Search Results

Search found 177198 results on 7088 pages for 'not programming'.

Page 78/7088 | < Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >

• Is Python Interpreted or Compiled?

  - by crodjer

  This is just a wondering I had while reading about interpreted and compiled languages. Ruby is no doubt an interpreted language, since source code is compiled by an interpreter at the point of execution. On the contrary C is a compiled language, as one have to compile the source code first according to the machine and then execute. This results is much faster execution. Now coming to Python: A python code (somefile.py) when imported creates a file (somefile.pyc) in the same directory. Let us say the import is done in a python shell or django module. After the import I change the code a bit and execute the imported functions again to find that it is still running the old code. This suggests that *.pyc files are compiled python files similar to executable created after compilation of a C file, though I can't execute *.pyc file directly. When the python file (somefile.py) is executed directly ( ./somefile.py or python somefile.py ) no .pyc file is created and the code is executed as is indicating interpreted behavior. These suggest that a python code is compiled every time it is imported in a new process to crate a .pyc while it is interpreted when directly executed. So which type of language should I consider it as? Interpreted or Compiled? And how does its efficiency compare to interpreted and compiled languages? According to wiki's Interpreted Languages page it is listed as a language compiled to Virtual Machine Code, what is meant by that? Update Looking at the answers it seems that there cannot be a perfect answer to my questions. Languages are not only interpreted or only compiled, but there is a spectrum of possibilities between interpreting and compiling. From the answers by aufather, mipadi, Lenny222, ykombinator, comments and wiki I found out that in python's major implementations it is compiled to bytecode, which is a highly compressed and optimized representation and is machine code for a virtual machine, which is implemented not in hardware, but in the bytecode interpreter. Also the the languages are not interpreted or compiled, but rather language implementations either interpret or compile code. I also found out about Just in time compilation As far as execution speed is concerned the various benchmarks cannot be perfect and depend on context and the task which is being performed. Please tell if I am wrong in my interpretations.

  Read the article

• OpenGL ES 2.0: Filtering Polygons within VBO

  - by Bunkai.Satori

  Say, I send 10 polygon pairs (one polygon pair == one 2d sprite == one rectangle == two triangles) into OpenGL ES 2.0 VBO. The 10 polygon pairs represent one animated 2D object consisting of 10 frames. The 10 frames, of course, can not be rendered all at the same time, but will be rendered in particular order to make up smooth animation. Would you have an advice, how to pick up proper polygon pair for rendering (4 vertices) inside Vertex Shader from the VBO? Creating separate VBO for each frame would end up with thousands of VBOs, which is not the right way of doing it. I use OpenGL ES 2.0, and VBOs for both Vertices and Indices.

  Read the article

• Why did object-oriented paradigms take so long to go mainstream?

  - by Earlz

  I read this question and it got me thinking about another fairly recent thing. Object oriented languages. I'm not sure when the first one was created, but why did it take so long before they became mainstream? C became vastly popular, but didn't become the object-oriented C++ for years(decades?) later No mainstream language before the 90s was object oriented Object oriented really seemed to take off with Java and C++ around the same time Now, my question, why did this take so long? Why wasn't C originally conceived as an object-oriented language? Taking a very small subset of C++ wouldn't have affected the core language a whole lot, so why was this idea not popular until the 90s?

  Read the article

• Code Reuse and Abstraction in FP vs OOP

  - by Electric Coffee

  I've been told that code reuse and abstraction in OOP is far more difficult to do than it is in FP, and that all the claims that have been made about Object Orientedness (for lack of a better term) being great at reusing code have been flat out lies So I was wondering if anyone here could tell me why that is, and perhaps show me some code to back up these claims, I'm not saying I don't believe you Functional programmers, it's just that I've been "indoctrinated" to think Object Orientedly, and thus can't (yet) think Functionally enough to see it myself To quote Jimmy Hoffa (from an answer to one of my previous questions): The cake is a lie, code reuse in OO is far more difficult than in FP. For all that OO has claimed code reuse over the years, I have seen it follow through a minimum of times. (feel free to just say I must be doing it wrong, I'm comfortable with how well I write OO code having had to design and maintain OO systems for years, I know the quality of my own results) That quote is the basis of my question, I want to see if there's anything to the claim or not

  Read the article

• Separating physics and game logic from UI code

  - by futlib

  I'm working on a simple block-based puzzle game. The game play consists pretty much of moving blocks around in the game area, so it's a trivial physics simulation. My implementation, however, is in my opinion far from ideal and I'm wondering if you can give me any pointers on how to do it better. I've split the code up into two areas: Game logic and UI, as I did with a lot of puzzle games: The game logic is responsible for the general rules of the game (e.g. the formal rule system in chess) The UI displays the game area and pieces (e.g. chess board and pieces) and is responsible for animations (e.g. animated movement of chess pieces) The game logic represents the game state as a logical grid, where each unit is one cell's width/height on the grid. So for a grid of width 6, you can move a block of width 2 four times until it collides with the boundary. The UI takes this grid, and draws it by converting logical sizes into pixel sizes (that is, multiplies it by a constant). However, since the game has hardly any game logic, my game logic layer [1] doesn't have much to do except collision detection. Here's how it works: Player starts to drag a piece UI asks game logic for the legal movement area of that piece and lets the player drag it within that area Player lets go of a piece UI snaps the piece to the grid (so that it is at a valid logical position) UI tells game logic the new logical position (via mutator methods, which I'd rather avoid) I'm not quite happy with that: I'm writing unit tests for my game logic layer, but not the UI, and it turned out all the tricky code is in the UI: Stopping the piece from colliding with others or the boundary and snapping it to the grid. I don't like the fact that the UI tells the game logic about the new state, I would rather have it call a movePieceLeft() method or something like that, as in my other games, but I didn't get far with that approach, because the game logic knows nothing about the dragging and snapping that's possible in the UI. I think the best thing to do would be to get rid of my game logic layer and implement a physics layer instead. I've got a few questions regarding that: Is such a physics layer common, or is it more typical to have the game logic layer do this? Would the snapping to grid and piece dragging code belong to the UI or the physics layer? Would such a physics layer typically work with pixel sizes or with some kind of logical unit, like my game logic layer? I've seen event-based collision detection in a game's code base once, that is, the player would just drag the piece, the UI would render that obediently and notify the physics system, and the physics system would call a onCollision() method on the piece once a collision is detected. What is more common? This approach or asking for the legal movement area first? [1] layer is probably not the right word for what I mean, but subsystem sounds overblown and class is misguiding, because each layer can consist of several classes.

  Read the article

• How can I become more agile?

  - by dough

  The definition of an agile approach I've adopted is: working to reduce feedback loops, everywhere. I'd describe my Personal Development Process (PDP) as "not very agile" or "not agile enough"! I've adopted TDD, automated building, and time-boxing (using the Pomodoro Technique) as part of my PDP. I find these practices really help me get feedback, review my direction, and catch yak shaving earlier! However, what still escapes me is the ability to reduce feedback time in the ultimate feedback loop; regularly getting working software in front of the end user. Aside from team-oriented practices, what can I do to personally become more agile?

  Read the article

• Why is Adobe Air so underrated for building mobile apps?

  - by Marcelo de Assis

  I worked with Adobe Flash related technologies for the last 5 years, although not being a big fan of Adobe. I see some little bugs happening in some apps, but I cannot imagine why a lot of big companies do not even think to use use Adobe Air as a good technology for their mobile apps. I see a lot of mobile developer positions asking for experts in Android or iOS , but very much less positions asking for Adobe Air, even when Adobe Air apps have the advantage of being multi-plataform, with the same app working in Blackberry, iOS and Android. Is so much easier to develop a game using Flash, than using Android SDK, for example. It really have flaws (that I never saw) or it is just some kind of mass prejudgement? I also would like to hear what a project manager or a indie developer takes when choosing a plataform for building apps.

  Read the article

• How should programmers handle email-username identity theft?

  - by Craige

  Background I recently signed up for an iTunes account, and found that somebody had fraudulently used MY email to register their iTunes account. Why Apple did not validate the email address, I will never know. Now I am told that I cannot use my email address to register a new iTunes account, as this email address is linked to an existing account. This got be thinking... Question How should we as developers handle email/identity theft? Obviously, we should verify that an email address belongs to the person it is said to belong to. Why Apple did not do this in my case, I have no idea. But lets pretend we use email address for login/account identification, and something slipped though the cracks (be it our end, or the users). How should we handle reports of fraudulent accounts?

  Read the article

• Build one to throw away vs Second-system effect

  - by m3th0dman

  One one hand there is an advice that says "Build one to throw away". Only after finishing a software system and seeing the end product we realize what went wrong in the design phase and understand how we should have really done it. On the other hand there is the "second-system effect" which says that the second system of the same kind that is designed is usually worse than the first one; there are many features that did not fit in the first project and were pushed into the second version usually leading to overly complex and overly engineered. Isn't here some contradiction between these principles? What is the correct view over the problems and where is the border between these two? I believe that these "good practices" are were firstly promoted in the seminal book The Mythical Man-Month by Fred Brooks. I know that some of these issues are solved by Agile methodologies, but deep down, the problem is still the principles still stand; for example we would not make important design changes 3 sprints before going live.

  Read the article

• Executable execution path. Does it depends of the place the executable is called from?

  - by Valkea

  as I'm still a new Linux user, I still discover some behaviours and I'm unable to tell if they are "normals" or not. I searched the Internet but as I can't really find an answer I guess it's time to ask here. Few weeks ago I installed a small game called "Machinarium" and I played it... but few days later when I wanted to continue my game I was unable to make the game start correctly. And as I didn't had the time to search I given up. But yesterday as I was working on a program of mine, I had the exactly same behaviour. So I searched a bit and I discovered that when using Nautilus with the "List view", I was able to run the program (ie: the program does find the sound, images etc resources) when I was literally "inside" the executable folder, but unable when I was in a parent folder and expanding it to the executable folder to run it. To illustrate the behaviour here are two screen shots. It doesn't works if the executable is double clicked from here It does works if the executable is double clicked from here This is indeed the same "place", but the Nautilus view is slightly different as the current folder is not the same and it seems to make a difference for the program. Furthermore, when I create a menu items via System Settings/Main Menu to the executable, it behaves just like if the executable can't find the resources (that's why I was unable to play Machinarium the second time as I created a menu short-cut after my first game). So I asked my program to generate a text file at it's root when running, and I started to launch it from different "parent" folders to see where is generated the text file. Each time the file was generated on the top folder of the current Nautilus view. I was expected to see it appears in the same folder of the executable (well not as I was guessing what as happening, but before that I would have expected to see it appears in the exe folder). Does anyone can explain me why it does works like this (I guess it's normal) ? How I'm supposed to solve this when creating programs (Should I detect the executable path in my C++ code or should I organize the resources files another way than on windows ?)

  Read the article

• Why Adobe Air is so underrated for building mobile apps?

  - by Marcelo de Assis

  I worked with Adobe Flash related technologies for the last 5 years, although not being a big fan of Adobe. I see some little bugs happening in some apps, but I cannot imagine why a lot of big companies do not even think to use use Adobe Air as a good technology for their mobile apps. I see a lot of mobile developer positions asking for experts in Android or iOS , but very much less positions asking for Adobe Air, even when Adobe Air apps have the advantage of being multi-plataform, with the same app working in Blackberry, iOS and Android. Is so much easier to develop a game using Flash, than using Android SDK, for example. It really have flaws (that I never saw) or it is just some kind of mass prejudgement? I also would like to hear what a project manager or a indie developer takes when choosing a plataform for building apps.

  Read the article

• Design pattern and best practices

  - by insane-36

  I am an iphone developer. I am quite confident on developing iphone application with some minimal feature. I would consider myself as a fair application developer but the code I write is not so much structured. I make vey little use of MVC because I dont seem to find places to impose MVC. Most of the time, I create application with viewcontrollers and very few models only. How could I improve the skill for making my code more reusable, standard, easy and maintainable. I have seen few books on design patterns and tried few chapters myself but I dont seem to skip my habit. I know few of them but I am not being able to apply those patterns into my app. What is the best way to learn the design patterns and coding habit. Any kind of suggestion is warmly welcomed.

  Read the article

• Different ways of solving problems in code.

  - by Erin

  I now program in C# for a living but before that I programmed in python for 5 years. I have found that I write C# very differently than most examples I see on the web. Rather then writing things like: foreach (string bar in foo) { //bar has something doen to it here } I write code that looks like this. foo.ForEach( c => c.someActionhere() ) Or var result = foo.Select( c => { //Some code here to transform the item. }).ToList(); I think my using code like above came from my love of map and reduce in python - while not exactly the same thing, the concepts are close. Now it's time for my question. What concepts do you take and move with you from language to language; that allow you to solve a problem in a way that is not the normal accepted solution in that language?

  Read the article

• How necessary is it to learn JavaScript before jQuery?

  - by benhowdle89

  In my opinion, when I looked at JavaScript, it looked like not my cup of tea. When I came across jQuery, I loved it. I sat and watched Nettuts+ 15 days of jQuery screencasts, 1 year later and now I'm fairly confident I wouldn't develop a website without including jQuery's library. I have never felt this has held me back but my question is, will this come back and bite me in the ass one day, the fact that I didn't have a solid JavaScript foundation before jumping feet first into one of its best (if not the best) frameworks? Did anyone else take this approach?

  Read the article

• graphical interface when using assembly language

  - by Hellbent

  Im looking to use assembly language to make a great game, not just an average game but a really great game. I want to learn a framework to use in assembly. I know thats not possible without learning the framework in c first. So im thinking of learning sdl in c and then learn, teach myself, how to interpret the program and run it as assembly language code which shouldnt be that hard. Then i will have a window and some graphics routines to display the game while using assembly to code everything in. I need to spend some time learning sdl and then some more time learning how to code all those statements using assembly while calling c functions and knowing what registers returned calls use and what they leave etc. My question is , Is this a good way to go or is there something better to get a graphical window display using assembly language? Regards HellBent

  Read the article

• Objects won't render when Texture Compression + Mipmapping is Enabled

  - by felipedrl

  I'm optimizing my game and I've just implemented compressed (DXTn) texture loading in OpenGL. I've worked my way removing bugs but I can't figure out this one: objects w/ DXTn + mipmapped textures are not being rendered. It's not like they are appearing with a flat color, they just don't appear at all. DXTn textured objs render and mipmapped non-compressed textures render just fine. The texture in question is 256x256 I generate the mips all the way down 4x4, i.e 1 block. I've checked on gDebugger and it display all the levels (7) just fine. I'm using GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST for min filter and GL_LINEAR for mag one. The texture is being compressed and mipmaps being created offline with Paint.NET tool using super sampling method. (I also tried bilinear just in case) Source follow: [SNIPPET 1: Loading DDS into sys memory + Initializing Object] // Read header DDSHeader header; file.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(&header), sizeof(DDSHeader)); uint pos = static_cast<uint>(file.tellg()); file.seekg(0, std::ios_base::end); uint dataSizeInBytes = static_cast<uint>(file.tellg()) - pos; file.seekg(pos, std::ios_base::beg); // Read file data mData = new unsigned char[dataSizeInBytes]; file.read(reinterpret_cast<char*>(mData), dataSizeInBytes); file.close(); mMipmapCount = header.mipmapcount; mHeight = header.height; mWidth = header.width; mCompressionType = header.pf.fourCC; // Only support files divisible by 4 (for compression blocks algorithms) massert(mWidth % 4 == 0 && mHeight % 4 == 0); massert(mCompressionType == NO_COMPRESSION || mCompressionType == COMPRESSION_DXT1 || mCompressionType == COMPRESSION_DXT3 || mCompressionType == COMPRESSION_DXT5); // Allow textures up to 65536x65536 massert(header.mipmapcount <= MAX_MIPMAP_LEVELS); mTextureFilter = TextureFilter::LINEAR; if (mMipmapCount > 0) { mMipmapFilter = MipmapFilter::NEAREST; } else { mMipmapFilter = MipmapFilter::NO_MIPMAP; } mBitsPerPixel = header.pf.bitcount; if (mCompressionType == NO_COMPRESSION) { if (header.pf.flags & DDPF_ALPHAPIXELS) { // The only format supported w/ alpha is A8R8G8B8 massert(header.pf.amask == 0xFF000000 && header.pf.rmask == 0xFF0000 && header.pf.gmask == 0xFF00 && header.pf.bmask == 0xFF); mInternalFormat = GL_RGBA8; mFormat = GL_BGRA; mDataType = GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE; } else { massert(header.pf.rmask == 0xFF0000 && header.pf.gmask == 0xFF00 && header.pf.bmask == 0xFF); mInternalFormat = GL_RGB8; mFormat = GL_BGR; mDataType = GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE; } } else { uint blockSizeInBytes = 16; switch (mCompressionType) { case COMPRESSION_DXT1: blockSizeInBytes = 8; if (header.pf.flags & DDPF_ALPHAPIXELS) { mInternalFormat = GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT1_EXT; } else { mInternalFormat = GL_COMPRESSED_RGB_S3TC_DXT1_EXT; } break; case COMPRESSION_DXT3: mInternalFormat = GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT3_EXT; break; case COMPRESSION_DXT5: mInternalFormat = GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT5_EXT; break; default: // Not Supported (DXT2, DXT4 or any compression format) massert(false); } } [SNIPPET 2: Uploading into video memory] massert(mData != NULL); glGenTextures(1, &mHandle); massert(mHandle!=0); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, mHandle); commitFiltering(); uint offset = 0; Renderer* renderer = Renderer::getInstance(); switch (mInternalFormat) { case GL_RGB: case GL_RGBA: case GL_RGB8: case GL_RGBA8: for (uint i = 0; i < mMipmapCount + 1; ++i) { uint width = std::max(1U, mWidth >> i); uint height = std::max(1U, mHeight >> i); glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, i, mInternalFormat, width, height, mHasBorder, mFormat, mDataType, &mData[offset]); offset += width * height * (mBitsPerPixel / 8); } break; case GL_COMPRESSED_RGB_S3TC_DXT1_EXT: case GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT1_EXT: case GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT3_EXT: case GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT5_EXT: { uint blockSize = 16; if (mInternalFormat == GL_COMPRESSED_RGB_S3TC_DXT1_EXT || mInternalFormat == GL_COMPRESSED_RGBA_S3TC_DXT1_EXT) { blockSize = 8; } uint width = mWidth; uint height = mHeight; for (uint i = 0; i < mMipmapCount + 1; ++i) { uint nBlocks = ((width + 3) / 4) * ((height + 3) / 4); // Only POT textures allowed for mipmapping massert(width % 4 == 0 && height % 4 == 0); glCompressedTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, i, mInternalFormat, width, height, mHasBorder, nBlocks * blockSize, &mData[offset]); offset += nBlocks * blockSize; if (width <= 4 && height <= 4) { break; } width = std::max(4U, width / 2); height = std::max(4U, height / 2); } break; } default: // Not Supported massert(false); } Also I don't understand the "+3" in the block size computation but looking for a solution for my problema I've encountered people defining it as that. I guess it won't make a differente for POT textures but I put just in case. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Single or multiple return statements in a function [on hold]

  - by Juan Carlos Coto

  When writing a function that can have several different return values, particularly when different branches of code return different values, what is the cleanest or sanest way of returning? Please note the following are really contrived examples meant only to illustrate different styles. Example 1: Single return def my_function(): if some_condition: return_value = 1 elif another_condition: return_value = 2 else: return_value = 3 return return_value Example 2: Multiple returns def my_function(): if some_condition: return 1 elif another_condition: return 2 else: return 3 The second example seems simpler and is perhaps more readable. The first one, however, might describe the overall logic a bit better (the conditions affect the assignment of the value, not whether it's returned or not). Is the second way preferable to the first? Why?

  Read the article

• How Does The Maybe Monad Relate To The Option Type?

  - by Onorio Catenacci

  I was doing a presentation on F# and was discussing the Option type when someone in the audience asked me if the Option type is F#'s implementation of the maybe monad. I know that's not the case but I did want to ask how the two concepts are related. I mean it seems to me that an option type might be the result of the operation of a maybe monad but I'm not even sure of that. Would someone elucidate the relationship between the maybe monad and the option type in those functional languages which support it?

  Read the article

• Final Year Project Advice: what impact on my CV [closed]

  - by Devon Smith

  I am being offered - as a final year project - to do a Company Website. This is basically an out-house project and I am not completely sure whether I should take it. The requirements are : Company Information User Registration Order placements. The technologies that I should use are PHP, Javascript, HTML, CSS and maybe Java Servlets. This appears to me a very basic project and I need an opinion as to what effect it might have on my CV. Is it worth to do it? Or should I go into some research project or something that has not been done before?

  Read the article

• What are the benefits of Android way of "saving memory" - explicitly passing Context objects everywhere?

  - by Sarge Borsch

  Turned out, this question is not easy to formulate for me, but let's try. In Android, pretty much any UI object depends on a Context, and has defined lifetime. It also can destroy and recreate UI objects and even whole application process at any time, and so on. This makes coding asynchronous operations correctly not straightforward. (and sometimes very cumbersome) But I never have seen a real explanation, why it's done that way? There are other OSes, including mobile OSes (iOS, for example), that don't do such things. So, what are the wins of Android way (Activities & Contexts)? Does that allow Android applications to use much less RAM, or maybe there are other benefits?

  Read the article

• is jargon related to a frameWork (concept)

  - by MaKo

  If this is not the right place to ask this question please inform where it would belong, to change it... I have a doubt for the correct word or concept in english language [not my native], about the relationship of language to framework for example i work with objective C, with the cocoa touch frame work || python with the django frame work My comparison is between natural languages and formal languages, So would be in a natural language english and the frame work a [computer, it]jargon? Does this make sense? Or what other concept would be the relationship between natural language - framework?

  Read the article

• Is return-type-(only)-polymorphism in Haskell a good thing?

  - by dainichi

  One thing that I've never quite come to terms with in Haskell is how you can have polymorphic constants and functions whose return type cannot be determined by their input type, like class Foo a where foo::Int -> a Some of the reasons that I do not like this: Referential transparency: "In Haskell, given the same input, a function will always return the same output", but is that really true? read "3" return 3 when used in an Int context, but throws an error when used in a, say, (Int,Int) context. Yes, you can argue that read is also taking a type parameter, but the implicitness of the type parameter makes it lose some of its beauty in my opinion. Monomorphism restriction: One of the most annoying things about Haskell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole reason for the MR is that computation that looks shared might not be because the type parameter is implicit. Type defaulting: Again one of the most annoying things about Haskell. Happens e.g. if you pass the result of functions polymorphic in their output to functions polymorphic in their input. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but this would not be necessary without functions whose return type cannot be determined by their input type (and polymorphic constants). So my question is (running the risk of being stamped as a "discussion quesion"): Would it be possible to create a Haskell-like language where the type checker disallows these kinds of definitions? If so, what would be the benefits/disadvantages of that restriction? I can see some immediate problems: If, say, 2 only had the type Integer, 2/3 wouldn't type check anymore with the current definition of /. But in this case, I think type classes with functional dependencies could come to the rescue (yes, I know that this is an extension). Furthermore, I think it is a lot more intuitive to have functions that can take different input types, than to have functions that are restricted in their input types, but we just pass polymorphic values to them. The typing of values like [] and Nothing seems to me like a tougher nut to crack. I haven't thought of a good way to handle them. I doubt I am the first person to have had thoughts like these. Does anybody have links to good discussions about this Haskell design decision and the pros/cons of it?

  Read the article

• Deferent ways of solving problems in code.

  - by Erin

  I now program in C# for a living but before that I programmed in python for 5 years. I have found that I write C# very that most examples I see on the web. Rather then writing things like: foreach (string bar in foo) { //bar has something doen to it here } I write code that looks like this. foo.ForEach( c => c.someActionhere() ) Or var result = foo.Select( c => { //Some code here to transform the item. }).ToList(); I think my using code like above came form my love of map and reduce in python while not exactly the same thing the concepts are close. Now it's time for my question. What concepts do you take and move with you from language to language. That allow you to solve a problem in a way that is not the normal accepted solution in that language?

  Read the article

• Is it ethical for a programmer to promote his/her own library?

  - by Kit Menke

  Fairly recently I started maintaining my own open source JavaScript library. I created it to solve a pretty specific need but fairly regularly see questions that can be solved (in whole/part) by using my library. I've always gone ahead to post my answer including my library and make sure to always include a disclosure specifying that I maintain it. I feel for open source projects this may not be such a big deal but where do you draw the line? (ex: commercial products) Is it ethical for a programmer to promote is own library? When is it not?

  Read the article

• Game Asset Storage: Archive vs Individual files

  - by David Colson

  As I am in the process of creating a 3D c++ game and I was wondering what would be more beneficial when dealing with game assets with regards to storage. I have seen some games have a single asset file compressed with everything in it and other with lots of little compressed files. If I had lots of individual files I would not need to load a large file at once and use up memory but the code would have to go about file seeking when the level loads to find all the correct files needed. There is no file seeking needed when dealing with one large file, but again, what about all the assets not currently needed that would get loaded with the one file? I could also have an asset file for each level, but then how do I deal with shared assets This has been bothering me for a while so tell me what other advantages and disadvantages are there to either way of doing things.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >