Search Results

Search found 15103 results on 605 pages for 'programmers notepad'.

Page 262/605 | < Previous Page | 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269  | Next Page >

  • How to handle editing a large file for a non-technical user

    - by Luke
    I have a client who is given a tab delimited .txt file containing hundreds of thousands of rows. I have a user story as follows: As a user I want to take the text file and add a new value at the end of each line which contains the concatenated value of two of the columns. for example if the file read text_one text_two I need to output the following (preferably to a .txt file) text_one text_two text_onetext_two My first approach was to ask the vendor supplying the file to do the concatenation before providing the file, the easiest way to solve a problem is to eliminate it right? however they are very uncooperative and have point blank refused. I've looked at building a simple javascript application that does this client side so a non-technical user could select the file using a file selector. This approach has a few problems The file could be over a GB in size and so can't be loaded straight into memory, I've tried and the browser crashes There is no means to write a file in javascript so I'd need to output the content to the screen and have the user save it (somehow) I was thinking if I could get around the filesize limitations I could just output the edited content to the page and have the user save the page as a .txt file, however I think there is a better way than using javascript that will still accommodate the users lack of technical know-how. Please consider this question to be stack agnostic, but bear in mind that a nice little shell script or python script would be deemed unsuitable for a non technical user unless there is a way of "packaging" it nicely for a non-technical user. Updates The file is too large to open in excel. The process needs to be run weekly, but it doesn't require scheduling or automation...(yet)

    Read the article

  • Single Responsibility Principle Implementation

    - by Mike S
    In my spare time, I've been designing a CMS in order to learn more about actual software design and architecture, etc. Going through the SOLID principles, I already notice that ideas like "MVC", "DRY", and "KISS", pretty much fall right into place. That said, I'm still having problems deciding if one of two implementations is the best choice when it comes to the Single Responsibility Principle. Implementation #1: class User getName getPassword getEmail // etc... class UserManager create read update delete class Session start stop class Login main class Logout main class Register main The idea behind this implementation is that all user-based actions are separated out into different classes (creating a possible case of the aptly-named Ravioli Code), but following the SRP to a "tee", almost literally. But then I thought that it was a bit much, and came up with this next implementation class UserView extends View getLogin //Returns the html for the login screen getShortLogin //Returns the html for an inline login bar getLogout //Returns the html for a logout button getRegister //Returns the html for a register page // etc... as needed class UserModel extends DataModel implements IDataModel // Implements no new methods yet, outside of the interface methods // Haven't figured out anything special to go here at the moment // All CRUD operations are handled by DataModel // through methods implemented by the interface class UserControl extends Control implements IControl login logout register startSession stopSession class User extends DataObject getName getPassword getEmail // etc... This is obviously still very organized, and still very "single responsibility". The User class is a data object that I can manipulate data on and then pass to the UserModel to save it to the database. All the user data rendering (what the user will see) is handled by UserView and it's methods, and all the user actions are in one space in UserControl (plus some automated stuff required by the CMS to keep a user logged in or to ensure that they stay out.) I personally can't think of anything wrong with this implementation either. In my personal feelings I feel that both are effectively correct, but I can't decide which one would be easier to maintain and extend as life goes on (despite leaning towards Implementation #1.) So what about you guys? What are your opinions on this? Which one is better? What basics (or otherwise, nuances) of that principle have I missed in either design?

    Read the article

  • MCTS certification (Windows Communication Foundation Development)

    - by Pinchy
    Hi guys! I seriously need some advice on getting MCTS certified (Windows Communication Foundation Development) I just cannot go to a MS certification courses as they are very expensive here and far from my hometown. I want to self educate myself and I don't know where to start with. My problem is finding good study materials and sample exam questions. I haven't taken any Microsoft exams before so I have got no idea what they would ask me on the exam (70-513). Can anyone give me some ideas on how to start from scratch? Any answer will be much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Registering as developer on Google Play store

    - by ChosenOne
    I am registering as a Developer to sell paid applications on the Google Play store and have run into a slight issue: After I paid, I clicked on "Setup merchant details" link. I filled out the business address section, but in the "Public contact" section, Google says this: How can your customers get in touch with you? This information will be made available to your customers when they make a purchase. I work from home. I do not want customers knowing my home address, nor do I want it displayed anywhere online or even accessible by anyone. Should I just enter NA in each of the following fields? Surely Google understands that we have a right to keep such things private? How can I get around this while not getting my account suspended or risk not being approved?

    Read the article

  • To what extent do code-signing certificates boost sales of your software?

    - by Dan W
    In the experiences of everyone here, have you found a certificate to boost sales of your (downloadable) program? I produce .NET software and upon clicking the installation file, Windows 7 pops up a message saying the software is from an "unknown publisher" and to proceed with caution. For Windows 8, this appears to be even more prominent, and may adversely affect the number of downloads, and therefore the number of sales. A certificate will help soften this 'warning' by (for example) changing the warning's colour from orange to blue, and give the publisher's name instead of 'unknown'. But I'd like more tangible evidence since many people are obviously used to that message, and may not care and download anyway. So has anyone noticed a jump in sales after the switch?

    Read the article

  • Software developer needs Validation for VA Chap 31 to purchase Macbook Pro vs. PC [closed]

    - by David
    I am currently attending college with a path of software development and working towards my BS thanks to VA Chap 31. My old original Macbook Pro is near dead and no longer upgradable on the software or hardware side. The VA has offered to purchase a PC laptop for me (Because my syllabi says computer required), but I do not want to go backwards. I have a lot invested in OS X software and Mac peripherals, not to mention I prefer to program in an Apple environment. PC vs. Mac costs are so drastically different that I must validate my request for a new Macbook Pro. In my request to the VA, I stated the above and some other topics but they requested more validation. Can anyone recommend issues, reasons, etc. to help me validate this purchase by the VA for school? Thanks in advance for your help, David

    Read the article

  • One-week release cycle: how do I make this feasible?

    - by Arkaaito
    At my company (3-yr-old web industry startup), we have frequent problems with the product team saying "aaaah this is a crisis patch it now!" (doesn't everybody?) This has an impact on the productivity (and morale) of engineering staff, self included. Management has spent some time thinking about how to reduce the frequency of these same-day requests and has come up with the solution that we are going to have a release every week. (Previously we'd been doing one every two weeks, which usually slipped by a couple of days or so.) There are 13 developers and 6 local / 9 offshore testers; the theory is that only 4 developers (and all testers) will work on even-numbered releases, unless a piece of work comes up that really requires some specific expertise from one of the other devs. Each cycle will contain two days of dev work and two days of QA work (plus 1 day of scoping / triage / ...). My questions are: (a) Does anyone have experience with this length of release cycle? (b) Has anyone heard of this length of release cycle even being attempted? (c) If (a) or (b), how on Earth do you make it work? (Any pitfalls to avoid, etc., are also appreciated.) (d) How can we minimize the damage if this effort fails?

    Read the article

  • Do you believe it's a good idea for Software Engineers to have to work as Quality Assurance Engineers for some period of time?

    - by Macy Abbey
    I believe it is. Why? I've encountered many Software Engineers who believe they are somehow superior to QA engineers. I think it may help quench this belief if they do the job of a QA engineer for some time, and realize that it is a unique and valuable skill-set of its own. The better a Software Engineer is at testing their own programs, the less cost in time their code incurs when making its way through the rest of the software development life-cycle. The more time a Software Engineer spends thinking about how a program can break, the more often they are to consider these cases as they are developing them, thus reducing bugs in the end product. A Software Engineer's definition of "complete" is always interesting...if they have spent time as a QA engineer maybe this definition will more closely match the designer of the software's. What do you all think?

    Read the article

  • Using public domain source code from JDK in my application

    - by user2941369
    Can I use source code from ThreadPoolExecutor.java taken from JDK 1.7 considering that the following clausule is at the beginning of the ThreadPoolExecutor.java: /* * Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166 * Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at * http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain */ And just before that there is also: /* * ORACLE PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL. Use is subject to license terms. */

    Read the article

  • Naming methods that perform HTTP GET/POST calls?

    - by antonpug
    In the application I am currently working on, there are generally 3 types of HTTP calls: pure GETs pure POSTs (updating the model with new data) "GET" POSTs (posting down an object to get some data back, no updates to the model) In the integration service, generally we name methods that post "postSomething()", and methods that get, "getSomething()". So my question is, if we have a "GET" POST, should the method be called: getSomething - seeing as the purpose is to obtain data postSomething - since we are technically using POST performSomeAction - arbitrary name that's more relevant to the action What are everyone's thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How to do dependency Injection and conditional object creation based on type?

    - by Pradeep
    I have a service endpoint initialized using DI. It is of the following style. This end point is used across the app. public class CustomerService : ICustomerService { private IValidationService ValidationService { get; set; } private ICustomerRepository Repository { get; set; } public CustomerService(IValidationService validationService,ICustomerRepository repository) { ValidationService = validationService; Repository = repository; } public void Save(CustomerDTO customer) { if (ValidationService.Valid(customer)) Repository.Save(customer); } Now, With the changing requirements, there are going to be different types of customers (Legacy/Regular). The requirement is based on the type of the customer I have to validate and persist the customer in a different way (e.g. if Legacy customer persist to LegacyRepository). The wrong way to do this will be to break DI and do somthing like public void Save(CustomerDTO customer) { if(customer.Type == CustomerTypes.Legacy) { if (LegacyValidationService.Valid(customer)) LegacyRepository.Save(customer); } else { if (ValidationService.Valid(customer)) Repository.Save(customer); } } My options to me seems like DI all possible IValidationService and ICustomerRepository and switch based on type, which seems wrong. The other is to change the service signature to Save(IValidationService validation, ICustomerRepository repository, CustomerDTO customer) which is an invasive change. Break DI. Use the Strategy pattern approach for each type and do something like: validation= CustomerValidationServiceFactory.GetStratedgy(customer.Type); validation.Valid(customer) but now I have a static method which needs to know how to initialize different services. I am sure this is a very common problem, What is the right way to solve this without changing service signatures or breaking DI?

    Read the article

  • The cost of longer delay between development and QA

    - by Neil N
    At my current position, QA has become a bottleneck. We have had the unfortunate occurence of features being held out of the current build so that QA could finish testing. This means features that are done being developed may not get tested for 2-3 weeks after the developer has already moved on. With dev moving faster thean QA, this time gap is only going to get bigger. I keep flipping through my copy of Code Compelte, looking for a "Hard Data" snippet that shows the cost of fixing defects grows exponentially the longer it exists. Can someone point me to some studies that back up this concept? I am trying to convince the powers that be that the QA bottleneck is a lot more costly than they think.

    Read the article

  • What is the point of dynamic allocation in C++?

    - by Aerovistae
    I really have never understood it at all. I can do it, but I just don't get why I would want to. For instance, I was programming a game yesterday, and I set up an array of pointers to dynamically allocated little enemies in the game, then passed it to a function which updates their positions. When I ran the game, I got one of those nondescript assertion errors, something about a memory block not existing, I don't know. It was a run-time error, so it didn't say where the problem was. So I just said screw it and rewrote it with static instantiation, i.e.: while(n<4) { Enemy tempEnemy = Enemy(3, 4); enemyVector.push_back(tempEnemy); n++; } updatePositions(&enemyVector); And it immediately worked perfectly. Now sure, some of you may be thinking something to the effect of "Maybe if you knew what you were doing," or perhaps "n00b can't use pointers L0L," but frankly, you really can't deny that they make things way overcomplicated, hence most modern languages have done away with them entirely. But please-- someone -- What IS the point of dynamic allocation? What advantage does it afford? Why would I ever not do what I just did in the above example?

    Read the article

  • Making dummy applications while not involved in LIVE work [closed]

    - by Ratan Sharma
    I know this is subjective but I am looking for some real time helpful points/advice here, which will be helpful for some to get motivated. In our company so many people are on bench(not assigned with real time work) and they do not want to experiment things by their own. What would be a good motivation for them to keep their learning spirit? I personally feel that one can learn and give more effort in live client work than regular practicing things and making dummies. Am I right here or it is just my thinking only?

    Read the article

  • Serialized values or separate table, which is more efficient?

    - by Aravind
    I have a Rails model email_condition_string with a word column in it. Now I have another model called request_creation_email_config with the following columns admin_filter_group:references vendor_service:references email_condition_string:references email_condition_string has many request_creation_email_config and request_creation_email_config belongs to email_condition_string. Instead of this model a colleague of mine is suggesting that strong the word inside the same model as comma separated values is efficient than storing as a separate model. Is that alright?

    Read the article

  • Help to understand the abstract factory pattern

    - by Chobeat
    I'm learning the 23 design patterns of the GoF. I think I've found a way to understand and simplify how the Abstract Factory works but I would like to know if this is a correct assumption or if I am wrong. What I want to know is if we can see the result of the Abstract Factory method as a matrix of possible products where there's a Product for every "Concrete Factory" x "AbstractProduct" where the Concrete Factory is a single implementation among the implementations of an AbstractFactory and an AbstractProduct is an interface among the interfaces to create Products. Is this correct or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Is there a theory for "transactional" sequences of failing and no-fail actions?

    - by Ross Bencina
    My question is about writing transaction-like functions that execute sequences of actions, some of which may fail. It is related to the general C++ principle "destructors can't throw," no-fail property, and maybe also with multi-phase transactions or exception safety. However, I'm thinking about it in language-neutral terms. My concern is with correctly designing error handling in C++ functions that must be reliable. I would like to know what the concepts below are called so that I can learn more about them. I'm sorry that I can't ask the question more directly. Since I don't know this area I have provided an example to explain my question. The question is at the end. Here goes: Consider a sequence of steps or actions executed sequentially, where actions belong to one of two classes: those that always succeed, and those that may fail. In the examples below: S stands for an action that always succeeds (called "no-fail" in some settings). F stands for an action that may fail (for example, it might fail to allocate memory or do I/O that could fail). Consider a sequences of actions (executed sequentially from left to right): S->S->S->S Since each action in the sequence above succeeds, the whole sequence succeeds. On the other hand, the following sequence may fail because the last action may fail: S->S->S->F So, claim: a sequence has the no-fail (S) property if and only if all of its actions are no-fail. Now, I'm interested in action sequences that form "atomic transactions", with "failure atomicity," i.e. where either the whole sequence completes successfully, or there is no effect. I.e. if some action fails, the earlier ones must be rolled back. This requires that any successfully executed actions prior to a failing action must always be able to be rolled back. Consider the sequence: S->S->S->F S<-S<-S In the example above, the first row is the forward path of the transaction, and the second row are inverse actions (executed from right to left) that can be used to roll back if the final top row actions fails. It seems to me that for a transaction to support failure atomicity, the following invariant must hold: Claim: To support failure atomicity (either completion or complete roll-back on failure) all actions preceding the latest failable (F) action on the forward path (marked * in the example below) must have no-fail (S) inverses. The following is an example of a sequence that supports failure atomicity: * S->F->F->F S<-S<-S Further, if we want the transaction to be able to attempt cancellation mid-way through, but still guarantee either full completion or full rollback then we need the following property: Claim: To support failure atomicity and cancellation mid-way through execution, in the face of errors in the inverse (cancellation) path, all actions following the earliest failable (F) inverse on the reverse path (marked *) must be no-fail (S). F->F->F->S->S S<-S<-F<-F * I believe that these two conditions guarantee that an abortable/cancelable transaction will never get "stuck". My questions are: What is the study and theory of these properties called? are my claims correct? and what else is there to know? UPDATE 1: Updated terminology: what I previously called "robustness" is called atomicity in the database literature. UPDATE 2: Added explicit reference to failure atomicity, which seems to be a thing.

    Read the article

  • how to upload & preview multiple images at single input and store in to php mysql [closed]

    - by Nilesh Sonawane
    This is nilesh , i am newcomer in this field , i need the script for when i click the upload button then uploaded images it should preview and store into db like wise i want to upload 10 images at same page using php mysql . #div { border:3px dashed #CCC; width:500px; min-height:100px; height:auto; text-align:center: } Multi-Images Uploader '.$f.''; } } } ? </div> <br> <font color='#3d3d3d' size='small'>By: Ahmed Hussein</font> this script select multiple images and then uplod , but i need to upload at a time only one image which preview and store into database like wise min 10 image user can upload .......

    Read the article

  • Software monetization that is not evil

    - by t0x1n
    I have a free open-source project with around 800K downloads to date. I've been contacted by some monetization companies from time to time and turned them down, since I didn't want toolbar malware associated with my software. I was wondering however, is there a non-evil way to monetize software ? Here are the options as I know them: Add a donation button. I don't feel comfortable with that as I really don't need "donations" - I'm paid quite well. Donating users may feel entitled to support etc. (see the second to last bullet) Add ads inside your application. In the web that may be acceptable, but in a desktop program it looks incredibly lame. Charge a small amount for each download. This model works well in the mobile world, but I suspect no one will go for it on the desktop. It doesn't mix well with open source, though I suppose I could charge only for the binaries (most users won't go to the hassle of compiling the sources). People may expect support etc. after having explicitly paid (see next bullet). Make money off a service / community / support associated with the program. This is one route I definitely don't want to take, I don't want any sort of hassle beyond coding. I assure you, the program is top notch (albeit simple) and I'm not aware of any bugs as of yet (there are support forums and blog comments where users may report them). It is also very simple, documented, and discoverable so I do think I have a case for supplying it "as is". Add affiliate suggestions to your installer. If you use a monetization company, you lose control over what they propose. Unless you can establish some sort of strong trust with the company to supply quality suggestions (I sincerely doubt it), I can't have that. Choosing your own affiliate (e.g. directly suggesting Google Toolbar) is possibly the only viable solution to my mind. Problem is, where do I find a solid affiliate that could actually give value to the user rather than infect his computer with crapware? I thought maybe Babylon (not the toolbar of course, I hate toolbars)?

    Read the article

  • What is a good way to share internal helpers?

    - by toplel32
    All my projects share the same base library that I have build up over quite some time. It contains utilities and static helper classes to assist them where .NET doesn't exactly offer what I want. Originally all the helpers were written mainly to serve an internal purpose and it has to stay that way, but sometimes they prove very useful to other assemblies. Now making them public in a reliable way is more complicated than most would think, for example all methods that assume nullable types must now contain argument checking while not charging internal utilities with the price of doing so. The price might be negligible, but it is far from right. While refactoring, I have revised this case multiple times and I've come up with the following solutions so far: Have an internal and public class for each helper The internal class contains the actual code while the public class serves as an access point which does argument checking. Cons: The internal class requires a prefix to avoid ambiguity (the best presentation should be reserved for public types) It isn't possible to discriminate methods that don't need argument checking   Have one class that contains both internal and public members (as conventionally implemented in .NET framework). At first, this might sound like the best possible solution, but it has the same first unpleasant con as solution 1. Cons: Internal methods require a prefix to avoid ambiguity   Have an internal class which is implemented by the public class that overrides any members that require argument checking. Cons: Is non-static, atleast one instantiation is required. This doesn't really fit into the helper class idea, since it generally consists of independent fragments of code, it should not require instantiation. Non-static methods are also slower by a negligible degree, which doesn't really justify this option either. There is one general and unavoidable consequence, alot of maintenance is necessary because every internal member will require a public counterpart. A note on solution 1: The first consequence can be avoided by putting both classes in different namespaces, for example you can have the real helper in the root namespace and the public helper in a namespace called "Helpers".

    Read the article

  • Are flag variables an absolute evil?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I remember doing a couple of projects where I totally neglected using flags and ended up with better architecture/code; however, it is a common practice in other projects I work at, and when code grows and flags are added, IMHO code-spaghetti also grows. Would you say there are any cases where using flags is a good practice or even necessary?, or would you agree that using flags in code are... red flags and should be avoided/refactored; me, I just get by with doing functions/methods that check for states in real time instead. Edit: Not talking about compiler flags

    Read the article

  • Methodology for Documenting Existing Code Base

    - by George Stocker
    I work as part of a team on an existing application that has no inline documentation, nor does it have technical documentation. As I've been working on various bug reports on the application, I've written a sort of breadcrumb trail for myself - bug numbers in various places so that the next developer can refer to that bug number to see what was going on. My question is thus: What is the most effecient method for documenting this code? Should I document as I touch the area (the virus method, if you will), or should I document from each section on its own, and not follow paths that branch out into other areas of the application? Should I insert inline comments where none previously existed (with the fear that I may end up incorrectly identifying what the code does)? What method would you use to accurately and quickly document a rather large application that has no existing inline documentation, nor inline references to external documentation?

    Read the article

  • The Singleton Pattern

    - by Darren Young
    Hi, I am a new programmer (4 months into my first job) and have recently taken an interest in design patterns. One that I have used recently is the Singleton. However, looking at some comments on this thread Overused or abused programming techniques .......it has some bad feedback. Come somebody explain why? I have found it useful in some places, however I could probably have achieved the same without it using a static class. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Interaction of a GUI-based App and Windows Service

    - by psubsee2003
    I am working on personal project that will be designed to help manage my media library, specifically recordings created by Windows Media Center. So I am going to have the following parts to this application: A Windows Service that monitors the recording folder. Once a new recording is completed that meets specific criteria, it will call several 3rd party CLI Applications to remove the commercials and re-encode the video into a more hard-drive friendly format. A controller GUI to be able to modify settings of the service, specifically add new shows to watch for, and to modify parameters for the CLI Applications A standalone (GUI-based) desktop application that can perform many of the same functions as the windows service, expect manually on specific files instead of automatically based on specific criteria. (It should be mentioned that I have limited experience with an application of this complexity, and I have absolutely zero experience with Windows Services) Since the 1st and 3rd bullet share similar functionality, my design plan is to pull the common functionality into a separate library shared by both parts applications, but these 2 components do not need to interact otherwise. The 2nd and 3rd bullets seem to share some common functionality, both will have a GUI, both will have to help define similar parameters (one to send to the service and the other to send directly to the CLI applications), so I can see some advantage to combining them into the same application. On the other hand, the standalone application (bullet #3) really does not need to interact with the service at all, except for possibly sharing a few common default parameters that can easily be put into an XML in a common location, so it seems to make more sense to just keep everything separate. The controller GUI (2nd bullet) is where I am stuck at the moment. Do I just roll this functionality (allow for user interaction with the service to update settings and criteria) into the standalone application? Or would it be a better design decision to keep them separate? Specifically, I'm worried about adding the complexity of communicating with the Windows Service to the standalone application when it doesn't need it. Is WCF the right approach to allow the controller GUI to interact with the Windows Service? Or is there a better alternative? At the moment, I don't envision a need for a significant amount of interaction, maybe just adding a new task once in a while and occasionally tweaking a parameter, but when something is changed, I do expect the windows service to immediately use the new settings.

    Read the article

  • Right multi object dependance design

    - by kenny
    I need some help with a correct design. I have a class called BufferManager. The push() method of this class reads data from a source and pushes it to a buffer repeatedly until there is no more data left in the source. There are also consumer threads that read data from this buffer, as soon as new data arrives. There is an option to sort the data before it comes to buffer. What I do right now is that BufferManager, instead of pushing data to the buffer, pushes it to another "sorting" buffer and starts a sorting thread. SorterManager class reads the data, sorts it in files and push()es the sorted data into the buffer. There will be a bottleneck (I use merge sort with files) but this is something I can't avoid. This is a bad design, because both BufferManager and SorterManager push data to a buffer (that consumers read from). I think only BufferManager should do it. How can I design it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269  | Next Page >