Search Results

Search found 11923 results on 477 pages for 'inner classes'.

Page 106/477 | < Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >

• 2d shapes in XNA 4.0?

  - by Lautaro

  Having some experience of XNA but none of 3D programming. I have an idea i want to realize but i have not decided to do it in 3d or 2d. Im not sure which one will be best in XNA. I want to have a shape like a blob that can reshape depending on input. The morphing does not need to be very advanced. It could be a circle (2d) or globe (3d) that just has one point that moves slightly in a random direction. In ASP.NET i have made this through the 2d Draw classes where i can make lines, circles, squares etc and then modify the points that makes them up. But it seems to me that XNA does not have classes for making 2d shapes (can i get this confirmed?). If it had, then this would be the quickest solution for me.

  Read the article

• CSS specificity: Why isn't CSS specificity weight of 10 or more class selectors greater than 1 id selector? [migrated]

  - by ajc

  While going through the css specificity concept, I understood the fact that it is calculated as a 4 parts 1) inline (1000) 2) id (100) 3) class (10) 4) html elments (1) CSS with the highest rule will be applied to the corresponding element. I tried the following example Created more than 10 classes <div class="a1"> .... <div class="a13" id="id1"> TEXT COLOR </div> ... </div> and the css as .a1 .a2 .a3 .a4 .a5 .a6 .a7 .a8 .a9 .a10 .a11 .a12 .a13 { color : red; } #id1 { color: blue; } Now, even though in this case there are 13 classes the weight is 130. Which is greater than the id. Result - JSFiddle CSS specificity

  Read the article

• Software Architecture and MEF composition location

  - by Leonardo

  Introduction My software (a bunch of webapi's) consist of 4 projects: Core, FrontWebApi, Library and Administration. Library is a code library project that consists of only interfaces and enumerators. All my classes in other projects inherit from at least one interface, and this interface is in the library. Generally speaking, my interfaces define either Entities, Repositories or Controllers. This project references no other project or any special dlls... just the regular .Net stuff... Core is a class-library project where concrete implementation of Entities and Repositories. In some cases i have more than 1 implementation for a Repository (ex: one for azure table storage and one for regular Sql). This project handles the intelligence (business rules mostly) and persistence, and it references only the Library. FrontWebApi is a ASP.NET MVC 4 WebApi project that implements the controllers interfaces to handle web-requests (from a mobile native app)... It references the Core and the Library. Administration is a code-library project that represents a "optional-module", meaning: if it is present, it provides extra-features (such as Access Control Lists) to the application, but if its not, no problem. Administration is also only referencing the Library and implementing concrete classes of a few interfaces such as "IAccessControlEntry"... I intend to make this available with a "setup" that will create any required database table or anything like that. But it is important to notice that the Core has no reference to this project... Development Now, in order to have a decoupled code I decide to use IoC and because this is a small project, I decided to do it using MEF, specially because of its advertised "composition" capabilities. I arranged all the imports/exports and constructors and everything, but something is quite not perfect in my "mental-visualisation": Main Question Where should I "Compose" the objects? I mean: Technically, the only place where real implementation access is required is in the Repositories, because in order to retrieve data from wherever, entities instances will be necessary, and in all other places. The repositories could also provide a public "GetCleanInstanceOf()" right? Then all other places will be just fine working with the interfaces instead of concrete classes... Secondary Question Should "Administration" implement the concrete object for "IAccessControlGeneralRepository" or the Core should?

  Read the article

• NetBeans, JSF, and MySQL Primary Keys using AUTO_INCREMENT

  - by MarkH

  I recently had the opportunity to spin up a small web application using JSF and MySQL. Having developed JSF apps with Oracle Database back-ends before and possessing some small familiarity with MySQL (sans JSF), I thought this would be a cakewalk. Things did go pretty smoothly...but there was one little "gotcha" that took more time than the few seconds it really warranted. The Problem Every DBMS has its own way of automatically generating primary keys, and each has its pros and cons. For the Oracle Database, you use a sequence and point your Java classes to it using annotations that look something like this: @GeneratedValue(strategy=GenerationType.SEQUENCE, generator="POC_ID_SEQ") @SequenceGenerator(name="POC_ID_SEQ", sequenceName="POC_ID_SEQ", allocationSize=1) Between creating the actual sequence in the database and making sure you have your annotations right (watch those typos!), it seems a bit cumbersome. But it typically "just works", without fuss. Enter MySQL. Designating an integer-based field as PRIMARY KEY and using the keyword AUTO_INCREMENT makes the same task seem much simpler. And it is, mostly. But while NetBeans cranks out a superb "first cut" for a basic JSF CRUD app, there are a couple of small things you'll need to bring to the mix in order to be able to actually (C)reate records. The (RUD) performs fine out of the gate. The Solution Omitting all design considerations and activity (!), here is the basic sequence of events I followed to create, then resolve, the JSF/MySQL "Primary Key Perfect Storm": Fire up NetBeans. Create JSF project. Create Entity Classes from Database. Create JSF Pages from Entity Classes. Test run. Try to create record and hit error. It's a simple fix, but one that was fun to find in its completeness. :-) Even though you've told it what to do for a primary key, a MySQL table requires a gentle nudge to actually generate that new key value. Two things are needed to make the magic happen. First, you need to ensure the following annotation is in place in your Java entity classes: @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) All well and good, but the real key is this: in your controller class(es), you'll have a create() function that looks something like this, minus the comment line and the setId() call in bold red type:     public String create() {         try {             // Assign 0 to ID for MySQL to properly auto_increment the primary key.             current.setId(0);             getFacade().create(current);             JsfUtil.addSuccessMessage(ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("CategoryCreated"));             return prepareCreate();         } catch (Exception e) {             JsfUtil.addErrorMessage(e, ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("PersistenceErrorOccured"));             return null;         }     } Setting the current object's primary key attribute to zero (0) prior to saving it tells MySQL to get the next available value and assign it to that record's key field. Short and simple…but not inherently obvious if you've never used that particular combination of NetBeans/JSF/MySQL before. Hope this helps! All the best, Mark

  Read the article

• What kind of an IT or programming job can a college student get part time?

  - by Alex Foster

  I'm a college student with a full load of classes and i need some extra money to cover some of my expenses. I love anything and everything to do with computers. I don't know how to program but have build computers before and know how windows works. I would call myself a power user. My question is, what kind of a job can someone like me get with effort? If there are some more skills that i can pick up that would benefit in getting the foot in the door i would love to hear about them. The only limitation i have is that i can't work very late in the evening most days due to classes. But usually in the morning my time is available for work. I will appreciate all answers i receive. Thank you for your help.

  Read the article

• Simulating .NET's ScriptService in PHP

  An easy-to-use class that allows us to create PHP classes whose methods are automatically exposed in client-side JavaScript.

  Read the article

• Dependency injection and IOC containers in a closed project

  - by Puckl

  Does it make sense to assemble my project with dependency injection containers if I am the only one who will use the code of that project? The question came up when I read this IOC Article http://martinfowler.com/articles/injection.html The justification for using dependency injection in this article is that friends can reuse a class, and replace depending classes with their own classes because they get injected and not instantiated in the class. I would only use it to inject objects where they are needed instead of passing them through layers to their target. (Which is not so bad I learned here: Is it bad practice to pass instances through several layers?) (Maybe I will reuse parts of the project, who knows, but I don´t know if that is a good justification)

  Read the article

• As a tooling/automation developer, can I be making better use of OOP?

  - by Tom Pickles

  My time as a developer (~8 yrs) has been spent creating tooling/automation of one sort or another. The tools I develop usually interface with one or more API's. These API's could be win32, WMI, VMWare, a help-desk application, LDAP, you get the picture. The apps I develop could be just to pull back data and store/report. It could be to provision groups of VM's to create live like mock environments, update a trouble ticket etc. I've been developing in .Net and I'm currently reading into design patterns and trying to think about how I can improve my skills to make better use of and increase my understanding of OOP. For example, I've never used an interface of my own making in anger (which is probably not a good thing), because I honestly cannot identify where using one would benefit later on when modifying my code. My classes are usually very specific and I don't create similar classes with similar properties/methods which could use a common interface (like perhaps a car dealership or shop application might). I generally use an n-tier approach to my apps, having a presentation layer, a business logic/manager layer which interfaces with layer(s) that make calls to the API's I'm working with. My business entities are always just method-less container objects, which I populate with data and pass back and forth between my API interfacing layer using static methods to proxy/validate between the front and the back end. My code by nature of my work, has few common components, at least from what I can see. So I'm struggling to see how I can better make use of OOP design and perhaps reusable patterns. Am I right to be concerned that I could be being smarter about how I work, or is what I'm doing now right for my line of work? Or, am I missing something fundamental in OOP? EDIT: Here is some basic code to show how my mgr and api facing layers work. I use static classes as they do not persist any data, only facilitate moving it between layers. public static class MgrClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Perform logic to validate or apply biz logic // call APIClass to do the work return APIClass.PowerOnVM(VMName); } } public static class APIClass { public static bool PowerOnVM(string VMName) { // Calls to 3rd party API to power on a virtual machine // returns true or false if was successful for example } }

  Read the article

• Are microsoft certificates useful [closed]

  - by grabah

  Possible Duplicate: Why should you get MCTS certified? Are microsoft certificates useful for anything more than beeing a bonus on job interviews? I do believe in formal training but i'm sceptical about their value, specialy if i dont' take classes (not enough time/money) but study at home/online and than go directly to take exams. Would you recomend taking preparation classes, or are they just waste of time? (or perhaps is whole certification thing waste of time?) (i have several years of expirience and currently working in software development)

  Read the article

• Which programming career path fits my terms? [closed]

  - by Goward Gerald

  I am sick and tired of my enterprise development job, I need some programming direction like this: Demanded in jobs-market Demanded in freelance market Can use Ubuntu as development environment Not enterprise. Standalone, mobile, web-development, anything, just not enterprise. Basically, I need a programming direction which doesn't need 20 developers, terribly big databases systems and long going projects with intense long-term support, I don't want enterprise job where a lot of people are working on one terribly big project and do modules to it all day long. Instead, I need something where: Projects change pretty often Projects are little, or medium-sized (in terms of code, modules and people working on it) but still not enterprise-sized Possible for freelance, solo-development, or at least requires a team of 3-4 programmers. Not like in enterprise where you feel like a drop in the sea with your 50 classes while system itself has hundreds of classes. Suggestions please?

  Read the article

• Serious Forum Design Issue

  - by John

  I want to launch a school forum for a country. I'm in dilemma as to how to design this forum. Country will have many states, each state will have cities, each city will have many schools. Each school will have many classes( 1st - 12th). It looks like this: States - Cities - Schools - Classes I want to make each class as forum. Now the biggest problems are two fold: If I were to list even 1000 schools it will create huge number of forums and I don't think forum softwares(PHPBB, MyBB) are designed to support these many Secondly creating and maintaining huge forums is also very difficult. Ideally I'd like to duplicate existing forum hierarchy to new one. I've done lot of search and I've found that such type of forums are infeasible and such designs don't work. Leave alone the fact the nobody uses such a forum. Keeping in mind this, how should I go about designing this forum?

  Read the article

• How to suggest using an ORM instead of stored procedures?

  - by Wayne M

  I work at a company that only uses stored procedures for all data access, which makes it very annoying to keep our local databases in sync as every commit we have to run new procs. I have used some basic ORMs in the past and I find the experience much better and cleaner. I'd like to suggest to the development manager and rest of the team that we look into using an ORM Of some kind for future development (the rest of the team are only familiar with stored procedures and have never used anything else). The current architecture is .NET 3.5 written like .NET 1.1, with "god classes" that use a strange implementation of ActiveRecord and return untyped DataSets which are looped over in code-behind files - the classes work something like this: class Foo { public bool LoadFoo() { bool blnResult = false; if (this.FooID == 0) { throw new Exception("FooID must be set before calling this method."); } DataSet ds = // ... call to Sproc if (ds.Tables[0].Rows.Count > 0) { foo.FooName = ds.Tables[0].Rows[0]["FooName"].ToString(); // other properties set blnResult = true; } return blnResult; } } // Consumer Foo foo = new Foo(); foo.FooID = 1234; foo.LoadFoo(); // do stuff with foo... There is pretty much no application of any design patterns. There are no tests whatsoever (nobody else knows how to write unit tests, and testing is done through manually loading up the website and poking around). Looking through our database we have: 199 tables, 13 views, a whopping 926 stored procedures and 93 functions. About 30 or so tables are used for batch jobs or external things, the remainder are used in our core application. Is it even worth pursuing a different approach in this scenario? I'm talking about moving forward only since we aren't allowed to refactor the existing code since "it works" so we cannot change the existing classes to use an ORM, but I don't know how often we add brand new modules instead of adding to/fixing current modules so I'm not sure if an ORM is the right approach (too much invested in stored procedures and DataSets). If it is the right choice, how should I present the case for using one? Off the top of my head the only benefits I can think of is having cleaner code (although it might not be, since the current architecture isn't built with ORMs in mind so we would basically be jury-rigging ORMs on to future modules but the old ones would still be using the DataSets) and less hassle to have to remember what procedure scripts have been run and which need to be run, etc. but that's it, and I don't know how compelling an argument that would be. Maintainability is another concern but one that nobody except me seems to be concerned about.

  Read the article

• Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed"

  - by Nicolas Repiquet

  After 10+ years of java/c# programming, I find myself creating either: abstract classes: contract not meant to be instantiated as-is. final/sealed classes: implementation not meant to serve as base class to something else. I can't think of any situation where a simple "class" (i.e. neither abstract nor final/sealed) would be "wise programming". Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed" ? EDIT This great article explains my concerns far better than I can.

  Read the article

• best way to "introduce" OOP/OOD to team of experienced C++ engineers

  - by DXM

  I am looking for an efficient way, that also doesn't come off as an insult, to introduce OOP concepts to existing team members? My teammates are not new to OO languages. We've been doing C++/C# for a long time so technology itself is familiar. However, I look around and without major infusion of effort (mostly in the form of code reviews), it seems what we are producing is C code that happens to be inside classes. There's almost no use of single responsibility principle, abstractions or attempts to minimize coupling, just to name a few. I've seen classes that don't have a constructor but get memset to 0 every time they are instantiated. But every time I bring up OOP, everyone always nods and makes it seem like they know exactly what I'm talking about. Knowing the concepts is good, but we (some more than others) seem to have very hard time applying them when it comes to delivering actual work. Code reviews have been very helpful but the problem with code reviews is that they only occur after the fact so to some it seems we end up rewriting (it's mostly refactoring, but still takes lots of time) code that was just written. Also code reviews only give feedback to an individual engineer, not the entire team. I am toying with the idea of doing a presentation (or a series) and try to bring up OOP again along with some examples of existing code that could've been written better and could be refactored. I could use some really old projects that no one owns anymore so at least that part shouldn't be a sensitive issue. However, will this work? As I said most people have done C++ for a long time so my guess is that a) they'll sit there thinking why I'm telling them stuff they already know or b) they might actually take it as an insult because I'm telling them they don't know how to do the job they've been doing for years if not decades. Is there another approach which would reach broader audience than a code review would, but at the same time wouldn't feel like a punishment lecture? I'm not a fresh kid out of college who has utopian ideals of perfectly designed code and I don't expect that from anyone. The reason I'm writing this is because I just did a review of a person who actually had decent high-level design on paper. However if you picture classes: A - B - C - D, in the code B, C and D all implement almost the same public interface and B/C have one liner functions so that top-most class A is doing absolutely all the work (down to memory management, string parsing, setup negotiations...) primarily in 4 mongo methods and, for all intents and purposes, calls almost directly into D. Update: I'm a tech lead(6 months in this role) and do have full support of the group manager. We are working on a very mature product and maintenance costs are definitely letting themselves be known.

  Read the article

• Alternative to "inheritance v composition??"

  - by Frank

  I have colleagues at work who claim that "Inheritance is an anti-pattern" and want to use composition systematically instead, except in (rare, according to them) cases where inheritance is really the best way to go. I want to suggest an alternative where we continue using inheritance, but it is strictly forbidden (enforced by code reviews) to use anything but public members of base classes in derived classes. For a case where we don't need to swap components of a class at runtime (static inheritance), would that be equivalent enough to composition? Or am I forgetting some other important aspect of composition?

  Read the article

• What's the best way to create a static utility class in python? Is using metaclasses code smell?

  - by rsimp

  Ok so I need to create a bunch of utility classes in python. Normally I would just use a simple module for this but I need to be able to inherit in order to share common code between them. The common code needs to reference the state of the module using it so simple imports wouldn't work well. I don't like singletons, and classes that use the classmethod decorator do not have proper support for python properties. One pattern I see used a lot is creating an internal python class prefixed with an underscore and creating a single instance which is then explicitly imported or set as the module itself. This is also used by fabric to create a common environment object (fabric.api.env). I've realized another way to accomplish this would be with metaclasses. For example: #util.py class MetaFooBase(type): @property def file_path(cls): raise NotImplementedError def inherited_method(cls): print cls.file_path #foo.py from util import * import env class MetaFoo(MetaFooBase): @property def file_path(cls): return env.base_path + "relative/path" def another_class_method(cls): pass class Foo(object): __metaclass__ = MetaFoo #client.py from foo import Foo file_path = Foo.file_path I like this approach better than the first pattern for a few reasons: First, instantiating Foo would be meaningless as it has no attributes or methods, which insures this class acts like a true single interface utility, unlike the first pattern which relies on the underscore convention to dissuade client code from creating more instances of the internal class. Second, sub-classing MetaFoo in a different module wouldn't be as awkward because I wouldn't be importing a class with an underscore which is inherently going against its private naming convention. Third, this seems to be the closest approximation to a static class that exists in python, as all the meta code applies only to the class and not to its instances. This is shown by the common convention of using cls instead of self in the class methods. As well, the base class inherits from type instead of object which would prevent users from trying to use it as a base for other non-static classes. It's implementation as a static class is also apparent when using it by the naming convention Foo, as opposed to foo, which denotes a static class method is being used. As much as I think this is a good fit, I feel that others might feel its not pythonic because its not a sanctioned use for metaclasses which should be avoided 99% of the time. I also find most python devs tend to shy away from metaclasses which might affect code reuse/maintainability. Is this code considered code smell in the python community? I ask because I'm creating a pypi package, and would like to do everything I can to increase adoption.

  Read the article

• Class as first-class object

  - by mrpyo

  Could a class be a first-class object? If yes, how would the implementation look? I mean, how could syntax for dynamically creating new classes look like? EDIT: I mean what example syntax could look like (I'm sorry, English is not my native language), but still I believe this question makes sense - how you give this functionality while keeping language consistent. For example how you create reference for new type. Do you make reference first-class object too and then use something like this: Reference<newType> r = new Reference<newType>(); r.set(value); Well this could get messy so you may just force user to use Object type references for dynamically created classes, but then you loose type-checking. I think creating concise syntax for this is interesting problem which solving could lead to better language design, maybe language which is metalanguage for itself (I wonder if this is possible).

  Read the article

• Switching from abstract class to interface

  - by nischayn22

  I have an abstract class which has all abstract methods except one which constructs objects of the subclasses. Now my mentor asked me to move this abstract class to an interface. Having an interface is no problem except with the method used to construct subclass objects. Where should this method go now? Also, I read somewhere that interfaces are more efficient than abstract classes. Is this true? Here's an example of my classes abstract class Animal { //many abstract methods getAnimalobject(some parameter) { return //appropriate subclass } } class Dog extends Animal {} class Elephant extends Animal {}

  Read the article

• When to use mixins in Ruby

  - by Gilles

  I am wondering when to use mixins? I have read about them. Many authors compare them to interfaces, abstract classes, etc. Mixins are modules that are mixed-in and modules are a way to group similar methods, constants and classes together. I have seen examples where a module for math functions is created. It makes sense to group and reuse such functions but should I only mix these in a class if I am faced with an inheritance situation? Should I mix these in anytime I want to use them in a class? Should they be used exactly like interfaces in other languages or are there other subtleties?

  Read the article

• What would the ultimate developer training class look like?

  - by user652273

  I think today's typical/traditional 3-5 days developer training classes aren't so great, as you tend to forget half of it shortly after. It's too much one way communication and not enough interaction. Also brain research has shown that this kind of setup is usually not optimal for efficient learning. For clarification, I am referring to professional, commercial, paid classes. However this could also be applied for any kind of studies. How could the ultimate developer training package be setup to really make sure you learn what you are supposed to learn? Would that be more: Multimedia? Exercises? Homeworks? Spread out over time instead of 3-5 compact days? Group projects?

  Read the article

• Alternative to "inheritance versus composition?" [closed]

  - by Frank

  Possible Duplicate: Where does this concept of “favor composition over inheritance” come from? I have colleagues at work who claim that "Inheritance is an anti-pattern" and want to use composition systematically instead, except in (rare, according to them) cases where inheritance is really the best way to go. I want to suggest an alternative where we continue using inheritance, but it is strictly forbidden (enforced by code reviews) to use anything but public members of base classes in derived classes. For a case where we don't need to swap components of a class at runtime (static inheritance), would that be equivalent enough to composition? Or am I forgetting some other important aspect of composition?

  Read the article

• Programming curricula

  - by davidk01

  There are a lot of schools that teach Java and C++ but whenever I see the syllabus for one of these classes it's almost always some cut and dry OO stuff with possibly some boring end of class project. With all the little gadgets and emulators for those gadgets why aren't more schools re-purposing those classes so that the students work their way up to building android or meego applications? That way students get to experience first hand what it takes to engineer/build a piece of software instead of doing finger exercises with syntax. Practically every self-taught programmer that I know started programming because they wanted to make their gadgets do things for them. They didn't learn a programming language with an abstract conception of using it on some far distant project so I don't understand why schools don't emulate this style of teaching.

  Read the article

• How to make the switch to C++11?

  - by Overv

  I've been programming in C++ for a while now, but mostly thinks centered around the low-level features of C++. By that I mean mostly working with pointers and raw arrays. I think this behavior is known as using C++ as C with classes despite me only having tried C recently for the first time. I was pleasantly surprised how languages like C# and Java hide these details away in convenient standard library classes like Dictionaries and Lists. I'm aware that the C++ standard library has many convenience containers like vectors, maps and strings as well and C++11 only adds to this by having std:: array and ranged loops. How do I best learn to make use of these modern language features and which are suitable for which moments? Is it correct that software engineering in C++ nowadays I'd mostly free of manual memory management? Lastly, which compiler should I use to make the most of the new standard? Visual Studio has excellent debugging tools, but even VS2012 seems to have terrible C++11 support.

  Read the article

• How to improve programming skills?

  - by Mike

  I'm very new to programming. I started learning PHP about half a year ago, so I do know something. I can write small functions, I can export and import information from a database and I can make a website. I don't know OOP principles and I don't know about objects and classes. Should I move to OOP principles and learn about classes, methods and objects? If not, what should I do? Continue writing simple code? How can a programmer write his/her own API? Is OOP necessary to do this? So how can i improve my skills? I love programming. I spend my 24/7 on it, so any help will be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Running a compiled Java program

  - by Roshan George

  I have a question on a compiled Java program that I have written. I have a Java file that has three classes defined within it. When I compiled the program I got a total of four classes. How do I make this into a form where I can run my application just by clicking an icon or something, or by issuing just a single command. For example, if I make it as an exe file, it could run only on Windows, how do I make it into a form compatible with all Oses. And hoe?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >