Search Results

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

Page 299/663 | < Previous Page | 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306  | Next Page >

  • Is dependency injection by hand a better alternative to composition and polymorphism?

    - by Drake Clarris
    First, I'm an entry level programmer; In fact, I'm finishing an A.S. degree with a final capstone project over the summer. In my new job, when there isn't some project for me to do (they're waiting to fill the team with more new hires), I've been given books to read and learn from while I wait - some textbooks, others not so much (like Code Complete). After going through these books, I've turned to the internet to learn as much as possible, and started learning about SOLID and DI (we talked some about Liskov's substitution principle, but not much else SOLID ideas). So as I've learned, I sat down to do to learn better, and began writing some code to utilize DI by hand (there are no DI frameworks on the development computers). Thing is, as I do it, I notice it feels familiar... and it seems like it is very much like work I've done in the past using composition of abstract classes using polymorphism. Am I missing a bigger picture here? Is there something about DI (at least by hand) that goes beyond that? I understand the possibility of having configurations not in code of some DI frameworks having some great benefits as far as changing things without having to recompile, but when doing it by hand, I'm not sure if it's any different than stated above... Some insight into this would be very helpful!

    Read the article

  • Refactoring and Open / Closed principle

    - by Giorgio
    I have recently being reading a web site about clean code development (I do not put a link here because it is not in English). One of the principles advertised by this site is the Open Closed Principle: each software component should be open for extension and closed for modification. E.g., when we have implemented and tested a class, we should only modify it to fix bugs or to add new functionality (e.g. new methods that do not influence the existing ones). The existing functionality and implementation should not be changed. I normally apply this principle by defining an interface I and a corresponding implementation class A. When class A has become stable (implemented and tested), I normally do not modify it too much (possibly, not at all), i.e. If new requirements arrive (e.g. performance, or a totally new implementation of the interface) that require big changes to the code, I write a new implementation B, and keep using A as long as B is not mature. When B is mature, all that is needed is to change how I is instantiated. If the new requirements suggest a change to the interface as well, I define a new interface I' and a new implementation A'. So I, A are frozen and remain the implementation for the production system as long as I' and A' are not stable enough to replace them. So, in view of these observation, I was a bit surprised that the web page then suggested the use of complex refactorings, "... because it is not possible to write code directly in its final form." Isn't there a contradiction / conflict between enforcing the Open / Closed Principle and suggesting the use of complex refactorings as a best practice? Or the idea here is that one can use complex refactorings during the development of a class A, but when that class has been tested successfully it should be frozen?

    Read the article

  • Distributed Development Tools -- (Version control and Project Management)

    - by Macy Abbey
    I've recently become responsible for choosing which source control and project management software to use for a company that employs me. Currently it uses Jira (project management) and Subversion (version control). I know there are many other options out there -- the ones I know about are all in this article http://mashable.com/2010/07/14/distributed-developer-teams/ . I'm leaning towards recommending they just stay with what they have as it seems workable and any change would have to be worth the cost of switching to say github/basecamp or some other solution. Some details on the team: It's a distributed development shop. Meetings of the whole team in one room are rare. It's currently a very small development team (three developers). The project management software is used by developers and a product manager or two. What are you experiences with version control and project management web applications? Are there any you would recommend and you think are worth the switching cost of time to learn new services / implementing the change? Edit: After educating myself further on the options it appears DVCS offer powerful benefits that may be worth investing in now as opposed to later in the company's lifetime when the switching cost is higher: I'm a Subversion geek, why I should consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS?

    Read the article

  • Studying computer science - what am I getting myself into?

    - by clankercrusher
    I'm a student considering the possibility of studying computer science. I've picked up programming indie games and websites as a hobby and I really enjoy it. Despite my fairly positive experience, I somehow get the feeling that computer science in the business world will be completely different than do-it-for-fun game making. Since I'm interested in the field and I'd like to study well, I want to prepare myself for the onslaught. (If that’s even possible) What are some of the most important principals I need to know if I decide to study computer science? What will I need to know about computer science that a University probably won't teach me? Is there any way I can get hands on experience before or while I'm at a University? What am I getting myself into? P.S. Is this the right stack exchange site for this type of question?

    Read the article

  • Packages organisation with MVC design pattern

    - by Oltarus
    I have been programming quite a lot now and still can't decide which of these packages hierachies was the best: package1 Class1Controller Class1Model Class1View package2 Class2Controller Class2Model Class2View or controller Class1Controller Class2Contoller model Class1Model Class2Model view Class1View Class2View In other words, is it better to apply the MVC design pattern to classes or to packages? Is there any reason to choose one over the other? My question is language-agnostic, but I'm mostly a Java programmer, if it does any difference.

    Read the article

  • Author's work and copyright. in UI design

    - by c-smile
    Typical situation in UI design: you do design of some UI and, say, came up with some bright new idea like "ribbon" or "kinetic scroll past end". What would be the strategy about such thing? Register patent, don't like it, but anyway would like to ask: how long it takes to do all this stuff and how much it will cost in average? If to forget about patents, will the idea have something like "prior art" status or some such if someone will try to patent this in future? All this about project / product published by solo developer.

    Read the article

  • Is there an excuse for excessively short variable names?

    - by KChaloux
    This has become a large frustration with the codebase I'm currently working in; many of our variable names are short and undescriptive. I'm the only developer left on the project, and there isn't documentation as to what most of them do, so I have to spend extra time tracking down what they represent. For example, I was reading over some code that updates the definition of an optical surface. The variables set at the start were as follows: double dR, dCV, dK, dDin, dDout, dRin, dRout dR = Convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[0].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); dCV = convert.ToDouble(_tblAsphere.Rows[1].ItemArray.GetValue(1)); ... and so on Maybe it's just me, but it told me essentially nothing about what they represented, which made understanding the code further down difficult. All I knew was that it was a variable parsed out specific row from a specific table, somewhere. After some searching, I found out what they meant: dR = radius dCV = curvature dK = conic constant dDin = inner aperture dDout = outer aperture dRin = inner radius dRout = outer radius I renamed them to essentially what I have up there. It lengthens some lines, but I feel like that's a fair trade off. This kind of naming scheme is used throughout a lot of the code however. I'm not sure if it's an artifact from developers who learned by working with older systems, or if there's a deeper reason behind it. Is there a good reason to name variables this way, or am I justified in updating them to more descriptive names as I come across them?

    Read the article

  • JS closures - Passing a function to a child, how should the shared object be accessed

    - by slicedtoad
    I have a design and am wondering what the appropriate way to access variables is. I'll demonstrate with this example since I can't seem to describe it better than the title. Term is an object representing a bunch of time data (a repeating duration of time defined by a bunch of attributes) Term has some print functionality but does not implement the print functions itself, rather they are passed in as anonymous functions by the parent. This would be similar to how shaders can be passed to a renderer rather than defined by the renderer. A container (let's call it Box) has a Schedule object that can understand and use Term objects. Box creates Term objects and passes them to Schedule as required. Box also defines the print functions stored in Term. A print function usually takes an argument and uses it to return a string based on that argument and Term's internal data. Sometime the print function could also use data stored in Schedule, though. I'm calling this data shared. So, the question is, what is the best way to access this shared data. I have a lot of options since JS has closures and I'm not familiar enough to know if I should be using them or avoiding them in this case. Options: Create a local "reference" (term used lightly) to the shared data (data is not a primitive) when defining the print function by accessing the shared data through Schedule from Box. Example: var schedule = function(){ var sched = Schedule(); var t1 = Term( function(x){ // Term.print() return (x + sched.data).format(); }); }; Bind it to Term explicitly. (Pass it in Term's constructor or something). Or bind it in Sched after Box passes it. And then access it as an attribute of Term. Pass it in at the same time x is passed to the print function, (from sched). This is the most familiar way for my but it doesn't feel right given JS's closure ability. Do something weird like bind some context and arguments to print. I'm hoping the correct answer isn't purely subjective. If it is, then I guess the answer is just "do whatever works". But I feel like there are some significant differences between the approaches that could have a large impact when stretched beyond my small example.

    Read the article

  • Generic Repositories with DI & Data Intensive Controllers

    - by James
    Usually, I consider a large number of parameters as an alarm bell that there may be a design problem somewhere. I am using a Generic Repository for an ASP.NET application and have a Controller with a growing number of parameters. public class GenericRepository<T> : IRepository<T> where T : class { protected DbContext Context { get; set; } protected DbSet<T> DbSet { get; set; } public GenericRepository(DbContext context) { Context = context; DbSet = context.Set<T>(); } ...//methods excluded to keep the question readable } I am using a DI container to pass in the DbContext to the generic repository. So far, this has met my needs and there are no other concrete implmentations of IRepository<T>. However, I had to create a dashboard which uses data from many Entities. There was also a form containing a couple of dropdown lists. Now using the generic repository this makes the parameter requirments grow quickly. The Controller will end up being something like public HomeController(IRepository<EntityOne> entityOneRepository, IRepository<EntityTwo> entityTwoRepository, IRepository<EntityThree> entityThreeRepository, IRepository<EntityFour> entityFourRepository, ILogError logError, ICurrentUser currentUser) { } It has about 6 IRepositories plus a few others to include the required data and the dropdown list options. In my mind this is too many parameters. From a performance point of view, there is only 1 DBContext per request and the DI container will serve the same DbContext to all of the Repositories. From a code standards/readability point of view it's ugly. Is there a better way to handle this situation? Its a real world project with real world time constraints so I will not dwell on it too long, but from a learning perspective it would be good to see how such situations are handled by others.

    Read the article

  • Medical Devices which supports Direct access through Bluetooth Low Energy [on hold]

    - by Suganthan
    I have went through this link and came to know that we can directly interact with BLE devices to read and write data, so I just want to know some medical device which supports direct access to third-party application (we can directly access the data from the medical device data). Is their any devices which supports direct access to the data Note: I already went through medical devices like Withings and Fitbit

    Read the article

  • C# inherit from a class in a different DLL

    - by Onno
    I need to make an application that needs to be highly modular and that can easily be expanded with new functionality. I've thought up a design where I have a main window and a list of actions that are implemented using a strategy pattern. I'd like to implement the base classes/interfaces in a DLL and have the option of loading actions from DLL's which are loaded dynamically when the application starts. This way the main window can initiate actions without having to recompile or redistribute a new version. I just have to (re)distribute new DLL's which I can update dynamically at runtime. This should enable very easy modular updating from a central online source. The 'action' DLL's all inherit their structure from the code defined in the the DLL which defines the main strategy pattern structure and it's abstract factory. I'd like to know if C# /.Net will allow such a construction. I'd also like to know whether this construction has any major problems in terms of design.

    Read the article

  • Is there a secure way to add a database troubleshooting page to an application?

    - by Josh Yeager
    My team makes a product (business management software) that our customers install on their own servers. The product uses a SQL database for data storage and app configuration. There have been quite a few cases where something strange happened in the customer's database (caused by bugs in our app and also sometimes admins who mess with the database). To figure out what is wrong with the data, we have to send SQL scripts to the customer and tell them how to run them on the database server. Then, once we know how to fix it, we have to send another script to repair the data. Is there a secure way to add a page in our application that allows an application admin to enter SQL scripts that read and write directly to the database? Our support team could use that to help customers run these scripts, without needing direct access to the SQL server. My big concerns are that someone might abuse this power to get data they shouldn't have and maybe to erase or modify data that they shouldn't be able to modify. I'm not worried about system admins, because they could find another way to do the same thing. But what if someone else got access to the form? Is there any way to do this kind of thing securely?

    Read the article

  • Live programming help

    - by frazras
    This idea has been floating around my head for a few years. I started some work on it but I just want to know if it is feasible, sensible, or if there is something else like it out there. Dont want to know I was wasting time on a solved issue. Whenever I have a programming issue, this is my sequence: Google it!: That usually brings up a lot of things: blogs, forums, stackoverflow, stackexchange, and even the official docs of the language/framework/cms. Ask on IRC: I format my question and try to get people on IRC to help me. Make a post: I create a post on forums/stackoverflow/stackexchange or shout on twitter with hashtags. Now a lot of the time I am in the middle of a project with a deadline. So I want answers NOW!!! Sometimes just 5-15 minutes worth of attention. Usually by the time I am failing at getting answers at #2, I am imagining how many people are ONLINE NOW with the skill and my exact answer but playing video games, watching youtube or idling online. However, if they were motivated, they would invest the 15 mintes helping me, that would make a world of a difference. I am even in positions where I would PAY for that 15 minutes of instant help. If your rate is as much as $100/hour (relatively good programmer) that is $25 that might save me 3 hours. This help would be live, text chat/skype/phone/screenshare. Should I continue developing this idea or is there a better alternative out there? Or is this even an unfeasible idea?

    Read the article

  • Keeping up with upstream changes while adding small fixes or even major changes

    - by neo
    Often I need to apply some small fixes (to make them run on my environment) or even change some parts of the software (to tailor it to my needs) to software from outside. However this obviously creates problem with updating said software, even when it changes nothing related to my fix. It would be easier when the software provided integration for some kind of plugins but more often than not it doesn't. What would be an ideal workflow regarding that? Most of the projects are git repos I pulled from outside. How should I apply my changes so that I can update painlessly? You can assume that external changes are much more often and larger than my own ones, so reviewing each one of them won't be a solution.

    Read the article

  • What skills does a web developer need to have/learn?

    - by Victor
    I've been I've asked around, and here's what I gathered so far in no particular order: Knowledge Web server management (IIS, Apache, etc.) Shell scripting Security (E.g. ethical hacking knowledge?) Regular Expression HTML and CSS HTTP Web programming language (PHP, Ruby, etc.) SQL (command based, not GUI, since most server environment uses terminal only) Javascript and library (jQuery) Versioning (SVN, Git) Unit and functional test Tools Build tools (Ant, NAnt, Maven) Debugging tools (Firebug, Fiddler) Mastering the above makes you a good web developer. Any comments?

    Read the article

  • Spreadsheet or writing an application?

    - by Lenny222
    When would you keep simple to medium-complex personal calculations in a spread sheet (Excel etc) and when would you write a small program or script for it? For example when you want to calculate what size of mortgage you can afford to buy a house. I could create a spreadsheet and have a nice tabular representation. On the other hand, if i would write a small script in a nice language (in my case Haskell), i'd have the security of a nice type system, preventing typos etc. What are the pro/cons in your opinion?

    Read the article

  • Why use string.Empty over "" when assigning to a string object

    - by dreza
    I've been running StyleCop over my code and one of the recommendations SA1122 is to use string.Empty rather than "" when assigning an empty string to a value. My question is why is this considered best practice. Or, is this considered best practice? I assume there is no compiler difference between the two statements so I can only think that it's a readability thing? UPDATE: Thanks for the answers but it's been kindly pointed out this question has been asked many times already on SO, which in hind-sight I should have considered and searched first before asking here. Some of these especially forward links makes for interesting reading. SO question and answer Jon Skeet answer to question

    Read the article

  • MVC + 3 tier; where ViewModels come into play?

    - by mikhairu
    I'm designing a 3-tiered application using ASP.NET MVC 4. I used the following resources as a reference. CodeProject: MVC + N-tier + Entity Framework Separating data access in ASP.NET MVC I have the following desingn so far. Presentation Layer (PL) (main MVC project, where M of MVC was moved to Data Access Layer): MyProjectName.Main Views/ Controllers/ ... Business Logic Layer (BLL): MyProjectName.BLL ViewModels/ ProjectServices/ ... Data Access Layer (DAL): MyProjectName.DAL Models/ Repositories.EF/ Repositories.Dapper/ ... Now, PL references BLL and BLL references DAL. This way lower layer does not depend on the one above it. In this design PL invokes a service of the BLL. PL can pass a View Model to BLL and BLL can pass a View Model back to PL. Also, BLL invokes DAL layer and DAL layer can return a Model back to BLL. BLL can in turn build a View Model and return it to PL. Up to now this pattern was working for me. However, I've ran into a problem where some of my ViewModels require joins on several entities. In the plain MVC approach, in the controller I used a LINQ query to do joins and then select new MyViewModel(){ ... }. But now, in the DAL I do not have access to where ViewModels are defined (in the BLL). This means I cannot do joins in DAL and return it to BLL. It seems I have to do separate queries in DAL (instead of joins in one query) and BLL would then use the result of these to build a ViewModel. This is very inconvenient, but I don't think I should be exposing DAL to ViewModels. Any ideas how I can solve this dilemma? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Using template questions in a technical interview

    - by Desolate Planet
    I've recently been in an argument with a colleage about technical questions in interviews. As a graduate, I went round lots of companies and noticed they used the same questions. An example is "Can you write a function that determines if a number is prime or not?", 4 years later, I find that particular question is quite common even for a junior developer. I might not be looking at this the correct way, but shouldn't software houses be intelligent enought to think up their own interview questions. This may well be the case, but I've been to about 16 interviews as a graduate and the same questions came up in about 75% of them. This leads me to believe that many companies are lazy and simply Google: 'Template questions for interviewing software developers' and I kind of look down on that. Question: Is it better to use a sest of questions off some template or should software houses strive to be more original and come up with their own interview material? From my point of view, if I failed an inteview and went off and looked for good answers to the questions I messed up on, I could fly through the next interview if they questions are the same.

    Read the article

  • System testing - making sure the system conforms to specification. Validation?

    - by user970696
    After weeks of research I have nearly completed my thesis, yet I am unable to clear up my confusion contained in all previous threads here (and in many books): During system testing, we check the system function against system analysis (functional system design) - but that would fit to a definition of verification according to many books. But I follow ISO12207, which considers all testing as validation (making sure work product meets requirement for intended use). How can I justify that unit testing or system testing is validation, even though when I check it against specification? Which fullfils the definiton of verification? When testing that e.g. "Save button" works, is it validation? This picture shows my understanding of V&V, so different from many other sources, including ISTQB etc. Essential problem I have is that a book using the same picture also states on another place that: test activities in the area of validation are usability, alpha and beta testing. For verification, testable system requirements are defined whose correct implementation can be tested through system tests. Isn't that the opposite of what the picture says? Most books present the following picture, where validation is just making sure that customer needs are satisfied. Mind you that according to ISO, validation activity is testing.

    Read the article

  • Open Source programs for learning C#

    - by dizzytri99er
    I was wondering if there are any good open source programs out there that are basically 'all-skill' encompassing that i could use to develop my skills Im a strong believer in learning by doing so a nice open source program i could load onto my machine to learn C# would be ideal. I have some knowledge with basic C# and a little more advanced techniques so im not a total beginner i realise similar questions have been asked before but i was just trying no see if there is one definitive one rather than lots of little projects hopefully im not asking too much! haha

    Read the article

  • Online examples for software design diagrams

    - by Gerenuk
    Do you know where I can find a good example of software design diagrams and specs on the internet? Like UML, specs and similar. I'd like to understand this approach better. Before I just started coding and now I'd like plan more in advance. By diagrams I don't mean made-up examples, but something that would actually be used. Also it shouldn't be so trivial that there is no use of using diagrams. Ideally it shouldn't be too large either. Do you know a good online source? (this question is about online resources and specific examples only. it is not asking about books or advise how to learn software design.)

    Read the article

  • "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD." Why?

    - by Florents
    William Cook in a tweet wrote that: "UML is the worst thing to ever happen to MDD. Fortunately many people now realize this ..." I would like to know the reasoning behind that claim (apparently, I'm not referring to his personal opinion). I've noticed that many people out there don't like UML that much. Also it is worth mentioning that he is in academia, where UML is preety much the holy grail of effective design and modelling.

    Read the article

  • How to estimate tasks in scrum?

    - by Arian
    Let's say we have a backlog of User Stories, each with an estimated number of Story Points, and now we're doing the Sprint Planning. Now, the Stories should be broken down into tasks and many Scrum resources suggest that each task should be estimated in person-hours. Since all questions have been discussed by the team at this point, estimating a task should not take longer than a minute. However, since a task should not be longer than a day, assuming a three week sprint with 8 developers means 120 tasks, and taking two hours only for estimations seems to be a bit much to me. I know that experienced teams can skip or short-cut task estimations, but let's say we're not at that stage yet. In your experience, how many tasks are there in a sprint* and how long should it take to estimate all of them? (Estimating only half of them doesn't make much sense, does it?) (*) I know that depends on sprint length and team size, so let's assume 8 developers and three weeks.

    Read the article

  • System for registering bugs, enhancements and invoice them?

    - by Roland Bengtsson
    I am searching suggestions for improvements? Currently our team use Github Issues to register changes in our software. Sometimes our customers have requirements that we will invoice them for. So now we reqister the same issue again in CRM. Unfortunately, the workflow is not as smooth as Github Issues and most developers try to avoid CRM if possible. It also feels waste of time to register the same issue twice. Are there any suggestions for better workflow than this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306  | Next Page >