Search Results

Search found 30549 results on 1222 pages for 'object orientation'.

Page 1/1222 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Architecture Best Practice (MVC): Repository Returns Object & Object Member Accessed Directly or Repository Returns Object Member

    - by coderabbi
    Architecturally speaking, which is the preferable approach (and why)? $validation_date = $users_repository->getUser($user_id)->validation_date; Seems to violate Law of Demeter by accessing member of object returned by method call Seems to violate Encapsulation by accessing object member directly $validation_date = $users_repository->getUserValidationDate($user_id); Seems to violate Single Responsibility Principle as $users_repository no longer just returns User objects

    Read the article

  • When would you want two references to the same object?

    - by HCBPshenanigans
    In Java specifically, but likely in other languages as well; When would it be useful to have two references to the same object? Example: Dog a = new Dog(); Dob b = a; Is there a situation where this would be useful? Why would this be a preferred solution to using a whenever you want to interact with the object represented by a? Edit: Can I just say that all of your dog related examples are Delightful!

    Read the article

  • How to make an object stay relative to another object

    - by Nick
    In the following example there is a guy and a boat. They have both a position, orientation and velocity. The guy is standing on the shore and would like to board. He changes his position so he is now standing on the boat. The boat changes velocity and orientation and heads off. My character however has a velocity of 0,0,0 but I would like him to stay onboard. When I move my character around, I would like to move as if the boat was the ground I was standing on. How do keep my character aligned properly with the boat? It is exactly like in World Of Warcraft, when you board a boat or zeppelin. This is my physics code for the guy and boat: this.velocity.addSelf(acceleration.multiplyScalar(dTime)); this.position.addSelf(this.velocity.clone().multiplyScalar(dTime)); The guy already has a reference to the boat he's standing on, and thus knows the boat's position, velocity, orientation (even matrices or quaternions can be used).

    Read the article

  • convert orientation vec3 to a rotation matrix

    - by lapin
    I've got a normalized vec3 that represents an orientation. Each frame of animation, an object's orientation changes slightly, so I add a delta vector to the orientation vector and then normalize to find the new orientation. I'd like to convert the vec3 that represents an orientation into a rotation matrix that I can use to orient my object. If it helps, my object is a cone, and I'd like to rotate it about the pointy end, not from its center :) PS I know I should use quaternions because of the gimbal lock problem. If someone can explain quats too, that'd be great :)

    Read the article

  • How to Force iPhone to Check Orientation

    - by Shannon A.
    Here's the problem: View Controller #1 only runs in the two landscape orientations. View Controller #2 runs in any orientation. When view controller #2 is pushed on top of view controller #1 (using presentModalViewController:animated:, as it happens), there's no check for orientation. Instead, VC #2 just assumes the orientation is whichever landscape orientation VC #1 is currently in. This behavior is incorrect if the user happens to be holding the iPhone in a portrait orientation, despite the fact that he's viewing VC #1 where it's not supported. This can easily happen during startup, so it's not just a theoretical question. Is there any way to tell VC #2 to recheck what it's orientation actually is? If so, where would it be best placed? viewDidLoad?

    Read the article

  • Any way to trigger interface orientation check?

    - by Johnny Tee
    My app is going from a flipside view (only one orientation) to its main view (can have any sort of orientation. When I go from flipside back to main view, the main view's orientation is not checked and changed immediately. I need a way to trigger the built in orientation check that happens in willRotateToInterfaceOrientation so that the orientation is correct when the user goes from flipside view to main view. Any help is appreciated. I saw another question about this but didn't see a definitive answer. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to safely copy an object?

    - by Prog
    This question is going to be a little long. Please bear with me. Something that happened in a project of mine made me think about how to safely copy objects. I'll present the situation I had and then ask a question. There was a class SomeClass: class SomeClass{ Thing[] things; public SomeClass(Thing[] things){ this.things = things; } // irrelevant stuff omitted public SomeClass copy(){ return new SomeClass(things); } } There was another class Processor that takes SomeClass objects, copies them (via someClassInstance.copy()), manipulates the copy's state, and returns the copy. Here it is: class Processor{ public SomeClass processObject(SomeClass object){ SomeClass copy = object.copy(); manipulateTheCopy(copy); return copy; } // irrelevant stuff omitted } I ran this, and it had bugs. I looked into these bugs, and it turned out that the manipulations Processor does on copy actually affect not only the copy, but also the original SomeClass object that was passed into processObject. I found out that it was because the original and the copy shared state - because the original passed it's field things into the copy when creating it. This made me realize that copying objects is harder than simply instantiating them with the same fields as the original. For the two objects to be completely disconnected, without any shared state, each of the fields passed to the copy also has to be copied. And if that object contains other objects - they have to be copied too. And so on. So basically, in order to be able to actually copy an object, each class in the system must have a copy() method, that also invokes copy() on all of it's fields, and so on. So for example, for copy() in SomeClass to work, it needs to look like this: public SomeClass copy(){ Thing[] copyThings = new Thing[things.length]; for(int i=0; i<things.length; i++) copyThings[i] = things[i].copy(); return new SomeClass(copyThings); } And if Thing has object fields of it's own, than it's own copy() method must be appropriate: class Thing{ Apple apple; Pencil pencil; int number; public Thing(Apple apple, Pencil pencil, int number){ this.apple = apple; this.pencil = pencil; this.number = number; } public Thing copy(){ // 'number' is a primitve. return new Thing(apple.getCopy(), pencil.getCopy(), number); } } And so on. Of course, instead of all classes having a copy() method, the copying mechanism can happen in all of the getters and the constructors of classes (unless places where it isn't suitable, for example when the field points to an external object, not to an object that 'is part' of this object). Still, that means that in order to be able to safely copy an object - most classes would have to have copying mechanisms in their getters. My question is divided into two parts: How frequently do you need to get a copy of an object? Is this a regular issue? Is the technique described common and/or reasonable? Or is there a better way to make safe copies of objects? Or is there an easier way to safely copy objects, without them sharing any state?

    Read the article

  • How do I lock the layout of my android program to one orientation

    - by Mike V
    I'm trying to write a program that needs smooth orientation sensor samples as the phone is rotated all around. Every time the orientation of the phone is changed, it interrupts the data and freezes the program while the layout changes. How can I lock it in one orientation (landscape or portrait, it doesn't matter)? I assume it has something to do with android:layout in the xml file, but I can't find anything online.

    Read the article

  • Should an object know its own ID?

    - by xenoterracide
    obj.id seems fairly common and also seems to fall within the range of something an object could know about itself. I find myself asking why should my object know its own id? It doesn't seem to have a reason to have it? One of the main reason for it existing is retrieve it, and so my repositories need to know it, and thus use it for database interaction. I also once encountered a problem where I wanted to serialize an object to JSON for a RESTful API where the id did not seem to fit in the payload, but only the URI and including it in the object made that more difficult. Should an object know it's own id? why or why not?

    Read the article

  • Object oriented design importance

    - by user5507
    I started studying Object Oriented Design and Modelling using the this book by James Rumbaugh. It uses a tool called Object Modeling Technique (OMT). I have certain newbie questions. I searched the net, but couldn't get answers The book is pretty old. Don't know why the school told me to learn this. I know OMT is a predecessor of the Unified Modeling Language (UML). So its a waste? Whether the concepts change very much when we move from OMT to UML? I know OMT has Object, Dynamic and Functional Model. Wikipedia says UML is compatible with OMT and UML is a model too. As per wikipedia the UML models are Static and Dynamic and they are represented by different diagrams like class, object, activity, sequence..... I couldn't find the equivalence of this in OMT. I read that there are many object oriented development methods like OMT, Booch,.... Which one is used by Industry ? Where could I get a comparison of different Object oriented development methods?

    Read the article

  • Android: Width and Height of View After Orientation Change

    - by David
    I need to get the width and height of a WebView and pass them in the query string of the URL I am loading in the WebView. I have found a way to do this in onResume(). Since the width and height are not calculated at this point, I post a Runnable to the WebView to be queued for after the UI loads. Here's my problem: when the orientation changes, I am handling it in onConfigurationChanged. When I try to post a Runnable in onConfigurationChanged to the WebView, the WebView's width and height end up being the old orientation's width and height. At what point can I intercept the new width and height after orientation change?

    Read the article

  • Using orientation to calculate position on Windows Phone 7

    - by Lavinski
    I'm using the motion API and I'm trying to figure out a control scheme for the game I'm currently developing. What I'm trying to achive is for a orienation of the device to correlate directly to a position. Such that tilting the phone forward and to the left represents the top left position and back to the right would be the bottom right position. Photos to make it clearer (the red dot would be the calculated position). Forward and Left Back and Right Now for the tricky bit. I also have to make sure that the values take into account left landscape and right landscape device orientations (portrait is the default so no calculations would be needed for it). Has anyone done anything like this? Notes: I've tried using the yaw, pitch, roll and Quaternion readings. Sample: // Get device facing vector public static Vector3 GetState() { lock (lockable) { var down = Vector3.Forward; var direction = Vector3.Transform(down, state); switch (Orientation) { case Orientation.LandscapeLeft: return Vector3.TransformNormal(direction, Matrix.CreateRotationZ(-rightAngle)); case Orientation.LandscapeRight: return Vector3.TransformNormal(direction, Matrix.CreateRotationZ(rightAngle)); } return direction; } }

    Read the article

  • Taking Object Oriented development to the next level

    - by Songo
    Can you mention some advanced OO topics or concepts that one should be aware of? I have been a developer for 2 years now and currently aiming for a certain company that requires a web developer with a minimum experience of 3 years. I imagine the interview will have the basic object oriented topics like (Abstraction, Polymorphism, Inheritance, Design patterns, UML, Databases and ORMs, SOLID principles, DRY principle, ...etc) I have these topics covered, but what I'm looking forward to is bringing up topics such as Efferent Coupling, Afferent Coupling, Instability, The law of Demeter, ...etc. Till few days ago I never knew such concepts existed (maybe because I'm a communication engineer basically not a CS graduate.) Can you please recommend some more advanced topics concerning object oriented programming?

    Read the article

  • How to use the client object model with SharePoint2010

    - by ybbest
    In SharePoint2010, you can use client object model to communicate with SharePoint server. Today, I’d like to show you how to achieve this by using the c# console application. You can download the solution here. 1. Create a Console application in visual studio and add the following references to the project. 2. Insert your code as below ClientContext context = new ClientContext("http://demo2010a"); Web currentWeb = context.Web; context.Load(currentWeb, web =&gt; web.Title); context.ExecuteQuery(); Console.WriteLine(currentWeb.Title); Console.ReadLine(); 3. Run your code then you will get the web title displayed as shown below Note: If you got the following errors, you need to change your target framework from .Net Framework 4 client profile to .Net Framework 4 as shown below: Change from TO

    Read the article

  • Object behaviour or separate class?

    - by Andrew Stephens
    When it comes to OO database access you see two common approaches - the first is to provide a class (say "Customer") with methods such as Retrieve(), Update(), Delete(), etc. The other is to keep the Customer class fairly lightweight (essentially just properties) and perform the database access elsewhere, e.g. using a repository. This choice of approaches doesn't just apply to database access, it can crop up in many different OOD scenarios. So I was wondering if one way is preferable over the other (although I suspect the answer will be "it depends")! Another dev on our team argues that to be truly OO the class should be "self-contained", i.e. providing all the methods necessary to manipulate and interact with that object. I personally prefer the repository approach - I don't like bloating the Customer class with all that functionality, and I feel it results in cleaner code having it elsewhere, but I can't help thinking I'm seriously violating core OO concepts! And what about memory implications? If I retrieve thousands of Customer objects I'm assuming those with the data access methods will take up a lot more memory than the property-only objects?

    Read the article

  • Any enlightenment for understanding Object Oriented Programming? [closed]

    - by ????
    I studied computer science near the end of 1980s, and wasn't taught OOP that formally. With Pascal or C, when I understand the top-down design of functions, and the idea of black box, then everything just seem to make sense, as if there is a "oh I get it!" -- some kind of totally getting it and enlightenment feeling. But with OOP, all I know was the mechanics: the class, instance, method, inheritance, polymorphism, encapsulation. It was like, I knew all the "this is how it is", but never had the feeling of "I totally get it", the enlightened feeling. Would somebody be able to describe it, or point to a chapter in some book or paper which talks about OOP so that the reader can feel: "I totally get it!" on OOP?

    Read the article

  • Resizing layouts for orientation change?

    - by Cole
    Normal: Landscape: See how the ListView overlaps other things on the screen when in landscape mode? How can I keep this from happening? XML: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <RelativeLayout xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent" android:orientation="vertical" android:id="@+id/main" > <RelativeLayout android:id="@+id/myWishLists" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="50dp"> <Spinner android:id="@+id/spinner1" android:layout_width="wrap_content" android:layout_height="wrap_content" android:layout_alignParentLeft="true" android:layout_alignParentTop="true" android:prompt="@string/optionsSpinner" android:entries="@array/options" /> </RelativeLayout> <TextView android:id="@+id/myListsText" android:layout_width="wrap_content" android:layout_height="wrap_content" android:layout_below="@+id/myWishLists" android:layout_centerHorizontal="true" android:text="My Wish Lists" android:textStyle="bold" android:textAppearance="?android:attr/textAppearanceLarge" /> <RelativeLayout android:id="@+id/listsList" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="445dp" android:layout_alignParentBottom="true" android:layout_alignParentLeft="true"> <ListView android:id="@+id/lists" android:layout_width="fill_parent" android:layout_height="fill_parent" android:entries="@array/entries" > </ListView> </RelativeLayout> </RelativeLayout>

    Read the article

  • How to practice object oriented programming?

    - by user1620696
    I've always programmed in procedural languages and currently I'm moving towards object orientation. The main problem I've faced is that I can't see a way to practice object orientation in an effective way. I'll explain my point. When I've learned PHP and C it was pretty easy to practice: it was just matter of choosing something and thinking about an algorithm for that thing. In PHP for example, it was matter os sitting down and thinking: "well, just to practice, let me build one application with an administration area where people can add products". This was pretty easy, it was matter of thinking of an algorithm to register some user, to login the user, and to add the products. Combining these with PHP features, it was a good way to practice. Now, in object orientation we have lots of additional things. It's not just a matter of thinking about an algorithm, but analysing requirements deeper, writing use cases, figuring out class diagrams, properties and methods, setting up dependency injection and lots of things. The main point is that in the way I've been learning object orientation it seems that a good design is crucial, while in procedural languages one vague idea was enough. I'm not saying that in procedural languages we can write good software without design, just that for sake of practicing it is feasible, while in object orientation it seems not feasible to go without a good design, even for practicing. This seems to be a problem, because if each time I'm going to practice I need to figure out tons of requirements, use cases and so on, it seems to become not a good way to become better at object orientation, because this requires me to have one whole idea for an app everytime I'm going to practice. Because of that, what's a good way to practice object orientation?

    Read the article

  • Generic object to object mapping with parametrized constructor

    - by Rody van Sambeek
    I have a data access layer which returns an IDataRecord. I have a WCF service that serves DataContracts (dto's). These DataContracts are initiated by a parametrized constructor containing the IDataRecord as follows: [DataContract] public class DataContractItem { [DataMember] public int ID; [DataMember] public string Title; public DataContractItem(IDataRecord record) { this.ID = Convert.ToInt32(record["ID"]); this.Title = record["title"].ToString(); } } Unfortanately I can't change the DAL, so I'm obliged to work with the IDataRecord as input. But in generat this works very well. The mappings are pretty simple most of the time, sometimes they are a bit more complex, but no rocket science. However, now I'd like to be able to use generics to instantiate the different DataContracts to simplify the WCF service methods. I want to be able to do something like: public T DoSomething<T>(IDataRecord record) { ... return new T(record); } So I'd tried to following solutions: Use a generic typed interface with a constructor. doesn't work: ofcourse we can't define a constructor in an interface Use a static method to instantiate the DataContract and create a typed interface containing this static method. doesn't work: ofcourse we can't define a static method in an interface Use a generic typed interface containing the new() constraint doesn't work: new() constraint cannot contain a parameter (the IDataRecord) Using a factory object to perform the mapping based on the DataContract Type. does work, but: not very clean, because I now have a switch statement with all mappings in one file. I can't find a real clean solution for this. Can somebody shed a light on this for me? The project is too small for any complex mapping techniques and too large for a "switch-based" factory implementation.

    Read the article

  • ipad SplitView Orientation in DetailView

    - by nishantcm
    I am using this code in the DetailView.m of a splitview app. Now the orientation changes occur only when the device is rotated. The detection does not take place when the app is launched. I also get this warning warning: 'RootViewController' may not respond to '-adjustViewsForOrientation:' What change do I need to make the app adjust the orientation code when the app is launched. (void) willRotateToInterfaceOrientation:(UIInterfaceOrientation)toInterfaceOrientation duration:(NSTimeInterval)duration { [self adjustViewsForOrientation:toInterfaceOrientation]; } (void) adjustViewsForOrientation:(UIInterfaceOrientation)orientation { if (orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeLeft || orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeRight) { detailDescriptionLabel.center = CGPointMake(235.0f, 42.0f); bigthumbImageView.center = CGPointMake(355.0f, 70.0f); } else if (orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationPortrait || orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationPortraitUpsideDown) { detailDescriptionLabel.center = CGPointMake(160.0f, 52.0f); bigthumbImageView.center = CGPointMake(275.0f, 80.0f); } }

    Read the article

  • Can a loosely typed language be considered true object oriented?

    - by user61852
    Can a loosely typed programming language like PHP be really considered object oriented? I mean, the methods don't have returning types and method parameters has no declared type either. Doesn't class design require methods to have a return type? Don't methods signatures have specifically-typed parameters? How can OOP techniques help you code in PHP if you always have to check the types of parameters received because the language doesn't enforce types? Please, if I'm wrong, explain it to me. When you design things using UML, then code classes in PHP with no return-typed methods and no-type parameters... Is the code really compliant with the UML design? You spend time designing the architecture of your software, then the compiler doesn't force the programmer to follow your design while coding, letting he/she assign any object variable to any other variable with no "type-mismatch" warning.

    Read the article

  • i have project code in cocos and cocos2d and have problem in orientation

    - by Sukhi
    i have project code in cocos and cocos2d and have problem in orientation . my game is in landscape mode part of its code in cocos2d and another one is in cocos . cocos2d views orientations is working fine . i put this code in appdelegate.m file -(void)orientationChanged:(NSNotification *)notification { UIDeviceOrientation orientation = [[UIDevice currentDevice] orientation]; if( orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeLeft) { [[CCDirector sharedDirector] setDeviceOrientation: kCCDeviceOrientationLandscapeRight]; } else if( orientation == UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeRight) { [[CCDirector sharedDirector] setDeviceOrientation: kCCDeviceOrientationLandscapeLeft]; } } but when i go to cocos code its view look good but as soon as i change the rotation LandscapeRight to LandscapeLeft my views goes in potrate mode i wrote following code in UIViewController (BOOL)shouldAutorotateToInterfaceOrientation:(UIInterfaceOrientation)interfaceOrientation { // Overriden to allow any orientation. BOOL orienationStatus=FALSE; if (interfaceOrientation ==UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeLeft || interfaceOrientation==UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeRight) { orienationStatus=TRUE; } return orienationStatus; } whats wrong in that i don't know .... help will be appreciated .....

    Read the article

  • How to toggle orientation lock in android?

    - by pixel
    I want to create checkbox in my preference Activity that allows user to toggle orientation change. In similar questions people write only about complete orientation lock (by overriding onConfigurationChanged method or adding configChanges in AndroidManifest.xml) or orientation enforcing ( by setRequestedOrientation ). Is there a way to toggle orientation lock?

    Read the article

  • How to manage orientation lock in android?

    - by pixel
    I want to create checkbox in my preference Activity that allows user to toggle orientation change. In similar questions people write only about complete orientation lock (by overriding onConfigurationChanged method or adding configChanges in AndroidManifest.xml) or orientation enforcing ( by setRequestedOrientation ). Is there a way to toggle orientation lock?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >