Search Results

Search found 13353 results on 535 pages for 'structural design'.

Page 127/535 | < Previous Page | 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134  | Next Page >

  • Triggering Data Changes in N-Tier

    - by Ryan Kinal
    I've been studying n-tier architectures as of late, particularly in VB.NET with Entity Framework and/or LINQ to SQL. I understand the basic concepts, but have been wondering about best practices in regard to triggering CRUD-type operations from user input/action. So, the arcitecture looks something like the following: [presentation layer] - [business layer] - [data layer] - (database) Getting information from the database into the presentation layer is simple and abstracted. It's just a matter of instantiating a new object from the business layer, which in turn uses the data layer to get at the correct information. However, saving (updating and inserting), and deleting seem to require particular APIs on the relevant business objects. I have to assume this is standard practice, unless a business object will save itself on various operations (which seems inefficient), or on disposal (which seems like it just wouldn't work, or may be unwieldy and unreliable). Should my "savable" business objects all implement a particular "ISavable" or "IDatabaseObject" interface? Is this a recognized (anti-)pattern? Are there other, better patterns I should be using that I'm just unaware of? The TLDR question, I suppose, is How does the presentation layer trigger database changes?

    Read the article

  • How to determine if class meets single responsibility principle ?

    - by user1483278
    Single Responsibility Principle is based on high cohesion principle. The difference between the two is that highly cohesive classes feature a set of responsibilities that are strongly related, while classes adhering to SRP have just one responsibility. But how do we determine whether particular class features a set of responsibilities and is thus just highly cohesive, or whether it has only one responsibility and is thus adhering to SRP? Namely, isn't it more or less subjective, since some may find class very granular ( and as such will consider a class as adhering to SRP ), while others may find it not granular enough?

    Read the article

  • Should developers make their games easier with new versions?

    - by Gil Kalai
    It seems that the game Angry Birds is becoming gradually easier with new versions. Maybe so people get the illusion of progress and satisfaction of breaking new records? I would like to know if gradual small modifications of games to enhance the sense of improvement and learning by users is known/common/standard practice in game developing. (I don't mean to say that there is anything wrong with such a practice.)

    Read the article

  • How do I deal with the problems of a fast side-scroller?

    - by Ska
    I'm making a side scrolling airplane game and when I begin going very fast I begin to experience some problems as a player: Elements are not distinguishable, like power-ups from bullets, etc I start to feel dizzy and uncomfortable There isn't enough time to see what's coming How can I sort this out? Do I use less details in all the grahpics? Tiny Wings has the same horizontal movement speed as in my game but it doesn't suffer from these problems. Are there any other really fast side-scrollers I could take as a reference?

    Read the article

  • Best Option for Creating A Small Church Website

    - by Jim
    I've been asked to create a website for a small church. Their prior site was hosted on geocities which is no longer. They are not looking for anything robust, just an informational site with a calendar and maybe a contact form. The church would also like to be able to administer the site with little technical know-how. Cost is also an issue. Given these requirements, something like sites.google.com seems like a good option. However, my main concern is that Sites will suffer the same fate as geocities. It is definitely not a flagship Google product. Are there other good alternatives that fit the requirements?

    Read the article

  • Is acoustic fingerprinting too broad for one audio file only?

    - by IBG
    We were looking for some topics related to audio analysis and found acoustic fingerprinting. As it is, it seems like the most famous application for it is for identification of music. Enter our manager, who requested us to research and possible find an algorithm or existing code that we can use for this very simple approach (like it's easy, source codes don't show up like mushrooms): Always-on app for listening Compare the audio patterns to a single audio file (assume sound is a simple beep) If beep is detected, send notification to server With a flow this simple, do you think acoustic fingerprinting is a broad approach to use? Should we stop and take another approach? Where to best start? We haven't started anything yet (on the development side) on this regard, so I want to get other opinion if this is pursuit is worth it or moot.

    Read the article

  • django/python: is one view that handles two sibling models a good idea?

    - by clime
    I am using django multi-table inheritance: Video and Image are models derived from Media. I have implemented two views: video_list and image_list, which are just proxies to media_list. media_list returns images or videos (based on input parameter model) for a certain object, which can be of type Event, Member, or Crag. The view alters its behaviour based on input parameter action (better name would be mode), which can be of value "edit" or "view". The problem is that I need to ask whether the input parameter model contains Video or Image in media_list so that I can do the right thing. Similar condition is also in helper method media_edit_list that is called from the view. I don't particularly like it but the only alternative I can think of is to have separate (but almost the same) logic for video_list and image_list and then probably also separate helper methods for videos and images: video_edit_list, image_edit_list, video_view_list, image_view_list. So four functions instead of just two. That I like even less because the video functions would be very similar to the respective image functions. What do you recommend? Here is extract of relevant parts: http://pastebin.com/07t4bdza. I'll also paste the code here: #urls url(r'^media/images/(?P<rel_model_tag>(event|member|crag))/(?P<rel_object_id>\d+)/(?P<action>(view|edit))/$', views.image_list, name='image-list') url(r'^media/videos/(?P<rel_model_tag>(event|member|crag))/(?P<rel_object_id>\d+)/(?P<action>(view|edit))/$', views.video_list, name='video-list') #views def image_list(request, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, mode): return media_list(request, Image, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, mode) def video_list(request, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, mode): return media_list(request, Video, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, mode) def media_list(request, model, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, mode): rel_model = tag_to_model(rel_model_tag) rel_object = get_object_or_404(rel_model, pk=rel_object_id) if model == Image: star_media = rel_object.star_image else: star_media = rel_object.star_video filter_params = {} if rel_model == Event: filter_params['event'] = rel_object_id elif rel_model == Member: filter_params['members'] = rel_object_id elif rel_model == Crag: filter_params['crag'] = rel_object_id media_list = model.objects.filter(~Q(id=star_media.id)).filter(**filter_params).order_by('date_added').all() context = { 'media_list': media_list, 'star_media': star_media, } if mode == 'edit': return media_edit_list(request, model, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, context) return media_view_list(request, model, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, context) def media_view_list(request, model, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, context): if request.is_ajax(): context['base_template'] = 'boxes/base-lite.html' return render(request, 'media/list-items.html', context) def media_edit_list(request, model, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id, context): if model == Image: get_media_edit_record = get_image_edit_record else: get_media_edit_record = get_video_edit_record media_list = [get_media_edit_record(media, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id) for media in context['media_list']] if context['star_media']: star_media = get_media_edit_record(context['star_media'], rel_model_tag, rel_object_id) else: star_media = None json = simplejson.dumps({ 'star_media': star_media, 'media_list': media_list, }) return HttpResponse(json, content_type=json_response_mimetype(request)) def get_image_edit_record(image, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id): record = { 'url': image.image.url, 'name': image.title or image.filename, 'type': mimetypes.guess_type(image.image.path)[0] or 'image/png', 'thumbnailUrl': image.thumbnail_2.url, 'size': image.image.size, 'id': image.id, 'media_id': image.media_ptr.id, 'starUrl':reverse('image-star', kwargs={'image_id': image.id, 'rel_model_tag': rel_model_tag, 'rel_object_id': rel_object_id}), } return record def get_video_edit_record(video, rel_model_tag, rel_object_id): record = { 'url': video.embed_url, 'name': video.title or video.url, 'type': None, 'thumbnailUrl': video.thumbnail_2.url, 'size': None, 'id': video.id, 'media_id': video.media_ptr.id, 'starUrl': reverse('video-star', kwargs={'video_id': video.id, 'rel_model_tag': rel_model_tag, 'rel_object_id': rel_object_id}), } return record # models class Media(models.Model, WebModel): title = models.CharField('title', max_length=128, default='', db_index=True, blank=True) event = models.ForeignKey(Event, null=True, default=None, blank=True) crag = models.ForeignKey(Crag, null=True, default=None, blank=True) members = models.ManyToManyField(Member, blank=True) added_by = models.ForeignKey(Member, related_name='added_images') date_added = models.DateTimeField('date added', auto_now_add=True, null=True, default=None, editable=False) class Image(Media): image = ProcessedImageField(upload_to='uploads', processors=[ResizeToFit(width=1024, height=1024, upscale=False)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}) thumbnail_1 = ImageSpecField(source='image', processors=[SmartResize(width=178, height=134)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}) thumbnail_2 = ImageSpecField(source='image', #processors=[SmartResize(width=256, height=192)], processors=[ResizeToFit(height=164)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}) class Video(Media): url = models.URLField('url', max_length=256, default='') embed_url = models.URLField('embed url', max_length=256, default='', blank=True) author = models.CharField('author', max_length=64, default='', blank=True) thumbnail = ProcessedImageField(upload_to='uploads', processors=[ResizeToFit(width=1024, height=1024, upscale=False)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}, null=True, default=None, blank=True) thumbnail_1 = ImageSpecField(source='thumbnail', processors=[SmartResize(width=178, height=134)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}) thumbnail_2 = ImageSpecField(source='thumbnail', #processors=[SmartResize(width=256, height=192)], processors=[ResizeToFit(height=164)], format='JPEG', options={'quality': 75}) class Crag(models.Model, WebModel): name = models.CharField('name', max_length=64, default='', db_index=True) normalized_name = models.CharField('normalized name', max_length=64, default='', editable=False) type = models.IntegerField('crag type', null=True, default=None, choices=crag_types) description = models.TextField('description', default='', blank=True) country = models.ForeignKey('country', null=True, default=None) #TODO: make this not null when db enables it latitude = models.FloatField('latitude', null=True, default=None) longitude = models.FloatField('longitude', null=True, default=None) location_index = FixedCharField('location index', length=24, default='', editable=False, db_index=True) # handled by db, used for marker clustering added_by = models.ForeignKey('member', null=True, default=None) #route_count = models.IntegerField('route count', null=True, default=None, editable=False) date_created = models.DateTimeField('date created', auto_now_add=True, null=True, default=None, editable=False) last_modified = models.DateTimeField('last modified', auto_now=True, null=True, default=None, editable=False) star_image = models.ForeignKey('Image', null=True, default=None, related_name='star_crags', on_delete=models.SET_NULL) star_video = models.ForeignKey('Video', null=True, default=None, related_name='star_crags', on_delete=models.SET_NULL)

    Read the article

  • Is programming in layers real?

    - by Aura
    I am fairly new in product development and I am trying to work over a product. The problem that I have realized is that people draw diagrams and charts showing different modules and layers. But as I am working alone (I am my own team) I got a bit confused about the interaction I am facing in the development within the programs and I am wondering whether developing a product in modules is real or not? Maybe I am not a great programmer, but I see no boundaries when data start to travel from frontend to backend.

    Read the article

  • The balance between client and server functionality

    - by Eugen Martynov
    I want to bring the discussion that started in our teams and get your opinion about it. Assume we have an user account which could have different credentials for authentication and associated email to recover. An user has possibility to do signup with an email or use his social profile to complete signup process. As an Rest API from the backend to client looks like: Create account Authorise Update user data Link social account Register email Verify email In addition our BE is distributed and divided between several services/servers/clusters. So different calls are related to different end points. In case of the social sign up some of steps should be skipped or simplified. For example, with Facebook signup we could already skip email registration and verification step (we ask email permission form user), linking the social account and pre-fill user displayed name. So we proposed to have another end point which will hide/combine different calls on BE and return whole process result to the clients. The pros for this approach: No more duplication of functionality between clients Speed up the networking and user experience The cons for this approach: Additional work for backend Probably most complex scenarios in future updates I would like to get your opinion or experience with this situation. Especially if you already experienced point #2 from against reasons.

    Read the article

  • What is the general definition of something that can be included or excluded?

    - by gutch
    When an application presents a user with a list of items, it's pretty common that it permits the user to filter the items. Often a 'filter' feature is implemented as a set of include or exclude rules. For example: include all emails from [email protected], and exclude those emails without attachments I've seen this include/exclude pattern often; for example Maven and Google Analytics filter things this way. But now that I'm implementing something like this myself, I don't know what to call something that could be either included or excluded. In specific terms: If I have a database table of filter rules, each of which either includes or excludes matching items, what is an appropriate name of the field that stores include or exclude? When displaying a list of filters to a user, what is a good way to label the include or exclude value? (as a bonus, can anyone recommend a good implementation of this kind of filtering for inspiration?)

    Read the article

  • Level Representation in a 2D Game

    - by meszar.imola
    I would like to create a 2D game, where a character should move on a stage/level. My stage would be static, constructed some little cubes, similar to the well-known Mario game: some of the elements should represent an element of the way where the character can step, but if the element is missing, the character should fall. My problem is, how to represent this programmatically? My first thought was to represent the stage with a vector, which should contain boolean elements, depending on the state of the element on the stage - if it's missing or not. But this means, I have to verify at my character's x or y position change if it has a stage element under or not (if not, to simulate the falling of the character) - I think it is not the best practice, it's not the beautiful solution. Can you help me with some advice, how to represent the stage?

    Read the article

  • Creating new games on Android and/or iPhone

    - by James Clifton
    I have a succesfull facebook poker game that is running very nicely, now some people have asked if I can port this to other platforms - mainly mobile devices (and I have been asked to make a tablet version, do I really need a seperate version?) I am currently a PHP programmer (and game designer) and I simply dont' have the time to learn Android and other languages - so I have decided to pay third parties to program them (if viable). The information I need to know is what programming language is needed for the following four devices - Android mobile phone, iPhone, iPad and tablets? Can they all run off a central sql database? If they can't then i'm not interested :( Do any of these run FLASH? Have I covered all my main bases here? For example if a person programs for a ANDROID mobile phone is that to much differant to an ANDROID tablet? They will have slightly differant graphics (because the tablet has a greater screen area might as well use it) but do they need to be started from scratch? Same goes for iPhone/iPad, do they really need to be programmed differantly if the only differance is the graphics?

    Read the article

  • Consistency vs. Usability?

    - by dsimcha
    When designing an API, consistency often aids usability. However, sometimes they conflict where an extra API feature can be added to streamline a common case. It seems like there's somewhat of a divide over what to do here. Some designs (the Java standard library come to mind) favor consistency even if it makes common cases more verbose. Others (the Python standard library comes to mind) favor usability even if it means treating the common case as "special" to make it easier. What is your opinion on how consistency and usability should be balanced?

    Read the article

  • Why do old programming languages continue to be revised?

    - by SunAvatar
    This question is not, "Why do people still use old programming languages?" I understand that quite well. In fact the two programming languages I know best are C and Scheme, both of which date back to the 70s. Recently I was reading about the changes in C99 and C11 versus C89 (which seems to still be the most-used version of C in practice and the version I learned from K&R). Looking around, it seems like every programming language in heavy use gets a new specification at least once per decade or so. Even Fortran is still getting new revisions, despite the fact that most people using it are still using FORTRAN 77. Contrast this with the approach of, say, the typesetting system TeX. In 1989, with the release of TeX 3.0, Donald Knuth declared that TeX was feature-complete and future releases would contain only bug fixes. Even beyond this, he has stated that upon his death, "all remaining bugs will become features" and absolutely no further updates will be made. Others are free to fork TeX and have done so, but the resulting systems are renamed to indicate that they are different from the official TeX. This is not because Knuth thinks TeX is perfect, but because he understands the value of a stable, predictable system that will do the same thing in fifty years that it does now. Why do most programming language designers not follow the same principle? Of course, when a language is relatively new, it makes sense that it will go through a period of rapid change before settling down. And no one can really object to minor changes that don't do much more than codify existing pseudo-standards or correct unintended readings. But when a language still seems to need improvement after ten or twenty years, why not just fork it or start over, rather than try to change what is already in use? If some people really want to do object-oriented programming in Fortran, why not create "Objective Fortran" for that purpose, and leave Fortran itself alone? I suppose one could say that, regardless of future revisions, C89 is already a standard and nothing stops people from continuing to use it. This is sort of true, but connotations do have consequences. GCC will, in pedantic mode, warn about syntax that is either deprecated or has a subtly different meaning in C99, which means C89 programmers can't just totally ignore the new standard. So there must be some benefit in C99 that is sufficient to impose this overhead on everyone who uses the language. This is a real question, not an invitation to argue. Obviously I do have an opinion on this, but at the moment I'm just trying to understand why this isn't just how things are done already. I suppose the question is: What are the (real or perceived) advantages of updating a language standard, as opposed to creating a new language based on the old?

    Read the article

  • Interface extension

    - by user877329
    Suppose that I have an input stream interface, which defines a method for reading data. I also have a seekable interface which defines a method for seeking. A natural way of defining a input file is then to implement both input stream and seekable. I want to construct a data decoder from the input stream interface so I can read data from a file or from another stream. The problem is that I also want to implement seek functionality to the data decoder, since I want to be able to step individual records not raw bytes. This is not possible if I only provide an input stream, which does not have the bytewise seek method. Should I skip the seekable interface and add the seek method to input stream instead and force all streams to at least leave it as a nop.

    Read the article

  • Self-Executing Anonymous Function vs Prototype

    - by Robotsushi
    In Javascript there are a few clearly prominent techniques for create and manage classes/namespaces in javascript. I am curious what situations warrant using one technique vs. the other. I want to pick one and stick with it moving forward. I write enterprise code that is maintained and shared across multiple teams, and I want to know what is the best practice when writing maintainable javascript ? I tend to prefer Self-Executing Anonymous Functions however I am curious what the community vote is on these techniques. Prototype : function obj() { } obj.prototype.test = function() { alert('Hello?'); }; var obj2 = new obj(); obj2.test(); Self-Closing Anonymous Function : //Self-Executing Anonymous Function (function( skillet, $, undefined ) { //Private Property var isHot = true; //Public Property skillet.ingredient = "Bacon Strips"; //Public Method skillet.fry = function() { var oliveOil; addItem( "\t\n Butter \n\t" ); addItem( oliveOil ); console.log( "Frying " + skillet.ingredient ); }; //Private Method function addItem( item ) { if ( item !== undefined ) { console.log( "Adding " + $.trim(item) ); } } }( window.skillet = window.skillet || {}, jQuery )); //Public Properties console.log( skillet.ingredient ); //Bacon Strips //Public Methods skillet.fry(); //Adding Butter & Fraying Bacon Strips //Adding a Public Property skillet.quantity = "12"; console.log( skillet.quantity ); //12 //Adding New Functionality to the Skillet (function( skillet, $, undefined ) { //Private Property var amountOfGrease = "1 Cup"; //Public Method skillet.toString = function() { console.log( skillet.quantity + " " + skillet.ingredient + " & " + amountOfGrease + " of Grease" ); console.log( isHot ? "Hot" : "Cold" ); }; }( window.skillet = window.skillet || {}, jQuery )); //end of skillet definition try { //12 Bacon Strips & 1 Cup of Grease skillet.toString(); //Throws Exception } catch( e ) { console.log( e.message ); //isHot is not defined } I feel that I should mention that the Self-Executing Anonymous Function is the pattern used by the jQuery team. Update When I asked this question I didn't truly see the importance of what I was trying to understand. The real issue at hand is whether or not to use new to create instances of your objects or to use patterns which do not require constructors of the use of the new keyword. I added my own answer, because in my opinion we should make use of patterns which don't use the new keyword. For more information please see my answer.

    Read the article

  • Using 'new' in a projection?

    - by davenewza
    I wish to project a collection from one type (Something) to another type (SomethingElse). Yes, this is a very open-eneded question, but which of the two options below do you prefer? Creating a new instance using new: var result = query.Select(something => new SomethingElse(something)); Using a factory: var result = query.Select(something => SomethingElse.FromSomething(something)); When I think of a projection, I generally think of it as a conversion. Using new gives me this idea that I'm creating new objects during a conversion, which doesn't feel right. Semantically, SomethingElse.FromSomething() most definitely fits better. Although, the second option does require addition code to setup a factory, which could become unnecessarily compulsive.

    Read the article

  • Implementing new required feature after software release

    - by TiagoBrenck
    Fake Scenario There is a software that was released 1 year ago. The software is to map and register all kind of animals on our planet. When the software was released, the client only needed to know the scientific name of the animal, a flag if it is in risk of extinction and a scale of dangerous(that is a fake software and specification, I don't want to discuss this here). There are already 100.000 animals records saved on DB. New Feature One year later, the client wants a new feature. It is really important to him to know the animals classes, and this is a required field. So he asks me to put a field to input the animal class, and this field is required. Or maybe where this animal was discovered. Problem I have already 100.000 recorded animals without a class or where it was discovered, but I need to insert a new column to storage this information and this column can't be null. I don't have a default value for this situation (there isn't a default animal class or where it was discovered). I don't want to keep the requirement rule only on my software, my DB must have this requirement too(I like to keep business rules on DB too). What are the alternatives to solve this situation? I am on a situation that this new feature cannot be previewed or reviewed for the existing records. The time already passed and I can't go back on time to get it

    Read the article

  • Rails: The Law of Demeter [duplicate]

    - by user2158382
    This question already has an answer here: Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion 4 answers I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

    Read the article

  • What is MVC, really?

    - by NickC
    As a serious programmer, how do you answer the question What is MVC? In my mind, MVC is sort of a nebulous topic — and because of that, if your audience is a learner, then you're free to describe it in general terms that are unlikely to be controversial. However, if you are speaking to a knowledgeable audience, especially an interviewer, I have a hard time thinking of a direction to take that doesn't risk a reaction of "well that's not right!...". We all have different real-world experience, and I haven't truly met the same MVC implementation pattern twice. Specifically, there seem to be disagreements regarding strictness, component definition, separation of parts (what piece fits where), etc. So, how should I explain MVC in a way that is correct, concise, and uncontroversial?

    Read the article

  • C++: calling non-member functions with the same syntax of member ones

    - by peoro
    One thing I'd like to do in C++ is to call non-member functions with the same syntax you call member functions: class A { }; void f( A & this ) { /* ... */ } // ... A a; a.f(); // this is the same as f(a); Of course this could only work as long as f is not virtual (since it cannot appear in A's virtual table. f doesn't need to access A's non-public members. f doesn't conflict with a function declared in A (A::f). I'd like such a syntax because in my opinion it would be quite comfortable and would push good habits: calling str.strip() on a std::string (where strip is a function defined by the user) would sound a lot better than calling strip( str );. most of the times (always?) classes provide some member functions which don't require to be member (ie: are not virtual and don't use non-public members). This breaks encapsulation, but is the most practical thing to do (due to point 1). My question here is: what do you think of such feature? Do you think it would be something nice, or something that would introduce more issues than the ones it aims to solve? Could it make sense to propose such a feature to the next standard (the one after C++0x)? Of course this is just a brief description of this idea; it is not complete; we'd probably need to explicitly mark a function with a special keyword to let it work like this and many other stuff.

    Read the article

  • Preferred lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Managing accounts on a private website for a real-life community

    - by Smudge
    I'm looking at setting-up a walled-in website for a real-life community of people, and I was wondering if anyone has any experience with managing member accounts for this kind of thing. Some conditions that must be met: This community has a set list of real-life members, each of whom would be eligible for one account on the website. We don't expect or require that they all sign-up. It is purely opt-in, but we anticipate that many of them would be interested in the services we are setting up. Some of the community members emails are known, but some of them have fallen off the grid over the years, so ideally there would be a way for them to get back in touch with us through the public-facing side of the site. (And we'd want to manually verify the identity of anyone who does so). Their names are known, and for similar projects in the past we have assigned usernames derived from their real-life names. This time, however, we are open to other approaches, such as letting them specify their own username or getting rid of usernames entirely. The specific web technology we will use (e.g. Drupal, Joomla, etc) is not really our concern right now -- I am more interested in how this can be approached in the abstract. Our database already includes the full member roster, so we can email many of them generated links to a page where they can create an account. (And internally we can require that these accounts be paired with a known member). Should we have them specify their own usernames, or are we fine letting them use their registered email address to log-in? Are there any paradigms for walled-in community portals that help address security issues if, for example, one of their email accounts is compromised? We don't anticipate attempted break-ins being much of a threat, because nothing about this community is high-profile, but we do want to address security concerns. In addition, we want to make the sign-up process as painless for the members as possible, especially given the fact that we can't just make sign-ups open to anyone. I'm interested to hear your thoughts and suggestions! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to explain bad software to non-technical people?

    - by mtutty
    In discussing software development with non-technical people (customers, business owners, project sponsors, etc.), I often resort to analogies and metaphors. It's relatively easy and effective to use a "house" or other metaphor for describing the size and complexity of new development. However, we often inherit someone else's code or data, and this approach doesn't seem to hold up as well when trying to explain why we're gutting something that already seems to work. Of course we can point to cycle time and cost to be saved in the future but this generally means nothing to business folks. I know doctors can say "just take this pill," but I'm not sure that software devs have the same authority. Ideas? EDIT: Let me add a bit to the discussion. The specific project I'm talking about has customers that don't realize (or care) about specific aspects of the system we're retiring (i.e., they think it was just fine): The system would save a NEW RECORD every time someone updated a field The system contained tables for reference data. These tables had new records added every day, even though they were duplicates of previous records. And there was no way to tie the reference data used for a particular case at the time it was closed. This is like 99% of the data in the old system. The field NAMES also have spaces, apostrophes and other inappropriate characters in them, making everything harder to work with. In addition to the incredible amount of duplicate data, they have around 1000 XLS files with data they want added to the system. Previously, they would do a spreadsheet for each case in the database, IN ADDITION TO what they typed into the database. Getting rid of this old, unneeded information and piping in the XLS data comprises about 80% of the total project effort, and was not something we could accurately predict. I'm trying to find a concrete way to describe how bad this thing was, mostly so that the customer will understand why the migration process has been so time-consuming. The actual coding was done pretty quickly and the new system works fine, but without the old data they won't be happy. Sorry to get into the weeds, but most of the answers I've seen so far are pretty basic scope/schedule/cost things. I've been doing this for 15 years, so this really is more of a reflective, philosophical question - but without some of the details it can be difficult to really appreciate the awful beauty of this problem.

    Read the article

  • Does MVC apply only to web

    - by Deeptechtons
    It is almost and instantaneous whenever I talk to developers about Model View Controller (MVC) they say you make a request to a url the server builds a entity (MODEL) and provides you with visual representation of that model. So does this mean MVC is only for the web or have I been meeting people who are just developers who employ MVC for writing web applications? Are there usages for MVC on desktop style applications? I for one am new to paradigm and would like to know of any super-set to MVC

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134  | Next Page >