Search Results

Search found 266 results on 11 pages for 'encapsulation'.

Page 10/11 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >

  • Passing IDisposable objects through constructor chains

    - by Matt Enright
    I've got a small hierarchy of objects that in general gets constructed from data in a Stream, but for some particular subclasses, can be synthesized from a simpler argument list. In chaining the constructors from the subclasses, I'm running into an issue with ensuring the disposal of the synthesized stream that the base class constructor needs. Its not escaped me that the use of IDisposable objects this way is possibly just dirty pool (plz advise?) for reasons I've not considered, but, this issue aside, it seems fairly straightforward (and good encapsulation). Codes: abstract class Node { protected Node (Stream raw) { // calculate/generate some base class properties } } class FilesystemNode : Node { public FilesystemNode (FileStream fs) : base (fs) { // all good here; disposing of fs not our responsibility } } class CompositeNode : Node { public CompositeNode (IEnumerable some_stuff) : base (GenerateRaw (some_stuff)) { // rogue stream from GenerateRaw now loose in the wild! } static Stream GenerateRaw (IEnumerable some_stuff) { var content = new MemoryStream (); // molest elements of some_stuff into proper format, write to stream content.Seek (0, SeekOrigin.Begin); return content; } } I realize that not disposing of a MemoryStream is not exactly a world-stopping case of bad CLR citizenship, but it still gives me the heebie-jeebies (not to mention that I may not always be using a MemoryStream for other subtypes). It's not in scope, so I can't explicitly Dispose () it later in the constructor, and adding a using statement in GenerateRaw () is self-defeating since I need the stream returned. Is there a better way to do this? Preemptive strikes: yes, the properties calculated in the Node constructor should be part of the base class, and should not be calculated by (or accessible in) the subclasses I won't require that a stream be passed into CompositeNode (its format should be irrelevant to the caller) The previous iteration had the value calculation in the base class as a separate protected method, which I then just called at the end of each subtype constructor, moved the body of GenerateRaw () into a using statement in the body of the CompositeNode constructor. But the repetition of requiring that call for each constructor and not being able to guarantee that it be run for every subtype ever (a Node is not a Node, semantically, without these properties initialized) gave me heebie-jeebies far worse than the (potential) resource leak here does.

    Read the article

  • Project management: Implementing custom errors in VS compilation process

    - by David Lively
    Like many architects, I've developed coding standards through years of experience to which I expect my developers to adhere. This is especially a problem with the crowd that believes that three or four years of experience makes you a senior-level developer.Approaching this as a training and code review issue has generated limited success. So, I was thinking that it would be great to be able to add custom compile-time errors to the build process to more strictly enforce this and other guidelines. For instance, we use stored procedures for ALL database access, which provides procedure-level security, db encapsulation (table structure is hidden from the app), and other benefits. (Note: I am not interested in starting a debate about this.) Some developers prefer inline SQL or parametrized queries, and that's fine - on their own time and own projects. I'd like a way to add a compilation check that finds, say, anything that looks like string sql = "insert into some_table (col1,col2) values (@col1, @col2);" and generates an error or, in certain circumstances, a warning, with a message like Inline SQL and parametrized queries are not permitted. Or, if they use the var keyword var x = new MyClass(); Variable definitions must be explicitly typed. Do Visual Studio and MSBuild provide a way to add this functionality? I'm thinking that I could use a regular expression to find unacceptable code and generate the correct error, but I'm not sure what, from a performance standpoint, is the best way to to integrate this into the build process. We could add a pre- or post-build step to run a custom EXE, but how can I return line- and file-specifc errors? Also, I'd like this to run after compilation of each file, rather than post-link. Is a regex the best way to perform this type of pattern matching, or should I go crazy and run the code through a C# parser, which would allow node-level validation via the parse tree? I'd appreciate suggestions and tales of prior experience.

    Read the article

  • Handles Comparison: empty classes vs. undefined classes vs. void*

    - by Nawaz
    Microsoft's GDI+ defines many empty classes to be treated as handles internally. For example, (source GdiPlusGpStubs.h) //Approach 1 class GpGraphics {}; class GpBrush {}; class GpTexture : public GpBrush {}; class GpSolidFill : public GpBrush {}; class GpLineGradient : public GpBrush {}; class GpPathGradient : public GpBrush {}; class GpHatch : public GpBrush {}; class GpPen {}; class GpCustomLineCap {}; There are other two ways to define handles. They're, //Approach 2 class BOOK; //no need to define it! typedef BOOK *PBOOK; typedef PBOOK HBOOK; //handle to be used internally //Approach 3 typedef void* PVOID; typedef PVOID HBOOK; //handle to be used internally I just want to know the advantages and disadvantages of each of these approaches. One advantage with Microsoft's approach is that, they can define type-safe hierarchy of handles using empty classes, which (I think) is not possible with the other two approaches. What else? EDIT: One advantage with the second approach (i.e using incomplete classes) is that we can prevent clients from dereferencing the handles (that means, this approach appears to support encapsulation strongly, I suppose). The code would not even compile if one attempts to dereference handles. What else?

    Read the article

  • Enum "copy" problem

    - by f0b0s
    Hi all! I have a class, let's call it A. It has a enum (E) and a method Foo(E e), with gets E in the arguments. I want to write a wrapper (decorator) W for A. So it'll have its own method Foo(A::E). But I want to have some kind of encapsulation, so this method should defined as Foo(F f), where F is another enum defined in W, that can be converted to A::E. For example: class A { public: enum E { ONE, TWO, THREE }; void Foo(E e); }; class B { //enum F; // ??? void Foo(F f) { a_.Foo(f); } private: A a_; }; How F should be defined? I don't want to copy value like this: enum F { ONE = A::ONE, TWO = A::TWO, THREE = A::THREE }; because its a potential error in the near feature. Is the typedef definition: typedef A::E F; is the best decision? Is it legal?

    Read the article

  • C++: calling non-member functions with the same syntax of member ones

    - by peoro
    One thing I'd like to do in C++ is to call non-member functions with the same syntax you call member functions: class A { }; void f( A & this ) { /* ... */ } // ... A a; a.f(); // this is the same as f(a); Of course this could only work as long as f is not virtual (since it cannot appear in A's virtual table. f doesn't need to access A's non-public members. f doesn't conflict with a function declared in A (A::f). I'd like such a syntax because in my opinion it would be quite comfortable and would push good habits: calling str.strip() on a std::string (where strip is a function defined by the user) would sound a lot better than calling strip( str );. most of the times (always?) classes provide some member functions which don't require to be member (ie: are not virtual and don't use non-public members). This breaks encapsulation, but is the most practical thing to do (due to point 1). My question here is: what do you think of such feature? Do you think it would be something nice, or something that would introduce more issues than the ones it aims to solve? Could it make sense to propose such a feature to the next standard (the one after C++0x)? Of course this is just a brief description of this idea; it is not complete; we'd probably need to explicitly mark a function with a special keyword to let it work like this and many other stuff.

    Read the article

  • How do you pass a generic delegate argument to a method in .NET 2.0 - UPDATED

    - by Seth Spearman
    Hello, I have a class with a delegate declaration as follows... Public Class MyClass Public Delegate Function Getter(Of TResult)() As TResult ''#the following code works. Public Shared Sub MyMethod(ByVal g As Getter(Of Boolean)) ''#do stuff End Sub End Class However, I do not want to explicitly type the Getter delegate in the Method call. Why can I not declare the parameter as follows... ... (ByVal g As Getter(Of TResult)) Is there a way to do it? My end goal was to be able to set a delegate for property setters and getters in the called class. But my reading indicates you can't do that. So I put setter and getter methods in that class and then I want the calling class to set the delegate argument and then invoke. Is there a best practice for doing this. I realize in the above example that I can set set the delegate variable from the calling class...but I am trying to create a singleton with tight encapsulation. For the record, I can't use any of the new delegate types declared in .net35. Answers in C# are welcome. Any thoughts? Seth

    Read the article

  • Dealing With Java Default Level Access Specifiers

    - by Tom Tresansky
    I've seen some code in a project recently where some fields in a couple classes have been using the default access modifier without good reason to. It almost looks like a case of "oops, forgot to make these private". Since the classes are used almost exclusively outside of the package they are defined in, the fields are not visible from the calling code, and are treated as private. So the mistake/oversight would not be very noticeable. However, encapsulation is broken. If I wanted to add a new class to the existing package, I could then mess with internal data in objects using fields with default access. So, my questions: Are there any best practices concerning default access specifiers that I should be aware of? Anything that would help prevent this type of accident from re-occurring? Are are any annotations which might say something to the effect of "I really meant for these to be default access"? Using CheckStyle, or any other Eclipse plugins, is there any way to flag instances of default fields, or disallow any not accompanied by, say, a "//default access" comment trailing them?

    Read the article

  • Good Replacement for User Control?

    - by David Lively
    I found user controls to be incredibly useful when working with ASP.NET webforms. By encapsulating the code required for displaying a control with the markup, creation of reusable components was very straightforward and very, very useful. While MVC provides convenient separation of concerns, this seems to break encapsulation (ie, you can add a control without adding or using its supporting code, leading to runtime errors). Having to modify a controller every time I add a control to a view seems to me to integrate concerns, not separate them. I'd rather break the purist MVC ideology than give up the benefits of reusable, packaged controls. I need to be able to include components similar to webforms user controls throughout a site, but not for the entire site, and not at a level that belongs in a master page. These components should have their own code not just markup (to interact with the business layer), and it would be great if the page controller didn't need to know about the control. Since MVC user controls don't have codebehind, I can't see a good way to do this. I've searched previous SO questions, and have yet to find a good answer. Options so far In an attempt to avoid turning the comments section into a discussion... RenderAction This allows the view to call another controller, which will be responsible for interacting with the BLL and whatever data is necessary to its corresponding view. The calling view needs to be aware of the sub controller. This seems to provide a nice way to encapsulate partial views and controls, without having to modify the calling controller. RenderPartial The calling controller is still responsible for executing whatever code is associated with the partial view, and making sure that the model passed to the partial view contains the data it expects. Effectively, modifying the partial view potentially means modifying the calling controller. Annoying especially if this is used in multiple places. Portable Areas Place each control in its own project/area?

    Read the article

  • How do you pass a generic delegate argument to a method in .NET 2.0

    - by Seth Spearman
    Hello, I have a class with a delegate declaration as follows... Public Class MyClass Public Delegate Function Getter(Of TResult)() As TResult 'the following code works. Public Shared Sub MyMethod(ByVal g As Getter(Of Boolean)) 'do stuff End Sub End Class However, I do not want to explicitly type the Getter delegate in the Method call. Why can I not declare the parameter as follows... ... (ByVal g As Getter(Of TResult)) Is there a way to do it? My end goal was to be able to set a delegate for property setters and getters in the called class. But my reading indicates you can't do that. So I put setter and getter methods in that class and then I want the calling class to set the delegate argument and then invoke. Is there a best practice for doing this. I realize in the above example that I can set set the delegate variable from the calling class...but I am trying to create a singleton with tight encapsulation. For the record, I can't use any of the new delegate types declared in .net35. Answers in C# are welcome. Any thoughts? Seth

    Read the article

  • [c++] accessing the hidden 'this' pointer

    - by Kyle
    I have a GUI architecture wherein elements fire events like so: guiManager->fireEvent(BUTTON_CLICKED, this); Every single event fired passes 'this' as the caller of the event. There is never a time I dont want to pass 'this', and further, no pointer except for 'this' should ever be passed. This brings me to a problem: How can I assert that fireEvent is never given a pointer other than 'this', and how can I simplify (and homogenize) calls to fireEvent to just: guiManager->fireEvent(BUTTON_CLICKED); At this point, I'm reminded of a fairly common compiler error when you write something like this: class A { public: void foo() {} }; class B { void oops() { const A* a = new A; a->foo(); } }; int main() { return 0; } Compiling this will give you ../src/sandbox.cpp: In member function ‘void B::oops()’: ../src/sandbox.cpp:7: error: passing ‘const A’ as ‘this’ argument of ‘void A::foo()’ discards qualifiers because member functions pass 'this' as a hidden parameter. "Aha!" I say. This (no pun intended) is exactly what I want. If I could somehow access the hidden 'this' pointer, it would solve both issues I mentioned earlier. The problem is, as far as I know you can't (can you?) and if you could, there would be outcries of "but it would break encapsulation!" Except I'm already passing 'this' every time, so what more could it break. So, is there a way to access the hidden 'this', and if not are there any idioms or alternative approaches that are more elegant than passing 'this' every time?

    Read the article

  • What is the Rule of Thumb on Exposing Encapsulated Class Methods

    - by javamonkey79
    Consider the following analogy: If we have a class: "Car" we might expect it to have an instance of "Engine" in it. As in: "The car HAS-A engine". Similarly, in the "Engine" class we would expect an instance of "Starting System" or "Cooling System" which each have their appropriate sub-components. By the nature of encapsulation, is it not true that the car "HAS-A" "radiator hose" in it as well as the engine? Therefore, is it appropriate OO to do something like this: public class Car { private Engine _engine; public Engine getEngine() { return _engine; } // is it ok to use 'convenience' methods of inner classes? // are the following 2 methods "wrong" from an OO point of view? public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return getCoolingSystem().getRadiatorHose(); } public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _engine.getCoolingSystem(); } } public class Engine { private CoolingSystem _coolingSystem; public CoolingSystem getCoolingSystem() { return _coolingSystem; } } public class CoolingSystem { private RadiatorHose _radiatorHose; public RadiatorHose getRadiatorHose() { return _radiatorHose; } } public class RadiatorHose {//... }

    Read the article

  • Common protected data member in base class?

    - by EXP0
    I have a base class and several derived classes. The derived classes use some common data, can I just put those common data as protected member of the base class? I know the protected member breaks encapsulation sometimes, so I wonder if there is any good approach. Here is a specific example: class Base{ public: virtual void foo() = 0; void printData(); protected: std::vector<std::string> mData; } class Dr1 : public Base{ public: virtual void foo(); //could change mData } class Dr2 : public Base{ public: virtual void foo(); //could change mData } If I put mData into Dr1 and Dr2 as private member, then I need to put it in both of them, and I can not have printData() in Base since printData() need access to mData unless I make printData() virtual and have identical function in both Dr1 and Dr2, which doesn't make much sense to me. Is there a better way to approach this without using protected member? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – SSIS Parameters in Parent-Child ETL Architectures – Notes from the Field #040

    - by Pinal Dave
    [Notes from Pinal]: SSIS is very well explored subject, however, there are so many interesting elements when we read, we learn something new. A similar concept has been Parent-Child ETL architecture’s relationship in SSIS. Linchpin People are database coaches and wellness experts for a data driven world. In this 40th episode of the Notes from the Fields series database expert Tim Mitchell (partner at Linchpin People) shares very interesting conversation related to how to understand SSIS Parameters in Parent-Child ETL Architectures. In this brief Notes from the Field post, I will review the use of SSIS parameters in parent-child ETL architectures. A very common design pattern used in SQL Server Integration Services is one I call the parent-child pattern.  Simply put, this is a pattern in which packages are executed by other packages.  An ETL infrastructure built using small, single-purpose packages is very often easier to develop, debug, and troubleshoot than large, monolithic packages.  For a more in-depth look at parent-child architectures, check out my earlier blog post on this topic. When using the parent-child design pattern, you will frequently need to pass values from the calling (parent) package to the called (child) package.  In older versions of SSIS, this process was possible but not necessarily simple.  When using SSIS 2005 or 2008, or even when using SSIS 2012 or 2014 in package deployment mode, you would have to create package configurations to pass values from parent to child packages.  Package configurations, while effective, were not the easiest tool to work with.  Fortunately, starting with SSIS in SQL Server 2012, you can now use package parameters for this purpose. In the example I will use for this demonstration, I’ll create two packages: one intended for use as a child package, and the other configured to execute said child package.  In the parent package I’m going to build a for each loop container in SSIS, and use package parameters to pass in a value – specifically, a ClientID – for each iteration of the loop.  The child package will be executed from within the for each loop, and will create one output file for each client, with the source query and filename dependent on the ClientID received from the parent package. Configuring the Child and Parent Packages When you create a new package, you’ll see the Parameters tab at the package level.  Clicking over to that tab allows you to add, edit, or delete package parameters. As shown above, the sample package has two parameters.  Note that I’ve set the name, data type, and default value for each of these.  Also note the column entitled Required: this allows me to specify whether the parameter value is optional (the default behavior) or required for package execution.  In this example, I have one parameter that is required, and the other is not. Let’s shift over to the parent package briefly, and demonstrate how to supply values to these parameters in the child package.  Using the execute package task, you can easily map variable values in the parent package to parameters in the child package. The execute package task in the parent package, shown above, has the variable vThisClient from the parent package mapped to the pClientID parameter shown earlier in the child package.  Note that there is no value mapped to the child package parameter named pOutputFolder.  Since this parameter has the Required property set to False, we don’t have to specify a value for it, which will cause that parameter to use the default value we supplied when designing the child pacakge. The last step in the parent package is to create the for each loop container I mentioned earlier, and place the execute package task inside it.  I’m using an object variable to store the distinct client ID values, and I use that as the iterator for the loop (I describe how to do this more in depth here).  For each iteration of the loop, a different client ID value will be passed into the child package parameter. The final step is to configure the child package to actually do something meaningful with the parameter values passed into it.  In this case, I’ve modified the OleDB source query to use the pClientID value in the WHERE clause of the query to restrict results for each iteration to a single client’s data.  Additionally, I’ll use both the pClientID and pOutputFolder parameters to dynamically build the output filename. As shown, the pClientID is used in the WHERE clause, so we only get the current client’s invoices for each iteration of the loop. For the flat file connection, I’m setting the Connection String property using an expression that engages both of the parameters for this package, as shown above. Parting Thoughts There are many uses for package parameters beyond a simple parent-child design pattern.  For example, you can create standalone packages (those not intended to be used as a child package) and still use parameters.  Parameter values may be supplied to a package directly at runtime by a SQL Server Agent job, through the command line (via dtexec.exe), or through T-SQL. Also, you can also have project parameters as well as package parameters.  Project parameters work in much the same way as package parameters, but the parameters apply to all packages in a project, not just a single package. Conclusion Of the numerous advantages of using catalog deployment model in SSIS 2012 and beyond, package parameters are near the top of the list.  Parameters allow you to easily share values from parent to child packages, enabling more dynamic behavior and better code encapsulation. If you want me to take a look at your server and its settings, or if your server is facing any issue we can Fix Your SQL Server. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: Notes from the Field, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • Tip #19 Module Private Visibility in OSGi

    - by ByronNevins
    I hate public and protected methods and classes.  It requires so much work to change them in a huge project like GlassFish.  Not to mention that you may well have to support those APIs forever.  They are highly overused in GlassFish.  In fact I'd bet that > 95% of classes are marked as public for no good reason.  It's just (bad) habit is my guess. private and default visibility (I call it package-private) is easier to maintain.  It is much much easier to change such classes and methods around.  If you have ANY public method or public class in GlassFish you'll need to grep through a tremendous amount of source code to find all callers.  But even that won't be theoretically reliable.  What if a caller is using reflection to access public methods?  You may never find such usages. If you have package private methods, it's easy.  Simply grep through all the code in that one package.  As long as that package compiles ok you're all set.  There can' be any compile errors anywhere else.  It's a waste of time to even look around or build the "outside" world.  So you may be thinking: "Aha!  I'll just make my module have one giant package with all the java files.  Then I can use the default visibility and maintenance will be much easier.  But there's a problem.  You are wasting a very nice feature of java -- organizing code into separate packages.  It also makes the code much more encapsulated.  Unfortunately to share code between the packages you have no choice but to declare public visibility. What happens in practice is that a module ends up having tons of public classes and methods that are used exclusively inside the module.  Which finally brings me to the point of this blog:  If Only There Was A Module-Private Visibility Available Well, surprise!  There is such a mechanism.  If your project is running under OSGi that is.  Like GlassFish does!  With this mechanism you can easily add another level of visibility by telling OSGi exactly which public you want to be exposed outside of the module.  You get the best of both worlds: Better encapsulation of your code so that maintenance is easier and productivity is increased. Usage of public visibility inside the module so that you can encapsulate intra-module better with packages. How I do this in GlassFish: Carefully plan out at least one package that will contain "true" publics.  This is the package that will be exported by OSGi.  I recommend just one package. Here is how to tell OSGi to use it in GlassFish -- edit osgi.bundle like so:-exportcontents:     org.glassfish.mymodule.truepublics;  version=${project.osgi.version} Now all publics declared in any other packages will be visible module-wide but not outside the module. There is one caveat: Accessing "module-private" items outside of the module is controlled at run-time, not compile-time.  The compiler has no clue that a public in a dependent module isn't really public.  it will happily compile it.  At runtime you will definitely see fireworks.  The good news is that you don't have to wait for the code path that tries to use the "module-private" items to fire.  OSGi will complain loudly when that module gets loaded.  OSGi will refuse to load it.  You will see an error like this: remote failure: Error while loading FOO: Exception while adding the new configuration : Error occurred during deployment: Exception while loading the app : org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle com.oracle.glassfish.miscreant.code [115]: Unable to resolve 115.0: missing requirement [115.0] osgi.wiring.package; (osgi.wiring.package=org.glassfish.mymodule.unexported). Please see server.log for more details. That is if you accidentally change code in module B to use a public that is really a "module-private" in module A, then you will see the error immediately when you try to test whatever you were changing in module B.

    Read the article

  • Objective-C wrapper API design methodology

    - by Wade Williams
    I know there's no one answer to this question, but I'd like to get people's thoughts on how they would approach the situation. I'm writing an Objective-C wrapper to a C library. My goals are: 1) The wrapper use Objective-C objects. For example, if the C API defines a parameter such as char *name, the Objective-C API should use name:(NSString *). 2) The client using the Objective-C wrapper should not have to have knowledge of the inner-workings of the C library. Speed is not really any issue. That's all easy with simple parameters. It's certainly no problem to take in an NSString and convert it to a C string to pass it to the C library. My indecision comes in when complex structures are involved. Let's say you have: struct flow { long direction; long speed; long disruption; long start; long stop; } flow_t; And then your C API call is: void setFlows(flow_t inFlows[4]); So, some of the choices are: 1) expose the flow_t structure to the client and have the Objective-C API take an array of those structures 2) build an NSArray of four NSDictionaries containing the properties and pass that as a parameter 3) create an NSArray of four "Flow" objects containing the structure's properties and pass that as a parameter My analysis of the approaches: Approach 1: Easiest. However, it doesn't meet the design goals Approach 2: For some reason, this seems to me to be the most "Objective-C" way of doing it. However, each element of the NSDictionary would have to be wrapped in an NSNumber. Now it seems like we're doing an awful lot just to pass the equivalent of a struct. Approach 3: Seems the cleanest to me from an object-oriented standpoint and the extra encapsulation could come in handy later. However, like #2, it now seems like we're doing an awful lot (creating an array, creating and initializing objects) just to pass a struct. So, the question is, how would you approach this situation? Are there other choices I'm not considering? Are there additional advantages or disadvantages to the approaches I've presented that I'm not considering?

    Read the article

  • How much abstraction is too much?

    - by Daniel Bingham
    In an Object Oriented Program: How much abstraction is too much? How much is just right? I have always been a nuts and bolts kind of guy. I understood the concept behind high levels of encapsulation and abstraction, but always felt instinctively that adding too much would just confuse the program. I always tried to shoot for an amount of abstraction that left no empty classes or layers. And where in doubt, instead of adding a new layer to the hierarchy, I would try and fit something into the existing layers. However, recently I've been encountering more highly abstracted systems. Systems where everything that could require a representation later in the hierarchy gets one up front. This leads to a lot of empty layers, which at first seems like bad design. However, on second thought I've come to realize that leaving those empty layers gives you more places to hook into in the future with out much refactoring. It leaves you greater ability to add new functionality on top of the old with out doing nearly as much work to adjust the old. The two risks of this seem to be that you could get the layers you need wrong. In this case one would wind up still needing to do substantial refactoring to extend the code and would still have a ton of never used layers. But depending on how much time you spend coming up with the initial abstractions, the chance of screwing it up, and the time that could be saved later if you get it right - it may still be worth it to try. The other risk I can think of is the risk of over doing it and never needing all the extra layers. But is that really so bad? Are extra class layers really so expensive that it is much of a loss if they are never used? The biggest expense and loss here would be time that is lost up front coming up with the layers. But much of that time still might be saved later when one can work with the abstracted code rather than more low level code. So when is it too much? At what point do the empty layers and extra "might need" abstractions become overkill? How little is too little? Where's the sweet spot? Are there any dependable rules of thumb you've found in the course of your career that help you judge the amount of abstraction needed?

    Read the article

  • Speed Problem with Wireless Connectivity on Cisco 877w

    - by Carl Crawley
    Having a bit of a weird one with my local LAN setup. I recently installed a Cisco 877W router on my DSL2+ connection and all is working really well.. Upgraded the IOS to 12.4 and my wired clients are streaming connectivity superfast at 1.3mb/s. However, there seems to be an issue with my wireless clients - I can't seem to stream any data across the local wireless connection (LAN) and using the Internet, whilst responsive enough isn't really comparable with the wired connection speed. For example, all devices are connected to an 8 Port Gb switch on FE0 from the Router with a NAS disk and on my wired clients, I can transfer/stream etc absolutely fine - however, transferring a local 700Mb file on my local LAN estimates 7-8 hours to transfer :( The Wireless config is as follows : interface Dot11Radio0 description WIRELESS INTERFACE no ip address ! encryption mode ciphers tkip ! ssid [MySSID] ! speed basic-1.0 basic-2.0 basic-5.5 6.0 9.0 basic-11.0 channel 2462 station-role root rts threshold 2312 world-mode dot11d country GB indoor bridge-group 1 bridge-group 1 subscriber-loop-control bridge-group 1 spanning-disabled bridge-group 1 block-unknown-source no bridge-group 1 source-learning no bridge-group 1 unicast-flooding All devices are connected to the Gb Switch which is connected to FE0 with the following: Hardware is Fast Ethernet, address is 0021.a03e.6519 (bia 0021.a03e.6519) Description: Uplink to Switch MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100000 Kbit/sec, DLY 100 usec, reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255 Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set Keepalive set (10 sec) Full-duplex, 100Mb/s ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 Last input never, output never, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue: 0/40 (size/max) 5 minute input rate 14000 bits/sec, 19 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 167000 bits/sec, 23 packets/sec 177365 packets input, 52089562 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 919 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 260 input errors, 260 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored 0 input packets with dribble condition detected 156673 packets output, 106218222 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out Not sure why I'm having problems on the wireless and I've reached the end of my Cisco knowledge... Thanks for any pointers! Carl

    Read the article

  • Constructor Injection and when to use a Service Locator

    - by Simon
    I'm struggling to understand parts of StructureMap's usage. In particular, in the documentation a statement is made regarding a common anti-pattern, the use of StructureMap as a Service Locator only instead of constructor injection (code samples straight from Structuremap documentation): public ShippingScreenPresenter() { _service = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IShippingService>(); _repository = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IRepository>(); } instead of: public ShippingScreenPresenter(IShippingService service, IRepository repository) { _service = service; _repository = repository; } This is fine for a very short object graph, but when dealing with objects many levels deep, does this imply that you should pass down all the dependencies required by the deeper objects right from the top? Surely this breaks encapsulation and exposes too much information about the implementation of deeper objects. Let's say I'm using the Active Record pattern, so my record needs access to a data repository to be able to save and load itself. If this record is loaded inside an object, does that object call ObjectFactory.CreateInstance() and pass it into the active record's constructor? What if that object is inside another object. Does it take the IRepository in as its own parameter from further up? That would expose to the parent object the fact that we're access the data repository at this point, something the outer object probably shouldn't know. public class OuterClass { public OuterClass(IRepository repository) { // Why should I know that ThingThatNeedsRecord needs a repository? // that smells like exposed implementation to me, especially since // ThingThatNeedsRecord doesn't use the repo itself, but passes it // to the record. // Also where do I create repository? Have to instantiate it somewhere // up the chain of objects ThingThatNeedsRecord thing = new ThingThatNeedsRecord(repository); thing.GetAnswer("question"); } } public class ThingThatNeedsRecord { public ThingThatNeedsRecord(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public string GetAnswer(string someParam) { // create activeRecord(s) and process, returning some result // part of which contains: ActiveRecord record = new ActiveRecord(repository, key); } private IRepository repository; } public class ActiveRecord { public ActiveRecord(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActiveRecord(IRepository repository, int primaryKey); { this.repositry = repository; Load(primaryKey); } public void Save(); private void Load(int primaryKey) { this.primaryKey = primaryKey; // access the database via the repository and set someData } private IRepository repository; private int primaryKey; private string someData; } Any thoughts would be appreciated. Simon

    Read the article

  • Overwhelmed by design patterns... where to begin?

    - by Pete
    I am writing a simple prototype code to demonstrate & profile I/O schemes (HDF4, HDF5, HDF5 using parallel IO, NetCDF, etc.) for a physics code. Since focus is on IO, the rest of the program is very simple: class Grid { public: floatArray x,y,z; }; class MyModel { public: MyModel(const int &nip1, const int &njp1, const int &nkp1, const int &numProcs); Grid grid; map<string, floatArray> plasmaVariables; }; Where floatArray is a simple class that lets me define arbitrary dimensioned arrays and do mathematical operations on them (i.e. x+y is point-wise addition). Of course, I could use better encapsulation (write accessors/setters, etc.), but that's not the concept I'm struggling with. For the I/O routines, I am envisioning applying simple inheritance: Abstract I/O class defines read & write functions to fill in the "myModel" object HDF4 derived class HDF5 HDF5 using parallel IO NetCDF etc... The code should read data in any of these formats, then write out to any of these formats. In the past, I would add an AbstractIO member to myModel and create/destroy this object depending on which I/O scheme I want. In this way, I could do something like: myModelObj.ioObj->read('input.hdf') myModelObj.ioObj->write('output.hdf') I have a bit of OOP experience but very little on the Design Patterns front, so I recently acquired the Gang of Four book "Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software". OOP designers: Which pattern(s) would you recommend I use to integrate I/O with the myModel object? I am interested in answering this for two reasons: To learn more about design patterns in general Apply what I learn to help refactor an large old crufty/legacy physics code to be more human-readable & extensible. I am leaning towards applying the Decerator pattern to myModel, so I can attach the I/O responsibilities dynamically to myModel (i.e. whether to use HDF4, HDF5, etc.). However, I don't feel very confident that this is the best pattern to apply. Reading the Gang of Four book cover-to-cover before I start coding feels like a good way to develop an unhealthy caffeine addiction. What patterns do you recommend?

    Read the article

  • In a PHP project, how do you organize and access your helper objects?

    - by Pekka
    How do you organize and manage your helper objects like the database engine, user notification, error handling and so on in a PHP based, object oriented project? Say I have a large PHP CMS. The CMS is organized in various classes. A few examples: the database object user management an API to create/modify/delete items a messaging object to display messages to the end user a context handler that takes you to the right page a navigation bar class that shows buttons a logging object possibly, custom error handling etc. I am dealing with the eternal question, how to best make these objects accessible to each part of the system that needs it. my first apporach, many years ago was to have a $application global that contained initialized instances of these classes. global $application; $application->messageHandler->addMessage("Item successfully inserted"); I then changed over to the Singleton pattern and a factory function: $mh =&factory("messageHandler"); $mh->addMessage("Item successfully inserted"); but I'm not happy with that either. Unit tests and encapsulation become more and more important to me, and in my understanding the logic behind globals/singletons destroys the basic idea of OOP. Then there is of course the possibility of giving each object a number of pointers to the helper objects it needs, probably the very cleanest, resource-saving and testing-friendly way but I have doubts about the maintainability of this in the long run. Most PHP frameworks I have looked into use either the singleton pattern, or functions that access the initialized objects. Both fine approaches, but as I said I'm happy with neither. I would like to broaden my horizon on what is possible here and what others have done. I am looking for examples, additional ideas and pointers towards resources that discuss this from a long-term, real-world perspective. Also, I'm interested to hear about specialized, niche or plain weird approaches to the issue. Bounty I am following the popular vote in awarding the bounty, the answer which is probably also going to give me the most. Thank you for all your answers!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC : Good Replacement for User Control?

    - by David Lively
    I found user controls to be incredibly useful when working with ASP.NET webforms. By encapsulating the code required for displaying a control with the markup, creation of reusable components was very straightforward and very, very useful. While MVC provides convenient separation of concerns, this seems to break encapsulation (ie, you can add a control without adding or using its supporting code, leading to runtime errors). Having to modify a controller every time I add a control to a view seems to me to integrate concerns, not separate them. I'd rather break the purist MVC ideology than give up the benefits of reusable, packaged controls. I need to be able to include components similar to webforms user controls throughout a site, but not for the entire site, and not at a level that belongs in a master page. These components should have their own code not just markup (to interact with the business layer), and it would be great if the page controller didn't need to know about the control. Since MVC user controls don't have codebehind, I can't see a good way to do this. Update FINALLY, a good (and, in retrospect, obvious) way to accomplish this. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; namespace K.ObjectModel.Controls { public class TestControl : ViewUserControl { protected override void Render(System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter writer) { writer.Write("Hello World"); base.Render(writer); } } } Create a new class which inherits ViewUserControl Override the .Render() method as shown above. Register the control via its associated ASCX as you would in a webForm: <%@ Register TagName="tn" TagPrefix="k" Src="~/Views/Navigation/LeftBar.ascx"%> Use the corresponding tag in whatever view or master page that you need: <k:tn runat="server"/> Make sure your .ascx inherits your new control: <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="K.ObjectModel.Controls.TestControl" %> Voila, you're up and running. This is tested with ASP.NET MVC 2, VS 2010 and .NET 4.0. Your custom tag references the ascx partial view, which inherits from the TestControl class. The control then overrides the Render() method, which is called to render the view, giving you complete control over the process from tag to output. Why does everyone try to make this so much harder than it has to be?

    Read the article

  • How to access a field's value in an object using reflection

    - by kentcdodds
    My Question: How to overcome an IllegalAccessException to access the value of a an object's field using reflection. Expansion: I'm trying to learn about reflection to make some of my projects more generic. I'm running into an IllegalAccessException when trying to call field.getValue(object) to get the value of that field in that object. I can get the name and type just fine. If I change the declaration from private to public then this works fine. But in an effort to follow the "rules" of encapsulation I don't want to do this. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! My Code: package main; import java.lang.reflect.Field; public class Tester { public static void main(String args[]) throws Exception { new Tester().reflectionTest(); } public void reflectionTest() throws Exception { Person person = new Person("John Doe", "555-123-4567", "Rover"); Field[] fields = person.getClass().getDeclaredFields(); for (Field field : fields) { System.out.println("Field Name: " + field.getName()); System.out.println("Field Type: " + field.getType()); System.out.println("Field Value: " + field.get(person)); //The line above throws: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalAccessException: Class main.Tester can not access a member of class main.Tester$Person with modifiers "private final" } } public class Person { private final String name; private final String phoneNumber; private final String dogsName; public Person(String name, String phoneNumber, String dogsName) { this.name = name; this.phoneNumber = phoneNumber; this.dogsName = dogsName; } } } The Output: run: Field Name: name Field Type: class java.lang.String Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalAccessException: Class main.Tester can not access a member of class main.Tester$Person with modifiers "private final" at sun.reflect.Reflection.ensureMemberAccess(Reflection.java:95) at java.lang.reflect.AccessibleObject.slowCheckMemberAccess(AccessibleObject.java:261) at java.lang.reflect.AccessibleObject.checkAccess(AccessibleObject.java:253) at java.lang.reflect.Field.doSecurityCheck(Field.java:983) at java.lang.reflect.Field.getFieldAccessor(Field.java:927) at java.lang.reflect.Field.get(Field.java:372) at main.Tester.reflectionTest(Tester.java:17) at main.Tester.main(Tester.java:8) Java Result: 1 BUILD SUCCESSFUL (total time: 0 seconds)

    Read the article

  • PPTP connection fails with errors 800/806

    - by Mark S. Rasmussen
    I've got a client (Server 2008 R2) that won't connect to our production environment PPTP VPN server (Server 2003, running RRAS). The server is behind a firewall that has TCP1723 open as well as GRE. Other clients at our office are able to connect just fine. Our office is behind a Juniper SSG5-Serial firewall, but all outgoing traffic is allowed, and multiple other clients are able to connect to VPN servers without issues. I've also setup a completely different VPN server on another network outside of our office. The functioning clients connect just fine - the Server 2008 R2 machine doesn't. Thus it's definitely a problem with this machine in particular. I've rebooted it. I've disabled the firewall, no dice on either. I've run PPTPSRV and PPTPCLNT on the server/client and they're able to communicate perfectly - indicating there's no problem using neither TCP1723 nor GRE. The Server 2008 R2 machine is also running as a VPN server itself (incoming connection) and that's working perfectly. We have the issues no matter if there are active incoming connections or not. I'm not sure what my next debugging step would be; any suggestions? EDIT: The event log on the server has the following warning from RasMan: A connection between the VPN server and the VPN client xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx has been established, but the VPN connection cannot be completed. The most common cause for this is that a firewall or router between the VPN server and the VPN client is not configured to allow Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE) packets (protocol 47). Verify that the firewalls and routers between your VPN server and the Internet allow GRE packets. Make sure the firewalls and routers on the user's network are also configured to allow GRE packets. If the problem persists, have the user contact the Internet service provider (ISP) to determine whether the ISP might be blocking GRE packets. Obviously this points to GRE being a potential problem. But seeing as I have other clients connectiong without problems, as well as PPTPSRV and PPTPCLNT being able to communicate, I'm suspecting this might be a red herring. EDIT: Here are the anonymized events logged by the client in chronological order: CoId={742CB15C-A7E0-47B7-8240-0EFA1139CBD9}: The user XXX\YYY has started dialing a VPN connection using a per-user connection profile named ZZZ. The connection settings are: Dial-in User = XXX\YYY VpnStrategy = PPTP DataEncryption = Require PrerequisiteEntry = AutoLogon = No UseRasCredentials = Yes Authentication Type = CHAP/MS-CHAPv2 Ipv4DefaultGateway = No Ipv4AddressAssignment = By Server Ipv4DNSServerAssignment = By Server Ipv6DefaultGateway = Yes Ipv6AddressAssignment = By Server Ipv6DNSServerAssignment = By Server IpDnsFlags = Register primary domain suffix IpNBTEnabled = Yes UseFlags = Private Connection ConnectOnWinlogon = No. CoId={742CB15C-A7E0-47B7-8240-0EFA1139CBD9}: The user XXX\YYY is trying to establish a link to the Remote Access Server for the connection named ZZZ using the following device: Server address/Phone Number = XXX.YYY.ZZZ.KKK Device = WAN Miniport (PPTP) Port = VPN3-4 MediaType = VPN. CoId={742CB15C-A7E0-47B7-8240-0EFA1139CBD9}: The user XXX\YYY has successfully established a link to the Remote Access Server using the following device: Server address/Phone Number = XXX.YYY.ZZZ.KKK Device = WAN Miniport (PPTP) Port = VPN3-4 MediaType = VPN. CoId={742CB15C-A7E0-47B7-8240-0EFA1139CBD9}: The link to the Remote Access Server has been established by user XXX\YYY. CoId={742CB15C-A7E0-47B7-8240-0EFA1139CBD9}: The user XXX\YYY dialed a connection named ZZZ which has failed. The error code returned on failure is 806. Running Wireshark on the client shows it trying and retrying to send a "71 Configuration Request" While the server shows the incoming client requests, but apparently without replying: Given that this is GRE traffic, I think rules out the GRE traffic being blocked. Question is, why doesn't the server reply? This is the Configuration Request the server receives from the non functioning client (meaning no response is sent to the client request): And this is the Configuration Request the server receives from the working client: To me they seem identical, except for differing keys and magic numbers, and the fact that one client receives a response while the other doesn't.

    Read the article

  • Configuring Wireless on Cisco 851W

    - by Aequitarum Custos
    Either a powersurge or something caused our router's configuration to get wiped, and our last backup was before the wireless network was setup. We have not been able to reconfigure the wireless since then, so was curious if anyone here would be able to determine what configuration is needed. We are using a Cisco 851W running 12.4(15)T9 We would like to use WPA encryption, and have it on the same network as the rest of the office network. Config file is below: User Access Verification Building configuration... Current configuration : 3857 bytes ! version 12.4 no service pad service timestamps debug datetime msec service timestamps log datetime msec service password-encryption no service dhcp ! hostname BOB ! boot-start-marker boot-end-marker ! enable secret 5 ********************* ! no aaa new-model ! ! dot11 syslog no ip source-route ! ! ip cef no ip bootp server ip domain name BOB.com ip name-server 61.11.1.1 ip name-server 61.11.1.2 ! ! ! username BOBB privilege 15 password 7 ************************* ! ! archive log config hidekeys ! ! ip tcp synwait-time 10 ! ! ! interface FastEthernet0 no cdp enable ! interface FastEthernet1 no cdp enable ! interface FastEthernet2 no cdp enable ! interface FastEthernet3 no cdp enable ! interface FastEthernet4 description WAN Connection$ETH-WAN$ ip address 61.11.1.14 255.255.254.0 ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly duplex auto speed auto no cdp enable ! interface Dot11Radio0 no ip address shutdown ! encryption mode ciphers tkip speed basic-1.0 basic-2.0 basic-5.5 6.0 9.0 basic-11.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 36.0 48.0 54.0 station-role root no cdp enable ! interface Dot11Radio0.1 encapsulation dot1Q 1 native no cdp enable bridge-group 1 bridge-group 1 subscriber-loop-control bridge-group 1 spanning-disabled bridge-group 1 block-unknown-source no bridge-group 1 source-learning no bridge-group 1 unicast-flooding ! interface Dot11Radio0.20 ip access-group Guest-ACL in no cdp enable ! interface Vlan1 description Internal Network ip address 192.168.2.60 255.255.255.0 ip nat inside ip nat enable ip virtual-reassembly ! ip forward-protocol nd ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 61.11.2.14 ! ip http server no ip http secure-server ip nat inside source list 1 interface FastEthernet4 overload ! ip access-list extended Guest-ACL deny ip any 192.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 permit ip any any ! access-list 1 permit 192.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 access-list 100 remark SDM_ACL Category=2 access-list 100 permit ip 192.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 any no cdp run ! control-plane ! !

    Read the article

  • Company Review: Google Products

    Google, Inc offers an array of products and services to all of its end-users. However their search capabilities are the foundation for Google’s current success and their primary business focus. Currently, Google offers over twenty different search applications that allow users to search the internet for books, maps, videos, images, products and much more. Their product decisions have allowed users demands to be met while focusing on the free based model. This allows users to access Google data free of charge and indirectly gives Google a strong competitive advantage of other competitors along with the accuracy of the search results. According to Google, Inc, they offer the following types of searching capabilities: Alerts Get email updates on the topics of your choice Blog Search Find blogs on your favorite topics  Books Search the full text of books  Custom Search Create a customized search experience for your community  Desktop Search and personalize your computer  Dictionary Search for definitions of words and phrases Directory Search the web, organized by topic or category Earth Explore the world from your computer Finance Business info, news and interactive charts GOOG-411 Find and connect for free with businesses from your phone  Images Search for images on the web Maps View maps and directions News Search thousands of news stories Patent Search Search the full text of US Patents Product Search Search for stuff to buy Scholar Search scholarly papers Toolbar Add a search box to your browser Trends Explore past and present search trends Videos Search for videos on the web Web Search Search billions of web pages Web Search Features Find movies, music, stocks, books and more mapping Google’s free based business model is only one way it differentiates itself from its competition. There is also a strong focus on the accuracy of search results and the speed in which they are returned to the end-user. Quality function deployment (QFD) is a structured method used to help connect user needs to the design features of a project proposed to address those needs. This method is particularly useful in accounting for needs that are not easily articulated or precisely defined according to the U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Due to the fact that QFD is so customer driven Google is always in a constant state of change in attempt to reengineer its search algorithms, and other dependant systems so that end-users requirements are constantly being met. Value engineering is a key example of this, Google is constantly trying to improve all aspects of its products, improve system maintainability, and system interoperability. Bridgefield Group defines value engineering as an organized methodology that identifies and selects the lowest lifecycle cost options in design, materials and processes that achieves the desired level of performance, reliability and customer satisfaction. In addition, it seeks to remove unnecessary costs in the above areas and is often a joint effort with cross-functional internal teams and relevant suppliers. Common issues that appear when developing large scale systems like Google’s search applications include modular design of a product and/or service and providing accurate value analysis. A design approach that adheres to four fundamental tenets of cohesiveness, encapsulation, self-containment, and high binding to design a system component as an independently operable unit subject to change is how the Open System Joint Task Force defines modular design. More specifically M. S. Schmaltz defines modular software design as having a large collection of statements strung together in one partition of in-line code; we segment or divide the statements into logical groups called modules. Each module performs one or two tasks, and then passes control to another module. By breaking up the code into "bite-sized chunks", so to speak, we are able to better control the flow of data and control. This is especially true in large software systems. Value analysis is a process to evaluate products and services based on effectiveness, safety, and cost. Value analysis involves assessing the quality as well as the cost of a product or service as defined by the Healthcare Financial Management Association.  “Operations Management deals with the design and management of products, processes, services and supply chains. It considers the acquisition, development, and utilization of resources that firms need to deliver the goods and services their clients want.” (MIT,2010) Google, Inc encourages an open environment between all employees, also known as Googlers. This is reinforced by a cross-section team or cross-functional teams comprised from multiple departments assigned to every project so that every department like marketing, finance, and quality assurance has input on every project. In addition, Google is known for their openness to new ideas regardless of the status or seniority of an employee. In fact, Google allows for 20% of an employee’s time can be devoted to developing new ideas and/or pet projects. HumTech.com defines a cross-functional team as a collection of people with varied levels of skills and experience brought together to accomplish a task. As the name implies, Cross-Functional Team members come from different organizational units. Cross-Functional Teams may be permanent or ad hoc. Google’s search application product strategy primarily focuses on mass customization. This is allows Google to create a base search application and allows results to be returned to the end-users quickly based on specific parameters and search settings. In addition, they also store the data that is returned in case other desire the same results based on other end-users supplying the same customized settings. This allows Google to appear to render search results in virtually real-time to the user while allowing for complete customization of the searching criteria. Greg Vogl, a professor at Uganda Martyrs University, defines mass customization as when a business gives its customers the opportunity to tailor its products or services to the customer's specifications. The IT staff at Google play a key role in ensuring that the search application’s product strategy is maintained simply because the IT staff designs, develops, and maintains all of their proprietary applications. In fact, they also maintain all network infrastructure to ensure that it is available to all end-users. References: http://www.google.com/intl/en/options/ http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/publications/ftat_user_guide/sec5.htm http://www.bridgefieldgroup.com/bridgefieldgroup/glos9.htm#V http://www.acq.osd.mil/osjtf/termsdef.html http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~mssz/Pascal-CGS2462/prog-dsn.html http://www.hfma.org/publications/business_caring_newsletter/exclusives/Supply+and+Inventory+Terms+Defined.htm http://mitsloan.mit.edu/omg/om-definition.php http://www.humtech.com/opm/grtl/ols/ols3.cfm http://www.gregvogl.net/courses/mis1/glossary.htm

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >