Search Results

Search found 11404 results on 457 pages for 'ui patterns'.

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 111/457 | < Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >

  • Magento Onepage Success Conversion Tracking Design Pattern

    - by user1734954
    My intent is to track conversions through multiple channels by inserting third party javascript (for example google analytics, optimizely, pricegrabber etc.) into the footer of onepage success . I've accomplished this by adding a block to the footer reference inside of the checkout success node within local.xml and everything works appropriately. My questions are more about efficiency and extensibility. It occurred to me that it would be better to combine all of the blocks into a single block reference and then use a various methods acting on a single call to the various related models to provide the data needed for insertion into the javascript for each of the conversion tracking scripts. Some examples of the common data that conversion tracking may rely on(pseudo): Order ID , Order Total, Order.LineItem.Name(foreach) and so on Currently for each of the scripts I've made a call to the appropriate model passing the customers last order id as the load value and the calling a get() assigning the return value to a variable and then iterating through the data to match the values with the expectations of the given third party service. All of the data should be pulled once when checkout is complete each third party services may expect different data in different formats Here is an example of one of the conversion tracking template files which loads at the footer of checkout success. $order = Mage::getModel('sales/order')->loadByIncrementId(Mage::getSingleton('checkout/session')->getLastRealOrderId()); $amount = number_format($order->getGrandTotal(),2); $customer = Mage::helper('customer')->getCustomer()->getData(); ?> <script type="text/javascript"> popup_email = '<?php echo($customer['email']);?>'; popup_order_number = '<?php echo $this->getOrderId() ?>'; </script> <!-- PriceGrabber Merchant Evaluation Code --> <script type="text/javascript" charset="UTF-8" src="https://www.pricegrabber.com/rating_merchrevpopjs.php?retid=<something>"></script> <noscript><a href="http://www.pricegrabber.com/rating_merchrev.php?retid=<something>" target=_blank> <img src="https://images.pricegrabber.com/images/mr_noprize.jpg" border="0" width="272" height="238" alt="Merchant Evaluation"></a></noscript> <!-- End PriceGrabber Code --> Having just a single piece of code like this is not that big of a deal, but we are doing similar things with a number of different third party services. Pricegrabber is one of the simpler examples. A more sophisticated tracking service expects a comma separated list of all of the product names, ids, prices, categories , order id etc. I would like to make it all more manageable so my idea to do the following: combine all of the template files into a single file Develop a helper class or library to deliver the data to the conversion template Goals Include Extensibility Minimal Model Calls Minimal Method Calls The Questions 1. Is a Mage helper the best route to take? 2. Is there any design pattern you may recommend for the "helper" class? 3. Why would this the design pattern you've chosen be best for this instance?

    Read the article

  • Choosing a design pattern for a class that might change it's internal attributes

    - by the_drow
    I have a class that holds arbitrary state and it's defined like this: class AbstractFoo { }; template <class StatePolicy> class Foo : public StatePolicy, public AbstractFoo { }; The state policy contains only protected attributes that represent the state. The state might be the same for multiple behaviors and they can be replaced at runtime. All Foo objects have the same interface to abstract the state itself and to enable storing Foo objects in containers. I would like to find the least verbose and the most maintainable way to express this.

    Read the article

  • How to make a jQuery plugin (the right way)?

    - by macek
    I know there are jQuery cookie plugins out there, but I wanted to write one for the sake of better learning the jQuery plugin pattern. I like the separation of "work" in small, manageable functions, but I feel like I'm passing name, value, and options arguments around too much. Is there a way this can be refactored? I'm looking for snippets of code to help illustrate examples provided with in answers. Any help is appreciated. Thanks :) example usage $.cookie('foo', 'bar', {expires:7}); $.cookie('foo'); //=> bar $.cookie('foo', null); $.cookie('foo'); //=> undefined Edit: I did a little bit of work on this. You can view the revision history to see where this has come from. It still feels like more refactoring can be done to optimize the flow a bit. Any ideas? the plugin (function($){ $.cookie = function(name, value, options) { if (typeof value == 'undefined') { return get(name); } else { options = $.extend({}, $.cookie.defaults, options || {}); return (value != null) ? set(name, value, options) : unset(name, options); } }; $.cookie.defaults = { expires: null, path: '/', domain: null, secure: false }; var set = function(name, value, options){ console.log(options); return document.cookie = options_string(name, value, options); }; var get = function(name){ var cookies = {}; $.map(document.cookie.split(';'), function(pair){ var c = $.trim(pair).split('='); cookies[c[0]] = c[1]; }); return decodeURIComponent(cookies[name]); }; var unset = function(name, options){ value = ''; options.expires = -1; set(name, value, options); }; var options_string = function(name, value, options){ var pairs = [param.name(name, value)]; $.each(options, function(k,v){ pairs.push(param[k](v)); }); return $.map(pairs, function(p){ return p === null ? null : p; }).join(';'); }; var param = { name: function(name, value){ return name + "=" + encodeURIComponent(value); }, expires: function(value){ // no expiry if(value === null){ return null; } // number of days else if(typeof value == "number"){ d = new Date(); d.setTime(d.getTime() + (value * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000)); } // date object else if(typeof value == "object" && value instanceof "Date") { d = value; } return "expires=" + d.toUTCString(); }, path: function(value){ return "path="+value; }, domain: function(value){ return value === null ? null : "domain=" + value; }, secure: function(bool){ return bool ? "secure" : null; } }; })(jQuery);

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for adding / removing elements

    - by de3
    Wikipedia's definition for Iterator pattern design: the Iterator pattern is a design pattern in which iterators are used to access the elements of an aggregate object sequentially without exposing its underlying implementation. Iterator interface in java provides the following methods hasNext() next() remove() Is there a pattern design, or a java interface for inserting / deleting elements, and getting length of the aggregate object, in addition to iterating them? I know remove() is an optional method that can be used once per call to next(), but I am implementing a circular FIFO array and need a method delete() independent of iterator's next().

    Read the article

  • Is this class + constructor definition pattern overly redundant?

    - by Protector one
    I often come across a pattern similar to this: class Person { public string firstName, lastName; public Person(string firstName, string lastName) { this.firstName = firstName; this.lastName = lastName; } } This feels overly redundant (I imagine typing "firstName" once, instead of thrice could be enough…), but I can't think of a proper alternative. Any ideas? Maybe I just don't know about a certain design pattern I should be using here? Edit - I think I need to elaborate a little. I'm not asking how to make the example code "better", but rather, "shorter". In its current state, all member names appear 3 times (declaration, initialization, constructor arguments), and it feels rather redundant. So I'm wondering if there is a pattern (or semantic sugar) to get (roughly) the same behavior, but with less bloat. I apologize for being unclear initially.

    Read the article

  • How can I refactor this to work without breaking the pattern horribly?

    - by SnOrfus
    I've got a base class object that is used for filtering. It's a template method object that looks something like this. public class Filter { public void Process(User u, GeoRegion r, int countNeeded) { List<account> selected = this.Select(u, r, countNeeded); // 1 List<account> filtered = this.Filter(selected, u, r, countNeeded); // 2 if (filtered.Count > 0) { /* do businessy stuff */ } // 3 if (filtered.Count < countNeeded) this.SendToSuccessor(u, r, countNeeded - filtered) // 4 } } Select(...), Filter(...) are protected abstract methods and implemented by the derived classes. Select(...) finds objects in the based on x criteria, Filter(...) filters those selected further. If the remaining filtered collection has more than 1 object in it, we do some business stuff with it (unimportant to the problem here). SendToSuccessor(...) is called if there weren't enough objects found after filtering (it's a composite where the next class in succession will also be derived from Filter but have different filtering criteria) All has been ok, but now I'm building another set of filters, which I was going to subclass from this. The filters I'm building however would require different params and I don't want to just implement those methods and not use the params or just add to the param list the ones I need and have them not used in the existing filters. They still perform the same logical process though. I also don't want to complicated the consumer code for this (which looks like this) Filter f = new Filter1(); Filter f2 = new Filter2(); Filter f3 = new Filter3(); f.Sucessor = f2; f2.Sucessor = f3; /* and so on adding filters as successors to previous ones */ foreach (User u in users) { foreach (GeoRegion r in regions) { f.Process(u, r, ##); } } How should I go about it?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript Module Pattern - What about using "return this"?

    - by Rob
    After doing some reading about the Module Pattern, I've seen a few ways of returning the properties which you want to be public. One of the most common ways is to declare your public properties and methods right inside of the "return" statement, apart from your private properties and methods. A similar way (the "Revealing" pattern) is to provide simply references to the properties and methods which you want to be public. Lastly, a third technique I saw was to create a new object inside your module function, to which you assign your new properties before returning said object. This was an interesting idea, but requires the creation of a new object. So I was thinking, why not just use "this.propertyName" to assign your public properties and methods, and finally use "return this" at the end? This way seems much simpler to me, as you can create private properties and methods with the usual "var" or "function" syntax, or use the "this.propertyName" syntax to declare your public methods. Here's the method I'm suggesting: (function() { var privateMethod = function () { alert('This is a private method.'); } this.publicMethod = function () { alert('This is a public method.'); } return this; })(); Are there any pros/cons to using the method above? What about the others?

    Read the article

  • Projects with browsable source using dependency injection w/ guice?

    - by André
    I often read about dependency injection and I did research on google and I understand in theory what it can do and how it works, but I'd like to see an actual code base using it (Java/guice would be preferred). Can anyone point me to an open source project, where I can see, how it's really used? I think browsing the code and seeing the whole setup shows me more than the ususal snippets in the introduction articles you find around the web. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Good case for a Null Object Pattern? (Provide some service with a mailservice)

    - by fireeyedboy
    For a website I'm working on, I made an Media Service object that I use in the front end, as well as in the backend (CMS). This Media Service object manipulates media in a local repository (DB); it provides the ability to upload/embed video's and upload images. In other words, website visitors are able to do this in the front end, but administrators of the site are also able to do this in the backend. I'ld like this service to mail the administrators when a visitor has uploaded/embedded a new medium in the frontend, but refrain from mailing them when they upload/embed a medium themself in the backend. So I started wondering whether this is a good case for passing a null object, that mimicks the mail funcionality, to the Media Service in the backend. I thought this might come in handy when they decide the backend needs to have implemented mail functionality as well. In simplified terms I'ld like to do something like this: Frontend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new StandardMailService() ); Backend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new NullMailService() ); How do you feel about this? Does this make sense? Or am I setting myself up for problems down the road?

    Read the article

  • Haskell: Pattern Matching with Lists

    - by user1670032
    I'm trying to make a function that takes in a list, and if one of the elements is negative, then any elements in that list that are equal to its positive counterpart should be changed to 0. Eg, if there is a -2 in a list, then all 2's in that list should be changed to 0. Any ideas why it only works for some cases and not others? I'm not understanding why this is, I've looked it over several times. changeToZero [] = [] changeToZero [x] = [x] changeToZero (x:zs:y:ws) | (x < 0) && ((-1)*(x) == y) = x : zs : 0 : changeToZero ws changeToZero (x:xs) = x : changeToZero xs *Main changeToZero [-1,1,-2,2,-3,3] [-1,1,-2,2,-3,3] *Main changeToZero [-2,1,2,3] [-2,1,0,3] *Main changeToZero [-2,1,2,3,2] [-2,1,0,3,2] *Main changeToZero [1,-2,2,2,1] [1,-2,2,0,1]

    Read the article

  • UI template with big controls

    - by Bumble Bee
    Im not sure if this question is appropriate to go in here but after some hard effort in google I had no option but to post this here. I'm in the process of doing some UIs for a touch screen, but not sure how the template should look like. e.g. how big the buttons/text/labels should be. If anyone has experience in doing s similar stuff, pls share some references you have. thanks BB

    Read the article

  • Why use hashing to create pathnames for large collections of files?

    - by Stephen
    Hi, I noticed a number of cases where an application or database stored collections of files/blobs using a has to determine the path and filename. I believe the intended outcome is a situation where the path never gets too deep, or the folders ever get too full - too many files (or folders) in a folder making for slower access. EDIT: Examples are often Digital libraries or repositories, though the simplest example I can think of (that can be installed in about 30s) is the Zotero document/citation database. Why do this? EDIT: thanks Mat for the answer - does this technique of using a hash to create a file path have a name? Is it a pattern? I'd like to read more, but have failed to find anything in the ACM Digital Library

    Read the article

  • How do i structure my SQL Database (tables, Schemas, users, stored procedures etc.) to prepare it fo

    - by AlexRednic
    I think the title is self explanatory. What I'm looking for is material so I can further my knowledge. I've never developed a full application before so building one from scratch is a bit overwhelming for me. And the first bump in the road is the database. Websites, articles, books, elaborate answers, anything will do as long as they keep me on the right track. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Does C# allow method overloading, PHP style (__call)?

    - by mr.b
    In PHP, there is a special method named __call($calledMethodName, $arguments), which allows class to catch calls to non-existing methods, and do something about it. Since most of classic languages are strongly typed, compiler won't allow calling a method that does not exist, I'm clear with that part. What I want to accomplish (and I figured this is how I would do it in PHP, but C# is something else) is to proxy calls to a class methods and log each of these calls. Right now, I have code similar to this: class ProxyClass { static logger; public AnotherClass inner { get; private set; } public ProxyClass() { inner = new AnotherClass(); } } class AnotherClass { public void A() {} public void B() {} public void C() {} // ... } // meanwhile, in happyCodeLandia... ProxyClass pc = new ProxyClass(); pc.inner.A(); pc.inner.B(); // ... So, how can I proxy calls to an object instance in extensible way? Extensible, meaning that I don't have to modify ProxyClass whenever AnotherClass changes. In my case, AnotherClass can have any number of methods, so it wouldn't be appropriate to overload or wrap all methods to add logging. I am aware that this might not be the best approach for this kind of problem, so if anyone has idea what approach to use, shoot. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Best practice to modularise a large Grails app?

    - by Mulone
    Hi all, A Grails app I'm working on is becoming pretty big, and it would be good to refactor it into several modules, so that we don't have to redeploy the whole thing every time. In your opinion, what is the best practice to split a Grails app in several modules? In particular I'd like to create a package of domain classes + relevant services and use it in the app as a module. Is this possible? Is it possible to do it with plugins? Cheers, Mulone

    Read the article

  • Question about factory classes

    - by devoured elysium
    Currently I have created a ABCFactory class that has a single method creating ABC objects. Now that I think of it, maybe instead of having a factory, I could just make a static method in my ABC Method. What are the pro's and con's on making this change? Will it not lead to the same? I don't foresee having other classes inherit ABC, but one never knows! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Are we using IoC effectively?

    - by Juliet
    So my company uses Castle Windsor IoC container, but in a way that feels "off": All the data types are registered in code, not the config file. All data types are hard-coded to use one interface implementation. In fact, for nearly all given interfaces, there is and will only ever be one implementation. All registered data types have a default constructor, so Windsor doesn't instantiate an object graph for any registered types. The people who designed the system insist the IoC container makes the system better. We have 1200+ public classes, so its a big system, the kind where you'd expect to find a framework like Windsor. But I'm still skeptical. Is my company using IoC effectively? Is there an advantage to new'ing objects with Windsor than new'ing objects with the new keyword?

    Read the article

  • Configuration and Model-View

    - by HH
    I am using the Model-View pattern on a small application I'm writing. Here's the scenario: The model maintains a list of directories from where it can extract the data that it needs. The View has a Configuration or a Setting dialog where the user can modify this list of directories (the dialog has a JList displaying the list in addition to add and remove buttons). I need some advice from the community: The View needs to communicate these changes to the model. I thought first of adding to the model these methods: addDirectory() and removeDirectory(). But I am trying to limit the number of methods (or channels) that the View can use to communicate with and manipulate the model. Is there any good practice for this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Should Factories Persist Entities?

    - by mxmissile
    Should factories persist entities they build? Or is that the job of the caller? Pseudo Example Incoming: public class OrderFactory { public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); .... return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public OrderController(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); repository.Insert(order); ... } } or public class OrderFactory { public OrderFactory(IRepository repository) { this.repository = repository; } public Order Build() { var order = new Order(); ... repository.Insert(order); return order; } } public class OrderController : Controller { public ActionResult MyAction() { var order = factory.Build(); ... } } Is there a recommended practice here?

    Read the article

  • Best practice to include log4Net external config file in ASP.NET

    - by Martin Buberl
    I have seen at least two ways to include an external log4net config file in an ASP.NET web application: Having the following attribute in your AssemblyInfo.cs file: [assembly: log4net.Config.XmlConfigurator(ConfigFile = "Log.config", Watch = true)] Calling the XmlConfigurator in the Global.asax.cs: protected void Application_Start() { XmlConfigurator.Configure(new FileInfo("Log.config")); } What would be the best practice to do it?

    Read the article

  • Is there a pattern for this?

    - by Timmy
    i have something that requires a matrix of values, similar to pokemon: i have a class object for each of the types, is there a pattern or a good way to implement this, as a middle layer or in the classes?

    Read the article

  • What should go in each MVVM triad?

    - by Harry
    OK, let's say I am creating a program that will list users contacts in a ListBox on the left side of the screen. When a user clicks on the contact, a bunch of messages or whatever appears in the main part of the window. Now my question is: how should the MVVM triads look? I have two models: Contact, and Message. The Contact model contains a list of Message models. Each ViewModel object will contain a single corresponding Model, right? And what about the Views? I have a "MainView" that is the main window, that will have things like the menu, toolbar etc. Do I put the ListBox in the MainView? My confusion is with what to put where; for example, what should the ContactView contain? Just a single instance of a contact? So the DataTemplate, ControlTemplate, context menus, styles etc for that single contact, and then just have a ListBox of them in the MainView...? Thanks.

    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 | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >