Search Results

Search found 9254 results on 371 pages for 'approach'.

Page 46/371 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • generating maps

    - by gardian06
    This is a conglomeration question when answering please specify which part you are addressing. I am looking at creating a maze type game that utilizes elevation. I have a few features I would like to have, but am unsure as to some of the implementation. I have done work doing fileIO maze generation (using a key to read the file, and then generate the level based on that file), but I am unsure how to think about this with elevation in the mix. I think height maps might be a good approach, but don't know how to represent them effectively. for a height map which is more beneficial XML(containing h[u,v] data and key definition), CSV (item1 is key reference, item2 is elevation), or another approach that I have not thought of yet? When it comes to placing the elevation values themselves what kind of deltah values are appropriate to have it noticeable at about a 60degree angle while not really effecting gravity driven physics (assuming some effect while moving up/down hill)? I am thinking of maybe going to procedural generation at some point, but am wondering if it is practical to have a procedurally generated grid (wall squares possibly same dimensions as the open space squares), or if designing to a thin wall open spaces is better? this decision will effect the amount of work need on the graphics end for uniform vs. irregular walls. EDIT: game will be a elevation maze shooter. levels/maps will be mazes with elevation the player has to negotiate. elevations will have effects on "combat" vision, and movement

    Read the article

  • How (and when) to move users to mysqli and PDO_MYSQL?

    - by cj
    An important discussion on the PHP "internals" development mailing list is taking place. It's one that you should take some note of. It concerns the next step in transitioning PHP applications away from the very old mysql extension and towards adopting the much better mysqli extension or PDO_MYSQL driver for PDO. This would allow the mysql extension to, at some as-yet undetermined time in the future, be removed. Both mysqli and PDO_MYSQL have been around for many years, and have various advantages: http://php.net/manual/en/mysqlinfo.api.choosing.php The initial RFC for this next step is at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/mysql_deprecation I would expect the RFC to change substantially based on current discussion. The crux of that discussion is the timing of the next step of deprecation. There is also discussion of the carrot approach (showing users the benfits of moving), and stick approach (displaying warnings when the mysql extension is used). As always, there is a lot of guesswork going on as to what MySQL APIs are in current use by PHP applications, how those applications are deployed, and what their upgrade cycle is. This is where you can add your weight to the discussion - and also help by spreading the word to move to mysqli or PDO_MYSQL. An example of such a 'carrot' is the excellent summary at Ulf Wendel's blog: http://blog.ulf-wendel.de/2012/php-mysql-why-to-upgrade-extmysql/ I want to repeat that no time frame for the eventual removal of the mysql extension is set. I expect it to be some years away.

    Read the article

  • Bejeweled-like game, managing different gem/powerup behaviors?

    - by Wissam
    I thought I'd ask a question and look forward to some insight from this very compelling community. In a Bejeweled-like (Match 3) game, the standard behavior once a valid swap of two adjacent tiles is made is that the resulting matching tiles are destroyed, any tiles now sitting over empty spaces fall to the position above the next present-tile, and any void created above is filled with new tiles. In richer Match-3 games like Bejeweled, 4 in a row (as opposed to just 3) modifies this behavior such that the tile that was swapped is retained, turned into a "flaming" gem, it falls, and then the empty space above is filled. The next time that "flaming gem" is played it explodes and destroys the 8 perimeter tiles, triggers a different animation sequence (neighbors of those 8 tiles being destroyed look like they've been hit by a shockwave then they fall to their respective positions). Scoring is different, the triggered sounds are different, etc. There are even more elaborate behaviors for Match5, Match-cross-pattern, and many powerups that can be purchased, each which produces a more elaborate sequence of events, sounds, animations, scoring, etc... What is the best approach to developing all these different behaviors that respond to players' "move" and her current "performance" and that deviate from the standard sequence of events, scoring, animation, sounds etc, in such a way that we can always flexibly introduce a new "powerup" ? What we are doing now is hard-coding the events of each one, but the task is long and arduous and seems like the wrong approach especially since the game-designers and testers often offer (later) valuable insight on what works better in-game, which means that the code itself may have to be re-written even for minor changes in behavior (say, destroy only 7 neighboring tiles, instead of all 8 in an explosion). ANY pointers for good practices here would be highly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Concurrency pattern of logger in multithreaded application

    - by Dipan Mehta
    The context: We are working on a multi-threaded (Linux-C) application that follows a pipeline model. Each module has a private thread and encapsulated objects which do processing of data; and each stage has a standard form of exchanging data with next unit. The application is free from memory leak and is threadsafe using locks at the point where they exchange data. Total number of threads is about 15- and each thread can have from 1 to 4 objects. Making about 25 - 30 odd objects which all have some critical logging to do. Most discussion I have seen about different levels as in Log4J and it's other translations. The real big questions is about how the overall logging should really happen? One approach is all local logging does fprintf to stderr. The stderr is redirected to some file. This approach is very bad when logs become too big. If all object instantiate their individual loggers - (about 30-40 of them) there will be too many files. And unlike above, one won't have the idea of true order of events. Timestamping is one possibility - but it is still a mess to collate. If there is a single global logger (singleton) pattern - it indirectly blocks so many threads while one is busy putting up logs. This is unacceptable when processing of the threads are heavy. So what should be the ideal way to structure the logging objects? What are some of the best practices in actual large scale applications? I would also love to learn from some of the real designs of large scale applications to get inspirations from!

    Read the article

  • Views : ViewControllers, many to one, or one to one?

    - by conor
    I have developed an Android application where, typically, each view (layout.xml) displayed on the screen has it's own corresponding fragment (for the purpose of this question I may refer to this as a ViewController). These views and Fragments/ViewControllers are appropriately named to reflect what they display. So this has the effect of allowing the programmer to easily pinpoint the files associated with what they see on any given screen. The above refers to the one to one part of my question. Please note that with the above there are a few exceptions where very similar is displayed on two views so the ViewController is used for two views. (Using a simple switch (type) to determine what layout.xml file to load) On the flip side. I am currently working on the iOS version of the same app, which I didn't develop. It seems that they are adopting more of a one-to-many (ViewController:View) approach. There appears to be one ViewController that handles the display logic for many different types of views. In the ViewController are an assortment of boolean flags and arrays of data (to be displayed) that are used to determine what view to load and how to display it. This seems very cumbersome to me and coupled with no comments/ambiguous variable names I am finding it very difficult to implement changes into the project. What do you guys think of the two approaches? Which one would you prefer? I'm really considering putting in some extra time at work to refactor the iOS into a more 1:1 oriented approach. My reasoning for 1:1 over M:1 is that of modularity and legibility. After all, don't some people measure the quality of code based on how easy it is for another developer to pick up the reigns or how easy it is to pull a piece of code and use it somewhere else?

    Read the article

  • MongoDB: Replicate data in documents vs. “join”

    - by JavierCane
    Disclaimer: This is a question derived from this one. What do you think about the following example of use case? I have a table containing orders. These orders has a lot of related information needed by my current queries (think about the products; the buyer information; the region, country and state of the sale point; and so on) In order to think with a de-normalized approach, I don't have to put identifiers of these related items in my main orders collection. Instead, I have to repeat all the information for each order (ie: I will repeat the buyer's name, surname, etc. for each of its orders). Assuming the previous premise, I'm committing to maintain all the data related to an order without a lot of updates (because if I modify the buyer's name, I'll have to iterate through all orders updating the ones made by the same buyer, and as MongoDB blocks at a document level on updates, I would be blocking the entire order at the update moment). I'll have to replicate all the products' related data? (ie: category, maker and optional attributes like color, size…) What if a new feature is requested and I've to make a lot of queries with the products "as the entry point of the query"? (ie: reports showing the products' sales performance grouping by region, country, or whatever) Is it fair enough to apply the $unwind operation to my orders original collection? (What about the performance?) I should have to do another collection with these queries in mind and replicate again all the products' information (and their orders)? Wouldn't be better to store a product_id in the original orders collection in order to be more tolerable to requirements change? (What about emulating JOINs?) The optimal approach would be a mixed solution with a RDBMS system like MySQL in order to retrieve the complete data? I mean: store products, users, and location identifiers in the orders collection and have queries in MySQL like getAllUsersDataByIds in which I would perform a SELECT * FROM users WHERE user_id IN ( :identifiers_retrieved_from_the_mongodb_query )

    Read the article

  • Best way to update UI when dealing with data synchronization

    - by developerdoug
    I'm working on a bug at work. The app is written in Objective-C for iOS based device, for the iPad. I'm the new guy there and I've been given a hard task. Sometimes, the UIButton text property does not show the correct state when syncing. Basically, when the app is syncing, my UI control would say "Syncing" and when its not syncing it'll display "Updated @ [specific date]". Right now there is a property on the app delegate called "SyncInProgress". When querying / syncing, occurring on background thread, it updates a counter. The property will return a bool checking expression 'counter 0'. There are three states I need to deal with. Sync has started. Sync is updating tables. Sync finished. These items need to occur in order. My coworker suggested to take a state based approach instead of just responding to events. I'm not sure about how to go about that. Would it be best to have the UI receive a notification to determine what state its in or to pull every so often if state changed? Here are two posts that I put on stackoverflow, in the last few days, that relate to this. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11025469/ios-syncing-using-a-state-approach-instead-of-just-reacting-to-events http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11037930/viewcontroller-when-viewwillappear-called-does-not-always-correctly-reflect-stat Any ideas that anyone might have to very much appreciated. Thanks, developerDoug

    Read the article

  • SIMPLEST way to set up password protection for a static site, with basic admin UI?

    - by Joseph Turian
    I have a static site. I would like the simplest approach to password protecting a directory, with a basic admin UI for adding/removing users. I will have so few users that I don't care about performance. I don't care if it's PHP or Django or whatever, I just want a complete software package. Apache basic auth isn't good, because you can't log out. Nor is there a UI for adding users. I tried throwing everything behind Django auth and serving the files through Django. However, Chrome treats all my text/css headers as text/plain, so I don't get any stylesheets showing. I can't use mod_xsendfile on my server because I can't reconfigure Apache to add new modules. I think this approach is overkill anyway. I can try configuring Nginx's X-Accel-Redirect, however that requires implementing all the Django code for auth myself, and I'd prefer an existing solution. However, this is my backup plan. Is there a code package that implements authentication with basic admin for a static site?

    Read the article

  • Advice on designing web application with a 40+ year lifetime

    - by user2708395
    Scenario Currently, I am apart of a health care project whose main requirement is to capture data with unknown attributes using user generated forms by health care providers. The second requirement is that data integrity is key and that the application will be used for 40+ years. We are currently migrating the client's data from the past 40 years from various sources (Paper, Excel, Access, etc...) to the database. Future requirements are: Workflow management of forms Schedule management of forms Security/Role based management Reporting engine Mobile/Tablet support Situation Only 6 months in, the current (contracted) architect/senior programmer has taken the "fast" approach and has designed a poor system. The database is not normalized, the code is coupled, the tiers have no dedicated purpose and data is starting to go missing since he has designed some beans to perform "deletes" on the database. The code base is extremely bloated and there are jobs just to synchronize data since the database is not normalized. His approach has been to rely on backup jobs to restore missing data and doesn't seem to believe in re-factoring. Having presented my findings to the PM, the architect will be removed when his contract ends. I have been given the task to re-architect this application. My team consists of me and one junior programmer. We have no other resources. We have been granted a 6-month requirement freeze in which we can focus on re-building this system. I suggested using a CMS system like Drupal, but for policy reasons at the client's organization, the system must be built from scratch. This is the first time that I will be designing a system with a 40+ lifespan. I have only worked on projects with 3-5 year lifespans, so this situation is very new, yet exciting. Questions What design considerations will make the system more "future proof"? What experiences have you had in designing such systems - both failures and successes? What questions should be asked to the client/PM to make the system more "future proof"?

    Read the article

  • The balance between client and server functionality

    - by Eugen Martynov
    I want to bring the discussion that started in our teams and get your opinion about it. Assume we have an user account which could have different credentials for authentication and associated email to recover. An user has possibility to do signup with an email or use his social profile to complete signup process. As an Rest API from the backend to client looks like: Create account Authorise Update user data Link social account Register email Verify email In addition our BE is distributed and divided between several services/servers/clusters. So different calls are related to different end points. In case of the social sign up some of steps should be skipped or simplified. For example, with Facebook signup we could already skip email registration and verification step (we ask email permission form user), linking the social account and pre-fill user displayed name. So we proposed to have another end point which will hide/combine different calls on BE and return whole process result to the clients. The pros for this approach: No more duplication of functionality between clients Speed up the networking and user experience The cons for this approach: Additional work for backend Probably most complex scenarios in future updates I would like to get your opinion or experience with this situation. Especially if you already experienced point #2 from against reasons.

    Read the article

  • Share home directory between Linux and Windows dual boot

    - by user877329
    This question is somewhat similar to How to use Windows Share has home directory, but in this case Windows is not running. I have installed a dual-boot configuration with Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows. My Windows partition is mounted on /C. Now I want either Ubuntu to locate home directories in /C/Users Which is the location of windows accounts or I want Windows to use D:\home for home directories. (D is the name of the Ubuntu root directory). For the first approach, I have managed to create a test user account test-user:x:1004:1001:Test:/C/Users/test-user:/bin/bash The account works but test-user cannot run any X session. From .xsession-errors chmod: Changing rights on ”/C/Users/test-user/.xsession-errors”: Operation not permitted Would it help get rid of that chmod, which has no effect? How do I? If I use the second approach, I need the Ext2fsd driver, which seems to work, but I am not sure if Windows maps the Ext2 system that early. Here is my fstab proc /proc proc nodev,noexec,nosuid 0 0 UUID=e7cef061-ed8d-4a82-b708-0c8f4c6f297f / ext3 errors=remount-ro 0 1 UUID=2CDCEB43DCEB0644 /C ntfs defaults,umask=007,gid=46 0 0 UUID=b087b5c0-b4bd-47e7-8d34-48ad9b192328 none swap sw 0 0 Update: I found something here: http://www.tuxera.com/community/ntfs-3g-advanced/ Will work if i do a correct mapping between NT users and Linux users.

    Read the article

  • What is the standard technique for shifting the frames of a sprite according to user input?

    - by virtual__
    From my own experience, I developed two techniques for changing the sprites of a character that's reacting to user input -- this in the context of a classic 2D platformer. The first one is to store all character's pixmaps in a list, putting the index of the currently used pixmap in an ordinary variable. This way, every time the player presses a key -- say the right arrow for moving the character forward -- the graphics engine sees what's the next pixmap to draw, draws it, and increments the index counter. That's a pretty common approach I believe, the problem is that in this case the animation's quality depends not only on the number of sprites available but also on how often your engine listens to user input. The second technique is to actually play an animation every key press event. For this you can use any sort of animation framework you want. It's only necessary to set the timer, the animation steps and to call the animation's play() method on your key press event handler. The problem with that approach is that is lacks responsiveness, since the character won't react to any input while the current animation is still being played. What I want to know is whether you are using one of these techniques -- or something similar -- in your games, or whether there's a standard method for animating sprites out there that's widely known by everybody but me.

    Read the article

  • Should Developers Perform All Tasks or Should They Specialize?

    - by Bob Horn
    Disclaimer: The intent of this question isn't to discern what is better for the individual developer, but for the system as a whole. I've worked in environments where small teams managed certain areas. For example, there would be a small team for every one of these functions: UI Framework code Business/application logic Database I've also worked on teams where the developers were responsible for all of these areas and more (QA, analsyt, etc...). My current environment promotes agile development (specifically scrum) and everyone has their hands in every area mentioned above. While there are pros and cons to each approach, I'd be curious to know if there are more pros and cons than I list below, and also what the generally feeling is about which approach is better. Devs Do It All Pros 1. Developers may be more well-rounded 2. Developers know more of the system Cons 1. Everyone has their hands in all areas, increasing the probability of creating less-than-optimal results in that area 2. It can take longer to do something with which you are unfamiliar (jack of all trades, master of none) Devs Specialize Pros 1. Developers can create policies and procedures for their area of expertise and more easily enforce them 2. Developers have more of a chance to become deeply knowledgeable about their specific area and make it the best it can be 3. Other developers don't cross boundaries and degrade another area Cons 1. As one colleague put it: "Why would you want to pigeon-hole yourself like that?" (Meaning some developers won't get a chance to work in certain areas.) It's easy to say how wonderful agile is, and that we should do it all, but I'm somewhat of a fan of having areas of expertise. Without that expertise, I've seen code degrade, database schemas become difficult to manage, hack UI code, etc... Let's face it, some people make careers out of doing just UI work, or just database work. It's not that easy to just fill in and do as good of a job as an expert in that area.

    Read the article

  • Structuring cascading properties - parent only or parent + entire child graph?

    - by SB2055
    I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

    Read the article

  • Storing editable site content?

    - by hmp
    We have a Django-based website for which we wanted to make some of the content (text, and business logic such as pricing plans) easily editable in-house, and so we decided to store it outside the codebase. Usually the reason is one of the following: It's something that non-technical people want to edit. One example is copywriting for a website - the programmers prepare a template with text that defaults to "Lorem ipsum...", and the real content is inserted later to the database. It's something that we want to be able to change quickly, without the need to deploy new code (which we currently do twice a week). An example would be features currently available to the customers at different tiers of pricing. Instead of hardcoding these, we read them from database. The described solution is flexible but there are some reasons why I don't like it. Because the content has to be read from the database, there is a performance overhead. We mitigate that by using a caching scheme, but this also adds some complexity to the system. Developers who run the code locally see the system in a significantly different state compared to how it runs on production. Automated tests also exercise the system in a different state. Situations like testing new features on a staging server also get trickier - if the staging server doesn't have a recent copy of the database, it can be unexpectedly different from production. We could mitigate that by committing the new state to the repository occasionally (e.g. by adding data migrations), but it seems like a wrong approach. Is it? Any ideas how best to solve these problems? Is there a better approach for handling the content that I'm overlooking?

    Read the article

  • Looking for a better Factory pattern (Java)

    - by Sam Goldberg
    After doing a rough sketch of a high level object model, I am doing iterative TDD, and letting the other objects emerge as a refactoring of the code (as it increases in complexity). (That whole approach may be a discussion/argument for another day.) In any case, I am at the point where I am looking to refactor code blocks currently in an if-else blocks into separate objects. This is because there is another another value combination which creates new set of logical sub-branches. To be more specific, this is a trading system feature, where buy orders have different behavior than sell orders. Responses to the orders have a numeric indicator field which describes some event that occurred (e.g. fill, cancel). The combination of this numeric indicator field plus whether it is a buy or sell, require different processing buy the code. Creating a family of objects to separate the code for the unique handling each of the combinations of the 2 fields seems like a good choice at this point. The way I would normally do this, is to create some Factory object which when called with the 2 relevant parameters (indicator, buysell), would return the correct subclass of the object. Some times I do this pattern with a map, which allows to look up a live instance (or constructor to use via reflection), and sometimes I just hard code the cases in the Factory class. So - for some reason this feels like not good design (e.g. one object which knows all the subclasses of an interface or parent object), and a bit clumsy. Is there a better pattern for solving this kind of problem? And if this factory method approach makes sense, can anyone suggest a nicer design?

    Read the article

  • Being stupid to get better productivity?

    - by loki2302
    I've spent a lot of time reading different books about "good design", "design patterns", etc. I'm a big fan of the SOLID approach and every time I need to write a simple piece of code, I think about the future. So, if implementing a new feature or a bug fix requires just adding three lines of code like this: if(xxx) { doSomething(); } It doesn't mean I'll do it this way. If I feel like this piece of code is likely to become larger in the nearest future, I'll think of adding abstractions, moving this functionality somewhere else and so on. The goal I'm pursuing is keeping average complexity the same as it was before my changes. I believe, that from the code standpoint, it's quite a good idea - my code is never long enough, and it's quite easy to understand the meanings for different entities, like classes, methods, and relations between classes and objects. The problem is, it takes too much time, and I often feel like it would be better if I just implemented that feature "as is". It's just about "three lines of code" vs. "new interface + two classes to implement that interface". From a product standpoint (when we're talking about the result), the things I do are quite senseless. I know that if we're going to work on the next version, having good code is really great. But on the other side, the time you've spent to make your code "good" may have been spent for implementing a couple of useful features. I often feel very unsatisfied with my results - good code that only can do A is worse than bad code that can do A, B, C, and D. Are there any books, articles, blogs, or your ideas that may help with developing one's "being stupid" approach?

    Read the article

  • Tips on how to notify a user of new features in your game (Android)

    - by brent777
    I have noticed a problem when releasing new features for a game that I wrote for Android and published on Google Play Store. Because my game is "stage-based" - and not a game like Hay Day, for example, where users will just go into the game every day since it can't really be finished - my users are not aware of new features that I release for the game. For example, if I publish a new version of my game and it contains a couple new stages, most of their devices will just auto-update the game and they don't even notice this and think to check out what's new. So this is why an approach like popping open a dialog that showcases the new feature(s) when they open the game for the first time after the update was done is not really sufficient. I am looking for some tips on an approach that will draw my users back into the game and then they could read more detail about new features on such a dialog. I was thinking of something like a notification that tells them to check out the new features after an update is done but I am not sure if this is a good idea. Any suggestions to help me solve this problem would be awesome.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Silverlight 4 Data and Services Cookbook &ndash; Book Review (sort of)

    - by Jim Duffy
    I just received my copy of the Microsoft Silverlight 4 Data and Services Cookbook, co-authored by fellow Microsoft Regional Director, Gill Cleeren, and at first glance I like what I see. I’ve always been a fan of the “cookbook” approach to technical books because they are problem/solution oriented. Often developers need solutions to solve specific questions like “how do I send email from within my .NET application” and so on, and yes, that was a blatant plug to my article explaining how to accomplish just that, but I digress. :-) I also enjoy the cookbook approach because you can just start flipping pages and randomly stop somewhere and see what nugget of information is staring up at you from the page. Anyway, what I like about this book is that it focuses on a specific area of Silverlight development, accessing data and services.  The book is broken down into the following chapters: Chapter 1: Learning the Nuts and Bolts of Silverlight 4 Chapter 2: An Introduction to Data Binding Chapter 3: Advanced Data Binding Chapter 4: The Data Grid Chapter 5: The DataForm Chapter 6: Talking to Services Chapter 7: Talking to WCF and ASMX Services Chapter 8: Talking to REST and WCF Data Services Chapter 9: Talking to WCF RIA Services Chapter 10: Converting Your Existing Applications to Use Silverlight As you can see this book is all about working with Silverlight 4 and data. I’m looking forward to taking a closer look at it. Have a day. :-|

    Read the article

  • How to plan/manage multi-platform (mobile) products?

    - by PhD
    Say I've to develop an app that runs on iOS, Android and Windows 8 Mobile. Now all three platforms are technically in different program languages. The only 'reuse' that I can see is that of the boxes-and-lines drawings (UML :) charts and nothing else. So how do companies/programmers manage the variation of the same product across different platforms especially since the implementation languages differ? It's 'easier' in the desktop world IMO given the plethora of languages and cross-platform libraries to make your life easier. Not so in the mobile world. More so, product line management principles don't seem to be all that applicable - what is same and variant doesn't really matter - the application is the same (conceptually) and the implementation is variant. Some difficulties that come to mind: Bug Fixing: Applications maybe designed in a similar manner but the bug identification and fixing would be radically different. A bug on iOS may/may-not be existent for that on Android. Or a bug fix approach on one platform may not be the same on another (unless it's a semantic bug like a!=b instead of a==b which would require the same 'approach' to fixing in essence Enhancements: Making a change on one platform would be radically different than on another Code-Design Divergence: They way the code is written/organized, the class structures etc., could be very different given the different implementation environments - leading to further reuse of the (above) UML models. There are of course many others - just keeping the development in sync and making sure all applications are up to the same version with the same set of features etc. Seems the effort is 3x that of a single application. So how exactly does one manage this nightmarish situation? Some thoughts: Split application to client/server to minimize the effect to client side only (not always doable) Use frameworks like Unity-3D that could take care of the cross-platform problem (mostly applicable to games and probably not to other applications etc.) Any other ways of managing a platform line? What are some proven approaches to managing/taming the effects?

    Read the article

  • Should I use a separate 'admin' user as my "root sudo" or grant sudo to my 'app' user?

    - by AJB
    I'm still wrapping my brain around the Ubuntu 'nullify root' user management philosophy (and Linux in general) and I'm wondering if I should 'replace' my root user with a user called 'admin' (which basically has all the powers of the root, when using sudo) and create another user called 'app' that will be the primary user for my app. Here's the context: I'll be running a LNMP stack on Ubuntu 12.04 Server LTS. There will be only one app running on the server. The 'app' user needs to have SUPER privileges for MySQL. PHP will need to be able to exec() shell commands. The 'app' user will need to be able to transfer files via SFTP. And I'm thinking this would be the best approach: nullify 'root' user create a user called 'admin' that will be a full sudoer of root, this will be the new "root" user of NGINX, PHP, and MySQL (and all system software) grant SUPER privileges to 'app' in MySQL Grant SFTP privileges to only the 'app' user. As I'm new to this, and the information I've found in researching it tends to be of a more general nature, I'm wondering if this is a solid approach, or if it's unorthodox in a way that would cause issues down the road. Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Unity gizmos vs. referenced game objects

    - by DuckMaestro
    I'm designing a Unity script that I intend to be highly reusable and as easy as possible to setup within the editor. To this end, a number of properties of this script really need some kind of visual representation on screen. It is an unresolved question to me whether the design of the script should require references to placeholder game objects, OR just Vector3's and float's that have associated gizmos drawn for them. Normally a gizmo would be a natural choice, except that Unity gizmos are not directly manipulable (as far as I can tell). Because of this shortcoming I'm having to consider whether depending on references to placeholder game objects is a more designer-friendly approach ultimately, in spite of the extra setup required, and that it might be counter-intuitive when the placeholder game objects disappear at run-time (which my script would do). Is there a community standard or preference here in this case? Can a Unity-experienced game programmer / designer speak to which approach they feel is more intuitive or more convenient to setup, when using a 3rd party script? Or is this just splitting hairs as long as I ship an example prefab with my script?

    Read the article

  • Is C# development effectively inseparable from the IDE you use?

    - by Ghopper21
    I'm a Python programmer learning C# who is trying to stop worrying and just love C# for what it is, rather than constantly comparing it back to Python. I'm really get caught up on one point: the lack of explicitness about where things are defined, as detailed in this Stack Overflow question. In short: in C#, using foo doesn't tell you what names from foo are being made available, which is analogous to from foo import * in Python -- a form that is discouraged within Python coding culture for being implicit rather than the more explicit approach of from foo import bar. I was rather struck by the Stack Overflow answers to this point from C# programmers, which was that in practice this lack of explicitness doesn't really matter because in your IDE (presumably Visual Studio) you can just hover over a name and be told by the system where the name is coming from. E.g.: Now, in theory I realise this means when you're looking with a text editor, you can't tell where the types come from in C#... but in practice, I don't find that to be a problem. How often are you actually looking at code and can't use Visual Studio? This is revelatory to me. Many Python programmers prefer a text editor approach to coding, using something like Sublime Text 2 or vim, where it's all about the code, plus command line tools and direct access and manipulation of folders and files. The idea of being dependent on an IDE to understand code at such a basic level seems anathema. It seems C# culture is radically different on this point. And I wonder if I just need to accept and embrace that as part of my learning of C#. Which leads me to my question here: is C# development effectively inseparable from the IDE you use?

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on Technical Opinions

    - by Joe Mayo
    Nearly every day, people send email from the C# Station contact form with feedback on the tutorial.  The overwhelming majority is positive and “Thank You” notes.  Some feedback identifies problems such as typos, grammatical errors, or a constructive explanation of an item that was confusing.  It’s pretty rare, but I even get emails that are not very nice at all – no big deal because it comes with the territory and is sometimes humorous.  Sometimes I get questions related to the content that is more of a general nature, referring to best practices or approaches. It’s these more general questions that are sometimes interesting because there’s often no right or wrong answer. There was a time when I was more opinionated about these general scenarios, but not so much anymore. Sure, people who are learning are wanting to know the “right” way to do something and general guidance is good to help them get started.  However, just because a certain practice is the way you or your clique does things, doesn’t mean that another approach is wrong.  These days, I think that a more open-minded approach when providing technical guidance is more constructive. By the way, to all the people who consistently send kind emails each day:  You’re very welcome. :) @JoeMayo

    Read the article

  • Structuring Access Control In Hierarchical Object Graph

    - by SB2055
    I have a Folder entity that can be Moderated by users. Folders can contain other folders. So I may have a structure like this: Folder 1 Folder 2 Folder 3 Folder 4 I have to decide how to implement Moderation for this entity. I've come up with two options: Option 1 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a moderator relationship between Folder 1 and User 1. No other relationships are added to the db. To determine if the user can moderate Folder 3, I check and see if User 1 is the moderator of any parent folders. This seems to alleviate some of the complexity of handling updates / moved entities / additions under Folder 1 after the relationship has been defined, and reverting the relationship means I only have to deal with one entity. Option 2 When the user is given moderation privileges to Folder 1, define a new relationship between User 1 and Folder 1, and all child entities down to the grandest of grandchildren when the relationship is created, and if it's ever removed, iterate back down the graph to remove the relationship. If I add something under Folder 2 after this relationship has been made, I just copy all Moderators into the new Entity. But when I need to show only the top-level Folders that a user is Moderating, I need to query all folders that have a parent folder that the user does not moderate, as opposed to option 1, where I just query any items that the user is moderating. Thoughts I think it comes down to determining if users will be querying for all parent items more than they'll be querying child items... if so, then option 1 seems better. But I'm not sure. Is either approach better than the other? Why? Or is there another approach that's better than both? I'm using Entity Framework in case it matters.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >