Search Results

Search found 7182 results on 288 pages for 'factory pattern'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 10/288 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • xslt broken: pattern does not match

    - by krisvandenbergh
    I'm trying to query an xml file using the following xslt: <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" xmlns:bpmn="http://dkm.fbk.eu/index.php/BPMN_Ontology"> <!-- Participants --> <xsl:template match="/"> <html> <body> <table> <xsl:for-each select="Package/Participants/Participant"> <tr> <td><xsl:value-of select="ParticipantType" /></td> <td><xsl:value-of select="Description" /></td> </tr> </xsl:for-each> </table> </body> </html> </xsl:template> </xsl:stylesheet> Here's the contents of the xml file: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="xpdl2bpmn.xsl"?> <Package xmlns="http://www.wfmc.org/2008/XPDL2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" Id="25ffcb89-a9bf-40bc-8f50-e5afe58abda0" Name="1 price setting" OnlyOneProcess="false"> <PackageHeader> <XPDLVersion>2.1</XPDLVersion> <Vendor>BizAgi Process Modeler.</Vendor> <Created>2010-04-24T10:49:45.3442528+02:00</Created> <Description>1 price setting</Description> <Documentation /> </PackageHeader> <RedefinableHeader> <Author /> <Version /> <Countrykey>CO</Countrykey> </RedefinableHeader> <ExternalPackages /> <Participants> <Participant Id="008af9a6-fdc0-45e6-af3f-984c3e220e03" Name="customer"> <ParticipantType Type="RESOURCE" /> <Description /> </Participant> <Participant Id="1d2fd8b4-eb88-479b-9c1d-7fe6c45b910e" Name="clerk"> <ParticipantType Type="ROLE" /> <Description /> </Participant> </Participants> </Package> Despite, the simple pattern, the foreach doesn't work. What is wrong with Package/Participants/Participant ? What do I miss here? Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • Matching unmatched strings based on a unknown pattern

    - by Polity
    Alright guys, i really hurt my brain over this one and i'm curious if you guys can give me any pointers towards the right direction i should be taking. The situation is this: Lets say, i have a collection of strings (let it be clear that the pattern of this strings is unknown. For a fact, i can say that the string contain only signs from the ASCII table and therefore, i dont have to worry about weird Chinese signs). For this example, i take the following collection of strings (note that the strings dont have to make any human sence so dont try figguring them out :)): "[001].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", "[002].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", "[003].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", "[001].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test.sample'", "[002].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test.sample'", "-001- BAR.[TEST] - 'bartest.xx1", "-002- BAR.[TEST] - 'bartest.xx1" Now, what i need to have is a way of finding logical groups (and subgroups) of these set of strings, so in the above example, just by rational thinking, you can combine the first 3, the 2 after that and the last 2. Also the resulting groups from the first 5 can be combined in one main group with 2 subgroups, this should give you something like this: { { "[001].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", "[002].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", "[003].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test'", } { "[001].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test.sample'", "[002].[FOO].[TEST] - 'foofoo.test.sample'", } { "-001- BAR.[TEST] - 'bartest.xx1", "-002- BAR.[TEST] - 'bartest.xx1" } } Sorry for the layout above but indenting with 4 spaces doesnt seem to work correctly (or im frakk'n it up). Anyways, I'm not sure how to approach this problem (how to get the result desired as indicated above). First of, i thought of creating a huge set of regexes which would parse most known patterns but the amount of different patterns is just to huge that this isn't realistic. Another think i thought of was parsing each indidual word within a string (so strip all non alphabetic or numeric characters and split by those), and if X% matches, i can assume the strings belong to the same group. (where X wil probably be around 80/90). However, i find the area of speculation kinda big. For example, when matching strings with each 20 words, the change of hitting above 80% is kinda big (that means that 4 words can differ), however when matching only 8 words, 2 words at most can differ. My question to you is, what would be a logical approach in the above situation? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Oracle BI Server Modeling, Part 1- Designing a Query Factory

    - by bob.ertl(at)oracle.com
      Welcome to Oracle BI Development's BI Foundation blog, focused on helping you get the most value from your Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (BI EE) platform deployments.  In my first series of posts, I plan to show developers the concepts and best practices for modeling in the Common Enterprise Information Model (CEIM), the semantic layer of Oracle BI EE.  In this segment, I will lay the groundwork for the modeling concepts.  First, I will cover the big picture of how the BI Server fits into the system, and how the CEIM controls the query processing. Oracle BI EE Query Cycle The purpose of the Oracle BI Server is to bridge the gap between the presentation services and the data sources.  There are typically a variety of data sources in a variety of technologies: relational, normalized transaction systems; relational star-schema data warehouses and marts; multidimensional analytic cubes and financial applications; flat files, Excel files, XML files, and so on. Business datasets can reside in a single type of source, or, most of the time, are spread across various types of sources. Presentation services users are generally business people who need to be able to query that set of sources without any knowledge of technologies, schemas, or how sources are organized in their company. They think of business analysis in terms of measures with specific calculations, hierarchical dimensions for breaking those measures down, and detailed reports of the business transactions themselves.  Most of them create queries without knowing it, by picking a dashboard page and some filters.  Others create their own analysis by selecting metrics and dimensional attributes, and possibly creating additional calculations. The BI Server bridges that gap from simple business terms to technical physical queries by exposing just the business focused measures and dimensional attributes that business people can use in their analyses and dashboards.   After they make their selections and start the analysis, the BI Server plans the best way to query the data sources, writes the optimized sequence of physical queries to those sources, post-processes the results, and presents them to the client as a single result set suitable for tables, pivots and charts. The CEIM is a model that controls the processing of the BI Server.  It provides the subject areas that presentation services exposes for business users to select simplified metrics and dimensional attributes for their analysis.  It models the mappings to the physical data access, the calculations and logical transformations, and the data access security rules.  The CEIM consists of metadata stored in the repository, authored by developers using the Administration Tool client.     Presentation services and other query clients create their queries in BI EE's SQL-92 language, called Logical SQL or LSQL.  The API simply uses ODBC or JDBC to pass the query to the BI Server.  Presentation services writes the LSQL query in terms of the simplified objects presented to the users.  The BI Server creates a query plan, and rewrites the LSQL into fully-detailed SQL or other languages suitable for querying the physical sources.  For example, the LSQL on the left below was rewritten into the physical SQL for an Oracle 11g database on the right. Logical SQL   Physical SQL SELECT "D0 Time"."T02 Per Name Month" saw_0, "D4 Product"."P01  Product" saw_1, "F2 Units"."2-01  Billed Qty  (Sum All)" saw_2 FROM "Sample Sales" ORDER BY saw_0, saw_1       WITH SAWITH0 AS ( select T986.Per_Name_Month as c1, T879.Prod_Dsc as c2,      sum(T835.Units) as c3, T879.Prod_Key as c4 from      Product T879 /* A05 Product */ ,      Time_Mth T986 /* A08 Time Mth */ ,      FactsRev T835 /* A11 Revenue (Billed Time Join) */ where ( T835.Prod_Key = T879.Prod_Key and T835.Bill_Mth = T986.Row_Wid) group by T879.Prod_Dsc, T879.Prod_Key, T986.Per_Name_Month ) select SAWITH0.c1 as c1, SAWITH0.c2 as c2, SAWITH0.c3 as c3 from SAWITH0 order by c1, c2   Probably everybody reading this blog can write SQL or MDX.  However, the trick in designing the CEIM is that you are modeling a query-generation factory.  Rather than hand-crafting individual queries, you model behavior and relationships, thus configuring the BI Server machinery to manufacture millions of different queries in response to random user requests.  This mass production requires a different mindset and approach than when you are designing individual SQL statements in tools such as Oracle SQL Developer, Oracle Hyperion Interactive Reporting (formerly Brio), or Oracle BI Publisher.   The Structure of the Common Enterprise Information Model (CEIM) The CEIM has a unique structure specifically for modeling the relationships and behaviors that fill the gap from logical user requests to physical data source queries and back to the result.  The model divides the functionality into three specialized layers, called Presentation, Business Model and Mapping, and Physical, as shown below. Presentation services clients can generally only see the presentation layer, and the objects in the presentation layer are normally the only ones used in the LSQL request.  When a request comes into the BI Server from presentation services or another client, the relationships and objects in the model allow the BI Server to select the appropriate data sources, create a query plan, and generate the physical queries.  That's the left to right flow in the diagram below.  When the results come back from the data source queries, the right to left relationships in the model show how to transform the results and perform any final calculations and functions that could not be pushed down to the databases.   Business Model Think of the business model as the heart of the CEIM you are designing.  This is where you define the analytic behavior seen by the users, and the superset library of metric and dimension objects available to the user community as a whole.  It also provides the baseline business-friendly names and user-readable dictionary.  For these reasons, it is often called the "logical" model--it is a virtual database schema that persists no data, but can be queried as if it is a database. The business model always has a dimensional shape (more on this in future posts), and its simple shape and terminology hides the complexity of the source data models. Besides hiding complexity and normalizing terminology, this layer adds most of the analytic value, as well.  This is where you define the rich, dimensional behavior of the metrics and complex business calculations, as well as the conformed dimensions and hierarchies.  It contributes to the ease of use for business users, since the dimensional metric definitions apply in any context of filters and drill-downs, and the conformed dimensions enable dashboard-wide filters and guided analysis links that bring context along from one page to the next.  The conformed dimensions also provide a key to hiding the complexity of many sources, including federation of different databases, behind the simple business model. Note that the expression language in this layer is LSQL, so that any expression can be rewritten into any data source's query language at run time.  This is important for federation, where a given logical object can map to several different physical objects in different databases.  It is also important to portability of the CEIM to different database brands, which is a key requirement for Oracle's BI Applications products. Your requirements process with your user community will mostly affect the business model.  This is where you will define most of the things they specifically ask for, such as metric definitions.  For this reason, many of the best-practice methodologies of our consulting partners start with the high-level definition of this layer. Physical Model The physical model connects the business model that meets your users' requirements to the reality of the data sources you have available. In the query factory analogy, think of the physical layer as the bill of materials for generating physical queries.  Every schema, table, column, join, cube, hierarchy, etc., that will appear in any physical query manufactured at run time must be modeled here at design time. Each physical data source will have its own physical model, or "database" object in the CEIM.  The shape of each physical model matches the shape of its physical source.  In other words, if the source is normalized relational, the physical model will mimic that normalized shape.  If it is a hypercube, the physical model will have a hypercube shape.  If it is a flat file, it will have a denormalized tabular shape. To aid in query optimization, the physical layer also tracks the specifics of the database brand and release.  This allows the BI Server to make the most of each physical source's distinct capabilities, writing queries in its syntax, and using its specific functions. This allows the BI Server to push processing work as deep as possible into the physical source, which minimizes data movement and takes full advantage of the database's own optimizer.  For most data sources, native APIs are used to further optimize performance and functionality. The value of having a distinct separation between the logical (business) and physical models is encapsulation of the physical characteristics.  This encapsulation is another enabler of packaged BI applications and federation.  It is also key to hiding the complex shapes and relationships in the physical sources from the end users.  Consider a routine drill-down in the business model: physically, it can require a drill-through where the first query is MDX to a multidimensional cube, followed by the drill-down query in SQL to a normalized relational database.  The only difference from the user's point of view is that the 2nd query added a more detailed dimension level column - everything else was the same. Mappings Within the Business Model and Mapping Layer, the mappings provide the binding from each logical column and join in the dimensional business model, to each of the objects that can provide its data in the physical layer.  When there is more than one option for a physical source, rules in the mappings are applied to the query context to determine which of the data sources should be hit, and how to combine their results if more than one is used.  These rules specify aggregate navigation, vertical partitioning (fragmentation), and horizontal partitioning, any of which can be federated across multiple, heterogeneous sources.  These mappings are usually the most sophisticated part of the CEIM. Presentation You might think of the presentation layer as a set of very simple relational-like views into the business model.  Over ODBC/JDBC, they present a relational catalog consisting of databases, tables and columns.  For business users, presentation services interprets these as subject areas, folders and columns, respectively.  (Note that in 10g, subject areas were called presentation catalogs in the CEIM.  In this blog, I will stick to 11g terminology.)  Generally speaking, presentation services and other clients can query only these objects (there are exceptions for certain clients such as BI Publisher and Essbase Studio). The purpose of the presentation layer is to specialize the business model for different categories of users.  Based on a user's role, they will be restricted to specific subject areas, tables and columns for security.  The breakdown of the model into multiple subject areas organizes the content for users, and subjects superfluous to a particular business role can be hidden from that set of users.  Customized names and descriptions can be used to override the business model names for a specific audience.  Variables in the object names can be used for localization. For these reasons, you are better off thinking of the tables in the presentation layer as folders than as strict relational tables.  The real semantics of tables and how they function is in the business model, and any grouping of columns can be included in any table in the presentation layer.  In 11g, an LSQL query can also span multiple presentation subject areas, as long as they map to the same business model. Other Model Objects There are some objects that apply to multiple layers.  These include security-related objects, such as application roles, users, data filters, and query limits (governors).  There are also variables you can use in parameters and expressions, and initialization blocks for loading their initial values on a static or user session basis.  Finally, there are Multi-User Development (MUD) projects for developers to check out units of work, and objects for the marketing feature used by our packaged customer relationship management (CRM) software.   The Query Factory At this point, you should have a grasp on the query factory concept.  When developing the CEIM model, you are configuring the BI Server to automatically manufacture millions of queries in response to random user requests. You do this by defining the analytic behavior in the business model, mapping that to the physical data sources, and exposing it through the presentation layer's role-based subject areas. While configuring mass production requires a different mindset than when you hand-craft individual SQL or MDX statements, it builds on the modeling and query concepts you already understand. The following posts in this series will walk through the CEIM modeling concepts and best practices in detail.  We will initially review dimensional concepts so you can understand the business model, and then present a pattern-based approach to learning the mappings from a variety of physical schema shapes and deployments to the dimensional model.  Along the way, we will also present the dimensional calculation template, and learn how to configure the many additivity patterns.

    Read the article

  • Help with Abstract Factory Pattern

    - by brazc0re
    I need help with a abstract factory pattern design. This question is a continuation of: Design help with parallel process I am really confused where I should be initializing all of the settings for each type of medium (ex: RS232, TCP/IP, etc). Attached is the drawing on how I am setting up the pattern: As shown, when a medium is created, each medium imposes a ICreateMedium interface. I would assume that the Create() method also create the proper object, such as SerialPort serialPort = new SerialPort("COM1", baud); however, TCPIPMedium would have an issue with the interface because it wouldn't need to initialize a serial port object. I know I am doing something majorly wrong here. I just can't figure it out and have been stuck for a while. What I also get confused on show the interface IMedium will get access to the communication object once it is created so it can write out the appropriate byte[] packet. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. My main goal is to have the Communicator class spit a packet out without caring which type of medium is active.

    Read the article

  • Friday Fun: Factory Balls – Christmas Edition

    - by Asian Angel
    Your weekend is almost here, but until the work day is over we have another fun holiday game for you. This week your job is to correctly decorate/paint the ornaments that go on the Christmas tree. Simple you say? Maybe, but maybe not! Factory Balls – Christmas Edition The object of the game is to correctly decorate/paint each Christmas ornament exactly as shown in the “sample image” provided for each level. What starts off as simple will quickly have you working to figure out the correct combination or sequence to complete each ornament. Are you ready? The first level serves as a tutorial to help you become comfortable with how to decorate/paint the ornaments. To move an ornament to a paint bucket or cover part of it with one of the helper items simply drag the ornament towards that area. The ornament will automatically move back to its’ starting position when the action is complete. First, a nice coat of red paint followed by covering the middle area with a horizontal belt. Once the belt is on move the ornament to the bucket of yellow paint. Next, you will need to remove the belt, so move the ornament back to the belt’s original position. One ornament finished! As soon as you complete decorating/painting an ornament, you move on to the next level and will be shown the next “sample Image” in the upper right corner. Starting with a coat of orange paint sounds good… Pop the little serrated edge cap on top… Add some blue paint… Almost have it… Place the large serrated edge cap on top… Another dip in the orange paint… And the second ornament is finished. Level three looks a little bit tougher…just work out your pattern of helper items & colors and you will definitely get it! Have fun decorating/painting those ornaments! Note: Starting with level four you will need to start using a combination of two helper items combined at times to properly complete the ornaments. Play Factory Balls – Christmas Edition Latest Features How-To Geek ETC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials The 50 Best Registry Hacks that Make Windows Better The How-To Geek Holiday Gift Guide (Geeky Stuff We Like) LCD? LED? Plasma? The How-To Geek Guide to HDTV Technology The How-To Geek Guide to Learning Photoshop, Part 8: Filters Improve Digital Photography by Calibrating Your Monitor Exploring the Jungle Ruins Wallpaper Protect Your Privacy When Browsing with Chrome and Iron Browser Free Shipping Day is Friday, December 17, 2010 – National Free Shipping Day Find an Applicable Quote for Any Programming Situation Winter Theme for Windows 7 from Microsoft Score Free In-Flight Wi-Fi Courtesy of Google Chrome

    Read the article

  • How a Portal Factory Simplifies Development

    Does your organization have a variety of ways to develop and maintain customer, partner, and employee websites? Perhaps you should consider how a portal development factory can simplify development through an efficient and consistent set of people, processes, and platforms.

    Read the article

  • How a Portal Factory Simplifies Development

    Does your organization have a variety of ways to develop and maintain customer, partner, and employee websites? Perhaps you should consider how a portal development factory can simplify development through an efficient and consistent set of people, processes, and platforms.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Database I/O Performance Tuning Using Benchmark Factory

    The real test of how heavily an Oracle database will tax its underlying I/O subsystem and related infrastructure is to actually tax that infrastructure using representative database application workloads. Jim Czuprynski tells you how to choose appropriate database schema(s) for realistic testing, how to create example TPC-E and TPC-H database schemas and how to perform initial loading of these schemas using Quest Benchmark Factory.

    Read the article

  • when does factory girl create objects in db?

    - by Pavel K.
    i am trying to simulate a session using factory girl/shoulda (it worked with fixtures but i am having problems with using factories). i have following factories (user login and email both have 'unique' validations): Factory.define :user do |u| u.login 'quentin' u.email '[email protected]' end Factory.define :session_user, :class => Session do |u| u.association :user, :factory => :user u.session_id 'session_user' end and here's the test class MessagesControllerTest < ActionController::TestCase context "normal user" do setup do @request.session[:user_id]=Factory(:user).id @request.session[:session_id]=Factory(:session_user).session_id end should "be able to access new message creation" do get :new assert_response :success end end end but when i run "rake test:functionals", i get this test result 1) Error: test: normal user should be able to access new message creation. (MessagesControllerTest): ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid: Validation failed: Account name already exists!, Email already exists! which means that record already exists in db when i am referring to it in test setup. is there something i don't understand here? does factory girl create all factories in db on startup? rails 2.3.5/shoulda/factory girl

    Read the article

  • Creation of Objects: Constructors or Static Factory Methods

    - by Rachel
    I am going through Effective Java and some of my things which I consider as standard are not suggested by the book, for instance creation of object, I was under the impression that constructors are the best way of doing it and books says we should make use of static factory methods, I am not able to few some advantages and so disadvantages and so am asking this question, here are the benefits of using it. Advantages: One advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they have names. A second advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they are not required to create a new object each time they’re invoked. A third advantage of static factory methods is that, unlike constructors, they can return an object of any subtype of their return type. A fourth advantage of static factory methods is that they reduce the verbosity of creating parameterized type instances. I am not able to understand this advantage and would appreciate if someone can explain this point Disadvantages: The main disadvantage of providing only static factory methods is that classes without public or protected constructors cannot be subclassed. A second disadvantage of static factory methods is that they are not readily distinguishable from other static methods.I am not getting this point and so would really appreciate some explanation. Reference: Effective Java, Joshua Bloch, Edition 2, pg: 5-10 Also, How to decide to use whether to go for Constructor or Static Factory Method for Object Creation ?

    Read the article

  • c#Repository pattern: One repository per subclass?

    - by Alex
    I am wondering if you would create a repository for each subclass of a domain model. There are two classes for example: public class Person { public virtual String GivenName { set; get; } public virtual String FamilyName { set; get; } public virtual String EMailAdress { set; get; } } public class Customer : Person { public virtual DateTime RegistrationDate { get; set; } public virtual String Password { get; set; } } Would you create both a PersonRepository and a CustomerRepository or just the PersonRepository which would also be able to execute Customer related queries?

    Read the article

  • pattern matching in Bash

    - by Tim
    Hi, Here is an example to get different parts of a filename bash-3.2$ pathandfile=/tmp/ff.txt bash-3.2$ filename=$(basename $pathandfile) bash-3.2$ echo $filename ff.txt bash-3.2$ echo ${filename##*.} txt bash-3.2$ echo ${filename%.*} ff I was wondering what does ## and % mean in the patterns. How is the patten matching working? Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • How do you make a Factory that can return derived types?

    - by Seth Spearman
    I have created a factory class called AlarmFactory as such... 1 class AlarmFactory 2 { 3 public static Alarm GetAlarm(AlarmTypes alarmType) //factory ensures that correct alarm is returned and right func pointer for trigger creator. 4 { 5 switch (alarmType) 6 { 7 case AlarmTypes.Heartbeat: 8 HeartbeatAlarm alarm = HeartbeatAlarm.GetAlarm(); 9 alarm.CreateTriggerFunction = QuartzAlarmScheduler.CreateMinutelyTrigger; 10 return alarm; 11 12 break; 13 default: 14 15 break; 16 } 17 } 18 } Heartbeat alarm is derived from Alarm. I am getting a compile error "cannot implicitly convert type...An explicit conversion exists (are you missing a cast?)". How do I set this up to return a derived type? Seth

    Read the article

  • Looking for ideas for a simple pattern matching algorithm to run on a microcontroller

    - by pic_audio
    I'm working on a project to recognize simple audio patterns. I have two data sets, each made up of between 4 and 32 note/duration pairs. One set is predefined, the other is from an incoming data stream. The length of the two strongly correlated data sets is often different, but roughly the same "shape". My goal is to come up with some sort of ranking as to how well the two data sets correlate/match. I have converted the incoming frequencies to pitch and shifted the incoming data stream's pitch so that it's average pitch matches that of the predefined data set. I also stretch/compress the incoming data set's durations to match the overall duration of the predefined set. Here are two graphical examples of data that should be ranked as strongly correlated: http://s2.postimage.org/FVeG0-ee3c23ecc094a55b15e538c3a0d83dd5.gif (Sorry, as a new user I couldn't directly post images) I'm doing this on a 8-bit microcontroller so resources are minimal. Speed is less an issue, a second or two of processing isn't a deal breaker. It wouldn't surprise me if there is an obvious solution, I've just been staring at the problem too long. Any ideas? Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • ocaml pattern match question

    - by REALFREE
    I'm trying to write a simple recursive function that look over list and return a pair of integer. This is easy to write in c/c++/java but i'm new to ocaml so somehow hard to find out the solution due to type conflict it goes like.. let rec test l = match l with [] - 0 | x::xs - if x 0 then (1+test, 0) else (0, 1+test);; I kno this is not correct one and kinda awkward.. but any help will be appreciated

    Read the article

  • F# pattern matching

    - by Roger Alsing
    What would be the most effective way to express the following code? match cond.EvalBool() with | true -> match body.Eval() with | :? ControlFlowModifier as e -> match e with | Break(scope) -> e :> obj //Break is a DU element of ControlFlowModifier | _ -> next() //other members of CFM should call next() | _ -> next() | false -> null cond.EvalBool returns a boolean result where false should return null and true should either run the entire block again (its wrapped in a func called next) or if the special value of break is found, then the loop should exit and return the break value. Is there any way to compress that block of code to something smaller?

    Read the article

  • Pattern matching in Perl ala Haskell

    - by Paul Nathan
    In Haskell (F#, Ocaml, and others), I can do this: sign x | x > 0 = 1 | x == 0 = 0 | x < 0 = -1 Which calculates the sign of a given integer. This can concisely express certain logic flows; I've encountered one of these flows in Perl. Right now what I am doing is sub frobnicator { my $frob = shift; return "foo" if $frob eq "Foomaticator"; return "bar" if $frob eq "Barmaticator"; croak("Unable to frob legit value: $frob received"); } Which feels inexpressive and ugly. This code has to run on Perl 5.8.8, but of course I am interested in more modern techniques as well.

    Read the article

  • Strategy Design Pattern -- *dynamic* !!!

    - by alexeypro
    My application will have different strategies for my objects. What's the best way of implementing that? I would really love the case when we can make strategy classes implementation dynamically loaded from, say, some relational database. Not sure how do that better, though. What's the best approach? Idea is that say we want to apply to object MyObj strategy Strategy123 then we just load from database by ID 123 the object, deserialize it, get the Strategy class, and use it with MyObj. The maintenance while sounds easier from the first look can be a pain in the long run if Strategy interfaces changes, etc. What can I do also? I want to find solution when I should be keeping Strategy classes in codebase -- just for the sake that I don't need code change and re-deployment of the application if my Strategy changes, or I add new strategy. Please advise!

    Read the article

  • Need a design pattern for representing multiple information sources

    - by hsmit
    I'm building a Java application that retrieves information from differing information sources. I'm using a sensor, a set of RecordStores and a few online web services. In the basic application all these resources are loaded by default. Some of these sources are directly read in a separate thread (load database, read sensor etc.). From this basic application some functions are started that use these sources. The classes that contain these functions (usually combining multiple sources information) are currently paramterized with a set of resources like this: AppPart a1 = new AppPart(source1, source2, source3); I could also do it like this AppPart a1 = new AppPart(this); ..where I need to make my sources public in order to read them. I'm also thinking about a kind of stage/collection to publish all sources on, e.g: public SourceCollectionStage sStage = new SourceCollectionStage(); and later: sStage.getSensor(); .. for example. What do you guys think is the best or most often used way to do this? Btw: the user interface is often implemented by the specific funtion classes, not by the main class. Should I do this in another way?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >