Search Results

Search found 666 results on 27 pages for 'disadvantages'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/27 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • What are the advantages/disadvantages of Seam over Spring?

    - by Josh
    What are the advantages/disadvantages of Seam over Spring? Why would I use Seam in lieu of Spring? Is there anything that can be done in Seam that can't be done in Spring? Anything in Spring that can't be done in Seam? What about stateful/stateless architecture? I am a Spring user, so I am biased, naturally.

    Read the article

  • What would be the disadvantages/risks of using AF_UNSPEC?

    - by Kiril Kirov
    From Beej's Guide to Network programming You can force it to use IPv4 or IPv6 in the ai_family field, or leave it as AF_UNSPEC to use whatever. This is cool because your code can be IP version-agnostic. As the title says - what would be the disadvantages (or risks, if any) of always using AF_UNSPEC, instead of specifying IPv4 or IPv6? Or it's only for one reason - if the version is specified, this will guarantee that this and only this version is supported? A little background - I think about adding support for IPv6 in client-server (C++) applications and both versions should be supported. So I wondered if it's fine to use AF_UNSPEC or it's better to "recognize" the address from the string and use AF_INET6 or AF_INET, depending on the address.

    Read the article

  • Ruby on Rails: What are Erubis' disadvantages and why isn't it packaged with Rails by default? How t

    - by williamjones
    I just discovered Erubis, a replacement for the default view renderer for Ruby on Rails. However, from what I can tell from reading about it, it's superior across the board. It is much faster. It has many more options. It can prevent cross site scripting without having to use h. Does this have any disadvantages versus the standard erb renderer? Why isn't this the standard renderer packaged with Rails? Also, the docs for Erubis say to install it just by installing the gem, and then add the following to environment.rb: require 'erubis/helpers/rails_helper' #Erubis::Helpers::RailsHelper.engine_class = Erubis::Eruby # or Erubis::FastEruby Reading the docs, FastEruby seems to be just a faster renderer than Eruby. Why wouldn't it be default and used by everyone? I'm highly interested in using the engine erubis::EscapedEruby which automatically calls h to escape html on fields from the database. Are there any gotchas I should be aware of or does this pretty much solve all cross site scripting?

    Read the article

  • What are the disadvantages of targeting the JVM instead of x86?

    - by Pindatjuh
    I'm developing a new language. My initial target was to compile to native x86 for the Windows platform, but now I am in doubt. I've seen some new languages target the JVM (most notable Scala and Clojure). Ofcourse it's not possible to port every language easily to the JVM; to do so may lead to small changes to the language and it's design. After posing this question, I even doubted more about this decision. I now know some "pro" JVM arguments. The original question was: is targetting the JVM a good idea, when creating a compiler for a new language? Updated the question: What are the disadvantages of targeting the JVM instead of x86 on Windows?

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of plug-in based architecture?

    - by RP
    I want to do the architectural design for a software that can be used integrate various third party software’s (executable) under one platform. Standard project types will be added to the platform by default. The project type defines the way in which the different software will be executed and their input and output files. The user can customize the available standard project type and that will be added to the platform as new project type which defines new custom execution flow. Also it should support easy extension and customization of the features. I read that plug-in based architecture supports both. What are the advantages and disadvantages of plug-in based architecture? Do we have any better architecture which can be used for this kind of scenario? Thanks in advance:)

    Read the article

  • Does using cat5e cables yield any disadvantages in combination with cat6/cat6a network?

    - by agent154
    If I were to have a fully compliant cat6 or cat6a network running through my walls... that is to say, wires and jacks... What would be the concequence of plugging a cat5e wire into one of the jacks? I'm assuming that it would still run at cat5e standards, but obviously not cat6/6a standards because the whole connection is not cat6. I only ask because it seems silly to me to make a bunch of cat6 patch cables for connections that don't really matter, like standard desktop computers and other equipment. Or will doing so hamper the whole network?

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a hosted firewall?

    - by Roy
    Would you rather have your firewall hosted or in house if you've got the skills to manage it? We currently have 6 remote offices and 2 different ISP's, one private network and our firewall (Watchguard, licenses are due to expire) is also our main gateway. I don't see how a hosted firewall (in this case Fortinet) is going to work for us especially when it's cheaper to buy our own firewall and the transition from one ISP to a new provider will take some time because our current contracts aren't due to expire soon. What are to pros and cons of having a firewall hosted by your ISP in general?

    Read the article

  • Disadvantages of enabling 'Low Fragmentation Heap' LFH on Windows Server 2003?

    - by James Wiseman
    I've been investigating an issue with a production Classic ASP website running on IIS6 which seems indicative of memory fragmentation. One of the suggestions of how to ameliorate this came from Stackoverflow: How can I find why some classic asp pages randomly take a real long time to execute?. It suggested flipping a setting in the site's global.asa file to 'turn on' Low Fragmentation Heap (LFH). The following code (with a registered version of the accompanying DLL) did the trick. Set LFHObj=CreateObject("TURNONLFH.ObjTurnOnLFH") LFHObj.TurnOnLFH() application("TurnOnLFHResult")=CStr(LFHObj.TurnOnLFHResult) (Really the code isn't that important to the question). An author of a linked post reported a seemingly magic resolution to this issue, and, reading around a little more, I discovered that this setting is enabled by default on Windows Server 2008. So, naturally, this left me a little concerned: Why is this setting not enabled by default on 2003, or If it works in 2008 why have Microsoft not issued a patch to enable it by default on 2003? I suspect the answer to the above is the same for both (if there is one). Obviously, we're testing it in a non-production environment, and doing an array of metrics and comparisons to deem if it does help us. But aside from this I'm really just trying to understand if there's any technical reason why we should do this, or if there are any gotchas that we need to be aware of.

    Read the article

  • Are there disadvantages to using VARCHAR(MAX) in a table?

    - by Meiscooldude
    Here is my predicament. Basically, I need a column in a table to hold up an unknown length of characters. But I was curious if in Sql Server performance problems could arise using a VARCHAR(MAX) or NVARCHAR(MAX) in a column, such as: 'This time' I only need to store 3 characters and most of the time I only need to store 10 characters. But there is a small chances that It could be up to a couple thousand characters in that column, or even possibly a million, It is unpredictable. But, I can guarantee that it will not go over the 2GB limit. I was just curious if there are any performance issues, or possibly better ways of solving this problem where available.

    Read the article

  • Advantages/disadvantages of Glassfish v3 Prelude vs Springsource dm server for Web applications?

    - by cletus
    Both of these appservers are at least in part OSGI based. One (Glassfish) is obviously J2EE while the other isn't. Now I'm at the stage of choosing a platform for a new project and the natural choice is Glassfish v3 Prelude. This does raise the issue of perhaps we should be using S2AP instead. The question then is this: does the springsource dm server offer any compelling reason to use it over Glassfish? And vice versa.

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages / disadvantages of a Cloud-based / Web-based IDE?

    - by Gabe
    I'm writing this as DevConnections in Las Vegas is happening. Visual Studio 2010 has been released and I now have this 3GB beast installed to my machine. (I'll admit, it has some nice features.) However, while the install was monopolizing my computer's resources I began to wish that my IDE worked more like Google Documents (instantly available, available anywhere, easy to share, easy to collaborate, naturally versioned). A few Google (and StackOverflow) searches led me to : Coderun Bespin I'm well aware that these IDE's are missing a lot of what exists in VS 2010. However, that isn't my question. Instead, I'm wondering what benefits a web-based IDE might have? Assuming a company invests the time to create the missing features, what is the downside?

    Read the article

  • Disadvantages of hard coding credentials? What's the resolution?

    - by SeeBees
    I am building a Sharepoint web part that will be used by all users. The web part connects to a web service which needs credentials with higher privileges than common users. I hard coded credentials in the web part's code. query.Credentials = new System.Net.NetworkCredential("username", "password", "domain"); query is an instance of the web service class This may not be a good approach. In regard with security, source code of the web apart is available to people who are not allowed to see the credential. This is bad enough, But is there any other drawback of this approach? How to prevent hard coding credentials into the source code? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Monitoring C++ applications

    - by Scott A
    We're implementing a new centralized monitoring solution (Zenoss). Incorporating servers, networking, and Java programs is straightforward with SNMP and JMX. The question, however, is what are the best practices for monitoring and managing custom C++ applications in large, heterogenous (Solaris x86, RHEL Linux, Windows) environments? Possibilities I see are: Net SNMP Advantages single, central daemon on each server well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions we run Net SNMP daemons on our servers already Disadvantages: complex implementation (MIBs, Net SNMP library) new technology to introduce for the C++ developers rsyslog Advantages single, central daemon on each server well-known standard unknown integration into monitoring solutions (I know they can do alerts based on text, but how well would it work for sending telemetry like memory usage, queue depths, thread capacity, etc) simple implementation Disadvantages: possible integration issues somewhat new technology for C++ developers possible porting issues if we switch monitoring vendors probably involves coming up with an ad-hoc communication protocol (or using RFC5424 structured data; I don't know if Zenoss supports that without custom Zenpack coding) Embedded JMX (embed a JVM and use JNI) Advantages consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions somewhat simple implementation (we already do this today for other purposes) Disadvantages: complexity (JNI, thunking layer between native C++ and Java, basically writing the management code twice) possible stability problems requires a JVM in each process, using considerably more memory JMX is new technology for C++ developers each process has it's own JMX port (we run a lot of processes on each machine) Local JMX daemon, processes connect to it Advantages single, central daemon on each server consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions Disadvantages: complexity (basically writing the management code twice) need to find or write such a daemon need a protocol between the JMX daemon and the C++ process JMX is new technology for C++ developers CodeMesh JunC++ion Advantages consistent management interface for both Java and C++ well-known standard easy integration into monitoring solutions single, central daemon on each server when run in shared JVM mode somewhat simple implementation (requires code generation) Disadvantages: complexity (code generation, requires a GUI and several rounds of tweaking to produce the proxied code) possible JNI stability problems requires a JVM in each process, using considerably more memory (in embedded mode) Does not support Solaris x86 (deal breaker) Even if it did support Solaris x86, there are possible compiler compatibility issues (we use an odd combination of STLPort and Forte on Solaris each process has it's own JMX port when run in embedded mode (we run a lot of processes on each machine) possibly precludes a shared JMX server for non-C++ processes (?) Is there some reasonably standardized, simple solution I'm missing? Given no other reasonable solutions, which of these solutions is typically used for custom C++ programs? My gut feel is that Net SNMP is how people do this, but I'd like other's input and experience before I make a decision.

    Read the article

  • A 4-byte Unsigned Int for Sql Server 2008?

    - by Jeff Meatball Yang
    I understand there are multiple questions about this on SO, but I have yet to find a definitive answer of "yes, here's how..." So here it is again: What are the possible ways to store an unsigned integer value (32-bit value or 32-bit bitmap) into a 4-byte field in SQL Server? Here are ideas I have seen: 1) Use a -1*2^31 offset for all values Disadvantages: need to perform math on the values before reading/writing/aggregating. 2) Use 4 tinyint fields Disadvantages: need to concatenate values to perform any operations 3) Use binary(4) Disadvantages: actually uses 4 + 2 bytes of space

    Read the article

  • Dynamic character animation - Using the physics engine or not

    - by Lex Webb
    I'm planning on building a dynamic reactant animation engine for the characters in my 2D Game. I have already built templates for a skeleton based animation system using key frames and interpolation to specify a limbs position at any given moment in time. I am using Farseer physics (an extension of Box2D) in Monogame/XNA in C# My real question lies in how i go about tying this character animation into the physics engine. I have two options: Moving limbs using physics engine - applying a interpolated force to each limb (dynamic body) in order to attempt to get it to its position as donated by the skeleton animation. Moving limbs by simply changing the position of a fixed body - Updating the new position of each limb manually, attempting to take into account physics collisions. Then stepping the physics after the animation to allow for environment interaction. Each of these methods have their distinct advantages and disadvantages. Physics based movement Advantages: Possibly more natural/realistic movement Better interaction with game objects as force applying to objects colliding with characters would be calculated for me. No need to convert to dynamic bodies when reacting to projectiles/death/fighting. Disadvantages: Possible difficulty in calculating correct amount of force to move a limb a certain distance at a constant rate. Underlying character balance system would need to be created that would need to be robust enough to prevent characters falling over at the touch of a feather. Added code complexity and processing time for the above. Static Object movement Advantages: Easy to interpolate movement of limbs between game steps Moving limbs is as simple as applying a rotation to the skeleton bone. Greater control over limbs, wont need to worry about characters falling over as all animation would be pre-defined. Disadvantages: Possible unnatural movement (Depends entirely on my animation skills!) Bad physics collision reactions with physics engine (Dynamic bodies simply slide out of the way of static objects) Need to calculate collisions with physics objects and my limbs myself and apply directional forces to them. Hard to account for slopes/stairs/non standard planes when animating walking/running animations. Need to convert objects to dynamic when reacting to projectile/fighting/death physics objects. The Question! As you can see, i have thought about this extensively, i have also had Google into physics based animation and have found mostly dissertation papers! Which is filling me with sense that it may a lot more advanced than my mathematics skills. My question is mostly subjective based on my findings above/any experience you may have: Which of the above methods should i use when creating my game? I am willing to spend the time to get a physics solution working if you think it would be possible. In the end i want to provide the most satisfying experience for the gamer, as well as a robust and dynamic system i can use to animate pretty much anything i need.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >