.NET/Java PDF, Tiff, Barcode SDK Library

> printfn "birth = %A" (date "18 March 2003, 6:21:01pm");; birth = 18/03/2003 18:21:01 val it : unit = () Note that formatting dates depends on the user s localization settings; you can achieve more explicit formatting by using the System.DateTime.ToString overload that accepts explicit format information. Here we use System.Uri type to parse a URL: > open System;; > System.Uri.TryCreate("http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/", UriKind.Absolute);; val it : bool * System.Uri = (true, http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/ { AbsolutePath = "/"; ... DnsSafeHost = "www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk"; ... Port = 80; ... Scheme = "http"; }) > Uri.TryCreate("e3 %//ww.gibberish.com", UriKind.Absolute);; val it : bool * Uri = (false, null) Many .NET types are used to hold static functions such as those for converting data from one format to another. Types such as System.Random play a similar role via objects with a small amount of state. Table 10-5 shows some of the most useful of these types.

free barcode generator excel 2010, excel barcode inventory, barcode generator excel kostenlos, free barcode macro excel 2007, excel barcode schriftart, excel barcode generator open source, free3of9 barcode font excel, convert text to barcode in excel 2013, print barcode labels in excel 2010, barcode excel 2007 freeware,

{ pstmt = conn.prepareStatement( stmtString ); rset = pstmt.executeQuery(); } finally { JDBCUtil.close( pstmt ); JDBCUtil.close( rset ); } } private static final String EXPLICIT_CACHING_KEY_PREFIX = "EXPLICIT_CACHING_KEY_PREFIX"; } The program simply runs the same select statement 5,000 times in a loop, first with implicit caching enabled and then with explicit caching enabled. In my runs, I found very little difference between the two cases. Since most of the time the performance bottleneck is in the SQL statement itself, my suggestion is to ignore performance as a criterion when selecting the approach of implicit versus explicit caching. In general, I recommend going with implicit caching unless you have a strong reason to use explicit caching.

Performance is frequently the most difficult metric to ensure, as it is often ill-defined, and many development shops don t have the skill set, experience, time, and/or motivation to design and run performance tests. Consequently, performance problems often first rear their ugly heads after an application is deployed. Further, these problems tend not to show up right away only after sufficient data storage thresholds have been met. Of course the system should respond in less than seven seconds. That s a given, says the consternated manager whose direct reports have been complaining about system performance. Performance strategies can often work directly against other system design decisions implemented to solve other requirements. You can use the layered software architecture to increase maintainability and reuse, though introducing new layers of abstraction does not necessarily increase performance. An overly deep call stack can actually impede it. However, other driving factors may actually increase performance. It depends. Performance is closely related to other aspects of the system, like availability, scalability, and robustness. Often a problem in one of these other areas first shows up as a performance problem. A bad memory chip is an availability issue, but it may first be reported as a performance problem. Similarly, for availability or scalability reasons, you may choose to persist data via asynchronous mechanisms. This decision may actually be perceived by the user as a performance issue. For example: I made an update to this widget record, but my changes weren t immediate. I had to wait 4.3422 seconds for my changes to take effect. While maybe it s not ideal for the user, an asynchronous mechanism like Message Queuing (MSMQ) allows for peak load balancing, guaranteed message delivery, and a looser coupling between the presentation tier and service availability. Weighing these against users experiences and their

approach to COM interoperability The NET runtime ships with tools that allow you to generate RCW and CCW wrappers offline, which allows you to use COM components as NET classes, and vice versa These tools are as follows: tlbimpexe: This is a tool for generating an RCW of a COM component given its type library aximpexe: This is similar to tlbimpexe and supports the generation of ActiveX components2 that have graphical interfaces (and that need to be integrated with Windows Forms) tlbexpexe: This generates a COM type library describing a NET assembly The CLR will be loaded as a COM component and will generate the appropriate CCW to make NET types accessible as COM components regasmexe: This is similar to tlbexpexe It also performs the registration of the assembly as a COM component.

Table 13-2 summarizes the main differences between these three caches. Table 13-2. Differences Between Session Cursor Cache, PL/SQL Cursor Cache, and JDBC Statement Caching