Search Results

Search found 1201 results on 49 pages for 'anti aliasing'.

Page 8/49 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

• Single Responsibility Principle vs Anemic Domain Model anti-pattern

  - by Niall Connaughton

  I'm in a project that takes the Single Responsibility Principle pretty seriously. We have a lot of small classes and things are quite simple. However, we have an anemic domain model - there is no behaviour in any of our model classes, they are just property bags. This isn't a complaint about our design - it actually seems to work quite well During design reviews, SRP is brought out whenever new behaviour is added to the system, and so new behaviour typically ends up in a new class. This keeps things very easily unit testable, but I am perplexed sometimes because it feels like pulling behaviour out of the place where it's relevant. I'm trying to improve my understanding of how to apply SRP properly. It seems to me that SRP is in opposition to adding business modelling behaviour that shares the same context to one object, because the object inevitably ends up either doing more than one related thing, or doing one thing but knowing multiple business rules that change the shape of its outputs. If that is so, then it feels like the end result is an Anemic Domain Model, which is certainly the case in our project. Yet the Anemic Domain Model is an anti-pattern. Can these two ideas coexist? EDIT: A couple of context related links: SRP - http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/srp.pdf Anemic Domain Model - http://martinfowler.com/bliki/AnemicDomainModel.html I'm not the kind of developer who just likes to find a prophet and follow what they say as gospel. So I don't provide links to these as a way of stating "these are the rules", just as a source of definition of the two concepts.

  Read the article

• anti-if campaign

  - by Andrew Siemer

  I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

  Read the article

• The 35 Best Tips and Tricks for Maintaining Your Windows PC

  - by Lori Kaufman

  When working (or playing) on your computer, you probably don’t think much about how you are going to clean up your files, backup your data, keep your system virus free, etc. However, these are tasks that need attention. We’ve published useful article about different aspects of maintaining your computer. Below is a list our most useful articles about maintaining your computer, operating system, software, and data. HTG Explains: Learn How Websites Are Tracking You Online Here’s How to Download Windows 8 Release Preview Right Now HTG Explains: Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting

  Read the article

• Ask HTG: Using the Malicious Software Removal Tool, Scheduling Computer Startups, and Diagnosing an Overheating Laptop

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  Once a week we select a few questions from the pile of emails we answer and share the solutions with the greater readership; this week we’re looking at the Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool, scheduling computer startups, and how to diagnose an overheating laptop. HTG Explains: When Do You Need to Update Your Drivers? How to Make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *Actually* Fast! Amazon’s New Kindle Fire Tablet: the How-To Geek Review

  Read the article

• P2P synchronization: can a player update fields of other players?

  - by CherryQu

  I know that synchronization is a huge topic, so I have minimized the problem to this example case. Let's say, Alice and Bob are playing a P2P game, fighting against each other. If Alice hits Bob, how should I do the network component to make Bob's HP decrease? I can think of two approaches: Alice perform a Bob.HP--, then send Bob's reduced HP to Bob. Alice send a "I just hit Bob" signal to Bob. Bob checks it, and reduce its own HP, then send his new HP to everyone including Alice. I think the second approach is better because I don't think a player in a P2P game should be able to modify other players' private fields. Otherwise cheating would be too easy, right? My philosophy is that in a P2P game especially, a player's attributes and all attributes of its belonging objects should only be updated by the player himself. However, I can't prove that this is right. Could someone give me some evidence? Thanks :)

  Read the article

• How one decision can turn web services to hell

  - by DigiMortal

  In this posting I will show you how one stupid decision may turn developers life to hell. There is a project where bunch of complex applications exchange data frequently and it is very hard to change something without additional expenses. Well, one analyst thought that string is silver bullet of web services. Read what happened. Bad bad mistake In the early stages of integration project there was analyst who also established architecture and technical design for web services. There was one very bad mistake this analyst made: All data must be converted to strings before exchange! Yes, that’s correct, this was the requirement. All integers, decimals and dates are coming in and going out as strings. There was also explanation for this requirement: This way we can avoid data type conversion errors! Well, this guy works somewhere else already and I hope he works in some burger restaurant – far away from computers. Consequences If you first look at this requirement it may seem like little annoying piece of crap you can easily survive. But let’s see the real consequences one stupid decision can cause: hell load of data conversions are done by receiving applications and SSIS packages, SSIS packages are not error prone and they depend heavily on strings they get from different services, there are more than one format per type that is used in different services, for larger amounts of data all these conversion tasks slow down the work of integration packages, practically all developers have been in hurry with some SSIS import tasks and some fields that are not used in different calculations in SSAS cube are imported without data conversions (by example, some prices are strings in format “1.021 $”). The most painful problem for developers is the part of data conversions because they don’t expect that there is such a stupid requirement stated and therefore they are not able to estimate the time their tasks take on these web services. Also developers must be prepared for cases when suddenly some service sends data that is not in acceptable format and they must solve the problems ASAP. This puts unexpected load on developers and they are not very happy with it because they can’t understand why they have to live with this horror if it is possible to fix. What to do if you see something like this? Well, explain the problem to customer and demand special tasks to project schedule to get this mess solved before going on with new developments. It is cheaper to solve the problems now that later.

  Read the article

• Clientside anticheating in multiplayer game 1vs1

  - by garnav

  I'm developing a simple card game, where there will be a matchmaking system that will put you against another human player. This will be the only game mode available, a 1vs1 against another human, no AI. I want to prevent cheating as much as possible. I have already read a lot of similar questions here and I already know that I cannot trust the client and I have to make all verifications server side. I intend to have a server (need one for the matchmaking anyway) and I intend to make some verifications server side but if I want to check everything server side this makes my server to be able to keep track of the state of all current games and check every action, and I don't have the money/infrastructure to support that server. My idea is to make clients check and verify some of the actions made by their opponent* and if they find some illegal action notify the possible cheating to the server and make the server verify it. This will still require my server to keep track of all current games, but it will save resources only checking some things that cannot be checked at client side(like card order in the deck) and only checking other things when they are actually wrong. *(only those they can check with out allowing themselves cheating! for example:they can't check if the played card was in hand cos that will need them to know all cards in hand) Summing up, my questions are: is this a viable approach? will I actually save resources doing this or the extra complexity in the server and client for exchanging this messages is not worth it? do you know any game that has successfully or unsuccessfully tried a similar approach? Thanks all for reading and answering

  Read the article

• spam mail filter or ward-off

  - by zapping

  Can you please let me know on a anti-spam that can be used with qmail.

  Read the article

• Strategies to Defeat Memory Editors for Cheating - Desktop Games

  - by ashes999

  I'm assuming we're talking about desktop games -- something the player downloads and runs on their local computer. Many are the memory editors that allow you to detect and freeze values, like your player's health. How do you prevent cheating via memory-modifiation? What strategies are effective to combat this kind of cheating? For reference, I know that players can: - Search for something by value or range - Search for something that changed value - Set memory values - Freeze memory values I'm looking for some good ones. Two I use that are mediocre are: Displaying values as a percentage instead of the number (eg. 46/50 = 92% health) A low-level class that holds values in an array and moves them with each change. (For example, instead of an int, I have a class that's an array of ints, and whenever the value changes, I use a different, randomly-chosen array item to hold the value)

  Read the article

• Avoiding the Anaemic Domain - How to decide what single responsibility a class has

  - by thecapsaicinkid

  Even after reading a bunch I'm still falling into the same trap. I have a class, usually an enity. I need to implement more than one, similar operations on this type. It feels wrong to (seemingly arbitrarily) choose one of these operations to belong inside the entity and push the others out to a separate class; I end up pushing all operations to service classes and am left with an anaemic domain. As a crude example, imagine the typical Employee class with numeric properties to hold how many paid days the employee is entitled to for both sickness and holiday and a collection of days taken for each. public class Employee { public int PaidHolidayAllowance { get; set; } public int PaidSicknessAllowance { get; set; } public IEnumerable<Holiday> Holidays { get; set; } public IEnumerable<SickDays> SickDays { get; set; } } I want two operations, one to calculate remaining holiday, another for remaining paid sick days. It seems strange to include say, CalculateRemaingHoliday() in the Employee class and bump CalculateRemainingPaidSick() to some PaidSicknessCalculator class. I would end up with a PaidSicknessCalculator and a RemainingHolidayCalculator and the anaemic Employee entity as seen above. The other alternative would be to put both operations in the Employee class and kick Single Responsibility to the curb. That doesn't make for particularly maintainable code. I suppose the Employee class should have some initialisation/validation logic (not accepting negative alowances etc.) So maybe I just stick to basic initialisation and validation in the entities themselves and be happy with my separate calculator classes. Or maybe I should be asking myself if Anaemic Domain is actually causing me some tangible problems with my code.

  Read the article

• Protection against CheatEngine and other injectors [duplicate]

  - by Lucas

  This question already has an answer here: Strategies to Defeat Memory Editors for Cheating - Desktop Games 10 answers Is protection against CheatEngine and other inject tools are possible to do? I was thinking a day and the only one idea I've got is about writting some small application which will scan the processes running every second, and in case if any injector will be found the game client will exit immadiately. I'm writing here to see your opinions on this case as some of you may have some expierence against protecting the game clients against DLL or PYC injection or something.

  Read the article

• Fair dice over network w/o trusted 3rd party

  - by Kay

  Though it should be a pretty basic problem, I did not find a solution for it: How to play dice over a network without a trusted third party? The M players shall roll N dice, one player after another. No player may "cheat", i.e. change the outcome to his advantage, or "look into the future" before the next roll. Is that possible? I guess the solution would be something like public key crypto, where each player turns in an encrypted message. After all messages were collected you exchange the keys to decode the messages. Then the sha1(joined string of all decrypted messages) mod 6 + 1 is used to determine the die. The major problem I have: since the message [c/s]hould be anything, I don't know how to prevent tampering with the private keys. Esp. the last player to turn in his key could easily cheat (I guess). The game should even stay fair, if all players "conspire" against one player.

  Read the article

• Windows xp : possible virus

  - by dotnet-practitioner

  I think my son downloaded some thing from internet and possibly infect the computer. The Google chrome browser will not start any more and after an hour of using computer he gets some sort of blue screen saying that memory is being dumped. I don't want to format the hdd and reinstall at this time. Can I salvage the machine by some anti virus? Questions: 1. How do I detect what kind of virus do I have? 2. What kind of free anti virus software do I download to fix this problem? Thanks

  Read the article

• Ensuring that saved data has not been edited in a game with both offline and online components

  - by Omar Kooheji

  I'm in the pre-planning phase of coming up with a game design and I was wondering if there was a sensible way to stop people from editing saves in a game with offline and online components. The offline component would allow the player to play through the game and the online component would allow them to play against other players, so I would need to make sure that people hadn't edited the source code/save files while offline to gain an advantage while online. Game likely to be developed in either .Net or Java, both of which are unfortunately easy to decompile.

  Read the article

• Strategies to Defeat Memory Editors for Cheating - Desktop Games

  - by ashes999

  I'm assuming we're talking about desktop games -- something the player downloads and runs on their local computer. Many are the memory editors that allow you to detect and freeze values, like your player's health. How do you prevent cheating? What strategies are effective to combat this kind of cheating? I'm looking for some good ones. Two I use that are mediocre are: Displaying values as a percentage instead of the number (eg. 46/50 = 92% health) A low-level class that holds values in an array and moves them with each change

  Read the article

• Is there a way to prevent users from adjusting their gamma correction to 'cheat' their way out of a 'dark' area?

  - by Athix

  In almost every game I've come across that includes a dark situation designed to change the way a user interacts with the environment, there are always some players who turn up their monitor's gamma correction in order to negate the desired effect. Is there a way to prevent users from adjusting their gamma correction to 'cheat' their way out of a challenge? (the darkness) I'd imagine if you could reliably retrieve the current gamma correction of the user's monitor, you could use that to more or less prevent the advantage it would otherwise grant without causing the normal users any inconvenience.

  Read the article

• Programming habits, patterns, and standards that have developed out of appeal to tradition/by mistake? [closed]

  - by user828584

  Being self-taught, the vast majority of what I know about programming has come from reading other peoples' code on websites like this. I'm starting to wonder if I've developed bad or otherwise pointless habits from other people, or even just made invalid assumptions. For example, in javascript, void 0 is used in a lot of places, and until I saw this, I just assumed it was necessary and that 0 had some significance. Also, the http header, referer is misspelled but hasn't been changed because it would break a lot of applications. Also mentioned in Code Complete 2: The architecture should describe the motivations for all major decisions. Be wary of “we’ve always done it that way” justifications. One story goes that Beth wanted to cook a pot roast according to an award-winning pot roast recipe handed down in her husband’s family. Her husband, Abdul, said that his mother had taught him to sprinkle it with salt and pepper, cut both ends off, put it in the pan, cover it, and cook it. Beth asked, “Why do you cut both ends off?” Abdul said, “I don’t know. I’ve always done it that way. Let me ask my mother.” He called her, and she said, “I don’t know. I’ve always done it that way. Let me ask your grandmother.” She called his grandmother, who said, “I don’t know why you do it that way. I did it that way because it was too big to fit in my pan.” What are some other examples of this?

  Read the article

• Failure Driven Development

  - by DevSolo

  At our shop, we strive to be agile. And I'd say we are making great strides. That said, a few of us have spotted a pattern we have started calling "Failure Driven Development". Failure Driven Development can basically be desribed as an agile release/iteration cycle where the bugs/features are guided not by tasks and stories with acceptance criteria, but with defects entered in the defect tracking software. Our team has a great Project Manager who strives to get the acceptance criteria from the customer(s), but it's not always possible. From my development chair, this is due to the customer either not knowing exactly what they want or (and this is the kicker) two different "camps" at the customer's main office conflict with how a story should be implemented. Camp A will losely dictate that Feature X works like this, then Camp B will fail it due not functioning like that. Hence, the term "FDD". The process is driven by "failures". This leads to my question: Has anyone else encountered this and if so, any tips/suggestions for dealing with it? We have, of course, tried to get Camp A and B to agree prior, but everyone knows this isn't always the case. Thanks

  Read the article

• Strategy to prevent players from seeing through walls in an online FPS?

  - by geneotech

  Why do we still moan on wallhackers in multiplayer first-person shooters ? Isn't it possible to perform occlusion culling for all players server-side ? For example, send player xyz information to client only when the player is visible in client's frustum and not occluded by any object ? Even if the collision-geometry is very simplified, most of the time cheater won't receive tactical information. Why not do this ?

  Read the article

• Modular Database Structures

  - by John D

  I have been examining the code base we use in work and I am worried about the size the packages have grown to. The actual code is modular, procedures have been broken down into small functional (and testable) parts. The issue I see is that we have 100 procedures in a single package - almost an entire domain model. I had thought of breaking these packages down - to create sub domains that are centered around the procedure relationships to other objects. Group a bunch of procedures that have 80% of their relationships to three tables etc. The end result would be a lot more packages, but the packages would be smaller and I feel the entire code base would be more readable - when procedures cross between two domain models it is less of a struggle to figure which package it belongs to. The problem I now have is what the actual benefit of all this would really be. I looked at the general advantages of modularity: 1. Re-usability 2. Asynchronous Development 3. Maintainability Yet when I consider our latest development, the procedures within the packages are already reusable. At this advanced stage we rarely require asynchronous development - and when it is required we simply ladder the stories across iterations. So I guess my question is if people know of reasons why you would break down classes rather than just the methods inside of classes? Right now I do believe there is an issue with these mega packages forming but the only benefit I can really pin down to break them down is readability - something that experience gained from working with them would solve.

  Read the article

• Javascript: Avoid this and new - further reading? [closed]

  - by Thomas Deutsch

  I do not want this to end in a sort of religious discussion, i want to collect some sources for further reading on this topic. As shown here: Node.js Style and Structure Point 1: Avoid this and new you can find a good example when it could be better to use closures instead of a prototype, and to make every argument explicit. Ok, i agree - could be nice, but i need to know more. Can anyone recommend a good link? Would this make my code 100% object-pattern-free ? (no factory-, repository-, module- pattern?)

  Read the article

• Which things instantly ring alarm bells when looking at code? [closed]

  - by FinnNk

  I attended a software craftsmanship event a couple of weeks ago and one of the comments made was "I'm sure we all recognize bad code when we see it" and everyone nodded sagely without further discussion. This sort of thing always worries me as there's that truism that everyone thinks they're an above average driver. Although I think I can recognize bad code I'd love to learn more about what other people consider to be code smells as it's rarely discussed in detail on people's blogs and only in a handful of books. In particular I think it'd be interesting to hear about anything that's a code smell in one language but not another. I'll start off with an easy one: Code in source control that has a high proportion of commented out code - why is it there? was it meant to be deleted? is it a half finished piece of work? maybe it shouldn't have been commented out and was only done when someone was testing something out? Personally I find this sort of thing really annoying even if it's just the odd line here and there, but when you see large blocks interspersed with the rest of the code it's totally unacceptable. It's also usually an indication that the rest of the code is likely to be of dubious quality as well.

  Read the article

• How to Avoid a Busy Loop Inside a Function That Returns the Object That's Being Waited For

  - by Carl Smith

  I have a function which has the same interface as Python's input builtin, but it works in a client-server environment. When it's called, the function, which runs in the server, sends a message to the client, asking it to get some input from the user. The user enters some stuff, or dismisses the prompt, and the result is passed back to the server, which passes it to the function. The function then returns the result. The function must work like Python's input [that's the spec], so it must block until it has the result. This is all working, but it uses a busy loop, which, in practice, could easily be spinning for many minutes. Currently, the function tells the client to get the input, passing an id. The client returns the result with the id. The server puts the result in a dictionary, with the id as the key. The function basically waits for that key to exist. def input(): '''simplified example''' key = unique_key() tell_client_to_get_input(key) while key not in dictionary: pass return dictionary.pop(pin) Using a callback would be the normal way to go, but the input function must block until the result is available, so I can't see how that could work. The spec can't change, as Python will be using the new input function for stuff like help and pdb, which provide their own little REPLs. I have a lot of flexibility in terms of how everything works overall, but just can't budge on the function acting exactly like Python's. Is there any way to return the result as soon as it's available, without the busy loop?

  Read the article

• When is a glue or management class doing too much?

  - by jprete

  I'm prone to building centralized classes that manage the other classes in my designs. It doesn't store everything itself, but most data requests would go to the "manager" first. While looking at an answer to this question I noticed the term "God Object". Wikipedia lists it as an antipattern, understandably. Where is the line between a legitimate glue class, or module, that passes data and messages from place to place, and a class that is doing too much?

  Read the article

• Protecting the integrity of a game state while minimizing amount of data sent

  - by espais

  I'm developing a game in PHP/jQuery, and naturally have to be wary of any sort of data coming from the client. At present, I have tables of data representing the map (2D roguelike), monsters, items, and player(s). Initially, my thought was to simply package it all in a JSON object and send it every game tick, however when actually looking at the data I realized that's quite a large packet to be sending. So, my question is what is a good approach for minimizing data sent to the client? Obviously I would need to figure out some way of validating whatever it sends back. Initially we'd hoped to do some minimal verification on the client-side, but each time we thought of one thing we could do it is immediately invalidated with tools like Firebug. Kind of an open question I realize, but we want to get this right before we move on with our implementation so we don't have to shoehorn in bugfixes later on.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >