Is the Gaia framework worth learning?

I've been learning greensock and I find it helpful now when studying greensock I've been introduced to Gaia does anyone here have an opinion on Gaia?

I have never used it before, but just gone to look at it. I am not a good flash developer yet, but I do know java extremely well, and if someone asked me if a similar library was good to learn with the java language, I would have mixed opinions. If the person asking me was new to the language, and did not know a lot, I would say stay away from it. In java, I tend to call them sort of libraries "lazy developer libraries", meaning that the people who use them are too lazy to actually learn the language, and would much rather use a library which does most of the work for them. I mean looking at the features Gaia provides, it is nothing which cant be done directly with as3, without any use of that library.
However, if an experienced developer asked me the same question (like yourself for instance), then I would suggest that using it could be of great benefit, especially if your expected to deliver projects in a relatively quick time. Reason I say it is ok to use for experienced developers is because they understand how to do everything the package provides them with manually, and using the package will not interfer with their learning. It has actually got me interested in it, especially when I saw you could create websites in under 10 minutes. However, I will try to stay away from it until I get better with AS3

Similar Messages

What are the pre-requisites for learning OA Framework?

Hi,
Im new to oaf,can any body help on this
What are the pre-requisites for learning OA Framework?
Karthik

In order to develop any OAF Application you need to know few concepts before doing any kind of development. The concepts are basically the Business Components for Java(BC4J) components.
They are:
Application Module(AM)
Entity Object(EO)
View Object(VO)
Association Object(AO)
View Link(VL)
Now let us see the description of each component.
Application Module:
Application Modules serve as a containers for related BC4J components. The pages are related by participating in the same task. It also defines the logical data model and business methods needed.They provide the transaction context and also used for establishing database connection. AM’s can be nested to provide more complex AM’s.
Entity Object:
EO encapsulates the business logic and rules.EO’s are used for Inserting,Updating and Deleting data. This is used for validating across the applications. We can also link to other EO’s and create a Association object.
View Object:
View object encapsulates the database query. It is used for selecting data. It provides iteration over a query result set.VO’s are primarily based on Eo’s. It can be used on multiple EO’s if the UI is for update. It provides a single point of contact for getting and setting entity object values. It can be linked together to form View Links.
Association Object:
An association object is created where we link EO’s. For example take the search page where we link the same EO to form a association between the manager and employee. Every employee should have a manager associated. But if it President then no there is no manager associated. This is a perfect example to understand the AO.
View Link:
A view link is an active link between view links. A view link can be created by providing the source and destination views and source and destination attributes. There are two modes of View link operation that can be performed. A document and Master/Detail operation.
-----Let me know if you need more information
Regards
Meher Irk
Edited by: Meher Irk on Oct 23, 2010 10:45 AM

Redesigning the Collections Framework

Hi!
I'm sort of an experienced Java programmer, in the sense that I program regularly in Java. However, I am not experienced enough to understand the small design specifics of the Collections Framework (or other parts of Javas standard library).
There's been a number of minor things that bugged me about the framework, and all these minor things added up to a big annoyance, after which I've decided to (try to) design and implement my own framework.
The thing is however, that since I don't understand many design specifics about the Collection Framework and the individual collection implementations, I risk coming up short with my own.
(And if you are still reading this, then I thank you for your time, because already now I know that this entry is going to be long. : ) )
Since I'm doing my Collection framework nearly from scratch, I don't have to worry too much about the issue of backwards compatibility (altough I should consider making some parts similar to the collection framework as it is today, and provide a wrapper that implements the original collection interfaces).
I also have certain options of optimizing several of the collections, but then again, there may be very specific design issues concerning performance and usability that the developers of the framework (or other more experienced Java progammers) knew about, that I don't know.
So I'm going to share all of my thoughts here. I hope this will start an interesting discussion : )
(I'm also not going to make a fuss about the source code of my progress. I will happily share it with anyone who is interested. It is probably even neccessary in order for others to understand how I've intended to solve my annoyances (or understand what these annoyances were in the first place). ).
(I've read the "Java Collections API Design FAQ", btw).
Below, I'm going to go through all of the things that I've thought about, and what I've decided to do.
1.
The Collections class is a class that consists only of static utility methods.
Several of them return wrapper classes. However the majority of them work on collections implementing the List interface.
So why weren't they built into the List interface (same goes for methods working only with the Collection interface only, etc)? Several of them can even be implemented more efficiently. For example calling rotate for a LinkedList.
If the LinkedList is circular, using a sentry node connecting the head and tail, rotate is done simply by relocating the sentry node (rotating with one element would require one single operation). The Collections class makes several calls to the reverse method instead (because it lacks access to the internal workings of a LinkedList).
If it were done this way, the Collections class would be much smaller, and contain mostly methods that return wrapped classes.
After thinking about it a while, I think I can answer this question myself. The List interface would become rather bloated, and would force an implementation of methods that the user may not need.
At any rate, I intend to try to do some sort of clean-up. Exactly how, is something I'm still thinking about. Maybe two versions of List interfaces (one "light", and the other advanced), or maybe making the internal fields package private and generally more accessible to other package members, so that methods in other classes can do some optimizations with the additional information.
2.
At one point, I realized that the PriorityQueue didn't support increase\decrease key operations. Of course, elements would need to know where in the backing data structure it was located, and this is implementation specific. However, I was rather dissapointed that this wasn't supported somehow, so i figured out a way to support this anyway, and implemented it.
Basically, I've wrapped the elements in a class that contains this info, and if the element would want to increase its key, it would call a method on the wrapping class it was contained in. It worked fine.
It may cause some overhead, but at least I don't have to re-implement such a datastructure and fiddle around so much with the element-classes just because I want to try something with a PriorityQueue.
I can do the same thing to implement a reusable BinomialHeap, FibonacciHeap, and other datastructures, that usually require that the elements contain some implementation-specific fields and methods.
And this would all become part of the framework.
3.
This one is difficult ot explain.
It basically revolves around the first question in the "Java Collections API Design FAQ".
It has always bothered me that the Collection interface contained methods, that "maybe" would be implemented.
To me it didn't make sense. The Collection should only contain methods that are general for all Collections, such as the contains method. All methods that request, and manipulate the Collection, belonged in other interfaces.
However, I also realized that the whole smart thing about the current Collection interface, is that you can transfer elements from one Collection to another, without needing to know what type of Collection you were transferring from\to.
But I still felt it violated "something" out there, even if it was in the name of convenience. If this convenience was to be provided, it should be done by making a separate wrapper interface with the purpose of grouping the various Collection types together.
If you don't know what I'm trying to say then you might have to see the interfaces I've made.
And while I as at it, I also fiddled with the various method names.
For example, add( int index, E element), I felt it should be insert( int index, E element). This type of minor things caused a lot of confusion for me back then, so I cared enough about this to change it to somthing I thought more appropriate. But I have no idea how appropriate my approach may seem to others. : )
4.
I see an iterator as something that iterates through a collection, and nothing else.
Therefor, it bothered me that the Iterator interface had an optional remove method.
I myself have never needed it, so maybe I just don't know how to appreciate it. How much is it used? If its heavily used, I guess I'm going to have to include it somehow.
5.
A LinkedList doesnt' support random access. But true random access is when you access randomly relative to the first index.
Iterating from the first to the last with a for statement isn't really random access, but it still causes bad performance in the current LinkedList implementation. One would have to use the ListIterator to achieve this.
But even here, if you want a ListIterator that starts in the middle of the list, you still need to traverse the list to reach that point.
So I've come up with LinkedList that remembers the last accessed element using the basic methods get, set, remove etc, and can use it to access elements relatively from it.
Basically, there is now an special interal "ListIterator" that is used to access elements when the basic methods are used. This gives way for several improvements (although that may depend how you look at it).
It introduces some overhead in the form of if-else statemenets, but otherwise, I'm hoping that it will generally outperform the current LinkedList class (when using lists with a large nr of elements).
6.
I've also played around with the ArrayList class.
I've implemented it in a way, that is something like a random-access Deque. This has made it possible to improvement certain methods, like inserting an element\Collection at some index.
Instead of always shifting subsequent element to the right, elements can be shifted left as well. That means that inserting at index 0 only requires a single operation, instead of k * the length of the list.
Again, this intrduces some overhead with if-else statements, but is still better in many cases (again, the List must be large for this to pay off).
7.
I'm also trying to do a hybrid between an ArrayList and a Linked list, hopefully allowing mostly constant insertion, but constant true random access as well. It requires more than twice the memory, since it is backed by both an ArrayList and a LinkedList.
The overhead introduced , and the fact that worst case random access is no better than that of a pure LinkedList (which occurs when elelements are inserted at the same index many times, and you then try to access these elements), may make this class infeasible.
It was mostly the first three points that pushed my over the edge, and made me throw myself at this project.
You're free to comment as much as you like.
If no real discussion starts, thats ok.
Its not like I'm not having fun with this thing on my own : )
I've started from scratch several times because of design problems discovered too late, so if you request to see some of the source code, it is still in the works and I would have to scurry off and add a lot of java-comments as well, to explain code.
Great. Thanks!

This sort of reply has great value : )
Some of them show me that I need to take some other things into consideration. Some of them however, aren't resolved yet, some because I'm probably misunderstanding some of your arguments.
Here goes:
1.
a)
Are you saying that they're were made static, and therefor were implemented in a utility class? Isn't it the other way around? Suppose that I did put them into the List interface, that would mean they don't need to be static anymore, right?
b)
A bloated List interface is a problem. Many of them will however have a default not-so-alwyas-efficient implementation in a abstract base class.
Many of the list-algorithms dump sequential lists in an array, execute the algorithm, and dump the finished list back into a sequential list.
I believe that there are several of them where one of the "dumps" can be avoided.
And even if other algorithms would effectively just be moved around, it wouldn't neccesarily be in the name of performance (some of them cannot really be done better), but in the name of consistency\convenience.
Regarding convenience, I'm getting the message that some may think it more convenient to have these "extra" methods grouped in a utility class. That can be arranged.
But when it comes to consistency with method names (which conacerns usability as well), I felt it is something else entirely.
For example take the two methods fill and replaceAll in the Collections class. They both set specific elements (or all of them) to some value. So they're both related to the set method, but use method names that are very distinguished. For me it make sense to have a method called setAll(...), and overload it. And since the List interface has a set method, I would very much like to group all these related methods together.
Can you follow my idea?
And well, the Collections class would become smaller. If you ask me, it's rather bloated right now, and supports a huge mixed bag of related and unrelated utitlity methods. If we should take this to the extreme, then The Collections class and the Arrays class should be merged.
No, right? That would be hell : )
2,
At a first glance, your route might do the trick. But there's several things here that aren't right
a)
In order to delete an object, you need to know where it is. The only remove method supported by PriorityQueue actually does a linear search. Increase and decrease operations are supposed to be log(n). Doing a linear search would ruin that.
You need a method something like removeAt( int i), where i would be the index in the backing array (assuming you're using an array). The elemeny itself would need to know that int, meaning that it needs an internal int field, even though this field only is required due to the internal workings of PriorityQueue. Every time you want to insert some element, you need to add a field, that really has nothing to with that element from an object-oriented view.
b)
Even if you had such a remove method, using it to increase\decrease key would use up to twice the operations neccesary.
Increasing a key, for example, only requires you to float the element up the heap. You don't need to remove it first, which would require an additional log(n) operations.
3.
I've read the link before, and I agree with them. But I feel that there are other ways to avoid an insane nr of interfaces. I also think I know why I arrive at other design choices.
The Collection interface as it is now, is smart because it can covers a wide range of collection types with add and remove methods. This is useful because you can exchange elements between collections without knowing the type of the collection.
The drawback is of course that not all collection are, e.g modifiable.
What I think the problem is, is that the Collection interface is trying to be two things at once.
On one side, it wants to be the base interface. But on the other side, it wants to cast a wide net over all the collection types.
So what I've done is make a Collection interface that is infact a true base interface, only supporting methods that all collection types have in common.
Then I have a separate interface that tries to support methods for exchanging elements between collections of unknown type.
There isn't neccesarily any performance benefit (actually, it may even introduces some overhead), but in certainly is easier to grasp, for me at least, since it is more logically grouped.
I know, that I'm basically challenging the design choices of Java programmers that have much more experience than me. Hell, they probably already even have considered and rejected what I'm considering now. In that case, I defend myself by mentioning that it isn't described as a possiblity in the FAQ : )
4.
This point is actually related to point 3., becausue if I want the Collection interface to only support common methods, then I can't have an Iterator with a remove method.
But okay....I need to support it somehow. No way around it .
5. 6. & 7.
The message I'm getting here, is that if I implement these changes to LinkedList and ArrayList, then they aren't really LinkedList and ArrayList anymore.
And finally, why do that, when I'm going to do a class that (hopefully) can simulate both anyway?
I hadn't thought of the names as being the problem.
My line of thought was, that okay, you have this arraylist that performs lousy insertion and removal, and so you avoid it.
But occasionally, you need it (don't ask me how often this type of situation arises. Rarely?), and so you would appreciate it if performed "ok". It would still be linear, but would often perform much better (in extreme cases it would be in constant time).
But these improvements would almost certainly change the way one would use LinkedList and ArrayList, and I guess that requires different names for them.
Great input. That I wouldn't have thought of. Thanks.
There is however some comments I should comment:
"And what happens if something is suibsequently inserted or removed between that element and the one you want?"
Then it would perform just like one would expect from a LinkedList. However if that index were closer to the last indexed position, it would be faster. As it is now, LinkedList only chooses either the first index or the last to start the traversal from.
If you're working with a small number of elements, then this is definitely not worth it.
"It sounds to me like this (the hybrid list) is what you really want and indeed all you really need."
You may be right. I felt that since the hybrid list would use twice as much memory, it would not always be the best choice.
I going to think about that one. Thanks.

Carrier in SAP: Is it worth learning MDM?

Hello Everyone,
Looking for a carrier guidance please let me know your thoughts.
I'm a J2EE Developer specializing in Content Management systems/Portals with about 8 years of experience.
Looking for learning new skills specifically learning vendor(canned) applications which would also require J2EE Experience so that i can use all my J2EE experience and as well learn new applications to better position myself in the consulting market.:-)
Started looking at the SAP Netweaver Technology and all the products stacked against key areas of the Netweaver Architecture. Lack of my experience in SAP landscape made me get confused on what product to pick and learn to position myself in and also was not sure about whether one would really get any jobs after going through all the learning with no experience in that product.
So wanted to reach out to all of you and see what you guys think and suggest after reading through my thoughts and confusion.
Getting into emerging technologies in SAP made more sense since there will be opportunities for people with less or no experience in sap landscape :(.
Do you guys think it is worth learning and planning a carrier in MDM?
How does the feature look for SAP MDM?
How should one go about planning to get to the MDM world. What other skills one should know that would help ?
Thanks All for all the help.
Rajes

Hi Rajesh,
MDM is truly a new way of solving old data management problems, Morris said. Traditional information architecture focuses on the infrastructure and design of systems in a company, and can include practices like synchronizing data around a hub. These architecture approaches are much more monolithic than MDM. Applied MDM, which includes data governance techniques, along with MDM infrastructure tools, represents a more flexible way of approaching the problem.
Andrew White, research director at Stamford, Conn.-based Gartner Inc., agrees that MDM is a legitimate solution for data management difficulties.
"Information architecture is lost," White said. "We're realizing that we need a different kind of governance model."
MDM is "80% old stuff and 20% new stuff," White said. The "old stuff" is technology expanded from product information management and CDI tools, as well as some of the data definition concepts of metadata management. The "new stuff" is a major emphasis on data governance and new MDM tools, which are different from anything the industry has seen before, White said.
MDM software, from companies like IBM, Kalido and others, acts as middleware, in essence giving systems a commonplace to look for approved data definitions. White describes this MDM software as an "intermediate tier between physical data and the consumption of that data." Combining software and data governance best practices, MDM is an innovative approach to solving data management problems, he said.
It's only a matter of time before companies start to adopt MDM, White said. The coming year will be one of awareness, and the peak of spending will come in two to three years, he predicts.
Between emerging technologies like SOA and RFID requiring consistent data definitions and motivators like heavy-handed fines for inaccurate reporting and non-compliance, analysts like Morris and White feel that MDM is a critical component to many business initiatives.
Master data management is not a technology market, but a business capability," said Rob Karel, principal analyst with Cambridge, Mass.-based Forrester Research Inc. "All of the vendors branding themselves as an MDM solution, I liken to comparing apples and Volkswagens. They're all very different pieces of the larger complex technology puzzle that's required to solve the master data management capability."
Vendors from across the IT landscape emerged in force in the last few months, joining such players as IBM, SAP and Burlington, Mass.-based Kalido Inc. in announcing MDM products. Dayton, Ohio-based Teradata partnered with Dallas-based i2 Technologies Inc. for its new Teradata MDM platform. Other announcements amounted to repositioning and re-branding. Product information management (PIM) vendor TIBCO Software Inc., based in Palo Alto, Calif., announced its Collaborative Information Manager MDM application. Customer data integration (CDI) players made their move as well. Redwood City, Calif.-based Purisma Inc. updated and re-named its "data hub," and San Mateo, Calif.-based Siperian Inc. emerged with a new "customer-centric MDM" hub. Other pure-play vendors and big players alike have scrambled to use MDM label.
Of course, every vendor has a slightly different take, and the relative infancy of the MDM discipline makes product comparisons tough. Buyers should be wary of any vendor that claims to solve MDM problems with just one tool -- an impossible feat, Gartner and Forrester analysts agreed.
Forrester: Evaluate your MDM ecosystem
Karel introduced the concept of an "MDM ecosystem audit guide," a tool intended to help companies identify technology components that should be part of their data supply chain.
"MDM is a capability which will cross multiple technology platforms," Karel said, "because information is being captured, managed and consumed across many platforms."
An MDM capability may include processes and technologies such as data governance and stewardship, data quality management, integration tools, service-oriented architectures -- as well as systems that help manage master data definitions. Ultimately, successful MDM will be achieved by combining a wide variety of technologies and applications that create, manage and consume master data. Some capabilities might already exist in a company, Karel said. In fact, he added, companies could conceivably manage master data with no tools bearing the MDM label at all.
"If you knit together some of these disparate tools [that you already have] with custom code and random wrappers, you can create an MDM solution for your company -- it just won't be pretty," Karel said. "The vendors that will be successful are the ones that [can] create a more seamless administrative experience and the ones that allow you to leverage your existing investments."
No vendors really fit that description today, though some, such as IBM, are further along than others, Karel said. And there are more mature sub-segments of MDM, namely CDI or PIM, with vendors that have successfully addressed the problems of managing a specific kind of data entity. But, he said, a true MDM capability should address multiple kinds of data entities -- not just customer or product -- and that's where the complexity comes in.
Gartner: Consider the MDM continuum
The Gartner study placed vendors on an "MDM continuum," according to Andrew White, study co-author and research vice president with the Stamford, Conn.-based analyst firm. The continuum looks like a horizontal line, with "MDM niche" vendors on the left, "MDM generalists" on the right, and infrastructure giants Oracle and SAP in the middle.
The niche vendors on the extreme left of the continuum solve complex problems in certain industries or domains, White explained. These products can handle the complexities of very specific kinds of entities, such as customer or product data. They can potentially manage thousands of attributes and hundreds of hierarchies and are suited for operational purposes. This is where PIM and CDI vendors fit in, he said. Gartner placed IBM, Siperian and Wayne, Penn.-based PIM vendor FullTilt Solutions Inc. on this end of the continuum.
Products that appear closer to right side come from generalists and help companies get a single view of many different data entities, White said. These products are probably more appropriate for analytics and business intelligence uses. Generalists' products handle many different kinds of entities with relatively low complexity -- for example, labeling many master data objects with a low number (say, five to 25) of attributes. Kalido; Hackensack, N.J.-based Data Foundations Inc.; and Paris-based Orchestra Networks appear on this end of the continuum.
The study was specifically presented as a continuum, not a ranking, White said. Like all IT programs, the selected MDM tool should fit a company's specific problem, and legacy vendors might not always be the best choice, he cautioned.
"Vendors are making hay with [MDM]. They're all calling themselves MDM vendors," White said. "Customers have to be very careful. It's not that one MDM vendor is better. It's really about form fitting function. Where is your business? What is your particular problem of the day, and what will your problem be next year? Then figure out which data is most important, and look at that part of the continuum."
For Details learnings go through this link, which requires SAP Service Market place ID.
<u>https://websmp201.sap-ag.de/~sapidb/011000358700004121872006E.HTM</u>
Hope you are more confussed.
Regards
Rehman

Discontinue the Spry Framework

In response to http://blogs.adobe.com/dreamweaver/2012/08/update-on-adobe-spry-framework-availability.htm l#comment-1826
I must express my DEEPEST DISAPPOINTMENT with Adobe for such a dis heartening move to discontiue this framework.
I have been using Adobe Spry Framework from inception and found the capabilities of at least the DataSet Object frameworks to be the most easiet, fast, effective implementation of frameworks when it comes to dealing with data/ external data display and manipulation EVER. It has been the goto framework for almost ALL of my data driven web applications and has proven to me to be BY FAR a superior advantage over using any MVC or another Ajax based framework that I have encountered.
To learn of its discontinuation after years of hope and promise of futher development of the framework with such a huge potential is really heart wrenching. I do hope that someone else will take up the regins to which Adobe has so cowardly let go of and continue to progress this framework into a new aged design specimen that it should be.
I personally though lacking in the extensive knowledge of the frameworks inner workings and expreience in javascript or framework development for that matter...will be one to TRY to develop it as much as I can. But will lend ANY SUPPORT that I can as limited only by my knowledge and experience to futher the success of this framework to any lengths to make it as great as it has always been and could be.
Sincerest Ice.
LONG LIVE SPRY FRAMEWORK

Thank you, Ben. This was the information that I needed.
Alas, I don't follow this forum specifically, although, I do lurk now and then to get answers to specific questions.
Re the shake issue. Gosh, I guess I fixed it and never came back (my apologies) or the whole thing went a different direction. It's been so long.
Thanks, again.
J.

UML2 is it worth learning?

Hello,
I am currently attempting to learn UML2 standard in a class I am taking. It seems that there are a lot of benefits and downsides to the modelling procedure.
I wanted to ask the developer and the academic community about how they view UML2 and how effective it is from an industrial point of view. I failed this module last year. The professor taught it from a purely academic point of view and although there were some good things about the ADLs (Architecture Description Languages) it did not seem very relavant to the industry but I could appreciate how it might be applied if one were to take an obscure view on matters e.g connectors and components in Wright and CSP (academic languages) . My current teaher not the guy I failed under informs me that UML2 is also affected by academic research.
He is also very keen on MDA (Model Driven Architecture). I have already read the gigantic post where jschell and SoureError duke it out round after round about process modelling and formal techniques. I am only interested in answers to a couple of questions.
1. UML2 claims several advantages however I can still see the same problem of gigantic diagrams and adhoc design patterns being formed to suit implementation do you agree?
2. UML2 modelling porbably wont' be used by smaller teams of developers. So is it relavant to argue that modelling techniques need to be scalable to the problem size and the team's man power. If so please suggest alternatives?
3. I have been informed that there can be quite some confusion between Asynchronous and Synchronous modelling in UML2 is this true or am I confused?
4. What about other "silver bullets" e.g design by contract of AOP(Aspect Orientated Programming) we have already spawn modelling concepts based on these approaches. How do you think they compare?
Kind regards
Prashant

In mathematics it is fairly widely accepted that there are two different type of mathematician, namely "geometers" and "algebrists". The presumed difference is between those who prefer to rely on their visual cortex for thinking - they "see" the problems and those who prefer to rely on their audio/language cortex and are pushing words around to solve their problems.
Some problems are easier to work in one mode and others are easier in the other mode. All working mathematicians, understand both methods, they just in general prefer one method over the other. Like being right handed or left handed.
My view of flowcharts and their modern UML equivalent is that they are just a way of presenting the design problem in different ways to the brain. They are ways of attempting to recruit different brain tissue to work on the problem.
This model of how people think, explains all the facts that I am aware of, namely that some people love UML, some people hate UML, some projects are helped by UML and some are hindered.
A complicated diagram with lines runing all over it is just the graphical equivalent of spaghetti code and just about as useful and easy to maintain. You have done something wrong. Just like it is easy to say that if you have a rountine with thousands of lines in one method it is certainly wrong.
As a mathematician I am most certainly a geometer, as a programmer, probably largly by training, I am an algebrist. I see math, I hear programs.
I have sympathy with those who say that you must learn this or that technique, because any technique that you can learn will enlarge the set of problems that you can solve elegantly. On the other hand I am extremely skeptical of ony one who claims that any particular technique is absolutely necessary for solving any problems.
For everyone that swears that UML is the only way to do design I can no doubt find someone that runs a UML emitter over their code when they are finished with a project so that they can satisfy some "requirement" that they produce UML design documents. Neither party is "right." Left handed people are not broken versions of right handed people.
I think it is foolishness to claim that one tool works for all things at all times. I likewise think it is foolishness to shun a possibly useful tool just because it is not the way your brain likes to work. Fix your brain. Exercise it.
As for what you will find people actually using in industrial settings, well Horatio, there are more things than ever dreamed of in your philosophies.
Is UML2 worth learning. Absolutely. Soak it up and then forget it. Try not to lose any sleep.

Is it worth learning JAVA?

Howdy!
Is it worth learning JAVA or would I be oaky with just sticking with ABAP and learning ABAP objects?
All opinions welcome y'all!

Hi Steve,
Sticking to ABAP is for the (near) future an option.
However SAP is migating to the SAP NetWeaver environment where a totally new development suite is presented: The SAP NetWeaver Development Studio.
With it you can develop the new Web Dynpro's and the studio is based on IBM's Eclipse (totally Java).
You can develop without knowledge of Java, however some knowledge of Java is very helpfull.
If you want to stick to ABAP: Somewhere half/end of the year 2005 this Developer studio will also be expanded with ABAP (you have to wait for that).
On the other hand, current releases of SAP components (Like CRM, Enterprise, SCM, APO and so on) still require the knowledge of ABAP (preferably ABAP Objects).
In my view ABAP Objects will play a major role in the new Developer Studio (when it comes available). Straight forward ABAP (without OO parts) will see it's role slowly getting less and less.
So my advice would be: Learn Java (at least do a beginners training with it) and learn all about ABAP Objects. You will be ready for the future.
Regrads,
Rob.

References are becoming invalid when passed to an actor using the Actor Framework

I have having an issue with passing a couple of references to an actor using the actor framework 3.0.7 (LabVIEW 2011 & TestStand 2010 SP1).
Some background:
My application has three main components:
Main VI -- is not part of any class and Launches UI Actor.
UI Actor -- Launches the teststand actor
TestStand Actor -- Initializes and starts teststand.
The two references showing similar behavior (invalid reference) are the TestStand App Manager control and the "Current VI's Menubar" reference. The App Mgr control is on the front panel of the UI Actor's Actor Core.vi. The menubar reference is retrieved in the block diagram of the UI Actor's Actor Core.vi
Now,
When I run the Main VI I get an error in the TestStand Actor's Actor Core.vi (Remember Main VI launches UI Actor launches TestStand Actor) because the App Mgr and menubar references are invalid (. I have checked and verified that in this scenario the references are valid in the UI Actor before it launches the teststand actor.
If I run the UI Actor's Actor Core.vi stand alone (i.e. run it top level) the App Mgr and menubar references are passed to the teststand actor, no error occurs, and the code functions as expected.
Why would these references be invalid by simply starting a different top level VI? Could it have something to do with when the references are passed vs. when the front panel is loaded into memory?
I tried putting the App Mgr control on the front panel of the Main VI and passing it to the UI Actor and then to the TestStand Actor. This works....
Anyone have any experience or knowledge to why this is occurring?

Generally, references in LV are "owned" by the hierarchy they are first created in, and the hierarchy is determined by the top level VI. Once the hierarchy goes idle or out of memory, the references created by that hierarchy are automatically closed. That's usually what causes something like this - the reference is created in one hierarchy (let's say the main VI hierarchy) and then that hierarchy stops running.
I don't know the AF well enough to say if that's really the case (I actually thought that it always launches a separate top level dynamic process, which I assumed is where the UI actor's core VI would always be called), but that might help explain it. If not, you might wish to post to the AF group in the communities section.
Try to take over the world!

Custom Branding Using the AJAX Framework L-Shape APIs

Hello folks,
i want to do this Tutorial (How To Apply Custom Branding Using the AJAX Framework L-Shape APIs) but i'm missing the source code.
Can anyone of you provide me with the necessary files?!
It was once located in Sap Code-Exchange (https://code.sdn.sap.com/svn/sap-portal-ajax-framework)
Thanks in advance.
Greetings,

I downloaded in May 2014 two EARs with a custom AFP from SAP:
com.customer.afp.fromscratch.ear
com.customer.sdesign.ear
I also have the images shown in the pdf....
If interested, send me an email (see profile).
Kai

I have two Apple accounts the one on my phone and computer are the same the one on my mini i pad is different I have credit on my mini i pad however, when I purchase an App or movie I am charged on my credit card and the $40:00 worth of I Tune cards is by

I have two Apple accounts the one on my I phone and computer are the same the one on my mini i pad is different I have credit on my mini i pad however, when I purchase an App or movie I am charged on my credit card and the $40:00 worth of I Tune cards is by passed I have tried to change the mini i pad account details to be the same as my computer and original apple i.d.account however, it will not allow me to do I have tried to reset the mini i pad but not all the way to factory otherwise I would loose all my data. I have visited a genuis bench at Fountain gate however, they tell me I need to ring apple support which I will do on the next working day.

You are going to need to change the email address you use with your old ID. Once you have got access to your old account you will then log into both accounts at the same time on your Mac and transfer your data to a single account. We can do this later, but need you to get access to your old account first.
My Apple ID

An exception occurred in the visualization framework.(error: RWI 00621) in BI Launchpad

Hello,
I am facing this error " an exception occurred in the visualization framework.(error: RWI 00621)" while running/opening a webi report from BI launchpad. Please see the attached screen shot.
Please help me in getting this resolved.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Arun

Hello Arun,
Seems its a known issue while using complex formulas in graph. SAP has provided a note for some similar issue. Can you try below note and see if there is any change?
SAP Note 1584024 - Error webi submitReport error ERR_WIS_30270 when complex formula is added in the stacked…
Please see if it can give any useful information.
Regards,
Nikhil Joy

What are the best practices for using the enhancement framework?

Hello enhancement framework experts,
Recently, my company upgraded to SAP NW 7.1 EhP6. This presents us with the capability to use the enhancement framework.
A couple of senior programmers were asked to deliver a guideline for use of the framework. They published the following statement:
"SAP does not guarantee the validity of the enhancement points in future releases/versions. As a result, any implemented enhancement points may require significant work during upgrades. So, enhancement points should essentially be used as an alternative to core modifications, which is a rare scenario.".
I am looking for confirmation or contradiction to the statement "SAP does not guarantee the validity of enhancement points in future releases/versions..." . Is this a true statement for both implicit and explicit enhancement points?
Is the impact of activated explicit and implicit enhancements much greater to an SAP upgrade than BAdi's and user exits?
Is there any SAP published guidelines/best practices for use of the enhancement framework?
Thank you,
Kimberly
Edited by: Kimberly Carmack on Aug 11, 2011 5:31 PM

Found an article that answers this question quite well:
[How to Get the Most From the Enhancement and Switch Framework as a Customer or Partner - Tips from the Experts|http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/c0f0373e-a915-2e10-6e88-d4de0c725ab3]
Thank you Thomas Weiss!

Using the Axis Framework in the SOAP Adapter

Hello experts,
I am currenty checking how I can easily manipulate sender and receiver details and how I could get attachments into XI.
I saw in the sap help that it is possible to use the AXIS framework from the SOAP adapter:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/45/a39e244b030063e10000000a11466f/frameset.htm
As usual, the documentation is of the same quality SAP usually provides.
So my first question would be: This is a moduke to be used from the SOAP adapter right? I am asking because they also wirte about the AXIS adapter and its metadata.
In oder to get it working, I created in the NWDStudio a library project, added my libraries (to the root directory) and deployed it via SDM. Deployment is succesful but its not working.
SAPHelp says I should check for a MessageServlet - I ask myself how that could appear suddenly just by packaging some axis libraries...?
I am using for that the ESA box (NW04s SP6) - I was not able to see whether there are some dependencies to the SP - are they?
Thanks for your support!
Helge

Helge,
Axis is outdated and has some issues ..use Apache Soap instead its much better and easy to use.
http://ws.apache.org/soap/
Regards
Ravi

What is the best way to learn SAP-ABAP

What is the best way to learn ABAP??
Stick to SAP press books and understand and learn theroitically
'or'
Move to ABAP programming and experiment all the things you have learn.
If both want to go hand in hand and if we want to do more practise, where can i find a source of abap programming questions (like codechef for java,c,c++..). Bcoz understanding new concepts require practise and to creating programs to practise is a really difficult.
Thnak you
Md Omar saleem

Hi,
Do the SAP course (BC400 - 5 days - it is a great course) and then practice practice practice.
The language itself is not difficult, but finding your way around the SAP system can be challenging.
Try to do real-life examples.
good luck!
Paul

"No enought room on startup disk for Application Memory" when using the Accelerate Framework

Dear colleagues,
I am running what I know is a large problem for a scientific application (tochnog) a finite element solver that runs from the Terminal. The application tries to solve 1,320,000 simultaneous linear equations. The problem starts when I use the Accelerate Framework as the Virtual Memory size jumps from 142 G to about 576 G after the library (LAPACK) is called to solve the system.It does not do it if I use a solver that does not calls LAPACK inside Accelerate.
The machine is a mac pro desktop with 8 GB of ram, the 2.66 GHz Quad-core Intel and the standard 640 GB hard drive. The system tells me that I have 487 GB available on hard drive.
The top instruction in Terminal reads VM 129G vsize when starting. When I run the finite element application once the LAPACK library in the Accelerate framework gets called, the Virtual Memory (VM) jumps to 563 G vsize.
After a short while, I get the "No enought room on startup disk for Application Memory error"
This is a screen capture of the application attempting to solve the problem using the LAPACK library inside the Accelerate framework: Here are the numbers as reported by the activity Monitor.
Tochnog Real Memory 6.68 GB
System Memory Free: 33.8 MB, Wired 378.8 MB, Active 5.06 GB, Inactive 2.53 GB, Used 7.96 GB.
VM size 567.52 GB, Page ins 270.8 MB, Page outs 108.2 MB, Swap used 505 MB
This is a screen copy of the same application solving the same problemwithout using the Accelerate framework.
Tochnog Real Memory 1.96 GB,
System Memory Free: 4.52 MB, Wired 382.1 MB, Active 2.69 GB, Inactive 416.2 GB, Used 3.47 GB.
VM size 148.60 GB, Page ins 288.8 MB, Page outs 108.2 MB, Swap used 2.5 MB
I can not understand the disparity in the behavior for the same case. As I said before, the only difference is the use of Accelerate in the first case. Also, as you can see, I thought that 8 GB of ram memory was a lot.
Your help will be greatly appreciated
Best regards,
F Lorenzo

The OP had posted this question in the iMac Intel forum.
I replied along similar lines, but suggested he repost this in the SL forum where I know there are usually several people who have a far better grasp of these issues than I.
I would be interested in getting their take on this.
Although, I think you are coming to the correct conclusion that there are not enough resources available for this process, I'm not certain that what you are saying on the way to that conclusion is correct. My understanding of VM is that it is the total theoretical demand on memory a process might make. It is not necessarily the actual or real world demand being made.
As such, this process is not actually demanding 568GB (rounded.) As evidence of that, you can see there is still memory available, albeit quite small, in the form of free memory of 33.8MB and inactive of 2.53GB (the GB for that figure, above, seems like it might be a typo, since for the process when not using Accelerate the reported figure for inactive was 416.2 GB -- surely impossible) and 7.96GB used. The process, itself, is using 6.68GB real memory.
In addition, I question whether the OP has misstated the 487GB free drive space. I think that might be the total drive capacity, not the free space.
My guess is that it is the combination of low available memory and low free drive space prompting this error.
From Dr. Smoke on VM:
it is possible that swap files could grow to the point where all free space on your disk is consumed by them. This can happen if you are very low on both RAM and free disk space.
https://discussions.apple.com/message/2232469?messageID=2232469&#2232469
This gets more to the actual intent of your question...
EDIT: Looks like some kind of glitch right now getting to the Dr. Smoke post.
Message was edited by: WZZZ
<Hyperlink Edited by Host>

Is the Gaia framework worth learning?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for