DOCSLIB.ORG

Copyrighted Material

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Index Abstract data type(s), 4, 72, 86, 223, Ancestor class, 245. See also Object- 244 oriented programming abstract operations, 4, 7, 244 ANTLR, 215, 265, 267, 268 encapsulation of concrete Applet, 44, 255 representation, 4 Argument consistency checking, Abstraction layer, 51 153–154 Abstract Windowing Toolkit (AWT), ArgumentException, 137–139 255 Aspect(s), 2, 55–56 Adaptive programming, 71. See also classes (in LOOM.NET), 81 DemeterJ cross-language interoperability, ADJ group, 211, 224 84 ADO.NET, 33, 242, 251 generic, 90 Advice, 56–58 implementation language, 60 custom attributes (in LOOM.NET), in Aspect.NET, 88–90 81 action(s), 89 Agile programming, 202–203, 205–206 condition(s), 89 eXtreme Programming (XP), 202, after, 95, 100, 116 205, 228,COPYRIGHTED 236 MATERIALbefore, 91, 110, 116 relation to AOP, 205–206, 208 instead, 100, 116 Scrum, 202–203 data, 89, 100, 105 AJAX, 250, 251, 258, 259 header, 91 Algebraic specifi cation methods, 226 module(s), 89, 92, 93, 98, 105, 109, ALGOL 5, 246, 248 114 ALPHARD, 224, 244 name, 88, 111, 115 Using Aspect-Oriented Programming for Trustworthy Software Development, By Vladimir O. Safonov Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 329 330 INDEX representing by custom attributes, staticinitialization, 69 92–94 privileged aspects, 68 (weaving) rule(s), 89, 93–94, 109, 117 thisJoinPoint, 67, 68 issues of introducing specifi cation Aspect-oriented modeling, 275 features into implementation Aspect-oriented programming (AOP), language 2, 270, 275 conceptual confusion, 60, 68, 75 adequacy for trustworthy computing, dependence on one’s own specifi c 2 tools for extended language annotations, support, 61 language neutral, 95, 96 diffi cult integration with common applying for use tools and IDE, 61 argument consistency checking, 153, locating, 57 156 mining, 7, 29–30, 61–62, 65, 89–90, business integrity, 29–30 165. See also Aspectizing design by contract, 129, 168–183 using lexical structure of the source error handling, 129, 136–142 code formal specifi cation and verifi cation, using types defi ned in the 164–165 application, 62 logging, 157–161 reusability, 54 multithreading and multicore-based specifi cation language, 60–61 applications, 145–149 Synchronization, 90–92 privacy, 25, 149–153 updating, 20 profi ling, 161–164 AspectDNG, 80–81 reliability, 27, 153–157 Aspectizing, 89–90, 94, 98, 165 security, 22, 132–136 AspectJ, x, 66–71 synchronization, 142–145 advice declarations, 67 framework, requirements to, 90 advices, kinds of generic nature, 85 after, 68–69 issues around, 68–69 “blind” weaving, 98 before, 68–69 conceptual confusion, 75 ant tasks support, 67 effi ciency, 63 aspect browser (ajbrowser), 67 losing aspect confi guration aspect defi nitions, 67 information, 75–76 alternative form using annotations, recipes of growing AOP popularity, 69 63 compiler (ajc), 66 security, 63 development tools (AJDT), 66 semantic gap between the sources documentation utility (ajdoc), 66 and the application code after integration with AspectWerkz, 69 weaving, 75 intertype declarations, 67 metalanguage, 88–90, 92, 93, 95, 96, language, 66–67, 69 98, 99, 101, 102, 104, 106, 107, load-time weaver, 67 108, 114. See also AOP named pointcut defi nitions, 67 specifi cation language pointcuts, types of perspectives, 123 call, 69 increasing application in the execution, 69 industry, 123 handler, 69 integration to knowledge initialization, 69 engineering, 124 set, 69 ubiquitous use, 124 INDEX 331 “pitfalls,” 8, 73, 75–76 framework, 61, 85, 92, 97, 99, 103, 104, recipes of trustworthy applying for 106, 107, 122, 125, 127, 128, trustworthy computing, 130, 135, 139, 167, 186, 187, 189, 130–132 204 avoid weaving conditions with Aspects tab, 111, 113, 135, 188 intersection of scopes, 131 Find joinpoints button, 111, 135 browsing and deselecting join points options, 113–114 if appropriate before weaving, selection and deselection of join 130 points before weaving, 130, 167, capturing join point context, 131 186, 188, 204, 207 making the weaving conditions as Weave aspects button, 135, 158, 188 narrow as possible, 130 join point(s), 140, 167 relation to knowledge management, 9, call, 91, 100, 102, 109, 110, 116, 117, 95, 97 120, 121, 125, 126 scope of applying, 62 context capturing, 114, 118–120 secure tools of, 63 performance assessment, 184–187, specifi cation language, 193–202. See also effi ciency complicated, as an AOP issue, 87 assessment language-agnostic, 87 perspectives, 125–127 tools aspect debugger, 126 requirements summary, 90 aspectizer, 127 for .Java, summary, 78 aspect repository, 127 for .NET, summary, 84 aspect script actions, 126 ubiquity, 85 %assign and %use join points, 126 Aspect#, 80–81 displaying changes in the source Aspect.NET, 8–9, 20, 22, 33, 36, 40–41, code, 126 46, 49–50, 57–64, 66–67, 74, 76, generic aspects, 90–92, 126 79–80, 83, 85, 88–92, 94, 96– join point fi lters using attributes to 99, 101–145, 158, 163–165, 167– mark entities, 125–126 170, 178, 183–191, 193–194, productization, 125 196–202, 204, 206–207, 210, rule sets, 126 214, 217, 220, 225, 238, 251, TargetMemberInfo feature, 104, 109, 270–271 110, 116, 119, 122, 158 aspect(s) version 1.0, 103, 114 self-documenting, 120. See also version 1.1, 103, 114 AspectDescription version 2.0, 104 Aspect class, when using customs version 2.1, 91, 102–105, 114, 117, 118, attribute directly, 120–121 119, 122, 136, 164, 190 AspectDotNet namespace, 94, 110, porting from Aspect.NET 1.0 or 1.1, 158, 171, 174 104 attributes for representing aspects weaver, 59, 105–106, 111–114, 117–118, AspectAction (version 2.1), 120–121, 122, 140, 189, 198 158 scanning phase, 105 AspectDef (version 1.0), 114 weaving phase, 105 AspectDescription (version 2.1), 110, Aspect.NET.ML, 88, 99, 104, 114–120, 114, 120–122 126, 127, 129, 134, 158 convenience features, summary, 206 keyword(s) converter (preprocessor), 120 args, 116 effi ciency assessment, 193–202. See aspect, 99, 109, 114–115 also performance assessment modules, 115 332 INDEX RetValue, 119 Cluster (in CLU), 224 rules, 115 CMM, 235, 236 SourceFileLine, 119, 120 COCOMO model, 184–186 SourceFilePath, 119 Coercion, 246–247 TargetMemberInfo, 119, 122 COM, 241 TargetObject, 119 Communications, software process This, 119 principle, 17–18 withincode, 118 Compiler WithinMethod, 119 ahead-of-time (AOT), 214, 267 WithinType, 119 development, 213–215, 218, 263–268 rule sets, 126. See also Aspect.NET error diagnostics, 265 perspectives error recovery, 265 ASP.NET, 250 just-in-time (JIT), 32, 242, 250, 264, Assembly, 21, 32–40. See also .NET 267 Assertion(s), 168, 169, 170, 217, 246, 254 trustworthy, 219, 264 Atomic synchronization operations, 146 verifying, 40, 219 Attack Component-oriented software, 241 distributed denial of service (DDoS), Compose*, 80 12, 220 Composition fi lters, 72 Attributes, 33, 35–38, 39, 41. See also implementation part, 72 .NET interface part, 72 custom, 42 input and output fi lter sets, 72 Authentication, 34, 37, 45, 46 superimposition clause, 72 Kerberos, 45 Conceptual explosion, 5, 75, 218, 225 passport, 37 Concern, 52 Windows, 37 core, 55 AuthentiCode, 24 cross-cutting, 2, 55, 226 graph, 72. See also FEAT BESM-6, Russian mainframe, 214, 260 modular, 55 BoogiePL specifi cation language, 41. separation of, 71 See also Spec# multidimensional, 71 Bowl-of-spaghetti software, 3, 221 Concurrency, 211 Boxing, 13, 44, 211, 253, 254 Contract bug in .NET Common Type System, 246. closing, 29 See also Design by contract duplicates of, 28 CORBA, 241 fi xing, 29 cpp preprocessor, use with Java, 48 Burroughs 5000/5500/6700/7700 Critical section(s), 47, 143 computers, 5, 212, 216, 238 C++, 21, 257, 268 Business integrity, 10, 12, 13, 19, 27–30 Deadlock, 47, 49, 143, 146, 148, 149 C, 247 Defi nition CaesarJ, 76, 77 current effective, for an identifi er, CafeOBJ, 211 213 Casting, 247 Demand, imperative security method, CDL/2, 51 36 Chief programmer’s team, 214, 235 DemeterJ, 71 CLU, 5, 90, 137, 211, 214, 223–224, 244, Denotational semantics, 26, 219, 226 248, 254, 257 Deprecated method, 46–47 INDEX 333 Descendant class, 245 specifi cation(s), 2, 4, 26, 218–219, Descriptor, 6 224–226, 229, 246 Design by contract, 40, 168–183, 219, verifi cation, 2, 4, 218–220 222, 284, 295 FORTRAN, 2, 137, 140, 264 contract notion, 168 Fuzz testing (fuzzing), 20 Eiffel, 168 FxCop utility, 18, 20, 21, 39–40 postcondition (ensure), 168 precondition (require), 168 Generative programming, 73 DISPAK, 260. See also Operating Generics, 52, 90, 96, 249, 251, 256–259 system(s) in Java, 256–259 DLL hell, 33. See also .NET get, 38. See also Property, 38, 44, 100, DotSpect, 80 119 DREAD, threat assessment paradigm, Global Assembly Cache (GAC), 38. See 17, 221 also .NET, 31–34 Dynaop, 76 GPRS, 215, 261, 263 grep utility, 7, 8, 62, 74 ECMA, .NET standards, 31 Eiffel, 40, 219, 224, 246 HIPO diagrams, 226 Elbrus computers, 6, 210, 260–264 Human interface proofs (HIP), 23 E-mail(s), 12–13, 23–24, 28, 216, HyperJ, 55, 70 235–238 hypermodule, 71 as a tool for software process, hyperslice, 71 235–236 hyperspace, 71 Embedded systems, 240 composition rules of, 71 Encryption, 24–25 Engineers’ education, element of SDL IBM 360, 2 implementation, 17–18 ICED-T model, 187–190 Enumerations in Java, 256 ildasm utility, 197 EL-76, 5 Implementation, as software life-cycle Encase, 80 stage, 226 EPIC architecture, 214, 215, 264, 266, coding style, 228 268 Hungarian notation, 228 ERATO (experience, retrospective, coding templates, 227–228 analysis, theory, oncoming choosing the language perspectives) teaching customer factor, 227 paradigm, 9, 208–211, 252 fi rst language factor,
Recommended publications
  • Liste Von Programmiersprachen

    Liste Von Programmiersprachen

    www.sf-ag.com Liste von Programmiersprachen A (1) A (21) AMOS BASIC (2) A# (22) AMPL (3) A+ (23) Angel Script (4) ABAP (24) ANSYS Parametric Design Language (5) Action (25) APL (6) Action Script (26) App Inventor (7) Action Oberon (27) Applied Type System (8) ACUCOBOL (28) Apple Script (9) Ada (29) Arden-Syntax (10) ADbasic (30) ARLA (11) Adenine (31) ASIC (12) Agilent VEE (32) Atlas Transformatikon Language (13) AIMMS (33) Autocoder (14) Aldor (34) Auto Hotkey (15) Alef (35) Autolt (16) Aleph (36) AutoLISP (17) ALGOL (ALGOL 60, ALGOL W, ALGOL 68) (37) Automatically Programmed Tools (APT) (18) Alice (38) Avenue (19) AML (39) awk (awk, gawk, mawk, nawk) (20) Amiga BASIC B (1) B (9) Bean Shell (2) B-0 (10) Befunge (3) BANCStar (11) Beta (Programmiersprache) (4) BASIC, siehe auch Liste der BASIC-Dialekte (12) BLISS (Programmiersprache) (5) Basic Calculator (13) Blitz Basic (6) Batch (14) Boo (7) Bash (15) Brainfuck, Branfuck2D (8) Basic Combined Programming Language (BCPL) Stichworte: Hochsprachenliste Letzte Änderung: 27.07.2016 / TS C:\Users\Goose\Downloads\Softwareentwicklung\Hochsprachenliste.doc Seite 1 von 7 www.sf-ag.com C (1) C (20) Cluster (2) C++ (21) Co-array Fortran (3) C-- (22) COBOL (4) C# (23) Cobra (5) C/AL (24) Coffee Script (6) Caml, siehe Objective CAML (25) COMAL (7) Ceylon (26) Cω (8) C for graphics (27) COMIT (9) Chef (28) Common Lisp (10) CHILL (29) Component Pascal (11) Chuck (Programmiersprache) (30) Comskee (12) CL (31) CONZEPT 16 (13) Clarion (32) CPL (14) Clean (33) CURL (15) Clipper (34) Curry (16) CLIPS (35)
  • Top 40 .NET Interview Questions & Answers

    Top 40 .NET Interview Questions & Answers

    https://career.guru99.com/ Guru99 Provides FREE ONLINE TUTORIAL on Various courses like Java | MIS | MongoDB | BigData | Cassandra | Web Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SQLite | JSP | Informatica | Accounting | SAP Training | Python ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Excel | ASP Net | HBase | Testing | Selenium | CCNA | NodeJS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TensorFlow | Data Warehouse | R Programming | Live Projects | DevOps ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Top 40 .NET Interview Questions & Answers 1) Explain what is .NET Framework? The.Net Framework is developed by Microsoft. It provides technologies and tool that is required to build Networked Applications as well as Distributed Web Services and Web Applications. 2) What does .NET Framework provides? .NET Framework renders the necessary compile time and run time foundation to build and run any language that conforms to the Common Language Specification (CLS). 3) Mention what are main components of .Net framework? The main components of .Net framework are Common Language Runtime (CLR) .Net Framework Class Library (FCL) Application Domains Runtime Host Cross-Language Interoperability Side-by-Side Execution
  • 2019 Stateof the Software Supply Chain

    2019 Stateof the Software Supply Chain

    2019 State of the Software Supply Chain The 5th annual report on global open source software development presented by in partnership with supported by Table of Contents Introduction................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER 4: Exemplary Dev Teams .................................26 4.1 The Enterprise Continues to Accelerate ...........................27 Infographic .................................................................................. 4 4.2 Analysis of 12,000 Large Enterprises ................................27 CHAPTER 1: Global Supply of Open Source .................5 4.3 Component Releases Make Up 85% of a Modern Application......................................... 28 1.1 Supply of Open Source is Massive ...........................................6 4.4 Characteristics of Exemplary 1.2 Supply of Open Source is Expanding Rapidly ..................7 Development Teams ................................................................... 29 1.3 Suppliers, Components and Releases ..................................7 4.5 Rewards for Exemplary Development Teams ..............34 CHAPTER 2: Global Demand for Open Source ..........8 CHAPTER 5: The Changing Landscape .......................35 2.1 Accelerating Demand for 5.1 Deming Emphasizes Building Quality In ...........................36 Open Source Libraries .....................................................................9 5.2 Tracing Vulnerable Component Release 2.2 Automated Pipelines and Downloads Across Software Supply Chains
  • Moscow ML .Net Owner's Manual

    Moscow ML .Net Owner's Manual

    Moscow ML .Net Owner's Manual Version 0.9.0 of November 2003 Niels Jørgen Kokholm, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark Peter Sestoft, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark This document describes Moscow ML .Net 0.9.0, a port of Moscow ML 2.00 to the .Net platform. The focus is on how Moscow ML .Net differs from Moscow ML 2.0. Three other documents, the Moscow ML Owner’s Manual [7], the Moscow ML Language Overview [5] and the Moscow ML Library Documentation [6] describe general aspects of the Moscow ML system. Moscow ML implements Standard ML (SML), as defined in the 1997 Definition of Standard ML, including the SML Modules language and some extensions. Moreover, Moscow ML supports most re- quired parts of the SML Basis Library. It supports separate compilation and the generation of stand-alone executables. The reader is assumed to be familiar with the .Net platform [2]. Contents 1 Characteristics of Moscow ML .Net 2 1.1 Compiling and linking 2 1.2 Command-line options 3 1.3 Additional primitives in the built-in units 3 1.4 The libraries 4 2 Installation 5 3 External programming interface 5 3.1 How external assemblies are found and loaded 5 3.2 How to call a .Net static method from Moscow ML .Net. 6 3.2.1 An example 7 3.2.2 Passing arguments and using results 7 3.2.3 Representation of ML Values 8 3.2.4 Notes 8 3.2.5 An experimental auto-marshalling import mechanism: clr_val 8 3.3 How to call an ML function from .Net 10 3.3.1 Example 10 3.3.2 Experimental, easier export of ML values via exportVal 11 The Moscow ML home page is http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~sestoft/mosml.html 1 1 Characteristics of Moscow ML .Net Unlike most other ports of Moscow ML, this port is not based on porting the Caml Light runtime, but is based on the creation of a new backend that generates .Net CIL code.
  • Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP

    Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP

    FEATURE Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP Aspect Oriented Software Development and PHP This article provides an introduction into the popular paradigm of aspect-oriented software development (AOSD). It includes a multitude of practical examples, provides a view of how to objectify an abstract approach like AOSD, and helps the reader easily grasp its essence and advantages. The article is primarily intended for programmers working with PHP. Its aim is to demonstrate a way of applying AOSD in PHP-based projects that already exist. by DMITRY SHEIKO he object oriented approach to programming PHP: 4.xx has been popular for a number of years. While its advantages are not often obvious for short TO DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE VISIT: term projects, major development simply cannot do without it. Object-oriented programming http://forum.phparch.com/297 Tlanguages provide the tools necessary to present business logic in a demonstrable form. Today, UML Class diagrams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Modeling_Language) can architecture is not an easy task—unless you are able even be used to develop system logic. to successfully implement methods described in Martin Demonstrable business logic makes it easier for Fowler’s book, Refactoring: Improving the Design of new participants to join in, and helps to save time for Existing Code. developers that come back into the project at later stages. Yet, even now, one can not find encapsulated It also reduces the number of mistakes, considerably. functionality (crosscutting concerns) in a number Is implementing an object-oriented approach, alone, of various classes (logging, caching, synchronizing, enough to develop the demonstrable business logic? tracing, monitoring, debugging, security checking, Obviously not.
  • The Zonnon Project: a .NET Language and Compiler Experiment

    The Zonnon Project: a .NET Language and Compiler Experiment

    The Zonnon Project: A .NET Language and Compiler Experiment Jürg Gutknecht Vladimir Romanov Eugene Zueff Swiss Fed Inst of Technology Moscow State University Swiss Fed Inst of Technology (ETH) Computer Science Department (ETH) Zürich, Switzerland Moscow, Russia Zürich, Switzerland [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT Zonnon is a new programming language that combines the style and the virtues of the Pascal family with a number of novel programming concepts and constructs. It covers a wide range of programming models from algorithms and data structures to interoperating active objects in a distributed system. In contrast to popular object-oriented languages, Zonnon propagates a symmetric compositional inheritance model. In this paper, we first give a brief overview of the language and then focus on the implementation of the compiler and builder on top of .NET, with a particular emphasis on the use of the MS Common Compiler Infrastructure (CCI). The Zonnon compiler is an interesting showcase for the .NET interoperability platform because it implements a non-trivial but still “natural” mapping from the language’s intrinsic object model to the underlying CLR. Keywords Oberon, Zonnon, Compiler, Common Compiler Infrastructure (CCI), Integration. 1. INTRODUCTION: THE BRIEF CCI and b) to experiment with evolutionary language HISTORY OF THE PROJECT concepts. The notion of active object was taken from the Active Oberon language [Gut01]. In addition, two This is a technical paper presenting and describing new concurrency mechanisms have been added: an the current state of the Zonnon project. Zonnon is an accompanying communication mechanism based on evolution of the Pascal, Modula, Oberon language syntax-oriented protocols , borrowed from the Active line [Wir88].
  • The Microsoft Way: COM, OLE/Activex, COM+, and .NET CLR

    The Microsoft Way: COM, OLE/Activex, COM+, and .NET CLR

    8557 Chapter 15 p329-380 8/10/02 12:24 pm Page 329 CHAPTER FIFTEEN The Microsoft way: COM, OLE/ActiveX, COM+, and .NET CLR In a sense, Microsoft is taking the easiest route. Instead of proposing a global standard and hoping to port its own systems to it, it continually re-engineers its existing application and platform base. Component technology is intro- duced gradually, gaining leverage from previous successes, such as the original Visual Basic controls (VBX – non-object-oriented components!), object link- ing and embedding (OLE), OLE database connectivity (ODBC), ActiveX, Microsoft Transaction Server (MTS), or active server pages (ASP). In the standards arena, Microsoft focuses mostly on internet (IETF) and web (W3C) standards. More recently, some of its .NET specifications (CLI and C#) where adopted by ECMA – a European standards body with a fast track to ISO (ECMA, 2001a, 2001b). Microsoft is not trying to align its approaches with OMG or Java standards. While Java figured prominently in Microsoft’s strategy for a while, it has been relegated to a mere continuation of support of its older Visual J++ product – in part as a result of a settlement between Sun and Microsoft. In addition, under the name Visual J# .NET, Microsoft offers a migration tool to .NET, primarily targeting users of Visual J++ 6.0. As part of the .NET initiative, Microsoft is promoting language neutrality as a major tenet of CLR and aims to establish a new language, C#. C# adopts many of the successful traits of Java, while adding several distinctive features of its own (such as value types) and not supporting key Java features (such as inner classes).
  • Introduction to .NET, C#, and Visual Studio

    Introduction to .NET, C#, and Visual Studio

    Introduction to .NET, C#, and Visual Studio C# Programming January 8 Part I Administrivia Administrivia • When: Wednesdays 10–11am (and a few Mondays as needed) • Where: Moore 100B • This lab has Windows machines, but feel free to bring laptops • Office Hours: to be announced • Course webpage: http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cse39905 Course Structure • No quizzes, no exams • Roughly 6 projects • Roughly 2 weeks per project • The final project will be slightly longer and more open-ended • Projects will be due at midnight on the night of the deadline • All assignments should be submitted through the Blackboard Digital Dropbox • Late policy: 15% off each day, up to 3 days late Final Project • Your chance to choose your own project • Brainstorming and planning will begin after spring break • Top projects will be entered into the Xtreme.NET Challenge – hopefully there will be 20 top projects :-) • First prize: Xbox 360! • Judges will include someone from Microsoft recruiting, maybe someone from the C# team • More details to come at http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cse39905/xtreme Part II What is .NET? The Microsoft .NET Framework • .NET is a development platform that launched in 2000 • Goals include language independence, language integration, web services • Technologies to promote rapid development of secure, connected applications • .NET components include: • Languages (C#, VB, Visual C++, Visual J#, ...) • Common Language Runtime (CLR) • Framework Class Library (FCL) Common Language Runtime • A single runtime environment to execute programs written in any .NET language • Includes a virtual machine • Activates objects, manages memory, performs security checks, collects garbage • To run on the CLR, a language must adhere to a Common Language Specification (CLS) • A language must also build upon base types specified in the Common Type System (CTS) Languages • Language compilers translate source into Microsoft Intermediate Language (MSIL).
  • Appendixes APPENDIX A

    Appendixes APPENDIX A

    PART 8 Appendixes APPENDIX A COM and .NET Interoperability The goal of this book was to provide you with a solid foundation in the C# language and the core services provided by the .NET platform. I suspect that when you contrast the object model provided by .NET to that of Microsoft’s previous component architecture (COM), you’ll no doubt be con- vinced that these are two entirely unique systems. Regardless of the fact that COM is now considered to be a legacy framework, you may have existing COM-based systems that you would like to inte- grate into your new .NET applications. Thankfully, the .NET platform provides various types, tools, and namespaces that make the process of COM and .NET interoperability quite straightforward. This appendix begins by examin- ing the process of .NET to COM interoperability and the related Runtime Callable Wrapper (RCW). The latter part of this appendix examines the opposite situation: a COM type communicating with a .NET type using a COM Callable Wrapper (CCW). ■Note A full examination of the .NET interoperability layer would require a book unto itself. If you require more details than presented in this appendix, check out my book COM and .NET Interoperability (Apress, 2002). The Scope of .NET Interoperability Recall that when you build assemblies using a .NET-aware compiler, you are creating managed code that can be hosted by the common language runtime (CLR). Managed code offers a number of ben- efits such as automatic memory management, a unified type system (the CTS), self-describing assemblies, and so forth. As you have also seen, .NET assemblies have a particular internal compo- sition.
  • Towards Mathix / Math-X, a Computer Algebra Language That Can Create Its Own Operating System, and That Is Amazingly User- Friendly and Secure

    Towards Mathix / Math-X, a Computer Algebra Language That Can Create Its Own Operating System, and That Is Amazingly User- Friendly and Secure

    Towards Mathix / Math-x, a computer algebra language that can create its own operating system, and that is amazingly user- friendly and secure Thomas Colignatus, August 19 2009, some clarifications August 23 2009 http://www.dataweb.nl/~cool Summary Given the current supply and demand for computer languages and systems, there is a clear window of opportunity for the software community to collaborate and create Mathix and Math-x. The base would be Oberon, which itself derives from Algol / Pascal / Modula and which is better designed than Unix / Linux, and which now has the system Bluebottle / A2 at http://bluebottle.ethz.ch. Mathix is defined as Oberon/A2 extended with a suitable computer algebra language (say, CAL). Math-x is defined as Minix ported to Oberon/A2 (via Cyclone) and extended with that CAL. Mathix and Math-x thus can create their own OS. Mathix and Math-x are flexible in that they contain both a strongly typed dialect relevant for OS creation (current Oberon) and a more flexible dialect relevant for the human user (CAL, to be created). The dialects have much syntax in common but the CAL allows more flexibility. The CAL is internally translated into Oberon/A2 which allows compilation as well. 2 2009-08-23-Math-x.nb Note This paper is best understood in the context of my book Elegance with Substance on mathematics education - see http://www.dataweb.nl/~cool/Papers/Math/Index.html. My book advises that each national parliament investigates the stagnation in doing mathematics on the computer in school. This paper suggests how the software community might anticipate on common sense conclusions and start working on improvement.
  • Sitecore CMS 7.0 Installation Guide Rev: 2014-10-21

    Sitecore CMS 7.0 Installation Guide Rev: 2014-10-21

    Sitecore CMS 7.0 Installation Guide Rev: 2014-10-21 Sitecore CMS 7.0 Installation Guide Installation guide for administrators and developers Sitecore® is a registered trademark. All other brand and product names are the property of their respective holders. The contents of this document are the property of Sitecore. Copyright © 2001-2014 Sitecore. All rights reserved. Sitecore CMS 7.0 Installation Guide Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 Getting Started .............................................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Preparing to Install Sitecore CMS 7.0 ........................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2 Sitecore CMS 7.0 Requirements ............................................................................................... 7 2.1 Sitecore Hosting Environment Requirements ............................................................................... 8 2.1.1 IIS Requirements....................................................................................................................... 8 2.1.2 Operating System Requirements .............................................................................................. 8 2.1.3 .NET Framework Requirements ................................................................................................ 9 2.1.4 Visual Studio Requirements
  • Infinite Loop Syntax Support for a Pascal-Family Language

    Infinite Loop Syntax Support for a Pascal-Family Language

    Infinite loop syntax support for a Pascal-family language http://coderesearchlabs.com/articles/ILP.pdf Code Research Laboratories www.coderesearchlabs.com Javier Santo Domingo [email protected] Buenos Aires, Argentina started - April 9th, 2010 published - July 9th, 2010 last revision - May 4th, 2011 copyright is held by the author all trademarks and logos are the property of their respective owners 1. Introduction Infinite loops are a basic logic flow need that is supported by conventional processors and virtual machines (see table A), but there is always a valid solution to avoid them in High Level Languages. In any case, the discussion if it is or not a good practice will never end. There is no code (operative system, service daemon, command line, real-time system, message loop, etc) that can not avoid an infinite loop, that's a fact: you can always write loops with an exit condition. Besides that, and nowadays that code readability is very important (and that goto has been totally removed from good practices), there are many developers that prefer to implement an infinite loop and break it's execution in the middle [1], or that coding a program "designed to never stop" come to solutions with an infinite loop. x86's assembly ARM's assembly .NET's ilasm Java's bytecode Llvm's assembly label: label label: label: Loop: ; something ; something // something ; something ; something jmp label B label br label goto label br label %Loop Infinite Loops (unconditional jumps/branches) in Some Low/Mid Level Of Abstraction Languages table A 2. Different Kind of Loops Usually, how you order the logic for the solution you are writing determines where you will be testing the exit condition for a loop: at the top or at the bottom [2].