Search Results

Search found 11934 results on 478 pages for 'plugin architecture'.

Page 78/478 | < Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >

  • Implementing my Entity System. Questions about some problems I have found.

    - by Notbad
    Hi!, Well during this week I have deciding about implementation of my entity system. It is a big topic so it has been difficult to take one option from the whole. This has been my decision: 1) I don't have an entity class it is just an id. 2) I have systems that contain a list of components (the list is homegenous, I mean, RenderSystem will just have RenderComponents). 3) Compones will be just data. 4) There would be some kind of "entity prototypes" in a manager or something from we will create entity instances.Ideally they will define the type of components it has and initialization data. 5) Prototype code to create an entity (this is from the top of my head): int id=World::getInstance()->createEntity("entity template"); 6) This will notify all systems that a new entity has been created, and if the entity needs a component that the system handles it will add it to the entity. Ok, this are the ideas. Let's see if some can help with the problems: 1) The main problem is this templates that are sent to the systems in creation process to populate the entity with needed components. What would you use, an OR(ed) int?, a list of strings?. 2) How to do initialization for components when the entity has been created? How to store this in the template? I have thought about having a function in the template that is virtual and after entity is created an populated, gets the components and sets initialization values. 3) Don't you think this is a lot of work for just an entity creation?. Sorry for the long post, I have tried to expose my ideas and finding in order other could have a start beside exposing my problems. Thanks in advance, Notbad.

    Read the article

  • Looking for menu-driven coding platforms

    - by user2634047
    Can anyone point me to an application development environment that uses menu-driven coding? This would mean where commands, variable names, etc. are not keyed in, but rather are selected from a menu of context-specific options. For example, the user selects an If...then command from a menu of commands, and is then presented with a menu of variables to choose from for the the 'if' conditions(s) (or creates new variable(s) on the fly via the menu), and is then presented with a menu of applicable functions that are applicable to the selected variable (e.g., val()), and so on until the If...then statement has been fully coded. The idea is that the user never types any portion of the code, but selects all code elements from a menu, or defines them on the fly via the menu. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Question on methods in Object Oriented Programming

    - by mal
    I’m learning Java at the minute (first language), and as a project I’m looking at developing a simple puzzle game. My question relates to the methods within a class. I have my Block type class; it has its many attributes, set methods, get methods and just plain methods. There are quite a few. Then I have my main board class. At the moment it does most of the logic, positioning of sprites collision detection and then draws the sprites etc... As I am learning to program as much as I’m learning to program games I’m curious to know how much code is typically acceptable within a given method. Is there such thing as having too many methods? All my draw functionality happens in one method, should I break this into a few ‘sub’ methods? My thinking is if I find at a later stage that the for loop I’m using to cycle through the array of sprites searching for collisions in the spriteCollision() method is inefficient I code a new method and just replace the old method calls with the new one, leaving the old code intact. Is it bad practice to have a method that contains one if statement, and place the call for that method in the for loop? I’m very much in the early stages of coding/designing and I need all the help I can get! I find it a little intimidating when people are talking about throwing together a prototype in a day too! Can’t wait until I’m that good!

    Read the article

  • De-facto standards for customer information record

    - by maasg
    I'm currently evaluating a potential new project that involves creating a DB for typical customer information (userid, pwd, first & last name, email, adress, telfnr ...). At this point, requirements are only roughly defined. The customer DB is expected in the O(millions) of records. In order to calculate some back-of-the-envelope numbers for DB sizing and evaluate potential DB options & architectures, I'm looking for some de-facto standards for these kind of records. In particular, the std size of every field (first name, last name, address,...) or typical avg for a simple customer record would be great info. With so many e-commerce websites out there, there should be some kind of typical config that can be reused and avoid re-inventing the wheel. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Component based design, but components rely on eatchother

    - by MintyAnt
    I've begun stabbing at a "Component Based" game system. Basically, each entity holds a list of components to update (and render) I inherit the "Component" class and break each game system into it. Examples: RenderComponent - Draws the entity MovementComponent - Moves the entity, deals with velocity and speed checks DamageComponent - Deals with how/if the entity gets damaged... So. My system has this: MovementComponent InputComponent Now maybe my design is off, but the InputComponent should say things like if (w key is down) add y speed to movement if (x key is down) Trigger primary attack This means that the InputComponent sort of relies on these other components. I have to do something alone the lines of: if (w key is down) { MovementComponent* entityMovement = mEntity->GetMovement(); if (entityMovement != NULL) add y speed to movement } which seems kinda crappy every update. Other options? Better design? Is this the best way? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Keeping a domain model consistent with actual data

    - by fstuijt
    Recently domain driven design got my attention, and while thinking about how this approach could help us I came across the following problem. In DDD the common approach is to retrieve entities (or better, aggregate roots) from a repository which acts as a in-memory collection of these entities. After these entities have been retrieved, they can be updated or deleted by the user, however after retrieval they are essentially disconnected from the data source and one must actively inform the repository to update the data source and make is consistent again with our in-memory representation. What is the DDD approach to retrieving entities that should remain connected to the data source? For example, in our situation we retrieve a series of sensors that have a specific measurement during retrieval. Over time, these measurement values may change and our business logic in the domain model should respond to these changes properly. E.g., domain events may be raised if a sensor value exceeds a predefined threshold. However, using the repository approach, these sensor values are just snapshots, and are disconnected from the data source. Does any of you have an idea on how to solve this following the DDD approach?

    Read the article

  • Looking for a 24 Hour project for multiple languages [closed]

    - by Daan Timmer
    Right two friends and I came up with this idea of having a 24h programming competition. Where we are going to meet at one place and program away for 24hours long. Though we need a 'project'. Something that needs to be made within 24h. Doesn't have to be a real thing, just a nice learning 'thing'. The rules that we setup for ourselves is that the project can be programmed in any language of our own choice. What I know is that one guy is a PHP enthousiastic, we've got a C#/.NET person. And I am quite easy in languages and speak quite a few (PHP/C#.net/C++STL/Python/JavaScript/Java). Anything really language specific is out of the question. Is there anyone who happens to have a great idea for this?

    Read the article

  • Service Layer - how broad should it be, and should it also be used from the local application?

    - by BornToCode
    The background: I need to build a desktop application with some operations (CRUD and more) (=winforms), I need to make another application which will re-use some of the functions of the main application (=webforms). I'm using service layer for reusing my functions. The service is calling the functions on the BL layer (correct me if I'm doing this wrong). so my desktop has 4 projects - DAL, BL, UI, WEBSERVICES. The dilemma (simple but I still need some more experienced opinions): In my main winform UI - should I call the functions from the BL - bl.getcustomers(), or do it similar to how I call it in the webform, and call the functions from the service - webservices.getcustomers? Should I create a service for every single function on the BL even if I need some of the functions only in one UI? for example - should I create services for all the CRUD operations, even though I need to re-use only update operation in the webform? YOUR HELP IS MUCH APPRECIATED

    Read the article

  • How can I cleanly and elegantly handle data and dependancies between classes

    - by Neophyte
    I'm working on 2d topdown game in SFML 2, and need to find an elegant way in which everything will work and fit together. Allow me to explain. I have a number of classes that inherit from an abstract base that provides a draw method and an update method to all the classes. In the game loop, I call update and then draw on each class, I imagine this is a pretty common approach. I have classes for tiles, collisions, the player and a resource manager that contains all the tiles/images/textures. Due to the way input works in SFML I decided to have each class handle input (if required) in its update call. Up until now I have been passing in dependencies as needed, for example, in the player class when a movement key is pressed, I call a method on the collision class to check if the position the player wants to move to will be a collision, and only move the player if there is no collision. This works fine for the most part, but I believe it can be done better, I'm just not sure how. I now have more complex things I need to implement, eg: a player is able to walk up to an object on the ground, press a key to pick it up/loot it and it will then show up in inventory. This means that a few things need to happen: Check if the player is in range of a lootable item on keypress, else do not proceed. Find the item. Update the sprite texture on the item from its default texture to a "looted" texture. Update the collision for the item: it might have changed shape or been removed completely. Inventory needs to be updated with the added item. How do I make everything communicate? With my current system I will end up with my classes going out of scope, and method calls to each other all over the place. I could tie up all the classes in one big manager and give each one a reference to the parent manager class, but this seems only slightly better. Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated! If anything is unclear, I'm happy to expand on things.

    Read the article

  • Business Forces: SOA Adoption

    The only constant in today’s business environment is change. Businesses that continuously foresee change and adapt quickly will gain market share and increased growth. In our ever growing global business environment change is driven by data in regards to collecting, maintaining, verifying and distributing data.  Companies today are made and broken over data. Would anyone still use Google if they did not have one of the most accurate search indexes on the internet? No, because their value is in their data and the quality of their data. Due to the increasing focus on data, companies have been adopting new methodologies for gaining more control over their data while attempting to reduce the costs of maintaining it. In addition, companies are also trying to reduce the time it takes to analyze data in regards to various market forces to foresee changes prior to them actually occurring.   Benefits of Adopting SOA Services can be maintained separately from other services and applications so that a change in one service will only affect itself and client services or applications. The advent of services allows for system functionality to be distributed across a network or multiple networks. The costs associated with maintain business functionality is much higher in standard application development over SOA due to the fact that one Services can be maintained and shared to other applications instead of multiple instances of business functionality being duplicated via hard coding in to several applications. When multiple applications use a single service for a specific business function then the all of the data being processed will be consistent in terms of quality and accuracy through the applications. Disadvantages of Adopting SOA Increased initial costs and timelines are associated with SOA due to the fact that services need to be created as well as applications need to be modified to call the services In order for an SOA project to be successful the project must obtain company and management support in order to gain the proper exposure, funding, and attention. If SOA is new to a company they must also support the proper training in order for the project to be designed, and implemented correctly. References: Tews, R. (2007). Beyond IT: Exploring the Business Value of SOA. SOA Magazine Issue XI.

    Read the article

  • Are separate business objects needed when persistent data can be stored in a usable format?

    - by Kylotan
    I have a system where data is stored in a persistent store and read by a server application. Some of this data is only ever seen by the server, but some of it is passed through unaltered to clients. So, there is a big temptation to persist data - whether whole rows/documents or individual fields/sub-documents - in the exact form that the client can use (eg. JSON), as this removes various layers of boilerplate, whether in the form of procedural SQL, an ORM, or any proxy structure which exists just to hold the values before having to re-encode them into a client-suitable form. This form can usually be used on the server too, though business logic may have to live outside of the object, On the other hand, this approach ends up leaking implementation details everywhere. 9 times out of 10 I'm happy just to read a JSON structure out of the DB and send it to the client, but 1 in every 10 times I have to know the details of that implicit structure (and be able to refactor access to it if the stored data ever changes). And this makes me think that maybe I should be pulling this data into separate business objects, so that business logic doesn't have to change when the data schema does. (Though you could argue this just moves the problem rather than solves it.) There is a complicating factor in that our data schema is constantly changing rapidly, to the point where we dropped our previous ORM/RDBMS system in favour of MongoDB and an implicit schema which was much easier to work with. So far I've not decided whether the rapid schema changes make me wish for separate business objects (so that server-side calculations need less refactoring, since all changes are restricted to the persistence layer) or for no separate business objects (because every change to the schema requires the business objects to change to stay in sync, even if the new sub-object or field is never used on the server except to pass verbatim to a client). So my question is whether it is sensible to store objects in the form they are usually going to be used, or if it's better to copy them into intermediate business objects to insulate both sides from each other (even when that isn't strictly necessary)? And I'd like to hear from anybody else who has had experience of a similar situation, perhaps choosing to persist XML or JSON instead of having an explicit schema which has to be assembled into a client format each time.

    Read the article

  • Tester/Doer pattern: Assume the caller conforms to the pattern or be defensive and repeat the check?

    - by Daniel Hilgarth
    Assume a simple class that implements the Tester/Doer pattern: public class FooCommandHandler : ICommandHandler { public bool CanHandle(object command) { return command is FooCommand; } public void Handle(object command) { var fooCommand = (FooCommand)command; // Do something with fooCommand } } Now, if someone doesn't conform to the pattern and calls Handle without verifying the command via CanHandle, the code in Handle throws an exception. However, depending on the actual implementation of Handle this can be a whole range of different exceptions. The following implementation would check CanHandle again in Handle and throw a descriptive exception: public void Handle(object command) { if(!CanHandle(command)) throw new TesterDoerPatternUsageViolationException("Please call CanHandle first"); // actual implementation of handling the command. } This has the advantage that the exception is very descriptive. It has the disadvantage that CanHandle is called twice for "good" clients. Is there a consensus on which variation should be used?

    Read the article

  • Circular class dependency

    - by shad0w
    Is it bad design to have 2 classes which need each other? I'm writing a small game in which I have a GameEngine class which has got a few GameState objects. To access several rendering methods, these GameState objects also need to know the GameEngine class - so it's a circular dependency. Would you call this bad design? I am just asking, because I am not quite sure and at this time I am still able to refactor these things.

    Read the article

  • How far do I take Composition?

    - by whiterook6
    (Although I'm sure this is a common problem I really don't know what to search for. Composition is the only thing I could come up with.) I've read over and over that multiple inheritance and subclassing is really, really bad, especially for game entities. If I have three types of motions, five types of guns, and three types of armoring, I don't want to have to make 45 different classes to get all the possible combinations; I'm going to add a motion behavior, gun behavior, and armor behavior to a single generic object. That makes sense. But how far do I take this? I can have as many different types of behaviors as I can imagine: DamageBehavior, MotionBehavior, TargetableBehavior, etc. If I add a new class of behaviors then I need to update all the other classes that use them. But what happens when I have functionality that doesn't really fit into one class of behaviors? For example, my armor needs to be damageable but also updateable. And should I be able to have use more than one type of behavior on an entity at a time, such as two motion behaviors? Can anyone offer any wisdom or point me in the direction of some useful articles? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Game State / Screen Management

    - by Ashylnn Mac
    What's the best way to handle game states / screens? My problem is this: PlayGameScreen adds a new InventoryGameScreen to the game during it's update. This immediately adds InventoryGameScreen to the array of GameScreens. That's throwing an exception when iterating over the array that the contents of the array have changed. Should I have two more arrays, like screensToBeAdded and screensToBeRemoved and do all the processing for them at the end of the game loop after drawing all the other screens?

    Read the article

  • Share text message on selected media

    - by Siddharth
    I want to share text data on player selected social media. Basically I want to implement functionality like following link represent for android. Send Text Content I want to give user a choice for sharing on Twitter, Facebook, Messaging, Gmail etc. Above link give proper guidance for my question. Here is code that work on android Intent sendIntent = new Intent(); sendIntent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_SEND); sendIntent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_TEXT, "This is my text to send."); sendIntent.setType("text/plain"); startActivity(sendIntent);Intent sendIntent = new Intent(); sendIntent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_SEND); sendIntent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_TEXT, "This is my text to send."); sendIntent.setType("text/plain"); startActivity(sendIntent); I don't know same functionality implementation in Unity. Basically at present I am targeting two platform for my game Android iOS I found answer for Android platform but I can't able to get answer of iOS platform. Share text message on selected media - Unity Forum Now I think my question is clear to all of you. So please help me to solve it.

    Read the article

  • Learning how to design knowledge and data flow [closed]

    - by max
    In designing software, I spend a lot of time deciding how the knowledge (algorithms / business logic) and data should be allocated between different entities; that is, which object should know what. I am asking for advice about books, articles, presentations, classes, or other resources that would help me learn how to do it better. I code primarily in Python, but my question is not really language-specific; even if some of the insights I learn don't work in Python, that's fine. I'll give a couple examples to clarify what I mean. Example 1 I want to perform some computation. As a user, I will need to provide parameters to do the computation. I can have all those parameters sent to the "main" object, which then uses them to create other objects as needed. Or I can create one "main" object, as well as several additional objects; the additional objects would then be sent to the "main" object as parameters. What factors should I consider to make this choice? Example 2 Let's say I have a few objects of type A that can perform a certain computation. The main computation often involves using an object of type B that performs some interim computation. I can either "teach" A instances what exact parameters to pass to B instances (i.e., make B "dumb"); or I can "teach" B instances to figure out what needs to be done when looking at an A instance (i.e., make B "smart"). What should I think about when I'm making this choice?

    Read the article

  • Restructuring a large Chrome Extension/WebApp

    - by A.M.K
    I have a very complex Chrome Extension that has gotten too large to maintain in its current format. I'd like to restructure it, but I'm 15 and this is the first webapp or extension of it's type I've built so I have no idea how to do it. TL;DR: I have a large/complex webapp I'd like to restructure and I don't know how to do it. Should I follow my current restructure plan (below)? Does that sound like a good starting point, or is there a different approach that I'm missing? Should I not do any of the things I listed? While it isn't relevant to the question, the actual code is on Github and the extension is on the webstore. The basic structure is as follows: index.html <html> <head> <link href="css/style.css" rel="stylesheet" /> <!-- This holds the main app styles --> <link href="css/widgets.css" rel="stylesheet" /> <!-- And this one holds widget styles --> </head> <body class="unloaded"> <!-- Low-level base elements are "hardcoded" here, the unloaded class is used for transitions and is removed on load. i.e: --> <div class="tab-container" tabindex="-1"> <!-- Tab nav --> </div> <!-- Templates for all parts of the application and widgets are stored as elements here. I plan on changing these to <script> elements during the restructure since <template>'s need valid HTML. --> <template id="template.toolbar"> <!-- Template content --> </template> <!-- Templates end --> <!-- Plugins --> <script type="text/javascript" src="js/plugins.js"></script> <!-- This contains the code for all widgets, I plan on moving this online and downloading as necessary soon. --> <script type="text/javascript" src="js/widgets.js"></script> <!-- This contains the main application JS. --> <script type="text/javascript" src="js/script.js"></script> </body> </html> widgets.js (initLog || (window.initLog = [])).push([new Date().getTime(), "A log is kept during page load so performance can be analyzed and errors pinpointed"]); // Widgets are stored in an object and extended (with jQuery, but I'll probably switch to underscore if using Backbone) as necessary var Widgets = { 1: { // Widget ID, this is set here so widgets can be retreived by ID id: 1, // Widget ID again, this is used after the widget object is duplicated and detached size: 3, // Default size, medium in this case order: 1, // Order shown in "store" name: "Weather", // Widget name interval: 300000, // Refresh interval nicename: "weather", // HTML and JS safe widget name sizes: ["tiny", "small", "medium"], // Available widget sizes desc: "Short widget description", settings: [ { // Widget setting specifications stored as an array of objects. These are used to dynamically generate widget setting popups. type: "list", nicename: "location", label: "Location(s)", placeholder: "Enter a location and press Enter" } ], config: { // Widget settings as stored in the tabs object (see script.js for storage information) size: "medium", location: ["San Francisco, CA"] }, data: {}, // Cached widget data stored locally, this lets it work offline customFunc: function(cb) {}, // Widgets can optionally define custom functions in any part of their object refresh: function() {}, // This fetches data from the web and caches it locally in data, then calls render. It gets called after the page is loaded for faster loads render: function() {} // This renders the widget only using information from data, it's called on page load. } }; script.js (initLog || (window.initLog = [])).push([new Date().getTime(), "These are also at the end of every file"]); // Plugins, extends and globals go here. i.e. Number.prototype.pad = .... var iChrome = function(refresh) { // The main iChrome init, called with refresh when refreshing to not re-run libs iChrome.Status.log("Starting page generation"); // From now on iChrome.Status.log is defined, it's used in place of the initLog iChrome.CSS(); // Dynamically generate CSS based on settings iChrome.Tabs(); // This takes the tabs stored in the storage (see fetching below) and renders all columns and widgets as necessary iChrome.Status.log("Tabs rendered"); // These will be omitted further along in this excerpt, but they're used everywhere // Checks for justInstalled => show getting started are run here /* The main init runs the bare minimum required to display the page, this sets all non-visible or instantly need things (such as widget dragging) on a timeout */ iChrome.deferredTimeout = setTimeout(function() { iChrome.deferred(refresh); // Pass refresh along, see above }, 200); }; iChrome.deferred = function(refresh) {}; // This calls modules one after the next in the appropriate order to finish rendering the page iChrome.Search = function() {}; // Modules have a base init function and are camel-cased and capitalized iChrome.Search.submit = function(val) {}; // Methods within modules are camel-cased and not capitalized /* Extension storage is async and fetched at the beginning of plugins.js, it's then stored in a variable that iChrome.Storage processes. The fetcher checks to see if processStorage is defined, if it is it gets called, otherwise settings are left in iChromeConfig */ var processStorage = function() { iChrome.Storage(function() { iChrome.Templates(); // Templates are read from their elements and held in a cache iChrome(); // Init is called }); }; if (typeof iChromeConfig == "object") { processStorage(); } Objectives of the restructure Memory usage: Chrome apparently has a memory leak in extensions, they're trying to fix it but memory still keeps on getting increased every time the page is loaded. The app also uses a lot on its own. Code readability: At this point I can't follow what's being called in the code. While rewriting the code I plan on properly commenting everything. Module interdependence: Right now modules call each other a lot, AFAIK that's not good at all since any change you make to one module could affect countless others. Fault tolerance: There's very little fault tolerance or error handling right now. If a widget is causing the rest of the page to stop rendering the user should at least be able to remove it. Speed is currently not an issue and I'd like to keep it that way. How I think I should do it The restructure should be done using Backbone.js and events that call modules (i.e. on storage.loaded = init). Modules should each go in their own file, I'm thinking there should be a set of core files that all modules can rely on and call directly and everything else should be event based. Widget structure should be kept largely the same, but maybe they should also be split into their own files. AFAIK you can't load all templates in a folder, therefore they need to stay inline. Grunt should be used to merge all modules, plugins and widgets into one file. Templates should also all be precompiled. Question: Should I follow my current restructure plan? Does that sound like a good starting point, or is there a different approach that I'm missing? Should I not do any of the things I listed? Do applications written with Backbone tend to be more intensive (memory and speed) than ones written in Vanilla JS? Also, can I expect to improve this with a proper restructure or is my current code about as good as can be expected?

    Read the article

  • PHP - Internal APIs/Libraries - What makes sense?

    - by Mark Locker
    I've been having a discussion lately with some colleagues about the best way to approach a new project, and thought it'd be interesting to get some external thoughts thrown into the mix. Basically, we're redeveloping a fairly large site (written in PHP) and have differing opinions on how the platform should be setup. Requirements: The platform will need to support multiple internal websites, as well as external (non-PHP) projects which at the moment consist of a mobile app and a toolbar. We have no plans/need in the foreseeable future to open up an API externally (for use in products other than our own). My opinion: We should have a library of well documented native model classes which can be shared between projects. These models will represent everything in our database and can take advantage of object orientated features such as inheritance, traits, magic methods, etc. etc. As well as employing ORM. We can then add an API layer on top of these models which can basically accept requests and route them to the appropriate methods, translating the response so that it can be used platform independently. This routing for each method can be setup as and when it's required. Their opinion: We should have a single HTTP API which is used by all projects (internal PHP ones or otherwise). My thoughts: To me, there are a number of issues with using the sole HTTP API approach: It will be very expensive performance wise. One page request will result in several additional http requests (which although local, are still ones that Apache will need to handle). You'll lose all of the best features PHP has for OO development. From simple inheritance, to employing the likes of ORM which can save you writing a lot of code. For internal projects, the actual process makes me cringe. To get a users name, for example, a request would go out of our box, over the LAN, back in, then run through a script which calls a method, JSON encodes the output and feeds that back. That would then need to be JSON decoded, and be presented as an array ready to use. Working with arrays, as appose to objects, makes me sad in a modern PHP framework. Their thoughts (and my responses): Having one method of doing thing keeps things simple. - You'd only do things differently if you were using a different language anyway. It will become robust. - Seeing as the API will run off the library of models, I think my option would be just as robust. What do you think? I'd be really interested to hear the thoughts of others on this, especially as opinions on both sides are not founded on any past experience.

    Read the article

  • Advice and resources on collaborative environments

    - by Tjaart
    I need some advice on collaborative software environments. More specifically, I am looking for books and reference materials that can aid me in understanding team and code structures and the interactions thereof. In other words books, blogs or white papers explaining: Different strategies for structuring teams that share common code between each other but have distinct individual functions? To summarise my question I would like to know what would be a good source of knowledge if I were to set up teams in an organisation that shared code but each unit still remained autonomous. I have done some research on this subject and explored: code review tools, distributed VCS, continuous integration tools, Unit testing automation. The tough part about implementing these tools are to determine where a good place would be to start, which tools are low hanging fruit, which tools or methods provide higher success rates. If someone asks me about code quality reference I point them to Code Complete. I am looking for an equivalent guide on software team structures and tools to make this equation work better. I realise that this question is quite vague but it arose as "we need to share code between teams without breaking each others stuff and causing management headaches and reams of red tape" The answer is definitely not simple and requires changes on many levels, hence the question. If the question is too vague please vote to close or delete. I would accept any good starting point as an answer.

    Read the article

  • Which version management design methodology to be used in a Dependent System nodes?

    - by actiononmail
    This is my first question so please indicate if my question is too vague and not understandable. My question is more related to High Level Design. We have a system (specifically an ATCA Chassis) configured in a Star Topology, having Master Node (MN) and other sub-ordinate nodes(SN). All nodes are connected via Ethernet and shall run on Linux OS with other proprietary applications. I have to build a recovery Framework Design so that any software entity, whether its Linux, Ramdisk or application can be rollback to previous good versions if something bad happens. Thus I think of maintaining a State Version Matrix over MN, where each State(1,2....n) represents Good Kernel, Ramdisk and application versions for each SN. It may happen that one SN version can dependent on other SN's version. Please see following diagram:- So I am in dilemma whether to use Package Management Methodology used by Debian Distributions (Like Ubuntu) or GIT repository methodology; in order to do a Rollback to previous good versions on either one SN or on all the dependent SNs. The method should also be easier for upgrading SNs along with MNs. Some of the features which I am trying to achieve:- 1) Upgrade of even single software entity is achievable without hindering others. 2) Dependency checks must be done before applying rollback or upgrade on each of the SN 3) User Prompt should be given in case dependency fails.If User still go for rollback, all the SNs should get notification to rollback there own releases (if required). 4) The binaries should be distributed on SNs accordingly so that recovery process is faster; rather fetching every time from MN. 5) Release Patches from developer for bug fixes, feature enhancement can be applied on running system. 6) Each version can be easily tracked and distinguishable. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Creating an Interface To a Language's Standard Library?

    - by Nathan Arthur
    In the process of learning test-driven development, I've been introduced to dependency injection and the use of interfaces, and have started using these concepts in my own PHP code in order to make it more testable. There have been times when I've needed to test code that was doing things like calling the PHP time() function. In order to make these tests predictable, it seemed logical to create an interface to the standard PHP functions I use so that I can mock them out in my tests. Is this good software design? What are the pros and cons of doing this? I've found myself groaning at how quickly my PHP interface can stick its fingers into everything I do. Is there a better way to make code that relies on PHP-accessed state and functions more testable?

    Read the article

  • How do I implement input and movement with characters that get into vehicles?

    - by Xkynar
    I'm making a game similar to GTA2. When the player enters the vehicle, what happens in terms of logic? Does the player becomes the vehicle? Does the vehicle override the player movement? The main question is how should it look at a vehicle? I want to understand if the player becomes the car or if the player has a "motion state" like "driving, walking, flying" depending on what he is doing in a moment, I know there are tons of ways to implement vehicles in a game.

    Read the article

  • Custom .NET apps and clustering

    - by Ahmed ilyas
    So for a clustered environment - how would this work with your apps? what about your own custom .NET apps? Would there be a special way to develop them? I know that you can say create a simple Hello world app, and cluster that but they wouldnt be something you could see interms of the UI or anything, so they would effectively need to be developed as a Windows Service perhaps or even as a standard Console app which runs and not wait for user input but you wouldnt see any output from it (unless you redirect output to somewhere else) What im getting at here is... for those who have experience or developed a cluster application in .NET, how did you do it and what are the things to be aware of? For example we have the cloud service - fundamentally its built on clustering - if there is an outage, another node takes place and service is resumed as normal but we dont really see much of that downtime.

    Read the article

  • Java game design question (graphical objects)

    - by vemalsar
    Hello Guys, I'm beginner in game development, in Java and here on this site too and I have a game design question. Please comment my idea: I have a main loop which call update and draw method. I want to use an ArrayList which store graphical objects, they have coordinate and image or text to draw and my game objects extends this class. In update, I can choose which objects should be put in the array and in draw method I'll display the elements of array on the screen. I'm using a buffer and draw first there, but it is not important now I guess...Here is a simple (not full) code, only the logic: public class GamePanel extends JPanel implements KeyListener { ArrayList<graphicalObjects> graphArray = new ArrayList<graphicalObjects>(); public void update() { //change the game scene, update the graphArray, process input etc. } public void draw() { //draws every element of graphArray to a JPanel } public static main(String[] args) { while(true) { update(); draw(); } } } My questions: Should have I use interface or abstract class for graphicalObjects? graphicalObjects class and the ArrayList really needs or there is some better solution? How to draw objects? They draw themself with their own method or in the draw method I have to draw manually based on graphicalObjects variables (x,y coordinates, image etc.)? If this conception is wrong, please suggest another one! All comments are welcome and sorry if this is dumb question, thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85  | Next Page >