Search Results

Search found 16554 results on 663 pages for 'programmers identity'.

Page 215/663 | < Previous Page | 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222  | Next Page >

  • How to set up a one-man research in the difference between BDD and Waterfall?

    - by Martijn van der Maas
    Earlier, I asked a question about how to measure the quality of a project. The outcome of that question was that the quality of the project can be divided into two parts: Internal quality (code quality, measurable by code quality metrics) External quality (Acceptance test, how well the software meets the requirements) So based on that, I want to set up some research and validate the outcome of the project. The problem is, I will conduct this research on my own, so it's not possible to run the project once in BDD style and the other one in waterfall by myself. It's also not possible to compare BDD and waterfall projects on a larger scale, due to the fact that there are not enough BDD projects that can be measured because of the age of BDD. So, my question is: did anybody face this problem? How could I execute my experiment in such a way that it is of scientific value?

    Read the article

  • Storing Attendance Data in database

    - by Ali Abbas
    So i have to store daily attendance of employees of my organisation from my application . The part where I need some help is, the efficient way to store attendance data. After some research and brain storming I came up with some approaches . Could you point me out which one is the best and any unobvious ill effects of the mentioned approaches. The approaches are as follows Create a single table for whole organisation and store empid,date,presentstatus as a row for every employee everyday. Create a single table for whole organisation and store a single row for each day with a comma delimited string of empids which are absent. I will generate the string on my application. Create different tables for each department and follow the 1 method. Please share your views and do mention any other good methods

    Read the article

  • Legal concern over "borrowed" code

    - by iandisme
    A company my friend works for (let's call him Me) recently unveiled a new face for their internal "networking" website. This new face looks remarkably like Facebook, and indeed, examination of the source code reveals that it's almost identical: The code, class names, and even the fonts are the same. There is also no indication that Facebook is in any way involved or aware. I know this is unethical, but is it illegal? I can't find anything concrete about this to help Me decide what to do about it. EDIT: We're talking front-end code. It does not appear to be linking to Facebook in any way.

    Read the article

  • Installing Perl modules and dependencies with non-root and without CPAN [migrated]

    - by Eegabooga
    I have been writing Perl scripts for my work and the machine that I have been given to work on makes installing Perl modules difficult: We cannot have gcc on my machine for security reasons, so I cannot use CPAN to install modules, for most modules. I do not have access to the root account. Usually, when I want to install a module, I put in a request and I have to wait a day or two before it gets installed. I know that nobody would have a problem with me installing them myself, so to save everyone's time and my sanity I would like to install them myself. It's just an issue of how to best do that. I have talked to various people and they said to use an RPM to install them (to get around not having gcc). However, when trying to install modules from RPMs, it does not handle the dependencies so I would manually need to handle the dependencies, which could take a while. How can I best install Perl modules with these limitations?

    Read the article

  • Is taking a semester or year off from college a good idea?

    - by astrieanna
    I am currently a Junior majoring in Computer Science at a top university (in the USA). As I'm really getting tired of taking classes, I was wondering if taking a semester or year off to do an internship(s) is a reasonable idea? It seems like it would give me more experience programming (making classes a bit easier), and give me a chance to recover from the burnout that comes from taking 18 credits a semester. A friend suggested that I just take a lighter course load, but I only have 2 more semesters of financial aid, so I need to take 18 credits in each of them in order to finish. Taking time off from school is not a normal thing to do, at least at this school. Since more internships are advertised for the summer (that I've seen), I was wondering if there are internships available in times other than the summer? If I took off for a whole year, would it be more valuable to try to stay at the same company for the whole time or to try to get a series of internships at different ones? Valuable in both the sense of resume value and personal value. Would it be easier or harder to get multiple shorter internships?

    Read the article

  • Type dependencies vs directory structure

    - by paul
    Something I've been wondering about recently is how to organize types in directories/namespaces w.r.t. their dependencies. One method I've seen, which I believe is the recommendation for both Haskell and .NET (though I can't find the references for this at the moment), is: Type Type/ATypeThatUsesType Type/AnotherTypeThatUsesType My natural inclination, however, is to do the opposite: Type Type/ATypeUponWhichTypeDepends Type/AnotherTypeUponWhichTypeDepends Questions: Is my inclination bass-ackwards? Are there any major benefits/pitfalls of one over the other? Is it just something that depends on the application, e.g. whether you're building a library vs doing normal coding?

    Read the article

  • Would learning any (linguistic) language imparticular further your programming career?

    - by Anonymous
    It seems apparent that English is the dominant international language for programming (in the West, at least!) based on previous P.SE questions. Or maybe not, given that a highly upvoted comment correctly points out that asking a question like that on a predominantly English site will skew the results. This question is about whether there is a benefit in learning a foreign language for software development. For example, do the Chinese have completely different software tools, langugages, technologies etc? How about Japanese, Russian, and other non-latin based languages? Am I/are we missing an entire world of software development languages, tools and so on that only exist in these other languages? Or do people that know these languages still learn and program using the tools and languages we all know and love?

    Read the article

  • Is the development of CLI apps considered "backward"?

    - by user61852
    I am a DBA fledgling with a lot of experience in programming. I have developed several CLI, non interactive apps that solve some daily repetitive tasks or eliminate the human error from more complex albeit not so daily tasks. These tools are now part of our tool box. I find CLI apps are great because you can include them in an automated workflow. Also the Unix philosophy of doing a single thing but doing it well, and letting the output of a process be the input of another, is a great way of building a set of tools than would consolidate into an strategic advantage. My boss recently commented that developing CLI tools is "backward", or constitutes a "regression". I told him I disagreed, because most CLI tools that exist now are not legacy but are live projects with improved versions being released all the time. Is this kind of development considered "backwards" in the market? Does it look bad on a rèsumè? I also considered all solutions whether they are web or desktop, should have command line, non-interactive options. Some people consider this a waste of programming resources. Is this goal a worthy one in a software project?

    Read the article

  • Syntax logic suggestions

    - by Anna
    This syntax will be used inside HTML attributes. Here are a few examples of what I have so far: <input name="a" conditions="!b, c" /> <input name="b" /> <input name="c" /> This will make input "a" do something if b is not checked and c is checked (b and c are assumed to be checkboxes if they don't have a :value defined) <input name="a" conditions="!b:foo|bar, c:foo" /> <input name="b" /> <input name="c" /> This will make input "a" do something if bdoesn't have foo or bar values, and if c has the foo value. <input name="a" conditions="!b:EMPTY" /> <input name="b" /> Makes input "a" do something if b has a value assigned. So, essentially , acts as logical AND, : as equals (=), ! as NOT, and | as OR. The | (OR) is only needed between values (at least I think so), and AND is not needed between values for obvious reasons :) EMPTY means empty value, like <input value="" /> Do you have any suggestions on improving this syntax, like making it more human friendly? For example I think the "EMPTY" keyword is not really appropriate and should be replaced with a character, but I don't know which one to choose.

    Read the article

  • User Acceptance Testing Defect Classification when developing for an outside client

    - by DannyC
    I am involved in a large development project in which we (a very small start up) are developing for an outside client (a very large company). We recently received their first output from UAT testing of a fairly small iteration, which listed 12 'defects', triaged into three categories : Low, Medium and High. The issue we have is around whether everything in this list should be recorded as a 'defect' - some of the issues they found would be better described as refinements, or even 'nice-to-haves', and some we think are not defects at all. They client's QA lead says that it is standard for them to label every issues they identify as a defect, however, we are a bit uncomfortable about this. Whilst the relationship is good, we don't see a huge problem with this, but we are concerned that, if the relationship suffers in the future, these lists of 'defects' could prove costly for us. We don't want to come across as being difficult, or taking things too personally here, and we are happy to make all of the changes identified, however we are a bit concerned especially as there is a uneven power balance at play in our relationship. Are we being paranoid here? Or could we be setting ourselves up for problems down the line by agreeing to this classification?

    Read the article

  • How many developers before continuous integration becomes effective for us?

    - by Carnotaurus
    There is an overhead associated with continuous integration, e.g., set up, re-training, awareness activities, stoppage to fix "bugs" that turn out to be data issues, enforced separation of concerns programming styles, etc. At what point does continuous integration pay for itself? EDIT: These were my findings The set-up was CruiseControl.Net with Nant, reading from VSS or TFS. Here are a few reasons for failure, which have nothing to do with the setup: Cost of investigation: The time spent investigating whether a red light is due a genuine logical inconsistency in the code, data quality, or another source such as an infrastructure problem (e.g., a network issue, a timeout reading from source control, third party server is down, etc., etc.) Political costs over infrastructure: I considered performing an "infrastructure" check for each method in the test run. I had no solution to the timeout except to replace the build server. Red tape got in the way and there was no server replacement. Cost of fixing unit tests: A red light due to a data quality issue could be an indicator of a badly written unit test. So, data dependent unit tests were re-written to reduce the likelihood of a red light due to bad data. In many cases, necessary data was inserted into the test environment to be able to accurately run its unit tests. It makes sense to say that by making the data more robust then the test becomes more robust if it is dependent on this data. Of course, this worked well! Cost of coverage, i.e., writing unit tests for already existing code: There was the problem of unit test coverage. There were thousands of methods that had no unit tests. So, a sizeable amount of man days would be needed to create those. As this would be too difficult to provide a business case, it was decided that unit tests would be used for any new public method going forward. Those that did not have a unit test were termed 'potentially infra red'. An intestesting point here is that static methods were a moot point in how it would be possible to uniquely determine how a specific static method had failed. Cost of bespoke releases: Nant scripts only go so far. They are not that useful for, say, CMS dependent builds for EPiServer, CMS, or any UI oriented database deployment. These are the types of issues that occured on the build server for hourly test runs and overnight QA builds. I entertain that these to be unnecessary as a build master can perform these tasks manually at the time of release, esp., with a one man band and a small build. So, single step builds have not justified use of CI in my experience. What about the more complex, multistep builds? These can be a pain to build, especially without a Nant script. So, even having created one, these were no more successful. The costs of fixing the red light issues outweighed the benefits. Eventually, developers lost interest and questioned the validity of the red light. Having given it a fair try, I believe that CI is expensive and there is a lot of working around the edges instead of just getting the job done. It's more cost effective to employ experienced developers who do not make a mess of large projects than introduce and maintain an alarm system. This is the case even if those developers leave. It doesn't matter if a good developer leaves because processes that he follows would ensure that he writes requirement specs, design specs, sticks to the coding guidelines, and comments his code so that it is readable. All this is reviewed. If this is not happening then his team leader is not doing his job, which should be picked up by his manager and so on. For CI to work, it is not enough to just write unit tests, attempt to maintain full coverage, and ensure a working infrastructure for sizable systems. The bottom line: One might question whether fixing as many bugs before release is even desirable from a business prespective. CI involves a lot of work to capture a handful of bugs that the customer could identify in UAT or the company could get paid for fixing as part of a client service agreement when the warranty period expires anyway.

    Read the article

  • Handling Deployment to Multiple Environments

    - by JayGee
    How should I handle deploying web applications to multiple servers? Constraints I have a dev, test and prod environment. No build server is available. Developers can't deploy to prod. The people that do deploy to prod copy files from test to prod. They don't have VS installed. Currently The way it's handled is using web.config transform. However, to deploy to prod involves putting prod code on the test server where it's copied over. Problem Sometimes simple mistakes are made, such as forgetting to change test back to the right environment after deployment. Or the test config gets moved to prod instead of the prod config. Solution So the question is, what is the best way to prevent mistakes from happening? My first thought is let the app determine which server it's on at runtime and use the appropriate settings/connection strings/etc... However, the server names could change in the not too distant future. So if multiple apps are hard coded, that would mean updating all of them. The easiest way to handle that situation would be to place a DLL in the GAC that determines the environment. Are there any drawbacks or possible complications that this would cause? Or is there a better solution to the problem than this?

    Read the article

  • What should one keep in mind when switching from traditional to RESTful routing in Rails?

    - by Brian Holder-Chow
    What should one keep in mind when switching from traditional to RESTful routing in Rails? From a typical Rails routes.rb file: # This is a legacy wild controller route that's not recommended for RESTful applications. # Note: This route will make all actions in every controller accessible via GET requests. match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)' As switching away from this means that I will have to create routes for each controller individually, does anyone have any advice on the best way to migrate this safely?

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't Haskell have type-level lambda abstractions?

    - by Petr Pudlák
    Are there some theoretical reasons for that (like that the type checking or type inference would become undecidable), or practical reasons (too difficult to implement properly)? Currently, we can wrap things into newtype like newtype Pair a = Pair (a, a) and then have Pair :: * -> * but we cannot do something like ?(a:*). (a,a). (There are some languages that have them, for example, Scala does.)

    Read the article

  • Changing from Frontend Development to .Net

    - by Ivo
    On of my colleagues is going to change jobs from full time frontend developer(jquery, css,html) to 50% frontend 50% .Net (MVC 3 with razor) What are good techniques to get him up to speed asap. I have the following idea's myself Read Clean Code Read/Pratice with the book Pro ASP.NET MVC 3 Framework Watch Asp.net video's http://www.asp.net/mvc/videos Do the nerd dinner intro http://www.asp.net/mvc/videos Start building the json services from jQuery 0.5/1 day of pair programming with an experienced .Net developer each week Is this a good way to go? Is it totally wrong? Any other tips

    Read the article

  • Script/tool to import series of snapshots, each being a new revision, into Subversion, populating source tree?

    - by Rob
    I've developed code locally and taken a fairly regular snapshot whenever I reach a significant point in development, e.g. a working build. So I have a long-ish list of about 40 folders, each folder being a snapshot e.g. in ascending date YYYYMMDD order, e.g.:- 20100523 20100614 20100721 20100722 20100809 20100901 20101001 20101003 20101104 20101119 20101203 20101218 20110102 I'm looking for a script to import each of these snapshots as a new subversion revision to the source tree. The end result being that the HEAD revision is the same as the last snapshot, and other revisions are as numbered. Some other requirements: that the HEAD revision is not cumulative of the previous snapshots, i.e., files that appeared in older snapshots but which don't appear in later ones (e.g. due to refactoring etc.) should not appear in the HEAD revision. meanwhile, there should be continuity between files that do persist between snapshots. Subversion should know that there are previous versions of these files and not treat them as brand new files within each revision. Some background about my aim: I need to formally revision control this work rather than keep local private snapshot copies. I plan to release this work as open source, so version controlling would be highly recommended I am evaluating some of the current popular version control systems (Subversion and GIT) BUT I definitely need a working solution in Subversion. I'm not looking to be persuaded to use one particular tool, I need a solution for each tool I am considering as I would also like a solution in GIT (I will post an answer separately for GIT so separate camps of folks who have expertise in GIT and Subversion will be able to give focused answers on one or the other). The same question but for GIT: Script/tool to import series of snapshots, each being a new edition, into GIT, populating source tree? An outline answer for Subversion in stackoverflow.com but not enough specifics about the script: what commands to use, code to check valid scenarios if necessary - i.e. a working script basically. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2203818/is-there-anyway-to-import-xcode-snapshots-into-a-new-svn-repository

    Read the article

  • Should mock objects for tests be created at a high or low level

    - by Danack
    When creating unit tests for those other objects, what is the best way to create mock objects that provide data to other objects. Should they be created at a 'high level' and intercept the calls as soon as possible, or should they be done at a 'low level' and so make as much as the real code still be called? e.g. I'm writing a test for some code that requires a NoteMapper object that allows Notes to be loaded from the DB. class NoteMapper { function getNote($sqlQueryFactory, $noteID) { // Create an SQL query from $sqlQueryFactory // Run that SQL // if null // return null // else // return new Note($dataFromSQLQuery) } } I could either mock this object at a high level by creating a mock NoteMapper object, so that there are no calls to the SQL at all e.g. class MockNoteMapper { function getNote($sqlQueryFactory, $noteID) { //$mockData = {'Test Note title', "Test note text" } // return new Note($mockData); } } Or I could do it at a very low level, by creating a MockSQLQueryFactory that instead of actually querying the database just provides mock data back, and passing that to the current NoteMapper object. It seems that creating mocks at a high level would be easier in the short term, but that in the long term doing it at a low level would be more powerful and possibly allow more automation of tests e.g. by recording data in an out of a DB and then replaying that data for tests. Is there a recommended way of creating mocks? Are there any hard and fast rules about which are better, or should they both be used where appropriate?

    Read the article

  • how to write good programming logic?

    - by user106616
    recently I got job as a java developer, and now I have assigned project too. I want to know what is a good logic? when I check in the code my team lead is saying that its a good code. But when it comes to my project manager he is saying that its a bad code. And he is changing my code, after his changes if I see his code its really very very good and even simple. can you please tell me how to develop the good program, good logic? what is the best way to structure a problem in terms of code?

    Read the article

  • Segmentation fault 11 in MacOS X- C++ [migrated]

    - by Marcos Cesar Vargas Magana
    all. I have a "segmentation fault 11" error when I run the following code. The code actually compiles but I get the error at run time. //** Terror.h ** #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <map> using std::map; using std::pair; using std::string; template<typename Tsize> class Terror { public: //Inserts a message in the map. static Tsize insertMessage(const string& message) { mErrorMessages.insert( pair<Tsize, string>(mErrorMessages.size()+1, message) ); return mErrorMessages.size(); } private: static map<Tsize, string> mErrorMessages; } template<typename Tsize> map<Tsize,string> Terror<Tsize>::mErrorMessages; //** error.h ** #include <iostream> #include "Terror.h" typedef unsigned short errorType; typedef Terror<errorType> error; errorType memoryAllocationError=error::insertMessage("ERROR: out of memory."); //** main.cpp ** #include <iostream> #include "error.h" using namespace std; int main() { try { throw error(memoryAllocationError); } catch(error& err) { } } I have kind of debugging the code and the error happens when the message is being inserted in the static map member. An observation is that if I put the line: errorType memoryAllocationError=error::insertMessage("ERROR: out of memory."); inside the "main()" function instead of at global scope, then everything works fine. But I would like to extend the error messages at global scope, not at local scope. The map is defined static so that all instances of "error" share the same error codes and messages. Do you know how can I get this or something similar. Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • unit/integration testing web service proxy client

    - by cori
    I'm rewriting a PHP client/proxy library that provides an interface to a SOAP-based .Net webservice, and in the process I want to add some unit and integration tests so future modifications are less risky. The work the library I'm working on performs is to marshall the calls to the web service and do a little reorganizing of the responses to present a slightly more -object-oriented interface to the underlying service. Since this library is little else than a thin layer on top of web service calls, my basic assumption is that I'll really be writing integration tests more than unit tests - for example, I don't see any reason to mock away the web service - the work that's performed by the code I'm working on is very light; it's almost passing the response from the service right back to its consumer. Most of the calls are basic CRUD operations: CreateRole(), CreateUser(), DeleteUser(), FindUser(), &ct. I'll be starting from a known database state - the system I'm using for these tests is isolated for testing purposes, so the results will be more or less predictable. My question is this: is it natural to use web service calls to confirm the results of operations within the tests and to reset the state of the application within the scope of each test? Here's an example: One test might be createUserReturnsValidUserId() and might go like this: public function createUserReturnsValidUserId() { // we're assuming a global connection to the service $newUserId = $client->CreateUser("user1"); assertNotNull($newUserId); assertNotNull($client->FindUser($newUserId); $client->deleteUser($newUserId); } So I'm creating a user, making sure I get an ID back and that it represents a user in the system, and then cleaning up after myself (so that later tests don't rely on the success or failure of this test w/r/t the number of users in the system, for example). However this still seems pretty fragile - lots of dependencies and opportunities for tests to fail and effect the results of later tests, which I definitely want to avoid. Am I missing some options of ways to decouple these tests from the system under test, or is this really the best I can do? I think this is a fairly general unit/integration testing question, but if it matters I'm using PHPUnit for the testing framework.

    Read the article

  • PHP rand function (or not so rand)

    - by Badr Hari
    I was testing PHP rand function to write on a image. Of course the output shows that it's not so random. The code I used: <?php header('Content-Type: image/png'); $lenght = 512; $im = imagecreatetruecolor($lenght, $lenght); $blue = imagecolorallocate($im, 0, 255, 255); for ($y = 0; $y < $lenght; $y++) { for ($x = 0; $x < $lenght; $x++) { if (rand(0,1) == 0) { imagesetpixel($im, $x, $y, $blue); } } } imagepng($im); imagedestroy($im); ?> My question is, if I use image width/lenght (variable $lenght in this example) number like 512, 256 or 1024, it is very clear that it's not so random. When I change the variable to 513 for an example, it is so much harder for human eye to detect it. Why is that? What is so special about these numbers? 512: 513: Edit: I'm running xampp on Windows to test it.

    Read the article

  • Matching the superclass's constructor's parameter list, is treating a null default value as a non-null value within a constructor a violation of LSP?

    - by Panzercrisis
    I kind of ran into this when messing around with FlashPunk, and I'm going to use it as an example. Essentially the main sprite class is pretty much class Entity. Entity's constructor has four parameters, each with a default value. One of them is graphic, whose default value is null. Entity is designed to be inherited from, with many such subclasses providing their own graphic within their own internal workings. Normally these subclasses would not have graphic in their constructor's parameter lists, but would simply pick something internally and go with it. However I was looking into possibly still adhering to the Liskov Substitution Principal. Which led me to the following example: package com.blank.graphics { import net.flashpunk.*; import net.flashpunk.graphics.Image; public class SpaceGraphic extends Entity { [Embed(source = "../../../../../../assets/spaces/blank.png")] private const BLANK_SPACE:Class; public function SpaceGraphic(x:Number = 0, y:Number = 0, graphic:Graphic = null, mask:Mask = null) { super(x, y, graphic, mask); if (!graphic) { this.graphic = new Image(BLANK_SPACE); } } } } Alright, so now there's a parameter list in the constructor that perfectly matches the one in the super class's constructor. But if the default value for graphic is used, it'll exhibit two different behaviors, depending on whether you're using the subclass or the superclass. In the superclass, there won't be a graphic, but in the subclass, it'll choose the default graphic. Is this a violation of the Liskov Substitution Principal? Does the fact that subclasses are almost intended to use different parameter lists have any bearing on this? Would minimizing the parameter list violate it in a case like this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Which paradigm to use for writing chess engine?

    - by poke
    If you were going to write a chess game engine, what programming paradigm would you use (OOP, procedural, etc) and why whould you choose it ? By chess engine, I mean the portion of a program that evaluates the current board and decides the computer's next move. I'm asking because I thought it might be fun to write a chess engine. Then it occured to me that I could use it as a project for learning functional programming. Then it occured to me that some problems aren't well suited to the functional paradigm. Then it occured to me that this might be good discussion fodder.

    Read the article

  • Secure Store Service Application not available in SharePoint 2010 Standard

    - by Haseeb Akhtar
    We have migrated from SharePoint 2010 foundation to SharePoint 2010 standard. Now, the problem is we are looking for Secure Store Service on 'Services on Server' page in Central Administration, but we didn't see it. We have another server where SharePoint 2010 standard is installed and there we can see Secure Store Service available. Please let me know what needs to be done for the same. Thanks in Advance

    Read the article

  • junior / professional / senior categorization

    - by oozoo
    Hey guys, is it just me or is the categorization of developer levels highly subjective? I get the feeling that every company tries to hire experienced developers as juniors because they don't know $technology. For example my own career: I switched technologies a couple of times, while sticking to java as a programming language. For example I first worked for 3 years using JavaSE technologies, the next company I worked for hired me as junior because I didn't have JavaEE experience - while still selling me as professional level to customers (I work in consulting). The next company hired me again as junior because I didn't have SAP experience - they mostly work with SAP Java technologies which is definitely a niche. Still, they are selling all their technology consultants for exactly the same rate while paying them significantly different wages. Now when switching jobs again I feel like this whole thing is going to start all over again because I don't have Spring experience or Oracle knowledge. tl;dr = is my observation totally off base that companies are just using these categorizations as means to keep down wages?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222  | Next Page >