Search Results

Search found 1913 results on 77 pages for 'james marthenal'.

Page 11/77 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • Is Google Closure a true compiler?

    - by James Allardice
    This question is inspired by the debate in the comments on this Stack Overflow question. The Google Closure Compiler documentation states the following (emphasis added): The Closure Compiler is a tool for making JavaScript download and run faster. It is a true compiler for JavaScript. Instead of compiling from a source language to machine code, it compiles from JavaScript to better JavaScript. However, Wikipedia gives the following definition of a "compiler": A compiler is a computer program (or set of programs) that transforms source code written in a programming language (the source language) into another computer language... A language rewriter is usually a program that translates the form of expressions without a change of language. Based on that, I would say that Google Closure is not a compiler. But the fact that Google explicitly state that it is in fact a "true compiler" makes me wonder if there's more to it. Is Google Closure really a JavaScript compiler?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Useful But Overlooked Sets

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again we consider some of the lesser known classes and keywords of C#.  Today we will be looking at two set implementations in the System.Collections.Generic namespace: HashSet<T> and SortedSet<T>.  Even though most people think of sets as mathematical constructs, they are actually very useful classes that can be used to help make your application more performant if used appropriately. A Background From Math In mathematical terms, a set is an unordered collection of unique items.  In other words, the set {2,3,5} is identical to the set {3,5,2}.  In addition, the set {2, 2, 4, 1} would be invalid because it would have a duplicate item (2).  In addition, you can perform set arithmetic on sets such as: Intersections: The intersection of two sets is the collection of elements common to both.  Example: The intersection of {1,2,5} and {2,4,9} is the set {2}. Unions: The union of two sets is the collection of unique items present in either or both set.  Example: The union of {1,2,5} and {2,4,9} is {1,2,4,5,9}. Differences: The difference of two sets is the removal of all items from the first set that are common between the sets.  Example: The difference of {1,2,5} and {2,4,9} is {1,5}. Supersets: One set is a superset of a second set if it contains all elements that are in the second set. Example: The set {1,2,5} is a superset of {1,5}. Subsets: One set is a subset of a second set if all the elements of that set are contained in the first set. Example: The set {1,5} is a subset of {1,2,5}. If We’re Not Doing Math, Why Do We Care? Now, you may be thinking: why bother with the set classes in C# if you have no need for mathematical set manipulation?  The answer is simple: they are extremely efficient ways to determine ownership in a collection. For example, let’s say you are designing an order system that tracks the price of a particular equity, and once it reaches a certain point will trigger an order.  Now, since there’s tens of thousands of equities on the markets, you don’t want to track market data for every ticker as that would be a waste of time and processing power for symbols you don’t have orders for.  Thus, we just want to subscribe to the stock symbol for an equity order only if it is a symbol we are not already subscribed to. Every time a new order comes in, we will check the list of subscriptions to see if the new order’s stock symbol is in that list.  If it is, great, we already have that market data feed!  If not, then and only then should we subscribe to the feed for that symbol. So far so good, we have a collection of symbols and we want to see if a symbol is present in that collection and if not, add it.  This really is the essence of set processing, but for the sake of comparison, let’s say you do a list instead: 1: // class that handles are order processing service 2: public sealed class OrderProcessor 3: { 4: // contains list of all symbols we are currently subscribed to 5: private readonly List<string> _subscriptions = new List<string>(); 6:  7: ... 8: } Now whenever you are adding a new order, it would look something like: 1: public PlaceOrderResponse PlaceOrder(Order newOrder) 2: { 3: // do some validation, of course... 4:  5: // check to see if already subscribed, if not add a subscription 6: if (!_subscriptions.Contains(newOrder.Symbol)) 7: { 8: // add the symbol to the list 9: _subscriptions.Add(newOrder.Symbol); 10: 11: // do whatever magic is needed to start a subscription for the symbol 12: } 13:  14: // place the order logic! 15: } What’s wrong with this?  In short: performance!  Finding an item inside a List<T> is a linear - O(n) – operation, which is not a very performant way to find if an item exists in a collection. (I used to teach algorithms and data structures in my spare time at a local university, and when you began talking about big-O notation you could immediately begin to see eyes glossing over as if it was pure, useless theory that would not apply in the real world, but I did and still do believe it is something worth understanding well to make the best choices in computer science). Let’s think about this: a linear operation means that as the number of items increases, the time that it takes to perform the operation tends to increase in a linear fashion.  Put crudely, this means if you double the collection size, you might expect the operation to take something like the order of twice as long.  Linear operations tend to be bad for performance because they mean that to perform some operation on a collection, you must potentially “visit” every item in the collection.  Consider finding an item in a List<T>: if you want to see if the list has an item, you must potentially check every item in the list before you find it or determine it’s not found. Now, we could of course sort our list and then perform a binary search on it, but sorting is typically a linear-logarithmic complexity – O(n * log n) - and could involve temporary storage.  So performing a sort after each add would probably add more time.  As an alternative, we could use a SortedList<TKey, TValue> which sorts the list on every Add(), but this has a similar level of complexity to move the items and also requires a key and value, and in our case the key is the value. This is why sets tend to be the best choice for this type of processing: they don’t rely on separate keys and values for ordering – so they save space – and they typically don’t care about ordering – so they tend to be extremely performant.  The .NET BCL (Base Class Library) has had the HashSet<T> since .NET 3.5, but at that time it did not implement the ISet<T> interface.  As of .NET 4.0, HashSet<T> implements ISet<T> and a new set, the SortedSet<T> was added that gives you a set with ordering. HashSet<T> – For Unordered Storage of Sets When used right, HashSet<T> is a beautiful collection, you can think of it as a simplified Dictionary<T,T>.  That is, a Dictionary where the TKey and TValue refer to the same object.  This is really an oversimplification, but logically it makes sense.  I’ve actually seen people code a Dictionary<T,T> where they store the same thing in the key and the value, and that’s just inefficient because of the extra storage to hold both the key and the value. As it’s name implies, the HashSet<T> uses a hashing algorithm to find the items in the set, which means it does take up some additional space, but it has lightning fast lookups!  Compare the times below between HashSet<T> and List<T>: Operation HashSet<T> List<T> Add() O(1) O(1) at end O(n) in middle Remove() O(1) O(n) Contains() O(1) O(n)   Now, these times are amortized and represent the typical case.  In the very worst case, the operations could be linear if they involve a resizing of the collection – but this is true for both the List and HashSet so that’s a less of an issue when comparing the two. The key thing to note is that in the general case, HashSet is constant time for adds, removes, and contains!  This means that no matter how large the collection is, it takes roughly the exact same amount of time to find an item or determine if it’s not in the collection.  Compare this to the List where almost any add or remove must rearrange potentially all the elements!  And to find an item in the list (if unsorted) you must search every item in the List. So as you can see, if you want to create an unordered collection and have very fast lookup and manipulation, the HashSet is a great collection. And since HashSet<T> implements ICollection<T> and IEnumerable<T>, it supports nearly all the same basic operations as the List<T> and can use the System.Linq extension methods as well. All we have to do to switch from a List<T> to a HashSet<T>  is change our declaration.  Since List and HashSet support many of the same members, chances are we won’t need to change much else. 1: public sealed class OrderProcessor 2: { 3: private readonly HashSet<string> _subscriptions = new HashSet<string>(); 4:  5: // ... 6:  7: public PlaceOrderResponse PlaceOrder(Order newOrder) 8: { 9: // do some validation, of course... 10: 11: // check to see if already subscribed, if not add a subscription 12: if (!_subscriptions.Contains(newOrder.Symbol)) 13: { 14: // add the symbol to the list 15: _subscriptions.Add(newOrder.Symbol); 16: 17: // do whatever magic is needed to start a subscription for the symbol 18: } 19: 20: // place the order logic! 21: } 22:  23: // ... 24: } 25: Notice, we didn’t change any code other than the declaration for _subscriptions to be a HashSet<T>.  Thus, we can pick up the performance improvements in this case with minimal code changes. SortedSet<T> – Ordered Storage of Sets Just like HashSet<T> is logically similar to Dictionary<T,T>, the SortedSet<T> is logically similar to the SortedDictionary<T,T>. The SortedSet can be used when you want to do set operations on a collection, but you want to maintain that collection in sorted order.  Now, this is not necessarily mathematically relevant, but if your collection needs do include order, this is the set to use. So the SortedSet seems to be implemented as a binary tree (possibly a red-black tree) internally.  Since binary trees are dynamic structures and non-contiguous (unlike List and SortedList) this means that inserts and deletes do not involve rearranging elements, or changing the linking of the nodes.  There is some overhead in keeping the nodes in order, but it is much smaller than a contiguous storage collection like a List<T>.  Let’s compare the three: Operation HashSet<T> SortedSet<T> List<T> Add() O(1) O(log n) O(1) at end O(n) in middle Remove() O(1) O(log n) O(n) Contains() O(1) O(log n) O(n)   The MSDN documentation seems to indicate that operations on SortedSet are O(1), but this seems to be inconsistent with its implementation and seems to be a documentation error.  There’s actually a separate MSDN document (here) on SortedSet that indicates that it is, in fact, logarithmic in complexity.  Let’s put it in layman’s terms: logarithmic means you can double the collection size and typically you only add a single extra “visit” to an item in the collection.  Take that in contrast to List<T>’s linear operation where if you double the size of the collection you double the “visits” to items in the collection.  This is very good performance!  It’s still not as performant as HashSet<T> where it always just visits one item (amortized), but for the addition of sorting this is a good thing. Consider the following table, now this is just illustrative data of the relative complexities, but it’s enough to get the point: Collection Size O(1) Visits O(log n) Visits O(n) Visits 1 1 1 1 10 1 4 10 100 1 7 100 1000 1 10 1000   Notice that the logarithmic – O(log n) – visit count goes up very slowly compare to the linear – O(n) – visit count.  This is because since the list is sorted, it can do one check in the middle of the list, determine which half of the collection the data is in, and discard the other half (binary search).  So, if you need your set to be sorted, you can use the SortedSet<T> just like the HashSet<T> and gain sorting for a small performance hit, but it’s still faster than a List<T>. Unique Set Operations Now, if you do want to perform more set-like operations, both implementations of ISet<T> support the following, which play back towards the mathematical set operations described before: IntersectWith() – Performs the set intersection of two sets.  Modifies the current set so that it only contains elements also in the second set. UnionWith() – Performs a set union of two sets.  Modifies the current set so it contains all elements present both in the current set and the second set. ExceptWith() – Performs a set difference of two sets.  Modifies the current set so that it removes all elements present in the second set. IsSupersetOf() – Checks if the current set is a superset of the second set. IsSubsetOf() – Checks if the current set is a subset of the second set. For more information on the set operations themselves, see the MSDN description of ISet<T> (here). What Sets Don’t Do Don’t get me wrong, sets are not silver bullets.  You don’t really want to use a set when you want separate key to value lookups, that’s what the IDictionary implementations are best for. Also sets don’t store temporal add-order.  That is, if you are adding items to the end of a list all the time, your list is ordered in terms of when items were added to it.  This is something the sets don’t do naturally (though you could use a SortedSet with an IComparer with a DateTime but that’s overkill) but List<T> can. Also, List<T> allows indexing which is a blazingly fast way to iterate through items in the collection.  Iterating over all the items in a List<T> is generally much, much faster than iterating over a set. Summary Sets are an excellent tool for maintaining a lookup table where the item is both the key and the value.  In addition, if you have need for the mathematical set operations, the C# sets support those as well.  The HashSet<T> is the set of choice if you want the fastest possible lookups but don’t care about order.  In contrast the SortedSet<T> will give you a sorted collection at a slight reduction in performance.   Technorati Tags: C#,.Net,Little Wonders,BlackRabbitCoder,ISet,HashSet,SortedSet

    Read the article

  • Test driven vs Business requirements constant changing

    - by James Lin
    One of the new requirement of our dev team set by the CTO/CIO is to become test driven development, however I don't think the rest of the business is going to help because they have no sense of development life cycles, and requirements get changed all the time within a single sprint. Which gets me frustrated about wasting time writing 10 test cases and will become useless tomorrow. We have suggested setting up processes to dodge those requirement changes and educate the business about development life cycles. What if the business fails to get the idea? What would you do?

    Read the article

  • How meaningful is the Big-O time complexity of an algorithm?

    - by james creasy
    Programmers often talk about the time complexity of an algorithm, e.g. O(log n) or O(n^2). Time complexity classifications are made as the input size goes to infinity, but ironically infinite input size in computation is not used. Put another way, the classification of an algorithm is based on a situation that algorithm will never be in: where n = infinity. Also, consider that a polynomial time algorithm where the exponent is huge is just as useless as an exponential time algorithm with tiny base (e.g., 1.00000001^n) is useful. Given this, how much can I rely on the Big-O time complexity to advise choice of an algorithm?

    Read the article

  • OpenGL 2D Depth Perception

    - by Stephen James
    This is the first time i have ever commented on a forum about programming, so sorry if I'm not specific enough. Here's my problem: I have a 2D RPG game written in Java using LWJGL. All works fine, but at the moment I'm having trouble deciding what the best way to do depth perception is. So , for example, if the player goes in front of the tree/enemy (lower than the objects y-coordinate) then show the player in front), if the player goes behind the tree/enemy (higher than the objects specific y-coordinate), then show the player behind the object. I have tried writing a block of code to deal with this, and it works quite well for the trees, but not for the enemies yet. Is there a simpler way of doing this in LWJGL that I'm missing? Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • OpenGL 2D Depth Perception

    - by Stephen James
    I have a 2D RPG game written in Java using LWJGL. All works fine, but at the moment I'm having trouble deciding what the best way to do depth perception is. So , for example, if the player goes in front of the tree/enemy (lower than the objects y-coordinate) then show the player in front), if the player goes behind the tree/enemy (higher than the objects specific y-coordinate), then show the player behind the object. I have tried writing a block of code to deal with this, and it works quite well for the trees, but not for the enemies yet. Is there a simpler way of doing this in LWJGL that I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • no disk space, cant use internet

    - by James
    after trying to install drivers using sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade, im faced with a message saying no space left on device, i ran disk usage analyzer as root and there was three folders namely, main volume, home folder, and my 116gb hard drive (which is practically empty) yet both other folders are full, which is stopping me installing drivers because of space, how do i get ubuntu to use this space on my hard drive? its causing problems because i cant gain access to the internet as i cant download drivers when i havnt got enough space, this happens every time i try it sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 120.0GB, 120034123776 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 14593 cylinders, total 234441648 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0003eeed Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 2048 231315455 115656704 83 Linux /dev/sda2 231317502 234440703 1561601 5 Extended /dev/sda5 231317504 234440703 1561600 82 Linux swap / solaris Output of df -h df: '/media/ubuntu/FB18-ED76': No such file or directory Filesysytem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /cow 751M 751M 0 100% / udev 740M 12K 740M 1% /dev tmpfs 151M 792K 150M 1% /run /dev/sr0 794M 794M 0 100% /cdrom /dev/loop0 758M 758M 0 100% /rofs none 4.0K 0 4.0K 0% /sys/fs/cgroup tmpfs 751M 1.4M 749M 1% /tmp none 5.0M 4.0K 5.0M 1% /run/lock none 751M 276K 751M 1% /run/shm none 100M 40K 100M 1% /run/user

    Read the article

  • OpenGL - have object follow mouse

    - by kevin james
    I want to have an object follow around my mouse on the screen in OpenGL. (I am also using GLEW, GLFW, and GLM). The best idea I've come up with is: Get the coordinates within the window with glfwGetCursorPos. The window was created with window = glfwCreateWindow( 1024, 768, "Test", NULL, NULL); and the code to get coordinates is double xpos, ypos; glfwGetCursorPos(window, &xpos, &ypos); Next, I use GLM unproject, to get the coordinates in "object space" glm::vec4 viewport = glm::vec4(0.0f, 0.0f, 1024.0f, 768.0f); glm::vec3 pos = glm::vec3(xpos, ypos, 0.0f); glm::vec3 un = glm::unProject(pos, View*Model, Projection, viewport); There are two potential problems I can already see. The viewport is fine, as the initial x,y, coordinates of the lower left are indeed 0,0, and it's indeed a 1024*768 window. However, the position vector I create doesn't seem right. The Z coordinate should probably not be zero. However, glfwGetCursorPos returns 2D coordinates, and I don't know how to go from there to the 3D window coordinates, especially since I am not sure what the 3rd dimension of the window coordinates even means (since computer screens are 2D). Then, I am not sure if I am using unproject correctly. Assume the View, Model, Projection matrices are all OK. If I passed in the correct position vector in Window coordinates, does the unproject call give me the coordinates in Object coordinates? I think it does, but the documentation is not clear. Finally, to each vertex of the object I want to follow the mouse around, I just increment the x coordinate by un[0], the y coordinate by -un[1], and the z coordinate by un[2]. However, since my position vector that is being unprojected is likely wrong, this is not giving good results; the object does move as my mouse moves, but it is offset quite a bit (i.e. moving the mouse a lot doesn't move the object that much, and the z coordinate is very large). I actually found that the z coordinate un[2] is always the same value no matter where my mouse is, probably because the position vector I pass into unproject always has a value of 0.0 for z. Edit: The (incorrectly) unprojected x-values range from about -0.552 to 0.552, and the y-values from about -0.411 to 0.411.

    Read the article

  • Basic shadow mapping fails on NVIDIA card?

    - by James
    Recently I switched from an AMD Radeon HD 6870 card to an (MSI) NVIDIA GTX 670 for performance reasons. I found however that my implementation of shadow mapping in all my applications failed. In a very simple shadow POC project the problem appears to be that the scene being drawn never results in a draw to the depth map and as a result the entire depth map is just infinity, 1.0 (Reading directly from the depth component after draw (glReadPixels) shows every pixel is infinity (1.0), replacing the depth comparison in the shader with a comparison of the depth from the shadow map with 1.0 shadows the entire scene, and writing random values to the depth map and then not calling glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT) results in a random noisy pattern on the scene elements - from which we can infer that the uploading of the depth texture and comparison within the shader are functioning perfectly.) Since the problem appears almost certainly to be in the depth render, this is the code for that: const int s_res = 1024; GLuint shadowMap_tex; GLuint shadowMap_prog; GLint sm_attr_coord3d; GLint sm_uniform_mvp; GLuint fbo_handle; GLuint renderBuffer; bool isMappingShad = false; //The scene consists of a plane with box above it GLfloat scene[] = { -10.0, 0.0, -10.0, 0.5, 0.0, 10.0, 0.0, -10.0, 1.0, 0.0, 10.0, 0.0, 10.0, 1.0, 0.5, -10.0, 0.0, -10.0, 0.5, 0.0, -10.0, 0.0, 10.0, 0.5, 0.5, 10.0, 0.0, 10.0, 1.0, 0.5, ... }; //Initialize the stuff used by the shadow map generator int initShadowMap() { //Initialize the shadowMap shader program if (create_program("shadow.v.glsl", "shadow.f.glsl", shadowMap_prog) != 1) return -1; const char* attribute_name = "coord3d"; sm_attr_coord3d = glGetAttribLocation(shadowMap_prog, attribute_name); if (sm_attr_coord3d == -1) { fprintf(stderr, "Could not bind attribute %s\n", attribute_name); return 0; } const char* uniform_name = "mvp"; sm_uniform_mvp = glGetUniformLocation(shadowMap_prog, uniform_name); if (sm_uniform_mvp == -1) { fprintf(stderr, "Could not bind uniform %s\n", uniform_name); return 0; } //Create a framebuffer glGenFramebuffers(1, &fbo_handle); glBindFramebuffer(GL_FRAMEBUFFER, fbo_handle); //Create render buffer glGenRenderbuffers(1, &renderBuffer); glBindRenderbuffer(GL_RENDERBUFFER, renderBuffer); //Setup the shadow texture glGenTextures(1, &shadowMap_tex); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, shadowMap_tex); glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT, s_res, s_res, 0, GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT, GL_FLOAT, NULL); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MAG_FILTER, GL_NEAREST); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MIN_FILTER, GL_NEAREST); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_S, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_T, GL_CLAMP_TO_EDGE); return 0; } //Delete stuff void dnitShadowMap() { //Delete everything glDeleteFramebuffers(1, &fbo_handle); glDeleteRenderbuffers(1, &renderBuffer); glDeleteTextures(1, &shadowMap_tex); glDeleteProgram(shadowMap_prog); } int loadSMap() { //Bind MVP stuff glm::mat4 view = glm::lookAt(glm::vec3(10.0, 10.0, 5.0), glm::vec3(0.0, 0.0, 0.0), glm::vec3(0.0, 1.0, 0.0)); glm::mat4 projection = glm::ortho<float>(-10,10,-8,8,-10,40); glm::mat4 mvp = projection * view; glm::mat4 biasMatrix( 0.5, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 1.0 ); glm::mat4 lsMVP = biasMatrix * mvp; //Upload light source matrix to the main shader programs glUniformMatrix4fv(uniform_ls_mvp, 1, GL_FALSE, glm::value_ptr(lsMVP)); glUseProgram(shadowMap_prog); glUniformMatrix4fv(sm_uniform_mvp, 1, GL_FALSE, glm::value_ptr(mvp)); //Draw to the framebuffer (with depth buffer only draw) glBindFramebuffer(GL_FRAMEBUFFER, fbo_handle); glBindRenderbuffer(GL_RENDERBUFFER, renderBuffer); glBindTexture(GL_TEXTURE_2D, shadowMap_tex); glFramebufferTexture2D(GL_FRAMEBUFFER, GL_DEPTH_ATTACHMENT, GL_TEXTURE_2D, shadowMap_tex, 0); glDrawBuffer(GL_NONE); glReadBuffer(GL_NONE); GLenum result = glCheckFramebufferStatus(GL_FRAMEBUFFER); if (GL_FRAMEBUFFER_COMPLETE != result) { printf("ERROR: Framebuffer is not complete.\n"); return -1; } //Draw shadow scene printf("Creating shadow buffers..\n"); int ticks = SDL_GetTicks(); glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); //Wipe the depth buffer glViewport(0, 0, s_res, s_res); isMappingShad = true; //DRAW glEnableVertexAttribArray(sm_attr_coord3d); glVertexAttribPointer(sm_attr_coord3d, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, 5*4, scene); glDrawArrays(GL_TRIANGLES, 0, 14*3); glDisableVertexAttribArray(sm_attr_coord3d); isMappingShad = false; glBindFramebuffer(GL_FRAMEBUFFER, 0); printf("Render Sbuf in %dms (GLerr: %d)\n", SDL_GetTicks() - ticks, glGetError()); return 0; } This is the full code for the POC shadow mapping project (C++) (Requires SDL 1.2, SDL-image 1.2, GLEW (1.5) and GLM development headers.) initShadowMap is called, followed by loadSMap, the scene is drawn from the camera POV and then dnitShadowMap is called. I followed this tutorial originally (Along with another more comprehensive tutorial which has disappeared as this guy re-configured his site but used to be here (404).) I've ensured that the scene is visible (as can be seen within the full project) to the light source (which uses an orthogonal projection matrix.) Shader utilities function fine in non-shadow-mapped projects. I should also note that at no point is the GL error state set. What am I doing wrong here and why did this not cause problems on my AMD card? (System: Ubuntu 12.04, Linux 3.2.0-49-generic, 64 bit, with the nvidia-experimental-310 driver package. All other games are functioning fine so it's most likely not a card/driver issue.)

    Read the article

  • Code Reuse is (Damn) Hard

    - by James Michael Hare
    Being a development team lead, the task of interviewing new candidates was part of my job.  Like any typical interview, we started with some easy questions to get them warmed up and help calm their nerves before hitting the hard stuff. One of those easier questions was almost always: “Name some benefits of object-oriented development.”  Nearly every time, the candidate would chime in with a plethora of canned answers which typically included: “it helps ease code reuse.”  Of course, this is a gross oversimplification.  Tools only ease reuse, its developers that ultimately can cause code to be reusable or not, regardless of the language or methodology. But it did get me thinking…  we always used to say that as part of our mantra as to why Object-Oriented Programming was so great.  With polymorphism, inheritance, encapsulation, etc. we in essence set up the concepts to help facilitate reuse as much as possible.  And yes, as a developer now of many years, I unquestionably held that belief for ages before it really struck me how my views on reuse have jaded over the years.  In fact, in many ways Agile rightly eschews reuse as taking a backseat to developing what's needed for the here and now.  It used to be I was in complete opposition to that view, but more and more I've come to see the logic in it.  Too many times I've seen developers (myself included) get lost in design paralysis trying to come up with the perfect abstraction that would stand all time.  Nearly without fail, all of these pieces of code become obsolete in a matter of months or years. It’s not that I don’t like reuse – it’s just that reuse is hard.  In fact, reuse is DAMN hard.  Many times it is just a distraction that eats up architect and developer time, and worse yet can be counter-productive and force wrong decisions.  Now don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of reusable code when it makes sense.  These are in the few cases where you are designing something that is inherently reusable.  The problem is, most business-class code is inherently unfit for reuse! Furthermore, the code that is reusable will often fail to be reused if you don’t have the proper framework in place for effective reuse that includes standardized versioning, building, releasing, and documenting the components.  That should always be standard across the board when promoting reusable code.  All of this is hard, and it should only be done when you have code that is truly reusable or you will be exerting a large amount of development effort for very little bang for your buck. But my goal here is not to get into how to reuse (that is a topic unto itself) but what should be reused.  First, let’s look at an extension method.  There’s many times where I want to kick off a thread to handle a task, then when I want to reign that thread in of course I want to do a Join on it.  But what if I only want to wait a limited amount of time and then Abort?  Well, I could of course write that logic out by hand each time, but it seemed like a great extension method: 1: public static class ThreadExtensions 2: { 3: public static bool JoinOrAbort(this Thread thread, TimeSpan timeToWait) 4: { 5: bool isJoined = false; 6:  7: if (thread != null) 8: { 9: isJoined = thread.Join(timeToWait); 10:  11: if (!isJoined) 12: { 13: thread.Abort(); 14: } 15: } 16: return isJoined; 17: } 18: } 19:  When I look at this code, I can immediately see things that jump out at me as reasons why this code is very reusable.  Some of them are standard OO principles, and some are kind-of home grown litmus tests: Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) – The only reason this extension method need change is if the Thread class itself changes (one responsibility). Stable Dependencies Principle (SDP) – This method only depends on classes that are more stable than it is (System.Threading.Thread), and in itself is very stable, hence other classes may safely depend on it. It is also not dependent on any business domain, and thus isn't subject to changes as the business itself changes. Open-Closed Principle (OCP) – This class is inherently closed to change. Small and Stable Problem Domain – This method only cares about System.Threading.Thread. All-or-None Usage – A user of a reusable class should want the functionality of that class, not parts of that functionality.  That’s not to say they most use every method, but they shouldn’t be using a method just to get half of its result. Cost of Reuse vs. Cost to Recreate – since this class is highly stable and minimally complex, we can offer it up for reuse very cheaply by promoting it as “ready-to-go” and already unit tested (important!) and available through a standard release cycle (very important!). Okay, all seems good there, now lets look at an entity and DAO.  I don’t know about you all, but there have been times I’ve been in organizations that get the grand idea that all DAOs and entities should be standardized and shared.  While this may work for small or static organizations, it’s near ludicrous for anything large or volatile. 1: namespace Shared.Entities 2: { 3: public class Account 4: { 5: public int Id { get; set; } 6:  7: public string Name { get; set; } 8:  9: public Address HomeAddress { get; set; } 10:  11: public int Age { get; set;} 12:  13: public DateTime LastUsed { get; set; } 14:  15: // etc, etc, etc... 16: } 17: } 18:  19: ... 20:  21: namespace Shared.DataAccess 22: { 23: public class AccountDao 24: { 25: public Account FindAccount(int id) 26: { 27: // dao logic to query and return account 28: } 29:  30: ... 31:  32: } 33: } Now to be fair, I’m not saying there doesn’t exist an organization where some entites may be extremely static and unchanging.  But at best such entities and DAOs will be problematic cases of reuse.  Let’s examine those same tests: Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) – The reasons to change for these classes will be strongly dependent on what the definition of the account is which can change over time and may have multiple influences depending on the number of systems an account can cover. Stable Dependencies Principle (SDP) – This method depends on the data model beneath itself which also is largely dependent on the business definition of an account which can be very inherently unstable. Open-Closed Principle (OCP) – This class is not really closed for modification.  Every time the account definition may change, you’d need to modify this class. Small and Stable Problem Domain – The definition of an account is inherently unstable and in fact may be very large.  What if you are designing a system that aggregates account information from several sources? All-or-None Usage – What if your view of the account encompasses data from 3 different sources but you only care about one of those sources or one piece of data?  Should you have to take the hit of looking up all the other data?  On the other hand, should you have ten different methods returning portions of data in chunks people tend to ask for?  Neither is really a great solution. Cost of Reuse vs. Cost to Recreate – DAOs are really trivial to rewrite, and unless your definition of an account is EXTREMELY stable, the cost to promote, support, and release a reusable account entity and DAO are usually far higher than the cost to recreate as needed. It’s no accident that my case for reuse was a utility class and my case for non-reuse was an entity/DAO.  In general, the smaller and more stable an abstraction is, the higher its level of reuse.  When I became the lead of the Shared Components Committee at my workplace, one of the original goals we looked at satisfying was to find (or create), version, release, and promote a shared library of common utility classes, frameworks, and data access objects.  Now, of course, many of you will point to nHibernate and Entity for the latter, but we were looking at larger, macro collections of data that span multiple data sources of varying types (databases, web services, etc). As we got deeper and deeper in the details of how to manage and release these items, it quickly became apparent that while the case for reuse was typically a slam dunk for utilities and frameworks, the data access objects just didn’t “smell” right.  We ended up having session after session of design meetings to try and find the right way to share these data access components. When someone asked me why it was taking so long to iron out the shared entities, my response was quite simple, “Reuse is hard...”  And that’s when I realized, that while reuse is an awesome goal and we should strive to make code maintainable, often times you end up creating far more work for yourself than necessary by trying to force code to be reusable that inherently isn’t. Think about classes the times you’ve worked in a company where in the design session people fight over the best way to implement a class to make it maximally reusable, extensible, and any other buzzwordable.  Then think about how quickly that design became obsolete.  Many times I set out to do a project and think, “yes, this is the best design, I can extend it easily!” only to find out the business requirements change COMPLETELY in such a way that the design is rendered invalid.  Code, in general, tends to rust and age over time.  As such, writing reusable code can often be difficult and many times ends up being a futile exercise and worse yet, sometimes makes the code harder to maintain because it obfuscates the design in the name of extensibility or reusability. So what do I think are reusable components? Generic Utility classes – these tend to be small classes that assist in a task and have no business context whatsoever. Implementation Abstraction Frameworks – home-grown frameworks that try to isolate changes to third party products you may be depending on (like writing a messaging abstraction layer for publishing/subscribing that is independent of whether you use JMS, MSMQ, etc). Simplification and Uniformity Frameworks – To some extent this is similar to an abstraction framework, but there may be one chosen provider but a development shop mandate to perform certain complex items in a certain way.  Or, perhaps to simplify and dumb-down a complex task for the average developer (such as implementing a particular development-shop’s method of encryption). And what are less reusable? Application and Business Layers – tend to fluctuate a lot as requirements change and new features are added, so tend to be an unstable dependency.  May be reused across applications but also very volatile. Entities and Data Access Layers – these tend to be tuned to the scope of the application, so reusing them can be hard unless the abstract is very stable. So what’s the big lesson?  Reuse is hard.  In fact it’s damn hard.  And much of the time I’m not convinced we should focus too hard on it. If you’re designing a utility or framework, then by all means design it for reuse.  But you most also really set down a good versioning, release, and documentation process to maximize your chances.  For anything else, design it to be maintainable and extendable, but don’t waste the effort on reusability for something that most likely will be obsolete in a year or two anyway.

    Read the article

  • More Fun with C# Iterators and Generators

    - by James Michael Hare
    In my last post, I talked quite a bit about iterators and how they can be really powerful tools for filtering a list of items down to a subset of items.  This had both pros and cons over returning a full collection, which, in summary, were:   Pros: If traversal is only partial, does not have to visit rest of collection. If evaluation method is costly, only incurs that cost on elements visited. Adds little to no garbage collection pressure.    Cons: Very slight performance impact if you know caller will always consume all items in collection. And as we saw in the last post, that con for the cost was very, very small and only really became evident on very tight loops consuming very large lists completely.    One of the key items to note, though, is the garbage!  In the traditional (return a new collection) method, if you have a 1,000,000 element collection, and wish to transform or filter it in some way, you have to allocate space for that copy of the collection.  That is, say you have a collection of 1,000,000 items and you want to double every item in the collection.  Well, that means you have to allocate a collection to hold those 1,000,000 items to return, which is a lot especially if you are just going to use it once and toss it.   Iterators, though, don't have this problem.  Each time you visit the node, it would return the doubled value of the node (in this example) and not allocate a second collection of 1,000,000 doubled items.  Do you see the distinction?  In both cases, we're consuming 1,000,000 items.  But in one case we pass back each doubled item which is just an int (for example's sake) on the stack and in the other case, we allocate a list containing 1,000,000 items which then must be garbage collected.   So iterators in C# are pretty cool, eh?  Well, here's one more thing a C# iterator can do that a traditional "return a new collection" transformation can't!   It can return **unbounded** collections!   I know, I know, that smells a lot like an infinite loop, eh?  Yes and no.  Basically, you're relying on the caller to put the bounds on the list, and as long as the caller doesn't you keep going.  Consider this example:   public static class Fibonacci {     // returns the infinite fibonacci sequence     public static IEnumerable<int> Sequence()     {         int iteration = 0;         int first = 1;         int second = 1;         int current = 0;         while (true)         {             if (iteration++ < 2)             {                 current = 1;             }             else             {                 current = first + second;                 second = first;                 first = current;             }             yield return current;         }     } }   Whoa, you say!  Yes, that's an infinite loop!  What the heck is going on there?  Yes, that was intentional.  Would it be better to have a fibonacci sequence that returns only a specific number of items?  Perhaps, but that wouldn't give you the power to defer the execution to the caller.   The beauty of this function is it is as infinite as the sequence itself!  The fibonacci sequence is unbounded, and so is this method.  It will continue to return fibonacci numbers for as long as you ask for them.  Now that's not something you can do with a traditional method that would return a collection of ints representing each number.  In that case you would eventually run out of memory as you got to higher and higher numbers.  This method, though, never runs out of memory.   Now, that said, you do have to know when you use it that it is an infinite collection and bound it appropriately.  Fortunately, Linq provides a lot of these extension methods for you!   Let's say you only want the first 10 fibonacci numbers:       foreach(var fib in Fibonacci.Sequence().Take(10))     {         Console.WriteLine(fib);     }   Or let's say you only want the fibonacci numbers that are less than 100:       foreach(var fib in Fibonacci.Sequence().TakeWhile(f => f < 100))     {         Console.WriteLine(fib);     }   So, you see, one of the nice things about iterators is their power to work with virtually any size (even infinite) collections without adding the garbage collection overhead of making new collections.    You can also do fun things like this to make a more "fluent" interface for for loops:   // A set of integer generator extension methods public static class IntExtensions {     // Begins counting to inifity, use To() to range this.     public static IEnumerable<int> Every(this int start)     {         // deliberately avoiding condition because keeps going         // to infinity for as long as values are pulled.         for (var i = start; ; ++i)         {             yield return i;         }     }     // Begins counting to infinity by the given step value, use To() to     public static IEnumerable<int> Every(this int start, int byEvery)     {         // deliberately avoiding condition because keeps going         // to infinity for as long as values are pulled.         for (var i = start; ; i += byEvery)         {             yield return i;         }     }     // Begins counting to inifity, use To() to range this.     public static IEnumerable<int> To(this int start, int end)     {         for (var i = start; i <= end; ++i)         {             yield return i;         }     }     // Ranges the count by specifying the upper range of the count.     public static IEnumerable<int> To(this IEnumerable<int> collection, int end)     {         return collection.TakeWhile(item => item <= end);     } }   Note that there are two versions of each method.  One that starts with an int and one that starts with an IEnumerable<int>.  This is to allow more power in chaining from either an existing collection or from an int.  This lets you do things like:   // count from 1 to 30 foreach(var i in 1.To(30)) {     Console.WriteLine(i); }     // count from 1 to 10 by 2s foreach(var i in 0.Every(2).To(10)) {     Console.WriteLine(i); }     // or, if you want an infinite sequence counting by 5s until something inside breaks you out... foreach(var i in 0.Every(5)) {     if (someCondition)     {         break;     }     ... }     Yes, those are kinda play functions and not particularly useful, but they show some of the power of generators and extension methods to form a fluid interface.   So what do you think?  What are some of your favorite generators and iterators?

    Read the article

  • Premature-Optimization and Performance Anxiety

    - by James Michael Hare
    While writing my post analyzing the new .NET 4 ConcurrentDictionary class (here), I fell into one of the classic blunders that I myself always love to warn about.  After analyzing the differences of time between a Dictionary with locking versus the new ConcurrentDictionary class, I noted that the ConcurrentDictionary was faster with read-heavy multi-threaded operations.  Then, I made the classic blunder of thinking that because the original Dictionary with locking was faster for those write-heavy uses, it was the best choice for those types of tasks.  In short, I fell into the premature-optimization anti-pattern. Basically, the premature-optimization anti-pattern is when a developer is coding very early for a perceived (whether rightly-or-wrongly) performance gain and sacrificing good design and maintainability in the process.  At best, the performance gains are usually negligible and at worst, can either negatively impact performance, or can degrade maintainability so much that time to market suffers or the code becomes very fragile due to the complexity. Keep in mind the distinction above.  I'm not talking about valid performance decisions.  There are decisions one should make when designing and writing an application that are valid performance decisions.  Examples of this are knowing the best data structures for a given situation (Dictionary versus List, for example) and choosing performance algorithms (linear search vs. binary search).  But these in my mind are macro optimizations.  The error is not in deciding to use a better data structure or algorithm, the anti-pattern as stated above is when you attempt to over-optimize early on in such a way that it sacrifices maintainability. In my case, I was actually considering trading the safety and maintainability gains of the ConcurrentDictionary (no locking required) for a slight performance gain by using the Dictionary with locking.  This would have been a mistake as I would be trading maintainability (ConcurrentDictionary requires no locking which helps readability) and safety (ConcurrentDictionary is safe for iteration even while being modified and you don't risk the developer locking incorrectly) -- and I fell for it even when I knew to watch out for it.  I think in my case, and it may be true for others as well, a large part of it was due to the time I was trained as a developer.  I began college in in the 90s when C and C++ was king and hardware speed and memory were still relatively priceless commodities and not to be squandered.  In those days, using a long instead of a short could waste precious resources, and as such, we were taught to try to minimize space and favor performance.  This is why in many cases such early code-bases were very hard to maintain.  I don't know how many times I heard back then to avoid too many function calls because of the overhead -- and in fact just last year I heard a new hire in the company where I work declare that she didn't want to refactor a long method because of function call overhead.  Now back then, that may have been a valid concern, but with today's modern hardware even if you're calling a trivial method in an extremely tight loop (which chances are the JIT compiler would optimize anyway) the results of removing method calls to speed up performance are negligible for the great majority of applications.  Now, obviously, there are those coding applications where speed is absolutely king (for example drivers, computer games, operating systems) where such sacrifices may be made.  But I would strongly advice against such optimization because of it's cost.  Many folks that are performing an optimization think it's always a win-win.  That they're simply adding speed to the application, what could possibly be wrong with that?  What they don't realize is the cost of their choice.  For every piece of straight-forward code that you obfuscate with performance enhancements, you risk the introduction of bugs in the long term technical debt of the application.  It will become so fragile over time that maintenance will become a nightmare.  I've seen such applications in places I have worked.  There are times I've seen applications where the designer was so obsessed with performance that they even designed their own memory management system for their application to try to squeeze out every ounce of performance.  Unfortunately, the application stability often suffers as a result and it is very difficult for anyone other than the original designer to maintain. I've even seen this recently where I heard a C++ developer bemoaning that in VS2010 the iterators are about twice as slow as they used to be because Microsoft added range checking (probably as part of the 0x standard implementation).  To me this was almost a joke.  Twice as slow sounds bad, but it almost never as bad as you think -- especially if you're gaining safety.  The only time twice is really that much slower is when once was too slow to begin with.  Think about it.  2 minutes is slow as a response time because 1 minute is slow.  But if an iterator takes 1 microsecond to move one position and a new, safer iterator takes 2 microseconds, this is trivial!  The only way you'd ever really notice this would be in iterating a collection just for the sake of iterating (i.e. no other operations).  To my mind, the added safety makes the extra time worth it. Always favor safety and maintainability when you can.  I know it can be a hard habit to break, especially if you started out your career early or in a language such as C where they are very performance conscious.  But in reality, these type of micro-optimizations only end up hurting you in the long run. Remember the two laws of optimization.  I'm not sure where I first heard these, but they are so true: For beginners: Do not optimize. For experts: Do not optimize yet. This is so true.  If you're a beginner, resist the urge to optimize at all costs.  And if you are an expert, delay that decision.  As long as you have chosen the right data structures and algorithms for your task, your performance will probably be more than sufficient.  Chances are it will be network, database, or disk hits that will be your slow-down, not your code.  As they say, 98% of your code's bottleneck is in 2% of your code so premature-optimization may add maintenance and safety debt that won't have any measurable impact.  Instead, code for maintainability and safety, and then, and only then, when you find a true bottleneck, then you should go back and optimize further.

    Read the article

  • Debugging/Logging Techniques for End Users

    - by James Burgess
    I searched a bit, but didn't find anything particularly pertinent to my problem - so please do excuse me if I missed something! A few months back I inherited the source to a fairly-popular indie game project and have been working, along with another developer, on the code-base. We recently made our first release since taking over the development but we're a little stuck. A few users are experiencing slowdowns/lagging in the current version, as compared to the previous version, and we are not able to reproduce these issues in any of our various development environments (debug, release, different OSes, different machines, etc.). What I'd like to know is how can we go about implementing some form of logging/debugging mechanism into the game, that users can enable and send the reports to us for examination? We're not able to distribute debug binaries using the MSVS 2010 runtimes, due to the licensing - and wouldn't want to, for a variety of reasons. We'd really like to get to the bottom of this issue, even if just to find out it's nothing to do with our code base but everything to do with their system configuration. At the moment, we just have no leads - and the community isn't a very technically-savvy one, so we're unable to rely on 'expert' bug reports or investigations. I've seen the debug logging mechanism used in other applications and games for everything from logging simple errors to crash dumps. We're really at a loss at this stage as to how to address these issues, having been over every commit to the repository from the previous to the current version and not finding any real issues.

    Read the article

  • ANTS Memory Profiler 7.0

    - by James Michael Hare
    I had always been a fan of ANTS products (Reflector is absolutely invaluable, and their performance profiler is great as well – very easy to use!), so I was curious to see what the ANTS Memory Profiler could show me. Background While a performance profiler will track how much time is typically spent in each unit of code, a memory profiler gives you much more detail on how and where your memory is being consumed and released in a program. As an example, I’d been working on a data access layer at work to call a market data web service.  This web service would take a list of symbols to quote and would return back the quote data.  To help consolidate the thousands of web requests per second we get and reduce load on the web services, we implemented a 5-second cache of quote data.  Not quite long enough to where customers will typically notice a quote go “stale”, but just long enough to be able to collapse multiple quote requests for the same symbol in a short period of time. A 5-second cache may not sound like much, but it actually pays off by saving us roughly 42% of our web service calls, while still providing relatively up-to-date information.  The question is whether or not the extra memory involved in maintaining the cache was worth it, so I decided to fire up the ANTS Memory Profiler and take a look at memory usage. First Impressions The main thing I’ve always loved about the ANTS tools is their ease of use.  Pretty much everything is right there in front of you in a way that makes it easy for you to find what you need with little digging required.  I’ve worked with other, older profilers before (that shall remain nameless other than to hint it was created by a very large chip maker) where it was a mind boggling experience to figure out how to do simple tasks. Not so with AMP.  The opening dialog is very straightforward.  You can choose from here whether to debug an executable, a web application (either in IIS or from VS’s web development server), windows services, etc. So I chose a .NET Executable and navigated to the build location of my test harness.  Then began profiling. At this point while the application is running, you can see a chart of the memory as it ebbs and wanes with allocations and collections.  At any given point in time, you can take snapshots (to compare states) zoom in, or choose to stop at any time.  Snapshots Taking a snapshot also gives you a breakdown of the managed memory heaps for each generation so you get an idea how many objects are staying around for extended periods of time (as an object lives and survives collections, it gets promoted into higher generations where collection becomes less frequent). Generating a snapshot brings up an analysis view with very handy graphs that show your generation sizes.  Almost all my memory is in Generation 1 in the managed memory component of the first graph, which is good news to me, because Gen 2 collections are much rarer.  I once3 made the mistake once of caching data for 30 minutes and found it didn’t get collected very quick after I released my reference because it had been promoted to Gen 2 – doh! Analysis It looks like (from the second pie chart) that the majority of the allocations were in the string class.  This also is expected for me because the majority of the memory allocated is in the web service responses, so it doesn’t seem the entities I’m adapting to (to prevent being too tightly coupled to the web service proxy classes, which can change easily out from under me) aren’t taking a significant portion of memory. I also appreciate that they have clear summary text in key places such as “No issues with large object heap fragmentation were detected”.  For novice users, this type of summary information can be critical to getting them to use a tool and develop a good working knowledge of it. There is also a handy link at the bottom for “What to look for on the summary” which loads a web page of help on key points to look for. Clicking over to the session overview, it’s easy to compare the samples at each snapshot to see how your memory is growing, shrinking, or staying relatively the same.  Looking at my snapshots, I’m pretty happy with the fact that memory allocation and heap size seems to be fairly stable and in control: Once again, you can check on the large object heap, generation one heap, and generation two heap across each snapshot to spot trends. Back on the analysis tab, we can go to the [Class List] button to get an idea what classes are making up the majority of our memory usage.  As was little surprise to me, System.String was the clear majority of my allocations, though I found it surprising that the System.Reflection.RuntimeMehtodInfo came in second.  I was curious about this, so I selected it and went into the [Instance Categorizer].  This view let me see where these instances to RuntimeMehtodInfo were coming from. So I scrolled back through the graph, and discovered that these were being held by the System.ServiceModel.ChannelFactoryRefCache and I was satisfied this was just an artifact of my WCF proxy. I also like that down at the bottom of the Instance Categorizer it gives you a series of filters and offers to guide you on which filter to use based on the problem you are trying to find.  For example, if I suspected a memory leak, I might try to filter for survivors in growing classes.  This means that for instances of a class that are growing in memory (more are being created than cleaned up), which ones are survivors (not collected) from garbage collection.  This might allow me to drill down and find places where I’m holding onto references by mistake and not freeing them! Finally, if you want to really see all your instances and who is holding onto them (preventing collection), you can go to the “Instance Retention Graph” which creates a graph showing what references are being held in memory and who is holding onto them. Visual Studio Integration Of course, VS has its own profiler built in – and for a free bundled profiler it is quite capable – but AMP gives a much cleaner and easier-to-use experience, and when you install it you also get the option of letting it integrate directly into VS. So once you go back into VS after installation, you’ll notice an ANTS menu which lets you launch the ANTS profiler directly from Visual Studio.   Clicking on one of these options fires up the project in the profiler immediately, allowing you to get right in.  It doesn’t integrate with the Visual Studio windows themselves (like the VS profiler does), but still the plethora of information it provides and the clear and concise manner in which it presents it makes it well worth it. Summary If you like the ANTS series of tools, you shouldn’t be disappointed with the ANTS Memory Profiler.  It was so easy to use that I was able to jump in with very little product knowledge and get the information I was looking it for. I’ve used other profilers before that came with 3-inch thick tomes that you had to read in order to get anywhere with the tool, and this one is not like that at all.  It’s built for your everyday developer to get in and find their problems quickly, and I like that! Tweet Technorati Tags: Influencers,ANTS,Memory,Profiler

    Read the article

  • Easy user management on html site?

    - by James Buldon
    I hope I'm not asking a question for which the answer is obvious...If I am, apologies. Within my html site (i.e. not Wordpress, Joomla, etc.) I want to be able to have a level of user management. That means that some pages I want to be only accessible to certain people with the correct username and password. What's the best way to do this? Are there any available scripts out there? I guess I'm looking for a free/open source version of something like this: http://www.webassist.com/php-scripts-and-solutions/user-registration/

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio Little Wonders: Quick Launch / Quick Access

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at features of Visual Studio that may seem trivial, but can help improve your efficiency as a developer. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. Well, my friends, this post will be a bit short because I’m in the middle of a bit of a move at the moment.  But, that said, I didn’t want to let the blog go completely silent this week, so I decided to add another Little Wonder to the list for the Visual Studio IDE. How often have you wanted to change an option or execute a command in Visual Studio, but can’t remember where the darn thing is in the menu, settings, etc.?  If so, Quick Launch in VS2012 (or Quick Access in VS2010 with the Productivity Power Tools extension) is just for you! Quick Launch / Quick Access – find a command or option quickly For those of you using Visual Studio 2012, Quick Launch is built right into the IDE at the top of the title bar, near the minimize, maximize, and close buttons: But do not despair if you are using Visual Studio 2010, you can get Quick Access from the Productivity Power Tools extension.  To do this, you can go to the extension manager: And then go to the gallery and search for Productivity Power Tools and install it.  If you don’t have VS2012 yet, then the Productivity Power Tools is the next best thing.  This extension updates VS2010 with features such as Quick Access, the Solution Navigator, searchable Add Reference Dialog, better tab wells, etc.  I highly recommend it! But back to the topic at hand!  In VS2012 Quick Launch is built into the IDE and can be accessed by clicking in the Quick Launch area of the title bar, or by pressing CTRL+Q.  If you have VS2010 with the PPT installed, though, it is called Quick Access and is accessible through View –> Quick Access: Regardless of which IDE you are using, the feature behaves mostly the same.  It allows you to search all of Visual Studio’s commands and options for a particular topic.  For example, let’s say you want to change from tabs to tabs expanded to spaces, but don’t remember where that option is buried.  You can bring up Quick Launch / Quick Access and type in “tabs”: And it brings up a list of all options on tabs, you can then choose the one appropriate to you and click on it and it will take you right there! A lot easier than diving through the options tree to find what you are looking for!  It also works on menu commands, for example if you can’t remember how to open the Output window: It shows you the menu items that will get you to the Output window, and (if applicable) the keyboard shortcuts.  Again, clicking on one of these will perform the action for you as well. There are also some tasks you can perform directly from Quick Launch / Quick Access.  For example, perhaps you are one of those people who like to have the line numbers in your editor (I do), so let’s bring up Quick Launch / Quick Access and type “line numbers”: And let’s select Turn Line Numbers On, and now our editor looks like: And Voila!  We have line numbers in VS2010.  You can do this in VS2012 too, but it takes you to the option settings instead of directly turning them off and on.  There are bound to be differences between the way the two editors organize settings and commands, but you get the point. So, as you can see, the Quick Launch / Quick Access feature in Visual Studio makes it easy to jump right to the options, commands, or tasks you are interested in without all the digging. Summary An IDE as powerful as Visual Studio has so many options and commands that it can be confusing to remember how to find and invoke them.  Quick Launch (Quick Access in VS2010 with Productivity Power Tools extension) is a quick and handy way to jump to any of these options, commands, or tasks quickly without having to remember in what menu or screen they are buried!  Technorati Tags: C#,CSharp,.NET,Little Wonders,Visual Studio,Quick Access,Quick Launch

    Read the article

  • Is there any reason to allow Yahoo! Slurp to crawl my site?

    - by James Skemp
    I thought a year or more ago Yahoo! would be using another search engine for results, and no longer using their own Slurp bot. However, a couple of the sites I manage Yahoo! Slurp continues to crawl pages, and seems to ignore the Gone status code when returned (as it keeps coming back). Is there any reason why I wouldn't want to block Yahoo! Slurp via robots.txt or by IP (since it tends to ignore robots.txt in some cases anyways)? I've confirmed that when the bot does hit it is from Yahoo! IPs, so I believe this is a legit instance of the bot. Is Yahoo Search the same as Bing Search now? is a related question, but I don't think it completely answers whether one should add a new block of the bot.

    Read the article

  • Survey: Do you write custom SQL CLR procedures/functions/etc

    - by James Luetkehoelter
    I'm quite curious because despite the great capabilities of writing CLR-based stored procedures to off-load those nasty operations TSQL isn't that great at (like iteration, or complex math), I'm continuing to see a wealth of SQL 2008 databases with complex stored procedures and functions which would make great candidates. The in-house skill to create the CLR code exists as well, but there is flat out resistance to use it. In one scenario I was told "Oh, iteration isn't a problem because we've trained...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Amnesia doesn't start due to audio problems

    - by james
    I have a problem with amnesia game. After Intro and clicking continue button few times, when game is supposed to start it crashes. Here is console output: ALSA lib pcm_dmix.c:1018:(snd_pcm_dmix_open) unable to open slave ALSA lib pcm.c:2217:(snd_pcm_open_noupdate) Unknown PCM cards.pcm.rear ALSA lib pcm.c:2217:(snd_pcm_open_noupdate) Unknown PCM cards.pcm.center_lfe ALSA lib pcm.c:2217:(snd_pcm_open_noupdate) Unknown PCM cards.pcm.side ALSA lib audio/pcm_bluetooth.c:1614:(audioservice_expect) BT_GET_CAPABILITIES failed : Input/output error(5) ALSA lib audio/pcm_bluetooth.c:1614:(audioservice_expect) BT_GET_CAPABILITIES failed : Input/output error(5) ALSA lib audio/pcm_bluetooth.c:1614:(audioservice_expect) BT_GET_CAPABILITIES failed : Input/output error(5) ALSA lib audio/pcm_bluetooth.c:1614:(audioservice_expect) BT_GET_CAPABILITIES failed : Input/output error(5) ALSA lib pcm_dmix.c:957:(snd_pcm_dmix_open) The dmix plugin supports only playback stream ALSA lib pcm_dmix.c:1018:(snd_pcm_dmix_open) unable to open slave Cannot connect to server socket err = No such file or directory Cannot connect to server socket jack server is not running or cannot be started I should mention I have integrated both graphic and sound card.

    Read the article

  • C#: A "Dumbed-Down" C++?

    - by James Michael Hare
    I was spending a lovely day this last weekend watching my sons play outside in one of the better weekends we've had here in Saint Louis for quite some time, and whilst watching them and making sure no limbs were broken or eyes poked out with sticks and other various potential injuries, I was perusing (in the correct sense of the word) this month's MSDN magazine to get a sense of the latest VS2010 features in both IDE and in languages. When I got to the back pages, I saw a wonderful article by David S. Platt entitled, "In Praise of Dumbing Down"  (msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee336129.aspx).  The title captivated me and I read it and found myself agreeing with it completely especially as it related to my first post on divorcing C++ as my favorite language. Unfortunately, as Mr. Platt mentions, the term dumbing-down has negative connotations, but is really and truly a good thing.  You are, in essence, taking something that is extremely complex and reducing it to something that is much easier to use and far less error prone.  Adding safeties to power tools and anti-kick mechanisms to chainsaws are in some sense "dumbing them down" to the common user -- but that also makes them safer and more accessible for the common user.  This was exactly my point with C++ and C#.  I did not mean to infer that C++ was not a useful or good language, but that in a very high percentage of cases, is too complex and error prone for the job at hand. Choosing the correct programming language for a job is a lot like choosing any other tool for a task.  For example: if I want to dig a French drain in my lawn, I can attempt to use a huge tractor-like backhoe and the job would be done far quicker than if I would dig it by hand.  I can't deny that the backhoe has the raw power and speed to perform.  But you also cannot deny that my chances of injury or chances of severing utility lines or other resources climb at an exponential rate inverse to the amount of training I may have on that machinery. Is C++ a powerful tool?  Oh yes, and it's great for those tasks where speed and performance are paramount.  But for most of us, it's the wrong tool.  And keep in mind, I say this even though I have 17 years of experience in using it and feel myself highly adept in utilizing its features both in the standard libraries, the STL, and in supplemental libraries such as BOOST.  Which, although greatly help with adding powerful features quickly, do very little to curb the relative dangers of the language. So, you may say, the fault is in the developer, that if the developer had some higher skills or if we only hired C++ experts this would not be an issue.  Now, I will concede there is some truth to this.  Obviously, the higher skilled C++ developers you hire the better the chance they will produce highly performant and error-free code.  However, what good is that to the average developer who cannot afford a full stable of C++ experts? That's my point with C#:  It's like a kinder, gentler C++.  It gives you nearly the same speed, and in many ways even more power than C++, and it gives you a much softer cushion for novices to fall against if they code less-than-optimally.  A bug is a bug, of course, in any language, but C# does a good job of hiding and taking on the task of handling almost all of the resource issues that make C++ so tricky.  For my money, C# is much more maintainable, more feature-rich, second only slightly in performance, faster to market, and -- last but not least -- safer and easier to use.  That's why, where I work, I much prefer to see the developers moving to C#.  The quantity of bugs is much lower, and we don't need to hire "experts" to achieve the same results since the language itself handles those resource pitfalls so prevalent in poorly written C++ code.  C++ will still have its place in the world, and I'm sure I'll still use it now and again where it is truly the correct tool for the job, but for nearly every other project C# is a wonderfully "dumbed-down" version of C++ -- in the very best sense -- and to me, that's the smart choice.

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Generic Func Delegates

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. Back in one of my three original “Little Wonders” Trilogy of posts, I had listed generic delegates as one of the Little Wonders of .NET.  Later, someone posted a comment saying said that they would love more detail on the generic delegates and their uses, since my original entry just scratched the surface of them. Last week, I began our look at some of the handy generic delegates built into .NET with a description of delegates in general, and the Action family of delegates.  For this week, I’ll launch into a look at the Func family of generic delegates and how they can be used to support generic, reusable algorithms and classes. Quick Delegate Recap Delegates are similar to function pointers in C++ in that they allow you to store a reference to a method.  They can store references to either static or instance methods, and can actually be used to chain several methods together in one delegate. Delegates are very type-safe and can be satisfied with any standard method, anonymous method, or a lambda expression.  They can also be null as well (refers to no method), so care should be taken to make sure that the delegate is not null before you invoke it. Delegates are defined using the keyword delegate, where the delegate’s type name is placed where you would typically place the method name: 1: // This delegate matches any method that takes string, returns nothing 2: public delegate void Log(string message); This delegate defines a delegate type named Log that can be used to store references to any method(s) that satisfies its signature (whether instance, static, lambda expression, etc.). Delegate instances then can be assigned zero (null) or more methods using the operator = which replaces the existing delegate chain, or by using the operator += which adds a method to the end of a delegate chain: 1: // creates a delegate instance named currentLogger defaulted to Console.WriteLine (static method) 2: Log currentLogger = Console.Out.WriteLine; 3:  4: // invokes the delegate, which writes to the console out 5: currentLogger("Hi Standard Out!"); 6:  7: // append a delegate to Console.Error.WriteLine to go to std error 8: currentLogger += Console.Error.WriteLine; 9:  10: // invokes the delegate chain and writes message to std out and std err 11: currentLogger("Hi Standard Out and Error!"); While delegates give us a lot of power, it can be cumbersome to re-create fairly standard delegate definitions repeatedly, for this purpose the generic delegates were introduced in various stages in .NET.  These support various method types with particular signatures. Note: a caveat with generic delegates is that while they can support multiple parameters, they do not match methods that contains ref or out parameters. If you want to a delegate to represent methods that takes ref or out parameters, you will need to create a custom delegate. We’ve got the Func… delegates Just like it’s cousin, the Action delegate family, the Func delegate family gives us a lot of power to use generic delegates to make classes and algorithms more generic.  Using them keeps us from having to define a new delegate type when need to make a class or algorithm generic. Remember that the point of the Action delegate family was to be able to perform an “action” on an item, with no return results.  Thus Action delegates can be used to represent most methods that take 0 to 16 arguments but return void.  You can assign a method The Func delegate family was introduced in .NET 3.5 with the advent of LINQ, and gives us the power to define a function that can be called on 0 to 16 arguments and returns a result.  Thus, the main difference between Action and Func, from a delegate perspective, is that Actions return nothing, but Funcs return a result. The Func family of delegates have signatures as follows: Func<TResult> – matches a method that takes no arguments, and returns value of type TResult. Func<T, TResult> – matches a method that takes an argument of type T, and returns value of type TResult. Func<T1, T2, TResult> – matches a method that takes arguments of type T1 and T2, and returns value of type TResult. Func<T1, T2, …, TResult> – and so on up to 16 arguments, and returns value of type TResult. These are handy because they quickly allow you to be able to specify that a method or class you design will perform a function to produce a result as long as the method you specify meets the signature. For example, let’s say you were designing a generic aggregator, and you wanted to allow the user to define how the values will be aggregated into the result (i.e. Sum, Min, Max, etc…).  To do this, we would ask the user of our class to pass in a method that would take the current total, the next value, and produce a new total.  A class like this could look like: 1: public sealed class Aggregator<TValue, TResult> 2: { 3: // holds method that takes previous result, combines with next value, creates new result 4: private Func<TResult, TValue, TResult> _aggregationMethod; 5:  6: // gets or sets the current result of aggregation 7: public TResult Result { get; private set; } 8:  9: // construct the aggregator given the method to use to aggregate values 10: public Aggregator(Func<TResult, TValue, TResult> aggregationMethod = null) 11: { 12: if (aggregationMethod == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("aggregationMethod"); 13:  14: _aggregationMethod = aggregationMethod; 15: } 16:  17: // method to add next value 18: public void Aggregate(TValue nextValue) 19: { 20: // performs the aggregation method function on the current result and next and sets to current result 21: Result = _aggregationMethod(Result, nextValue); 22: } 23: } Of course, LINQ already has an Aggregate extension method, but that works on a sequence of IEnumerable<T>, whereas this is designed to work more with aggregating single results over time (such as keeping track of a max response time for a service). We could then use this generic aggregator to find the sum of a series of values over time, or the max of a series of values over time (among other things): 1: // creates an aggregator that adds the next to the total to sum the values 2: var sumAggregator = new Aggregator<int, int>((total, next) => total + next); 3:  4: // creates an aggregator (using static method) that returns the max of previous result and next 5: var maxAggregator = new Aggregator<int, int>(Math.Max); So, if we were timing the response time of a web method every time it was called, we could pass that response time to both of these aggregators to get an idea of the total time spent in that web method, and the max time spent in any one call to the web method: 1: // total will be 13 and max 13 2: int responseTime = 13; 3: sumAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 4: maxAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 5:  6: // total will be 20 and max still 13 7: responseTime = 7; 8: sumAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 9: maxAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 10:  11: // total will be 40 and max now 20 12: responseTime = 20; 13: sumAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 14: maxAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); The Func delegate family is useful for making generic algorithms and classes, and in particular allows the caller of the method or user of the class to specify a function to be performed in order to generate a result. What is the result of a Func delegate chain? If you remember, we said earlier that you can assign multiple methods to a delegate by using the += operator to chain them.  So how does this affect delegates such as Func that return a value, when applied to something like the code below? 1: Func<int, int, int> combo = null; 2:  3: // What if we wanted to aggregate the sum and max together? 4: combo += (total, next) => total + next; 5: combo += Math.Max; 6:  7: // what is the result? 8: var comboAggregator = new Aggregator<int, int>(combo); Well, in .NET if you chain multiple methods in a delegate, they will all get invoked, but the result of the delegate is the result of the last method invoked in the chain.  Thus, this aggregator would always result in the Math.Max() result.  The other chained method (the sum) gets executed first, but it’s result is thrown away: 1: // result is 13 2: int responseTime = 13; 3: comboAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 4:  5: // result is still 13 6: responseTime = 7; 7: comboAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); 8:  9: // result is now 20 10: responseTime = 20; 11: comboAggregator.Aggregate(responseTime); So remember, you can chain multiple Func (or other delegates that return values) together, but if you do so you will only get the last executed result. Func delegates and co-variance/contra-variance in .NET 4.0 Just like the Action delegate, as of .NET 4.0, the Func delegate family is contra-variant on its arguments.  In addition, it is co-variant on its return type.  To support this, in .NET 4.0 the signatures of the Func delegates changed to: Func<out TResult> – matches a method that takes no arguments, and returns value of type TResult (or a more derived type). Func<in T, out TResult> – matches a method that takes an argument of type T (or a less derived type), and returns value of type TResult(or a more derived type). Func<in T1, in T2, out TResult> – matches a method that takes arguments of type T1 and T2 (or less derived types), and returns value of type TResult (or a more derived type). Func<in T1, in T2, …, out TResult> – and so on up to 16 arguments, and returns value of type TResult (or a more derived type). Notice the addition of the in and out keywords before each of the generic type placeholders.  As we saw last week, the in keyword is used to specify that a generic type can be contra-variant -- it can match the given type or a type that is less derived.  However, the out keyword, is used to specify that a generic type can be co-variant -- it can match the given type or a type that is more derived. On contra-variance, if you are saying you need an function that will accept a string, you can just as easily give it an function that accepts an object.  In other words, if you say “give me an function that will process dogs”, I could pass you a method that will process any animal, because all dogs are animals.  On the co-variance side, if you are saying you need a function that returns an object, you can just as easily pass it a function that returns a string because any string returned from the given method can be accepted by a delegate expecting an object result, since string is more derived.  Once again, in other words, if you say “give me a method that creates an animal”, I can pass you a method that will create a dog, because all dogs are animals. It really all makes sense, you can pass a more specific thing to a less specific parameter, and you can return a more specific thing as a less specific result.  In other words, pay attention to the direction the item travels (parameters go in, results come out).  Keeping that in mind, you can always pass more specific things in and return more specific things out. For example, in the code below, we have a method that takes a Func<object> to generate an object, but we can pass it a Func<string> because the return type of object can obviously accept a return value of string as well: 1: // since Func<object> is co-variant, this will access Func<string>, etc... 2: public static string Sequence(int count, Func<object> generator) 3: { 4: var builder = new StringBuilder(); 5:  6: for (int i=0; i<count; i++) 7: { 8: object value = generator(); 9: builder.Append(value); 10: } 11:  12: return builder.ToString(); 13: } Even though the method above takes a Func<object>, we can pass a Func<string> because the TResult type placeholder is co-variant and accepts types that are more derived as well: 1: // delegate that's typed to return string. 2: Func<string> stringGenerator = () => DateTime.Now.ToString(); 3:  4: // This will work in .NET 4.0, but not in previous versions 5: Sequence(100, stringGenerator); Previous versions of .NET implemented some forms of co-variance and contra-variance before, but .NET 4.0 goes one step further and allows you to pass or assign an Func<A, BResult> to a Func<Y, ZResult> as long as A is less derived (or same) as Y, and BResult is more derived (or same) as ZResult. Sidebar: The Func and the Predicate A method that takes one argument and returns a bool is generally thought of as a predicate.  Predicates are used to examine an item and determine whether that item satisfies a particular condition.  Predicates are typically unary, but you may also have binary and other predicates as well. Predicates are often used to filter results, such as in the LINQ Where() extension method: 1: var numbers = new[] { 1, 2, 4, 13, 8, 10, 27 }; 2:  3: // call Where() using a predicate which determines if the number is even 4: var evens = numbers.Where(num => num % 2 == 0); As of .NET 3.5, predicates are typically represented as Func<T, bool> where T is the type of the item to examine.  Previous to .NET 3.5, there was a Predicate<T> type that tended to be used (which we’ll discuss next week) and is still supported, but most developers recommend using Func<T, bool> now, as it prevents confusion with overloads that accept unary predicates and binary predicates, etc.: 1: // this seems more confusing as an overload set, because of Predicate vs Func 2: public static SomeMethod(Predicate<int> unaryPredicate) { } 3: public static SomeMethod(Func<int, int, bool> binaryPredicate) { } 4:  5: // this seems more consistent as an overload set, since just uses Func 6: public static SomeMethod(Func<int, bool> unaryPredicate) { } 7: public static SomeMethod(Func<int, int, bool> binaryPredicate) { } Also, even though Predicate<T> and Func<T, bool> match the same signatures, they are separate types!  Thus you cannot assign a Predicate<T> instance to a Func<T, bool> instance and vice versa: 1: // the same method, lambda expression, etc can be assigned to both 2: Predicate<int> isEven = i => (i % 2) == 0; 3: Func<int, bool> alsoIsEven = i => (i % 2) == 0; 4:  5: // but the delegate instances cannot be directly assigned, strongly typed! 6: // ERROR: cannot convert type... 7: isEven = alsoIsEven; 8:  9: // however, you can assign by wrapping in a new instance: 10: isEven = new Predicate<int>(alsoIsEven); 11: alsoIsEven = new Func<int, bool>(isEven); So, the general advice that seems to come from most developers is that Predicate<T> is still supported, but we should use Func<T, bool> for consistency in .NET 3.5 and above. Sidebar: Func as a Generator for Unit Testing One area of difficulty in unit testing can be unit testing code that is based on time of day.  We’d still want to unit test our code to make sure the logic is accurate, but we don’t want the results of our unit tests to be dependent on the time they are run. One way (of many) around this is to create an internal generator that will produce the “current” time of day.  This would default to returning result from DateTime.Now (or some other method), but we could inject specific times for our unit testing.  Generators are typically methods that return (generate) a value for use in a class/method. For example, say we are creating a CacheItem<T> class that represents an item in the cache, and we want to make sure the item shows as expired if the age is more than 30 seconds.  Such a class could look like: 1: // responsible for maintaining an item of type T in the cache 2: public sealed class CacheItem<T> 3: { 4: // helper method that returns the current time 5: private static Func<DateTime> _timeGenerator = () => DateTime.Now; 6:  7: // allows internal access to the time generator 8: internal static Func<DateTime> TimeGenerator 9: { 10: get { return _timeGenerator; } 11: set { _timeGenerator = value; } 12: } 13:  14: // time the item was cached 15: public DateTime CachedTime { get; private set; } 16:  17: // the item cached 18: public T Value { get; private set; } 19:  20: // item is expired if older than 30 seconds 21: public bool IsExpired 22: { 23: get { return _timeGenerator() - CachedTime > TimeSpan.FromSeconds(30.0); } 24: } 25:  26: // creates the new cached item, setting cached time to "current" time 27: public CacheItem(T value) 28: { 29: Value = value; 30: CachedTime = _timeGenerator(); 31: } 32: } Then, we can use this construct to unit test our CacheItem<T> without any time dependencies: 1: var baseTime = DateTime.Now; 2:  3: // start with current time stored above (so doesn't drift) 4: CacheItem<int>.TimeGenerator = () => baseTime; 5:  6: var target = new CacheItem<int>(13); 7:  8: // now add 15 seconds, should still be non-expired 9: CacheItem<int>.TimeGenerator = () => baseTime.AddSeconds(15); 10:  11: Assert.IsFalse(target.IsExpired); 12:  13: // now add 31 seconds, should now be expired 14: CacheItem<int>.TimeGenerator = () => baseTime.AddSeconds(31); 15:  16: Assert.IsTrue(target.IsExpired); Now we can unit test for 1 second before, 1 second after, 1 millisecond before, 1 day after, etc.  Func delegates can be a handy tool for this type of value generation to support more testable code.  Summary Generic delegates give us a lot of power to make truly generic algorithms and classes.  The Func family of delegates is a great way to be able to specify functions to calculate a result based on 0-16 arguments.  Stay tuned in the weeks that follow for other generic delegates in the .NET Framework!   Tweet Technorati Tags: .NET, C#, CSharp, Little Wonders, Generics, Func, Delegates

    Read the article

  • SEO Keyword Research Help

    - by James
    Hi Everyone, I'm new at SEO and keyword research. I am using Market Samurai as my research tool, and I was wondering if I could ask for your help to identify the best key word to target for my niche. I do plan on incorporating all of them into my site, but I wanted to start with one. If you could give me your input on these keywords, I would appreciate it. This is all new to me :) I'm too new to post pictures, but here are my keywords (Searches, SEO Traffic, and SEO Value / Day): Searches | SEO Traffic | PBR | SEO Value | Average PR/Backlinks of Current Top 10 1: 730 | 307 | 20% | 2311.33 | 1.9 / 7k-60k 2: 325 | 137 | 24% | 822.94 | 2.3 / 7k-60k 3: 398 | 167 | 82% | 589.79 | 1.6 / 7k-60k I'm wondering if the PBR (Phrase-to-broad) value of #1 is too low. It seems like the best value because the SEOV is crazy high. That is like $70k a month. #3 has the highest PBR, but also the lowest SEOV. #2 doesn't seem worth it because of the PR competetion. Might be a little too hard to get into the top page of Google. I'm wondering which keywords to target, and if I should be looking at any other metric to see if this is a profitable niche to jump into. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How *not* to handle a compensation step on failure in an SSIS package

    - by James Luetkehoelter
    Just stumbed across this where I'm working. Someone created a global error handler for a package that included this SQL step: DELETE FROM Table WHERE DateDiff(MI, ExportedDate, GetDate()) < 5 So if the package runs for longer than 5 minutes and fails, nothing gets cleaned up. Please people, don't do this... Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How to update a game off a database

    - by James Clifton
    I am currently writing a sports strategy management game (cricket) in PHP, with a MYSQL database, and I have come across one stumbling block - how do I update games where neither player is online? Cricket is a game played between two players, and when they (or one of them) is online then everything is fine; but what if neither player is online? This occurs when championship games are played, and these games need to happen at certain times for game reasons. At the moment I have a private web page that updates every 5 seconds, and each time it loads all games are updated; but then I have the problem that when my private web page stops (for example my computer crashes or my web browser plays up) the game stops updating! Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • What is a best practice tier structure of a Java EE 6/7 application?

    - by James Drinkard
    I was attempting to find a best practice for modeling the tiers in a Java EE application yesterday and couldn't come up with anything current. In the past, say java 1.4, it was four tiers: Presentation Tier Web Tier Business Logic Tier DAL (Data Access Layer ) which I always considered a tier and not a layer. After working with Web Services and SOA I thought to add in a services tier, but that may fall under 3. the business logic tier. I did searches for quite a while and reading articles. It seems like Domain Driven Design is becoming more popular, but I couldn't find a diagram on it's tier structure. Anyone have ideas or diagrams on what the proper tier structure is for newer Java EE applications or is it really the same, but more items are ranked under the four I've mentioned?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >