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 112/457 | < Previous Page | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >

  • What is the best Design/Way to keep user connected ?

    - by Fasih Hansmukh
    Am working on a POC for self learning in which I want to keep my user connected in LIVE pattern. For example, A game in which 4 user can play at a time , here I need to keep this user connected to my game . M not good at Socket type of programming and love to do that in Services way.What i wana know is 'What is the best way of doing this'. According to my initial Brain Storming, I have decided that I will use SilverLight(In Browser Or Out of Browser) as Front end [I have no issue in that]. I m more concern in back end. Either I make an handler or make a WCF service or use full duplex service and use pooling mechanism for that. As a random thought I come up with a Timer type logic that will fire every after 10 seconds at clients end and get status like Is it now Its turn to roll a dice Home many user left (in case if some of them left) What are connected user status in game like there score/points ect and update game view according to this at his end Kindly place your best answers here that will help me to learn this. Regards and thanks in Advance EDIT: Starting Bounty as i need more feedback. FH

    Read the article

  • Visitor Pattern can be replaced with Callback functions?

    - by getit
    Is there any significant benefit to using either technique? In case there are variations, the Visitor Pattern I mean is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_pattern And below is an example of using a delegate to achieve the same effect (at least I think it is the same) Say there is a collection of nested elements: Schools contain Departments which contain Students Instead of using the Visitor pattern to perform something on each collection item, why not use a simple callback (Action delegate in C#) Say something like this class Department { List Students; } class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student> actionDelegate) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu); } } } } School A = new School(); ...//populate collections A.Visit((student)=> { ...Do Something with student... }); *EDIT Example with delegate accepting multiple params Say I wanted to pass both the student and department, I could modify the Action definition like so: Action class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student, Department> actionDelegate, Action<Department> d2) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { d2(dep); //This performs a different process. //Using Visitor pattern would avoid having to keep adding new delegates. //This looks like the main benefit so far foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu, dep); } } } }

    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

  • Java: Make a method abstract for each extending class

    - by Martijn Courteaux
    Hi, Is there any keyword or design pattern for doing this? public abstract class Root { public abstract void foo(); } public abstract class SubClass extends Root { public void foo() { // Do something } } public class SubberClass extends SubClass { // Here is it not necessary to override foo() // So is there a way to make this necessary? // A way to obligate the developer make again the override } Thanks

    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

  • wpf command pattern

    - by evan
    I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

    Read the article

  • anti-if campaign

    - by Andrew Siemer
    I recently ran against a very interesting site that expresses a very interesting idea - the anti-if campaign. You can see this here at www.antiifcampaign.com. I have to agree that complex nested IF statements are an absolute pain in the rear. I am currently on a project that up until very recently had some crazy nested IFs that scrolled to the right for quite a ways. We cured our issues in two ways - we used Windows Workflow Foundation to address routing (or workflow) concerns. And we are in the process of implementing all of our business rules utilizing ILOG Rules for .NET (recently purchased by IBM!!). This for the most part has cured our nested IF pains...but I find myself wondering how many people cure their pains in the manner that the good folks at the AntiIfCampaign suggest (see an example here) by creating numerous amounts of abstract classes to represent a given scenario that was originally covered by the nested IF. I wonder if another way to address the removal of this complexity might also be in using an IoC container such as StructureMap to move in and out of different bits of functionality. Either way... Question: Given a scenario where I have a nested complex IF or SWITCH statement that is used to evaluate a given type of thing (say evaluating an Enum) to determine how I want to handle the processing of that thing by enum type - what are some ways to do the same form of processing without using the IF or SWITCH hierarchical structure? public enum WidgetTypes { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4 } ... WidgetTypes _myType = WidgetTypes.Type1; ... switch(_myType) { case WidgetTypes.Type1: //do something break; case WidgetTypes.Type2: //do something break; //etc... }

    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

  • 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

  • Using switch and enumerations as substitute for named methods

    - by MatthewMartin
    This pattern pops up a lot. It looks like a very verbose way to move what would otherwise be separate named methods into a single method and then distinguished by a parameter. Is there any good reason to have this pattern over just having two methods Method1() and Method2() ? The real kicker is that this pattern tends to be invoked only with constants at runtime-- i.e. the arguments are all known before compiling is done. public enum Commands { Method1, Method2 } public void ClientCode() { //Always invoked with constants! Never user input. RunCommands(Commands.Method1); RunCommands(Commands.Method2); } public void RunCommands(Commands currentCommand) { switch (currentCommand) { case Commands.Method1: // Stuff happens break; case Commands.Method2: // Other stuff happens break; default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("currentCommand"); } }

    Read the article

  • Undo/Redo using Memento: Stack, Queue or just LinkedList?

    - by serhio
    What is the best having when implementing Memento pattern (for Undo/Redo) in witch collection to Keep Mementos? Basically, I need this(c = change, u = undo, r = redo): 0 *c -1 0 *c -2 -1 0 *c -3 -2 -1 0 <u -2 -1 0 1 *c -3 -2 -1 0 Variants: LinkedList - possible in principle, maybe not optimized. Queue - not adapted for this task, IMO. Stack - not adapted for undo AND redo; Double Stack - maybe optimal, but can't control the undo maximum size.

    Read the article

  • WPF binding to a boolean on a control

    - by Jose
    I'm wondering if someone has a simple succinct solution to binding to a dependency property that needs to be the converse of the property. Here's an example I have a textbox that is disabled based on a property in the datacontext e.g.: <TextBox IsEnabled={Binding CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> The requirement changes and I want to make it ReadOnly instead of disabled, so without changing my ViewModel I could do this: In the UserControl resources: <UserControl.Resources> <m:NotConverter x:Key="NotConverter"/> </UserControl.Resources> And then change the TextBox to: <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding CanEdit,Converter={StaticResource NotConverter}} Text={Binding MyText}/> Which I personally think is EXTREMELY verbose I would love to be able to just do this(notice the !): <TextBox IsReadOnly={Binding !CanEdit} Text={Binding MyText}/> But alas, that is not an option that I know of. I can think of two options. Create an attached property IsNotReadOnly to FrameworkElement(?) and bind to that property If I change my ViewModel then I could add a property CanEdit and another CannotEdit which I would be kind of embarrassed of because I believe it adds an irrelevant property to a class, which I don't think is a good practice. The main reason for the question is that in my project the above isn't just for one control, so trying to keep my project as DRY as possible and readable I am throwing this out to anyone feeling my pain and has come up with a solution :)

    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

  • Converting ASP.NET MVC to n-Tiered Architecture

    - by Jeff
    I just built an application using ASP.NET MVC. The programmers at my company want to build all future modules using n-Tiered (Presentation Layer, Business Logic Layer, Data Access Layer) architecture. I am not the programmer and need to know why this makes sense? Do I have to completely rewrite the entire code or can it be converted? We are building an HRIS system with Business Intelligence. Somebody please explain why or why not this approach does or does not make sense.

    Read the article

  • Can I use foreign key restrictions to return meaningful UI errors with PHP

    - by Shane
    I want to start by saying that I am a big fan of using foreign keys and have a tendency to use them even on small projects to keep my database from being filled with orphaned data. On larger projects I end up with gobs of keys which end up covering upwards of 8 - 10 layers of data. I want to know if anyone could suggest a graceful way of handling 'expected errors' from the MySQL database in a way that I can construct meaningful messages for the end user. I will explain 'expected errors' with an example. Lets say I have a set of tables used for basic discussions: discussion questions responses users Hierarchically they would probably look something like this: -users --discussion ---questions ----responses When I attempt to delete a user the FKs will check discussions and if any discussion exist the deletion is restricted, deleting discussion checks questions, deleting questions checks responses. An 'expected error' in this case would be attempting to delete a user--unless they are newly created I can anticipate that one or more foreign keys will fail causing an error. What I WANT to do is to catch that error on deletion and be able to tell the end user something like 'We're sorry, but all discussions must be removed before you can delete this user...'. Now I know I can keep and maintain matching arrays in PHP and map specific errors to messages but that is messy and prone to becoming stagnant, or I could manually run a set of selects prior to attempting the deletion, but then I am doing just as much work as without using FKs. Any help here would be greatly appreciated, or if I am just looking at this completely wrong then please let me know. On a side note I generally use CodeIgniter for my application development, so if that would open up an avenue through that framework please consider that in your answers. Thanks in Advance

    Read the article

  • When are global variables acceptable?

    - by dsimcha
    Everyone here seems to hate global variables, but I see at least one very reasonable use for them: They are great for holding program parameters that are determined at program initialization and not modified afterwords. Do you agree that this is an exception to the "globals are evil" rule? Is there any other exception that you can think of, besides in quick and dirty throwaway code where basically anything goes? If not, why are globals so fundamentally evil that you do not believe that there are any exceptons?

    Read the article

  • Routing redirection decision

    - by programming late night
    I have really no idea why I'm asking this as this a really completely irrelevant question for which I should have figured out an answer within milliseconds, yet I'm doing it. So in my project I have a Router class which splits up the request and selects the right page to be loaded. Fine so far. Now I have a page displayed when the user requests a page that doesn't exist, you know, 404. So theoretically, if the user entered mydomain.com/404 (I use mod_rewrite with a requests collector via index.php?req=*) the 404 error would be shown to him, but in fact there was no error - the 404 page would be displayed as a perfectly normal page. So if someone would try out requesting the 404 page via /404, he would be shown the page but he can't tell if the 404 page he requested doesn't exist and he is actually getting a, you guessed it, 404 error or if he actually found some flaw in the system that makes him able to see an error page when there is no error. I don't know how dumb this whole thing here is but I'm sure some of you have in fact ran into this problem already. Short version: If the user enters mydomain.com/404 the 404 page is shown even though there is no 404 error. I know this is a completely irrelevant question, please don't tell me, but I just spontaneously wanted to hear your thoughts on it. Strange eh? Should I redirect direct access to my 404-page to the home page? Should I do nothing? Should I just go to bed and stop asking irrelevant stuff?

    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

  • Inheritance in tables - structure problem

    - by Naor
    I have 3 types of users in my system. each type has different information I created the following tables: BaseUser(base_user_id, username, password, additional common data) base_user_id is PK and Identity UserType1(user_id, data related to type1 only) user_id is PK and FK to base_user_id UserType2(user_id, data related to type2 only) user_id is PK and FK to base_user_id UserType3(user_id, data related to type3 only) user_id is PK and FK to base_user_id Now I have relation from each type of user to warehouses table. Users from type1 and type2 should have only warehouse_id and users from type3 should have warehouse_id and customer_id. I thought about this structure: WarehouseOfUser(base_user_id,warehouse_id) base_user_id is FK to base_user_id in BaseUser WarehouseOfTyp3User(base_user_id,warehouse_id, customer_id) base_user_id is FK to base_user_id in BaseUser The problem is that such structure allows 2 things I want to prevent: 1. add to WarehouseOfTyp3User data of user from type2 or type1. 2. add to WarehouseOfUser data of user from type3. what is the best structure for such case?

    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

  • Process a batch of items, return an object to report on status

    - by Naeem Sarfraz
    I'm looking for a pattern (or good practice) for the following scenario: My function List<BatchItemResponse> Process(List<BatchItem> Data) {..} will process a list of data, and return info on where each item in the batch could be processed. struct BatchItemResponse { int BatchItemID; bool Processed; string Description; } Any thoughts? Is what I've proposed as good as it gets?

    Read the article

  • .net design pattern question

    - by user359562
    Hi. I am trying to understand design pattern problems. I am trying to modify the code like this in winforms and trying to see if any design pattern suits my requirement. Please suggest which is the best design pattern in this scenario. This is very basic code containing 2 tab pages which might have different controls can be added dynamically and read out different files on click of particular tab. To elaborate more... I have written this code to learn and understand design pattern. This is just a scenario where user click on a particular tab which will show dynamic controls generated. public partial class Form1 : Form { public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); } private void tabControl1_SelectedIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (tabControl1.SelectedTab.Name.Equals("tabPage1")) { GeneratedynamicControlsForTab1(); } else if (tabControl1.SelectedTab.Name.Equals("tabPage2")) { GeneratedynamicControlsForTab2(); } } private void GeneratedynamicControlsForTab1() { Label label1 = new Label(); label1.Text = "Label1"; tabPage1.Controls.Add(label1); ReadCSVFile(); } private void GeneratedynamicControlsForTab2() { tabPage1.Controls.Clear(); Label label2 = new Label(); label2.Text = "Label2"; tabPage2.Controls.Add(label2); ReadTextFile(); } private void ReadCSVFile() { } private void ReadTextFile() { } }

    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 | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >