Search Results

Search found 1079 results on 44 pages for 'specification'.

Page 8/44 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • ISTQB terminology question (Defect)

    - by user970696
    According to ISTQB (and few more sources + wiki ), a defect/bug is the actual cause of error in software, e.g. incorrect statement, logical or semantic error. The actual definion is: a flaw in the system or component that could lead to the failure. But what about specification bugs? I cannot relate to it. Specification bugs are quite common but if the programmer implements software according to spec with a bug, it is not his fault (IMHO). But then the definion could not apply and I am sure it must have been addressed somehow. Could you help me to understand this?

    Read the article

  • How You Helped Shape Java EE 7...

    - by reza_rahman
    I have been working with the JCP in various roles since EJB 3/Java EE 5 (much of it on my own time), eventually culminating in my decision to accept my current role at Oracle (despite it's inevitable set of unique challenges, a role I find by and large positive and fulfilling). During these years, it has always been clear to me that pretty much everyone in the JCP genuinely cares about openness, feedback and developer participation. Perhaps the most visible sign to date of this high regard for grassroots level input is a survey on Java EE 7 gathered a few months ago. The survey was designed to get open feedback on a number of critical issues central to the Java EE 7 umbrella specification including what APIs to include in the standard. When we started the survey, I don't think anyone was certain what the level of participation from developers would really be. I also think everyone was pleasantly surprised that a large number of developers (around 1100) took the time out to vote on these very important issues that could impact their own professional life. And it wasn't just a matter of the quantity of responses. I was particularly impressed with the quality of the comments made through the survey (some of which I'll try to do justice to below). With Java EE 7 under our belt and the horizons for Java EE 8 emerging, this is a good time to thank everyone that took the survey once again for their thoughts and let you know what the impact of your voice actually was. As an aside, you may be happy to know that we are working hard behind the scenes to try to put together a similar survey to help kick off the agenda for Java EE 8 (although this is by no means certain). I'll break things down by the questions asked in the survey, the responses and the resulting change in the specification. APIs to Add to Java EE 7 Full/Web Profile The first question in the survey asked which of four new candidate APIs (WebSocket, JSON-P, JBatch and JCache) should be added to the Java EE 7 Full and Web profile respectively. Developers by and large wanted all the new APIs added to the full platform. The comments expressed particularly strong support for WebSocket and JCache. Others expressed dissatisfaction over the lack of a JSON binding (as opposed to JSON processing) API. WebSocket, JSON-P and JBatch are now part of Java EE 7. In addition, the long-awaited Java EE Concurrency Utilities API was also included in the Full Profile. Unfortunately, JCache was not finalized in time for Java EE 7 and the decision was made not to hold up the Java EE release any longer. JCache continues to move forward strongly and will very likely be included in Java EE 8 (it will be available much sooner than Java EE 8 to boot). An emergent standard for JSON-B is also a strong possibility for Java EE 8. When it came to the Web Profile, developers were supportive of adding WebSocket and JSON-P, but not JBatch and JCache. Both WebSocket and JSON-P are now part of the Web Profile, now also including the already popular JAX-RS API. Enabling CDI by Default The second question asked whether CDI should be enabled in Java EE by default. The overwhelming majority of developers supported the default enablement of CDI. In addition, developers expressed a desire for better CDI/Java EE alignment (with regards to EJB and JSF in particular). Some developers expressed legitimate concerns over the performance implications of enabling CDI globally as well as the potential conflict with other JSR 330 implementations like Spring and Guice. CDI is enabled by default in Java EE 7. Respecting the legitimate concerns, CDI 1.1 was very careful to add additional controls around component scanning. While a lot of work was done in Java EE 6 and Java EE 7 around CDI alignment, further alignment is under serious consideration for Java EE 8. Consistent Usage of @Inject The third question was around using CDI/JSR 330 @Inject consistently vs. allowing JSRs to create their own injection annotations (e.g. @BatchContext). A majority of developers wanted consistent usage of @Inject. The comments again reflected a strong desire for CDI/Java EE alignment. A lot of emphasis in Java EE 7 was put into using @Inject consistently. For example, the JBatch specification is focused on using @Inject wherever possible. JAX-RS remains an exception with it's existing custom injection annotations. However, the JAX-RS specification leads understand the importance of eventual convergence, hopefully in Java EE 8. Expanding the Use of @Stereotype The fourth question was about expanding CDI @Stereotype to cover annotations across Java EE beyond just CDI. A solid majority of developers supported the idea of making @Stereotype more universal in Java EE. The comments maintained the general theme of strong support for CDI/Java EE alignment Unfortunately, there was not enough time and resources in Java EE 7 to implement this fairly pervasive feature. However, it remains a serious consideration for Java EE 8. Expanding Interceptor Use The final set of questions was about expanding interceptors further across Java EE. Developers strongly supported the concept. Along with injection, interceptors are now supported across all Java EE 7 components including Servlets, Filters, Listeners, JAX-WS endpoints, JAX-RS resources, WebSocket endpoints and so on. I hope you are encouraged by how your input to the survey helped shape Java EE 7 and continues to shape Java EE 8. Participating in these sorts of surveys is of course just one way of contributing to Java EE. Another great way to stay involved is the Adopt-A-JSR Program. A large number of developers are already participating through their local JUGs. You could of course become a Java EE JSR expert group member or observer. You should stay tuned to The Aquarium for the progress of Java EE 8 JSRs if that's something you want to look into...

    Read the article

  • OpenJDK In The News: Oracle Outlines Roadmap for Java SE and JavaFX at JavaOne 2012

    - by $utils.escapeXML($entry.author)
    The OpenJDK Community continues to host the development of the reference implementation of Java SE 8. Weekly developer preview builds of JDK 8 continue to be available from jdk8.java.net.OpenJDK continues to thrive with contributions from Oracle, as well as other companies, researchers and individuals.The OpenJDK Web Site Terms of Use was recently updated to allow work on Java Specification Requests (JSRs) for Java SE to take place in the OpenJDK Community, alongside their corresponding reference implementations, so that specification leads can satisfy the new transparency requirements of the Java Community Process (JCP 2.8).“The recent decision by the Java SE 8 Expert Group to defer modularity to Java SE 9 will allow us to focus on the highly-anticipated Project Lambda, the Nashorn JavaScript engine, the new Date/Time API, and Type Annotations, along with numerous other performance, simplification, and usability enhancements,” said Georges Saab, vice president, Software Development, Java Platform Group at Oracle. “We are continuing to increase our communication and transparency by developing the reference implementation and the Oracle-led JSRs in the OpenJDK community.”Quotes taken from the 14th press release from Oracle mentioning OpenJDK, titled "Oracle Outlines Roadmap for Java SE and JavaFX at JavaOne 2012".

    Read the article

  • Type Conversion in JPA 2.1

    - by delabassee
    The Java Persistence 2.1 specification (JSR 338) adds support for various new features such as schema generation, stored procedure invocation, use of entity graphs in queries and find operations, unsynchronized persistence contexts, injection into entity listener classes, etc. JPA 2.1 also add support for Type Conversion methods, sometime called Type Converter. This new facility let developers specify methods to convert between the entity attribute representation and the database representation for attributes of basic types. For additional details on Type Conversion, you can check the JSR 338 Specification and its corresponding JPA 2.1 Javadocs. In addition, you can also check those 2 articles. The first article ('How to implement a Type Converter') gives a short overview on Type Conversion while the second article ('How to use a JPA Type Converter to encrypt your data') implements a simple use-case (encrypting data) to illustrate Type Conversion. Mission critical applications would probably rely on transparent database encryption facilities provided by the database but that's not the point here, this use-case is easy enough to illustrate JPA 2.1 Type Conversion.

    Read the article

  • JSR Updates and Inactive JSR ballots

    - by heathervc
    The following are JSRs have posted updates in the last week: JSR 331, Constraint Programming API, has posted a Maintenance Draft Review; this review closes 29 September. JSR 352, Batch Applications for the Java Platform, has posted an Early Draft Review; this review closes 29 September. JSR 353, Java API for JSON Processing, has posted an Early Draft Review; this review closes 7 October. Inactive JSRs: The following JSR proposals have been Inactive for at least two years and are currently on the EC ballot to be declared Dormant, following a period where the community was given an opportunity to express interest in their continued development: JSR 50, Distributed Real-Time Specification JSR 282, Real-Time Specification for Java (RTSJ) 1.1 JSR 307, Network Mobility and Mobile Data API JSR 327, Dynamic Contents Delivery Service API for Java ME JSR 328, Change Management API

    Read the article

  • Vers des Java Community Process plus ouvertes ? C'est ce qu'affirme Oracle, les développeurs sont se

    Vers des Java Community Process plus ouvertes ? C'est ce qu'affirme Oracle, les développeurs sont septiques Oracle innovera-t-il en ouvrant les spécifications Java ? C'est ce qu'avait promis le géant du logiciel. Une des manières d'y arriver serait de rendre plus démocratique le Java Community Process (JCP). Mais depuis, c'est le silence radio. Certes la société souligne qu'en tant que membre du JCP elle a pris part à plus de 80 Java Specification Requests, des propositions pour amender Java. Certes, Oracle continue de laisser entendre qu'il souhaite ouvrir les process de spécification pour satisfaire les participants actifs et soutenir...

    Read the article

  • Servlet 3.1 Early Draft Now Available

    - by arungupta
    JSR 340 has released an Early Draft of the Servlet 3.1 specification. Other than the usual clarifications and javadoc updates, ProtocolHandler and WebConnection are new classes that encapsulates the protocol upgrade processing. This will typically be used for upgrading an HTTP connection to a WebSocket. Section 2.3.3.5 in the specification provide more details on it. Section 3.7 explain non-blocking request processing by the Web container. ReadListener and WriteListener are new interfaces that represents a call-back mechanism to read and write data without blocking. As with other Java EE 7 specifications, progress can be tracked at servlet-spec.java.net. The Expert Group discussions are archived and you can participate by sending an email to [email protected].

    Read the article

  • What's New in JMS 2 - Part 1

    - by reza_rahman
    JMS 2 is one of the most significant parts of Java EE 7. One of the principal goals of the JMS 2 API is improving developer productivity by reducing the amount of code to work with JMS by adopting programming paradigms like higher level abstractions, dependency injection, annotations, runtime exceptions, the builder pattern and intelligent defaults. In a recent OTN article, JMS 2 specification lead Nigel Deakin covers the ease-of-use changes in detail. The article is the first of a two part series on JMS 2. For more visual folks, there is my JMS 2 slide deck: What’s New in Java Message Service 2 from Reza Rahman You can also check out the official specification yourself or try things out with the newly released Java EE 7 SDK.

    Read the article

  • Google indexing pages with #! although we don't have any

    - by Benjamin Gruenbaum
    Our company has developed a Single Page Application using AngularJS and its routing. Google indexed our site decently with JavaScript but it did not index some pages very well so we have developed an HTML only version. We have followed the Ajax Crawling Specification posted here and have a <meta name='fragment' content='!'> tag and canonical urls. We expect http://www.example.com/foo/bar to be fetched from http://www.example.com/?_escaped_fragment_=/foo/bar. However, we have found out that when we rolled the AJAX specification we now have all pages indexed twice, once with the JavaScript version as http://www.example.com/foo/bar and once with the new version as http://www.example.com/#!/foo/bar. This is harmful to us since it's duplicate content and also mis-representing out site. I have tried looking for similar questions here and in the Google product forum but could not come up with anything.

    Read the article

  • Java operator precedence guidelines

    - by trashgod
    Misunderstanding Java operator precedence is a source of frequently asked questions and subtle errors. I was intrigued to learn that even the Java Language Specification says, "It is recommended that code not rely crucially on this specification." JLS §15.7 Preferring clear to clever, are there any useful guidelines in this area? Here are a number of resources on the topic: JLS Operators JLS Precedence Java Glossary Princeton Sun Tutorial University of West Florida Usenet discussion Additions or corrections welcome.

    Read the article

  • JPA/EJB3 Relationship

    - by sdoca
    I have been reading about JPA and EJB3 and would like to confirm that my understanding of their relationship is correct. Here's what I think I know... JPA is a specification that has been implemented by a number of vendors including: JBoss/Hibernate Oracle/TopLink Essentials (now EclipseLink) Apache/OpenJPA EJB3 is a specification that is implemented in Application Servers including: Glassfish JBoss Is this correct?

    Read the article

  • How to show linked file size and type in title attributes using jquery?

    - by jitendra
    For example: Before <a target="_blank" href="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/reader_overview.pdf"> Adobe Reader JavaScript specification </a> Bcoz file is PDF so title should be title="PDF, 93KB, opens in a new window" <a title="PDF, 93KB, opens in a new window" target="_blank" href="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/reader_overview.pdf" > Adobe Reader JavaScript specification </a>

    Read the article

  • How to convert EER to SQL Table?

    - by Khajavi
    I have no problem with converting ER to SQL tables, but I don't know how can I convert EER to SQL tables? as you Know that EER has "is a" specification and inheritance, but I don't know how relational databases can connect with inheritance specification

    Read the article

  • What are Bridge and Synthetic methods in Java?

    - by kunjaan
    Returns : true if and only if this method is a bridge method as defined by the Java Language Specification. Since: 1.5 Returns: true if and only if this method is a synthetic method as defined by the Java Language Specification. Since: 1.5 I saw these in my Reflection doc. I saw couple of docs but I couldn't fully understand the usage of them. Could Somebody expalin these methods for a layperson?

    Read the article

  • Where a developer can sell / donate his time?

    - by kyrisu
    Recently business isn't good and was wondering what are your favourite places where you can sell your time working on a projects (you get specification / idea - you crank code - you get paid :) ) (I don't mean selling your own apps, just working for someone else) or where you can donate your time (you get specification - you crank code - you feel good :D) (I've heard about cranking code on weekends for charities in US but I'm from Poland so I was thinking about something not location specific)

    Read the article

  • sudo in Debian squeeze inside linux-vserver always wants password

    - by mark
    Every since I upgraded all my linux-vserver Debian guests from Lenny to Squeeze I've the apparent problem that whenever I want to use sudo it asks me for my password. Every time. I've configured sudo to have a timeout of 30 minutes: Defaults timestamp_timeout=30 . This has been configured when it was still Lenny (note: as suggested by EightBitTony I've also tried without this setting - no change). I've a hard time figuring out what the problem here is, since I think my configuration is right. I thought about it being a problem with the file used to record the timestamp, maybe a permission issue, but was unlucky to find any hard evidence. I've compared the contents of /var/lib/sudo/ between a working and a non-working system but couldn't spot any difference. The version of sudo used in both environments is 1.7.4p4-2.squeeze.3. My non-working system(s): find /var/lib/sudo/ -ls 17319289 4 drwx------ 4 root root 4096 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/ 17319286 4 drwx------ 2 root mark 4096 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark 17319312 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/6 17319361 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/9 17319490 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/10 17319326 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/4 17319491 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/2 A working system: find /var/lib/sudo -ls 2598921 4 drwx------ 5 root root 4096 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo 1999522 4 drwx------ 2 root mark 4096 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark 2000781 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/8 1998998 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/17 1999459 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/26 1998930 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/24 2000771 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jun 25 11:39 /var/lib/sudo/mark/4 2000773 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/5 1999223 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/0 1998908 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/14 2000769 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jul 9 13:30 /var/lib/sudo/mark/2 2000770 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/3 2000782 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/9 2000778 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jul 8 00:11 /var/lib/sudo/mark/7 1998892 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/19 1999264 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/23 2000789 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/12 1999093 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/25 1998880 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/18 1998853 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/20 2000790 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/15 1998878 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/16 1998874 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/13 2000774 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/6 2000786 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/11 1998893 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/22 2000783 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/10 1998949 4 -rw------- 1 root mark 40 Jan 1 1985 /var/lib/sudo/mark/1 Despite the obvious (some up2date timestamps on the working system) I don't see anything wrong here, so it could be as well be a wrong track. Here's my current /etc/sudoers: # /etc/sudoers # # This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root. # # See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file. # Defaults env_reset # Host alias specification # User alias specification User_Alias FULLADMIN = user1, user2, user3 # Cmnd alias specification # User privilege specification root ALL=(ALL) ALL FULLADMIN ALL = (ALL) ALL # Allow members of group sudo to execute any command # (Note that later entries override this, so you might need to move # it further down) %sudo ALL=(ALL) ALL # #includedir /etc/sudoers.d #Defaults always_set_home,timestamp_timeout=30

    Read the article

  • DISA Cross Domain Enterprise Solutions on the NetBeans Platform

    - by Geertjan
    Bray 2.0 is a tool based on the NetBeans Platform that assists in creating valid Data Flow Configuration (DFC) files. The DFC Specification was developed to provide a standardized way for defining, validating, and approving data flows for use on cross-domain guarding solutions. A DFC document specifies key entities such as security domains, guards that facilitate data between security domains, data flows that describe how data travels between security domains, filters that transform and validate the data and more. Related info: http://www.disa.mil/Services/Information-Assurance/Cross-Domain-Solutions The Bray product is in development at Fulcrum IT (http://www.fulcrumco.com). The DFC Specification and Bray were developed in support of the US Department of Defense. Bray 2.0 marks the first release of Bray on the NetBeans Platform and utilizes a number of features that are core to the NetBeans Platform: Modular plugability. Bray consumers can integrate their own tools, file types, and more into the product with relative ease. Robust UI. The NetBeans Platform intuitive UI makes it easy to access and manipulate multiple aspects of a DFC. Explorer. The Explorer is a key component that makes the DFC XML easy to traverse, edit, and find errors. Context-sensitive help. JavaHelp can be readily integrated for the product as well as all the UI within. Editors. Any external file can be added to a DFC. Users can register their own editors or use the provided NetBeans editors to edit files. Printing. The NetBeans Platform Print API makes it easy to determine what should be printed and how.   A screenshot: Bray 2.0 provides a lot of key features in developing valid, robust DFC files:  XML validation. A DFC can be validated against the DFC schema specification. DFC Check List. An interactive, minimal guide for creating a complete DFC. Summary Window. The Summary Window functions like the Navigator in NetBeans IDE. The current "item of interest" is checked against various business rules and provides the ability to quickly find and fix errors. Change Log. Bray audits every change to a DFC and places them in a change log for users to peruse. Comments. Users can optionally add comments for other users to see. Digital signatures. DFC files can be digitally signed. A signature history and signature validation is provided in Bray. Pluggable security schemes. Bray ships with plain text and IC-ISM security schemes. If needed, users can integrate additional ones.  ...and more to come! New features for Bray are constantly in development including use of the NetBeans Visual Library, language support, and more. More screenshots:

    Read the article

  • Iterative and Incremental Principle Series 4: Iteration Planning – (a.k.a What should I do today?)

    - by llowitz
    Welcome back to the fourth of a five part series on applying the Iteration and Incremental principle.  During the last segment, we discussed how the Implementation Plan includes the number of the iterations for a project, but not the specifics about what will occur during each iteration.  Today, we will explore Iteration Planning and discuss how and when to plan your iterations. As mentioned yesterday, OUM prescribes initially planning your project approach at a high level by creating an Implementation Plan.  As the project moves through the lifecycle, the plan is progressively refined.  Specifically, the details of each iteration is planned prior to the iteration start. The Iteration Plan starts by identifying the iteration goal.  An example of an iteration goal during the OUM Elaboration Phase may be to complete the RD.140.2 Create Requirements Specification for a specific set of requirements.  Another project may determine that their iteration goal is to focus on a smaller set of requirements, but to complete both the RD.140.2 Create Requirements Specification and the AN.100.1 Prepare Analysis Specification.  In an OUM project, the Iteration Plan needs to identify both the iteration goal – how far along the implementation lifecycle you plan to be, and the scope of work for the iteration.  Since each iteration typically ranges from 2 weeks to 6 weeks, it is important to identify a scope of work that is achievable, yet challenging, given the iteration goal and timeframe.  OUM provides specific guidelines and techniques to help prioritize the scope of work based on criteria such as risk, complexity, customer priority and dependency.  In OUM, this prioritization helps focus early iterations on the high risk, architecturally significant items helping to mitigate overall project risk.  Central to the prioritization is the MoSCoW (Must Have, Should Have, Could Have, and Won’t Have) list.   The result of the MoSCoW prioritization is an Iteration Group.  This is a scope of work to be worked on as a group during one or more iterations.  As I mentioned during yesterday’s blog, it is pointless to plan my daily exercise in advance since several factors, including the weather, influence what exercise I perform each day.  Therefore, every morning I perform Iteration Planning.   My “Iteration Plan” includes the type of exercise for the day (run, bike, elliptical), whether I will exercise outside or at the gym, and how many interval sets I plan to complete.    I use several factors to prioritize the type of exercise that I perform each day.  Since running outside is my highest priority, I try to complete it early in the week to minimize the risk of not meeting my overall goal of doing it twice each week.  Regardless of the specific exercise I select, I follow the guidelines in my Implementation Plan by applying the 6-minute interval sets.  Just as in OUM, the iteration goal should be in context of the overall Implementation Plan, and the iteration goal should move the project closer to achieving the phase milestone goals. Having an Implementation Plan details the strategy of what I plan to do and keeps me on track, while the Iteration Plan affords me the flexibility to juggle what I do each day based on external influences thus maximizing my overall success. Tomorrow I’ll conclude the series on applying the Iterative and Incremental approach by discussing how to manage the iteration duration and highlighting some benefits of applying this principle.

    Read the article

  • Does *every* project benefit from written specifications?

    - by nikie
    I know this is holy war territory, so please read the question to the end before answering. There are many cases where written specifications make a lot of sense. For example, if you're a contractor and you want to get paid, you need written specs. If you're working in a team with 20 persons, you need written specs. If you're writing a programming language compiler or interpreter (and it's not perl), you'll usually write a formal specification. I don't doubt that there are many more cases where written specifications are a really good idea. I just think that there are cases where there's so little benefit in written specs, that it doesn't outweigh the costs of writing and maintaining them. EDIT: The close votes say that "it is difficult to say what is asked here", so let me clarify: The usefulness of written, detailed specifications is often claimed like a dogma. (If you want examples, look at the comments.) But I don't see the use of them for the kind of development I'm doing. So what is asked here is: How would written specifications help me? Background information: I work for a small company that's developing vertical market software. If our product is easier to use and has better performance than the competition, it sells. If it's harder to use, even if it behaves 100% as the specification says, it doesn't sell. So there are no "external forces" for having written specs. The advantage would have to be somewhere in the development process. Now, I can see how frozen specifications would make a developer's life easier. But we'll never have frozen specs. If we see in the middle of development that feature X is not intuitive to use the way it's specified, then we can only choose between changing the specification or developing a product that won't sell. You'll probably ask by now: How do you know when you're done? Well, we're continually improving our product. The competition does the same. So (hopefully) we're never done. We keep improving the software, and when we reach a point when the benefits of the improvements we've added since the last release outweigh the costs of an update, we create a new release that is then tested, localized, documented and deployed. This also means that there's rarely any schedule pressure. Nobody has to do overtime to make a deadline. If the feature isn't done by the time we want to release the next version, it'll simply go into the next version. The next question might be: How do your developers know what they're supposed to implement? The answer is: They have a lot of domain knowledge. They know the customers business well enough, so a high-level description of the feature (or even just the problem that the customer needs solved) is enough to implement it. If it's not clear, the developer creates a few fake screens to get feedback from marketing/management or customers, but this is nowhere near the level of detail of actual specifications. This might be inefficient for larger teams, but for a small team with low turnover it works quite well. It has the additional benefit that the developer in question often comes up with a better solution than the person writing the specs might have. This question is already getting very long, but let me address one last point: Testing. Like I said in the beginning, if our software behaves 100% like the spec says, it still can be crap. In fact, if it's so unintuitive that you need a spec to know how to test it, it probably is crap. It makes sense to have fixed, written tests for some core functionality and for regression bugs, but again, this is nowhere near a full written spec of how the software should behave when. The main test is: hand the software to a user who doesn't know it yet and tell him to use the new feature X. If she can figure out how to use it and it works, it works.

    Read the article

  • ISO/IEC Website and Charging for C and C++ Standards

    - by Michael Aaron Safyan
    The ISO C Standard (ISO/IEC 9899) and the ISO C++ Standard (ISO/IEC 14882) are not published online; instead, one must purchase the PDF for each of those standards. I am wondering what the rationale is behind this... is it not detrimental to both the C and C++ programming languages that the authoritative specification for these languages is not made freely available and searchable online? Doesn't this encourage the use of possibly inaccurate, non-authoritative sources for information regarding these standards? While I understand that much time and effort has gone into developing the C and C++ standards, I am still somewhat puzzled by the choice to charge for the specification. The OpenGroup Base Specification, for example, is available for free online; they make money buy charging for certification. Does anyone know why the ISO standards committees don't make their revenue in certifying standards compliance, instead of charging for these documents? Also, does anyone know if the ISO standards committee's atrociously looking website is intentionally made to look that way? It's as if they don't want people visiting and buying the spec. One last thing... the C and C++ standards are generally described as "open standards"... while I realize that this means that anyone is permitted to implement the standard, should that definition of "open" be revised? Charging for the standard rather than making it openly available seems contrary to the spirit of openness. P.S. I do have a copy of the ISO/IEC 9899:1999 and ISO/IEC 14882:2003, so please no remarks about being cheap or anything... although if you are tempted to say such things, you might want to consider the high school, undergraduate, and graduate students who might not have all that much extra cash. Also, you might want to consider the fact that the ISO website is really sketchy and they don't even tell you the cost until you proceed to the checkout... doesn't really encourage one to go and get a copy, now does it?

    Read the article

  • How do I ensure that a regex does not match an empty string?

    - by Dancrumb
    I'm using the Jison parser generator for Javascript and am having problems with my language specification. The program I'm writing will be a calculator that can handle feet, inches and sixteenths. In order to do this, I have the following specification: %% ([0-9]+\s*"'")?\s*([0-9]+\s*"\"")?\s*([0-9]+\s*"s")? {return 'FIS';} [0-9]+("."[0-9]+)?\b {return 'NUMBER';} \s+ {/* skip whitespace */} "*" {return '*';} "/" {return '/';} "-" {return '-';} "+" {return '+';} "(" {return '(';} ")" {return ')';} <<EOF>> {return 'EOF';} Most of these lines come from a basic calculator specification. I simply added the first line. The regex correctly matches feet, inch, sixteenths, such as 6'4" (six feet, 4 inches) or 4"5s (4 inches, 5 sixteenths) with any kind of whitespace between the numbers and indicators. The problem is that the regex also matches a null string. As a result, the lexical analysis always records a FIS at the start of the line and then the parsing fails. Here is my question: is there a way to modify this regex to guarantee that it will only match a non-zero length string?

    Read the article

  • help with fixing fwts errors log

    - by jasmines
    Here is an extract of results.log: MTRR validation. Test 1 of 3: Validate the kernel MTRR IOMEM setup. FAILED [MEDIUM] MTRRIncorrectAttr: Test 1, Memory range 0xc0000000 to 0xdfffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Combining. FAILED [MEDIUM] MTRRIncorrectAttr: Test 1, Memory range 0xfee01000 to 0xffffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Protect. ==================================================================================================== Test 1 of 1: Kernel log error check. Kernel message: [ 0.208079] [Firmware Bug]: ACPI: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored ADVICE: This is not exactly a failure mode but a warning from the kernel. The _OSI() method has implemented a match to the 'Linux' query in the DSDT and this is redundant because the ACPI driver matches onto the Windows _OSI strings by default. FAILED [HIGH] KlogACPIErrorMethodExecutionParse: Test 1, HIGH Kernel message: [ 3.512783] ACPI Error : Method parse/execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DOD] (Node f7425858), AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT (20110623/psparse-536) ADVICE: This is a bug picked up by the kernel, but as yet, the firmware test suite has no diagnostic advice for this particular problem. Found 1 unique errors in kernel log. ==================================================================================================== Check if system is using latest microcode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cannot read microcode file /usr/share/misc/intel-microcode.dat. Aborted test, initialisation failed. ==================================================================================================== MSR register tests. FAILED [MEDIUM] MSRCPUsInconsistent: Test 1, MSR SYSENTER_ESP (0x175) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0xffffffffffffffff). MSR CPU 0 -> 0xf7bb9c40 vs CPU 1 -> 0xf7bc7c40 FAILED [MEDIUM] MSRCPUsInconsistent: Test 1, MSR MISC_ENABLE (0x1a0) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0x400c51889). MSR CPU 0 -> 0x850088 vs CPU 1 -> 0x850089 ==================================================================================================== Checks firmware has set PCI Express MaxReadReq to a higher value on non-motherboard devices. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Check firmware settings MaxReadReq for PCI Express devices. MaxReadReq for pci://00:00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio Controller (rev 03) is low (128) [Audio device]. MaxReadReq for pci://00:02:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection is low (128) [Network controller]. FAILED [LOW] LowMaxReadReq: Test 1, 2 devices have low MaxReadReq settings. Firmware may have configured these too low. ADVICE: The MaxReadRequest size is set too low and will affect performance. It will provide excellent bus sharing at the cost of bus data transfer rates. Although not a critical issue, it may be worth considering setting the MaxReadRequest size to 256 or 512 to increase throughput on the PCI Express bus. Some drivers (for example the Brocade Fibre Channel driver) allow one to override the firmware settings. Where possible, this BIOS configuration setting is worth increasing it a little more for better performance at a small reduction of bus sharing. ==================================================================================================== PCIe ASPM check. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 2: PCIe ASPM ACPI test. PCIE ASPM is not controlled by Linux kernel. ADVICE: BIOS reports that Linux kernel should not modify ASPM settings that BIOS configured. It can be intentional because hardware vendors identified some capability bugs between the motherboard and the add-on cards. Test 2 of 2: PCIe ASPM registers test. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.01h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.01h L1 not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 02h:00h.00h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 02h:00h.00h L1 not enabled. PASSED: Test 2, PCIE aspm setting matched was matched. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.05h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.05h L1 not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 85h:00h.00h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 85h:00h.00h L1 not enabled. PASSED: Test 2, PCIE aspm setting matched was matched. ==================================================================================================== Extract and analyse Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI). Test 1 of 2: Check Windows Management Instrumentation in DSDT Found WMI Method WMAA with GUID: 5FB7F034-2C63-45E9-BE91-3D44E2C707E4, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Event, Notifier ID: 0x80, GUID: 95F24279-4D7B-4334-9387-ACCDC67EF61C, Instance 0x01 PASSED: Test 1, GUID 95F24279-4D7B-4334-9387-ACCDC67EF61C is handled by driver hp-wmi (Vendor: HP). Found WMI Event, Notifier ID: 0xa0, GUID: 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0, Instance 0x01 FAILED [MEDIUM] WMIUnknownGUID: Test 1, GUID 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0 is unknown to the kernel, a driver may need to be implemented for this GUID. ADVICE: A WMI driver probably needs to be written for this event. It can checked for using: wmi_has_guid("2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0"). One can install a notify handler using wmi_install_notify_handler("2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0", handler, NULL). http://lwn.net/Articles/391230 describes how to write an appropriate driver. Found WMI Object, Object ID AB, GUID: 05901221-D566-11D1-B2F0-00A0C9062910, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Method WMBA with GUID: 1F4C91EB-DC5C-460B-951D-C7CB9B4B8D5E, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Object, Object ID BC, GUID: 2D114B49-2DFB-4130-B8FE-4A3C09E75133, Instance 0x7f, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BD, GUID: 988D08E3-68F4-4C35-AF3E-6A1B8106F83C, Instance 0x19, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BE, GUID: 14EA9746-CE1F-4098-A0E0-7045CB4DA745, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BF, GUID: 322F2028-0F84-4901-988E-015176049E2D, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BG, GUID: 8232DE3D-663D-4327-A8F4-E293ADB9BF05, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BH, GUID: 8F1F6436-9F42-42C8-BADC-0E9424F20C9A, Instance 0x00, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BI, GUID: 8F1F6435-9F42-42C8-BADC-0E9424F20C9A, Instance 0x00, Flags: 00 Found WMI Method WMAC with GUID: 7391A661-223A-47DB-A77A-7BE84C60822D, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Object, Object ID BJ, GUID: DF4E63B6-3BBC-4858-9737-C74F82F821F3, Instance 0x05, Flags: 00 ==================================================================================================== Disassemble DSDT to check for _OSI("Linux"). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Disassemble DSDT to check for _OSI("Linux"). This is not strictly a failure mode, it just alerts one that this has been defined in the DSDT and probably should be avoided since the Linux ACPI driver matches onto the Windows _OSI strings { If (_OSI ("Linux")) { Store (0x03E8, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001")) { Store (0x07D1, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001 SP1")) { Store (0x07D1, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001 SP2")) { Store (0x07D2, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2006")) { Store (0x07D6, OSYS) } If (LAnd (MPEN, LEqual (OSYS, 0x07D1))) { TRAP (0x01, 0x48) } TRAP (0x03, 0x35) } WARNING: Test 1, DSDT implements a deprecated _OSI("Linux") test. ==================================================================================================== 0 passed, 0 failed, 1 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only. ==================================================================================================== ACPI DSDT Method Semantic Tests. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP Failed to install global event handler. Test 22 of 93: Check _PSR (Power Source). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 22, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_SB_.AC__._PSR'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 22, \_SB_.AC__._PSR correctly acquired and released locks 16 times. Test 35 of 93: Check _TMP (Thermal Zone Current Temp). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.DTSZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.DTSZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 14 times. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.CPUZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.CPUZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 10 times. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.SKNZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.SKNZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 10 times. PASSED: Test 35, _TMP correctly returned sane looking value 0x00000b4c (289.2 degrees K) PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.BATZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 9 times. PASSED: Test 35, _TMP correctly returned sane looking value 0x00000aac (273.2 degrees K) PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.FDTZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 7 times. Test 46 of 93: Check _DIS (Disable). FAILED [MEDIUM] MethodShouldReturnNothing: Test 46, \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.COM1._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. Object returned: INTEGER: 0x00000000 ADVICE: This probably won't cause any errors, but it should be fixed as the AML code is not conforming to the expected behaviour as described in the ACPI specification. FAILED [MEDIUM] MethodShouldReturnNothing: Test 46, \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.LPT0._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. Object returned: INTEGER: 0x00000000 ADVICE: This probably won't cause any errors, but it should be fixed as the AML code is not conforming to the expected behaviour as described in the ACPI specification. Test 61 of 93: Check _WAK (System Wake). Test _WAK(1) System Wake, State S1. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(2) System Wake, State S2. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(3) System Wake, State S3. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(4) System Wake, State S4. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(5) System Wake, State S5. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test 87 of 93: Check _BCL (Query List of Brightness Control Levels Supported). Package has 2 elements: 00: INTEGER: 0x00000000 01: INTEGER: 0x00000000 FAILED [MEDIUM] Method_BCLElementCount: Test 87, Method _BCL should return a package of more than 2 integers, got just 2. Test 88 of 93: Check _BCM (Set Brightness Level). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT during execution of method _BCM FAILED [CRITICAL] AEAMLPackgeLimit: Test 88, Detected error 'Package limit' when evaluating '\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0.DD02._BCM'. ==================================================================================================== ACPI table settings sanity checks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Check ACPI tables. PASSED: Test 1, Table APIC passed. Table ECDT not present to check. FAILED [MEDIUM] FADT32And64BothDefined: Test 1, FADT 32 bit FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero, and X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL is also non-zero. Section 5.2.9 of the ACPI specification states that if the FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero then X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL must be set to zero. ADVICE: The FADT FIRMWARE_CTRL is a 32 bit pointer that points to the physical memory address of the Firmware ACPI Control Structure (FACS). There is also an extended 64 bit version of this, the X_FIRMWARE_CTRL pointer that also can point to the FACS. Section 5.2.9 of the ACPI specification states that if the X_FIRMWARE_CTRL field contains a non zero value then the FIRMWARE_CTRL field *must* be zero. This error is also detected by the Linux kernel. If FIRMWARE_CTRL and X_FIRMWARE_CTRL are defined, then the kernel just uses the 64 bit version of the pointer. PASSED: Test 1, Table HPET passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table MCFG passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table RSDT passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table RSDP passed. Table SBST not present to check. PASSED: Test 1, Table XSDT passed. ==================================================================================================== Re-assemble DSDT and find syntax errors and warnings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 2: Disassemble and reassemble DSDT FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError4043: Test 1, Assembler error in line 2261 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 02258| 0x00000000, // Range Minimum 02259| 0xFEDFFFFF, // Range Maximum 02260| 0x00000000, // Translation Offset 02261| 0x00000000, // Length | ^ | error 4043: Invalid combination of Length and Min/Max fixed flags 02262| ,, _Y0E, AddressRangeMemory, TypeStatic) 02263| DWordMemory (ResourceProducer, PosDecode, MinFixed, MaxFixed, Cacheable, ReadWrite, 02264| 0x00000000, // Granularity ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for error #4043): This occurs if the length is zero and just one of the resource MIF/MAF flags are set, or the length is non-zero and resource MIF/MAF flags are both set. These are illegal combinations and need to be fixed. See section 6.4.3.5 Address Space Resource Descriptors of version 4.0a of the ACPI specification for more details. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError4050: Test 1, Assembler error in line 2268 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 02265| 0xFEE01000, // Range Minimum 02266| 0xFFFFFFFF, // Range Maximum 02267| 0x00000000, // Translation Offset 02268| 0x011FEFFF, // Length | ^ | error 4050: Length is not equal to fixed Min/Max window 02269| ,, , AddressRangeMemory, TypeStatic) 02270| }) 02271| Method (_CRS, 0, Serialized) ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for error #4050): The minimum address is greater than the maximum address. This is illegal. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 1, Assembler error in line 8885 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 08882| Method (_DIS, 0, NotSerialized) 08883| { 08884| DSOD (0x02) 08885| Return (0x00) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_DIS) 08886| } 08887| 08888| Method (_SRS, 1, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 1, Assembler error in line 9195 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09192| Method (_DIS, 0, NotSerialized) 09193| { 09194| DSOD (0x01) 09195| Return (0x00) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_DIS) 09196| } 09197| 09198| Method (_SRS, 1, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1127: Test 1, Assembler error in line 9242 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09239| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y21._MAX, MAX2) 09240| CreateByteField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y21._LEN, LEN2) 09241| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y22._INT, IRQ0) 09242| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y23._DMA, DMA0) | ^ | warning level 0 1127: ResourceTag smaller than Field (Tag: 8 bits, Field: 16 bits) 09243| If (RLPD) 09244| { 09245| Store (0x00, Local0) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1128: Test 1, Assembler error in line 18682 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18679| Store (0x01, Index (DerefOf (Index (Local0, 0x02)), 0x01)) 18680| If (And (WDPE, 0x40)) 18681| { 18682| Wait (\_SB.BEVT, 0x10) | ^ | warning level 0 1128: Result is not used, possible operator timeout will be missed 18683| } 18684| 18685| Store (BRID, Index (DerefOf (Index (Local0, 0x02)), 0x02)) ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for warning level 0 #1128): The operation can possibly timeout, and hence the return value indicates an timeout error. However, because the return value is not checked this very probably indicates that the code is buggy. A possible scenario is that a mutex times out and the code attempts to access data in a critical region when it should not. This will lead to undefined behaviour. This should be fixed. Table DSDT (0) reassembly: Found 2 errors, 4 warnings. Test 2 of 2: Disassemble and reassemble SSDT PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (0) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 60 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00057| { 00058| Store (CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00059| GCAP (Local0) 00060| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00061| } 00062| 00063| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 174 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00171| { 00172| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00173| GCAP (Local0) 00174| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00175| } 00176| 00177| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 244 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00241| { 00242| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00243| GCAP (Local0) 00244| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00245| } 00246| 00247| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 290 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00287| { 00288| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00289| GCAP (Local0) 00290| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00291| } 00292| 00293| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== Table SSDT (1) reassembly: Found 0 errors, 4 warnings. PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (2) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (3) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. ==================================================================================================== 3 passed, 10 failed, 0 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only. ==================================================================================================== Critical failures: 1 method test, at 1 log line: 1449: Detected error 'Package limit' when evaluating '\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0.DD02._BCM'. High failures: 11 klog test, at 1 log line: 121: HIGH Kernel message: [ 3.512783] ACPI Error: Method parse/execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DOD] (Node f7425858), AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT (20110623/psparse-536) syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1668: Assembler error in line 2261 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1687: Assembler error in line 2268 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1703: Assembler error in line 8885 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1716: Assembler error in line 9195 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1729: Assembler error in line 9242 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1742: Assembler error in line 18682 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1766: Assembler error in line 60 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1779: Assembler error in line 174 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1792: Assembler error in line 244 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1805: Assembler error in line 290 Medium failures: 9 mtrr test, at 1 log line: 76: Memory range 0xc0000000 to 0xdfffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Combining. mtrr test, at 1 log line: 78: Memory range 0xfee01000 to 0xffffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Protect. msr test, at 1 log line: 165: MSR SYSENTER_ESP (0x175) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0xffffffffffffffff). msr test, at 1 log line: 173: MSR MISC_ENABLE (0x1a0) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0x400c51889). wmi test, at 1 log line: 528: GUID 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0 is unknown to the kernel, a driver may need to be implemented for this GUID. method test, at 1 log line: 1002: \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.COM1._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. method test, at 1 log line: 1011: \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.LPT0._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. method test, at 1 log line: 1443: Method _BCL should return a package of more than 2 integers, got just 2. acpitables test, at 1 log line: 1643: FADT 32 bit FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero, and X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL is also non-zero. Se

    Read the article

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