Search Results

Search found 97532 results on 3902 pages for 'user acceptance testing'.

Page 79/3902 | < Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >

  • T-4 Templates for ASP.NET Web Form Databound Control Friendly Logical Layers

    - by joycsharp
    I just released an open source project at codeplex, which includes a set of T-4 templates to enable you to build logical layers (i.e. DAL/BLL) with just few clicks! The logical layers implemented here are  based on Entity Framework 4.0, ASP.NET Web Form Data Bound control friendly and fully unit testable. In this open source project you will get Entity Framework 4.0 based T-4 templates for following types of logical layers: Data Access Layer: Entity Framework 4.0 provides excellent ORM data access layer. It also includes support for T-4 templates, as built-in code generation strategy in Visual Studio 2010, where we can customize default structure of data access layer based on Entity Framework. default structure of data access layer has been enhanced to get support for mock testing in Entity Framework 4.0 object model. Business Logic Layer: ASP.NET web form based data bound control friendly business logic layer, which will enable you few clicks to build data bound web applications on top of ASP.NET Web Form and Entity Framework 4.0 quickly with great support of mock testing. Download it to make your web development productive. Enjoy!

    Read the article

  • Oracle’s New Approach to Cloud-based Applications User Experiences

    - by Oracle OpenWorld Blog Team
    By Misha Vaughan It was an exciting Oracle OpenWorld this year for customers and partners, as they got to see what their input into the Oracle user experience research and development process has produced for cloud-delivered applications. The result of all this engagement and listening is a focus on simplicity, mobility, and extensibility. These were the core themes across Oracle OpenWorld sessions, executive roundtables, and analyst briefings given by Jeremy Ashley, Oracle's vice president of user experience. The highlight of every meeting with a customer featured the new simplified UI for Oracle’s cloud applications.    Attendees at some sessions and events also saw a vision of what is coming next in the Oracle user experience, and they gave direct feedback on whether this would help solve their business problems.  What did attendees think of what they saw this year? Rebecca Wettemann of Nucleus Research was part of  an analyst briefing on next-generation user experiences from Oracle. Here’s what she told CRM Buyer in an interview just after the event:  “Many of the improvements are incremental, which is not surprising, as Oracle regularly updates its application,” Rebecca Wettemann, vice president of Nucleus Research, told CRM Buyer. "Still, there are distinct themes to this latest set of changes. One is usability. Oracle Sales Cloud, for example, is designed to have zero training for onboarding sales reps, which it does," she explained. "It is quite impressive, actually—the intuitive nature of the application and the design work they have done with this goal in mind. The software uses as few buttons and fields as possible," she pointed out. "The sales rep doesn't have to ask, 'what is the next step?' because she can see what it is."  What else did we hear? Oracle OpenWorld is a time when we can take a broader pulse of our customers’ and partners’ concerns. This year we heard some common user experience themes on the following: · A desire to continue to simplify widely used self-service tasks · A need to understand how customers or partners could take some of the UX lessons learned on simplicity and mobility into their own custom areas and projects  · The continuing challenge of needing to support bring-your-own-device and corporate-provided mobile devices to end users · A desire to harmonize user experiences across platforms for specific business-use cases  What does this mean for next year? Well, there were a lot of things we could only show to smaller groups of customers in our Oracle OpenWorld usability labs and HQ lab tours, to partners at our Expo, and to analysts under non-disclosure agreements. But we used these events as a way to get some early feedback about where we are focusing for the year ahead. Attendees gave us a positive response: @bkhan Saw some excellent UX innovations at the expo “@usableapps: Great job @mishavaughan and @vinoskey on #oow13 UX partner expo!” @WarnerTim @usableapps @mishavaughan @vinoskey @ultan Thanks for an interesting afternoon definitely liked the UX tool kits for partners. You can expect Oracle to continue pushing themes of simplicity, mobility, and extensibility even more aggressively in the next year.  If you are interested to find out what really goes on in the UX labs, such as what we are doing with smartphones, tablets, heads-up displays, and the AppsLab robots, feel free to reach out to me for more information: Misha Vaughan or on Twitter: @mishavaughan.

    Read the article

  • 6 Prominent Features of New GMail User Interface

    - by Gopinath
    GMail’s user interface has got a big make over today and the new user interface is available to everyone. We can switch to the new user interface by click on “Switch to the new look” link available at the bottom right of GMail (If you are on IE 6 or similar type of bad browsers, you will not see the option!). I switched to the new user interface as soon I noticed the link and played with it for sometime. In this post I want to share the prominent features of all new GMail interface. 1. All New Conversations Interface GMail’s threaded conversations is a game changing feature when it was first introduced by Google. For  a long time we have not seen much updates to the threaded conversation views. In the new GMail interface, threaded conversation sports a great new look – conversations are always visible in a horizontal fashion as opposed to stack interface of earlier version. When you open a conversation, you get a quick glance of individual thread without expanding the thread. Readability is improved a lot now.  Check image after the break 2. Sender Profile Photos In Email Threads Did you observe the above screenshot of conversations view? It has profile images of the participants in the thread. Identifying person of a thread is much more easy. 3. Advanced Search Box Search is the heart of Google’s business and it’s their flagship technology. GMail’s search interface is enhanced to let you quickly find the required e-mails. Also you can create mail filters from the search box without leaving the screen or opening up a new popup. 4. Gmail Automatically Resizing To Fit Multiple Devices There is no doubt that this is post PC era where people started using more of tablets and big screen smartphones than ever. The new user interface of GMail automatically resizes itself to fit the size of screen seamlessly. 5. HD Images For Your Themes, Sourced from iStockphoto Are you bored with minimalistic GMail interface and the few flashy themes? Here comes GMail HD themes backed by stock photographs sourced from iStockPhoto website. If you have a widescreen HD monitor then decorate your inbox with beautiful themes. 6. Resize Labels & Chat Panels Now you got a splitter between Labels & Chat panel that lets resize their height as you prefer. Also Label panel auto expands its height when you mouse over to show you hidden labels if any. Video – overview of new GMail features This article titled,6 Prominent Features of New GMail User Interface, was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • How to search for a tester?

    - by MainMa
    As a freelance developer, a few times I tried to find some testers to be able to let them test my software/web applications. If I try to find them, it's because most of the customers are not intended to hire external testers and don't see why this can benefit to them, so products are UI-untested and buggy. I tried lots of things. Discussion boards for IT people, specific websites for people who search for a job. Every time I clearly precise that I'm looking for product testers. I completely failed to find anybody for this job. I found instead two types of people: Non IT people who try to qualify as testers, but don't have enough skills for that, and don't really know what testing is and how to do it, Programmers, who are skilled as programmers, but not as testers, and who mostly don't understand neither what testing is about (or think it's the same thing as code review, or it consists in writing unit tests). Of course, they submit general programmers resumes, where they describe their high experience in Assembler and C++, but don't tell anything about anything related to the job of a tester. What I'm doing wrong? Isn't it called "tester"? Is there at least a tester job, different from general programming job? Is there any precise requirement to require from each candidate which can eliminate non IT people and general programmers?

    Read the article

  • Have unit test generators helped you when working with legacy code?

    - by Duncan Bayne
    I am looking at a small (~70kLOC including generated) C# (.NET 4.0, some Silverlight) code-base that has very low test coverage. The code itself works in that it has passed user acceptance testing, but it is brittle and in some areas not very well factored. I would like to add solid unit test coverage around the legacy code using the usual suspects (NMock, NUnit, StatLight for the Silverlight bits). My normal approach is to start working through the project, unit testing & refactoring, until I am satisfied with the state of the code. I've done this many times in the past, and it's worked well. However, this time I'm thinking of using a test generator (in particular Pex) to create the test framework, then manually fleshing it out. My question is: have you used unit test generators in the past when commencing work on a legacy codebase, and if so, would you recommend them? My fear is that the generated tests will miss the semantic nuances of the code-base, leading to the dreaded situation of having tests for the sake of the coverage metric, rather than tests which clearly express the intended behaviour in code.

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection: what belongs in the constructor?

    - by Adam Backstrom
    I'm evaluating my current PHP practices in an effort to write more testable code. Generally speaking, I'm fishing for opinions on what types of actions belong in the constructor. Should I limit things to dependency injection? If I do have some data to populate, should that happen via a factory rather than as constructor arguments? (Here, I'm thinking about my User class that takes a user ID and populates user data from the database during construction, which obviously needs to change in some way.) I've heard it said that "initialization" methods are bad, but I'm sure that depends on what exactly is being done during initialization. At the risk of getting too specific, I'll also piggyback a more detailed example onto my question. For a previous project, I built a FormField class (which handled field value setting, validation, and output as HTML) and a Model class to contain these fields and do a bit of magic to ease working with fields. FormField had some prebuilt subclasses, e.g. FormText (<input type="text">) and FormSelect (<select>). Model would be subclassed so that a specific implementation (say, a Widget) had its own fields, such as a name and date of manufacture: class Widget extends Model { public function __construct( $data = null ) { $this->name = new FormField('length=20&label=Name:'); $this->manufactured = new FormDate; parent::__construct( $data ); // set above fields using incoming array } } Now, this does violate some rules that I have read, such as "avoid new in the constructor," but to my eyes this does not seem untestable. These are properties of the object, not some black box data generator reading from an external source. Unit tests would progressively build up to any test of Widget-specific functionality, so I could be confident that the underlying FormFields were working correctly during the Widget test. In theory I could provide the Model with a FieldFactory() which could supply custom field objects, but I don't believe I would gain anything from this approach. Is this a poor assumption?

    Read the article

  • System testing - making sure the system conforms to specification. Validation?

    - by user970696
    After weeks of research I have nearly completed my thesis, yet I am unable to clear up my confusion contained in all previous threads here (and in many books): During system testing, we check the system function against system analysis (functional system design) - but that would fit to a definition of verification according to many books. But I follow ISO12207, which considers all testing as validation (making sure work product meets requirement for intended use). How can I justify that unit testing or system testing is validation, even though when I check it against specification? Which fullfils the definiton of verification? When testing that e.g. "Save button" works, is it validation? This picture shows my understanding of V&V, so different from many other sources, including ISTQB etc. Essential problem I have is that a book using the same picture also states on another place that: test activities in the area of validation are usability, alpha and beta testing. For verification, testable system requirements are defined whose correct implementation can be tested through system tests. Isn't that the opposite of what the picture says? Most books present the following picture, where validation is just making sure that customer needs are satisfied. Mind you that according to ISO, validation activity is testing.

    Read the article

  • How can I reduce the amount of time it takes to fully regression test an application ready for release?

    - by DrLazer
    An app I work on is being developed with a modified version of scrum. If you are not familiar with scrum, it's just an alternative approach to a more traditional watefall model, where a series of features are worked on for a set amount of time known as a sprint. The app is written in C# and makes use of WPF. We use Visual C# 2010 Express edition as an IDE. If we work on a sprint and add in a few new features, but do not plan to release until a further sprint is complete, then regression testing is not an issue as such. We just test the new features and give the app a good once over. However, if a release is planned that our customers can download - a full regression test is factored in. In the past this wasn't a big deal, it took 3 or 4 days and the devs simply fix up any bugs found in the regression phase, but now, as the app is getting larger and larger and incorporating more and more features, the regression is spanning out for weeks. I am interested in any methods that people know of or use that can decrease this time. At the moment the only ideas I have are to either start writing Unit Tests, which I have never fully tried out in a commercial environment, or to research the possibilty of any UI Automation API's or tools that would allow me to write a program to perform a series of batch tests. I know literally nothing about the possibilities of UI automation so any information would be valuable. I don't know that much about Unit testing either, how complicated can the tests be? Is it possible to get Unit tests to use the UI? Are there any other methods I should consider? Thanks for reading, and for any advice in advance. Edit: Thanks for the information. Does anybody know of any alternatives to what has been mentioned so far (NUnit, RhinoMocks and CodedUI)?

    Read the article

  • How would you TDD the functionality of getting the corresponding process of a running windows service?

    - by Matt Spinelli
    Purpose Over the last year or more I've been learning unit testing via books I've read recently like The Art of Unit Testing, Working Effectively with Legacy Code, and others. I've also been using unit tests, mocking frameworks, and the like, periodically at work and definitely see the value. However, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my mind around TDD (as opposed to TAD) when the situation calls for code that is gong to mostly use external API calls. Problem to solve Get the process associated with a windows service using the service name. example: Function GetProcess(ByVal serviceName As String) As Process Rules Show each major iteration in production & test code using TDD No need to see any other code or configuration that is required to get things to run. Just curious about the interfaces, concrete classes, and test methods. C# or VB.NET Must use the .Net framework regarding services/processes (i.e. System.Diagnostics.Process) Test Frameworks: Nunit or MSTest Isolation Frameworks: Moq, Rhino Mock, or Microsoft Moles Must write true unit tests (no integration tests) Additional notes As far as I can tell there are two approaches design wise. Use an Inversion of Control approach along with using the Adapter and/or Facade patterns to wrap the underlying .net framework objects dealing with processes and services. Keep the .net framework code in the class containing the Get Process method and use code detouring (interception) via Microsoft Moles to isolate the hard dependencies from the method under test.

    Read the article

  • Copy-and-Pasted Test Code: How Bad is This?

    - by joshin4colours
    My current job is mostly writing GUI test code for various applications that we work on. However, I find that I tend to copy and paste a lot of code within tests. The reason for this is that the areas I'm testing tend to be similar enough to need repetition but not quite similar enough to encapsulate code into methods or objects. I find that when I try to use classes or methods more extensively, tests become more cumbersome to maintain and sometimes outright difficult to write in the first place. Instead, I usually copy a big chunk of test code from one section and paste it to another, and make any minor changes I need. I don't use more structured ways of coding, such as using more OO-principles or functions. Do other coders feel this way when writing test code? Obviously I want to follow DRY and YAGNI principles, but I find that test code (automated test code for GUI testing anyway) can make these principles tough to follow. Or do I just need more coding practice and a better overall system of doing things? EDIT: The tool I'm using is SilkTest, which is in a proprietary language called 4Test. As well, these tests are mostly for Windows desktop applications, but I also have tested web apps using this setup as well.

    Read the article

  • How to refactor a myriad of similar classes

    - by TobiMcNamobi
    I'm faced with similar classes A1, A2, ..., A100. Believe it or not but yeah, there are roughly hundred classes that almost look the same. None of these classes are unit tested (of course ;-) ). Each of theses classes is about 50 lines of code which is not too much by itself. Still this is way too much duplicated code. I consider the following options: Writing tests for A1, ..., A100. Then refactor by creating an abstract base class AA. Pro: I'm (near to totally) safe by the tests that nothing goes wrong. Con: Much effort. Duplication of test code. Writing tests for A1, A2. Abstracting the duplicated test code and using the abstraction to create the rest of the tests. Then create AA as in 1. Pro: Less effort than in 1 but maintaining a similar degree of safety. Con: I find generalized test code weird; it often seems ... incoherent (is this the right word?). Normally I prefer specialized test code for specialized classes. But that requires a good design which is my goal of this whole refactoring. Writing AA first, testing it with mock classes. Then inheriting A1, ..., A100 successively. Pro: Fastest way to eliminate duplicates. Con: Most Ax classes look very much the same. But if not, there is the danger of changing the code by inheriting from AA. Other options ... At first I went for 3. because the Ax classes are really very similar to each other. But now I'm a bit unsure if this is the right way (from a unit testing enthusiast's perspective).

    Read the article

  • Do you write unit tests for all the time in TDD?

    - by mcaaltuntas
    I have been designing and developing code with TDD style for a long time. What disturbs me about TDD is writing tests for code that does not contain any business logic or interesting behaviour. I know TDD is a design activity more than testing but sometimes I feel it's useless to write tests in these scenarios. For example I have a simple scenario like "When user clicks check button, it should check file's validity". For this scenario I usually start writing tests for presenter/controller class like the one below. @Test public void when_user_clicks_check_it_should_check_selected_file_validity(){ MediaService service =mock(MediaService); View view =mock(View); when(view.getSelectedFile).thenReturns("c:\\Dir\\file.avi"); MediaController controller =new MediaController(service,view); controller.check(); verify(service).check("c:\\Dir\\file.avi"); } As you can see there is no design decision or interesting code to verify behaviour. I am testing values from view passed to MediaService. I usually write but don't like these kind of tests. What do yo do about these situations ? Do you write tests for all the time ? UPDATE : I have changed the test name and code after complaints. Some users said that you should write tests for the trivial cases like this so in the future someone might add interesting behaviour. But what about “Code for today, design for tomorrow.” ? If someone, including myself, adds more interesting code in the future the test can be created for it then. Why should I do it now for the trivial cases ?

    Read the article

  • Oracle Applications Cloud Release 8 Customization: Your User Interface, Your Text

    - by ultan o'broin
    Introducing the User Interface Text Editor In Oracle Applications Cloud Release 8, there’s an addition to the customization tool set, called the User Interface Text Editor  (UITE). When signed in with an application administrator role, users launch this new editing feature from the Navigator's Tools > Customization > User Interface Text menu option. See how the editor is in there with other customization tools? User Interface Text Editor is launched from the Navigator Customization menu Applications customers need a way to make changes to the text that appears in the UI, without having to initiate an IT project. Business users can now easily change labels on fields, for example. Using a composer and activated sandbox, these users can take advantage of the Oracle Metadata Services (MDS), add a key to a text resource bundle, and then type in their preferred label and its description (as a best practice for further work, I’d recommend always completing that description). Changing a simplified UI field label using Oracle Composer In Release 8, the UITE enables business users to easily change UI text on a much wider basis. As with composers, the UITE requires an activated sandbox where users can make their changes safely, before committing them for others to see. The UITE is used for editing UI text that comes from Oracle ADF resource bundles or from the Message Dictionary (or FND_MESSAGE_% tables, if you’re old enough to remember such things). Functionally, the Message Dictionary is used for the text that appears in business rule-type error, warning or information messages, or as a text source when ADF resource bundles cannot be used. In the UITE, these Message Dictionary texts are referred to as Multi-part Validation Messages.   If the text comes from ADF resource bundles, then it’s categorized as User Interface Text in the UITE. This category refers to the text that appears in embedded help in the UI or in simple error, warning, confirmation, or information messages. The embedded help types used in the application are explained in an Oracle Fusion Applications User Experience (UX) design pattern set. The message types have a UX design pattern set too. Using UITE  The UITE enables users to search and replace text in UI strings using case sensitive options, as well as by type. Users select singular and plural options for text changes, should they apply. Searching and replacing text in the UITE The UITE also provides users with a way to preview and manage changes on an exclusion basis, before committing to the final result. There might, for example, be situations where a phrase or word needs to remain different from how it’s generally used in the application, depending on the context. Previewing replacement text changes. Changes can be excluded where required. Multi-Part Messages The Message Dictionary table architecture has been inherited from Oracle E-Business Suite days. However, there are important differences in the Oracle Applications Cloud version, notably the additional message text components, as explained in the UX Design Patterns. Message Dictionary text has a broad range of uses as indicated, and it can also be reserved for internal application use, for use by PL/SQL and C programs, and so on. Message Dictionary text may even concatenate together at run time, where required. The UITE handles the flexibility of such text architecture by enabling users to drill down on each message and see how it’s constructed in total. That way, users can ensure that any text changes being made are consistent throughout the different message parts. Multi-part (Message Dictionary) message components in the UITE Message Dictionary messages may also use supportability-related numbers, the ones that appear appended to the message text in the application’s UI. However, should you have the requirement to remove these numbers from users' view, the UITE is not the tool for the job. Instead, see my blog about using the Manage Messages UI.

    Read the article

  • Is wrapping a third party code the only solution to unit test its consumers? [closed]

    - by Songo
    I'm doing unit testing and in one of my classes I need to send a mail from one of the methods, so using constructor injection I inject an instance of Zend_Mail class which is in Zend framework. Now some people argue that if a library is stable enough and won't change often then there is no need to wrap it. So assuming that Zend_Mail is stable and won't change and it fits my needs entirely, then I won't need a wrapper for it. Now take a look at my class Logger that depends on Zend_Mail: class Logger{ private $mailer; function __construct(Zend_Mail $mail){ $this->mail=$mail; } function toBeTestedFunction(){ //Some code $this->mail->setTo('some value'); $this->mail->setSubject('some value'); $this->mail->setBody('some value'); $this->mail->send(); //Some } } However, Unit testing demands that I test one component at a time, so I need to mock the Zend_Mail class. In addition I'm violating the Dependency Inversion principle as my Logger class now depends on concretion not abstraction. Now is wrapping Zend_Mail the only solution or is there a better approach to this problem? The code is in PHP, but answers doesn't have to be. This is more of a design issue than a language specific feature

    Read the article

  • How can I reduce the amount of time it takes to fully regression test an application ready for release?

    - by DrLazer
    An app I work on is being developed with a modified version of scrum. If you are not familiar with scrum, it's just an alternative approach to a more traditional watefall model, where a series of features are worked on for a set amount of time known as a sprint. The app is written in C# and makes use of WPF. We use Visual C# 2010 Express edition as an IDE. If we work on a sprint and add in a few new features, but do not plan to release until a further sprint is complete, then regression testing is not an issue as such. We just test the new features and give the app a good once over. However, if a release is planned that our customers can download - a full regression test is factored in. In the past this wasn't a big deal, it took 3 or 4 days and the devs simply fix up any bugs found in the regression phase, but now, as the app is getting larger and larger and incorporating more and more features, the regression is spanning out for weeks. I am interested in any methods that people know of or use that can decrease this time. At the moment the only ideas I have are to either start writing Unit Tests, which I have never fully tried out in a commercial environment, or to research the possibilty of any UI Automation API's or tools that would allow me to write a program to perform a series of batch tests. I know literally nothing about the possibilities of UI automation so any information would be valuable. I don't know that much about Unit testing either, how complicated can the tests be? Is it possible to get Unit tests to use the UI? Are there any other methods I should consider? Thanks for reading, and for any advice in advance.

    Read the article

  • Automated browser testing: How to test JavaScript in web pages?

    - by Dave
    I am trying to write an application that will test a series of web-pages programmatically. The web pages being tested have JavaScript embedded within them which alter the structure of the HTML when they complete execution. It is then the goal to take the final HTML (post-execution of the embedded JavaScript) and compare it against a known output. Essentially, the Input --- Output for the test application is: URL ---[retrieve HTML]--- HTML ---[execute JS, then compare]--- PASS/FAIL Here is the challenge: I have been unable to find a solution that is able to take the HTML I retrieve from the URL and process the JavaScript, as a browser would, and generate the final HTML a user might see from "View Source" on the same page within the browser. It would be very surprising if this sort of approach has not been made before, so I'm hoping someone out there knows of a fitting solution for this application/problem? If at all possible, I'm hoping for a solution that integrates with .NET (I've tried using the WebBrowser, with no luck). However, if there is an existing 3rd party application that can do exactly this, that would be quite acceptable. Thanks in advance for the suggestions! Dave

    Read the article

  • ODI 11g - Cleaning control characters and User Functions

    - by David Allan
    In ODI user functions have a poor name really, they should be user expressions - a way of wrapping common expressions that you may wish to reuse many times - across many different technologies is an added bonus. To illustrate look at the problem of how to remove control characters from text. Users ask these types of questions over all technologies - Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and for many years - how do I clean a string, how do I tokenize a string and so on. After some searching around you will find a few ways of doing this, in Oracle there is a convenient way of using the TRANSLATE and REPLACE functions. So you can convert some text using the following SQL; replace( translate('This is my string'||chr(9)||' which has a control character', chr(3)||chr(4)||chr(5)||chr(9), chr(3) ), chr(3), '' ) If you had many columns to perform this kind of transformation on, in the Oracle database the natural solution you'd go to would be to code this as a PLSQL function since you don't want the code splattered everywhere. Someone tells you that there is another control character that needs added equals a maintenance headache. Coding it as a PLSQL function will incur a context switch between SQL and PLSQL which could prove costly. In ODI user functions let you capture this expression text and reference it many times across your mappings. This will protect the expression from being copy-pasted by developers and make maintenance much simpler - change the expression definition in one place. Firstly define a name and a syntax for the user function, I am calling it UF_STRIP_BAD_CHARACTERS and it has one parameter an input string;  We then can define an implementation for each technology we will use it, I will define Oracle's using the inputString parameter and the TRANSLATE and REPLACE functions with whatever control characters I want to replace; I can then use this inside mapping expressions in ODI, below I am cleaning the ENAME column - a fabricated example but you get the gist.  Note when I use the user function the function name remains in the text of the mapping, the actual expression is not substituted until I generate the scenario. If you generate the scenario and export the scenario you can have a peak at the code that is processed in the runtime - below you can see a snippet of my export scenario;  That's all for now, hopefully a useful snippet of info.

    Read the article

  • Real-Time Multi-User Gaming Platform

    - by Victor Engel
    I asked this question at Stack Overflow but was told it's more appropriate here, so I'm posting it again here. I'm considering developing a real-time multi-user game, and I want to gather some information about possibilities before I do some real development. I've thought about how best to ask the question, and for simplicity, the best way that occurred to me was to make an analogy to the field (or playground) game darebase. In the field game of darebase, there are two or more bases. To start, there is one team on each base. The game is a fancy game of tag. When two people meet out in the field, the person who left his base most recently timewise captures the other person. They then return to that person's base. Play continues until everyone is part of the same team. So, analogizing this to an online computer game, let's suppose there are an indefinite number of bases. When a person starts up the game, he has a team that is located at, for example, his current GPS coordinates. It could be a virtual world, but for sake of argument, let's suppose the virtual world corresponds to the player's actual GPS coordinates. The game software then consults the database to see where the closest other base is that is online, and the two teams play their game of virtual tag. Note that the user of the other base could have a different base than the one run by the current user as the closest base to him, in which case, he would be in two simultaneous battles, one with each base. When they go offline, the state of their players is saved on a server somewhere. Game logic calls for the players to have some automaton-logic of some sort, so they can fend for themselves in a limited way using basic rules, until their user goes online again. The user doesn't control the players' movements directly, but issues general directives that influence the players' movement logic. I think this analogy is good enough to frame my question. What sort of platforms are available to develop this sort of game? I've been looking at smartfoxserver, but I'm not convinced yet that it is the best option or even that it will work at all. One possibility, of course, would be to roll out my own web server, but I'd rather not do that if there is an existing service out there already that I could tap into. I will be developing for iOS devices at first. So any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I think I need to establish the architecture first before proceeding with this project. Note that darbase is not the game I intend to implement, but, upon reflection, that might not be a bad idea either.

    Read the article

  • Testing IPP Printing with ipptool

    - by senloe
    I'm trying to send an IPP print job using the ipptool. Using the sample .test files, I can send commands to the printer, but I am unable to successfully use the print-job.test file. Here's an example using ipptool. c:\...>ipptool -v ipp://name.local.:631/ipp/printer print-job.test ipptool: Filename "$filename" on line 21 cannot be read. ipptool: Filename mapped to "". It looks like it's failing resolving the variable $filename within the test file so I attempted to hardcode this value in the test file. In this case I get no error, but still no print. Does anybody have any experience using ipptool to test ipp printing?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: Menu 'New->Text document' is missing, when not admin user

    - by Isamux
    Hi, when I'm logged in as a user that is not member of the administrator group the entry to create a new textfile is missing from the right click "New" menu. If I give the user admin rights or start the explorer with admin rights the "New - text document" menu entry magically appears. As far as I can see the registry entries are correct. Anybody got a solution for that side effect of beeing a normal user in windows?? Regards

    Read the article

  • Limit which processes a user can restart with supervisor?

    - by dvcolgan
    I have used supervisor to manage a Gunicorn process running a Django site, though this question could pertain to anything being managed by supervisor. Previously I was the only person managing and using our server, and supervisor just ran as root and I would use sudo to run supervisorctl restart myapp when needed. Now our server has to support multiple users working on different sites, and each project needs to be able to restart their own gunicorn processes without being able to restart other users' processes. I followed this blog post: http://drumcoder.co.uk/blog/2010/nov/24/running-supervisorctl-non-root/ and was able to allow non-root users to use supervisorctl, but now anyone can restart anyone else's processes. From the looks of it, supervisor doesn't have a way of doing per-user access control. Anyone have any ideas on how to allow users to restart only their own processes without root?

    Read the article

  • Disabling the soundcard for a specific user

    - by Ron
    Does anyone know how to disable the soundcard when a particular user logs on to Windows XP? My last pair of speakers was blown by an inconsiderate user and I want to disable the sound to the speakers only when a particular user logs on. The PC has multiple users logged on (one of which is me).

    Read the article

  • Parental Controls in Ubuntu - per user

    - by Hamish Downer
    I would like to set up parental controls on Ubuntu for a friend of mine. I want it so that the child user has the controls set, but the parent user is not restricted. To be clear, they are sharing one computer, so a router based solution won't help. And I would like a set of step by step instructions to do this. Just one way of doing it. I'm an experienced Ubuntu user, happy at the command line. I've spent quite some time googling for this along the way. I hope that the GChildCare project will eventually make this easy, but it is not ready yet. In the meantime, the WebContentControl GUI provides a way of managing parental controls, but apply them to every user on the computer (easy WebContentContol install instructions and detailed instructions, discussion and related links on ubuntuforums). The ubuntuforums post has a FAQ that states that user-specific configuration is not possible with WebContentControl, and then provides 3 links he used to help him do it. But they are far from step by step instructions. There is this thread which is notes along the way and linking to this article about squid and dansguardian. And then to these two dansguardian articles which are somewhat in depth ... So does anyone know of an existing guide to how to set up parental controls on ubuntu with some users not affected? If no one has come up with an answer after a little bit, I'll set up a community wiki answer so we can come up with a guide.

    Read the article

  • Best way to find the computer a user last logged on from?

    - by Garrett
    I am hoping that somewhere in Active Directory the "last logged on from [computer]" is written/stored, or there is a log I can parse out? The purpose of wanting to know the last PC logged on from is for offering remote support over the network - our users move around pretty infrequently, but I'd like to know that whatever I'm consulting was updating that morning (when they logged in, presumably) at minimum. I'm also considering login scripts that write the user and computer names to a known location I can reference, but some of our users don't like to logout for 15 days at a time. If there is an elegant solution that uses login scripts, definitely mention it - but if it happens to work for merely unlocking the station, that would be even better!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >