Search Results

Search found 1367 results on 55 pages for 'cyclomatic complexity'.

Page 9/55 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • What should a Java/SOA developer be able to do?

    - by Regular Joe
    Hello community. I got assigned the task to list the activities a Java Developer should be able to perform and create an estimate about the time it would take. I've came up with the following: S = Small complexity M = Medium complexity H = High complexity 1d = 1 day Create JDBC CRUD backend ( S=1d, M=5d, H=10d ) Create JSP/Servlet frontend for a CRUD app ( S=1d, M=10d, H=20d ) Create Swing desktop frontend ( S=1d, M=15d, H=30d) Create ORM based CRUD ... Create Webapp fronend with webframework ... This is thought for a Java "enterprise" developer. The other profile I have is SOA Developer, but I could not pass beyond: Create webservice ( S=.5d, M=2d, H=7d ) Q.- What other activities should a Java Developer be able to do? Q.- What activities should a SOA Developer be able to do? Please, help me with this, I know this is in the limit of the kind of questions that could be asked here, but I really need a little push on this, and I don't want to go to Yahoo Answers for this.

    Read the article

  • What should a Java/SOA developer be able to do?

    - by Regular Joe
    I got assigned the task to list the activities a Java Developer should be able to perform and create an estimate about the time it would take. I've came up with the following: Create JDBC CRUD backend ( S=1d, M=5d, H=10d ) Create JSP/Servlet frontend for a CRUD app ( S=1d, M=10d, H=20d ) Create Swing desktop frontend ( S=1d, M=15d, H=30d) Create ORM based CRUD etc. Create Webapp fronend with webframework etc Where.. S = Small complexity M = Medium complexity H = High complexity 1d = 1 day This is thought for a Java "enterprise" developer. The other profile I have is SOA Developer, but I could not pass beyond: Create webservice ( S=.5d, M=2d, H=7d ) Q.- What other activities should a Java Developer be able to do? Q.- What activities should a SOA Developer be able to do? Please, help me with this, I know this is in the limit of the kind of questions that could be asked here, but I really need a little push on this, and I don't want to go to Yahoo Answers for this.

    Read the article

  • question on find value in array

    - by davit-datuashvili
    i have seen a few days ago such problem there is given two array find elements which are common of these array one of the solution was sort big array and then use binary search algorithm and also there is another algorithm- brute-force algorithm for (int i=0;i<array1.length;i++){ for (int j=0;j<array2.length;j++){ if (array1[i]==array2[j]){ //code here } } it's complexity is O(array1.length*array2.length); and i am interested the first method's complexity is also same yes? because we should sort array first and then use search method binary search algorithm's complexity is log_2(n) so it means that total time will be array.length*log_2(n) and about sort? please explain me which is better

    Read the article

  • Solid principles vs YAGNI

    - by KeesDijk
    When do the SOLID principles become YAGNI. As programmers we make trade-off's all the time, between complexity, maintainabillity, time to build and so forth.Amongst others. two of the smartest guidelines for making choices are in my mind the SOLID principles and YAGNI. If you don't need it, dont build it and keep it clean. Now for example when i watch the dimecast series on SOLID I see it start out as a fairly simple programm and ending up prettty complex (end yes complexity is also in the eye of the beholder) but it still makes me wonder, when do SOLID principles turn into something you don't need. All solid principles are ways of working that enable use te make changes at a later stage. But what if the problem to solve is a pretty simple one and it's a through away application, than what ? Or are the SOLID principles something that apply always ?

    Read the article

  • time it takes to develop 4*N lines of code. Nonlinear, but how nonlinear ?

    - by Andrei
    It took me time T to develop program A, 1000 lines of code (SLOC), in certain language/area/complexity. Then how much time it will take to develop program B which is expected 4000 lines, in same area/complexity/language ? I expect it to be 4*N, right ? Any formula how T grows with SLOC ? For contractor, these estimates are important. Is there formula from software enginering books, or from people's experience ? Also, what methods exist to make the code bug-free before it hits QA ?

    Read the article

  • Organizing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

    - by OnesimusUnbound
    As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application project folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three tier, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

    Read the article

  • Can "go" replace C++? [closed]

    - by iammilind
    I was reading wiki article about "go" programming language, where Bruce Eckel states: The complexity of C++ (even more complexity has been added in the new C++), and the resulting impact on productivity, is no longer justified. All the hoops that the C++ programmer had to jump through in order to use a C-compatible language make no sense anymore --they're just a waste of time and effort. Now, Go makes much more sense for the class of problems that C++ was originally intended to solve. Can go really replace C++(11) for new development in future? How about generic programming? I don't know go , but the amount of time (in)wasted in learning C++ seems to go in vain.

    Read the article

  • Solid principles vs YAGNI

    - by KeesDijk
    When do the SOLID principles become YAGNI? As programmers we make trade-offs all the time, between complexity, maintainability, time to build and so forth. Amongst others, two of the smartest guidelines for making choices are in my mind the SOLID principles and YAGNI. If you don't need it; don't build it, and keep it clean. Now for example, when I watch the dimecast series on SOLID, I see it starts out as a fairly simple program, and ends up as a pretty complex one (end yes complexity is also in the eye of the beholder), but it still makes me wonder: when do SOLID principles turn into something you don't need? All solid principles are ways of working that enable use to make changes at a later stage. But what if the problem to solve is a pretty simple one and it's a throwaway application, then what? Or are the SOLID principles something that always apply? As asked in the comments: Solid Principles YAGNI

    Read the article

  • How can calculus and linear algebra be useful to a system programmer?

    - by Victor
    I found a website saying that calculus and linear algebra are necessary for System Programming. System Programming, as far as I know, is about osdev, drivers, utilities and so on. I just can't figure out how calculus and linear algebra can be helpful on that. I know that calculus has several applications in science, but in this particular field of programming I just can't imagine how calculus can be so important. The information was on this site: http://www.wikihow.com/Become-a-Programmer Edit: Some answers here are explaining about algorithm complexity and optimization. When I made this question I was trying to be more specific about the area of System's Programming. Algorithm complexity and optimization can be applied to any area of programming not just System's Programming. That may be why I wasn't able to came up with such thinking at the time of the question.

    Read the article

  • 50 Years of Space Exploration [Infographic]

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    We’ve sent over 200 missions out into space to check out the Moon, the Sun, planets, and more. Curious where they all went? Check out this awesome infographic to trace the launches to their destination. The infographic includes all international missions including visits to the Sun, observation orbits around the Earth, the Moon, other planets in our solar system, visits to asteroids, and the adventures of deep space probes like Voyager 1. The official image at National Geographic is trapped inside a clunky viewfinder style image viewer. If you want to look at the whole thing more comfortably or use it for desktop wallpaper, make sure to visit the full size image at Simple Complexity here. 50 Years of Exploration [National Geographic via Simple Complexity] How to Enable Google Chrome’s Secret Gold IconHTG Explains: What’s the Difference Between the Windows 7 HomeGroups and XP-style Networking?Internet Explorer 9 Released: Here’s What You Need To Know

    Read the article

  • Less is More Redux

    In my short happy life as a developer, Ive run into all kinds of development efforts that include frameworks, libraries, web sites, and much more.The one thing that stands out as an irritant to me is complexity. Specifically, unnecessary complexity. Ive seen developers author entire library assemblies that provide wrapper utility methods consisting of calls to .NET BCL methods that take one line of code methods that could have been called inline without even the need for the helper classes.Ive seen...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Browser based UI Customization with Oracle Identity Management 11gR2

    - by B Shashikumar
    Business users need user interfaces that are not only friendly but also easily customizable. However the downside of any customization project is the cost and complexity involved in developing, testing, deploying, and managing custom code. And equally critical is the challenge of ensuring customizations stay intact through product upgrades.To overcome these challenges, Oracle Identity Management 11gR2 now includes a Durable UI Configuration Framework which lets customers make complex UI customizations all from with the confines of a web browser. I recently sat down with Clayton Donley, Senior Director of Development for Oracle Identity and Access Management products. In this podcast, we examine how this new capability in Oracle Identity Management around browser based UI customization can reduce costs and complexity of customization while simplifying self service integration with corporate portal strategies. Click here to listen.

    Read the article

  • Organazing ASP.Net Single Page Application with Nancy

    - by OnesimusUnbound
    As a personal project, I'm creating a single page, asp.net web application using Nancy to provide RESTful services to the single page. Due to the complexity of the single page, particularly the JavaScripts used, I've think creating a dedicated project for the client side of web development and another for service side will organize and simplify the development. solution | +-- web / client side (single html page, js, css) | - contains asp.net project, and nancy library | to host the modules in application ptoject folder | +-- application / service (nancy modules, bootstrap for other layer) | . . . and other layers (three teir, domain driven, etc) . Is this a good way of organizing a complex single page application? Am I over-engineering the web app, incurring too much complexity?

    Read the article

  • Monitoring C++ applications

    - by Scott A
    We're implementing a new centralized monitoring solution (Zenoss). Incorporating servers, networking, and Java programs is straightforward with SNMP and JMX. The question, however, is what are the best practices for monitoring and managing custom C++ applications in large, heterogenous (Solaris x86, RHEL Linux, Windows) environments? Possibilities I see are: Net SNMP Advantages single, central daemon on each server well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions we run Net SNMP daemons on our servers already Disadvantages: complex implementation (MIBs, Net SNMP library) new technology to introduce for the C++ developers rsyslog Advantages single, central daemon on each server well-known standard unknown integration into monitoring solutions (I know they can do alerts based on text, but how well would it work for sending telemetry like memory usage, queue depths, thread capacity, etc) simple implementation Disadvantages: possible integration issues somewhat new technology for C++ developers possible porting issues if we switch monitoring vendors probably involves coming up with an ad-hoc communication protocol (or using RFC5424 structured data; I don't know if Zenoss supports that without custom Zenpack coding) Embedded JMX (embed a JVM and use JNI) Advantages consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions somewhat simple implementation (we already do this today for other purposes) Disadvantages: complexity (JNI, thunking layer between native C++ and Java, basically writing the management code twice) possible stability problems requires a JVM in each process, using considerably more memory JMX is new technology for C++ developers each process has it's own JMX port (we run a lot of processes on each machine) Local JMX daemon, processes connect to it Advantages single, central daemon on each server consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions Disadvantages: complexity (basically writing the management code twice) need to find or write such a daemon need a protocol between the JMX daemon and the C++ process JMX is new technology for C++ developers CodeMesh JunC++ion Advantages consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions single, central daemon on each server when run in shared JVM mode somewhat simple implementation (requires code generation) Disadvantages: complexity (code generation, requires a GUI and several rounds of tweaking to produce the proxied code) possible JNI stability problems requires a JVM in each process, using considerably more memory (in embedded mode) Does not support Solaris x86 (deal breaker) Even if it did support Solaris x86, there are possible compiler compatibility issues (we use an odd combination of STLPort and Forte on Solaris each process has it's own JMX port when run in embedded mode (we run a lot of processes on each machine) possibly precludes a shared JMX server for non-C++ processes (?) Is there some reasonably standardized, simple solution I'm missing? Given no other reasonable solutions, which of these solutions is typically used for custom C++ programs? My gut feel is that Net SNMP is how people do this, but I'd like other's input and experience before I make a decision.

    Read the article

  • Pirates, Treasure Chests and Architectural Mapping

    Pirate 1: Why do pirates create treasure maps? Pirate 2: I do not know.Pirate 1: So they can find their gold. Yes, that was a bad joke, but it does illustrate a point. Pirates are known for drawing treasure maps to their most prized possession. These documents detail the decisions pirates made in order to hide and find their chests of gold. The map allows them to trace the steps they took originally to hide their treasure so that they may return. As software engineers, programmers, and architects we need to treat software implementations much like our treasure chest. Why is software like a treasure chest? It cost money, time,  and resources to develop (Usually) It can make or save money, time, and resources (Hopefully) If we operate under the assumption that software is like a treasure chest then wouldn’t make sense to document the steps, rationale, concerns, and decisions about how it was designed? Pirates are notorious for documenting where they hide their treasure.  Shouldn’t we as creators of software do the same? By documenting our design decisions and rationale behind them will help others be able to understand and maintain implemented systems. This can only be done if the design decisions are correctly mapped to its corresponding implementation. This allows for architectural decisions to be traced from the conceptual model, architectural design and finally to the implementation. Mapping gives software professional a method to trace the reason why specific areas of code were developed verses other options. Just like the pirates we need to able to trace our steps from the start of a project to its implementation,  so that we will understand why specific choices were chosen. The traceability of a software implementation that actually maps back to its originating design decisions is invaluable for ensuring that architectural drifting and erosion does not take place. The drifting and erosion is prevented by allowing others to understand the rational of why an implementation was created in a specific manor or methodology The process of mapping distinct design concerns/decisions to the location of its implemented is called traceability. In this context traceability is defined as method for connecting distinctive software artifacts. This process allows architectural design models and decisions to be directly connected with its physical implementation. The process of mapping architectural design concerns to a software implementation can be very complex. However, most design decision can be placed in  a few generalized categories. Commonly Mapped Design Decisions Design Rationale Components and Connectors Interfaces Behaviors/Properties Design rational is one of the hardest categories to map directly to an implementation. Typically this rational is mapped or document in code via comments. These comments consist of general design decisions and reasoning because they do not directly refer to a specific part of an application. They typically focus more on the higher level concerns. Components and connectors can directly be mapped to architectural concerns. Typically concerns subdivide an application in to distinct functional areas. These functional areas then can map directly back to their originating concerns.Interfaces can be mapped back to design concerns in one of two ways. Interfaces that pertain to specific function definitions can be directly mapped back to its originating concern(s). However, more complicated interfaces require additional analysis to ensure that the proper mappings are created. Depending on the complexity some Behaviors\Properties can be translated directly into a generic implementation structure that is ready for business logic. In addition, some behaviors can be translated directly in to an actual implementation depending on the complexity and architectural tools used. Mapping design concerns to an implementation is a lot of work to maintain, but is doable. In order to ensure that concerns are mapped correctly and that an implementation correctly reflects its design concerns then one of two standard approaches are usually used. All Changes Come From ArchitectureBy forcing all application changes to come through the architectural model prior to implementation then the existing mappings will be used to locate where in the implementation changes need to occur. Allow Changes From Implementation Or Architecture By allowing changes to come from the implementation and/or the architecture then the other area must be kept in sync. This methodology is more complex compared to the previous approach.  One reason to justify the added complexity for an application is due to the fact that this approach tends to detect and prevent architectural drift and erosion. Additionally, this approach is usually maintained via software because of the complexity. Reference:Taylor, R. N., Medvidovic, N., & Dashofy, E. M. (2009). Software architecture: Foundations, theory, and practice Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons  

    Read the article

  • SharePoint Apps &ndash; the dark side

    - by Sahil Malik
    SharePoint 2010 Training: more information First of all, I am a proponent of SharePoint apps. As I have said many times over, SharePoint Apps make me very ‘appy, they are very app-propriate. But there are some points to consider that make a bit app-rehensive. These are all mentioned in my book “SharePoint 2013 - Planet of the Apps”, .. but here are some thoughts of the negatives of Apps that I think we need to consider before diving in, Mutliple Servers, More Complexity Apps, by definition will include an extra server. This excludes SharePoint-hosted apps of course. Extra servers by definition will add more complexity. As it is, when you introduce SharePoint to an organization, the number of servers multiply like bunnies. Now you will have additional servers, and these servers talking with each other. You will have to maintain trusts, and you will have to patch more stuff, reset more “admin” passwords – you get my point. Read full article ....

    Read the article

  • What is an achievable way of setting content budgets (e.g. polygon count) for level content in a 3D title?

    - by MrCranky
    In answering this question for swquinn, the answer raised a more pertinent question that I'd like to hear answers to. I'll post our own strategy (promise I won't accept it as the answer), but I'd like to hear others. Specifically: how do you go about setting a sensible budget for your content team. Usually one of the very first questions asked in a development is: what's our polygon budget? Of course, these days it's rare that vertex/poly count alone is the limiting factor, instead shader complexity, fill-rate, lighting complexity, all come into play. What the content team want are some hard numbers / limits to work to such that they have a reasonable expectation that their content, once it actually gets into the engine, will not be too heavy. Given that 'it depends' isn't a particularly useful answer, I'd like to hear a strategy that allows me to give them workable limits without being a) misleading, or b) wrong.

    Read the article

  • What &lsquo;enterprise&rsquo; doesn&rsquo;t understand about risk

    - by Liam McLennan
    Enterprises (large bureaucracies) obsess about risk. I think it is because of the inertia generated by the process and politics that they have to deal with. The trouble is that they respond to risk in precisely the wrong way: by adding complexity. Need to call a method? Better wrap it in WCF service. Need to talk to another application? Better hook a message queue to a service bus connected to a biztalk sharepoint – on Oracle. Here is a simple guide: Complexity increases risk. Simplicity reduces risk.

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 32 bit & windows 7 professional SP1

    - by Harry
    I'm testing my new Windows Server 2008 32 bit edition (2 servers) as a server and Windows 7 professional 32 bit as a client. Let say one is a primary domain controller (PDC) and the other is a backup domain controller (BDC) like the old time to ease. Every setup were done in the PDC and just replicate to BDC. Didn't setup anything, just install the server with AD, DNS, DHCP, that's all. Then I use my windows 7 pro 32 bit to join the domain. It worked. After that I tried to change the password of a the user (not administrator) but it always failed said it didn't meet the password complexity setup while in fact there's no setup at all either in account policy, default domain policy or even local policy. Tried to disable the password complexity in the default domain policy instead of didn't set all then test again but still failed. Browse and found suggestion to setup the minimum and maximum password age to 0 but it also failed. Tried to restart the server and the client then change password, still failed with the same error, didn't meet password complexity setup. Tried to see in the rsop.msc but didn't found anything. In fact, if I see the setup in another system with windows server 2003 and windows xp, using rsop.msc I can see there's setup for computer configuration windows settings security settings account policies password policy. I also have a windows 7 pro 32 bit in a windows server 2003 32 bit environment but unable to find the same setting using rsop but this windows 7 works fine. anyone can give suggestion what's the problem and what to do so I can change my windows 7 pro laptop password in a windows server 2008 environment? another thing, is it the right assumption that we can see all the policies setting in windows 7 whether it's in a windows server 2003 or 2008 environment? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Password Policy seems to be ignored for new Domain on Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by Earl Sven
    I have set up a new Windows Server 2008 R2 domain controller, and have attempted to configure the Default Domain Policy to permit all types of passwords. When I want to create a new user (just a normal user) in the Domain Users and Computers application, I am prevented from doing so because of password complexity/length reasons. The password policy options configured in the Default Domain Policy are not defined in the Default Domain Controllers Policy, but having run the Group Policy Modelling Wizard these settings do not appear to be set for the Domain Controllers OU, should they not be inherited from the Default Domain policy? Additionally, if I link the Default Domain policy to the Domain Controllers OU, the Group Policy Modelling Wizard indicates the expected values for complexity etc, but I still cannot create a new user with my desired password. The domain is running at the Windows Server 2008 R2 functional level. Any thoughts? Thanks! Update: Here is the "Account policy/Password policy" Section from the GPM Wizard: Policy Value Winning GPO Enforce password history 0 Passwords Remembered Default Domain Policy Maximum password age 0 days Default Domain Policy Minimum password age 0 days Default Domain Policy Minimum password length 0 characters Default Domain Policy Passwords must meet complexity Disabled Default Domain Policy These results were taken from running the GPM Wizard at the Domain Controllers OU. I have typed them out by hand as the system I am working on is standalone, this is why the table is not exactly the wording from the Wizard. Are there any other policies that could override the above? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Measuring Code Quality

    - by DotNetBlues
    Several months back, I was tasked with measuring the quality of code in my organization. Foolishly, I said, "No problem." I figured that Visual Studio has a built-in code metrics tool (Analyze -> Calculate Code Metrics) and that would be a fine place to start with. I was right, but also very wrong. The Visual Studio calculates five primary metrics: Maintainability Index, Cyclomatic Complexity, Depth of Inheritance, Class Coupling, and Lines of Code. The first two are figured at the method level, the second at (primarily) the class level, and the last is a simple count. The first question any reasonable person should ask is "Which one do I look at first?" The first question any manager is going to ask is, "What one number tells me about the whole application?" My answer to both, in a way, was "Maintainability Index." Why? Because each of the other numbers represent one element of quality while MI is a composite number that includes Cyclomatic Complexity. I'd be lying if I said no consideration was given to the fact that it was abstract enough that it's harder for some surly developer (I've been known to resemble that remark) to start arguing why a high coupling or inheritance is no big deal or how complex requirements are to blame for complex code. I should also note that I don't think there is one magic bullet metric that will tell you objectively how good a code base is. There are a ton of different metrics out there, and each one was created for a specific purpose in mind and has a pet theory behind it. When you've got a group of developers who aren't accustomed to measuring code quality, picking a 0-100 scale, non-controversial metric that can be easily generated by tools you already own really isn't a bad place to start. That sort of answers the question a developer would ask, but what about the management question; how do you dashboard this stuff when Visual Studio doesn't roll up the numbers to the solution level? Since VS does roll up the MI to the project level, I thought I could just figure out what sort of weighting Microsoft used to roll method scores up to the class level and then to the namespace and project levels. I was a bit surprised by the answer: there is no weighting. That means that a class with one 1300 line method (which will score a 0 MI) and one empty constructor (which will score a 100 MI) will have an overall MI of a respectable 50. Throw in a couple of DTOs that are nothing more than getters and setters (which tend to score 95 or better) and the project ends up looking really, really healthy. The next poor bastard who has to work on the application is probably not going to be singing the praises of its maintainability, though. For the record, that 1300 line method isn't a hypothetical, either. So, what does one do with that? Well, I decided to weight the average by the Lines of Code per method. For our above example, the formula for the class's MI becomes ((1300 * 0) + (1 * 100))/1301 = .077, rounded to 0. Sounds about right. Continue the pattern for namespace, project, solution, and even multi-solution application MI scores. This can be done relatively easily by using the "export to Excel" button and running a quick formula against the data. On the short list of follow-up questions would be, "How do I improve my application's score?" That's an answer for another time, though.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >