Search Results

Search found 26869 results on 1075 pages for 'library design'.

Page 179/1075 | < Previous Page | 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186  | Next Page >

• Is there a pattern to restrict which classes can update another class?

  - by Mike

  Say I have a class ImportantInfo with a public writable property Data. Many classes will read this property but only a few will ever set it. Basically, if you want to update Data you should really know what you're doing. Is there a pattern I could use to make this explicit other than by documenting it? For example, some way to enforce that only classes that implement IUpdateImportantData can do it (this is just an example)? I'm not talking about security here, but more of a "hey, are you sure you want to do that?" kind of thing.

  Read the article

• Creating a Predicate Builder extension method

  - by Rippo

  I have a Kendo UI Grid that I am currently allowing filtering on multiple columns. I am wondering if there is a an alternative approach removing the outer switch statement? Basically I want to able to create an extension method so I can filter on a IQueryable<T> and I want to drop the outer case statement so I don't have to switch column names. private static IQueryable<Contact> FilterContactList(FilterDescriptor filter, IQueryable<Contact> contactList) { switch (filter.Member) { case "Name": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || w.Lastname.Contains(filter.Value.ToString()) || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname).Contains( filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Firstname == filter.Value.ToString() || w.Lastname == filter.Value.ToString() || (w.Firstname + " " + w.Lastname) == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; case "Company": switch (filter.Operator) { case FilterOperator.StartsWith: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.StartsWith(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.Contains: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company.Contains(filter.Value.ToString())); break; case FilterOperator.IsEqualTo: contactList = contactList.Where(w => w.Company == filter.Value.ToString()); break; } break; } return contactList; } Some additional information, I am using NHibernate Linq. Also another problem is that the "Name" column on my grid is actually "Firstname" + " " + "LastName" on my contact entity. We can also assume that all filterable columns will be strings.

  Read the article

• Managing different utility classes between engine and libraries

  - by hayer

  I'm currently in updating some engine code (which does not work, so it is more like creating a engine). I've decided to swap over to SFML (instead of my own crappy renderer, window manager, and audio), Box2D (since I need physics, but have none), and some small utilities I've built myself. The problem is that each of the project mentioned over use different types for things like Vector2, etc. So to the question: is it a good idea to replace Box2D and SFML vectors with my own vector class (which is one of my better implementations)? My idea then was to have a separate .lib with all my classes that should be shared between all the projects in the solution.

  Read the article

• How does process of updating code with Continous Integration work?

  - by BleakCabalist

  I want to draw a model of process of updating the source code with the use of Continous Integration. The main issue is I don't really understand how it works when there are several programmers working on various aspects of the code at the same time. I can't visualize it in my mind. Here's what I know but I might be wrong: New code is sent to repository. Continous Integration server asks Version Control System if there is a new code in repository. If there is than CIS executes tests on the code. If tests show there are problems than CIS orders VCS to revert back to working wersion of the code and communicates it to programmer. If tests are passed positively it compiles the repository code and makes new build of a game? New build is made not after ever single change, but at the end of the day I believe? Are my assumptions above correct? If yes, does it also work when there are several programmers updating repository at once? Is this enough to draw a model of the process in your opinions or did I miss something? Also, what software would I need for above process? Can you guys give examples for CIS software and VCS software and whatever else I need? Does CIS software perform code tests or do I need another tool for that and integrate it with CIS? Is there a repository software?

  Read the article

• What is realism?

  - by eversor

  Beyond the obvious something that seams real, realism in games is a hard feature to hit. In some cases, things that are completely impossible in real life are seen as realistic by gamers. For instance, in some FPS you can survive being hit by a fair amount of bullets when in real life one is enough, Newton-defying car drifts, etc. So, in some cases, reductions of life-like actions or consequences implies a bigger sense of realism. The root of this pseudo-philosophical question lies in: I am going to create a engine for battles in an online (browser-based) strategic game. Browser-based means that the battle would not be seen. And i do not know how to approach this realism issue.

  Read the article

• Complex, yet simple crafting system model

  - by KatShot

  I'm working on some arcade shooter/slasher, and the main logline is "Kick'em with everything you want". There's not so many enemies in GDD, main focus is on tons of weapons and gadgets to cause mayhem. To get weapon, you need to craft it, and now crafting system looks simple, like: 1) You got three slots for weapon parts (like A, B, C) 2) You collect misc weapon parts, and when you got atleast one for every slot, you can craft a weapon (for example, if you got A1, B1, B2, B3 and C1, you can craft such models - A1B1C1, A1B2C1, A1B3C1) As for me, this crafting system is too simple, because weapon parts will just fall from the top of screen, often enough. That's why I'm thinking about adding some more crafting system levels, like resources (collect 10 scrap pieces to make part A1 or C3), etc. My question is: How can i add some more complex, still simple, transparent levels in crafting system? upd. For example, in Minecraft or Terraria, first 5-10 crafting recipies quite transparent and simple IMHO. But then it turns into huge mess to understand, how to craft this or that (for example, fishing rod)

  Read the article

• "Collection Wrapper" pattern - is this common?

  - by Prog

  A different question of mine had to do with encapsulating member data structures inside classes. In order to understand this question better please read that question and look at the approach discussed. One of the guys who answered that question said that the approach is good, but if I understood him correctly - he said that there should be a class existing just for the purpose of wrapping the collection, instead of an ordinary class offering a number of public methods just to access the member collection. For example, instead of this: class SomeClass{ // downright exposing the concrete collection. Things[] someCollection; // other stuff omitted Thing[] getCollection(){return someCollection;} } Or this: class SomeClass{ // encapsulating the collection, but inflating the class' public interface. Thing[] someCollection; // class functionality omitted. public Thing getThing(int index){ return someCollection[index]; } public int getSize(){ return someCollection.length; } public void setThing(int index, Thing thing){ someCollection[index] = thing; } public void removeThing(int index){ someCollection[index] = null; } } We'll have this: // encapsulating the collection - in a different class, dedicated to this. class SomeClass{ CollectionWrapper someCollection; CollectionWrapper getCollection(){return someCollection;} } class CollectionWrapper{ Thing[] someCollection; public Thing getThing(int index){ return someCollection[index]; } public int getSize(){ return someCollection.length; } public void setThing(int index, Thing thing){ someCollection[index] = thing; } public void removeThing(int index){ someCollection[index] = null; } } This way, the inner data structure in SomeClass can change without affecting client code, and without forcing SomeClass to offer a lot of public methods just to access the inner collection. CollectionWrapper does this instead. E.g. if the collection changes from an array to a List, the internal implementation of CollectionWrapper changes, but client code stays the same. Also, the CollectionWrapper can hide certain things from the client code - from example, it can disallow mutation to the collection by not having the methods setThing and removeThing. This approach to decoupling client code from the concrete data structure seems IMHO pretty good. Is this approach common? What are it's downfalls? Is this used in practice?

  Read the article

• How are the conceptual pairs Abstract/Concrete, Generic/Specific, and Complex/Simple related to one another in software architecture?

  - by tjb1982

  (= 2 (+ 1 1)) take the above. The requirement of the '=' predicate is that its arguments be comparable. Any two structures are comparable in this case, and so the contract/requirement is pretty generic. The '+' predicate requires that its arguments be numbers. That's more specific. (socket domain type protocol) the arguments here are much more specific (even though the arguments are still just numbers and the function itself returns a file descriptor, which is itself an int), but the arguments are more abstract, and the implementation is built up from other functions whose abstractions are less abstract, which are themselves built from less and less abstract abstractions. To the point where the requirements are something like move from one location to another, observe whether the switch at that location is on or off, turn the switch on or off, or leave it the same, etc. But are functions also less and less complex the less abstract they are? And is there a relationship between the number and range of arguments of a function and the complexity of its implementation, as you go from more abstract to less abstract, and vice versa? (= 2 (+ 1 1) 2r10) the '=' predicate is more generic than the '+' predicate, and thus could be more complex in its implementation. The '+' predicate's contract is less generic, and so could be less complex in its implementation. Is this even a little correct? What about the 'socket' function? Each of those arguments is a number of some kind. What they represent, though, is something more elaborate. It also returns a number (just like the others do), which is also a representation of something conceptually much more elaborate than a number. To boil it down, I'm asking if there is a relationship between the following dimensions, and why: Abstract/Concrete Complex/Simple Generic/Specific And more specifically, do different configurations of these dimensions have a specific, measurable impact on the number and range of the arguments (i.e., the contract) of a function?

  Read the article

• Do you have a data roadmap?

  - by BuckWoody

  I often visit companies where they asked me “What is SQL Server’s Roadmap?” What they mean is that they want to know where Microsoft is going with our database products. I explain that we’re expanding not only the capacities in SQL Server but the capabilities – we’re trying to make an “information platform”, rather than just a data store. But it’s interesting when I ask the same question back. “What is your data roadmap?” Most folks are surprised by the question, thinking only about storage and archival. To them, data is data. Ah, not so. Your data is one of the most valuable, if not the most valuable asset in your organization. And you should be thinking about how you’ll acquire it, how it will be distributed, how you’ll archive it (which includes more than just backing it up) and most importantly, how you’ll leverage it. Because it’s only when data becomes information that it is truly useful. to be sure, the folks on the web that collect lots of data have a strategy for it – do you? Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

  Read the article

• What is the preferred pattern when attaching a 'runtime object'?

  - by sebf

  In my application I have the following: public class NeatObject { /* lots of static data, and configuration flags */ } public class NeatObjectConsumer { void DoCleverStuffWithObjectOnGPU(NeatObject obj); } Where NeatObject and its consumer are used to control the GPU. The idea being that, the configuration of an instance of NeatObject and its members, define how the consumer instance behaves. The object can be passed around, edited, and most importantly serialised/deserialised by the application, with and without knowledge of NeatObjectConsumer, then provided back to the consumer to do something else. The purpose of this seperation is: The consumer manages hardware resources, which change depending on the computer, and even on the execution of the application, making preserving the state of an object which does everything difficult. Avoids circular references if the assembly that contains the consumer needs to reference one that only needs to know about NeatObject. However, there is a complication in that the consumer creates hardware resources and needs to associate them with NeatObject. These don't need to be preserved, but still need to be retrieved. DoCleverStuffWithObjectOnGPU() will be called many, many times during execution and so any bottleneck is a concern, therefore I would like to avoid dictionary lookups. What is the preferred method of attaching this information to NeatObject? By preferred, I mean intuitive - other coders can see immediately what is going on - and robust - method doesn't invite playing with the resources or present them in such a way as to make them easily corruptible. Essentially, I want to add my own metadata - how should I do it? Try to use 'actual metadata' functionality like Reflection? A member of the type of an abstract class? Unmanaged pointers? If you took on a project that used this pattern, what would you have liked the previous developer to do?

  Read the article

• Team seeks collaboration for 2D action adventure RPG

  - by AlchemicTempest

  not entirely sure if it's appropriate to post this here, but I'll try: We are looking for all kinds of game dev interested people for our 2D sci-fi action adventure rpg "Quantum Nucleus" This is voluntary collaboration. We are seeking programmers(Java), artists, designers, audio people and writers So basically all kinds of people. Please watch our video, for further information: Video Link Thanks ! :D http://www.Alchemic-Tempest.com

  Read the article

• Will you still play a good Red Alert 3 mission map? [closed]

  - by W.N.

  I've been creating a RA3 mission map (play in Skirmish), most likely a remake of RA2 Yuri "To the Moon" mission, with more interesting elements. However, because of my work, the process was corrupted for more than a year. And now, I see that very few people still play RA3. So, should I continue making this map? Because there're still a lot of work to complete this map. I can assure you, the mission will be interesting. However, if few people play it, there's no need to waste time to it. Please give me some advice. Thank you.

  Read the article

• How can I implement a matchmaker?

  - by csiz

  I'm making a multiplayer game, where players are separated in to rooms that would ideally have about 20 players. So I need a few pointers on an algorithm to distribute the players in to these rooms. A few more constraints: When a players gets in to a room, he should stay there until he decides to exit (the room itself changes levels) There may be more room servers, every server should create more rooms until near full capacity There's a central server that manages all the room servers, and directs the players towards their room

  Read the article

• Testing complex compositions

  - by phlipsy

  I have a rather large collection of classes which check and mutate a given data structure. They can be composed via the composition pattern into arbitrarily complex tree-like structures. The final product contains a lot of these composed structures. My question is now: How can I test those? Albeit it is easy to test every single unit of these compositions, it is rather expensive to test the whole compositions in the following sense: Testing the correct layout of the composition-tree results in a huge number of test cases Changes in the compositions result in a very laborious review of every single test case What is the general guideline here?

  Read the article

• Charakter coding / programming

  - by Jery

  lately I tryed a few times to create charakters for some games, but at some certain point (especially when collision detection came in) everything became messy and the interaction between chars, the world and certain items had a lot of bugs. So here is my question, how do you ussualy keep track of actions that your charakter is allowed to do, or more in general do you have some links / advices how to set up a char efficiantly? I´m working on a char right now, who should at least be able to run, jump, pick items up and use different fighting animations. Most ideas I came up with until now use some kind of action.priority / action.duration system to determain whats possible and what not, or a "action-manager" which defines for every action what is possible from that action on but it all doesnt work that well together =\ thx in advance for some input

  Read the article

• "Do it right, against customer's wishes" - how is it called?

  - by SF.

  We know the optimal situation of negotiating corrections of specifications with the customer, getting the specs to do what the client wanted, not what they said or thought they wanted. That's negotiating, explaining. Sometimes, we're unable to convince the client. We're forced to produce broken as designed. This, called "demonology" by merit of mages summoning demons and demons fulfilling their wishes very literally, causing the mage's demise as result, is another approach that will leave the customer very dissatisfied once they realize their error, and of course try to pin the blame on the developer. Now I just faced a very different approach: the customer created simple specs that fail to account for some critical caveat, and is completely unwilling to fix them, admit the obvious errors and accept suggested corrections. The product made to these specs will be critically broken, and possibly might cost human lives. Still, it's too late to drop the contract entirely. The contract has punitive clauses for that, ones we can't really accept. The boss' decision? We do the work right and lie to the customer that we did it according to the specs. The algorithms in question are hidden deep enough under the surface, the product will do the work just fine, won't fail in the caveat situation, and unless someone digs too deep, they will never discover we didn't break it as requested. Is there some common name for this tactics of execution of specs?

  Read the article

• How to plan a PHP based project with DB involved in the below scenario? [closed]

  - by San

  I'm starting a project on web monitoring where other websites can be monitored. Recently, I have found codeIgniter, yii, kohana frameworks online, but I'm confused as to whether to choose any of those or start directly. Moreover, this is my first big project that I'm planning for. So can anyone give me suggestions on how to start, how to plan, what books to refer to, to start this kind of web application and share some links to understand for myself on how to work on this project?

  Read the article

• How can I refactor my code to use fewer singletons?

  - by fish

  I started a component based, networked game (so far only working on the server). I know why singletons can be bad, but I can't think of another way to implement the same thing. So far I have: A GameState singleton (for managing the global state of the game, i.e. pre-game, running, exiting). A World singleton, which is the root entity for my entity graph An EntityFactory A ComponentFactory I'm thinking about adding a "MessageDispatcher" so individual components can subscribe to network messages. The factories do not have state, so I suppose they aren't so bad. However, the others do have global state, which is asking for trouble. How can I refactor my code so it uses fewer singletons?

  Read the article

• Versioning Java APIs in a non-web context

  - by GAP

  I have modular java application which consists of 40 modules. Some of these modules needs to expose external APIs which other modules or any external integration should be using. The system runs as a desktop application and each module is bundled as a separate jar file. My plan is to bundle the external api as a separate jar. But now the question is: how can I maintain multiple versions of the same API to keep backward compatibility in cases where it can co-exist? Are there any de facto standards on handling APIs versioning out of a web context ?

  Read the article

• Should Business Interfaces be part of the Model layer?

  - by Mik378

  In an oriented-services enterprise application, isn't it an antipattern to mix Service APIs (containing interface that external users depends on) with Model objects (entities, custom exceptions objects etc...) ? According to me, Services should only depends on Model layer but never mixed with it. In fact, my colleague told me that it doesn't make sense to separate it since client need both. (model and service interfaces) But I notice that everytime a client asks for some changes, like adding a new method in some interface (means a new service), Model layer has to be also delivered... Thus, client who has not interested by this "addition" is constrained to be concerned by this update of Model... and in a large enterprise application, this kind of delivery is known to be very risked... What is the best practice ? Separate services(only interfaces so) and model objects or mix it ?

  Read the article

• OOP PHP make separate classes or one

  - by user2956219

  I'm studying OOP PHP and working on a small personal project but I have hard time grasping some concepts. Let's say I have a list of items, each item belongs to subcategory, and each subcategory belongs to category. So should I make separate classes for category (with methods to list all categories, add new category, delete category), class for subcategories and class for items? Or should I make creating, listing and deleting categories as methods for item class? Both category and subcategory are very simple and basically consist of ID, Name and parentID (for subcategory).

  Read the article

• Is there a language that allows this syntax: add(elements)at(index);

  - by c_maker

  Does a language exist with such a syntax? If not, what are some of the limitations/disadvantages to this syntax in case I want to write a language that supported it? Some examples: sort(array, fromIndex, toIndex); vs sort(array)from(index1)to(index2); Method signature would like this: sort(SomeType[] arr)from(int begin)to(int end){ ... } Update: Because there might be some confusion, I'd like to clarify... I meant this question as a general idea like this (not specific to sorting and possibly using keywords like from and to): In JAVA(like language): void myfancymethod(int arg1, String arg2){ ... } myfancymethod(1, "foo"); In imaginary language: void my(int arg1)fancy(String arg2)method{ ... } my(1)fancy("foo")method;

  Read the article

• PHP class data implementation

  - by Bakanyaka

  I'm studying OOP PHP and have watched two tutorials that implement user login\registration system as an example. But implementation varies. Which way will be more correct one to work with data such as this? Load all data retrieved from database as array into a property called something like _data on class creation and further methods operate with this property Create separate properties for each field retrieved from database, on class creation load all data fields into respective properties and operate with that properties separately? Then let's say I want to create a method that returns a list of all users with their data. Which way is better? Method that returns just an array of userdata like this: Array([0]=>array([id] => 1, [username] => 'John', ...), [1]=>array([id] => 2, [username] => 'Jack', ...), ...) Method that creates a new instance of it's class for each user and returns an array of objects

  Read the article

• What's wrong with this answer? [migrated]

  - by MikeLJ

  I wrote an answer to this question, but I can't post it even though it's not opinion based. which tile size to choice for 16-bits What's wrong with my answer? The Answer: I'll use these classic 16-bit consoles as reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(fourth_generation) Super Nintendo: Max Resolution: 512x478 Sprites On Screen: 128 Max Sprite Size: 8×8. TurboGrafx-16: Max Resolution: 565x242 "Normal" resolution: 256×239 Sprites On Screen: 64 Max Sprite Sizes: 32×64 Neo Geo: Display resolution: 320×224 "Normal" Resolution: 304x224 Sprites on screen: 380 Max Sprite Size: 16x512

  Read the article

• When you’re on a high, start something big

  - by BuckWoody

  Most days are pretty average – we have some highs, some lows, and just regular old work to do. But some days the sun is shining, your co-workers are especially nice, and everything just falls into place. You really *enjoy* what you do. Don’t let that moment pass. All of us have “big” projects that we need to tackle. Things that are going to take a long time, and a lot of money. Those kinds of data projects take a LOT of planning, and many times we put that off just to get to the day’s work. I’ve found that the “high” moments are the perfect time to take on these big projects. I’m more focused, and more importantly, more positive. And as the quote goes, “whether you think you can or you think you can’t, you’re probably right.” You’ll find a way to make it happen if you’re in a positive mood. Now – having those “great days” is actually something you can influence, but I’ll save that topic for a future post. I have a project to work on. :) Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186  | Next Page >