Search Results

Search found 5915 results on 237 pages for 'practices'.

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 104/237 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • What are the principles of developing web-applications with action-based java frameworks?

    - by Roman
    Background I'm going to develop a new web-application with java. It's not very big or very complex and I have enough time until it'll "officially" start. I have some JSF/Facelets development background (about half a year). And I also have some expirience with JSP+JSTL. In self-educational purpose (and also in order to find the best solution) I want to prototype the new project with one of action-based frameworks. Actually, I will choose between Spring MVC and Stripes. Problem In order to get correct impression about action-based frameworks (in comparison with JSF) I want to be sure that I use them correctly (in bigger or lesser extent). So, here I list some most-frequent tasks (at least for me) and describe how I solve them with JSF. I want to know how they should be solved with action-based framework (or separately with Spring MVC and Stripes if there is any difference for concrete task). Rendering content: I can apply ready-to-use component from standard jsf libraries (core and html) or from 3rd-party libs (like RichFaces). I can combine simple components and I can easily create my own components which are based on standard components. Rendering data (primitive or reference types) in the correct format: Each component allow to specify a converter for transforming data in both ways (to render and to send to the server). Converter is, as usual, a simple class with 2 small methods. Site navigation: I specify a set of navigation-cases in faces-config.xml. Then I specify action-attribute of a link (or a button) which should match one or more of navigation cases. The best match is choosen by JSF. Implementing flow (multiform wizards for example): I'm using JSF 1.2 so I use Apache Orchestra for the flow (conversation) scope. Form processing: I have a pretty standard java-bean (backing bean in JSF terms) with some scope. I 'map' form fields on this bean properties. If everything goes well (no exceptions and validation is passed) then all these properties are set with values from the form fields. Then I can call one method (specified in button's action attribute) to execute some logic and return string which should much one of my navigation cases to go to the next screen. Forms validation: I can create custom validator (or choose from existing) and add it to almost each component. 3rd-party libraries have sets of custom ajax-validators. Standard validators work only after page is submitted. Actually, I don't like how validation in JSF works. Too much magic there. Many standard components (or maybe all of them) have predefined validation and it's impossible to disable it (Maybe not always, but I met many problems with it). Ajax support: many 3rd-party libraries (MyFaces, IceFaces, OpenFaces, AnotherPrefixFaces...) have strong ajax support and it works pretty well. Until you meet a problem. Too much magic there as well. It's very difficult to make it work if it doesn't work but you've done right as it's described in the manual. User-friendly URLs: people say that there are some libraries for that exist. And it can be done with filters as well. But I've never tried. It seems too complex for the first look. Thanks in advance for explaning how these items (or some of them) can be done with action-based framework.

    Read the article

  • Simple network gaming, client-server architecture planning.

    - by michal
    Hi, I'm coding simple game which I plan to make multiplayer (over the network) as my university project. I'm considering two scenarios for client-server communication: The physics (they're trivial! I should call it "collision tests" in fact :) ) are processed on server machine only. Therefore the communication looks like Client1->Server: Pressed "UP" Server->Clients: here you go, Client1 position is now [X,Y] Client2->Server: Pressed "fire" Server->Clients: Client1 hit Client2, make Client2 disappear! server receives the event and broadcasts it to all the other clients. Client1->Server: Pressed "UP" Server->Clients: Client1 pressed "UP", recalculate his position!! [Client1 receives this one as well!] Which one is better? Or maybe none of them? :)

    Read the article

  • Manually setting object's position or have the object do it all?

    - by N. Lucas
    I'm stuck thinking about the best way to go about setting a line segment's position, I have a class Line(length, angle, previous) being called from a class Polygon.. Right now I have: public function Line(length:Number, angle:Number, previous:Line = null) { if (previous != null) { this.x = previous.end.x; this.y = previous.end.y; } /**/ } Now, is this the best practice or should I be doing: Polygon.addLine(length:Number, angle:Number):void { var previous = _line[_line.length - 1]; // Array containing all Lines var line:Line = new Line(length, angle, previous); line.x = previous.end.x; line.y = previous.end.y; /**/ }

    Read the article

  • How to expose a constructor variable(sic!) as read-only?

    - by Malax
    Hi StackOverflow! I have this rather simple question about Scala. Given that i have to following class definition: class Foo(var bar: Int) The code which is able to construct an instance of Foo must be able to pass the initial value for bar. But if I define bar as var the User is also able to change its value at runtime which is not what I want. The User should only be able to read bar. bar itself is modified internally so a val is not an option. I think I might be getting an answer very soon as this question is so simple. :-) Cheers, Malax

    Read the article

  • Ideal way to set global uncaught exception Handler in Android

    - by Samuh
    I want to set a global uncaught exception handler for all the threads in my Android application. So, in my Application subclass I set an implementation of Thread.UncaughtExceptionHandler as default handler for uncaught exceptions. Thread.setDefaultUncaughtExceptionHandler( new DefaultExceptionHandler(this)); In my implementation, I am trying to display an AlertDialog displaying appropriate exception message. However, this doesn't seem to work. Whenever, an exception is thrown for any thread which goes un-handled, I get the stock, OS-default dialog (Sorry!-Application-has-stopped-unexpectedly dialog). What is the correct and ideal way to set a default handler for uncaught exceptions? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Haskel dot (.) and dollar ($) composition: correct use.

    - by Robert Massaioli
    I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • which version of the code below is right?

    - by TheVillageIdiot
    Hi I found this function in a utilities code file: Version 1: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { bool result = true; try { long tmp = long.Parse(strLong); } catch (Exception ex) { result = false; } return result; } I want to replace this (and validators for other types) with following: Version 2: public static bool IsValidLong(string strLong) { long l; return long.TryParse(strLong, out l); } which version is better and why?

    Read the article

  • Being pressured to GOTO the dark-side

    - by Dan McG
    We have a situation at work where developers working on a legacy (core) system are being pressured into using GOTO statements when adding new features into existing code that is already infected with spagetti code. Now, I understand there may be arguments for using 'just one little GOTO' instead of spending the time on refactoring to a more maintainable solution. The issue is, this isolated 'just one little GOTO' isn't so isolated. At least once every week or so there is a new 'one little GOTO' to add. This codebase is already a horror to work with due to code dating back to or before 1984 being riddled with GOTOs that would make many Pastafarians believe it was inspired by the Flying Spagetti Monster itself. Unfortunately the language this is written in doesn't have any ready made refactoring tools, so it makes it harder to push the 'Refactor to increase productivity later' because short-term wins are the only wins paid attention to here... Has anyone else experienced this issue whereby everybody agrees that we cannot be adding new GOTOs to jump 2000 lines to a random section, but continually have Anaylsts insist on doing it just this one time and having management approve it? tldr; How can one go about addressing the issue of developers being pressured (forced) to continually add GOTO statements (by add, I mean add to jump to random sections many lines away) because it 'gets that feature in quicker'? I'm beginning to fear we may loses valuable developers to the raptors over this...

    Read the article

  • How do I create a new AnyType[] array?

    - by cb
    Which is the best practice in this situation? I would like an un-initialized array of the same type and length as the original. public static <AnyType extends Comparable<? super AnyType>> void someFunction(AnyType[] someArray) { AnyType[] anotherArray = (AnyType[]) new Comparable[someArray.length]; ...or... AnyType[] anotherArray = (AnyType[]) new Object[someArray.length]; ...some other code... } Thanks, CB

    Read the article

  • Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

    - by Luki
    I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

    Read the article

  • Me As Child Type In General Function

    - by Steven
    I have a MustInherit Parent class with two Child classes which Inherit from the Parent. How can I use (or Cast) Me in a Parent function as the the child type of that instance? EDIT: My actual goal is to be able to serialize (BinaryFormatter.Serialize(Stream, Object)) either of my child classes. However, "repeating the code" in each child "seems" wrong. EDIT2: This is my Serialize function. Where should I implement this function? Copying and pasting to each child doesn't seem right, but casting the parent to a child doesn't seem right either. Public Function Serialize() As Byte() Dim bFmt As New BinaryFormatter() Dim mStr As New MemoryStream() bFmt.Serialize(mStr, Me) Return mStr.ToArray() End Function

    Read the article

  • Database Structure for CakePHP Models

    - by Michael T. Smith
    We're building a data tracking web app using CakePHP, and I'm having some issues getting the database structure right. We have Companies that haveMany Sites. Sites haveMany DataSamples. Tags haveAndBelongToMany Sites. That is all set up fine. The problem is "ranking" the sites within tags. We need to store it in the database as an archive. I created a Rank model that is setup like this: rank ( id (int), sample_id (int), tag_id (int), site_id (int), rank (int), total_rows) ) So, the question is, how do I create the associations for tag, site and sample to rank? I originally set them as haveMany. But the returned structures don't get me where I'd like to be. It looks like: [Site] => Array ( [Sample] = Array(), [Tag] = Array() ) When I'm really looking for: [Site] => Array ( [Tag] = Array ( [Sample] => Array ( [Rank] => Array ( ...data... ) ) ) ) I think that I may not be structuring the database properly; so if I need to update please let me know. Otherwise, how do I write a find query that gets me where I need to be? Thanks! Thoughts? Need more details? Just ask!

    Read the article

  • How do I correct feature envy in this case?

    - by RMorrisey
    I have some code that looks like: class Parent { private Intermediate intermediateContainer; public Intermediate getIntermediate(); } class Intermediate { private Child child; public Child getChild() {...} public void intermediateOp(); } class Child { public void something(); public void somethingElse(); } class Client { private Parent parent; public void something() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().something(); } public void somethingElse() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().somethingElse(); } public void intermediate() { parent.getIntermediate().intermediateOp(); } } I understand that is an example of the "feature envy" code smell. The question is, what's the best way to fix it? My first instinct is to put the three methods on parent: parent.something(); parent.somethingElse(); parent.intermediateOp(); ...but I feel like this duplicates code, and clutters the API of the Parent class (which is already rather busy). Do I want to store the result of getIntermediate(), and/or getChild(), and keep my own references to these objects?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

    - by Roman
    I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • Should checkins be small steps or complete features?

    - by Caspin
    Two of version controls uses seem to dictate different checkin styles. distibution centric: changesets will generally reflect a complete feature. In general these checkins will be larger. This style is more user/maintainer friendly. rollback centric: changesets will be individual small steps so the history can function like an incredibly powerful undo. In general these checkins will be smaller. This style is more developer friendly. I like to use my version control as really powerful undo while while I banging away at some stubborn code/bug. In this way I'm not afraid to make drastic changes just to try out a possible solution. However, this seems to give me a fragmented file history with lots of "well that didn't work" checkins. If instead I try to have my changeset reflect complete features I loose the use of my version control software for experimentation. However, it is much easier for user/maintainers to figure out how the code is evolving. Which has great advantages for code reviews, managing multiple branches, etc. So what's a developer to do? checkin small steps or complete features?

    Read the article

  • How strict should I be in the "do the simplest thing that could possible work" while doing TDD

    - by Support - multilanguage SO
    For TDD you have to Create a test that fail Do the simplest thing that could possible work to pass the test Add more variants of the test and repeat Refactor when a pattern emerge With this approach you're supposing to cover all the cases ( that comes to my mind at least) but I'm wonder if am I being too strict here and if it is possible to "think ahead" some scenarios instead of simple discover them. For instance, I'm processing a file and if it doesn't conform to a certain format I am to throw an InvalidFormatException So my first test was: @Test void testFormat(){ // empty doesn't do anything... processor.validate("empty.txt"); try { processor.validate("invalid.txt"); assert false: "Should have thrown InvalidFormatException"; } catch( InvalidFormatException ife ) { assert "Invalid format".equals( ife.getMessage() ); } } I run it and it fails because it doesn't throw an exception. So the next thing that comes to my mind is: "Do the simplest thing that could possible work", so I : public void validate( String fileName ) throws InvalidFormatException { if(fileName.equals("invalid.txt") { throw new InvalidFormatException("Invalid format"); } } Doh!! ( although the real code is a bit more complicated, I found my self doing something like this several times ) I know that I have to eventually add another file name and other test that would make this approach impractical and that would force me to refactor to something that makes sense ( which if I understood correctly is the point of TDD, to discover the patterns the usage unveils ) but: Q: am I taking too literal the "Do the simplest thing..." stuff?

    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 | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >