Search Results

Search found 13675 results on 547 pages for 'concurrent programming'.

Page 89/547 | < Previous Page | 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96  | Next Page >

  • I am afraid that my University is not going to teach me enough information [closed]

    - by Muhklayne
    I attend a University and am a Computer Science major. I have barely entered into the major, as I am a sophomore. However, the coursework I am doing is extremely easy already and I feel as though this degree is going to lead me to a path of knowledge without knowing how to bring it all together. Therefore, I am coming to you to ask where I should begin learning on my own! I am willing to dedicate hours upon hours of learning to code outside of class, as it is truly my passion. I will begin by completing all work on http://www.codecademy.com, however I feel this will not be enough either. I would love to learn to integrate visual languages for video games such as NXA and C# combining it with C++ (as I understand video games can be created in this manner). I would also like to look into LUA and Python scripting. I am asking for advice as to where I should begin my personal studies of learning to program, as with my research it has become quite apparent that simply attaining a degree in Computer Science is quite frankly not enough. Thank you for your time!

    Read the article

  • Trying not to get ahead of myself but it is hard!

    - by Andrew
    Well I made a 5 year plan for myself (11years-16years) I am pretty good at Java, HTML, and PHP. I have already done some end projects: Small Java Platform Game A Small Polynomial Solver A Small Image Sharing Site A Chess Website: chesslounge.net I am currently doing some Android Development and so far I have made a program that Vibrates, Blinks the Light, or Creates a custom status message based on the user input. And a program that rotates a pyramid with a texture. My question is: Should I stick to what I am doing or Learn something a little new? I am itching to do C++, but what is your advice?

    Read the article

  • Mail Scanning System

    - by Mr D
    In the same way gmail can generate ads based on email content, I am looking for a way to develop a system which can: Allow users to connect their email address to our site It then would continously monitor all incomming emails From the incomming emails there would be a critera(e.g. a certain address or subject) if any of the emails matched the critea it would would be saved to a database Then once a new email had been found the users would receive an email notification will tells them to log back into the site to see it. My questions are: Would this be possible? What would be a good language to use(generally I like php, python and java) Are there any frameworks which would help do this? How would I connect the users email account to allow access to their emails(do I need a mail server?) Any advice? Thank you! If you need more information please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Does my JavaScript look big in this?

    - by benhowdle89
    As programmers, you have certain curtains to hide behind with your code. With PHP all of your code is server side preprocessed, so this never see's the light of day as far as the user is concerned. If you have maybe rushed through some code for a deadline, as long as it functions correctly then the user never needs to know how many expletives you've inserted into the comments. However with more and more applications being written for the web, with a desktop feel implemented by AJAX and popular frameworks like jQuery being banded around to every Tom, Dick and Harry, how can a programmer maintain some dignity and hide his/her JavaScript code without it being flaunted like dirty laundry when the users hit Right Click-View Source or Inspect Element. Are there any ways to hide JavaScript application logic/code?

    Read the article

  • Metaphor for task synchronization [closed]

    - by nkint
    I'm looking for a metaphor. A friend of mine taught me to use metaphors from nature, everyday life, math, and use them to design my projects. They can help in creating a better design or better understanding or the problem, and they are cool. Now I'm working on a project with hardware and micro-controllers in C. For convenience, I have decided to use multiple micro-controllers as co-processor units for real-time (the slaves) and a master. This has saved me a lot of headache: I can code the main logic in the master without paying too much attention to super optimizing everything; I don't care if I need some blocking-call; I don't worry about serial communication with the computer. I just send messages to the slaves and they are super fast super in real time. I like my design and it seems to work well. So here are the important concepts that I'm trying capture in the metaphor: hierarchy of processing Not using one big brain but rather several small, distributed brain units using distributed power or resources I'm looking for a good metaphor for this concept of having one unit synchronize the work of all the others. Preferably, the metaphor would come from nature, biology, or zoology.

    Read the article

  • Expanding existing DVCS Wiki

    - by A Lion
    A portion of my job is to maintain technical documentation for a rapidly expanding manufacturing company. Because it is only a portion of my job and the company's product line is expanding so quickly, I can't stay on top of the documentation. As a result, I've been yearning for an information management system with a handful of specific features. I've found many products that have a subset, but none that have all the features I'm looking for. I'm at the point of picking an existing product and expanding it to cover my desired feature set, however, this will be a pet project and I will be learning the underlying language as I go. So, the main question is which existing product will be the easiest to expand to cover the full feature set and has a relatively easy to learn language? Alternatively, have I missed another existing program that will cover the feature set or should be in my list of "close, but not quite there"? Feature Set web interface based on a distributed version control system (e.g., git) easy to edit by logged in novices (e.g. wiki, multimarkdown) outputs in more traditional formats (e.g., doc, odt, pdf) edits held in queue until editor/engineer/manager approves them (e.g., MS Word editing) [this is the really big elephant in list - suggestions on where to start appreciated] edits held in queue specifically for engineer approval [extra limb of the elephant in the list] well-supported in the open source community Closest, but not quite there ikiwiki - http://ikiwiki.info (php) lots of awesome functionality and extensions, including easy to edit and based on DVCS lacks a review/forward for review queue appears to be well-supported within the OSS community gitit - http://gitit.net/ (haskell) easy to edit and based on DVCS lots of outputs in traditional formats a great web-based gui diff interface lacks a review/forward for review queue appears to be primarily maintained by one individual

    Read the article

  • Default values - are they good or evil?

    - by Andrew
    The question about default values in general - default return function values, default parameter values, default logic for when something is missing, default logic for handling exceptions, default logic for handling the edge conditions etc. For a long time I considered default values to be a "pure evil" thing, something that "cloaks the catastrophe" and results in a very hard do find bugs. But recently I started to think about default values as some sort of a technical debt ... which is not a straight bad thing but something that could provide some "short term financing" get us to survive the project (how many of us could afford to buy a house without taking out the mortgage?). When I say a "short term" - I don't mean - "do something quickly first and do refactor it out later before it hits the production". No - I am talking about relying on a hardcoded default values in a production software. Granted - it could cause some issues, but what if it only going to cause a single trouble in a whole year. Again - I am talking about the "average" mainstream software here (not a software for a nuclear power station) - the average web site or a UI application for the accounting software, meaning that people lives are not at stake, nor millions of dollars. Again, from my experience, business users would rather live with the software which "works somehow", rather then wait for a perfect one. And the use of default values helps a lot if you develop a software in a RAD style. But again - the longest debug sessions I have spent were because of the bugs introduced by a default value which either stopped being "a default" along the way or because a small subsystem has recently been upgraded and as a result of this upgrade it does not handle the default correctly (e.g. empty list vs null, or null string vs empty string). So my question is - are the default values good or evil. And if they are a technical debt - how do measure up how much you can borrow so you can afford the repayments? Would really appreciate any input. Cheers. EDIT: If I am using the default values as a way to cut the corners during the development - and if the corners cutting results in a bugs and issues - what is the methodology to recover from these issues?

    Read the article

  • Celko's SQL Stumper: Eggs in one Basket

    Joe Celko returns with another stumper to celebrate Easter. Unsurprisingly, this involves eggs. More surprising is the nature of the puzzle: This time, the puzzle is one of designing a database rather than a query. DDL as well as the DML.

    Read the article

  • Has any language become greatly popular for something other than its intended purpose?

    - by Jon Purdy
    Take this scenario: A programmer creates a language to solve some problem. He then releases this language to help others solve problems like it. Another programmer discovers it's actually much better for some different category of problems. By virtue of this new application, the language then becomes popular for that application primarily. Are there any instances of this actually occurring? Put another way, does the intended purpose of a language have any bearing on how it's actually used, or whether it becomes popular? Is it even important that a language have an advertised purpose?

    Read the article

  • How to handle compensation issue

    - by Ali
    I consider myself an expert Software Developer. Recently, I noticed my current company posted a new job through a recruting firm requiring half experience than I have and even lesser set of skills. However, they are offering the same salary as my current salary. When I joined my current company a year ago, they declined to pay my asking salary. My evaluations are good and there are critical projects in the pipeline where my involvement is crucial for their success. I'm little confused on how to handle this situation. I don't want to come across threatning or any thing like that.

    Read the article

  • Grading an algorithm: Readability vs. Compactness

    - by amiregelz
    Consider the following question in a test \ interview: Implement the strcpy() function in C: void strcpy(char *destination, char *source); The strcpy function copies the C string pointed by source into the array pointed by destination, including the terminating null character. Assume that the size of the array pointed by destination is long enough to contain the same C string as source, and does not overlap in memory with source. Say you were the tester, how would you grade the following answers to this question? 1) void strcpy(char *destination, char *source) { while (*source != '\0') { *destination = *source; source++; destionation++; } *destionation = *source; } 2) void strcpy(char *destination, char *source) { while (*(destination++) = *(source++)) ; } The first implementation is straightforward - it is readable and programmer-friendly. The second implementation is shorter (one line of code) but less programmer-friendly; it's not so easy to understand the way this code is working, and if you're not familiar with the priorities in this code then it's a problem. I'm wondering if the first answer would show more complexity and more advanced thinking, in the tester's eyes, even though both algorithms behave the same, and although code readability is considered to be more important than code compactness. It seems to me that since making an algorithm this compact is more difficult to implement, it will show a higher level of thinking as an answer in a test. However, it is also possible that a tester would consider the first answer not good because it's not readable. I would also like to mention that this is not specific to this example, but general for code readability vs. compactness when implementing an algorithm, specifically in tests \ interviews.

    Read the article

  • Is there a Visual Studio style tool/IDE?

    - by Tim
    I have been developing in the windows space with Visual Studio for a while now with work, but I have also been using Ubuntu for a while and am keen to get into some software development for linux. I should also note. I am not looking for .NET and I am aware of mono. I am also familiar with c++ development and some python, so the language isn't so much relevant as the "all in one" aspect. I was interested to know if there is a useful all in one code/debug/design(gui) IDE similar to something like Visual Studio but for linux?

    Read the article

  • Best language or tool for automating tedious manual tasks

    - by Jon Hopkins
    We all have tasks that come up from time to time that we think we'd be better off scripting or automating than doing manually. Obviously some tools or languages are better for this than others - no-one (in their right mind) is doing a one off job of cross referencing a bunch of text lists their PM has just given them in assembler for instance. What one tool or language would you recommend for the sort of general quick and dirty jobs you get asked to do where time (rather than elegance) is of the essence? Background: I'm a former programmer, now development manager PM, looking to learn a new language for fun. If I'm going to learn something for fun I'd like it to be useful and this sort of use case is the most likely to come up.

    Read the article

  • Are XML Comments Necessary Documentation?

    - by Bob Horn
    I used to be a fan of requiring XML comments for documentation. I've since changed my mind for two main reasons: Like good code, methods should be self-explanatory. In practice, most XML comments are useless noise that provide no additional value. Many times we simply use GhostDoc to generate generic comments, and this is what I mean by useless noise: /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the unit of measure. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The unit of measure. /// </value> public string UnitOfMeasure { get; set; } To me, that's obvious. Having said that, if there were special instructions to include, then we should absolutely use XML comments. I like this excerpt from this article: Sometimes, you will need to write comments. But, it should be the exception not the rule. Comments should only be used when they are expressing something that cannot be expressed in code. If you want to write elegant code, strive to eliminate comments and instead write self-documenting code. Am I wrong to think we should only be using XML comments when the code isn't enough to explain itself on its own? I believe this is a good example where XML comments make pretty code look ugly. It takes a class like this... public class RawMaterialLabel : EntityBase { public long Id { get; set; } public string ManufacturerId { get; set; } public string PartNumber { get; set; } public string Quantity { get; set; } public string UnitOfMeasure { get; set; } public string LotNumber { get; set; } public string SublotNumber { get; set; } public int LabelSerialNumber { get; set; } public string PurchaseOrderNumber { get; set; } public string PurchaseOrderLineNumber { get; set; } public DateTime ManufacturingDate { get; set; } public string LastModifiedUser { get; set; } public DateTime LastModifiedTime { get; set; } public Binary VersionNumber { get; set; } public ICollection<LotEquipmentScan> LotEquipmentScans { get; private set; } } ... And turns it into this: /// <summary> /// Container for properties of a raw material label /// </summary> public class RawMaterialLabel : EntityBase { /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the id. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The id. /// </value> public long Id { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the manufacturer id. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The manufacturer id. /// </value> public string ManufacturerId { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the part number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The part number. /// </value> public string PartNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the quantity. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The quantity. /// </value> public string Quantity { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the unit of measure. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The unit of measure. /// </value> public string UnitOfMeasure { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the lot number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The lot number. /// </value> public string LotNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the sublot number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The sublot number. /// </value> public string SublotNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the label serial number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The label serial number. /// </value> public int LabelSerialNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the purchase order number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The purchase order number. /// </value> public string PurchaseOrderNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the purchase order line number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The purchase order line number. /// </value> public string PurchaseOrderLineNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the manufacturing date. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The manufacturing date. /// </value> public DateTime ManufacturingDate { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the last modified user. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The last modified user. /// </value> public string LastModifiedUser { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the last modified time. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The last modified time. /// </value> public DateTime LastModifiedTime { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets or sets the version number. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The version number. /// </value> public Binary VersionNumber { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Gets the lot equipment scans. /// </summary> /// <value> /// The lot equipment scans. /// </value> public ICollection<LotEquipmentScan> LotEquipmentScans { get; private set; } }

    Read the article

  • How do you navigate and refactor code written in a dynamic language?

    - by Philippe Beaudoin
    I love that writing Python, Ruby or Javascript requires so little boilerplate. I love simple functional constructs. I love the clean and simple syntax. However, there are three things I'm really bad at when developing a large software in a dynamic language: Navigating the code Identifying the interfaces of the objects I'm using Refactoring efficiently I have been trying simple editors (i.e. Vim) as well as IDE (Eclipse + PyDev) but in both cases I feel like I have to commit a lot more to memory and/or to constantly "grep" and read through the code to identify the interfaces. As for refactoring, for example changing method names, it becomes hugely dependent on the quality of my unit tests. And if I try to isolate my unit tests by "cutting them off" the rest of the application, then there is no guarantee that my stub's interface stays up to date with the object I'm stubbing. I'm sure there are workarounds for these problems. How do you work efficiently in Python, Ruby or Javascript?

    Read the article

  • Can Scala be considered a functional superset of Java?

    - by Giorgio
    Apart from the differences in syntax, can Scala be considered a superset of Java that adds the functional paradigm to the object-oriented paradigm? Or are there any major features in Java for which there is no direct Scala equivalent? With major features I mean program constructs that would force me to heavily rewrite / restructure my code, e.g., if I had to port a Java program to Scala. Or can I expect that, given a Java program, I can port it to Scala almost line-by-line?

    Read the article

  • What are approaches for analyzing the cost-benefits of a development methodology?

    - by Garrett Hall
    There are many development practices (TDD, continuous integration, cowboy-coding), principles (SOLID, layers of abstraction, KISS), and processes (RUP, Scrum, XP, Waterfall). I have learned you can't follow any of these blindly, but have to consider context and ROI (return on investment). My question is: How do you know whether you are getting a good ROI by following a particular methodology? Metrics, guesstimation, experience? Do analytical methods exist? Or is this just the million-dollar question in software engineering that has no answer?

    Read the article

  • Computer Games Technolgy or Software Engineering?

    - by Suleman Anwar
    I'm in the last year of my college and going to university next year. Could you tell me what the difference between Software Engineering and Computer Games Technology is? I know a bit of both but don't know the actual difference. I'm kind off in a dilemma between these two. I want to be a programmer, I'd love to go into gaming but I heard getting a job within a computer games company is really hard.

    Read the article

  • Is committing/checking code everyday a good practice?

    - by ArtB
    I've been reading Martin Fowler's note on Continuous Integration and he lists as a must "Everyone Commits To the Mainline Every Day". I do not like to commit code unless the section I'm working on is complete and that in practice I commit my code every three days: one day to investigate/reproduce the task and make some preliminary changes, a second day to complete the changes, and a third day to write the tests and clean it up^ for submission. I would not feel comfortable submitting the code sooner. Now, I pull changes from the repository and integrate them locally usually twice a day, but I do not commit that often unless I can carve out a smaller piece of work. Question: is committing everyday such a good practice that I should change my workflow to accomodate it, or it is not that advisable? ^ The order is more arbitrary and depends on the task, my point was to illustrate the time span and activities, not the exact sequence.

    Read the article

  • Enterprise VS Regular corporate developer

    - by Rick Ratayczak
    Ok, I "almost" lost a job offer because I "didn't have enough experience as an enterprise software engineer". I've been a programmer for over 16 years, and the last 12-14 professionally, at companies big and small. So this made me think of this question: What's the difference between a software engineer and an enterprise software engineer? Is there really a difference between software architecture and enterprise architecture? BTW: I try to do what every other GOOD software programmer does, like architecture, tdd, SDLC, etc.

    Read the article

  • Breaking The Promise of Web Service Interoperability

    The promise of web service interoperability is achievable if certain technical and non-technical issues are dealt with properly. As the world gets smaller and smaller thanks to our growing global economy the need for security is increasing. The use of security is vital in the transferring of data from one server to another. As new security standards and protocols are created, the environments for web service hosts and clients must be in sync so that they can communicate on the same standard and protocols. For example, if a new protocol x can only be implemented on computers built after 2010 then all computers built prior to 2010 will not be able to connect to any web service hosts that only use this protocol in its security policy. If both the host and client of a web service cannot communicate using a set of common standards and protocols then web services are not available to these clients thus breaking the promise of interoperability. Another limiting factor of web services is governmental policies and regulations. I have experienced this first hand last year when I had to work on a project that dealt with personally identifiable information (PII) regarding US and Canadian Citizens. Currently the Canadian government regulates that any data pertaining to Canadian citizens must be store in Canada only. The issue that we had was that fact that we are a US based company that sometimes works with Canadian PII as part of a service that we provide. As you can see we are US based company and dealing with Canadian Data, so we had to place a file server inside the border of Canada in order for us to continue working for our Canadian customers.

    Read the article

  • Could someone break this nasty habit of mine please?

    - by MimiEAM
    I recently graduated in cs and was mostly unsatisfied since I realized that I received only a basic theoretical approach in a wide range of subjects (which is what college is supposed to do but still...) . Anyway I took the habit of spending a lot of time looking for implementations of concepts and upon finding those I will used them as guides to writing my own implementation of those concepts just for fun. But now I feel like the only way I can fully understand a new concept is by trying to implement from scratch no matter how unoptimized the result may be. Anyway this behavior lead me to choose by default the hard way, that is time consuming instead of using a nicely written library until I hit my head again a huge wall and then try to find a library that works for my purpose.... Does anyone else do that and why? It seems so weird why would anyone (including me) do that ? Is it a bad practice ? and if so how can i stop doing that ?

    Read the article

  • Different ways of solving problems in code.

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

    Read the article

  • Why is an anemic domain model considered bad in C#/OOP, but very important in F#/FP?

    - by Danny Tuppeny
    In a blog post on F# for fun and profit, it says: In a functional design, it is very important to separate behavior from data. The data types are simple and "dumb". And then separately, you have a number of functions that act on those data types. This is the exact opposite of an object-oriented design, where behavior and data are meant to be combined. After all, that's exactly what a class is. In a truly object-oriented design in fact, you should have nothing but behavior -- the data is private and can only be accessed via methods. In fact, in OOD, not having enough behavior around a data type is considered a Bad Thing, and even has a name: the "anemic domain model". Given that in C# we seem to keep borrowing from F#, and trying to write more functional-style code; how come we're not borrowing the idea of separating data/behavior, and even consider it bad? Is it simply that the definition doesn't with with OOP, or is there a concrete reason that it's bad in C# that for some reason doesn't apply in F# (and in fact, is reversed)? (Note: I'm specifically interested in the differences in C#/F# that could change the opinion of what is good/bad, rather than individuals that may disagree with either opinion in the blog post).

    Read the article

  • Which is more important in a web application code promotion hierarchy? production environment to repo equivalence or unidirectional propagation?

    - by ghbarratt
    Lets say you have a code promotion hierarchy consisting of several environments, (the polar end) two of which are development (dev) and production (prod). Lets say you also have a web application where important (but not developer controlled) files are created (and perhaps altered) in the production environment. Lets say that you (or someone above you) decided that the files which are controlled/created/altered/deleted in the production environment needed to go into the repository. Which of the following two sets of practice / approaches do you find best: Committing these non-developed file modifications made in the production environment so that the repository reflects the production environment as closely and as often as possible. Generally ignoring the non-developed production environment alterations, placing confidence in backups to restore the production environment should it be harmed, and keeping a resolution to avoid pushing developments through the promotion hierarchy in the reverse direction (avoiding pushing from prod to dev), only committing the files found in the production environment if they were absolutely necessary in other environments for development. So, 1 or 2, and why? PS - I am currently slightly biased toward maintaining production environment to repository equivalence (option 1), but I keep an open mind and would accept an answer supporting either.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96  | Next Page >