348 reputation
28
bio website
location Boulder, CO
age
visits member for 3 years
seen Jul 4 at 5:44
  • Assembler programmer since dawn of time.
  • Perl enthusiast (intermediate).
  • C/C++
  • Objective-C 2, Cocoa, iOS (beginner).
  • Java (late beginner).
  • Unix freak.

Working as Systems Analyst for direct marketing cooperative database.


Aug
1
asked Are there security implications to using dynamically-assigned TCP port numbers?
Jul
17
comment How to provide a ubiquitous object without including it in every parameter list
I like your thinking here. Unfortunately, one of the arguments presented for logging directly from the low-level component was to support a logging level that might include DEBUG, in which case successful events might be logged. The need for this level might not be restricted just to the development phase. I have a hard time refuting this... so we're going with a global object.
Jul
15
accepted How to provide a ubiquitous object without including it in every parameter list
Jul
13
comment How to provide a ubiquitous object without including it in every parameter list
I'm struggling to understand the concept of the Factory in general. In the first approach, why is typeof(MyClass) being passed? In the second approach, is a "Factory" involved at all? I'm liking this answer, esp. the 2nd since it appears I can make up a dummy Log class for testing purposes, but am having trouble understanding the notion of a Factory.
Jul
13
asked How to provide a ubiquitous object without including it in every parameter list
Jul
3
awarded  Notable Question
May
10
comment Seeking advice on design of application protocol
Thank you for such a thorough and thoughtful answer. I have some followup questions but I'm not sure how that fits into SE's format, since comments are limited in size (and hard to format). My biggest concern is with whether there should be one layer enforcing, say, the request/reply protocol (plus maybe the session setup/teardown), and a higher "presentation" layer responsible for unwrapping the request, validating it against a metadata definition of its layout, and presenting to the application pure data, perhaps in the form of a hash table.
May
9
comment Seeking advice on design of application protocol
See update above.
May
9
revised Seeking advice on design of application protocol
Rewrote question to address comment #1.
May
9
asked Seeking advice on design of application protocol
Apr
22
accepted Protocol for closing a socket connection
Apr
22
comment Protocol for closing a socket connection
I debated whether this belonged here or on SO. The link you gave doesn't completely answer my question, which I think is more of a general programming/protocol question than just the specifics of close and shutdown.
Apr
22
comment Protocol for closing a socket connection
Very clear explanation! One question: although I like CLOSE/CLOSE_OK, it sounds as if I (the client) could just issue shutdown(OUTPUT) and wait to receive EOF, while the server, on reading my EOF, could send <final_message> + EOF. Or are there circumstances under which the server could receive EOF without my having intentionally caused it by issuing shutdown or close?
Apr
22
awarded  Yearling
Apr
22
asked Protocol for closing a socket connection
Jan
17
asked Application protocols and state machines: designing a complicated server
Jan
2
comment Design question about a concurrent forking server
@miraculixx: I answered your question; does it change your answer any? (My view is that it's "complicated" because of requirements for database integrity.)
Dec
28
comment Design question about a concurrent forking server
Throughput is top priority - we process hundreds of thousands of input records and lookup against tables with a billion rows. The managers will (eventually) be heavily optimized to keep memory caches, etc. Configuration - we may want to distribute the managers across different physical servers. Scalability? I don't know - it's pretty big as it is, although we might want to have more than three or four clients running at the same time.
Dec
28
awarded  Commentator
Dec
28
comment Design question about a concurrent forking server
You made me realize that it's very possible that we'll eventually need to write another client program which has a slightly different overall purpose, but requires precisely the same service being provided here to carry out its mission! And you're correct - none of this needs to be done by the clients. (I think the motivation here is mostly "premature optimization".) Thanks for your reassurance.