Search Results

Search found 24266 results on 971 pages for 'api design'.

Page 157/971 | < Previous Page | 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164  | Next Page >

• Which Language Next? Python? Ruby? [closed]

  - by Ryan Craig

  I am a beginning Webmaster (relatively), with 2+ years of php experience. I also have some java training and a bit of .net. My company is now close to redeveloping the website that I work on, which is coded primarily in php, but has some poorly-written .net in part as well (it's confusing and ill-planned, but I didn't make any of those decisions. Can anyone say action-oriented .net and JScript?). So, I'm trying to decide which language I should learn next to quickly develop a new site. I will probably just redevelop it at first in php because I'm very comfortable with it. However, I'd like to migrate in the next year to something newer and more forward-thinking. This being said, .net is out of the question a little bit. We need cheap developers who are fast and can get pages up quickly. In this part of the country, part-time .net developers are hard to find. So, we need something that will be pretty standard in the next few years, but we have some .net SOAP 1.1 APIs that we use on our actual service (separate from the corporate website), that we will need to integrate part of the site with. Developing with php and SOAP is much more difficult than doing the same thing. So, I may have to develop the API collaborative part in .net just to be easy, and then I'd like to use something else that is fast, flexible, forward thinking, and will be relatively standard and easy to find developers for. So, any ideas? Python and Django? Ruby on Rails? Another framework? Thanks for your thoughts. Sorry, I know this was long, but it's all very convoluted and confusing so I needed to be slightly long-winded.

  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

• How to handle fine grained field-based ACL permissions in a RESTful service?

  - by Jason McClellan

  I've been trying to design a RESTful API and have had most of my questions answered, but there is one aspect of permissions that I'm struggling with. Different roles may have different permissions and different representations of a resource. For example, an Admin or the user himself may see more fields in his own User representation vs another less-privileged user. This is achieved simply by changing the representation on the backend, ie: deciding whether or not to include those fields. Additionally, some actions may be taken on a resource by some users and not by others. This is achieved by deciding whether or not to include those action items as links, eg: edit and delete links. A user who does not have edit permissions will not have an edit link. That covers nearly all of my permission use cases, but there is one that I've not quite figured out. There are some scenarios whereby for a given representation of an object, all fields are visible for two or more roles, but only a subset of those roles my edit certain fields. An example: { "person": { "id": 1, "name": "Bob", "age": 25, "occupation": "software developer", "phone": "555-555-5555", "description": "Could use some sunlight.." } } Given 3 users: an Admin, a regular User, and Bob himself (also a regular User), I need to be able to convey to the front end that: Admins may edit all fields, Bob himself may edit all fields, but a regular User, while they can view all fields, can only edit the description field. I certainly don't want the client to have to make the determination (or even, for that matter, to have any notion of the roles involved) but I do need a way for the backend to convey to the client which fields are editable. I can't simply use a combination of representation (the fields returned for viewing) and links (whether or not an edit link is availble) in this scenario since it's more finely grained. Has anyone solved this elegantly without adding the logic directly to the client?

  Read the article

• How to Effectively Create Bullet Patterns

  - by SoulBeaver

  I'm currently creating a top-down shooter like Touhou. The most important factor of the game is that there are many diverse patterns and ways at which bullets are generated and shot at the player, see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nb5Ohbt1Sg#start=0:60;end=9:53; At the moment, I'm using a class "Pattern" which has a series of steps on moving and shooting. However, I feel this method is quite laborous as I have to create a new Pattern for each attack and perhaps new Bullet classes that will implement a certain behavior. This question received a comment suggesting I should look into BulletML for easy creation and storage of bullets with a specific pattern. It looks decent, but it led me to wonder, what other solutions do you have that I should take into consideration? Update My current design is as follows: An example of an implemented pattern: My GigasPattern first executes a teleport which moves Alice to a certain point (X, Y) on the screen. After this is completed, the pattern starts using the Mover to move the sprite around (whereas teleporting has separate effects and animation). These are of no concern, really, as they are quite simple. The Shooter also creates various Attacks, which are classes again that the Shooter can use to create various patterns of bullets, much like the one in the question I posted. Once the Mover has reached it's destination, both it and the shooter stop and return to an inactive state. The pattern completes, is removed by the AI and a new one gets chosen.

  Read the article

• How can we best petition to bring Adobe creative software to Ubuntu?

  - by Sixthlaw

  Now I know its not as simple as asking for Adobe to support their design software on Ubuntu, but is there a way for the community and Canonical to make known to Adobe the rapidly growing amount of Linux users, and their desire for this great set of tools OFFICIALLY? I know that many of the answers I receive might be of the fashion "Its not going to happen", "use the free tools provided" or "Who knows it might happen in the near future", but this IS not what I am looking for. I have noticed, on sites like www.OmgUbuntu.com, there are links to pages where people can "like" the idea. Is there a way to try and get the whole community on board with this one, even Canonical, and as stated above, put forward this proposal to Adobe. The current requests for an Adobe CS, for Linux, are in dribs and drabs scattered all of the internet. Now is the best time to come up with productive solutions on how we can best gather statistics on the amount of people willing to buy the Adobe CS. These are the words of an Adobe employee: "I have forwarded this feedback on to the appropriate team who will consider it for future releases of Adobe software." The larger amount of people we have unified in the ONE community proposal, the greater chance we have of getting the software. How can we make this happen?

  Read the article

• Keeping a domain model consistent with actual data

  - by fstuijt

  Recently domain driven design got my attention, and while thinking about how this approach could help us I came across the following problem. In DDD the common approach is to retrieve entities (or better, aggregate roots) from a repository which acts as a in-memory collection of these entities. After these entities have been retrieved, they can be updated or deleted by the user, however after retrieval they are essentially disconnected from the data source and one must actively inform the repository to update the data source and make is consistent again with our in-memory representation. What is the DDD approach to retrieving entities that should remain connected to the data source? For example, in our situation we retrieve a series of sensors that have a specific measurement during retrieval. Over time, these measurement values may change and our business logic in the domain model should respond to these changes properly. E.g., domain events may be raised if a sensor value exceeds a predefined threshold. However, using the repository approach, these sensor values are just snapshots, and are disconnected from the data source. Does any of you have an idea on how to solve this following the DDD approach?

  Read the article

• Is there a common programming term for the problems of adding features to an already-featureful program?

  - by Jeremy Friesner

  I'm looking for a commonly used programming term to describe a software-engineering phenomenon, which (for lack of a better way to describe it) I'll illustrate first with a couple of examples-by-analogy: Scenario 1: We want to build/extend a subway system on the outskirts of a small town in Wyoming. There are the usual subway-problems to solve, of course (hiring the right construction company, choosing the best route, buying the subway cars), but other than that it's pretty straightforward to implement the system because there aren't a huge number of constraints to satisfy. Scenario 2: Same as above, except now we need to build/extend the subway system in downtown Los Angeles. Here we face all of the problems we did in case (1), but also additional problems -- most of the applicable space is already in use, and has a vocal constituency which will protest loudly if we inconvenience them by repurposing, redesigning, or otherwise modifying the infrastructure that they rely on. Because of this, extensions to the system happen either very slowly and expensively, or they don't happen at all. I sometimes see a similar pattern with software development -- adding a new feature to a small/simple program is straightforward, but as the program grows, adding further new features becomes more and more difficult, if only because it is difficult to integrate the new feature without adversely affecting any of the large number of existing use-cases or user-constituencies. (even with a robust, adaptable program design, you run into the problem of the user interface becoming so elaborate that the program becomes difficult to learn or use) Is there a term for this phenomenon?

  Read the article

• Depending on fixed version of a library and ignore its updates

  - by Moataz Elmasry

  I was talking to a technical boss yesterday. Its about a project in C++ that depends on opencv and he wanted to include a specific opencv version into the svn and keep using this version ignoring any updates which I disagreed with.We had a heated discussion about that. His arguments: Everything has to be delivered into one package and we can't ask the client to install external libraries. We depend on a fixed version so that new updates of opencv won't screw our code. We can't guarantee that within a version update, ex from 3.2.buildx to 3.2.buildy. Buildy the function signatures won't change. My arguments: True everything has to be delivered to the client as one package,but that's what build scripts are for. They download the external libraries and create a bundle. Within updates of the same version 3.2.buildx to 3.2.buildy its impossible that a signature change, unless it is a really crappy framework, which isn't the case with opencv. We deprive ourselves from new updates and features of that library. If there's a bug in the version we took, and even if there's a bug fix later, we won't be able to get that fix. Its simply ineffiecient and anti design to depend on a certain version/build of an external library as it makes our project difficult in the future to adopt to new changes. So I'd like to know what you guys think. Does it really make sense to include a specific version of external library in our svn and keep using it ignoring all updates?

  Read the article

• Material System

  - by Towelie

  I'm designing Material/Shader System (target API DX10+ and may be OpenGL3+, now only DX10). I know, there was a lot of topics about this, but i can't find what i need. I don't want to do some kind of compilation/parsing scripts in real-time. So there some artist-created material, written at some analog of CG. After it compiled to hlsl code and after to final shader. Also there are some hard-coded ConstantBuffers, like cbuffer EveryFrameChanging { float4x4 matView; float time; float delta; } And shader use shared constant buffers to get parameters. For each mesh in the scene, getting needs and what it can give (normals, binormals etc.) and finding corresponding permutation of shader or calculating missing parts. Also, during build calculating render states and the permutations or hash for this shader which later will be used for sorting or even giving the ID from 0 to ShaderCount w/o gaps to it for sorting. FinalShader have only 1 technique and one pass. After it for each Mesh setting some shader and it's good to render. some pseudo code SetConstantBuffer(ConstantBuffer::PerFrame); foreach (shader in FinalShaders) SetConstantBuffer(ConstantBuffer::PerShader, shader); SetRenderState(shader); foreach (mesh in shader.GetAllMeshes) SetConstantBuffer(ConstantBuffer::PerMesh, mesh); SetBuffers(mesh); Draw(); class FinalShader { public: UUID m_ID; RenderState m_RenderState; CBufferBindings m_BufferBindings; } But i have no idea how to create this CG language and do i really need it?

  Read the article

• Is wrapping a third party code the only solution to unit test its consumers? [closed]

  - by Songo

  I'm doing unit testing and in one of my classes I need to send a mail from one of the methods, so using constructor injection I inject an instance of Zend_Mail class which is in Zend framework. Now some people argue that if a library is stable enough and won't change often then there is no need to wrap it. So assuming that Zend_Mail is stable and won't change and it fits my needs entirely, then I won't need a wrapper for it. Now take a look at my class Logger that depends on Zend_Mail: class Logger{ private $mailer; function __construct(Zend_Mail $mail){ $this->mail=$mail; } function toBeTestedFunction(){ //Some code $this->mail->setTo('some value'); $this->mail->setSubject('some value'); $this->mail->setBody('some value'); $this->mail->send(); //Some } } However, Unit testing demands that I test one component at a time, so I need to mock the Zend_Mail class. In addition I'm violating the Dependency Inversion principle as my Logger class now depends on concretion not abstraction. Now is wrapping Zend_Mail the only solution or is there a better approach to this problem? The code is in PHP, but answers doesn't have to be. This is more of a design issue than a language specific feature

  Read the article

• Create an array from mysql with column names and values [on hold]

  - by ScaZ

  i'm trying to create an array with PHP and MySQL, but i always get errors. The code i'm using function db_listar_usuarios(){ $link=db_connect(); $query = "select * from usuarios" or die("Problemas en el select: " . mysqli_error($link)); $result = $link->query($query); while($row = mysqli_fetch_assoc($result)) { $row['nombre'] . array(; foreach ($row as $col => $val) { $col => $val; } } } And what I want to create with this code is: array( 'john' => array('address' => 'st 123', 'age' => '25', 'surname' => 'doe'), 'ane' => array('address' => 'av 456', 'age'=> '32', 'surname' => 'smith'), ); To use then like something like this: private $contacts = db_listar_usuarios(); I use 2 files: functions.php and server.php server.php is a downloaded file example to do a REST API. Here are both of them. server.php - pastebin.com/5j54m1Mz functions.php - pastebin.com/N7jMhSBa Thank you in advance!

  Read the article

• Should I make up my own HTTP status codes? (a la Twitter 420: Enhance Your Calm)

  - by Max Bucknell

  I'm currently implementing an HTTP API, my first ever. I've been spending a lot of time looking at the Wikipedia page for HTTP status codes, because I'm determined to implement the right codes for the right situations. Listed on that page is a code with number 420, which is a custom code that Twitter used to use for rate limiting. There is already a code for rate limiting, though. It's 429. This led me to wonder why they would set a custom one, when there is already a use case. Is that just being cute? And if so, then which circumstances would make it acceptable to return a different status code, and what, if any problems may clients have with it? I read somewhere that Mozilla doesn't implement the joke 418: I’m a teapot response, which makes me think that clients choose which status codes they implement. If that's true, then I can imagine Twitter's funny little enhance your calm code being problematic. Unless I'm mistaken, and we can appropriate any code number to mean whatever we like, and that only convention dictates that 404 means not found, and 429 means take it easy.

  Read the article

• What are solutions and tradeoffs to maintain search result consistency in a web application

  - by iammichael

  Consider a web application with a custom search function that must display the results in a paged manner (twenty per page with up to hundreds of thousands of total results) and the ability to drill down to individual results that maintain next/previous links to navigate through the results. Re-executing the search on each page request to get the appropriate results for that page of data can be too expensive (up to 15s per search). Also, since the underlying data can change frequently (e.g. addition of new results), re-executing could cause the next/previous functionality to result in inconsistent behavior (e.g. the same results reappearing on a later page after having been viewed on an earlier page). What options exist to ensure the search results can be viewed across multiple pages in a consistent manner, and what tradeoffs does each option have in terms of network, CPU, memory, and storage requirements? EDIT: I thought caching the query search results was an obvious necessity. The question is really asking about where to cache the result set and what tradeoffs might exist to each. For example, storing the ids of the entities in the result set on the client, or storing the IDs of the entities themselves in the users session on the web server, or in a temporary table in the database. I'm not looking specifically for a single solution as different scenarios may result in different approaches (and such a question would be more suited for stackoverflow.com rather than here), but more of a design comparison between the possible approaches.

  Read the article

• Static / Shared Helper Functions vs Built-In Methods

  - by Nathan

  This is a simple question but a design consideration that I often run across in my day to day development work. Lets say that you have a class that represents some kinds of collection. Public Class ModifiedCustomerOrders Public Property Orders as List(Of ModifiedOrders) End Class Within this class you do all kinds of important work, such as combining many different information sources and, eventually, build the Modified Customer Orders. Now, you have different processes that consume this class, each of which needs a slightly different slice of the ModifiedCustomerOrders items. To enable this, you want to add filtering functionality. How do you go about this? Do you: Add Filtering calls to the ModifiedCustomerOrders class so that you can say: MyOrdersClass.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a Static / Shared "tooling" class that allows you to call: OrdersFilters.RemoveCanceledOrders(MyOrders) Create an extension method to accomplish the same feat as #2 but with less typing: MyOrders.RemoveCanceledOrders() Create a "Service" method that handles the getting of Orders as appropriate to the calling function, while using one of the previous approaches "under the hood". OrdersService.GetOrdersForProcessA() Others? I tend to prefer the tooling / extension method approaches as they make testing a little bit simpler. Although I dependency inject all my sourcing data into the ModifiedCustomerOrders, having it as part of the class makes it a little bit more complicated to test. Typically, I choose to use extension methods where I am doing parameterless transformations / filters. As they get more complex, I will move it into a static class instead. Thoughts on this approach? How would you approach it?

  Read the article

• Should I think about switching to another platform as a .Net developer? [closed]

  - by A. Karimi

  I’ve been a developer for about 10 years and I’ve almost worked on Microsoft stack. At the last several years I’ve been introduced to some good practices such as IoC and other primary design patterns. Now I feel so much comfortable using these patterns and concepts and I’m very angry why we didn’t do that earlier! They exist and used by many developers since more than 5 years ago but why I and many of my colleagues began using them a little later. As you may know Java developers are more ahead in these fields (concepts, patterns and …) than .Net developers. Am I right? Now the question is, “Why we (as .NET developers) weren’t ahead so much? Isn’t it because we are using Microsoft stack?”. I know ALT.NET but why we are trying make a closed ecosystem open and finding alternatives for Microsoft Echo Chamber, while there are natively open ecosystems like Java!? I've always liked most of the Microsoft works very much but I’m worried about this issue. I am even ask myself should I move to another platform?

  Read the article

• Correct way to inject dependencies in Business logic service?

  - by Sri Harsha Velicheti

  Currently the structure of my application is as below Web App -- WCF Service (just a facade) -- Business Logic Services -- Repository - Entity Framework Datacontext Now each of my Business logic service is dependent on more than 5 repositories ( I have interfaces defined for all the repos) and I am doing a Constructor injection right now(poor mans DI instead of using a proper IOC as it was determined that it would be a overkill for our project). Repositories have references to EF datacontexts. Now some of the methods in the Business logic service require only one of the 5 repositories, so If I need to call that method I would end up instantiating a Service which will instatiate all 5 repositories which is a waste. An example: public class SomeService : ISomeService { public(IFirstRepository repo1, ISecondRepository repo2, IThirdRepository repo3) {} // My DoSomething method depends only on repo1 and doesn't use repo2 and repo3 public DoSomething() { //uses repo1 to do some stuff, doesn't use repo2 and repo3 } public DoSomething2() { //uses repo2 and repo3 to do something, doesn't require repo1 } public DoSomething3() { //uses repo3 to do something, doesn't require repo1 and repo2 } } Now if my I have to use DoSomething method on SomeService I end up creating both IFirstRepository,ISecondRepository and IThirdRepository but using only IFirstRepository, now this is bugging me, I can seem to accept that I am un-necessarily creating repositories and not using them. Is this a correct design? Are there any better alternatives? Should I be looking at Lazy instantiation Lazy<T> ?

  Read the article

• Motivation for service layer (instead of just copying dlls)?

  - by BornToCode

  I'm creating an application which has 2 different UIs so I'm making it with a service layer which I understood is appropriate for such case. However I found myself just creating web methods for every single method I have in the BL layer, so the services basically built from methods that looks like this: return customers_bl.Get_Customer_Prices(customer_id); I understood that a main point of the service layer is to prevent duplication of code so I asked myself - well, why not just import the BL.dll (and the DAL.dll) to the other UI, and whenever making a change re-copy the dll files, it might not be so 'neat', but is the all purpose of the service layer to prevent this? {I know something is wrong in my approach, I'm probably missing the importance of service layer, I'd like to get more motivation to create another layer, especially because as it is I found that many of my BL functions ALREADY looks like: return customers_dal.Get_Customer_Prices(cust_id) which led me to ask: was it really necessary to create the BL just because on several functions I actually have LOGIC inside the BL?} so I'm looking for more motivation to creating ONE MORE layer, I'm sure it's not just to make it more convenient that I won't have to re-copy the dlls on changes? Am I grasping it wrong? Any simple guidelines on how to design service layer (corresponding to all the BL layer functions or not? any simple example?) any enlightenment on the subject?

  Read the article

• How to implement isValid correctly?

  - by Songo

  I'm trying to provide a mechanism for validating my object like this: class SomeObject { private $_inputString; private $_errors=array(); public function __construct($inputString) { $this->_inputString = $inputString; } public function getErrors() { return $this->_errors; } public function isValid() { $isValid = preg_match("/Some regular expression here/", $this->_inputString); if($isValid==0){ $this->_errors[]= 'Error was found in the input'; } return $isValid==1; } } Then when I'm testing my code I'm doing it like this: $obj = new SomeObject('an INVALID input string'); $isValid = $obj->isValid(); $errors=$obj->getErrors(); $this->assertFalse($isValid); $this->assertNotEmpty($errors); Now the test passes correctly, but I noticed a design problem here. What if the user called $obj->getErrors() before calling $obj->isValid()? The test will fail because the user has to validate the object first before checking the error resulting from validation. I think this way the user depends on a sequence of action to work properly which I think is a bad thing because it exposes the internal behaviour of the class. How do I solve this problem? Should I tell the user explicitly to validate first? Where do I mention that? Should I change the way I validate? Is there a better solution for this? UPDATE: I'm still developing the class so changes are easy and renaming functions and refactoring them is possible.

  Read the article

• Need ideas on how to give my levels structure

  - by akuritsu

  I am making an iOS game for a project at school. It is going to be a tiny bit like Fruit Ninja, as in it will have different things on the screen, and when you hit them, they die, and you get points. The trouble is that unlike Fruit Ninja, my game will have different types of sprites, all doing different things (moving different places, doing different things, etc). The one thing that is bad about having all of these sprites that do different things is that it is hard for them to look neat on the screen all together. I was planning on having a couple of different gamemodes: Time Trial You have 120 seconds to kill as many sprites as possible. Survival You have three lives, every time you try to hit a sprite and miss, you lose a life. ???? Whatever I think of. I am a rookie to game design in general, and I don't know the best way to make my game look good, and play well. I could have all of these sprites on the screen at the same time, or I could have them come in waves, for example 10 of sprite_a come on, and once they are killed, 10 of sprite_b come on, etc... Please give me your opinion about which one I should code. If you have any other suggestions for either a third gamemode, or a completely different way to make the levels, feel free to tell me.

  Read the article

• Override methods should call base method?

  - by Trevor Pilley

  I'm just running NDepend against some code that I have written and one of the warnings is Overrides of Method() should call base.Method(). The places this occurs are where I have a base class which has virtual properties and methods with default behaviour but which can be overridden by a class which inherits from the base class and doesn't call the overridden method. For example, in the base class I have a property defined like this: protected virtual char CloseQuote { get { return '"'; } } And then in an inheriting class which uses a different close quote: protected override char CloseQuote { get { return ']'; } } Not all classes which inherit from the base class use different quote characters hence my initial design. The alternatives I thought of were have get/set properties in the base class with the defaults set in the constructor: protected BaseClass() { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; set; } public InheritingClass() { this.CloseQuote = ']'; } Or make the base class require the values as constructor args: protected BaseClass(char closeQuote, ...) { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; private set; } public InheritingClass() base (closeQuote: ']', ...) { } Should I use virtual in a scenario where the base implementation may be replaced instead of extended or should I opt for one of the alternatives I thought of? If so, which would be preferable and why?

  Read the article

• Repository query conditions, dependencies and DRY

  - by vFragosop

  To keep it simple, let's suppose an application which has Accounts and Users. Each account may have any number of users. There's also 3 consumers of UserRepository: An admin interface which may list all users Public front-end which may list all users An account authenticated API which should only list it's own users Assuming UserRepository is something like this: class UsersRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { private function query() { return $this->database()->select('users.*'); } public function getAll() { return $this->query()->exec(); } // IMPORTANT: // Tons of other methods for searching, filtering, // joining of other tables, ordering and such... } Keeping in mind the comment above, and the necessity to abstract user querying conditions, How should I handle querying of users filtering by account_id? I can picture three possible roads: 1. Should I create an AccountUsersRepository? class AccountUsersRepository extends UserRepository { public function __construct(Account $account) { $this->account = $account; } private function query() { return parent::query() ->where('account_id', '=', $this->account->id); } } This has the advantage of reducing the duplication of UsersRepository methods, but doesn't quite fit into anything I've read about DDD so far (I'm rookie by the way) 2. Should I put it as a method on AccountsRepository? class AccountsRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { public function getAccountUsers(Account $account) { return $this->database() ->select('users.*') ->where('account_id', '=', $account->id) ->exec(); } } This requires the duplication of all UserRepository methods and may need another UserQuery layer, that implements those querying logic on chainable way. 3. Should I query UserRepository from within my account entity? class Account extends Entity { public function getUsers() { return UserRepository::findByAccountId($this->id); } } This feels more like an aggregate root for me, but introduces dependency of UserRepository on Account entity, which may violate a few principles. 4. Or am I missing the point completely? Maybe there's an even better solution? Footnotes: Besides permissions being a Service concern, in my understanding, they shouldn't implement SQL query but leave that to repositories since those may not even be SQL driven.

  Read the article

• What online games would let me practice AI development?

  - by Myn

  I am working on a project experimenting with Artificial Intelligence design methodologies for online world avatars. Online world here is quite open to interpretation; Second Life is just as applicable as Counter Strike, for example. To carry out these experiments, I must first develop an intelligent agent for the world in question. However, I am honestly quite stuck as to which game I could use for this. My preference was to develop an intelligent "bot" to play an MMORPG, but the legal restrictions of such games prevent me. Likewise with most FPS games the use of an intelligent agent in place of a human player is considered cheating. The alternative, of course, is to create an NPC bot; an intelligent agent that populates the world alongside the player(s) rather than replacing a particular player. However, I'm struggling to find a game that would enable me to create an intelligent opponent either. I suppose the main requirements would be a game allows a third party program to use the function calls usually utilised by players and read feedback on the state of the world. Quake III and Unreal Tournament have been suggested before, but they have already been the subject of work on this research project. Short of writing my own online game from scratch, what games would allow me, through middleware, an API, or otherwise, to create either an artificially intelligent player or a bot?

  Read the article

• How to avoid the GameManager god object?

  - by lorancou

  I just read an answer to a question about structuring game code. It made me wonder about the ubiquitous GameManager class, and how it often becomes an issue in a production environment. Let me describe this. First, there's prototyping. Nobody cares about writing great code, we just try to get something running to see if the gameplay adds up. Then there's a greenlight, and in an effort to clean things up, somebody writes a GameManager. Probably to hold a bunch of GameStates, maybe to store a few GameObjects, nothing big, really. A cute, little, manager. In the peaceful realm of pre-production, the game is shaping up nicely. Coders have proper nights of sleep and plenty of ideas to architecture the thing with Great Design Patterns. Then production starts and soon, of course, there is crunch time. Balanced diet is long gone, the bug tracker is cracking with issues, people are stressed and the game has to be released yesterday. At that point, usually, the GameManager is a real big mess (to stay polite). The reason for that is simple. After all, when writing a game, well... all the source code is actually here to manage the game. It's easy to just add this little extra feature or bugfix in the GameManager, where everything else is already stored anyway. When time becomes an issue, no way to write a separate class, or to split this giant manager into sub-managers. Of course this is a classical anti-pattern: the god object. It's a bad thing, a pain to merge, a pain to maintain, a pain to understand, a pain to transform. What would you suggest to prevent this from happening?

  Read the article

• How to pass dynamic information between a form and a service? [closed]

  - by qminator

  I have a design problem and hopefully the braintrust which is stack exchange can help. I have a generic form, which loads a dataset and displays it. It never has direct knowledge of what it contains but can pass it to a service for manipulation (via an Onclick event for example). However, the form might need to alter its behaviour based on the manipulation by the service. Example: The service realises this dataset requires sending of an email by the user and needs to send an instruction to the form to open up a mail form. My idea is thus: I'm thinking about passing back some type of key/name dictionary, filled with commands which the service requires. They could then be interpeted by the form without it need to reference something specific. Example: IF the service decides that the dataset needs to refresh it would send back a key/name pair, I might even be able to chain commands. Refreshing the dataset and sending a mail. Refresh / "Foo" Mail / "[email protected]" The form would reference an action explicitly (Refresh or Mail) but not the instructions themselves. Is this a valid idea or am I wasting time?

  Read the article

• Motivation for a service layer (instead of just copying dlls)?

  - by BornToCode

  I'm creating an application which has 2 different UIs so I'm making it with a service layer which I understood is appropriate for such scenario. However I found myself just creating web methods for every single method I have in the BL layer, so the services basically built from methods that looks like this: return customers_bl.Get_Customer_Prices(customer_id); I understood that a main point of the service layer is to prevent duplication of code so I asked myself - why not just import the BL.DLL (and the dal.dll) to the other UI, and whenever making a change re-copy the dlls, it might not be so 'neat', but still less hassle than one more layer? {I know something is wrong in my approach, I'm probably missing the importance of service layer, I'd like to get more motivation to create another layer, especially because as it is I found that many of my BL functions ALREADY looks like: return customers_dal.Get_Customer_Prices(cust_id) which led me to ask: was it really necessary to create the BL just because on several functions I actually have LOGIC inside the BL?} so I'm looking for more motivation to creating ONE MORE layer, I'm sure it's not just to make it more convenient that I won't have to re-copy the dlls on changes? Am I grasping it wrong? Any simple guidelines on how to design service layer (corresponding to all the BL layer functions or not? any simple example?) any enlightenment on the subject?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164  | Next Page >