Search Results

Search found 17940 results on 718 pages for 'algorithm design'.

Page 187/718 | < Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >

• Concurrency pattern of logger in multithreaded application

  - by Dipan Mehta

  The context: We are working on a multi-threaded (Linux-C) application that follows a pipeline model. Each module has a private thread and encapsulated objects which do processing of data; and each stage has a standard form of exchanging data with next unit. The application is free from memory leak and is threadsafe using locks at the point where they exchange data. Total number of threads is about 15- and each thread can have from 1 to 4 objects. Making about 25 - 30 odd objects which all have some critical logging to do. Most discussion I have seen about different levels as in Log4J and it's other translations. The real big questions is about how the overall logging should really happen? One approach is all local logging does fprintf to stderr. The stderr is redirected to some file. This approach is very bad when logs become too big. If all object instantiate their individual loggers - (about 30-40 of them) there will be too many files. And unlike above, one won't have the idea of true order of events. Timestamping is one possibility - but it is still a mess to collate. If there is a single global logger (singleton) pattern - it indirectly blocks so many threads while one is busy putting up logs. This is unacceptable when processing of the threads are heavy. So what should be the ideal way to structure the logging objects? What are some of the best practices in actual large scale applications? I would also love to learn from some of the real designs of large scale applications to get inspirations from!

  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

• Why don't languages include implication as a logical operator?

  - by Maciej Piechotka

  It might be a strange question, but why there is no implication as a logical operator in many languages (Java, C, C++, Python Haskell - although as last one have user defined operators its trivial to add it)? I find logical implication much clearer to write (particularly in asserts or assert-like expressions) then negation with or: encrypt(buf, key, mode, iv = null) { assert (mode != ECB --> iv != null); assert (mode == ECB || iv != null); assert (implies(mode != ECB, iv != null)); // User-defined function }

  Read the article

• How to handle monetary values in PHP and MySql?

  - by Songo

  I've inherited a huge pile of legacy code written in PHP on top of a MySQL database. The thing I noticed is that the application uses doubles for storage and manipulation of data. Now I came across of numerous posts mentioning how double are not suited for monetary operations because of the rounding errors. However, I have yet to come across a complete solution to how monetary values should be handled in PHP code and stored in a MySQL database. Is there a best practice when it comes to handling money specifically in PHP? Things I'm looking for are: How should the data be stored in the database? column type? size? How should the data be handling in normal addition, subtraction. multiplication or division? When should I round the values? How much rounding is acceptable if any? Is there a difference between handling large monetary values and low ones? Note: A VERY simplified sample code of how I might encounter money values in everyday life: $a= $_POST['price_in_dollars']; //-->(ex: 25.06) will be read as a string should it be cast to double? $b= $_POST['discount_rate'];//-->(ex: 0.35) value will always be less than 1 $valueToBeStored= $a * $b; //--> any hint here is welcomed $valueFromDatabase= $row['price']; //--> price column in database could be double, decimal,...etc. $priceToPrint=$valueFromDatabase * 0.25; //again cast needed or not? I hope you use this sample code as a means to bring out more use cases and not to take it literally of course. Bonus Question If I'm to use an ORM such as Doctrine or PROPEL, how different will it be to use money in my code.

  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

• Is having 'Util' classes a cause for concern? [closed]

  - by Matt Fenwick

  I sometimes create 'Util' classes which primarily serve to hold methods and values that don't really seem to belong elsewhere. But every time I create one of these classes, I think "uh-oh, I'm gonna regret this later ...", because I read somewhere that it's bad. But on the other hand, there seem to be two compelling (at least for me) cases for them: implementation secrets that are used in multiple classes within a package providing useful functionality to augment a class, without cluttering its interface Am I on the way to destruction? What you say !! Should I refactor?

  Read the article

• Breaking up classes and methods into smaller units

  - by micahhoover

  During code reviews a couple devs have recommended I break up my methods into smaller methods. Their justification was (1) increased readability and (2) the back trace that comes back from production showing the method name is more specific to the line of code that failed. There may have also been some colorful words about functional programming. Additionally I think I may have failed an interview a while back because I didn't give an acceptable answer about when to break things up. My inclination is that when I see a bunch of methods in a class or across a bunch of files, it isn't clear to me how they flow together, and how many times each one gets called. I don't really have a good feel for the linearity of it as quickly just by eye-balling it. The other thing is a lot of people seem to place a premium of organization over content (e.g. 'Look at how organized my sock drawer is!' Me: 'Overall, I think I can get to my socks faster if you count the time it took to organize them'). Our business requirements are not very stable. I'm afraid that if the classes/methods are very granular it will take longer to refactor to requirement changes. I'm not sure how much of a factor this should be. Anyway, computer science is part art / part science, but I'm not sure how much this applies to this issue.

  Read the article

• MVVM- Expose Model object in ViewModel

  - by Angel

  I have a wpf MVVM application , I exposed my model object into my viewModel by creating an instance of Model class (which cause dependency) into ViewModel , and instead of creating seperate VM properties , I wrap the Model properties inside my ViewModel Property. My model is just an entity framework generated proxy classes. Here is my Model class : public partial class TblProduct { public TblProduct() { this.TblPurchaseDetails = new HashSet<TblPurchaseDetail>(); this.TblPurchaseOrderDetails = new HashSet<TblPurchaseOrderDetail>(); this.TblSalesInvoiceDetails = new HashSet<TblSalesInvoiceDetail>(); this.TblSalesOrderDetails = new HashSet<TblSalesOrderDetail>(); } public int ProductId { get; set; } public string ProductCode { get; set; } public string ProductName { get; set; } public int CategoryId { get; set; } public string Color { get; set; } public Nullable<decimal> PurchaseRate { get; set; } public Nullable<decimal> SalesRate { get; set; } public string ImagePath { get; set; } public bool IsActive { get; set; } public virtual TblCompany TblCompany { get; set; } public virtual TblProductCategory TblProductCategory { get; set; } public virtual TblUser TblUser { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<TblPurchaseDetail> TblPurchaseDetails { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<TblPurchaseOrderDetail> TblPurchaseOrderDetails { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<TblSalesInvoiceDetail> TblSalesInvoiceDetails { get; set; } public virtual ICollection<TblSalesOrderDetail> TblSalesOrderDetails { get; set; } } Here is my ViewModel , public class ProductViewModel : WorkspaceViewModel { #region Constructor public ProductViewModel() { StartApp(); } #endregion //Constructor #region Properties private IProductDataService _dataService; public IProductDataService DataService { get { if (_dataService == null) { if (IsInDesignMode) { _dataService = new ProductDataServiceMock(); } else { _dataService = new ProductDataService(); } } return _dataService; } } //Get and set Model object private TblProduct _product; public TblProduct Product { get { return _product ?? (_product = new TblProduct()); } set { _product = value; } } #region Public Properties public int ProductId { get { return Product.ProductId; } set { if (Product.ProductId == value) { return; } Product.ProductId = value; RaisePropertyChanged("ProductId"); } } public string ProductName { get { return Product.ProductName; } set { if (Product.ProductName == value) { return; } Product.ProductName = value; RaisePropertyChanged(() => ProductName); } } private ObservableCollection<TblProduct> _productRecords; public ObservableCollection<TblProduct> ProductRecords { get { return _productRecords; } set { _productRecords = value; RaisePropertyChanged("ProductRecords"); } } //Selected Product private TblProduct _selectedProduct; public TblProduct SelectedProduct { get { return _selectedProduct; } set { _selectedProduct = value; if (_selectedProduct != null) { this.ProductId = _selectedProduct.ProductId; this.ProductCode = _selectedProduct.ProductCode; } RaisePropertyChanged("SelectedProduct"); } } #endregion //Public Properties #endregion // Properties #region Commands private ICommand _newCommand; public ICommand NewCommand { get { if (_newCommand == null) { _newCommand = new RelayCommand(() => ResetAll()); } return _newCommand; } } private ICommand _saveCommand; public ICommand SaveCommand { get { if (_saveCommand == null) { _saveCommand = new RelayCommand(() => Save()); } return _saveCommand; } } private ICommand _deleteCommand; public ICommand DeleteCommand { get { if (_deleteCommand == null) { _deleteCommand = new RelayCommand(() => Delete()); } return _deleteCommand; } } #endregion //Commands #region Methods private void StartApp() { LoadProductCollection(); } private void LoadProductCollection() { var q = DataService.GetAllProducts(); this.ProductRecords = new ObservableCollection<TblProduct>(q); } private void Save() { if (SelectedOperateMode == OperateModeEnum.OperateMode.New) { //Pass the Model object into Dataservice for save DataService.SaveProduct(this.Product); } else if (SelectedOperateMode == OperateModeEnum.OperateMode.Edit) { //Pass the Model object into Dataservice for Update DataService.UpdateProduct(this.Product); } ResetAll(); LoadProductCollection(); } #endregion //Methods } Here is my Service class: class ProductDataService:IProductDataService { /// <summary> /// Context object of Entity Framework model /// </summary> private MaizeEntities Context { get; set; } public ProductDataService() { Context = new MaizeEntities(); } public IEnumerable<TblProduct> GetAllProducts() { using(var context=new R_MaizeEntities()) { var q = from p in context.TblProducts where p.IsDel == false select p; return new ObservableCollection<TblProduct>(q); } } public void SaveProduct(TblProduct _product) { using(var context=new R_MaizeEntities()) { _product.LastModUserId = GlobalObjects.LoggedUserID; _product.LastModDttm = DateTime.Now; _product.CompanyId = GlobalObjects.CompanyID; context.TblProducts.Add(_product); context.SaveChanges(); } } public void UpdateProduct(TblProduct _product) { using (var context = new R_MaizeEntities()) { context.TblProducts.Attach(_product); context.Entry(_product).State = EntityState.Modified; _product.LastModUserId = GlobalObjects.LoggedUserID; _product.LastModDttm = DateTime.Now; _product.CompanyId = GlobalObjects.CompanyID; context.SaveChanges(); } } public void DeleteProduct(int _productId) { using (var context = new R_MaizeEntities()) { var product = (from c in context.TblProducts where c.ProductId == _productId select c).First(); product.LastModUserId = GlobalObjects.LoggedUserID; product.LastModDttm = DateTime.Now; product.IsDel = true; context.SaveChanges(); } } } I exposed my model object in my viewModel by creating an instance of it using new keyword, also I instantiated my DataService class in VM, I know this will cause a strong dependency. So , 1- Whats the best way to expose Model object in ViewModel ? 2- Whats the best way to use DataService in VM ?

  Read the article

• How should I write new code when the old codebase and the environment uses lots of globals in PHP

  - by Nicola Peluchetti

  I'm working in the Wordpress environment which itself heavily relies on globals and the codebase I'm maintaining introduces some more. I want this to change and so I'm trying to think how should I handle this. For the globals our code has introduced I think I will set them as dependencies in the constructor or in getter / setter so that I don't rely on them being globals and then refactor the old codebase little by little so that we have no globals. With Wordpress globals I was thinking to wrap all WP globals inside a Wrapper class and hide them in there. Like this class WpGlobals { public static function getDb() { global $wpdb; return $wpdb; } } Would this be of any help? The idea is that I centralize all globals in one class and do not scatter them through the code, so that if Wordpress kills one of them I need to modify code only in one place. What would you do?

  Read the article

• Trying to Integrate Five9 and Apptivio [on hold]

  - by David Mitchell

  Five9 is a calling system application and Apptivio will be used to store client information for purchased products. Specifically what I need is an example code that will allow me to access Five9's CRM system using the access key and transfer a persons first and last name, for example, to Apptivio. The issue is I have never dealt with this type of system and I cannot find any information for it other than the Web2Campaign that was sent to me by Five9. Lets say this is the code from Five9 F9key=first_name&F9key=last_name&first_name=jon&last_name=smith Once this information is placed into Five9 I must update Apptivio with this information. I am lost as to how to send this information to Apptivio.

  Read the article

• Questioning one of the arguments for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

  - by oberlies

  Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So there may be other arguments for dependency injection (which are out of scope for this question!), but easy creation of testable object graphs is not one of them, is it?

  Read the article

• How should I architect a personal schedule manager that runs 24/7?

  - by Crawford Comeaux

  I've developed an ADHD management system for myself that's attempting to change multiple habits at once. I know this is counter to conventional wisdom, but I've tried the conventional for years & am now trying it my way. (just wanted to say that to try and prevent it from distracting people from the actual question) Anyway, I'd like to write something to run on a remote server that monitors me, helps me build/avoid certain habits, etc. What this amounts to is a system that: runs 24/7 may have multiple independent tasks to run at once may have tasks that require other tasks to run first lets tasks be scheduled by specific time, recurrence (ie. "run every 5 mins"), or interval (ie. "run from 2pm to 3pm") My first naive attempt at this was just a single PHP script scheduled to run every minute by cron (language was chosen in order to use a certain library, but no longer necessary). The logic behind when to run this or that portion of code got hairy pretty quick. So my question is how should I approach this from here? I'm not tied to any one language, though I'm partial to python/javascript. Thoughts: Could be done as a set of scripts that include a scheduling mechanism with one script per bit of logic...but the idea just feels wrong to me. Building it as a daemon could be helpful, but still unsure what to do about dozens of if-else statements for detecting the current time

  Read the article

• Should a web designer know server-side coding?

  - by Rasoul Zabihi

  We're implementing an CMS based on ASP.NET MVC. Now, any designer should be able to provide themes for this CMS. But to write a theme, they need to be able to modify the generated HTML, thus the concept of View. In other words, they should be capable to either modify current views, or create new views from scratch, to fit their requirements. However, now we're not sure that we're taking the right path. Should a web designer (HTML, CSS, JavaScript + Photoshop) really know about server-side platforms like Razor or PHP, or classic ASP, or anything else?

  Read the article

• How to fix this navigation issue in my site?

  - by David

  First off I use webs.com for the creation of my site. I have a very basic layout. List of links of the left and content on the right with a heading up top. Now in my list of links every link is an article that I wrote, I have about 25 links going down the left hand side of my site. Problem is when I try out new themes that support horizontal navigation as opposed to vertical navigation I get either a messy overflow of links Or a link called "more" which lists the rest of the articles in a drop down-list across my site. What I wish I had was a simple horizontal navigation like" "home, about, articles" and when the user clicks on articles it would then bring them to a page containing all my articles there. I would prefer it to be in a table like display. That way is not a long list. Anyways any ideas on how I can fix this issue im having? Please let me know if you need more information.

  Read the article

• what knowledge would I need to make a good simulation games

  - by Skeith

  I have an idea for a game like theme park but don't know how simulation games are made. I am not some noob on his first game so I appreciated constructive answers instead of "its hard, don't do it". What I want is to know how simulation game mechanics are put together. I figure it would be heaver on the AI than normal games and not knowing much about AI would like to know some programming techniques I should look into for this style game. specific techniques please not just a book on ai. what sort of architecture would be used? I guess it would have some sort of probability engine with pre designed events that are triggered based on the AI state. Would it use a FSM or be purely event driven ? Any information on how a sims game functions would be cool.

  Read the article

• Provide an OnChange event for an internal property which is controlled externally?

  - by NGLN

  For fun and by request I am updating this ImageGrid component, a kind of listbox for images that has a FileNames property of type TStrings. For ease of writing, I have been misusing its FileNames.Objects property for bitmap storage. But since the TStrings type suggests that users of the component could or would want to use the Objects property for custom data, e.g. like TListBox.Items, I am rewriting the component to store the bitmaps elsewhere and leave FileNames.Objects untouched for unknown future usage. Now I am wondering whether to provide an OnChange event. And if so, whether to fire it when one or more FileNames.Objects changes. Trying to answer it myself, I dove in Delphi's own VCL and stumbled on: TMemo: has an OnChange event, but ignores Lines.Objects TListBox: has no OnChange event, but is capable of storing Items.Objects TStringGrid: has no OnChange event, but is capable of storing Objects, Rows.Objects, Cols.Objects So now I am somewhat puzzeled, because I cannot imagine Borland's developers didn't add events for several Objects properties out of ease. Sure, when a user changes a FileNames.Object in my component, he knows he does and could implement appropriate interaction himself. But wouldn't it be convenient when the component does automatically? What would you expect from this component in this regard?

  Read the article

• Using "prevent execution of method" flags

  - by tpaksu

  First of all I want to point out my concern with some pseudocode (I think you'll understand better) Assume you have a global debug flag, or class variable named "debug", class a : var debug = FALSE and you use it to enable debug methods. There are two types of usage it as I know: first in a method : method a : if debug then call method b; method b : second in the method itself: method a : call method b; method b : if not debug exit And I want to know, is there any File IO or stack pointer wise difference between these two approaches. Which usage is better, safer and why?

  Read the article

• Square One to Game Development

  - by Ian Quach

  How does someone even get into developing a game. What would they need to know, how would someone find the knowledge to program a game? I've always looked at game development as a future career. Now that I'm getting closer to university I was hoping to find a way to head start this future in game development. What would be the best place to start? I would love any help or tips from anyone. Thanks for reading this. :)

  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

• Have you worked with a well designed application?

  - by Vilx-

  Inspired by this question, I started wondering - is there or has there ever been such a thing as a "well designed application"? One where the architecture would be perfect and no refactoring would ever be needed; code would be easy to read and understand even for someone new to the project; changes could be done with a 100% certainty that they won't break anything; etc? I must admit that whatever codebases I've worked with, they've all been more or less a mess. Even code that I start myself only stays organized at the start, and then slowly deteriorates as the time passes. I'm even starting to accept this as part of life and can't figure out whether I should be worried about that or not. So... is there such a thing as a "well designed application"? Or is all our code so shitty that there isn't even a point in trying to make it better, because it will never be good anyway?

  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

• Who can change the View in MVC?

  - by Luke

  I'm working on a thick client graph displaying and manipulation application. I'm trying to apply the MVC pattern to our 3D visualization component. Here is what I have for the Model, View, and Controller: Model - The graph and it's metadata. This includes vertices, edges, and the attributes of each. It does not contain position information, icons, colors, or anything display related. View - This would commonly be called a scene graph. It includes the 3D display information, texture information, color information, and anything else that is related specifically to the visualization of the model. Controller - The controller takes the view and displays it in a Window using OpenGL (but it could potentially be any 3D graphics package). The application has various "layouts" that change the position of the vertices in the display. For instance, one layout may arrange the vertices in a circle. Is it common for these layouts to access and change the view directly? Should they go through the Controller to access the View? If they go through the Controller, should they just ask for direct access to the View or should each change go through the controller? I realize this is a bit different from the standard MVC example where there a finite number of Views. In this case, the View can change in an infinite number of ways. Perhaps I'm shattering some basic principle of MVC here. Thanks in advance!

  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

• Is it okay to showcase templates/layouts recreated in different codes in a portfolio?

  - by Souta

  I have several different templates/layouts, both simple and complex. I recreated these templates multiple times, just using different codes. (Say, a complex one was originally made in only HTML and CSS, I recreated it using HTML, Javascript, CSS, then again with a HTML and PHP concoction, and etc.) I wanted to showcase my work and skills by doing this, but I don't know if it would be okay for that all to go into a resumé/portfolio. This is why: Freelancing Does potential business really care about how their site is made, as long as it looks and functions to their liking? (As in, should I just only show the one example of each template/layout and not the multiple recreations?) Potential Hire However, if a potential employer were to stumble across my resumé/portfolio, would having the multiple recreations do any good for a career outlook? (As in, this potential employer is a company where I could be working on a team to create/develop sites and not be freelancing; would a lack of skill-shining turn this employer away because I didn't set myself apart and show that I'm not just like every other budding web designer?) Those two issues have me wondering if it is okay to have a resumé/portfolio combined for this specific reason. Or does something like this not matter to potential business (as a freelancer) because they wouldn't care either way as long as it looks and functions to their liking and therefore it is okay to showcase the recreations with the originals?

  Read the article

• Is it a good approach to rely on 3rd party software ( not library )?

  - by gunbuster363

  We have program using a call to a winzip program or 7zip commandline tool to zip some files. Once I accidentally uninstall winzip on my computer and making one of our program( created by the programmer already left ) crashed. So we cannot uninstall the winzip program. Now I've come to a point which I need to decide a external tool for gzip in windows or I make a java program which I can call to gzip the file. Obviously a external tool such as 7z is convenient and we can avoid some extra coding with java. On the contrary, if 7z is uninstalled accidentally, our program will crash. What do you think?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >