Can someone please give a comparison between meteor-simple-schema and meteor-astronomy (pros and cons as well please) and advise on which one is better to use with the Mantra architecture?
The creator of Simple Schema has said that if Astronomy existed when he created Simple Schema, he would not have.
From practical experience, Astronomy is miles ahead of Simple Schema and I use it with all my projects. I don't know about the Mantra architecture but a casual review confirms Astronomy would work, and well.
Related
I've been programming in Delphi with Midas/DataSnap for quite long time and quite happy with it. Moving to .NET I'm more than happy with the ADO.NET DataSet. For CRUD application, I'm highly uncomfortable with any kind of ORM. Generic data-structure with automatic diff/delta handling get my job done better for me, an average database application developer.
Tried to study Java years ago, and could not find similar idea implemented. The closest I could find is SDO (Service Data Object). I thought it should be widely adopted when I saw it, but I'm wrong. Even the spec is rather old now, I still hardly find many people discuss on it or use it extensively. Assuming from information I can find on the internet, SDO usage is highly passive.
Wondering if it's dying ? Any experience in SDO you want to share ? Manual DTO coding is always better ?
Ok. I see. The answer is "no"
;)
Same for me when trying SDO first time. Old specs, passive feedback... Definitely NO.
I wouldn't recommend using SDO unless it's imposed on you by some other part of the project.
WebSphere process server uses SDO. It's not really a bad API once you learn it. But the spec and the documentation are vague. It doesn't spell out what happens if you ask for a field that doesn't exist, or whether it does type conversions while getting or setting fields, to name two gripes.
I don't think the API defines how to define new types, so that part will be implementation-specific. Type definitions are based on XSD, so you'll be working with those and all of the associated standards.
As others have implied, the API isn't widely used. This means it'll be hard to find people experienced with it, or help using it.
It's very easy to explain NoSQL from high level view - it is basically "key-value" storage. Of course with thousand minor and important things, but in general it's just key value storage.
What's the best way to explain Hadoop and Map/Reduce?
May be some "real world" example which can be easy to give an compare for even newbies? Thanks!
I recently found this great article describing Map Reduce :
I’ve been planning on writing about
the Google’s MapReduce algorithm for
some time but I couldn’t find a good
practical example. Then we had a
Northwest C++ Users Group presentation
by Steve Yegge and a followup
discussion and beers, and I had a
little epiphany. Steve was talking
about, among other things, the build
process. And that’s just a bunch of
algorithms that are perfect for
explaining MapReduce.
The code examples are in C++, but the content is really language agnostic.
Here's a great tutorial on map/reduce in general, explaining the background, basics and data flow. I'm finding it useful to explain Google's App Engine implementation as well.
http://developer.yahoo.com/hadoop/tutorial/module4.html
jQuery+jQueryUI vs Yahoo UI..Which is the best UI to use in asp.net web applications?
I think your question is a little open-ended to be answered in a single answer.
I think in this case the answer must be there are horses-for-courses. By that I mean you need to choose the right technology to suit the problem you are trying to solve.
You have not provided us with enough information to make a critical judgment on your needs. All you have asked is which is better and the answer is neither. They both fit a need. They overlap in a great many places but each also has it's own unique advantages.
So I guess you need to either provide us with more information on what problem you are trying to solve or gain an in-depth understanding of both technologies to see which best fits your solution. It may be that you need both or you may decide to role your own.
If you have a particular issue then please create a new question with the particulars and perhaps someone will be better placed in giving you an answer.
However, having said all that, I'm a huge fan of jQuery. It's easy to use and lightweight. I can very quickly and easily write my own plugins and there is a great community out there sharing their own plugins.
I can't speak for the Yahoo UI as I haven't used it in quite some time and at the moment when I begin a new project I instantly reach for jQuery. But that's my own personal, and possibly subjective, choice.
There seems to be quite a bit of folklore knowledge floating about in restricted circles about the pitfalls of hash-consing combined with marshalling-unmarshalling of data. I am looking for citable references to these tidbits.
For instance, someone once pointed me to library aterm and mentioned that the authors had clearly thought about this and that the representation on disk was bottom-up (children of a node come before the node itself in the data stream). This is indeed the right way to do things when you need to re-share each node (with a possible identical node already in memory). This re-sharing pass needs to be done bottom-up, so the unmarshalling itself might as well be, too, so that it's possible to do everything in a single pass.
I am in the process of describing difficulties encountered in our own context, and the solutions we found. I would appreciate any citable reference to the kind of aforementioned folklore knowledge. Some people obviously have encountered the problems before (the aterm library is only one example). But I didn't find anything in writing. Even the little piece of information I have about aterm is hear-say. I am not worried it's not reliable (you can't make this up), but "personal communication" and "look how it's done in the source code" are considered poor form in citations.
I have enough references on hash-consing alone. I am only interested in references where it interferes with other aspects of programming, such as marshalling or distribution.
OK, this is not much more use, but Andrew Kennedy wrote a functional pearl called simply Pickling Combinators, which appears in the Journal of Functional Programming, (2004), 14:6:727-739. There is extensive discussion of structure sharing and how it is handled in pickles, but no direct discussion of how this problem might relate to hash-consing in the implementation of the language. But the article does discuss structure sharing in memory as well as in a pickle, so I hope it is better than nothing.
Martin Elsman had a follow-on paper in 2005 in Trends in Functional Programming; the title is Type-specialized serialization with sharing. The article deals primarily with hash-consing by the unpickler (deserializer), not with hash-consing in the impelementation, but again it may be worth something.
The JFP paper is proprietary, but there appears to be a preprint on Andrew's web page.
Elsman's paper appears to be available through Google Scholar at http://tinyurl.com/yd5tw2b.
(In a previous life, I worked on a project to create ASCII pickles that people could read and edit. I stupidly failed to publish it, but I have retained an interest.)
I found one reference on marshalling in functional languages; not sure if it will be useful, but the authors are smart: http://tinyurl.com/yc3hob9
I believe that Matthias Blume and/or Andrew Appel did something on this, but I can't find the paper. I also believe I reviewed something once for the Journal of Functional Programming, but I can't remember if the paper was accepted or who wrote it.
I suggest you ask Matthias Blume, Andrew Appel, and Phil Wadler if they can help.
Coq V5.10 had hash-consing and marshaling/unmarshaling. I didn't find anything in published form but the unmarshaling steps would be referenced as "reinterning" in the source code. Coq unmarhsaled values and then traversed them in order to re-create sharing, the obvious and only solution when all the language provides is an unmarshal function of type int_channel -> 'a.
Are there any real world applications written in the Clean programming language? Either open source or proprietary.
This is not a direct answer, but when I checked last time (and I find the language very interesting) I didn't find anything ready for real-world.
The idealist in myself always wants to try out new languagages, very hot on my list (apart from the aforementioned very cool Clean Language) is currently (random order) IO, Fan and Scala...
But in the meantime I then get my pragmatism out and check the Tiobe Index. I know you can discuss it, but still: It tells me what I will be able to use in a year from now and what I possibly won't be able to use...
No pun intended!
I am using Clean together with the iTasks library to build websites quite easy around workflows.
But I guess another problem with Clean is the lack of documentation and examples: "the Clean book" is from quite a few years back, and a lot of new features don't get documented except for the papers they publish.
http://clean.cs.ru.nl/Projects page doesn't look promising :) It looks like just another research project with no real-world use to date.
As one of my professors at college has been involved in the creation of Clean, it was no shock he'd created a real world application. The rostering-program of our university was created entirely in Clean.
The Clean IDE and the Clean compiler are written in Clean. (http://wiki.clean.cs.ru.nl/Download_Clean)
Cloogle, a search engine for Clean libraries, syntax, etc. (like Hoogle for Haskell) is written in Clean. Its source is on Radboud University's GitLab instance (web frontend; engine).