Search Results

Search found 17191 results on 688 pages for 'programming logic'.

Page 324/688 | < Previous Page | 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331  | Next Page >

  • load a php page with a cron job

    - by s2xi
    I am using a cron job to reload my httpd service after a subdomain is created. I have the problem that when the reload happens the page that registers the user throws a server error. I was wondering if I could go around this by having another cron task. So my logic would be: httpd reload after a .conf file is created then take the user back to the DocumentRoot of the main page. So in usage it would be: a user registers, then is automatically taken back to domain.com

    Read the article

  • Disabling the Squid Error pages

    - by Nicholas Smith
    I've just started looking at using Squid for a project and can't seem to see an easy way of disabling the Squid error pages (e.g. "Name Error: The domain name does not exist"). We use a custom browser which handles that scenario in our way, so the Squid error pages are overriding our custom logic. Is it possible to set them too 'off'? I've been through the .conf and I've found where the error pages are stored, but no real options to disable them.

    Read the article

  • IIS URL Rewrite - Redirect any HTTPS traffic to sub-domain

    - by uniquelau
    We have an interesting hosting environment that dictates all secure traffic must travel over a specific sub domain. E.g. http://secure.domain.com/my-page I'd like to handle this switch using URL Rewrite, i.e. at server level, rather than application level. My cases are: https://secure.domain.com/page = NO CHANGE, remains the same https://domain.com/page = sub-domain inserted, https://secure.domain.com/page https://www.domain.com/page = remove 'www', insert sub-domain In my mind the logic is: INPUT = Full Url = http://www.domain.com/page If INPUT contains HTTPS Then check Full URL, does it contain 'secure'? If YES do nothing, if no add 'secure' If INPUT contains 'www' remove 'www' The certificate is not a wild card (e.g. top level domain) and is issues to: https://secure.domain.com/ The website could also be hosted in a staging environment. E.g. https://secure.environment.domain.com/ I do not have control over 'environment' or 'domain' or the 'tld'. Laurence - Update 1, 19th August So as mentioned below, the trick here is to avoid a redirect loop that could drive anyone well loopy. This is what I propose: One rule to force certain traffic to the secure domain: <rule name="Force 'Umbraco' to secure" stopProcessing="true"> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll"> <add input="{REQUEST_URI}" pattern="^/umbraco/(.+)$" ignoreCase="true" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" negate="true" pattern="^secure\.(.+)$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://secure.{HTTP_HOST}/{R:0}" redirectType="Permanent" /> </rule> Another rule, that then removes the secure domain, expect for traffic on the secure domain. <rule name="Remove secure, expect for Umbraco" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" ignoreCase="true" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^secure\.(.+)$" /> <add input="{REQUEST_URI}" negate="true" pattern="^/umbraco/(.+)$" ignoreCase="true" /> </conditions> <!-- Set Domain to match environment --> <action type="Redirect" url="http://staging.domain.com/{R:0}" appendQueryString="true" redirectType="Permanent" /> </rule> This works for a single directory or group of files, however I've been unable to add additional logic into those two rules. For example you might have 3 folders that need to be secure, I tried adding these as Negate records, but then no redirection happens at all. Hmmm! L

    Read the article

  • IIS Express only utilizes 13% of i7 Quad Core

    - by John Nevermore
    Since one of my scripts got incredibly complex, i was benchmarking the performance of moving some javascript processing logic to the server side in my ASP.NET MVC 4 application. According to taskmgr.exe, IIS Express only utilizes 13% of my i7. I decided to throw in 3 parallel tasks calculating the fibonacci sequence up to 50 and the IIS express still wouldn't utilize more than 13% of my cpu. Is there anything i can do, so that the application utilizes the full cpu, as it would in a real server ?

    Read the article

  • Lefthand SAN questions.

    - by Gk
    I'm curious about Lefthand SAN solutions from HP. People from Dell have told me that Lefthand SAN's require at least two nodes and data must be mirroring between them so capacity is a half less compare to other SAN technology (e.g.Equal Logic). Is it true? Can a HP lefhand SAN be used as a stand-alone storage server with full RAID function (1, 10, 5)? TIA, -giobuon

    Read the article

  • Lefthand SAN quetions.

    - by Gk
    I'm curios about Lefthand SAN solution from HP. Ppl from Dell told me that lefthand SAN require at least two nodes and data must be mirroring between them so capacity is a half less compare to other SAN technology (e.g.Equal Logic). Is it true? Can a HP lefhand SAN can use as a stand-alone storage server with full RAID function (1, 10, 5)? TIA, -giobuon

    Read the article

  • Yahoo Mail Does Not Have https

    - by Daniel
    Why is yahoo mail behind in security, they don't support https yet. Gmail and many others do, I'm shocked that yahoo still doesn't have https? Why is this? What is the logic behind not supporting https in their mail client?

    Read the article

  • How can I export search folders in Outlook 2010?

    - by Martin
    In Outlook it is possible to export rules. Is it also possible to export custom search folders? I am trying to export the custom search folders I have defined in Outlook 2010 (the logic, not the contents). I have tried: right clicking the search folders and looking into the available menus going into the outlook Import/Export menu, but I can only export real folders to .pst etc. looked into the rules menu

    Read the article

  • Is an NTBackup of a MySQL data directory reliable

    - by Justin Dearing
    This question was asked on the MySQL forums in 2004 with no answers. I'm installing MySQL 5.0.x on a Windows 2003 Server for use with Drupal. I began to configure the backup with mysqldump when it occurred to me that an ntbackup taken using shadow copying should be reliable enough for backing up the database. Is there any flaw in my logic?

    Read the article

  • SQl server 2008 permission and encryption

    - by Paranjai
    i have made columns in some of the tables encrypted in sql server 2008. Now as i am a db owner i have the access to encode and decode the data using the symmetric key and certificate. But some other users have only currently datareader and datawriter rights ,and when they execute any SP referring the logic which uses the key and certificate "User does has not right on the certificate to execute". What rights / exact permission should i grant them just to solve this problem

    Read the article

  • Mac OSX 10.8 Server DNS Domain Routing

    - by Oldek
    I just cant seem to figure out the logic in how to configure my Mac Server. So I have set up an DNS, which will take the domain and all subdomains and point towards an IP. File: db.mydomain.com (in /var/named/) mydomain.com. 10800 IN SOA mydomain.com. admin.mydomain.com. ( 2012110903 ; serial 3600 ; refresh (1 hour) 900 ; retry (15 minutes) 1209600 ; expire (2 weeks) 86400 ; minimum (1 day) ) 10800 IN NS mydomain.com. 10800 IN A 10.0.1.2 www.mydomain.com. 10800 IN A 10.0.1.2 So I want all of these requests to be requested to the 10.0.1.2 server, as I run 2 servers in my cluster. This one has always handled the requests, and now I want to add a server in between. So the server in between will get all the signals from my router which NAT the trafic coming from outside. So after setting this up and trying to point my port 80 towards my new server which will be the middle point, it doesn't work. Is it even possible to do it this way? First server: Mac Second server: Linux So what I try to achieve once more: 1. User goes to mydomain.com or www.mydomain.com 2. User request gets handled by my first server 3. First server refers to a local server, which is only available locally (it is configured to allow requests on port 80 and handle them) 4. Second server receives signal 5. Second server returns a request (either directly send to user or send through first server, whichever is most secure and configurable) I also want to be able to set up domains that lead to other servers in the future, and some that are only available within the VPN. (If that changes anything) I hope some kind soul could help me with this, it is really cumbersome for my mind to get the logic here. Do I have to configure my other server in any way? /Marcus

    Read the article

  • Website & Forum sharing the same login credentials ?

    - by Brian
    I am going to be running a small site (100 hits a week maybe) and I am looking for a quick and easy way to share login information between the main website, a control panel (webmin, cpanel, or something), and the forum. One login needed to access any of the three. The website won't have use for the login, per say. But it will display "logged in" when you are on the website. Any custom solutions, any thoughts, logic, examples?

    Read the article

  • How do you monitor and react when some scheduled job fails? - general question

    - by Dzida
    Hi, In many projects my team faced problems with 'silent fails' of some important components. There are lot of tasks executed behind the scenes and if somethings fails (either by errors in logic or hardware problems) in most cases responsible person is not notified (or not notified instantly). I know about heavy-weight monitoring tools that could solve some of that problems but there over-complicated and too expensive for our team. I am interested what are your solutions for such problems.

    Read the article

  • how Infiniband speed is related to processor speed

    - by user223231
    I have two exactly the same servers and very curious how to make Infiniband interconnection between them? Both servers' basic specs are: CPU: 32GHz = 2x Intel Xeon X5650, 6 core, 2.66GHz and RAM: 24GB per server (edited) How determine what speed of Infiniband will be enough for perfect interconnection? SDR, DDR, QDR or FDR? My logic is 32Ghz = 32Gb/s and 40Gb one is enough, am I right or it is not that simple?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 immediately disconnects a USB drive

    - by Daniel Saner
    I am having a problem with Windows 7 x64 consistently disconnecting one specific USB mass storage drive immediately after it is connected. The drive in question is a Cowon C2 digital music player which works in standard mass storage controller mode (i.e. no device-specific drivers needed/available). When I connect the player, Windows plays the "USB connect" sound and the device appears (under its correct name) in the device manager, but it never appears as a drive. The player itself displays "USB Connected" for a split-second before reporting that it has been disconnected again. Since the player, by design, reboots after it has been disconnected, Windows plays the "USB disconnect" sound before restarting the whole cycle once the player has powered back on. I am connecting the player through an Intel X79 Chipset motherboard (Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3) to Windows 7 Pro 64-bit. The player used to work fine the first few times I connected it, showing up as an external drive; it only recently stopped working. It is not a problem with the player, since it works fine when connected to another computer, even such running the exact same operating system. It is also not a problem with the USB controller, since the issue is the same on both the Intel USB 2.0 and the Fresco Logic FL1009 USB 3.0 controller ports. I have also not had the problem with any other drive so far. Among the things I have tried so far: Disabling USB legacy mode in BIOS Disabling energy-saving power down for all USB controllers in Windows' device manager Removing and reinstalling Windows' USB mass storage driver Removing and reinstalling Intel and Fresco Logic USB controller driver Restoring the player to factory defaults None of these made a difference. Again, the player used to work fine on the exact same system just days ago; I didn't install any new hardware or drivers on it since then. I would be very grateful for any hints on what else to try. Edit: Here is another new hint; I found out that when I connect the drive before booting Windows, it is available in Windows Explorer as it should, and does not automatically disconnect. If I remove and reconnect it though, the infinite connect/disconnect-loop starts anew.

    Read the article

  • Should I refactor this code?

    - by user156814
    The code is for a view debate page. The code is supposed to determine whether or not to show an add reply form to the viewing user. If the user is logged in, and the user is not the creator of the debate, then check if the user already replied to the debate. If the user did not already reply to the debate then show the form... Otherwise, Check If the user wants to edit their already existing reply by looking in the url for the reply id If any of these tests dont pass, Then I save the reason as an int and pass that to a switch statement in the view. The logic seems easy enough, but my code seems a little sloppy. Here's the code.. (using Kohana V2.3.4) public function view($id = 0) { $debate = ORM::factory('debate')->with('user')->with('category')->find($id); if ($debate->loaded == FALSE) { url::redirect(); } // series of tests to show an add reply form if ($this->logged_in) { // is the viewer the creator? if ($this->user->id != $debate->user->id) { // has the user already replied? if (ORM::factory('reply') ->where(array('debate_id' => $id, 'user_id' => $this->user->id)) ->count_all() == 0) { $form = $errors = array ( 'body' => '', 'choice_id' => '', 'add' => '' ); if ($post = $this->input->post()) { $reply = ORM::factory('reply'); // validate and insert the reply if ($reply->add($post, TRUE)) { url::redirect(url::current()); } $form = arr::overwrite($form, $post->as_array()); $errors = arr::overwrite($errors, $post->errors('reply_errors')); } } // editing a reply? else if (($rid = (int) $this->input->get('edit')) AND ($reply = ORM::factory('reply') ->where(array('debate_id' => $id, 'user_id' => $this->user->id)) ->find($rid))) { $form = $errors = array ( 'body' => '', 'choice_id' => '', 'add' => '' ); // autocomplete the form $form = arr::overwrite($form, $reply->as_array()); if ($post = $this->input->post()) { // validate and insert the reply if ($reply->edit($post, TRUE)) { url::redirect(url::current()); } $form = arr::overwrite($form, $post->as_array()); $errors = arr::overwrite($errors, $post->errors('reply_errors')); } } else { // user already replied $reason = 3; } } else { // user started the debate $reason = 2; } } else { // user is not logged in. $reason = 1; } $limits = Kohana::config('app/debate.limits'); $page = (int) $this->input->get('page', 1); $offset = ($page > 0) ? ($page - 1) * $limits['replies'] : 0; $replies = ORM::factory('reply')->with('user')->with('choice')->where('replies.debate_id', $id); $this->template->title = $debate->topic; $this->template->debate = $debate; $this->template->body = View::factory('debate/view') ->set('debate', $debate) ->set('replies', $replies->find_all($limits['replies'], $offset)) ->set('pagination', Pagination::factory(array ( 'style' => 'digg', 'items_per_page' => $limits['replies'], 'query_string' => 'page', 'auto_hide' => TRUE, 'total_items' => $total = $replies->count_last_query() )) ) ->set('total', $total); // are we showing the add reply form? if (isset($form, $errors)) { $this->template->body->add_reply_form = View::factory('reply/add_reply_form') ->set('debate', $debate) ->set('form', $form) ->set('errors', $errors); } else { $this->template->body->reason = $reason; } } Heres the view, theres some logic in here that determines what message to show the user. <!-- Add Reply Form --> <?php if (isset($add_reply_form)): ?> <?php echo $add_reply_form; ?> <?php else: ?> <?php switch ($reason) { case 1 : // not logged in, show a message $message = 'Add your ' . html::anchor('login?url=' . url::current(TRUE), '<b>vote</b>') . ' to this discussion'; break; case 2 : // started the debate. dont show a message for that. $message = NULL; break; case 3: // already replied, show a message $message = 'You have already replied to this debate'; break; default: // unknown reason. dont show a message $message = NULL; break; } ?> <?php echo app::show_message($message, 'h2'); ?> <?php endif; ?> <!-- End Add Reply Form --> Should I refactor the add reply logic into another function or something.... It all works, it just seems real sloppy. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Architecture choice about representation of collections in Business Objects

    - by Rajarshi
    I have made certain choices in my architecture which I request the community to review and comment. I am breaking up the post in smaller sections to make it easier to understand the context and then suggest/comment. I am sorry that the post is long, but is required to explain the context. What am I building A typical business application where there are application users, security roles, business operation/action rights based on roles and several business modules like Stock Receive, Stock Transfer, Sale Order, Sale Invoice, Sale Return, Stock Audit etc. and several reports. The application is a WinForm application since it has a lot of rich and responsive UI requirements and has to operate in disconnected mode (with a local SQL Server), most of the time. What have I done I have built a framework - nothing to boast about, but just a set of libraries that serves the repetative requirements of my application, e.g. authentication, role based authorization, data access, validation, exception handling, logging, change status tracking, presentation model compliance and reasonable loose coupling between components. No, I have not written everything from scratch, you can say I have consolidated many things together like some concepts from CSLA, Martin Fowler for Presentation Model, blocks from Enterprise Library, Unity etc. to build a set of libraries that will help my developers be productive quickly without having to look up Google for many of the technical requirements. I have tried to keep the framework generic so that it can be used in typical business applications and also tried to follow some best practices that will support the same Business Objects to be used in an ASP.NET MVC environment also. My present architecture serves my objectives well, and have built several modules (on WinForm) without much trouble. The architecture also lent itself well to build some usable prototype on ASP.NET MVC with the same set of business objects, without changing a single line of code. My Dilemma I have used Custom Business Objects since that gives me a clearer OOP representation of the problem scope in my solution scope, and helps me visualize my entire solution as collection of objects with data and behavior rather than having a set of relational data (DataSet) and implement behaviours (business logic, validation) etc. separately. With rich databinding support in .NET 2.0 binding Custom Business Objects to UI was a breeze. Now while building my business objects, I am still in a dilemma about representation of collections in business objects. Currently I am using DataSets to represent collections while I have seen many suggestions to implement custom collections. For example, in my vision, a typical Sale Invoice Object will contain 'Sales Invoice Items' as a collection. Now theoritically, I can accept that the each 'Sales Invoice Item' should have its own behavior along with their data (ItemCode, Name, Qty, Price etc.) but typically managing of Sale Invoice Items in a Sale Invoice is handled by the Sale Invoice Object itself, e.g. adding/removing Items from collection. Additionally, we can also put business logic/rules for the Sales Invoice Items like "Qty should not be greater than the ordered qty", "Price should be max 10% above the price in Sale Order" etc. in the Sale Invoice object itself. With that kind of a vision, I felt that most business object child collections can be managed by the parent itself, including add/remove from collection as well and implementing business logic for the collection items, hence the collection items hold nothing but data. Additionally, typical collections are represented in UI in Grids, where ability to support DataBinding becomes very important for any collection. Implementing a custom collection, in that case would also mean, I have to implement robust DataBinding support as well, for the collection, which is of course time consuming. Now, considering child collection behaviors are implemented in the parent and the need for DataBinding of child collections, I chose DataSet to represent any child collection in my business objects. In the above example of Sale Invoice I will have 'Invoice Number', 'Date', 'Customer' etc. as attributes of the 'Sale Invoice' but 'InvoiceItems' as a DataSet. Of course, when I say DataSet, it is not a vanilla dataset but an extended DataSet that supports business rule validation and the same role based security model of my framework to allow/deny any business operation to rows/columns of the DataSet, automatically. This approach has allowed easier collection management and databinding in my business objects and my developers are able to deliver modules rapidly. Questions Do you feel that the approach is reasonable? Do you see any shortcomings of this approach? I am recently thinking of using 'Typed DataSets' as child collections, for easier representation in code, that will allow me to write 'currentInvoice.InvoiceItems' (for the DataTable) and 'invoiceItem.ProductCode' or 'invoiceItem.Qty', instead of 'drow["ProductCode"].ToString()' or '(int)drow["Qty"]' etc. Does this choice have any demerits? Thank you if you have read so far and a salute if you still have the Energy to answer.

    Read the article

  • How to find an entry-level job after you already have a graduate degree?

    - by Uri
    Note: I asked this question in early 2009. A couple of months later, I found a great job. I've previously updated this question with some tips for whoever ends up in a similar situation, and now cleaned it up a little for the benefit of the fresh batch of graduates. Original post: In my early 20s I abandoned a great C++ development career path in a major company to go to graduate school and get a research masters (3 years). I did another year in industrial research, and then moved to the US to attend graduate school again, getting another masters and a Ph.D in software engineering from a top school (another 6 years down the drain). I was coding the whole way throughout my degrees (core Java and Eclipse plug-ins) and working on research related to software engineering (usability of APIs). I ended up graduating the year of the recession, with a son on the way and the prospects of no healthcare. Academic jobs and industrial research jobs are quite scarce. Initially, I was naive, thinking that with my background, I could easily find a coding job. Big mistake. It turns out that I'm in a complicated position. Entry level positions are usually offered to college undergraduates. I attended my school's career fairs, but you could immediately see signs of Ph.D. aversion and overqualification issues. Some of the recruiters I spoke with explicitly told me that they wanted 20 year olds with clean slates, and some were looking for interns since they are in various forms of hiring freezes. I managed to get a couple of interviews from these career fairs and through recruiters. However, since I've been out of school for a long time and programming primarily in Java, I am also no longer proficient in C/C++ and the usual range of college-level interview questions that everyone uses. I had no problems with this when I was 19 and interviewing for my first job since a lot of what you do in C is manipulate pointers and I was coding C++ for fun and for school. Later I was routinely doing pointer manipulation on the job, and during my first masters taught college courses with data structures and C++. But even though I remember many properties of C++ well, it's been close to ten years since I regularly used C++ and pointers. As a Java developer I rarely had to work at this level, but experience in OOD and in writing good maintainable code is meaningless for C++ interviews. Reading books as a refresh and looking at sample code did not do the trick. I also looked at mid-to-senior level Java positions, but most of them focused on J2EE APIs rather than on core Java and required a certain number of years in industrial positions. Coding research tools and prior C++ experience doesn't count. So that sends me back to entry-level jobs that are posted through job-boards, and these are not common (mostly they are Monster junk), and small companies are even less likely to answer a Ph.D. compared to the giants who participate in top-10 career fairs. Even worse, in many companies initial screening is done by HR folks who really don't want to deal with anything anomalous like a Ph.D. Any tips on how I should approach this intractable position? For example, what should I write in cover letters? Note that while immigration is not an issue for me, I cannot go freelance as I need the benefits (and in particular group health insurance). During my studies I had no time to contribute to open-source projects or maintain a popular blog, so even if I invested in that now there would be no immediate benefit. Updates: In the two months after posting this I received several offers to work as a core Java developer in the financial industry and accepted one from a firm where I am working to this day. For those who find themselves in similar situations, here are my tips: Give up on trying to find an entry level positions. You can't undo time. Accept the fact that there is Ph.D. discrimination in the job market (some might say rightfully so). It is legal to discriminate based on education. No point fighting it. The most important tip is to focus on the language you are comfortable with. The sad truth about programming in a particular language is that it is not like riding a bike. If you haven't used a language in the last few years, and can't actually apply it routinely (not just as a refresher) before you start your search, it is going to be very difficult to do well in an interview. Now that I'm interviewing others, I routinely see it in folks with a mixed C++/Java background. We maintain "a shadow" of the old language but end up with a weird mix that makes it hard to interview on either. Entry-level folks are at an advantage here since they usually have one language. Memory can help you do great in a screening interview, but without recent day-to-day experience, code tests will be difficult. Despite the supposed relation, core Java programming and J2EE programming are two different things with different skillsets. If you come from academia, you likely have very little J2EE experience and may find it hard to get accepted for a J2EE job. J2EE jobs seem to have a larger list of acronyms in their requirements. In addition, from interviewing J2EE developers it seems that for many there is a focus on mastering specific APIs and architectures, whereas core Java development tends to be secondary. In the same way that I can no longer manipulate pointers well, a J2EE developer may have difficulties doing low level Java manipulation. This puts you at a relative advantage in competing for core Java jobs! If you are able to work for startups (in terms of family life and stability) or migrate to startup-rich areas such as the west coast, you can find many exciting opportunities where advanced degrees are a benefit. I've since been approached by several startups, although I had to decline. Work through a recruiter if possible. They have direct contacts with the hiring parties, allowing you to "stand out". It is better to get a clear yes/no confirmation from a recruiter on whether a company might be interested in interviewing you, than it is to send your resume and hope that someone will ever see it. Recruiters are also a great way of bypassing HR. However, also beware of recruiters. They have a vested interest and will go to various shady practices and pressure tactics. To find a good recruiter, talk to a friend who declined a job offer he got through a recruiter. A good recruiter, to me, is measured in how they handle that. Interview for the jobs that require your core strength. If you're rusty or entirely unfamiliar with a technology around which the job revolves, you're probably not a good match. Yes, you probably have the talent to master them, but most companies would want "instant gratification". I got my offers from companies that wanted core Java developer. I didn't do well on places that wanted advance C++ because I am too rusty and not up to date on recent libraries. I also didn't hear from companies that wanted lots of J2EE experience, and that's ok. Finding companies that want core Java without web is harder, but exists in specific industries (e.g., finance, defense). This requires a lot more legwork in terms of search, but these jobs do exist. There are different interview styles. Some companies focus on puzzles, some companies focus on algorithms, and some companies focus on design and coding skills. I had the most success in places where the questions were the most related to the function I would have been performing. Pick companies accordingly as well.

    Read the article

  • segmentation fault using BaseCode encryption

    - by Natasha Thapa
    i took the code from the links below to encrypt and decrypt a text but i get segmentation fault when trying to run this any ideas?? http://etutorials.org/Programming/secure+programming/Chapter+4.+Symmetric+Cryptography+Fundamentals/4.5+Performing+Base64+Encoding/ http://etutorials.org/Programming/secure+programming/Chapter+4.+Symmetric+Cryptography+Fundamentals/4.6+Performing+Base64+Decoding/ #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdio.h> static char b64revtb[256] = { -3, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*0-15*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*16-31*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, 62, -1, -1, -1, 63, /*32-47*/ 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, -1, -1, -1, -2, -1, -1, /*48-63*/ -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, /*64-79*/ 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*80-95*/ -1, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, /*96-111*/ 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*112-127*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*128-143*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*144-159*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*160-175*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*176-191*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*192-207*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*208-223*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, /*224-239*/ -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1 /*240-255*/ }; unsigned char *spc_base64_encode( unsigned char *input , size_t len , int wrap ) ; unsigned char *spc_base64_decode(unsigned char *buf, size_t *len, int strict, int *err); static unsigned int raw_base64_decode(unsigned char *in, unsigned char *out, int strict, int *err); unsigned char *tmbuf = NULL; static char tmpbuffer[] ={0}; int main(void) { memset( tmpbuffer, NULL, sizeof( tmpbuffer ) ); sprintf( tmpbuffer, "%s:%s" , "username", "password" ); tmbuf = spc_base64_encode( (unsigned char *)tmpbuffer , strlen( tmpbuffer ), 0 ); printf(" The text %s has been encrytped to %s \n", tmpbuffer, tmbuf ); unsigned char *decrypt = NULL; int strict; int *err; decrypt = spc_base64_decode( tmbuf , strlen( tmbuf ), 0, err ); printf(" The text %s has been decrytped to %s \n", tmbuf , decrypt); } static char b64table[64] = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" "0123456789+/"; /* Accepts a binary buffer with an associated size. * Returns a base64 encoded, NULL-terminated string. */ unsigned char *spc_base64_encode(unsigned char *input, size_t len, int wrap) { unsigned char *output, *p; size_t i = 0, mod = len % 3, toalloc; toalloc = (len / 3) * 4 + (3 - mod) % 3 + 1; if (wrap) { toalloc += len / 57; if (len % 57) toalloc++; } p = output = (unsigned char *)malloc(((len / 3) + (mod ? 1 : 0)) * 4 + 1); if (!p) return 0; while (i < len - mod) { *p++ = b64table[input[i++] >> 2]; *p++ = b64table[((input[i - 1] << 4) | (input[i] >> 4)) & 0x3f]; *p++ = b64table[((input[i] << 2) | (input[i + 1] >> 6)) & 0x3f]; *p++ = b64table[input[i + 1] & 0x3f]; i += 2; if (wrap && !(i % 57)) *p++ = '\n'; } if (!mod) { if (wrap && i % 57) *p++ = '\n'; *p = 0; return output; } else { *p++ = b64table[input[i++] >> 2]; *p++ = b64table[((input[i - 1] << 4) | (input[i] >> 4)) & 0x3f]; if (mod = = 1) { *p++ = '='; *p++ = '='; if (wrap) *p++ = '\n'; *p = 0; return output; } else { *p++ = b64table[(input[i] << 2) & 0x3f]; *p++ = '='; if (wrap) *p++ = '\n'; *p = 0; return output; } } } static unsigned int raw_base64_decode(unsigned char *in, unsigned char *out, int strict, int *err) { unsigned int result = 0, x; unsigned char buf[3], *p = in, pad = 0; *err = 0; while (!pad) { switch ((x = b64revtb[*p++])) { case -3: /* NULL TERMINATOR */ if (((p - 1) - in) % 4) *err = 1; return result; case -2: /* PADDING CHARACTER. INVALID HERE */ if (((p - 1) - in) % 4 < 2) { *err = 1; return result; } else if (((p - 1) - in) % 4 == 2) { /* Make sure there's appropriate padding */ if (*p != '=') { *err = 1; return result; } buf[2] = 0; pad = 2; result++; break; } else { pad = 1; result += 2; break; } case -1: if (strict) { *err = 2; return result; } break; default: switch (((p - 1) - in) % 4) { case 0: buf[0] = x << 2; break; case 1: buf[0] |= (x >> 4); buf[1] = x << 4; break; case 2: buf[1] |= (x >> 2); buf[2] = x << 6; break; case 3: buf[2] |= x; result += 3; for (x = 0; x < 3 - pad; x++) *out++ = buf[x]; break; } break; } } for (x = 0; x < 3 - pad; x++) *out++ = buf[x]; return result; } /* If err is non-zero on exit, then there was an incorrect padding error. We * allocate enough space for all circumstances, but when there is padding, or * there are characters outside the character set in the string (which we are * supposed to ignore), then we end up allocating too much space. You can * realloc() to the correct length if you wish. */ unsigned char *spc_base64_decode(unsigned char *buf, size_t *len, int strict, int *err) { unsigned char *outbuf; outbuf = (unsigned char *)malloc(3 * (strlen(buf) / 4 + 1)); if (!outbuf) { *err = -3; *len = 0; return 0; } *len = raw_base64_decode(buf, outbuf, strict, err); if (*err) { free(outbuf); *len = 0; outbuf = 0; } return outbuf; }

    Read the article

  • Why does decorating a class break the descriptor protocol, thus preventing staticmethod objects from behaving as expected?

    - by Robru
    I need a little bit of help understanding the subtleties of the descriptor protocol in Python, as it relates specifically to the behavior of staticmethod objects. I'll start with a trivial example, and then iteratively expand it, examining it's behavior at each step: class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" At this point, this behaves as expected, but what's going on here is a bit subtle: When you call Stub.do_things(), you are not invoking do_things directly. Instead, Stub.do_things refers to a staticmethod instance, which has wrapped the function we want up inside it's own descriptor protocol such that you are actually invoking staticmethod.__get__, which first returns the function that we want, and then gets called afterwards. >>> Stub <class __main__.Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub.__dict__['do_things'] <staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Doing things! So far so good. Next, I need to wrap the class in a decorator that will be used to customize class instantiation -- the decorator will determine whether to allow new instantiations or provide cached instances: def deco(cls): def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory @deco class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" Now, naturally this part as-is would be expected to break staticmethods, because the class is now hidden behind it's decorator, ie, Stub not a class at all, but an instance of factory that is able to produce instances of Stub when you call it. Indeed: >>> Stub <function factory at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> AttributeError: 'function' object has no attribute 'do_things' >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! So far I understand what's happening here. My goal is to restore the ability for staticmethods to function as you would expect them to, even though the class is wrapped. As luck would have it, the Python stdlib includes something called functools, which provides some tools just for this purpose, ie, making functions behave more like other functions that they wrap. So I change my decorator to look like this: def deco(cls): @functools.wraps(cls) def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory Now, things start to get interesting: >>> Stub <function Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> TypeError: 'staticmethod' object is not callable >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! Wait.... what? functools copies the staticmethod over to the wrapping function, but it's not callable? Why not? What did I miss here? I was playing around with this for a bit and I actually came up with my own reimplementation of staticmethod that allows it to function in this situation, but I don't really understand why it was necessary or if this is even the best solution to this problem. Here's the complete example: class staticmethod(object): """Make @staticmethods play nice with decorated classes.""" def __init__(self, func): self.func = func def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs): """Provide the expected behavior inside decorated classes.""" return self.func(*args, **kwargs) def __get__(self, obj, objtype=None): """Re-implement the standard behavior for undecorated classes.""" return self.func def deco(cls): @functools.wraps(cls) def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory @deco class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" Indeed it works exactly as expected: >>> Stub <function Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <__main__.staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Doing things! >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! What approach would you take to make a staticmethod behave as expected inside a decorated class? Is this the best way? Why doesn't the builtin staticmethod implement __call__ on it's own in order for this to just work without any fuss? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • A way of doing real-world test-driven development (and some thoughts about it)

    - by Thomas Weller
    Lately, I exchanged some arguments with Derick Bailey about some details of the red-green-refactor cycle of the Test-driven development process. In short, the issue revolved around the fact that it’s not enough to have a test red or green, but it’s also important to have it red or green for the right reasons. While for me, it’s sufficient to initially have a NotImplementedException in place, Derick argues that this is not totally correct (see these two posts: Red/Green/Refactor, For The Right Reasons and Red For The Right Reason: Fail By Assertion, Not By Anything Else). And he’s right. But on the other hand, I had no idea how his insights could have any practical consequence for my own individual interpretation of the red-green-refactor cycle (which is not really red-green-refactor, at least not in its pure sense, see the rest of this article). This made me think deeply for some days now. In the end I found out that the ‘right reason’ changes in my understanding depending on what development phase I’m in. To make this clear (at least I hope it becomes clear…) I started to describe my way of working in some detail, and then something strange happened: The scope of the article slightly shifted from focusing ‘only’ on the ‘right reason’ issue to something more general, which you might describe as something like  'Doing real-world TDD in .NET , with massive use of third-party add-ins’. This is because I feel that there is a more general statement about Test-driven development to make:  It’s high time to speak about the ‘How’ of TDD, not always only the ‘Why’. Much has been said about this, and me myself also contributed to that (see here: TDD is not about testing, it's about how we develop software). But always justifying what you do is very unsatisfying in the long run, it is inherently defensive, and it costs time and effort that could be used for better and more important things. And frankly: I’m somewhat sick and tired of repeating time and again that the test-driven way of software development is highly preferable for many reasons - I don’t want to spent my time exclusively on stating the obvious… So, again, let’s say it clearly: TDD is programming, and programming is TDD. Other ways of programming (code-first, sometimes called cowboy-coding) are exceptional and need justification. – I know that there are many people out there who will disagree with this radical statement, and I also know that it’s not a description of the real world but more of a mission statement or something. But nevertheless I’m absolutely sure that in some years this statement will be nothing but a platitude. Side note: Some parts of this post read as if I were paid by Jetbrains (the manufacturer of the ReSharper add-in – R#), but I swear I’m not. Rather I think that Visual Studio is just not production-complete without it, and I wouldn’t even consider to do professional work without having this add-in installed... The three parts of a software component Before I go into some details, I first should describe my understanding of what belongs to a software component (assembly, type, or method) during the production process (i.e. the coding phase). Roughly, I come up with the three parts shown below:   First, we need to have some initial sort of requirement. This can be a multi-page formal document, a vague idea in some programmer’s brain of what might be needed, or anything in between. In either way, there has to be some sort of requirement, be it explicit or not. – At the C# micro-level, the best way that I found to formulate that is to define interfaces for just about everything, even for internal classes, and to provide them with exhaustive xml comments. The next step then is to re-formulate these requirements in an executable form. This is specific to the respective programming language. - For C#/.NET, the Gallio framework (which includes MbUnit) in conjunction with the ReSharper add-in for Visual Studio is my toolset of choice. The third part then finally is the production code itself. It’s development is entirely driven by the requirements and their executable formulation. This is the delivery, the two other parts are ‘only’ there to make its production possible, to give it a decent quality and reliability, and to significantly reduce related costs down the maintenance timeline. So while the first two parts are not really relevant for the customer, they are very important for the developer. The customer (or in Scrum terms: the Product Owner) is not interested at all in how  the product is developed, he is only interested in the fact that it is developed as cost-effective as possible, and that it meets his functional and non-functional requirements. The rest is solely a matter of the developer’s craftsmanship, and this is what I want to talk about during the remainder of this article… An example To demonstrate my way of doing real-world TDD, I decided to show the development of a (very) simple Calculator component. The example is deliberately trivial and silly, as examples always are. I am totally aware of the fact that real life is never that simple, but I only want to show some development principles here… The requirement As already said above, I start with writing down some words on the initial requirement, and I normally use interfaces for that, even for internal classes - the typical question “intf or not” doesn’t even come to mind. I need them for my usual workflow and using them automatically produces high componentized and testable code anyway. To think about their usage in every single situation would slow down the production process unnecessarily. So this is what I begin with: namespace Calculator {     /// <summary>     /// Defines a very simple calculator component for demo purposes.     /// </summary>     public interface ICalculator     {         /// <summary>         /// Gets the result of the last successful operation.         /// </summary>         /// <value>The last result.</value>         /// <remarks>         /// Will be <see langword="null" /> before the first successful operation.         /// </remarks>         double? LastResult { get; }       } // interface ICalculator   } // namespace Calculator So, I’m not beginning with a test, but with a sort of code declaration - and still I insist on being 100% test-driven. There are three important things here: Starting this way gives me a method signature, which allows to use IntelliSense and AutoCompletion and thus eliminates the danger of typos - one of the most regular, annoying, time-consuming, and therefore expensive sources of error in the development process. In my understanding, the interface definition as a whole is more of a readable requirement document and technical documentation than anything else. So this is at least as much about documentation than about coding. The documentation must completely describe the behavior of the documented element. I normally use an IoC container or some sort of self-written provider-like model in my architecture. In either case, I need my components defined via service interfaces anyway. - I will use the LinFu IoC framework here, for no other reason as that is is very simple to use. The ‘Red’ (pt. 1)   First I create a folder for the project’s third-party libraries and put the LinFu.Core dll there. Then I set up a test project (via a Gallio project template), and add references to the Calculator project and the LinFu dll. Finally I’m ready to write the first test, which will look like the following: namespace Calculator.Test {     [TestFixture]     public class CalculatorTest     {         private readonly ServiceContainer container = new ServiceContainer();           [Test]         public void CalculatorLastResultIsInitiallyNull()         {             ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();               Assert.IsNull(calculator.LastResult);         }       } // class CalculatorTest   } // namespace Calculator.Test       This is basically the executable formulation of what the interface definition states (part of). Side note: There’s one principle of TDD that is just plain wrong in my eyes: I’m talking about the Red is 'does not compile' thing. How could a compiler error ever be interpreted as a valid test outcome? I never understood that, it just makes no sense to me. (Or, in Derick’s terms: this reason is as wrong as a reason ever could be…) A compiler error tells me: Your code is incorrect, but nothing more.  Instead, the ‘Red’ part of the red-green-refactor cycle has a clearly defined meaning to me: It means that the test works as intended and fails only if its assumptions are not met for some reason. Back to our Calculator. When I execute the above test with R#, the Gallio plugin will give me this output: So this tells me that the test is red for the wrong reason: There’s no implementation that the IoC-container could load, of course. So let’s fix that. With R#, this is very easy: First, create an ICalculator - derived type:        Next, implement the interface members: And finally, move the new class to its own file: So far my ‘work’ was six mouse clicks long, the only thing that’s left to do manually here, is to add the Ioc-specific wiring-declaration and also to make the respective class non-public, which I regularly do to force my components to communicate exclusively via interfaces: This is what my Calculator class looks like as of now: using System; using LinFu.IoC.Configuration;   namespace Calculator {     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         public double? LastResult         {             get             {                 throw new NotImplementedException();             }         }     } } Back to the test fixture, we have to put our IoC container to work: [TestFixture] public class CalculatorTest {     #region Fields       private readonly ServiceContainer container = new ServiceContainer();       #endregion // Fields       #region Setup/TearDown       [FixtureSetUp]     public void FixtureSetUp()     {        container.LoadFrom(AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory, "Calculator.dll");     }       ... Because I have a R# live template defined for the setup/teardown method skeleton as well, the only manual coding here again is the IoC-specific stuff: two lines, not more… The ‘Red’ (pt. 2) Now, the execution of the above test gives the following result: This time, the test outcome tells me that the method under test is called. And this is the point, where Derick and I seem to have somewhat different views on the subject: Of course, the test still is worthless regarding the red/green outcome (or: it’s still red for the wrong reasons, in that it gives a false negative). But as far as I am concerned, I’m not really interested in the test outcome at this point of the red-green-refactor cycle. Rather, I only want to assert that my test actually calls the right method. If that’s the case, I will happily go on to the ‘Green’ part… The ‘Green’ Making the test green is quite trivial. Just make LastResult an automatic property:     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         public double? LastResult { get; private set; }     }         One more round… Now on to something slightly more demanding (cough…). Let’s state that our Calculator exposes an Add() method:         ...   /// <summary>         /// Adds the specified operands.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="operand1">The operand1.</param>         /// <param name="operand2">The operand2.</param>         /// <returns>The result of the additon.</returns>         /// <exception cref="ArgumentException">         /// Argument <paramref name="operand1"/> is &lt; 0.<br/>         /// -- or --<br/>         /// Argument <paramref name="operand2"/> is &lt; 0.         /// </exception>         double Add(double operand1, double operand2);       } // interface ICalculator A remark: I sometimes hear the complaint that xml comment stuff like the above is hard to read. That’s certainly true, but irrelevant to me, because I read xml code comments with the CR_Documentor tool window. And using that, it looks like this:   Apart from that, I’m heavily using xml code comments (see e.g. here for a detailed guide) because there is the possibility of automating help generation with nightly CI builds (using MS Sandcastle and the Sandcastle Help File Builder), and then publishing the results to some intranet location.  This way, a team always has first class, up-to-date technical documentation at hand about the current codebase. (And, also very important for speeding up things and avoiding typos: You have IntelliSense/AutoCompletion and R# support, and the comments are subject to compiler checking…).     Back to our Calculator again: Two more R# – clicks implement the Add() skeleton:         ...           public double Add(double operand1, double operand2)         {             throw new NotImplementedException();         }       } // class Calculator As we have stated in the interface definition (which actually serves as our requirement document!), the operands are not allowed to be negative. So let’s start implementing that. Here’s the test: [Test] [Row(-0.5, 2)] public void AddThrowsOnNegativeOperands(double operand1, double operand2) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => calculator.Add(operand1, operand2)); } As you can see, I’m using a data-driven unit test method here, mainly for these two reasons: Because I know that I will have to do the same test for the second operand in a few seconds, I save myself from implementing another test method for this purpose. Rather, I only will have to add another Row attribute to the existing one. From the test report below, you can see that the argument values are explicitly printed out. This can be a valuable documentation feature even when everything is green: One can quickly review what values were tested exactly - the complete Gallio HTML-report (as it will be produced by the Continuous Integration runs) shows these values in a quite clear format (see below for an example). Back to our Calculator development again, this is what the test result tells us at the moment: So we’re red again, because there is not yet an implementation… Next we go on and implement the necessary parameter verification to become green again, and then we do the same thing for the second operand. To make a long story short, here’s the test and the method implementation at the end of the second cycle: // in CalculatorTest:   [Test] [Row(-0.5, 2)] [Row(295, -123)] public void AddThrowsOnNegativeOperands(double operand1, double operand2) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => calculator.Add(operand1, operand2)); }   // in Calculator: public double Add(double operand1, double operand2) {     if (operand1 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");     }     if (operand2 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");     }     throw new NotImplementedException(); } So far, we have sheltered our method from unwanted input, and now we can safely operate on the parameters without further caring about their validity (this is my interpretation of the Fail Fast principle, which is regarded here in more detail). Now we can think about the method’s successful outcomes. First let’s write another test for that: [Test] [Row(1, 1, 2)] public void TestAdd(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Add(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); } Again, I’m regularly using row based test methods for these kinds of unit tests. The above shown pattern proved to be extremely helpful for my development work, I call it the Defined-Input/Expected-Output test idiom: You define your input arguments together with the expected method result. There are two major benefits from that way of testing: In the course of refining a method, it’s very likely to come up with additional test cases. In our case, we might add tests for some edge cases like ‘one of the operands is zero’ or ‘the sum of the two operands causes an overflow’, or maybe there’s an external test protocol that has to be fulfilled (e.g. an ISO norm for medical software), and this results in the need of testing against additional values. In all these scenarios we only have to add another Row attribute to the test. Remember that the argument values are written to the test report, so as a side-effect this produces valuable documentation. (This can become especially important if the fulfillment of some sort of external requirements has to be proven). So your test method might look something like that in the end: [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 2)] [Row(0, 999999999, 999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, double.MaxValue)] public void TestAdd(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Add(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); } And this will produce the following HTML report (with Gallio):   Not bad for the amount of work we invested in it, huh? - There might be scenarios where reports like that can be useful for demonstration purposes during a Scrum sprint review… The last requirement to fulfill is that the LastResult property is expected to store the result of the last operation. I don’t show this here, it’s trivial enough and brings nothing new… And finally: Refactor (for the right reasons) To demonstrate my way of going through the refactoring portion of the red-green-refactor cycle, I added another method to our Calculator component, namely Subtract(). Here’s the code (tests and production): // CalculatorTest.cs:   [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 0)] [Row(0, 999999999, -999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, -double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, -double.MaxValue)] public void TestSubtract(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       double result = calculator.Subtract(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, result); }   [Test, Description("Arguments: operand1, operand2, expectedResult")] [Row(1, 1, 0)] [Row(0, 999999999, -999999999)] [Row(0, 0, 0)] [Row(0, double.MaxValue, -double.MaxValue)] [Row(4, double.MaxValue - 2.5, -double.MaxValue)] public void TestSubtractGivesExpectedLastResult(double operand1, double operand2, double expectedResult) {     ICalculator calculator = container.GetService<ICalculator>();       calculator.Subtract(operand1, operand2);       Assert.AreEqual(expectedResult, calculator.LastResult); }   ...   // ICalculator.cs: /// <summary> /// Subtracts the specified operands. /// </summary> /// <param name="operand1">The operand1.</param> /// <param name="operand2">The operand2.</param> /// <returns>The result of the subtraction.</returns> /// <exception cref="ArgumentException"> /// Argument <paramref name="operand1"/> is &lt; 0.<br/> /// -- or --<br/> /// Argument <paramref name="operand2"/> is &lt; 0. /// </exception> double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2);   ...   // Calculator.cs:   public double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2) {     if (operand1 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");     }       if (operand2 < 0.0)     {         throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");     }       return (this.LastResult = operand1 - operand2).Value; }   Obviously, the argument validation stuff that was produced during the red-green part of our cycle duplicates the code from the previous Add() method. So, to avoid code duplication and minimize the number of code lines of the production code, we do an Extract Method refactoring. One more time, this is only a matter of a few mouse clicks (and giving the new method a name) with R#: Having done that, our production code finally looks like that: using System; using LinFu.IoC.Configuration;   namespace Calculator {     [Implements(typeof(ICalculator))]     internal class Calculator : ICalculator     {         #region ICalculator           public double? LastResult { get; private set; }           public double Add(double operand1, double operand2)         {             ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(operand1, operand2);               return (this.LastResult = operand1 + operand2).Value;         }           public double Subtract(double operand1, double operand2)         {             ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(operand1, operand2);               return (this.LastResult = operand1 - operand2).Value;         }           #endregion // ICalculator           #region Implementation (Helper)           private static void ThrowIfOneOperandIsInvalid(double operand1, double operand2)         {             if (operand1 < 0.0)             {                 throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand1");             }               if (operand2 < 0.0)             {                 throw new ArgumentException("Value must not be negative.", "operand2");             }         }           #endregion // Implementation (Helper)       } // class Calculator   } // namespace Calculator But is the above worth the effort at all? It’s obviously trivial and not very impressive. All our tests were green (for the right reasons), and refactoring the code did not change anything. It’s not immediately clear how this refactoring work adds value to the project. Derick puts it like this: STOP! Hold on a second… before you go any further and before you even think about refactoring what you just wrote to make your test pass, you need to understand something: if your done with your requirements after making the test green, you are not required to refactor the code. I know… I’m speaking heresy, here. Toss me to the wolves, I’ve gone over to the dark side! Seriously, though… if your test is passing for the right reasons, and you do not need to write any test or any more code for you class at this point, what value does refactoring add? Derick immediately answers his own question: So why should you follow the refactor portion of red/green/refactor? When you have added code that makes the system less readable, less understandable, less expressive of the domain or concern’s intentions, less architecturally sound, less DRY, etc, then you should refactor it. I couldn’t state it more precise. From my personal perspective, I’d add the following: You have to keep in mind that real-world software systems are usually quite large and there are dozens or even hundreds of occasions where micro-refactorings like the above can be applied. It’s the sum of them all that counts. And to have a good overall quality of the system (e.g. in terms of the Code Duplication Percentage metric) you have to be pedantic on the individual, seemingly trivial cases. My job regularly requires the reading and understanding of ‘foreign’ code. So code quality/readability really makes a HUGE difference for me – sometimes it can be even the difference between project success and failure… Conclusions The above described development process emerged over the years, and there were mainly two things that guided its evolution (you might call it eternal principles, personal beliefs, or anything in between): Test-driven development is the normal, natural way of writing software, code-first is exceptional. So ‘doing TDD or not’ is not a question. And good, stable code can only reliably be produced by doing TDD (yes, I know: many will strongly disagree here again, but I’ve never seen high-quality code – and high-quality code is code that stood the test of time and causes low maintenance costs – that was produced code-first…) It’s the production code that pays our bills in the end. (Though I have seen customers these days who demand an acceptance test battery as part of the final delivery. Things seem to go into the right direction…). The test code serves ‘only’ to make the production code work. But it’s the number of delivered features which solely counts at the end of the day - no matter how much test code you wrote or how good it is. With these two things in mind, I tried to optimize my coding process for coding speed – or, in business terms: productivity - without sacrificing the principles of TDD (more than I’d do either way…).  As a result, I consider a ratio of about 3-5/1 for test code vs. production code as normal and desirable. In other words: roughly 60-80% of my code is test code (This might sound heavy, but that is mainly due to the fact that software development standards only begin to evolve. The entire software development profession is very young, historically seen; only at the very beginning, and there are no viable standards yet. If you think about software development as a kind of casting process, where the test code is the mold and the resulting production code is the final product, then the above ratio sounds no longer extraordinary…) Although the above might look like very much unnecessary work at first sight, it’s not. With the aid of the mentioned add-ins, doing all the above is a matter of minutes, sometimes seconds (while writing this post took hours and days…). The most important thing is to have the right tools at hand. Slow developer machines or the lack of a tool or something like that - for ‘saving’ a few 100 bucks -  is just not acceptable and a very bad decision in business terms (though I quite some times have seen and heard that…). Production of high-quality products needs the usage of high-quality tools. This is a platitude that every craftsman knows… The here described round-trip will take me about five to ten minutes in my real-world development practice. I guess it’s about 30% more time compared to developing the ‘traditional’ (code-first) way. But the so manufactured ‘product’ is of much higher quality and massively reduces maintenance costs, which is by far the single biggest cost factor, as I showed in this previous post: It's the maintenance, stupid! (or: Something is rotten in developerland.). In the end, this is a highly cost-effective way of software development… But on the other hand, there clearly is a trade-off here: coding speed vs. code quality/later maintenance costs. The here described development method might be a perfect fit for the overwhelming majority of software projects, but there certainly are some scenarios where it’s not - e.g. if time-to-market is crucial for a software project. So this is a business decision in the end. It’s just that you have to know what you’re doing and what consequences this might have… Some last words First, I’d like to thank Derick Bailey again. His two aforementioned posts (which I strongly recommend for reading) inspired me to think deeply about my own personal way of doing TDD and to clarify my thoughts about it. I wouldn’t have done that without this inspiration. I really enjoy that kind of discussions… I agree with him in all respects. But I don’t know (yet?) how to bring his insights into the described production process without slowing things down. The above described method proved to be very “good enough” in my practical experience. But of course, I’m open to suggestions here… My rationale for now is: If the test is initially red during the red-green-refactor cycle, the ‘right reason’ is: it actually calls the right method, but this method is not yet operational. Later on, when the cycle is finished and the tests become part of the regular, automated Continuous Integration process, ‘red’ certainly must occur for the ‘right reason’: in this phase, ‘red’ MUST mean nothing but an unfulfilled assertion - Fail By Assertion, Not By Anything Else!

    Read the article

  • 3D game engine for networked world simulation / AI sandbox

    - by Martin
    More than 5 years ago I was playing with DirectSound and Direct3D and I found it really exciting although it took much time to get some good results with C++. I was a college student then. Now I have mostly enterprise development experience in C# and PHP, and I do it for living. There is really no chance to earn money with serious game development in our country. Each day more and more I find that I miss something. So I decided to spend an hour or so each day to do programming for fun. So my idea is to build a world simulation. I would like to begin with something simple - some human-like creatures that live their life - like Sims 3 but much more simple, just basic needs, basic animations, minimum graphic assets - I guess it won't be a city but just a large house for a start. The idea is to have some kind of a server application which stores the world data in MySQL database, and some client applications - body-less AI bots which simulate movement and some interactions with the world and each other. But it wouldn't be fun without 3D. So there are also 3D clients - I can enter that virtual world and see the AI bots living. When the bot enters visible area, it becomes material - loads a mesh and animations, so I can see it. When I leave, the bots lose their 3d mesh bodies again, but their virtual life still continues. With time I hope to make it like some expandable scriptable sandbox to experiment with various AI algorithms and so on. But I am not intended to create a full-blown MMORPG :D I have looked for many possible things I would need (free and open source) and now I have to make a choice: OGRE3D + enet (or RakNet). Old good C++. But won't it slow me down so much that I won't have fun any more? CrystalSpace. Formally not a game engine but very close to that. C++ again. MOgre (OGRE3D wrapper for .NET) + lidgren (networking library which is already used in some gaming projects). Good - I like C#, it is good for fast programming and also can be used for scripting. XNA seems just a framework, not an engine, so really have doubts, should I even look at XNA Game Studio :( Panda3D - full game engine with positive feedback. I really like idea to have all the toolset in one package, it has good reviews as a beginner-friendly engine...if you know Python. On the C++ side, Panda3D has almost non-existent documentation. I have 0 experience with Python, but I've heard it is easy to learn. And if it will be fun and challenging then I guess I would benefit from experience in one more programming language. Which of those would you suggest, not because of advanced features or good platform support but mostly for fun, easy workflow and expandability, and so I can create and integrate all the components I need - the server with the database, AI bots and a 3D client application?

    Read the article

  • Pure JSP without mixing HTML, by writing html as Java-like code

    - by ADTC
    Please read before answering. This is a fantasy programming technique I'm dreaming up. I want to know if there's anything close in real life. The following JSP page: <% html { head { title {"Pure fantasy";} } body { h1 {"A heading with double quote (\") character";} p {"a paragraph";} String s = "a paragraph in string. the date is "; p { s; new Date().toString(); } table (Border.ZERO, new Padding(27)) { tr { for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { td {i;} } } } } } %> could generate the following HTML page: <html> <head> <title>Pure fantasy</title> </head> <body> <h1>A heading with double quote (") character</h1> <p>a paragraph</p> <p>a paragraph in string. the date is 11 December 2012</p> <table border="0" padding="27"> <tr> <td>0</td> <td>1</td> <td>2</td> <td>3</td> <td>4</td> <td>5</td> <td>6</td> <td>7</td> <td>8</td> <td>9</td> </tr> </table> </body> </html> The thing about this fantasy is it reuses the same old Java programming language technique that enable customized keywords used in a way similar to if-else-then, while, try-catch etc to represent html tags in a non-html way that can easily be checked for syntactic correctness, and most importantly can easily be mixed up with regular Java code without being lost in a sea of <%, %>, <%=, out.write(), etc. An added feature is that strings can directly be placed as commands to print out into generated HTML, something Java doesn't support (where pure strings have to be assigned to variables before use). Is there anything in real life that comes close? If not, is it possible to define customized keywords in Java or JSP? Or do I have to create an entirely new programming language for that? What problems do you see with this kind of setup? PS: I know you can use HTML libraries to construct HTML using Java code, but the problem with such libraries is, the source code itself doesn't have a readable HTML representation like the code above does - if you get what I mean.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331  | Next Page >