my components are loaded asynchronously basically are loaded when AjaxRequest is fired up and so there is not fix pattern or rather information on when components will appear on the webpages. Now in order to pass information to Omniture I need to call track function on $(document).(ready) and append information for each components(7 parameters are required by Omniture for each component). So in the init:config function of each component am calling Omniture and passing paramters but now no. of Omniture calls is directly proportional to no. of Components on the webpage but this is not acceptable as each call to Omniture is very expensive. Now I am looking for a way where in I can club the information about 7 parameters and than make one Call to Omniture wherein I pass those information. Points to note is that I do not know when the components are loaded and so there is no pre-defined time or no. of components that would be loaded. The thing is am calling track function when document is ready but components are loaded after call to Omniture has been made and so my question is Q: How can I collect the information for all the components and than just make one call to Omniture to send those information ? As mentioned, I do not know when the components are loaded as they are done on the Ajax Request. Hope I am able to explain my challenge and would appreciate if some one can provide from Design/Architect Solutions for the Challenge.

    Read the article

  • Database warehouse design: fact tables and dimension tables

    - by morpheous
    I am building a poor man's data warehouse using a RDBMS. I have identified the key 'attributes' to be recorded as: sex (true/false) demographic classification (A, B, C etc) place of birth date of birth weight (recorded daily): The fact that is being recorded My requirements are to be able to run 'OLAP' queries that allow me to: 'slice and dice' 'drill up/down' the data and generally, be able to view the data from different perspectives After reading up on this topic area, the general consensus seems to be that this is best implemented using dimension tables rather than normalized tables. Assuming that this assertion is true (i.e. the solution is best implemented using fact and dimension tables), I would like to seek some help in the design of these tables. 'Natural' (or obvious) dimensions are: Date dimension Geographical location Which have hierarchical attributes. However, I am struggling with how to model the following fields: sex (true/false) demographic classification (A, B, C etc) The reason I am struggling with these fields is that: They have no obvious hierarchical attributes which will aid aggregation (AFAIA) - which suggest they should be in a fact table They are mostly static or very rarely change - which suggests they should be in a dimension table. Maybe the heuristic I am using above is too crude? I will give some examples on the type of analysis I would like to carryout on the data warehouse - hopefully that will clarify things further. I would like to aggregate and analyze the data by sex and demographic classification - e.g. answer questions like: How does male and female weights compare across different demographic classifications? Which demographic classification (male AND female), show the most increase in weight this quarter. etc. Can anyone clarify whether sex and demographic classification are part of the fact table, or whether they are (as I suspect) dimension tables.? Also assuming they are dimension tables, could someone elaborate on the table structures (i.e. the fields)? The 'obvious' schema: CREATE TABLE sex_type (is_male int); CREATE TABLE demographic_category (id int, name varchar(4)); may not be the correct one.

    Read the article

  • C++ design question on traversing binary trees

    - by user231536
    I have a binary tree T which I would like to copy to another tree. Suppose I have a visit method that gets evaluated at every node: struct visit { virtual void operator() (node* n)=0; }; and I have a visitor algorithm void visitor(node* t, visit& v) { //do a preorder traversal using stack or recursion if (!t) return; v(t); visitor(t->left, v); visitor(t->right, v); } I have 2 questions: I settled on using the functor based approach because I see that boost graph does this (vertex visitors). Also I tend to repeat the same code to traverse the tree and do different things at each node. Is this a good design to get rid of duplicated code? What other alternative designs are there? How do I use this to create a new binary tree from an existing one? I can keep a stack on the visit functor if I want, but it gets tied to the algorithm in visitor. How would I incorporate postorder traversals here ? Another functor class?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 database design - many-to-many relationships with hierarchy

    - by Remnant
    Note I have completely re-written my original post to better explain the issue I am trying to understand. I have tried to generalise the problem as much as possible. Also, my thanks to the original people who responded. Hopefully this post makes things a little clearer. Context In short, I am struggling to understand the best way to design a small scale database to handle (what I perceive to be) multiple many-to-many relationships. Imagine the following scenario for a company organisational structure: Textile Division Marketing Division | | ---------------------- ---------------------- | | | | HR Dept Finance Dept HR Dept Finance Dept | | | | ---------- ---------- ---------- --------- | | | | | | | | Payroll Hiring Audit Tax Payroll Hiring Audit Accounts | | | | | | | | Emps Emps Emps Emps Emps Emps Emps Emps NB: Emps denotes a list of employess that work in that area When I first started with this issue I made four separate tables: Divisions - Textile, Marketing (PK = DivisionID) Departments - HR, Finance (PK = DeptID) Functions - Payroll, Hiring, Audit, Tax, Accounts (PK = FunctionID) Employees - List of all Employees (PK = EmployeeID) The problem as I see it is that there are multiple many-to-many relationships i.e. many departments have many divisions and many functions have many departments. Question Giving the database structure above, suppose I wanted to do the following: Get all employees who work in the Payroll function of the Marketing Division To do this I need to be able to differentiate between the two Payroll departments but I am not sure how this can be done? I understand that I could build a 'Link / Junction' table between Departments and Functions so that I can retrieve which Functions are in which Departments. However, I would still need to differentiate the Division they belong to. Research Effort As you can see I am an abecedarian when it comes to database deisgn. I have spent the last two days resaerching this issue, traversing nested set models, adjacency models, reading that this issue is known not to be NP complete etc. I am sure there is a simple solution?

    Read the article

  • Does my API design violate RESTful principles?

    - by peta
    Hello everybody, I'm currently (I try to) designing a RESTful API for a social network. But I'm not sure if my current approach does still accord to the RESTful principles. I'd be glad if some brighter heads could give me some tips. Suppose the following URI represents the name field of a user account: people/{UserID}/profile/fields/name But there are almost hundred possible fields. So I want the client to create its own field views or use predefined ones. Let's suppose that the following URI represents a predefined field view that includes the fields "name", "age", "gender": utils/views/field-views/myFieldView And because field views are kind of higher logic I don't want to mix support for field views into the "people/{UserID}/profile/fields" resource. Instead I want to do the following: utils/views/field-views/myFieldView/{UserID} Though Leonard Richardson & Sam Ruby state in their book "RESTful Web Services" that a RESTful design is somehow like an "extreme object oriented" approach, I think that my approach is object oriented and therefore accords to RESTful principles. Or am I wrong? When not: Are such "object oriented" approaches generally encouraged when used with care and in order to avoid query-based REST-RPC hybrids? Thanks for your feedback in advance, peta

    Read the article

  • Database warehoue design: fact tables and dimension tables

    - by morpheous
    I am building a poor man's data warehouse using a RDBMS. I have identified the key 'attributes' to be recorded as: sex (true/false) demographic classification (A, B, C etc) place of birth date of birth weight (recorded daily): The fact that is being recorded My requirements are to be able to run 'OLAP' queries that allow me to: 'slice and dice' 'drill up/down' the data and generally, be able to view the data from different perspectives After reading up on this topic area, the general consensus seems to be that this is best implemented using dimension tables rather than normalized tables. Assuming that this assertion is true (i.e. the solution is best implemented using fact and dimension tables), I would like to see some help in the design of these tables. 'Natural' (or obvious) dimensions are: Date dimension Geographical location Which have hierarchical attributes. However, I am struggling with how to model the following fields: sex (true/false) demographic classification (A, B, C etc) The reason I am struggling with these fields is that: They have no obvious hierarchical attributes which will aid aggregation (AFAIA) - which suggest they should be in a fact table They are mostly static or very rarely change - which suggests they should be in a dimension table. Maybe the heuristic I am using above is too crude? I will give some examples on the type of analysis I would like to carryout on the data warehouse - hopefully that will clarify things further. I would like to aggregate and analyze the data by sex and demographic classification - e.g. answer questions like: How does male and female weights compare across different demographic classifications? Which demographic classification (male AND female), show the most increase in weight this quarter. etc. Can anyone clarify whether sex and demographic classification are part of the fact table, or whether they are (as I suspect) dimension tables.? Also assuming they are dimension tables, could someone elaborate on the table structures (i.e. the fields)? The 'obvious' schema: CREATE TABLE sex_type (is_male int); CREATE TABLE demographic_category (id int, name varchar(4)); may not be the correct one.

    Read the article

  • GAE python database object design for simple list of values

    - by Joey
    I'm really new to database object design so please forgive any weirdness in my question. Basically, I am use Google AppEngine (Python) and contructing an object to track user info. One of these pieces of data is 40 Achievement scores. Do I make a list of ints in the User object for this? Or do I make a separate entity with my user id, the achievement index (0-39) and the score and then do a query to grab these 40 items every time I want to get the user data in total? The latter approach seems more object oriented to me, and certainly better if I extend it to have more than just scores for these 40 achievements. However, considering that I might not extend it, should I even consider just doing a simple list of 40 ints in my user data? I would then forgo doing a query, getting the sorted list of achievements, reading the score from each one just to process a response etc. Is doing this latter approach just such a common practice and hand-waved as not even worth batting an eyelash at in terms of thinking it might be more costly or complex processing wise?

    Read the article

  • Which design is better?

    - by Tattat
    I have an "Enemy" object, that have many "gun" . Each "gun" can fire "bullet". Storing "gun" is using an array. when the "gun" is fired, the "bullet" will be created. And the enemy object will have an array to store the "bullet". So, I am thinking about the fire method. I am think making a firebulletFromGun in the "enemy". It need have a parameter: "gun". while this method is called. The "enemy" 's bullet will be added in the Array. Another design is writing the fire method in the "gun". The "enemy" use the "gun"'s fire method. And the "gun" will return a "bullet" object, and it will be added in the Array of "enemy". Both method can work, but which way is better? or they are similar the same? plx drop ur ideas/suggestions. thz.

    Read the article

  • Design: Website calling a webservice on the same machine

    - by Chris L
    More of a design/conceptual question. At work the decision was made to have our data access layer be called through webservices. So our website would call the webservices for any/all data to and from the database. Both the website & the webservices will be on the same machine(so no trip across the wire), but the database is on a separate machine(so that would require a trip across the wire regardless). This is all in-house, the website, webservice, and database are all within the same company(AFAIK, the webservices won't be reused by another other party). To the best of my knowledge: the website will open a port to the webservices, and the webservices will in turn open another port and go across the wire to the database server to get/submit the data. The trip across the wire can't be avoided, but I'm concerned about the webservices standing in the middle. I do agree there needs to be distinct layers between the functionality(such as business layer, data access layer, etc...), but this seems overly complex to me. I'm also sensing there will be some performance problems down the line. Seems to me it would be better to have the (DAL)assemblies referenced directly within the solution, thus negating the first port to port connection. Any thoughts(or links) both for and against this idea would be appreciated P.S. We're a .NET shop(migrating from vb to C# 3.5)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >