Search Results

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

Page 288/663 | < Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >

  • Prepared statement alternatives for this middle-man program?

    - by user2813274
    I have an program that is using a prepared statement to connect and write to a database working nicely, and now need to create a middle-man program to insert between this program and the database. This middle-man program will actually write to multiple databases and handle any errors and connection issues. I would like advice as to how to replicate the prepared statements such as to create minimal impact to the existing program, however I am not sure where to start. I have thought about creating a "SQL statement class" that mimics the prepared statement, only that seems silly. The existing program is in Java, although it's going to be networked anyways so I would be open to writing it in just about anything that would make sense. The databases are currently MySQL, although I would like to be open to changing the database type in the future. My main question is what should the interface for this program look like, and does doing this even make sense? A distributed DB would be the ideal solution, but they seem overly complex and expensive for my needs. I am hoping to replicate the main functionality of a distributed DB via this middle-man. I am not too familiar with sql-based servers distributing data (or database in general...) - perhaps I am fighting an uphill battle by trying to solve it via programming, but I would like to make an attempt at least.

    Read the article

  • Standard -server to server- and -browser to server- authentication method

    - by jeruki
    I have server with some resources; until now all these resources were requested through a browser by a human user, and the authentication was made with an username/password method, that generates a cookie with a token (to have the session open for some time). Right now the system requires that other servers make GET requests to this resource server but they have to authenticate to get them. We have been using a list of authorized IPs but having two authentication methods makes the code more complex. My questions are: Is there any standard method or pattern to authenticate human users and servers using the same code? If there is not, are the methods I'm using now the right ones or is there a better / more standard way to accomplish what I need? Thanks in advance for any suggestion.

    Read the article

  • Design for object with optional and modifiable attributtes?

    - by Ikuzen
    I've been using the Builder pattern to create objects with a large number of attributes, where most of them are optional. But up until now, I've defined them as final, as recommended by Joshua Block and other authors, and haven't needed to change their values. I am wondering what should I do though if I need a class with a substantial number of optional but non-final (mutable) attributes? My Builder pattern code looks like this: public class Example { //All possible parameters (optional or not) private final int param1; private final int param2; //Builder class public static class Builder { private final int param1; //Required parameters private int param2 = 0; //Optional parameters - initialized to default //Builder constructor public Builder (int param1) { this.param1 = param1; } //Setter-like methods for optional parameters public Builder param2(int value) { param2 = value; return this; } //build() method public Example build() { return new Example(this); } } //Private constructor private Example(Builder builder) { param1 = builder.param1; param2 = builder.param2; } } Can I just remove the final keyword from the declaration to be able to access the attributes externally (through normal setters, for example)? Or is there a creational pattern that allows optional but non-final attributes that would be better suited in this case?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid throwing vexing exceptions?

    - by Mike
    Reading Eric Lippert's article on exceptions was definitely an eye opener on how I should approach exceptions, both as the producer and as the consumer. However, I'm still struggling to define a guideline regarding how to avoid throwing vexing exceptions. Specifically: Suppose you have a Save method that can fail because a) Somebody else modified the record before you, or b) The value you're trying to create already exists. These conditions are to be expected and not exceptional, so instead of throwing an exception you decide to create a Try version of your method, TrySave, which returns a boolean indicating if the save succeeded. But if it fails, how will the consumer know what was the problem? Or would it be best to return an enum indicating the result, kind of Ok/RecordAlreadyModified/ValueAlreadyExists? With integer.TryParse this problem doesn't exist, since there's only one reason the method can fail. Is the previous example really a vexing situation? Or would throwing an exception in this case be the preferred way? I know that's how it's done in most libraries and frameworks, including the Entity framework. How do you decide when to create a Try version of your method vs. providing some way to test beforehand if the method will work or not? I'm currently following these guidelines: If there is the chance of a race condition, then create a Try version. This prevents the need for the consumer to catch an exogenous exception. For example, in the Save method described before. If the method to test the condition pretty much would do all that the original method does, then create a Try version. For example, integer.TryParse(). In any other case, create a method to test the condition.

    Read the article

  • SQL Triggers and when or when not to use them.

    - by John Mitchell
    When I was originally learning about SQL I was always told, only use triggers if you really need to and opt to use stored procedures instead if possible. Now unfortunately at the time (a good few years ago) I wasn't as curious and caring about fundamentals as I am now so never did ask to the reason why. What's the communities opinion in this? Is it just someone's personal preference, or should triggers be avoided (just like cursors) unless there is a good reason for them.

    Read the article

  • What should I do to scale out an high-traffic website?

    - by makerofthings7
    What Best Practices should be undertaken for a Website that needs to "scale out" to handle capacity? This is especially relevant now that people are considering the cloud, but may be missing out on the fundamentals. I'm interested in hearing about anything you consider a best practice from development-level tasks, to infrastructure, to management. Use your best judgement when posting multiple answers, since it may make sense to post them separately for voting purposes. (hint: you'll likely get more reputation points for many small answers than one large answer)

    Read the article

  • How to avoid getting carried away with details?

    - by gablin
    When I program, I often get too involved with details. There might be some little thing that doesn't do exactly what I want it to, or maybe there's some little feature I want to add. Either way, none are really essential to the application - it's just a minor niusance (if any). However, when trying to fix it, I may happen to spend way more time on it than I planned, and there are things much more important that I should be doing instead of dealing with this little detail. What can I do to avoid getting carried away with details, when there's more essential things that need doing? (I didn't know how to tag this question, so feel free to add whatever appropriate tags that are missing.)

    Read the article

  • Why isn't Japanese software industry as strong as their hardware technology?

    - by Joan Venge
    I admire Japanese technology and their innovation. They always seem to be one step ahead of everyone else. But why isn't their software industry just as developed? Why aren't there any Japanese operating systems, high-end game engines, 3D digital content creation applications? I would like to see their take on these and I think it could bring alot of innovation. Btw I mentioned 3D software because the animation industry is strong there as well, but they are using North American software for this.

    Read the article

  • Does it make sense to implement OAuth for a 2 party system?

    - by nbv4
    I'm under the impression that OAuth is for authentication between three parties. Does it make sense to implement OAuth in a context where there is just a client and server. We have a server, and a client (HTML/javascript). Currently we authenticate via the normal "post credentials to server, get a cookie, use cookie to authenticate all subsequent requests" method. Will implementing OAuth be a benefit in this situation?

    Read the article

  • Docker vs ESXi for Startup Projects - Deploying Code for Dev Testing

    - by JasonG
    Why hello there little programmer dude! I have a question for you and all of your experience and knowledge. I have an ESXi whitebox that I built which is an 8 dude that sits in the corner. I made a mistake recently and took the key that had ESXi, formatted it and used it for something else. No big deal because the last project I worked on had stalled out. I'm about to pick up another project and now I need to spin up a whole bunch of stuff for CI, qa + db, ticket tracker, wikis etc etc. I've been hearing a lot about Docker recently and as this is just a consumer grade machine, I'm wondering if it may make more sense for me to use Docker on OpenOS and then put everything there - bamboo or hudson, jira, confluence, postgress for the tools to use, then a qa env. I can't really seem to find any documents that directly compare traditional VM infrastructure vs docker solutions and I'm wondering if it is fair to compare. Is there any reason why CoreOS w/ containers would be a strictly worse solution? Or do you have any insight into why I may want to stick with ESXi? I've looked on multiple occasions and can't find a good reason not to. I'm not going to run a production env on the server so I don't need to have HA if updating security or OS for example where esxi would allow me to restart one vm at a time. I can just shut the thing down and bring it back up if I need a reboot no problem. So what's up with this container stuff? Is it a fair replacement for ESXi? I'm guessing the atlassian products would run much better and my ram would go a lot farther using docker. Probably the CPU would run much cooler too and my expensive HDD space would be better utilized.

    Read the article

  • If a library doesn't provide all my needs, how should I proceed?

    - by 9a3eedi
    I'm developing an application involving math and physics models, and I'd like to use a Math library for things like Matrices. I'm using C#, and so I was looking for some libraries and found Math.NET. I'm under the impression, from past experience, that for math, using a robust and industry-approved third party library is much better than writing your own code. It seems good for many purposes, but it does not provide support for Quaternions, which I need to use as a type. Also, I need some functions in Vector and Matrix that also aren't provided, such as rotation matrices and vector rotation functions, and calculating cross products. At the same time, it provides a lot of functions/classes that I simply do not need, which might mean a lot of unnecessary bloat and complexity. At this rate, should I even bother using the library? Should I write my own math library? Or is it a better idea to stick to the third party library and somehow wrap around it? Perhaps I should make a subclass of the Matrix and Vector type of the library? But isn't that considered bad style? I've also tried looking for other libraries but unfortunately I couldn't find anything suitable.

    Read the article

  • Understanding and memorizing git rebase parameters

    - by Robert Dailey
    So far the most confusing portion of git is rebasing onto another branch. Specifically, it's the command line arguments that are confusing. Each time I want to rebase a small piece of one branch onto the tip of another, I have to review the git rebase documentation and it takes me about 5-10 minutes to understand what each of the 3 main arguments should be. git rebase <upstream> <branch> --onto <newbase> What is a good rule of thumb to help me memorize what each of these 3 parameters should be set to, given any kind of rebase onto another branch? Bear in mind I have gone over the git-rebase documentation again, and again, and again, and again (and again), but it's always difficult to understand (like a boring scientific white-paper or something). So at this point I feel I need to involve other people to help me grasp it. My goal is that I should never have to review the documentation for these basic parameters. I haven't been able to memorize them so far, and I've done a ton of rebases already. So it's a bit unusual that I've been able to memorize every other command and its parameters so far, but not rebase with --onto.

    Read the article

  • Scheme vs Haskell for an Introduction to Functional Programming?

    - by haziz
    I am comfortable with programming in C and C#, and will explore C++ in the future. I may be interested in exploring functional programming as a different programming paradigm. I am doing this for fun, my job does not involve computer programming, and am somewhat inspired by the use of functional programming, taught fairly early, in computer science courses in college. Lambda calculus is certainly beyond my mathematical abilities, but I think I can handle functional programming. Which of Haskell or Scheme would serve as a good intro to functional programming? I use emacs as my text editor and would like to be able to configure it more easily in the future which would entail learning Emacs Lisp. My understanding, however, is that Emacs Lisp is fairly different from Scheme and is also more procedural as opposed to functional. I would likely be using "The Little Schemer" book, which I have already bought, if I pursue Scheme (seems to me a little weird from my limited leafing through it). Or would use the "Learn You a Haskell for Great Good" if I pursue Haskell. I would also watch the Intro to Haskell videos by Dr Erik Meijer on Channel 9. Any suggestions, feedback or input appreciated. Thanks. P.S. BTW I also have access to F# since I have Visual Studio 2010 which I use for C# development, but I don't think that should be my main criteria for selecting a language.

    Read the article

  • Design documents as part of Agile

    - by syrion
    At my workplace, we face a challenge in that "agile" too often has meant "vague requirements, bad acceptance criteria, good luck!" We're trying to address that, as a general improvement effort. So, as part of that, I am proposing that we generate design documents that, above and beyond the user story level, accurately reflect the outcome of preliminary investigations of the effect of a given feature within the system and including answers to questions that we have asked the business. Is there an effective standard for this? We currently face a situation where a new feature may impact multiple areas in our "big ball of mud" system, and estimates are starting to climb due to this technical debt. Hopefully more thoughtful design processes can help.

    Read the article

  • undefined control sequence in a NOWEB document

    - by Jean Baldraque
    I'm writing a TeX-noweb document. I compile it with noweave -tex -filter "elide comment:*" texcode.nw > documentation.tex but when I try to compile the resulting file with xetex -halt-on-error documentation.tex I obtain the following error message ! Undefined control sequence. <argument> ...on}\endmoddef \nwstartdeflinemarkup \nwenddeflinemarkup It seems that \nwenddeflinemarkup is not recognized. If i delete from the document all the sequences \nwstartdeflinemarkup\nwenddeflinemarkup the document compile without exceptions. What can be the problem?

    Read the article

  • KISS principle applied to programming language design?

    - by Giorgio
    KISS ("keep it simple stupid", see e.g. here) is an important principle in software development, even though it apparently originated in engineering. Citing from the wikipedia article: The principle is best exemplified by the story of Johnson handing a team of design engineers a handful of tools, with the challenge that the jet aircraft they were designing must be repairable by an average mechanic in the field under combat conditions with only these tools. Hence, the 'stupid' refers to the relationship between the way things break and the sophistication available to fix them. If I wanted to apply this to the field of software development I would replace "jet aircraft" with "piece of software", "average mechanic" with "average developer" and "under combat conditions" with "under the expected software development / maintenance conditions" (deadlines, time constraints, meetings / interruptions, available tools, and so on). So it is a commonly accepted idea that one should try to keep a piece of software simple stupid so that it easy to work on it later. But can the KISS principle be applied also to programming language design? Do you know of any programming languages that have been designed specifically with this principle in mind, i.e. to "allow an average programmer under average working conditions to write and maintain as much code as possible with the least cognitive effort"? If you cite any specific language it would be great if you could add a link to some document in which this intent is clearly expressed by the language designers. In any case, I would be interested to learn about the designers' (documented) intentions rather than your personal opinion about a particular programming language.

    Read the article

  • What are approaches for analyzing the cost-benefits of a development methodology?

    - by Garrett Hall
    There are many development practices (TDD, continuous integration, cowboy-coding), principles (SOLID, layers of abstraction, KISS), and processes (RUP, Scrum, XP, Waterfall). I have learned you can't follow any of these blindly, but have to consider context and ROI (return on investment). My question is: How do you know whether you are getting a good ROI by following a particular methodology? Metrics, guesstimation, experience? Do analytical methods exist? Or is this just the million-dollar question in software engineering that has no answer?

    Read the article

  • How to guide stakeholder(s) not to get far from the scrum vision?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    Consider this scenario: Stakeholder(s): Let's build a web application to manage user's financial data. Scrum team: Ok, let's do it. . . . After 3 sprints Stakeholder(s): Let's also implement a mailing system, so that when user's financial status is not good, (s)he would be warned. Scrum team: Ok, it's not that hard. We'll do it. . . . After 5 sprints Stakholder(s): Let's become a mailing provider. Here, how should scrum team guide stakeholder to stay inside the scope of scrum vision? Maybe a more fundamental question is, should the at all? Update: Of course there is a product owner. But by scrum team I meant PO, SM, and Team.

    Read the article

  • How to justify technology choice to customer?

    - by suslik
    When freelancing / contracting a customer will typically specify functional requirements, acceptance criteria, etc, and the implementation details are in the developer's hands. As a developer your technology choice is a balancing act between what you are most familiar with, technologically what the right tool appears to be, ease of finding coders with this skill and their expense, and a few other factors. I'm in a situation where I have evaluated my options and selected a somewhat obscure open source technology that I believe will get me there faster, easier, and be more maintanable in the long term. It's different, but I think that that is what the requirements call for. The customer has inquired about what I'm going to use to build the solution, and now they are concerned because they've never heard of it before. The reasons for my choice are mostly technical, whereas the customer isn't (but they know some buzzwords!). Explaining these technical reasons will not be easy, and I am not sure if that is the right way to approach this situation anyway. And that's my question: what is the right way to approach this situation so as to cause the least amount of headache for everyone involved?

    Read the article

  • Android Card Game Database for Deck Building

    - by Singularity222
    I am making a card game for Android where a player can choose from a selection of cards to build a deck that would contain around 60 cards. Currently, I have the entire database of cards created that the user can browse. The next step is allowing the user to select cards and create a deck with whatever cards they would like. I have a form where the user can search for specific cards based off a few different attributes. The search results are displayed in a List Activity. My thought about deck creation is to add the primary key of each card the user selects to a SQLite Database table with the amount they would like in the deck. This way as the user performs searches for cards they can see the state of the deck. Once the user decides to save the deck. I'll export the card list to XML and wipe the contents of the table. If the user wanted to make changes to the deck, they would load it, it would be parsed back into the table so they could make the changes. A similar situation would occur when the eventually load the deck to play a game. I'm just curious what the rest of you may think of this method. Currently, this is a personal project and I am the only one working on it. If I can figure out the best implementation before I even begin coding I'm hoping to save myself some time and trouble.

    Read the article

  • Ninject/DI: How to correctly pass initialisation data to injected type at runtime

    - by MrLane
    I have the following two classes: public class StoreService : IStoreService { private IEmailService _emailService; public StoreService(IEmailService emailService) { _emailService = emailService; } } public class EmailService : IEmailService { } Using Ninject I can set up bindings no problem to get it to inject a concrete implementation of IEmailService into the StoreService constructor. StoreService is actually injected into the code behind of an ASP.NET WebForm as so: [Ninject.Inject] public IStoreService StoreService { get; set; } But now I need to change EmailService to accept an object that contains SMTP related settings (that are pulled from the ApplicationSettings of the Web.config). So I changed EmailService to now look like this: public class EmailService : IEmailService { private SMTPSettings _smtpSettings; public void SetSMTPSettings(SMTPSettings smtpSettings) { _smtpSettings = smtpSettings; } } Setting SMTPSettings in this way also requires it to be passed into StoreService (via another public method). This has to be done in the Page_Load method in the WebForms code behind (I only have access to the Settings class in the UI layer). With manual/poor mans DI I could pass SMTPSettings directly into the constructor of EmailService and then inject EmailService into the StoreService constructor. With Ninject I don't have access to the instances of injected types outside of the objects they are injected to, so I have to set their data AFTER Ninject has already injected them via a separate public setter method. This to me seems wrong. How should I really be solving this scenario?

    Read the article

  • How to represent an agile project to people focused on waterfall [closed]

    - by ahsteele
    Our team has been asked to represent our development efforts in a project plan. No one is unhappy with our work or questioning our ability to deliver, we are just participating in an IT cattle call for project plans. Trouble is we are an agile team and haven't thought about our work in terms of a formal project plan. While we have a general idea of what we are working on next we aren't 100% sure until we plan an iteration. Until now our team has largely operated in a vacuum and has not been required to present our methodology or metrics to outside parties. We follow most of the practices espoused in Extreme Programming. We hold quarterly planning meetings to have a general idea of the stories we are going to work on for a quarter. That said, our stories are documented on 3x5 cards and are only estimated at the beginning of the iteration in which they are going to be worked. After estimation we document the story in Team Foundation Sever. During an iteration, we attach code to stories and mark stories as completed once finished. From this data we are able to generate burn down and velocity charts. Most importantly we know our average velocity for an iteration keeping us from biting off more than we can chew. I am not looking to modify the way we do development but want to present our development activities in a report that someone only familiar with waterfall will understand. In What Does an Agile Project Plan Look Like, Kent McDonald does a good job laying out the differences between agile and waterfall project plans. He specifies the differences in consumable bullets: An agile project plan is feature based An Agile Project Plan is organized into iterations An Agile Project Plan has different levels of detail depending on the time frame An Agile Project Plan is owned by the Team Being able to explain the differences is great, but how best to present the data?

    Read the article

  • Play or Lift: which one is more explicit?

    - by Andrea
    I am going to investigate web development with Scala, and the choice is between learning Lift or Play: probably I will not have enough time to try both, at least at first. Now, many comparisons between the two are available on the internet, but I would like to know how do they compare with respect to being explicit and involving less magic. Let me explain what I mean by example. I have used, to various degrees, CakePHP, symfony2, Django and Grails. I feel a very clear distinction between Django and symfony2, which are very explicit about what you are doing, and Grails and CakePHP, which try to do their best to guess what you are trying to achieve and often feel "magical". Let me give some examples comparing Django and Grails. In Django, views are functions that take a request as input and return a response. You can instantiate explicitly an instance of HttpResponse and populate its body with a string, or you can use shortcut functions to leverage the template system. In any case the return value from your view always has the same type. In contrast, the render method from Grails is highly polymorphic. You can throw a context at it and it will try to render a template which is found by convention using that context. Or you can pass it a pair of a template path and a context and that will work too. Or a string. Or XML. Grails tries hard to make sense of whatever you return from your controller. In the Django ORM, each model class has a static attribute representing the manager for that class. That manager exposes a fluent interface to build querysets. In Grails, you can have a similar functionality by composing detached criteria. Still, the most common way to query objects seems to be the use of runtime-generated methods like FindUserByEmailNotNull or FindPostByDateGreaterThan. I will not go further, but my point is that in Django-like frameworks you have control over the whole flow of the request/response process, while in Grails-like ones I feel I only have to feel the blanks and the framework will manage the rest of the flow for me. This is not to criticize Grails or CakePHP; which type you prefer is mainly a matter of preference. In fact, I happen to like some aspects of Grails, but I feel more comfortable with a framework which does less for me. Back to the point of the question: which one among Play and Lift is more explicit about what you do and which one tries to simplify more what you have to do with a layer of "magic"?

    Read the article

  • What kind of an IT or programming job can a college student get part time?

    - by Alex Foster
    I'm a college student with a full load of classes and i need some extra money to cover some of my expenses. I love anything and everything to do with computers. I don't know how to program but have build computers before and know how windows works. I would call myself a power user. My question is, what kind of a job can someone like me get with effort? If there are some more skills that i can pick up that would benefit in getting the foot in the door i would love to hear about them. The only limitation i have is that i can't work very late in the evening most days due to classes. But usually in the morning my time is available for work. I will appreciate all answers i receive. Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • How many questions is it appropriate to ask as an intern?

    - by Casey Patton
    So, I just started an internship, and I'm worried that I'm asking too many questions. My mentor assigns me projects and helps me learn all the company's technologies and methodologies. However, there's so much new material for me to learn while doing this project that I have a lot of questions. I generally ask questions over instant messages or E-mail (those are the primary modes of communication for my company). I'm trying to be careful not to ask too many questions: I don't want to come off as annoying or dumb. How many questions are appropriate to ask? Once an hour? More? Less? Keep in mind, my mentor is also a fellow programmer who has his own responsibilities.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295  | Next Page >