Click here to Skip to main content
Page 1 of 24
Page Size: 10 · 25 · 50


Author filtered by: Paulo Zemek [x]
Re: My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 11 May 2013  
Thanks!
420 Frames Per Second by Paulo Zemek
Article 10 May 2013   license: CPOL
This article presents a class to manage enumerator based animations in WPF that can deal with different framerated animations independent of the hardware framerate
Article 7 May 2013   license: CPOL
This article presents a pattern to create immutable objects, which have thread-safe guarantee among others, and which also support modifications throught clonning, yet avoiding excessive intermediate clones.
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Thanks for the comments. About the TransactionScope I should really review it. But about the other details, well, I understand that simply getting a new library and using it in an existing project m
Re: My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Re: My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
The final answer: Did you try to reflect the SemaphoreSlim, found in the mscorlib? If you reflect it, you will see it uses Monitor.Pulse (when releasing a single thread), Monitor
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
I saw the new version, yet you are not really showing the Liskov substitution. In the first example, the "Computer" class was, in fact, the "Desktop" class. But in your code, you did:
Re: My vote of 1 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
You should also note that your link goes to this link: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert
Re: My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
There is no ordering problem, as the state set and the state read are done inside the lock, and Pulse/PulseAll/Wait should use the appropriate fences (if they don't in some implementation, then there
Re: My vote of 1 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Again you are not reading the article (or you are not understanding it). I explain the problem of using a Mutable Until Frozen object... the link you shown presents that pattern and, well I explain
Re: My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Thanks!
Re: My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
If Mono behaves differently it is not the focus, and when I said it is non-sense to talk about Mono I am simply saying that telling me that Mono works differently does not help at all with the "proble
Re: My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Pulse is not flawed. It simple did not keep the state signalled. It will only release an already waiting thread. We can say that AutoResetEvent has the same problem, but not at the first Set(). But
Re: My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Thanks! :-)
Forum Message 6 May 2013  
Thanks Sacha! It's always great to have a five from you.
Re: My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 5 May 2013  
Great... you didn't read the article and so you saw that it is flawed. In the beginning of the article, I say this: "When I first saw Pulse() I thought it could solve the problem, but the MSD
Forum Message 5 May 2013  
I think you confused what the "I am not the author" means. I did not publish this article, but I am answering a question in the forum. I did not intended to say that I was not the author of the code
ADO+.NET by Paulo Zemek
Article 5 May 2013   license: CPOL
This library is intended to "replace" ADO.NET by solving type mismatches and by creating typed readers that are faster and easier to use than DataTables.
Forum Message 5 May 2013  
I am not the author, but the calc is correct. It should be c.GetPrice() * 1.20 or c.getPrice() + c.GetPrice() * 0.20. The idea is to get the final value (value + 20%)... I will prefer a single c
Forum Message 5 May 2013  
I know the principle, but I simple didn't get your example. Liskov substitution is not directly related to the Open-Closed Principle. Doing things with ifs or the like has nothing to do with this p
Forum Message 5 May 2013  
Even if Monitor.TryEnter() is fully managed and may be considered better than the normal lock keyword (which uses Monitor.Enter()), it is not the purpose of this
Re: Performance tests... by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 4 May 2013  
The sample is, in fact, a performance test... But to be more realist: Do you have already built items to add and remove? Or you do a lock and then build the item? If you already have the items buil
Re: My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 4 May 2013  
Thanks!
Article 3 May 2013   license: CPOL
Using only Managed Resources to create Thread Synchronization
C#
MultiKeyDictionary by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 2 May 2013  
For your MultiKeyDictionary, I should say that it could be faster and use less memory if you used the Tuples as the key on a normal dictionary (in this case, your tuples must implement the IEquatable&
Forum Message 2 May 2013  
The idea seems interesting, but I think there are some problems. The article itself seems a lot of code dump with very small explanations. I for example got confused why you had the:
Re: My vote of 3 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 1 May 2013  
Or it will be published as open-source, giving the bad image again to the open-source community when, in fact, it was a commercial product. I really understand everything you said. I simply can't a
My vote of 3 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 1 May 2013  
I approved this article when it appeared on the "needing approval" section. At that moment I said that it is well written, but I simply don't agree with your opinion. In fact, I see that the open-sour
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
Because it was a coding horror.
Volatile As It Should Be by Paulo Zemek
Article 22 Apr 2013   license: CPOL
This article presents a class that allows volatile reads and writes as they are expected to work.
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
I was really talking about case 1.
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
I know, it is already an error, but what will happen if the object is disposed (and so, returned to the pool) and then it is used again? When there is a wrapper for the pooled object, we usually ge
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
The compiler will make everything into a single string... and I was presenting this as a coding horrer exactly because the many + that were done as const were being replaced by stringbuilders.
Re: Good article! by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
Hehehe... my bad. I remembered that I commented about the Add only collection that is O(1)... but I changed its implementation and it is mutable now. Yet... I think I did something silly, as it is ve
Some details by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
You wrote County instead of Country... at the first moment I was simple confused on what County meant. Also, I think you need to explain a bit better how the taxes assemblies will work... and maybe
Re: Incorrect!! by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 22 Apr 2013  
Me too!
Re: Good article! by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 21 Apr 2013  
If you want to understand my O(1) add collection, look at the ADO+.NET[
Forum Message 21 Apr 2013  
Well... look at Microsoft. To me, their Serialization API is an error. Remoting is another error. To the point that WCF uses a different way to serialize things and only partially supports Serializab
Forum Message 21 Apr 2013  
... the main problem I see is that you compare most of open-source projects. In fact, there are many commercial and open-source softwares that have bad quality, but it is certain that as anyone can wr
Article 20 Apr 2013   license: CPOL
A tutorial explaining how to create a Virtual Machine and a Compiler for such virtual machine
My vote of 2 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 20 Apr 2013  
I just explained why this is still incorrect. You really presented a method that works as a factory, but it does not follow the image presented or the factory method pattern from the Gang-of-Four.
Still incorrect. by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 20 Apr 2013  
Ok... maybe I misguided you... but I said that you should either call the interface IIceCream or that you should have IIceCreamFactory, ChocolateIceCreamFactory and ChocolateIceCream... Yet, your
Re: Incorrect!! by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
Yes... I am saying that... and also that in such situation you will not have the AbstractFactory, the ConcreteFactory and the Product. If you do that, you will only have a ConcreteFactory and an abstr
Re: Incorrect!! by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
I saw the comments and I should agree with FatCatProgrammer. The main confusion is that your method is returning a IIceCreamFactory. So, it seems that your ChocolateIceCream
My vote of 5 by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
Impressive work! I am personally not a big fun of dynamic, but this work really shows how powerful it can be.
Re: AND and OR by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
As all the examples concatenated Wheres I though it was mandatory. But I know that allowing to concatenate wheres is great (and in fact I use that with LINQ... but in many cases I have to build the ex
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
It is a small error, but in the JustMock example the bool called is starting as true when it should start as false.
AND and OR by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 19 Apr 2013  
Hi. This library is pretty impressive. But I have one question about AND and OR. In all where samples, you do one where after the other, but can the Where include the && and || operators? Th
Forum Message 18 Apr 2013  
Call me lazy, but I don't have C++ installed, yet I got really interested in this project and I want to see the final result... maybe that inspires me to install C++ :-)
Re: Much better by Paulo Zemek
Forum Message 18 Apr 2013  
Thanks. And I am actually writing some info on how to get started with the library. Probably I will post it this week-end.

Page 1 of 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Advertise | Privacy | Mobile
Web04 | 2.6.130513.1 | Last Updated 14 May 2013
Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2013
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use
Layout: fixed | fluid