Search Results

Search found 69357 results on 2775 pages for 'data oriented design'.

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 131/2775 | < Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >

  • Tips On Opting Affordable Web Design Solution

    More importantly the small business owners would find it highly comforting if one can find a proficient web designer with professional experience who charges reasonably or is affordable because affor... [Author: Alan Smith - Web Design and Development - April 08, 2010]

    Read the article

  • A programming language that does not allow IO. Haskell is not a pure language

    - by TheIronKnuckle
    (I asked this on Stack Overflow and it got closed as off-topic, I was a bit confused until I read the FAQ, which discouraged subjective theoratical debate style questions. The FAQ here doesn't seem to have a problem with it and it sounds like this is a more appropriate place to post. If this gets closed again, forgive me, I'm not trying to troll) Are there any 100% pure languages (as I describe in the Stack Overflow post) out there already and if so, could they feasibly be used to actually do stuff? i.e. do they have an implementation? I'm not looking for raw maths on paper/Pure lambda calculus. However Pure lambda calculus with a compiler or a runtime system attached is something I'd be interested in hearing about.

    Read the article

  • Web Design Services For Your Business

    A basic requirement for an Internet marketer is a Website; and two fundamental questions related to it at the outset are whether to take on the designing of your website yourself or hire a firm for t... [Author: Mike Smith - Web Design and Development - April 02, 2010]

    Read the article

  • How to recover data from NTFS partition that was made into a Swap partition?

    - by Raghav Mehta
    I have extremely important stuff on my windows partition which during the ubuntu 10.10 installation,when it said that I should create something called swap space, I selected it to be a swap space (without even knowing what it actually meant) The Grub2 doesn't show up so I don't get a choice to boot Ubuntu or Windows. I don't get my windows partition as a removable device in Ubuntu either. When I go to disk utility and select the sda2 (i.e.. my windows partition) and click edit partition and select HPFS/NTFS for the type and tick bootable and click OK the small processing sign keep on rotating on the bottom right of the sda2 in the chart and after about 10 to 15 minutes it gives an unknown error and thus, I am still unable to use my windows. I am even worse than a beginner who doesn't know a thing about Ubuntu so please be patient and help me out.

    Read the article

  • Does using structure data semantic LocalBusiness schema markup work for local EMD URL's?

    - by ElHaix
    Based on what I have read about Google's recent Panda and Penguin updates, I'm getting the impression that using semantic markup may help improve SEO results. On a EMD (exact match domain) site, that may have been hit, we list location-based products. We are now going to be adding a itemtype="http://schema.org/Product" to each product, with relevant details. However, that product may be available in Los Angeles and also in appear in a Seattle results page. We could add a LocalBusiness item type on each geo page to define the geo location for that page. While the definition states: A particular physical business or branch of an organization. Examples of LocalBusiness include a restaurant, a particular branch of a restaurant chain, a branch of a bank, a medical practice, a club, a bowling alley, etc. We could add use the location property which would simply include the city/state details. I realize that this looks like it is meant for a physical location, however could this be done without seeming black-hat?

    Read the article

  • Learning PHP OOP

    - by Ryan Murphy
    I have been coding PHP for about 2 years now and I THINK that I have a very good grasps of the fundamental parts of PHP, i.e. Functions foreach/IF statements sessions/cookies POST/GET Amongst a few others. I want to move on to learning OOP PHP now, so learning how to use classes and making it a really valuable skill. I have 1 requirement, the source must be a respected source that doesn't teach developers bad habits. I have the book: PHP and MySQL Web Development However, as useful as that is I would like an online source. I would like to know from people with experience in OOP PHP, how and where did they learn OOP PHP. Obviously by doing, but I would really appreciate some great resources which help me along the way.

    Read the article

  • When to decide to introduce interfaces (pure abstract base classes) in C++?

    - by Honza Brabec
    Assume that you are developing a functionality and are 90% sure that the implementation class will stay alone. If I was in this position in Java I would probably not use the interface right now to keep the things simple. In Java it is easy to refactor the code and extract the interface later. In C++ the refactoring is not always so easy. It may require replacing values with smart pointers (because of the introduction of polymorphism) and other non-trivial tasks. On the other hand I don't much like the idea of introducing virtual calls when I am 90% sure they won't be needed. After all speed is one of the reasons to prefer C++ over simpler languages.

    Read the article

  • When to use identity comparison instead of equals?

    - by maaartinus
    I wonder why would anybody want to use identity comparison for fields in equals, like here (Java syntax): class C { private A a; public boolean equals(Object other) { // standard boring prelude if (other==this) return true; if (other==null) return false; if (other.getClass() != this.getClass()) return false; C c = (C) other; // the relevant part if (c.a != this.a) return false; // more tests... and then return true; } // getter, setters, hashCode, ... } Using == is a bit faster than equals and a bit shorter (due to no need for null tests), too, but in what cases (if any) you'd say it's really better to use == for fields inside equals?

    Read the article

  • Metaobject protocol:Why is it known as an important concept

    - by sushant
    Metaobject protocol is protocol for metaobjects in a programming languages. Although I understand it on simple terms, I want to know the reason and a summary of real world usage patterns of this protocol. So, why exactly is metaobject and more importantly metaobject protocol is such a good idea. I want to know the problem which led to its evolution and also, its high power usage. Opinions as well as general overview/description/alternate explanations are also welcome.

    Read the article

  • Inheritance vs composition in this example

    - by Gerenuk
    I'm wondering about the differences between inheritance and composition examined with concrete code relevant arguments. In particular my example was Inheritance: class Do: def do(self): self.doA() self.doB() def doA(self): pass def doB(self): pass class MyDo(Do): def doA(self): print("A") def doB(self): print("B") x=MyDo() vs Composition: class Do: def __init__(self, a, b): self.a=a self.b=b def do(self): self.a.do() self.b.do() x=Do(DoA(), DoB()) (Note for composition I'm missing code so it's not actually shorter) Can you name particular advantages of one or the other? I'm think of: composition is useful if you plan to reuse DoA() in another context inheritance seems easier; no additional references/variables/initialization method doA can access internal variable (be it a good or bad thing :) ) inheritance groups logic A and B together; even though you could equally introduce a grouped delegate object inheritance provides a preset class for the users; with composition you'd have to encapsule the initialization in a factory so that the user does have to assemble the logic and the skeleton ... Basically I'd like to examine the implications of inheritance vs composition. I heard often composition is prefered, but I'd like to understand that by example. Of course I can always start with one and refactor later to the other.

    Read the article

  • Database ERD design: 2 types user in one table

    - by Giskin Leow
    I have read this (Database design: 3 types of users, separate or one table?) I decided to put admin and normal user in one table since the attributes are similar: fullname, address, phone, email, gender ... Then I want to draw ERD, suddenly my mind pop out a question. How to draw? Customer make appointment and admin approve appointment. now only two tables, and admin, customer in same table. Help.

    Read the article

  • EMEA Analytics & Data Integration Oracle Partner Forum

    - by Mike.Hallett(at)Oracle-BI&EPM
    MONDAY 12TH NOVEMBER, 2012 IN LONDON (UK) For Oracle Partners across Europe, Middle East and Africa: come to hear the latest news from Oracle OpenWorld about Oracle BI & Data Integration, and propel your business growth as an Oracle partner. This event should appeal to BI or Data Integration specialised partners, Executives, Sales, Pre-sales and Solution architects: with a choice of participation in the plenary day and then a set of special interest (technical) sessions. The follow on breakout sessions from the 13th November provide deeper dives and technical training for those of you who wish to stay for more detailed and hands-on workshops. Keynote: Andrew Sutherland, SVP Oracle Technology Hot agenda items will include: The Fusion Middleware Stack: Engineered to work together A complete Analytics and Data Integration Solution Architecture: Big Data and Little Data combined In-Memory Analytics for Extreme Insight Latest Product Development Roadmap for Data Integration and Analytics Venue:  Oracles London CITY Moorgate Offices Places are limited, Register from this Link {see Register button at bottom right of page}. Note: Registration for the conference and the deeper dives and technical training is free of charge to OPN member Partners, but you will be responsible for your own travel and hotel expenses. Event Schedule During this event you can learn about partner success stories, participate in an array of break-out sessions, exchange information with other partners and enjoy a vibrant panel discussion. Nov. 12th  : Day 1 Main Plenary Session : Full day, starting 10.30 am.     Oracle Hosted Dinner in the Evening Nov. 13th  onwards Architecture Masterclass : IM Reference Architecture – Big Data and Little Data combined (1 day) BI-Apps Bootcamp  (4-days) Oracle GoldenGate workshop (1 day) Oracle Data Integrator and Oracle Enterprise Data Quality workshop (1 day)   For further information and detail download the Agenda (pdf) or contact Michael Hallett at [email protected].

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection: Only for single-instance objects?

    - by HappyDeveloper
    What if I want to also decouple my application, from classes like Product or User? (which usually have more than one instance) Take a look at this example: class Controller { public function someAction() { $product_1 = new Product(); $product_2 = new Product(); // do something with the products } } Is it right to say that Controller now depends on Product? I was thinking that we could decouple them too (as we would with single-instance objects like Database) In this example, however ugly, they are decoupled: class Controller { public function someAction(ProductInterface $new_product) { $product_1 = clone $new_product; $product_2 = clone $new_product; // do something with the products } } Has anyone done something like this before? Is it excessive?

    Read the article

  • Why to say, my function is of IFly type rather than saying it's Airplane type

    - by Vishwas Gagrani
    Say, I have two classes: Airplane and Bird, both of them fly. Both implement the interface IFly. IFly declares a function StartFlying(). Thus both Airplane and Bird have to define the function, and use it as per their requirement. Now when I make a manual for class reference, what should I write for the function StartFlying? 1) StartFlying is a function of type IFly . 2) StartFlying is a function of type Airplane 3) StartFlying is a function of type Bird. My opinion is 2 and 3 are more informative. But what i see is that class references use the 1st one. They say what interface the function is declared in. Problem is, I really don't get any usable information from knowing StartFlying is IFly type. However, knowing that StartFlying is a function inside Airplane and Bird, is more informative, as I can decide which instance (Airplane or Bird ) to use. Any lights on this: how saying StartFlying is a function of type IFly, can help a programmer understanding how to use the function?

    Read the article

  • Packages organisation with MVC design pattern

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

    Read the article

  • Using dot To Access Object Attribute and Proper abstraction

    - by cobie
    I have been programming in python and java for quite a number of years and one thing i find myself doing is using the setters and getters from java in python but a number of blogs seem to think using the dot notation for access is the pythonic way. What I would like to know is if using dot to access methods does not violate abstraction principle. If for example I implement an attribute as a single object and use dot notation to access, if I wanted to change the code later so that the attribute is represented by a list of objects, that would require quite some heavy lifting which violates abstraction principle.

    Read the article

  • Super constructor must be a first statement in Java constructor [closed]

    - by Val
    I know the answer: "we need rules to prevent shooting into your own foot". Ok, I make millions of programming mistakes every day. To be prevented, we need one simple rule: prohibit all JLS and do not use Java. If we explain everything by "not shooting your foot", this is reasonable. But there is not much reason is such reason. When I programmed in Delphy, I always wanted the compiler to check me if I read uninitializable. I have discovered myself that is is stupid to read uncertain variable because it leads unpredictable result and is errorenous obviously. By just looking at the code I could see if there is an error. I wished if compiler could do this job. It is also a reliable signal of programming error if function does not return any value. But I never wanted it do enforce me the super constructor first. Why? You say that constructors just initialize fields. Super fields are derived; extra fields are introduced. From the goal point of view, it does not matter in which order you initialize the variables. I have studied parallel architectures and can say that all the fields can even be assigned in parallel... What? Do you want to use the unitialized fields? Stupid people always want to take away our freedoms and break the JLS rules the God gives to us! Please, policeman, take away that person! Where do I say so? I'm just saying only about initializing/assigning, not using the fields. Java compiler already defends me from the mistake of accessing notinitialized. Some cases sneak but this example shows how this stupid rule does not save us from the read-accessing incompletely initialized in construction: public class BadSuper { String field; public String toString() { return "field = " + field; } public BadSuper(String val) { field = val; // yea, superfirst does not protect from accessing // inconstructed subclass fields. Subclass constr // must be called before super()! System.err.println(this); } } public class BadPost extends BadSuper { Object o; public BadPost(Object o) { super("str"); this. o = o; } public String toString() { // superconstructor will boom here, because o is not initialized! return super.toString() + ", obj = " + o.toString(); } public static void main(String[] args) { new BadSuper("test 1"); new BadPost(new Object()); } } It shows that actually, subfields have to be inilialized before the supreclass! Meantime, java requirement "saves" us from writing specializing the class by specializing what the super constructor argument is, public class MyKryo extends Kryo { class MyClassResolver extends DefaultClassResolver { public Registration register(Registration registration) { System.out.println(MyKryo.this.getDepth()); return super.register(registration); } } MyKryo() { // cannot instantiate MyClassResolver in super super(new MyClassResolver(), new MapReferenceResolver()); } } Try to make it compilable. It is always pain. Especially, when you cannot assign the argument later. Initialization order is not important for initialization in general. I could understand that you should not use super methods before initializing super. But, the requirement for super to be the first statement is different. It only saves you from the code that does useful things simply. I do not see how this adds safety. Actually, safety is degraded because we need to use ugly workarounds. Doing post-initialization, outside the constructors also degrades safety (otherwise, why do we need constructors?) and defeats the java final safety reenforcer. To conclude Reading not initialized is a bug. Initialization order is not important from the computer science point of view. Doing initalization or computations in different order is not a bug. Reenforcing read-access to not initialized is good but compilers fail to detect all such bugs Making super the first does not solve the problem as it "Prevents" shooting into right things but not into the foot It requires to invent workarounds, where, because of complexity of analysis, it is easier to shoot into the foot doing post-initialization outside the constructors degrades safety (otherwise, why do we need constructors?) and that degrade safety by defeating final access modifier When there was java forum alive, java bigots attecked me for these thoughts. Particularly, they dislaked that fields can be initialized in parallel, saying that natural development ensures correctness. When I replied that you could use an advanced engineering to create a human right away, without "developing" any ape first, and it still be an ape, they stopped to listen me. Cos modern technology cannot afford it. Ok, Take something simpler. How do you produce a Renault? Should you construct an Automobile first? No, you start by producing a Renault and, once completed, you'll see that this is an automobile. So, the requirement to produce fields in "natural order" is unnatural. In case of alarmclock or armchair, which are still chair and clock, you may need first develop the base (clock and chair) and then add extra. So, I can have examples where superfields must be initialized first and, oppositely, when they need to be initialized later. The order does not exist in advance. So, the compiler cannot be aware of the proper order. Only programmer/constructor knows is. Compiler should not take more responsibility and enforce the wrong order onto programmer. Saying that I cannot initialize some fields because I did not ininialized the others is like "you cannot initialize the thing because it is not initialized". This is a kind of argument we have. So, to conclude once more, the feature that "protects" me from doing things in simple and right way in order to enforce something that does not add noticeably to the bug elimination at that is a strongly negative thing and it pisses me off, altogether with the all the arguments to support it I've seen so far. It is "a conceptual question about software development" Should there be the requirement to call super() first or not. I do not know. If you do or have an idea, you have place to answer. I think that I have provided enough arguments against this feature. Lets appreciate the ones who benefit form it. Let it just be something more than simple abstract and stupid "write your own language" or "protection" kind of argument. Why do we need it in the language that I am going to develop?

    Read the article

  • 5 Key Factors That Make Your Logo Design Great

    Everything your business stands for can simply be conveyed by your company logo. It';s basically the visual representation of your unique selling proposition, key benefits, and products or services of... [Author: Leo Blanco - Web Design and Development - April 03, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Logo Design ? Stand out or Mingle

    When it comes to common small businesses in industries such as restaurants or grocery stores, finding a unique idea for a logo could be difficult. A designer might feel that all the good ideas are al... [Author: Claudia Winifred - Web Design and Development - April 02, 2010]

    Read the article

  • What's the equivalent name of "procedure" in OOP?

    - by AeroCross
    In several of my programming courses in the University, my teachers always told me the following: A function and a procedure are basically the same thing: the only difference is that a function returns a value, and the procedure doesn't. That means that this: function sum($a, $b) { return $a + $b; } ... is a function, and this: function sum($a, $b) { echo $a + $b; } ... is a procedure. In the same train of thought, I've seen that a method is the equivalent of a function in the OOP world. That means that this: class Example { function sum($a, $b) { return $a + $b; } } Is a method — but how do you call this? class Example { function sum($a, $b) { echo $a + $b; } } What's the equivalent name, or how do you call a method that doesn't returns anything?

    Read the article

  • Free Logos Vs Custom Logo Design

    Web is full of all kind of free stuff, the quality and usefulness of this free stuff is debatable. But there is no doubt that there is a huge demand of free stuff on the web. Marketing is a limitless... [Author: Claudia Winifred - Web Design and Development - March 20, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Should I use an interface when methods are only similar?

    - by Joshua Harris
    I was posed with the idea of creating an object that checks if a point will collide with a line: public class PointAndLineSegmentCollisionDetector { public void Collides(Point p, LineSegment s) { // ... } } This made me think that if I decided to create a Box object, then I would need a PointAndBoxCollisionDetector and a LineSegmentAndBoxCollisionDetector. I might even realize that I should have a BoxAndBoxCollisionDetector and a LineSegmentAndLineSegmentCollisionDetector. And, when I add new objects that can collide I would need to add even more of these. But, they all have a Collides method, so everything I learned about abstraction is telling me, "Make an interface." public interface CollisionDetector { public void Collides(Spatial s1, Spatial s2); } But now I have a function that only detects some abstract class or interface that is used by Point, LineSegment, Box, etc.. So if I did this then each implementation would have to to a type check to make sure that the types are the appropriate type because the collision algorithm is different for each different type match up. Another solution could be this: public class CollisionDetector { public void Collides(Point p, LineSegment s) { ... } public void Collides(LineSegment s, Box b) { ... } public void Collides(Point p, Box b) { ... } // ... } But, this could end up being a huge class that seems unwieldy, although it would have simplicity in that it is only a bunch of Collide methods. This is similar to C#'s Convert class. Which is nice because it is large, but it is simple to understand how it works. This seems to be the better solution, but I thought I should open it for discussion as a wiki to get other opinions.

    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 | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >