Search Results

Search found 56777 results on 2272 pages for 'system programming'.

Page 142/2272 | < Previous Page | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | Next Page >

  • Is Linq having a mind-numbing effect on .NET programmers?

    - by Aaronaught
    A lot of us started seeing this phenomenon with jQuery about a year ago when people started asking how to do absolutely insane things like retrieve the query string with jQuery. The difference between the library (jQuery) and the language (JavaScript) is apparently lost on many programmers, and results in a lot of inappropriate, convoluted code being written where it is not necessary. Maybe it's just my imagination, but I swear I'm starting to see an uptick in the number of questions where people are asking to do similarly insane things with Linq, like find ranges in a sorted array. I can't get over how thoroughly inappropriate the Linq extensions are for solving that problem, but more importantly the fact that the author just assumed that the ideal solution would involve Linq without actually thinking about it (as far as I can tell). It seems that we are repeating history, breeding a new generation of .NET programmers who can't tell the difference between the language (C#/VB.NET) and the library (Linq). What is responsible for this phenomenon? Is it just hype? Magpie tendencies? Has Linq picked up a reputation as a form of magic, where instead of actually writing code you just have to utter the right incantation? I'm hardly satisfied with those explanations but I can't really think of anything else. More importantly, is it really a problem, and if so, what's the best way to help enlighten these people?

    Read the article

  • Naming: objectAction or actionObject?

    - by DocSalvage
    The question, Stored procedure Naming conventions?, and Joel's excellent Making Wrong Code Look Wrong article come closest to addressing my question, but I'm looking for a more general set of criteria to use in deciding how to name modules containing code (classes, objects, methods, functions, widgets, or whatever). English (my only human language) is structured as action-object (i.e closeFile, openFile, saveFile) and since almost all computer languages are based on English, this is the most common convention. However, in trying to keep related code close together and still be able to find things, I've found object-action (i.e. fileClose, fileOpen, fileSave) to be very attractive. Quite a number of non-English human languages follow this structure as well. I doubt that one form is universally superior, but when should each be used in the pursuit of helping to make sure bad code looks bad?

    Read the article

  • Is reference to bug/issue in commit message considered good practice?

    - by Christian P
    I'm working on a project where we have the source control set up to automatically write notes in the bug tracker. We simply write the bug issue ID in the commit message and the commit message is added as a note to the bug tracker. I can see only a few downsides for this practice. If sometime in the future the source code gets separated from the bug tracking software (or the reported bugs/issues are somehow lost). Or when someone is looking in the history of commits but doesn't have access to our bug tracker. My question is if having a bug/issue reference in the commit message is considered good practice? Are there some other downsides?

    Read the article

  • Exploring your database schema with SQL

    In the second part of Phil's series of articles on finding stuff (such as objects, scripts, entities, metadata) in SQL Server, he offers some scripts that should be handy for the developer faced with tracking down problem areas and potential weaknesses in a database.

    Read the article

  • Why not have a High Level Language based OS? Are Low Level Languages more efficient?

    - by rtindru
    Without being presumptuous, I would like you to consider the possibility of this. Most OS today are based on pretty low level languages (mainly C/C++) Even the new ones such as Android uses JNI & underlying implementation is in C In fact, (this is a personal observation) many programs written in C run a lot faster than their high level counterparts (eg: Transmission (a bittorrent client on Ubuntu) is a whole lot faster than Vuze(Java) or Deluge(Python)). Even python compilers are written in C, although PyPy is an exception. So is there a particular reason for this? Why is it that all our so called "High Level Languages" with the great "OOP" concepts can't be used in making a solid OS? So I have 2 questions basically. Why are applications written in low level languages more efficient than their HLL counterparts? Do low level languages perform better for the simple reason that they are low level and are translated to machine code easier? Why do we not have a full fledged OS based entirely on a High Level Language?

    Read the article

  • Creating an expandable, cross-platform compatible program "core".

    - by Thomas Clayson
    Hi there. Basically the brief is relatively simple. We need to create a program core. An engine that will power all sorts of programs with a large number of distinct potential applications and deployments. The core will be an analytics and algorithmic processor which will essentially take user-specific input and output scenarios based on the information it gets, whilst recording this information for reporting. It needs to be cross platform compatible. Something that can have platform specific layers put on top which can interface with the core. It also needs to be able to be expandable, for instance, modular with developers being able to write "add-ons" or "extensions" which can alter the function of the end program and can use the core to its full extent. (For instance, a good example of what I'm looking to create is a browser. It has its main core, the web-kit engine, for instance, and then on top of this is has a platform-specific GUI and can also have add-ons and extensions which can change the behavior of the program.) Our problem is that the extensions need to interface directly with the main core and expand/alter that functionality rather than the platform specific "layer". So, given that I have no experience in this whatsoever (I have a PHP background and recently objective-c), where should I start, and is there any knowledge/wisdom you can impart on me please? Thanks for all the help and advice you can give me. :) If you need any more explanation just ask. At the moment its in the very early stages of development, so we're just researching all possible routes of development. Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • Someone tell me why people writing GNU code use { like that?

    - by Deus Deceit
    I saw the rules on how to type code for UNITY project or GNU software in general. Why do they write code in such an ugly form? Is there a particular reason why they don't put brackets the way (from what I know) most people do? Why like this: for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) { //do something } and not like this: for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) { //Do something } or this: for(i = 0; i < 5l i++) { //Do Something } ???

    Read the article

  • Grading an algorithm: Readability vs. Compactness

    - by amiregelz
    Consider the following question in a test \ interview: Implement the strcpy() function in C: void strcpy(char *destination, char *source); The strcpy function copies the C string pointed by source into the array pointed by destination, including the terminating null character. Assume that the size of the array pointed by destination is long enough to contain the same C string as source, and does not overlap in memory with source. Say you were the tester, how would you grade the following answers to this question? 1) void strcpy(char *destination, char *source) { while (*source != '\0') { *destination = *source; source++; destionation++; } *destionation = *source; } 2) void strcpy(char *destination, char *source) { while (*(destination++) = *(source++)) ; } The first implementation is straightforward - it is readable and programmer-friendly. The second implementation is shorter (one line of code) but less programmer-friendly; it's not so easy to understand the way this code is working, and if you're not familiar with the priorities in this code then it's a problem. I'm wondering if the first answer would show more complexity and more advanced thinking, in the tester's eyes, even though both algorithms behave the same, and although code readability is considered to be more important than code compactness. It seems to me that since making an algorithm this compact is more difficult to implement, it will show a higher level of thinking as an answer in a test. However, it is also possible that a tester would consider the first answer not good because it's not readable. I would also like to mention that this is not specific to this example, but general for code readability vs. compactness when implementing an algorithm, specifically in tests \ interviews.

    Read the article

  • Is it good to review programs with seniors and boss even if it is working fine?

    - by Himanshu
    In my company, before delivery of any project, my boss asks my seniors to review programs written by me or other team members or sometimes boss also sits with us for review. I think it is a good way of getting knowledge, but sometimes when programs are working fine, they don't work same after review and I need to look again into my program. They says that review helps to optimize program and query execution, but can we prefer optimization over actual functioning of program?

    Read the article

  • Why are people using C instead of C++? [closed]

    - by Darth
    Possible Duplicate: When to use C over C++, and C++ over C? Many times I've stumbled upon people saying that C++ is not always better than C. Great example here would be the Linux kernel, where they simply decided to use C instead of C++ because it had better compilers at the time. But that's many years ago and a lot has changed. So the question is, why are people still using C over C++? I gues there are probably some cases (like embedded devices), where there simply isn't a good C++ compiler, or am I wrong here? What are the other cases when it is better to go with C instead of C++?

    Read the article

  • Cloud Computing - just get started already!

    - by BuckWoody
    OK - you've been hearing about "cloud" (I really dislike that term, but whatever) for over two years. You've equated it with just throwing some VM's in some vendor's datacenter - which is certainly part of it, but not the whole story. There's a whole world of - wait for it - *coding* out there that you should be working on. If you're a developer, this is just a set of servers with operating systems and the runtime layer (like.NET, Java, PHP, etc.) that you can deploy code to and have it run. It can expand in a horizontal way, allowing massive - and I really, honestly mean massive, not just marketing talk kind of scale. We see this every day. If you're not a developer, well, now's the time to learn. Explore a little. Try it. We'll help you. There's a free conference you can attend in November, and you can sign up for it now. It's all on-line, and the tools you need to code are free. Put down Facebook and Twitter for a minute - go sign up. Learn. Do. :) See you there. http://www.windowsazureconf.net/

    Read the article

  • What's a nice explanation for pointers?

    - by Macneil
    In your own studies (on your own, or for a class) did you have an "ah ha" moment when you finally, really understood pointers? Do you have an explanation you use for beginner programmers that seems particularly effective? For example, when beginners first encounter pointers in C, they might just add &s and *s until it compiles (as I myself once did). Maybe it was a picture, or a really well motivated example, that made pointers "click" for you or your student. What was it, and what did you try before that didn't seem to work? Were any topics prerequisites (e.g. structs, or arrays)? In other words, what was necessary to understand the meaning of &s and *, when you could use them with confidence? Learning the syntax and terminology or the use cases isn't enough, at some point the idea needs to be internalized. Update: I really like the answers so far; please keep them coming. There are a lot of great perspectives here, but I think many are good explanations/slogans for ourselves after we've internalized the concept. I'm looking for the detailed contexts and circumstances when it dawned on you. For example: I only somewhat understood pointers syntactically in C. I heard two of my friends explaining pointers to another friend, who asked why a struct was passed with a pointer. The first friend talked about how it needed to be referenced and modified, but it was just a short comment from the other friend where it hit me: "It's also more efficient." Passing 4 bytes instead of 16 bytes was the final conceptual shift I needed.

    Read the article

  • What attracts software developers such as yourselves to choose to program for the Android mobile platform?

    - by Hasnan Karim
    Dear programmers, as part of my final year university project, I am conducting research into what makes programmers prefer to program for Android as opposed to other mobile operating systems. The description does not need to be detailed however, I am trying to find patterns between programmers to determine what properties (other than money) a software company such as Android must have in order to attract programmers and therefore grow.

    Read the article

  • How to handle compensation issue

    - by Ali
    I consider myself an expert Software Developer. Recently, I noticed my current company posted a new job through a recruting firm requiring half experience than I have and even lesser set of skills. However, they are offering the same salary as my current salary. When I joined my current company a year ago, they declined to pay my asking salary. My evaluations are good and there are critical projects in the pipeline where my involvement is crucial for their success. I'm little confused on how to handle this situation. I don't want to come across threatning or any thing like that.

    Read the article

  • Is the copy/paste approach professionally viable when working with the Google Maps API?

    - by Ian Campbell
    I find that I understand much of the Javascript concepts used in the Google Maps API code, but then again there is quite a bit that is way over my head in syntax. For example, the geocoder syntax seems to be of Ajax form, though I don't understand what is happening under the hood (especially with lines like results[0].geometry.location). I am able to modify the body of if (status == google.maps.GeocoderStatus.OK) for different purposes though. So, being that I am able to take various code from the Developer's Guide and rework it to an extent for my own purposes, all the while not fully understanding what Google Maps is actually doing, does this make me a copy-paste programmer? Is this a bad practice, or is this professionally viable? I am, of course, interested in learning as much as I can, but what if time-constraints outweigh the learning process?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to procedurally generate the history of a world?

    - by pdusen
    I am somewhat intrigued by the diagram found here representing 1800 years of cultural history in an imaginary world some guy created. This sort of thing would seem to have strong applications for game development, insofar as world design. It looks like he did this diagram by hand. What I'm interested in is seeing if there is a way to create this sort of diagram programatically. If you were tasked with generating diagrams in the style of the above from random values, how would you go about it? Are there any particular data structures or algorithms that you would consider?

    Read the article

  • Question about separating game core engine from game graphics engine...

    - by Conrad Clark
    Suppose I have a SquareObject class, which implements IDrawable, an interface which contains the method void Draw(). I want to separate drawing logic itself from the game core engine. My main idea is to create a static class which is responsible to dispatch actions to the graphic engine. public static class DrawDispatcher<T> { private static Action<T> DrawAction = new Action<T>((ObjectToDraw)=>{}); public static void SetDrawAction(Action<T> action) { DrawAction = action; } public static void Dispatch(this T Obj) { DrawAction(Obj); } } public static class Extensions { public static void DispatchDraw<T>(this object Obj) { DrawDispatcher<T>.DispatchDraw((T)Obj); } } Then, on the core side: public class SquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<SquareObject>(); } #endregion } And on the graphics side: public static class SquareRender{ //stuff here public static void Initialize(){ DrawDispatcher<SquareObject>.SetDrawAction((Square)=>{//my square rendering logic}); } } Do this "pattern" follow best practices? And a plus, I could easily change the render scheme of each object by changing the DispatchDraw parameter, as in: public class SuperSquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<SquareObject>(); } #endregion } public class RedSquareObject: GameObject, IDrawable { #region Interface public void Draw() { this.DispatchDraw<RedSquareObject>(); } #endregion } RedSquareObject would have its own render method, but SuperSquareObject would render as a normal SquareObject I'm just asking because i do not want to reinvent the wheel, and there may be a design pattern similar (and better) to this that I may be not acknowledged of. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Turning your code inside out (functional style) compared to a OO paradigm

    - by Acaz Souza
    I have find this article Turning Your Code Inside Out and I want to know how this approach described in article is for OO programmers/languages. Is this style of design used in OO programmers/languages? What's downsides and goodsides of this approach in a OO language? Update: OO objects have state and behavior, the design explained in article is stateless. Is not only Single Responsability Principle. (If I'm talking shit, please explain to me instead of only downside/close votes)

    Read the article

  • Default values - are they good or evil?

    - by Andrew
    The question about default values in general - default return function values, default parameter values, default logic for when something is missing, default logic for handling exceptions, default logic for handling the edge conditions etc. For a long time I considered default values to be a "pure evil" thing, something that "cloaks the catastrophe" and results in a very hard do find bugs. But recently I started to think about default values as some sort of a technical debt ... which is not a straight bad thing but something that could provide some "short term financing" get us to survive the project (how many of us could afford to buy a house without taking out the mortgage?). When I say a "short term" - I don't mean - "do something quickly first and do refactor it out later before it hits the production". No - I am talking about relying on a hardcoded default values in a production software. Granted - it could cause some issues, but what if it only going to cause a single trouble in a whole year. Again - I am talking about the "average" mainstream software here (not a software for a nuclear power station) - the average web site or a UI application for the accounting software, meaning that people lives are not at stake, nor millions of dollars. Again, from my experience, business users would rather live with the software which "works somehow", rather then wait for a perfect one. And the use of default values helps a lot if you develop a software in a RAD style. But again - the longest debug sessions I have spent were because of the bugs introduced by a default value which either stopped being "a default" along the way or because a small subsystem has recently been upgraded and as a result of this upgrade it does not handle the default correctly (e.g. empty list vs null, or null string vs empty string). So my question is - are the default values good or evil. And if they are a technical debt - how do measure up how much you can borrow so you can afford the repayments? Would really appreciate any input. Cheers. EDIT: If I am using the default values as a way to cut the corners during the development - and if the corners cutting results in a bugs and issues - what is the methodology to recover from these issues?

    Read the article

  • What is the meaning of 'high cohesion'?

    - by Max
    I am a student who recently joined a software development company as an intern. Back at the university, one of my professors used to say that we have to strive to achieve "Low coupling and high cohesion". I understand the meaning of low coupling. It means to keep the code of separate components separately, so that a change in one place does not break the code in another. But what is meant by high cohesion. If it means integrating the various pieces of the same component well with each other, I dont understand how that becomes advantageous. What is meant by high cohesion? Can an example be explained to understand its benefits?

    Read the article

  • Which is more important in a web application code promotion hierarchy? production environment to repo equivalence or unidirectional propagation?

    - by ghbarratt
    Lets say you have a code promotion hierarchy consisting of several environments, (the polar end) two of which are development (dev) and production (prod). Lets say you also have a web application where important (but not developer controlled) files are created (and perhaps altered) in the production environment. Lets say that you (or someone above you) decided that the files which are controlled/created/altered/deleted in the production environment needed to go into the repository. Which of the following two sets of practice / approaches do you find best: Committing these non-developed file modifications made in the production environment so that the repository reflects the production environment as closely and as often as possible. Generally ignoring the non-developed production environment alterations, placing confidence in backups to restore the production environment should it be harmed, and keeping a resolution to avoid pushing developments through the promotion hierarchy in the reverse direction (avoiding pushing from prod to dev), only committing the files found in the production environment if they were absolutely necessary in other environments for development. So, 1 or 2, and why? PS - I am currently slightly biased toward maintaining production environment to repository equivalence (option 1), but I keep an open mind and would accept an answer supporting either.

    Read the article

  • OpenGLES GLSL Shader attributes always bound to 0

    - by codemonkey
    So I have a very simple vertex shader as follows #version 120 attribute vec3 position; attribute vec3 inColor; uniform mat4 mvp; varying vec3 fragColor; void main(void){ fragColor = inColor; gl_Position = mvp * vec4(position, 1.0); } Which I load, as well as the fragment shader: #version 120 varying vec3 fragColor; void main(void) { gl_FragColor = vec4(fragColor,1.0); } Which I then load, compile, and link to my shader program. I check for link status using glGetProgramiv(shaderProgram, GL_LINK_STATUS, &shaderSuccess); which returns GL_TRUE so I think its ok. However, when I query the active attributes and uniforms using #ifdef DEBUG int totalAttributes = -1; glGetProgramiv(shaderProgram, GL_ACTIVE_ATTRIBUTES, &totalAttributes); for(int i=0; i<totalAttributes; ++i) { int name_len=-1, num=-1; GLenum type = GL_ZERO; char name[100]; glGetActiveAttrib(shaderProgram, GLuint(i), sizeof(name)-1, &name_len, &num, &type, name ); name[name_len] = 0; GLuint location = glGetAttribLocation(shaderProgram, name); fprintf(stderr, "Attribute %s is bound at %d\n", name, location); } int totalUniforms = -1; glGetProgramiv(shaderProgram, GL_ACTIVE_UNIFORMS, &totalUniforms); for(int i=0; i<totalUniforms; ++i) { int name_len=-1, num=-1; GLenum type = GL_ZERO; char name[100]; glGetActiveUniform(shaderProgram, GLuint(i), sizeof(name)-1, &name_len, &num, &type, name ); name[name_len] = 0; GLuint location = glGetUniformLocation(shaderProgram, name); fprintf(stderr, "Uniform %s is bound at %d\n", name, location); } #endif I get: Attribute inColor is bound at 0 Attribute position is bound at 1 Uniform mvp is bound at 0 Which leads to failure when trying to use the shader to render the objects. I have tried switching the order of declaration of position & inColor, but still, only position is bound with the other two giving 0 Can someone please explain why this is happening? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it a good pattern that no objects should know more than what it needs to know?

    - by Jim Thio
    I am implementing a viewController class. The view controller class got NSNotification when the Grabbing class start or finish updating. I have 2 choices. I can make the grabbing class to provide a public read only property so all other classes can know whether it is still uploading. Or I can let view Controller to listen to 2 different events. Start updating and finish updating events. The truth is the viewController do need to know whether the grabbing class is still updating or not at any other time. So I am thinking of creating 2 events would be a better way to go. Actually, what do you think?

    Read the article

  • Infix vs Prefix Notation - Which do you prefer?

    - by Jetti
    I have been learning Clojure and looking at Scheme and CL which introduced me to the world of prefix notation. At first I didn't like it but it is still starting to grow on me. To be honest though, there are still long calculations that are difficult for me to understand but I think that is an issue of me needing more exposure/practice and I'll get it. But that leads me to the question: Which type of notation do you prefer and why?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149  | Next Page >