Search Results

Search found 654 results on 27 pages for 'principles'.

Page 2/27 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Loose Coupling in Object Oriented Design

    - by m3th0dman
    I am trying to learn GRASP and I found this explained (here on page 3) about Low Coupling and I was very surprised when I found this: Consider the method addTrack for an Album class, two possible methods are: addTrack( Track t ) and addTrack( int no, String title, double duration ) Which method reduces coupling? The second one does, since the class using the Album class does not have to know a Track class. In general, parameters to methods should use base types (int, char ...) and classes from the java.* packages. I tend to diasgree with this; I believe addTrack(Track t) is better than addTrack(int no, String title, double duration) due to various reasons: It is always better for a method to as fewer parameters as possible (according to Uncle Bob's Clean Code none or one preferably, 2 in some cases and 3 in special cases; more than 3 needs refactoring - these are of course recommendations not holly rules). If addTrack is a method of an interface, and the requirements need that a Track should have more information (say year or genre) then the interface needs to be changed and so that the method should supports another parameter. Encapsulation is broke; if addTrack is in an interface, then it should not know the internals of the Track. It is actually more coupled in the second way, with many parameters. Suppose the no parameter needs to be changed from int to long because there are more than MAX_INT tracks (or for whatever reason); then both the Track and the method need to be changed while if the method would be addTrack(Track track) only the Track would be changed. All the 4 arguments are actually connected with each other, and some of them are consequences from others. Which approach is better?

    Read the article

  • Skinny controller in ASP.NET MVC 4

    - by thangchung
    Rails community are always inspire a lot of best ideas. I really love this community by the time. One of these is "Fat models and skinny controllers". I have spent a lot of time on ASP.NET MVC, and really I did some miss-takes, because I made the controller so fat. That make controller is really dirty and very hard to maintain in the future. It is violate seriously SRP principle and KISS as well. But how can we achieve that in ASP.NET MVC? That question is really clear after I read "Manning ASP.NET MVC 4 in Action". It is simple that we can separate it into ActionResult, and try to implementing logic and persistence data inside this. In last 2 years, I have read this from Jimmy Bogard blog, but in that time I never had a consideration about it. That's enough for talking now. I just published a sample on ASP.NET MVC 4, implemented on Visual Studio 2012 RC at here. I used EF framework at here for implementing persistence layer, and also use 2 free templates from internet to make the UI for this sample. In this sample, I try to implementing the simple magazine website that managing all articles, categories and news. It is not finished at all in this time, but no problems, because I just show you about how can we make the controller skinny. And I wanna hear more about your ideas. The first thing, I am abstract the base ActionResult class like this:    public abstract class MyActionResult : ActionResult, IEnsureNotNull     {         public abstract void EnsureAllInjectInstanceNotNull();     }     public abstract class ActionResultBase<TController> : MyActionResult where TController : Controller     {         protected readonly Expression<Func<TController, ActionResult>> ViewNameExpression;         protected readonly IExConfigurationManager ConfigurationManager;         protected ActionResultBase (Expression<Func<TController, ActionResult>> expr)             : this(DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IExConfigurationManager>(), expr)         {         }         protected ActionResultBase(             IExConfigurationManager configurationManager,             Expression<Func<TController, ActionResult>> expr)         {             Guard.ArgumentNotNull(expr, "ViewNameExpression");             Guard.ArgumentNotNull(configurationManager, "ConfigurationManager");             ViewNameExpression = expr;             ConfigurationManager = configurationManager;         }         protected ViewResult GetViewResult<TViewModel>(TViewModel viewModel)         {             var m = (MethodCallExpression)ViewNameExpression.Body;             if (m.Method.ReturnType != typeof(ActionResult))             {                 throw new ArgumentException("ControllerAction method '" + m.Method.Name + "' does not return type ActionResult");             }             var result = new ViewResult             {                 ViewName = m.Method.Name             };             result.ViewData.Model = viewModel;             return result;         }         public override void ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context)         {             EnsureAllInjectInstanceNotNull();         }     } I also have an interface for validation all inject objects. This interface make sure all inject objects that I inject using Autofac container are not null. The implementation of this as below public interface IEnsureNotNull     {         void EnsureAllInjectInstanceNotNull();     } Afterwards, I am just simple implementing the HomePageViewModelActionResult class like this public class HomePageViewModelActionResult<TController> : ActionResultBase<TController> where TController : Controller     {         #region variables & ctors         private readonly ICategoryRepository _categoryRepository;         private readonly IItemRepository _itemRepository;         private readonly int _numOfPage;         public HomePageViewModelActionResult(Expression<Func<TController, ActionResult>> viewNameExpression)             : this(viewNameExpression,                    DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<ICategoryRepository>(),                    DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IItemRepository>())         {         }         public HomePageViewModelActionResult(             Expression<Func<TController, ActionResult>> viewNameExpression,             ICategoryRepository categoryRepository,             IItemRepository itemRepository)             : base(viewNameExpression)         {             _categoryRepository = categoryRepository;             _itemRepository = itemRepository;             _numOfPage = ConfigurationManager.GetAppConfigBy("NumOfPage").ToInteger();         }         #endregion         #region implementation         public override void ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context)         {             base.ExecuteResult(context);             var cats = _categoryRepository.GetCategories();             var mainViewModel = new HomePageViewModel();             var headerViewModel = new HeaderViewModel();             var footerViewModel = new FooterViewModel();             var mainPageViewModel = new MainPageViewModel();             headerViewModel.SiteTitle = "Magazine Website";             if (cats != null && cats.Any())             {                 headerViewModel.Categories = cats.ToList();                 footerViewModel.Categories = cats.ToList();             }             mainPageViewModel.LeftColumn = BindingDataForMainPageLeftColumnViewModel();             mainPageViewModel.RightColumn = BindingDataForMainPageRightColumnViewModel();             mainViewModel.Header = headerViewModel;             mainViewModel.DashBoard = new DashboardViewModel();             mainViewModel.Footer = footerViewModel;             mainViewModel.MainPage = mainPageViewModel;             GetViewResult(mainViewModel).ExecuteResult(context);         }         public override void EnsureAllInjectInstanceNotNull()         {             Guard.ArgumentNotNull(_categoryRepository, "CategoryRepository");             Guard.ArgumentNotNull(_itemRepository, "ItemRepository");             Guard.ArgumentMustMoreThanZero(_numOfPage, "NumOfPage");         }         #endregion         #region private functions         private MainPageRightColumnViewModel BindingDataForMainPageRightColumnViewModel()         {             var mainPageRightCol = new MainPageRightColumnViewModel();             mainPageRightCol.LatestNews = _itemRepository.GetNewestItem(_numOfPage).ToList();             mainPageRightCol.MostViews = _itemRepository.GetMostViews(_numOfPage).ToList();             return mainPageRightCol;         }         private MainPageLeftColumnViewModel BindingDataForMainPageLeftColumnViewModel()         {             var mainPageLeftCol = new MainPageLeftColumnViewModel();             var items = _itemRepository.GetNewestItem(_numOfPage);             if (items != null && items.Any())             {                 var firstItem = items.First();                 if (firstItem == null)                     throw new NoNullAllowedException("First Item".ToNotNullErrorMessage());                 if (firstItem.ItemContent == null)                     throw new NoNullAllowedException("First ItemContent".ToNotNullErrorMessage());                 mainPageLeftCol.FirstItem = firstItem;                 if (items.Count() > 1)                 {                     mainPageLeftCol.RemainItems = items.Where(x => x.ItemContent != null && x.Id != mainPageLeftCol.FirstItem.Id).ToList();                 }             }             return mainPageLeftCol;         }         #endregion     }  Final step, I get into HomeController and add some line of codes like this [Authorize]     public class HomeController : BaseController     {         [AllowAnonymous]         public ActionResult Index()         {             return new HomePageViewModelActionResult<HomeController>(x=>x.Index());         }         [AllowAnonymous]         public ActionResult Details(int id)         {             return new DetailsViewModelActionResult<HomeController>(x => x.Details(id), id);         }         [AllowAnonymous]         public ActionResult Category(int id)         {             return new CategoryViewModelActionResult<HomeController>(x => x.Category(id), id);         }     } As you see, the code in controller is really skinny, and all the logic I move to the custom ActionResult class. Some people said, it just move the code out of controller and put it to another class, so it is still hard to maintain. Look like it just move the complicate codes from one place to another place. But if you have a look and think it in details, you have to find out if you have code for processing all logic that related to HttpContext or something like this. You can do it on Controller, and try to delegating another logic  (such as processing business requirement, persistence data,...) to custom ActionResult class. Tell me more your thinking, I am really willing to hear all of its from you guys. All source codes can be find out at here. Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://weblogs.asp.net//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");

    Read the article

  • Please help me give this principle a name

    - by Brent Arias
    As a designer, I like providing interfaces that cater to a power/simplicity balance. For example, I think the LINQ designers followed that principle because they offered both dot-notation and query-notation. The first is more powerful, but the second is easier to read and follow. If you disagree with my assessment of LINQ, please try to see my point anyway; LINQ was just an example, my post is not about LINQ. I call this principle "dial-able power". But I'd like to know what other people call it. Certainly some will say "KISS" is the common term. But I see KISS as a superset, or a "consumerism" practice. Using LINQ as my example again, in my view, a team of programmers who always try to use query notation over dot-notation are practicing KISS. Thus the LINQ designers practiced "dial-able power", whereas the LINQ consumers practice KISS. The two make beautiful music together. I'll give another example. Imagine a C# logging tool that has two signatures allowing two uses: void Write(string message); void Write(Func<string> messageCallback); The purpose of the two signatures is to fulfill these needs: //Every-day "simple" usage, nothing special. myLogger.Write("Something Happened" + error.ToString() ); //This is performance critical, do not call ToString() if logging is //disabled. myLogger.Write( () => { "Something Happened" + error.ToString() }); Having these overloads represents "dial-able power," because the consumer has the choice of a simple interface or a powerful interface. A KISS-loving consumer will use the simpler signature most of the time, and will allow the "busy" looking signature when the power is needed. This also helps self-documentation, because usage of the powerful signature tells the reader that the code is performance critical. If the logger had only the powerful signature, then there would be no "dial-able power." So this comes full-circle. I'm happy to keep my own "dial-able power" coinage if none yet exists, but I can't help think I'm missing an obvious designation for this practice. p.s. Another example that is related, but is not the same as "dial-able power", is Scott Meyer's principle "make interfaces easy to use correctly, and hard to use incorrectly."

    Read the article

  • Is there a term for "Use procedures that execute a single task"?

    - by Tom
    I'm having a discussion with a fellow developer, and I'm trying to argument this in something like a short "term". SoC (Separation of Concerns) is pretty straight forward design practice, but it dwells deeper. If we want to pick on it's deep corners, we can Google it and there are plenty of articles that pop up, and after taking a glimpse, we know a lot more, and might find some examples. But, what about "Use procedures that execute a single task"? That's also a great design principle to use when writing applications and it becomes more and more rewarding, the larger the application gets. Is there a term for Use procedures that execute a single task?

    Read the article

  • "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#": Is this just a .NET-translation of the popular Uncle Bob book?

    - by Louis Rhys
    I found this book sold on Amazon Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#, written by Robert C Martin and Micah Martin. Is it merely a .NET port of the older, more popular Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices? Or is it just a new book trying to take advantage of the other book's popularity? If I am a .NET developer who hasn't read either book, which one would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Trying to find a recent - PHP book - that utilizes SOLID principles! [closed]

    - by darga33
    Pulling my hair out! I have heard of Martin Fowler's book PoEAA and the other book Head First OOA OOD but those are not in PHP. I desperately want to read them, but ONLY in PHP utilizing the - SOLID acronym - principles! Does anyone know of the absolute best, most recent PHP book that utilizes the SOLID principles and GRASP, and all the other best practices? I want to learn from the best possible source! Not beginner books! I already understand OOP. This seems like an almost impossible question to find the answer to and so I thought, hey, might as well post on stackexchange!! Surely someone out there must know!!!!!!!!!! Or if noone happens to know, Maybe they know of an open source application that utilizes these principles that is relatively small that is not a framework. Something that I can go through every single class, and spend time understanding the insides and outs of how the program was developed. Thanks so much in advance! I really really really really appreciate it! Well it looks like we aren't supposed to ask about best books, so nevermind this question! Sorry about that!

    Read the article

  • What are the design principles that promote testable code? (designing testable code vs driving design through tests)

    - by bot
    Most of the projects that I work on consider development and unit testing in isolation which makes writing unit tests at a later instance a nightmare. My objective is to keep testing in mind during the high level and low level design phases itself. I want to know if there are any well defined design principles that promote testable code. One such principle that I have come to understand recently is Dependency Inversion through Dependency injection and Inversion of Control. I have read that there is something known as SOLID. I want to understand if following the SOLID principles indirectly results in code that is easily testable? If not, are there any well-defined design principles that promote testable code? I am aware that there is something known as Test Driven Development. Although, I am more interested in designing code with testing in mind during the design phase itself rather than driving design through tests. I hope this makes sense. One more question related to this topic is whether it's alright to re-factor an existing product/project and make changes to code and design for the purpose of being able to write a unit test case for each module?

    Read the article

  • Tomcat custom classloader in Liferay principles

    - by lisak
    When custom class loader in webapp context file is used and the context is being initialized and started, the custom classloader is just a substitution for the default webapp class loader, right ? But what are the consequences of doing this? Because, for instance, in Liferay portal an application can use custom PortalClassLoader, which just extends webapp class loader and does nothing else, it's the same class, no modifications at all. And I didn't find any following initializations like repository location changes etc. The point is, that the PortalClassLoader provides the webapp with an access to the ROOT portal context, which AFAIK doesn't use PortalClassLoader, according to debugger.

    Read the article

  • Are SOLID principles really solid?

    - by Arseny
    The first pattern stands for this acronym is SRP. Here is a quote. the single responsibility principle states that every object should have a single responsibility, and that responsibility should be entirely encapsulated by the class. That's is simple and clear till we start to code ) Suppose we have a class with well defined SRP. To serialize this class instances we need to add special atrributes to that class. So now the class have other responsibility. Dosen't it violate SRP? Let's see other story. Interface implementation. Then we implement an interface we simply add other responsibility say dispose its resorces or compare its instances or whatever. So my question. Is it possible to keep SRP complete? How can we do it?

    Read the article

  • Understanding OOP Principles in passing around objects/values

    - by Hans
    I'm not quite grokking a couple of things in OOP and I'm going to use a fictional understanding of SO to see if I can get help understand. So, on this page we have a question. You can comment on the question. There are also answers. You can comment on the answers. Question - comment - comment - comment Answer -comment Answer -comment -comment -comment Answer -comment -comment So, I'm imagining a very high level understanding of this type of system (in PHP, not .Net as I am not yet familiar with .Net) would be like: $question = new Question; $question->load($this_question_id); // from the URL probably echo $question->getTitle(); To load the answers, I imagine it's something like this ("A"): $answers = new Answers; $answers->loadFromQuestion($question->getID()); // or $answers->loadFromQuestion($this_question_id); while($answer = $answers->getAnswer()) { echo $answer->showFormatted(); } Or, would you do ("B"): $answers->setQuestion($question); // inject the whole obj, so we have access to all the data and public methods in $question $answers->loadFromQuestion(); // the ID would be found via $this->question->getID() instead of from the argument passed in while($answer = $answers->getAnswer()) { echo $answer->showFormatted(); } I guess my problem is, I don't know when or if I should be passing in an entire object, and when I should just be passing in a value. Passing in the entire object gives me a lot of flexibility, but it's more memory and subject to change, I'd guess (like a property or method rename). If "A" style is better, why not just use a function? OOP seems pointless here. Thanks, Hans

    Read the article

  • PHP MVC Principles

    - by George
    I'm not using an off-the-shelf framework and don't particularly want to (nor d I want to go into the reasons why...). Anyway, onto my question(s), I hope it make sense.... I'm trying to get my head around what should go in the model and what should go in the controller. Originally I had the impression that a model class should represent an actual object (eg - a car from the cars table of a database) and model properties should mirror the database fields. However I'm now getting the feeling that I've got the wrong idea - should an instance of a model class represent an actual item, or should it contain a number of methods for doing stuff - sometimes to one car or sometimes to multiple cars based on my example earlier. For example I want to get all the cars from a the database and show them in the view. Am I right in think it should be along the lines of this? Controller File function list() { $cars = $this->model->get_all(); $this->view->add($cars); $this->view->render('cars-list'); } Model File function get_all() { // Use a database interaction class that I've written $cars = Database::select(); return $cars; } Now, if the car had a "status" field that was stored as an integer in the database and I wanted to change that to a string, where should that be done? By looping the SQL results array in the get_all() method in the model? Also, where should form validation live? I have written a validation class that works a little like this: $validator = new Validator(); $validator->check('field_name', 'required'); If the check fails, it adds an error message to the array in the Validator. This array of error messages would then get passed to the view. Should the use of my validator class go in model or the controller? Thanks in advance for for any help anyone can offer. If you know of any links to a simple MVC example / open source application that deals with basic CRUD, they would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • SOA design principles with regards to database relationships

    - by Eitan
    If I were to extricate my current membership provider from my solution, i.e. as a dll and expose it as a web service with it's own db, how would I model the relationships with regards to SOA design. For example I have a table: USER id, name, lastname, username, password, role. and table PRODUCT id, name, price, createdate, userid the foreign key being userid to table user. How would I model the relationship and/or query the db. If I wanted to get all products that were uploaded today for example, before I would query: SELECT u.name, u.lastname, u.username, p.* FROM PRODUCT p INNER JOIN USER u ON p.userid = u.id WHERE createdate = '05/05/2010' Now that I don't have the table within the database how would I perform this query? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • The Utilization of Software Engineering Development Principles

    - by Chance
    Being a CS student I've had to take a course in basic software engineering. I was a little curious to find such elaborate "software development processes", like the spiral model, the waterfall model, et cetera. Some of these methodologies seem a little antiquated to me and, after speaking with several employed developers, I can't seem to find anyone who actually adheres to these models. Does anyone here have experience working under the guidance of these models? Were they useful to you and your team during the development of your product? Or are these models just some way to communicate a sense of progression to interested parties outside of the development team?

    Read the article

  • RESTful principles question

    - by auser
    An intelligent coworker friend of mine brought up a question to me that I was uncertain how to answer and I'd like to pose it to the world. If a RESTful endpoint uses token-based authentication, aka a time-based token is required to access a resource and that token expires after a certain amount of time, would this violate the RESTful principle? In other words, if the same URL expires after a certain amount of time, so the resource returns a different response depending when it was requested, is that breaking REST?

    Read the article

  • Core principles, rules, and habits for CS students

    - by Asad Butt
    No doubt there is a lot to read on blogs, in books, and on Stack Overflow, but can we identify some guidelines for CS students to use while studying? For me these are: Finish your course books early and read 4-5 times more material relative to your course work. Programming is the one of the fastest evolving professions. Follow the blogs on a daily basis for the latest updates, news, and technologies. Instead of relying on assignments and exams, do at least one extra, non-graded, small to medium-sized project for every programming course. Fight hard for internships or work placements even if they are unpaid, since 3 months of work 1 year at college. Practice everything, every possible and impossible way. Try doing every bit of your assignments project yourself; i.e. fight for every inch. Rely on documentation as the first source for help and samples, Google, and online forums as the last source. Participate often in online communities and forums to learn the best possible approach for every solution to your problem. (After doing your bit.) Make testing one of your habits as it is getting more important everyday in programming. Make writing one of your habits. Write something productive once or twice a week and publish it.

    Read the article

  • At what point would you drop some of your principles of software development for the sake of more money?

    - by MeshMan
    I'd like to throw this question out there to interestingly see where the medium is. I'm going to admit that in my last 12 months, I picked up TDD and a lot of the Agile values in software development. I was so overwhelmed with how much better my development of software became that I would never drop them out of principle. Until...I was offered a contracting role that doubled my take home pay for the year. The company I joined didn't follow any specific methodology, the team hadn't heard of anything like code smells, SOLID, etc., and I certainly wasn't going to get away with spending time doing TDD if the team had never even seen unit testing in practice. Am I a sell out? No, not completely... Code will always been written "cleanly" (as per Uncle Bob's teachings) and the principles of SOLID will always be applied to the code that I write as they are needed. Testing was dropped for me though, the company couldn't afford to have such a unknown handed to the team who quite frankly, even I did create test frameworks, they would never use/maintain the test framework correctly. Using that as an example, what point would you say a developer should never drop his craftsmanship principles for the sake of money/other benefits to them personally? I understand that this can be a very personal opinion on how concerned one is to their own needs, business needs, and the sake of craftsmanship etc. But one can consider that for example testing can be dropped if the company decided they would rather have a test team, than rather understand unit testing in programming, would that be something you could forgive yourself for like I did? So given that there is something you would drop, there usually should be an equal cost in the business that makes up for what you drop - hopefully, unless of course you are pretty much out for lining your own pockets and not community/social collaborating ;). Double your money, go back to RAD? Or walk on, and look for someone doing Agile, and never look back...

    Read the article

  • How to use data mining principles in this project?

    - by Simon
    I'm getting a Data Mining class this semester and we are free for the final project. For a few months I'm working on procedural planets rendering (something like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL8zDgTlXso). Do you have any idea of which data mining principles I could use to keep working this project ? Maybe I could try to generate interesting terrains from a set of real maps ? Any publications on that subject ? Any other ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Computer Graphics: Principles and Practice in C ( in Python? )

    - by user29163
    I am attending a Computer graphics course after the summer. I have read lots of good things about the book "Computer Graphics: Principles and Practice in C" for people who are willing to put in some work. My school does not focus on C/C++ until next year, so I have decided to learn Python this summer and get good at Python this following year. How language dependent is this book? Can I work through it in Python?

    Read the article

  • SRP & "axis of change"?

    - by lance
    I'm reading Bob Martin's principles of OOD, specifically the SRP text, and I understand the spirit of what it's saying pretty well, but I don't quite understand a particular phrasing, from page 2 of the link (page 150 of the book): I paraphrase: It is important to separate these two responsibilities into separate classes because each responsibility is an axis of change. What exactly is meant here by "axis of change"?

    Read the article

  • Is "convention over configuration" not violating basic programming principles?

    - by Geerten
    I was looking at the WPF MVVM framework Caliburn.Micro and read that a lot of standard things are based on naming conventions. For example, automatic binding of properties in the View to properties in the ViewModel. Although this seems to be convenient (removes some boilerplate code), my first instinct reaction is that it isn't completely obvious to a new programmer that will read this code. In other words, the functionality of the application is not completely explained by its own code, but also by the documentation of the framework. EDIT: So this approach is called convention over configuration. Since I could not find any questions concerning this, I altered my question: My question is: Is convention over configuration a correct way of simplifying things, or is it violating some programming principles (and if so, which ones)?

    Read the article

  • Concrete Types or Interfaces for return types?

    - by SDReyes
    Today I came to a fundamental paradox of the object programming style, concrete types or interfaces. Whats the better election for a method's return type: a concrete type or an interface? In most cases, I tend to use concrete types as the return type for methods. because I believe that an concrete type is more flexible for further use and exposes more functionality. The dark side of this: Coupling. The angelic one: A concrete type contains per-se the interface you would going to return initially, and extra functionality. What's your thumb's rule? Is there any programming principle for this? BONUS: This is an example of what I mean http://stackoverflow.com/questions/491375/readonlycollection-or-ienumerable-for-exposing-member-collections

    Read the article

  • SOLID Liskov Substitution Principle

    - by Omu
    if i have something like class square : figure {} class triangle : figure {} does that mean that i should never ever use the square and triangle classes but only refer to figure ? like never do like this: var x = new square();

    Read the article

  • What is design principle behind Servlets being Singleton

    - by Sandeep Jindal
    A servlet container "generally" create one instance of a servlet and different threads of the same instance to serve multiple requests. (I know this can be changed using deprecated SingleThreadModel and other features, but this is the usual way). I thought, the simple reason behind this is performance gain, as creating threads is better than creating instances. But it seems this is not the reason. On the other hand, creating instances have little advantage that developers never have to worry about thread safety. I am trying to understand the reason for this decision over the trade-off of thread-safety.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >