Search Results

Search found 8962 results on 359 pages for 'abstract factory pattern'.

Page 12/359 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to create a C++ factory system that can create an instance of any "registered" object

    - by chrensli
    Hello, I've spent my entire day researching this topic, so it is with some scattered knowledge on the topic that i come to you with this inquiry. Please allow me to describe what I am attempting to accomplish, and maybe you can either suggest a solution to the immediate question, or another way to tackle the problem entirely. I am trying to mimic something related to how XAML files work in WPF, where you are essentially instantiating an object tree from an XML definition. If this is incorrect, please inform. This issue is otherwise unrelated to WPF, C#, or anything managed - I solely mention it because it is a similar concept.. So, I've created an XML parser class already, and generated a node tree based on ObjectNode objects. ObjectNode objects hold a string value called type, and they have an std::vector of child ObjectNode objects. The next step is to instantiate a tree of objects based on the data in the ObjectNode tree. This intermediate ObjectNode tree is needed because the same ObjectNode tree might be instantiated multiple times or delayed as needed. The tree of objects that is being created is such that the nodes in the tree are descendants of a common base class, which for now we can refer to as MyBase. Leaf nodes can be of any type, not necessarily derived from MyBase. To make this more challenging, I will not know what types of MyBase derived objects might be involved, so I need to allow for new types to be registered with the factory. I am aware of boost's factory. Their docs have an interesting little design paragraph on this page: o We may want a factory that takes some arguments that are forwarded to the constructor, o we will probably want to use smart pointers, o we may want several member functions to create different kinds of objects, o we might not necessarily need a polymorphic base class for the objects, o as we will see, we do not need a factory base class at all, o we might want to just call the constructor - without #new# to create an object on the stack, and o finally we might want to use customized memory management. I might not be understanding this all correctly, but that seems to state that what I'm trying to do can be accomplished with boost's factory. But all the examples I've located, seem to describe factories where all objects are derived from a base type. Any guidance on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • factorygirl rails, says "top required" in my spec - don't know how to fix

    - by user924088
    I get the following error message when I run my tests. It says that the problem is in my lecture_spec, and that the top is required. I don't know if this has something to do with requiring my spec_helper.rb file. 1) Lecture has a valid factory Failure/Error: FactoryGirl.create(:lecture).should be_valid NoMethodError: undefined method `after_build=' for #<Lecture:0x007fe7747bce70> # ./spec/models/lecture_spec.rb:21:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>' My factory looks like the following: require 'faker' FactoryGirl.define do factory :question do association :lecture name { Faker::Lorem.words(1) } description {Faker::Lorem.words(7)} factory :question_one do answer 1 end factory :question_two do answer 2 end factory :question_three do answer 3 end end end And this is my lecture_spec file require 'spec_helper' describe Lecture do it "has a valid factory" do FactoryGirl.create(:lecture).should be_valid end end and this is my lecture factory, where I defined the lecture factory. FactoryGirl.define do factory :lecture do #association :question name {Faker::Lorem.words(1)} description {Faker::Lorem.words(7)} soundfile_file_name {Faker::Lorem.words(1)} soundfile_content_type {Faker::Lorem.words(3)} soundfile_file_size {Faker::Lorem.words(8)} after_build do |question| [:question_one, :question_two, :question_three].each do |question| association :questions, factory: :question, strategy: :build end end end end

    Read the article

  • Factory.next not working in FactoryGirl 4.x and Rails 3.0. Anyone know the replacement?

    - by cchapman900
    I'm very new to Rails and am following along in the Ruby on Rails 3 Tutorial book by Michael Hartl and am running into a little bump while using the factory_girl gem. Specifically, I'm not sure how to update the code Factory.next(...) Before coming to this, I did run into a little problem between the older version of FactoryGirl used in the book and the current 4.1 version I'm using now, but was able to resolve it. Specifically, the old way of writing code as user = Factory(:user) needed to be updated to user = FactoryGirl.create(:user) That was fine, but now I'm coming to the code (as written in the book): spec/controllers/users_controler_spec.rb . @users << Factory(:user, :email => Factory.next(:email)) . which I've tried updating to . @users << FactoryGirl.create(:user, :email => FactoryGirl.next(:email)) . but get the error: Failure/Error: @users << FactoryGirl.create(:user, :email => FactoryGirl.next(:email)) NoMethodError: undefined method `next' for FactoryGirl:Module I've tried a few different variations but still can't quite get it. Is the problem I'm having with FactoryGirl and just not using the gem correctly or does it have something to do with the Ruby methods?

    Read the article

  • Creating Entity Framework objects with Unity for Unit of Work/Repository pattern

    - by TobyEvans
    Hi there, I'm trying to implement the Unit of Work/Repository pattern, as described here: http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive/2009/06/16/using-repository-and-unit-of-work-patterns-with-entity-framework-4-0.aspx This requires each Repository to accept an IUnitOfWork implementation, eg an EF datacontext extended with a partial class to add an IUnitOfWork interface. I'm actually using .net 3.5, not 4.0. My basic Data Access constructor looks like this: public DataAccessLayer(IUnitOfWork unitOfWork, IRealtimeRepository realTimeRepository) { this.unitOfWork = unitOfWork; this.realTimeRepository = realTimeRepository; } So far, so good. What I'm trying to do is add Dependency Injection using the Unity Framework. Getting the EF data context to be created with Unity was an adventure, as it had trouble resolving the constructor - what I did in the end was to create another constructor in my partial class with a new overloaded constructor, and marked that with [InjectionConstructor] [InjectionConstructor] public communergyEntities(string connectionString, string containerName) :this() { (I know I need to pass the connection string to the base object, that can wait until once I've got all the objects initialising correctly) So, using this technique, I can happily resolve my entity framework object as an IUnitOfWork instance thus: using (IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer()) { container.RegisterType<IUnitOfWork, communergyEntities>(); container.Configure<InjectedMembers>() .ConfigureInjectionFor<communergyEntities>( new InjectionConstructor("a", "b")) DataAccessLayer target = container.Resolve<DataAccessLayer>(); Great. What I need to do now is create the reference to the repository object for the DataAccessLayer - the DAL only needs to know the interface, so I'm guessing that I need to instantiate it as part of the Unity Resolve statement, passing it the appropriate IUnitOfWork interface. In the past, I would have just passed the Repository constructor the db connection string, and it would have gone away, created a local Entity Framework object and used that just for the lifetime of the Repository method. This is different, in that I create an Entity Framework instance as an IUnitOfWork implementation during the Unity Resolve statement, and it's that instance I need to pass into the constructor of the Repository - is that possible, and if so, how? I'm wondering if I could make the Repository a property and mark it as a Dependency, but that still wouldn't solve the problem of how to create the Repository with the IUnitOfWork object that the DAL is being Resolved with I'm not sure if I've understood this pattern correctly, and will happily take advice on the best way to implement it - Entity Framework is staying, but Unity can be swapped out if not the best approach. If I've got the whole thing upside down, please tell me thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC ViewModel Pattern

    - by Omu
    EDIT: I made something much better to fill and read data from a view using ViewModels, called it ValueInjecter. http://valueinjecter.codeplex.com/documentation using the ViewModel to store the mapping logic was not such a good idea because there was repetition and SRP violation, but now with the ValueInjecter I have clean ViewModels and dry mapping code I made a ViewModel pattern for editing stuff in asp.net mvc this pattern is usefull when you have to make a form for editing an entity and you have to put on the form some dropdowns for the user to choose some values public class OrganisationViewModel { //paramterless constructor required, cuz we are gonna get an OrganisationViewModel object from the form in the post save method public OrganisationViewModel() : this(new Organisation()) {} public OrganisationViewModel(Organisation o) { Organisation = o; Country = new SelectList(LookupFacade.Country.GetAll(), "ID", "Description", CountryKey); } //that's the Type for whom i create the viewmodel public Organisation Organisation { get; set; } #region DropDowns //for each dropdown i have a int? Key that stores the selected value public IEnumerable<SelectListItem> Country { get; set; } public int? CountryKey { get { if (Organisation.Country != null) { return Organisation.Country.ID; } return null; } set { if (value.HasValue) { Organisation.Country = LookupFacade.Country.Get(value.Value); } } } #endregion } and that's how i use it public ViewResult Edit(int id) { var model = new OrganisationViewModel(organisationRepository.Get(id)); return View(model); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Edit(OrganisationViewModel model) { organisationRepository.SaveOrUpdate(model.Organisation); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } and the markup <p> <label for="Name"> Name:</label> <%= Html.Hidden("Organisation.ID", Model.Organisation.ID)%> <%= Html.TextBox("Organisation.Name", Model.Organisation.Name)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("Organisation.Name", "*")%> </p> <p> ... <label for="CountryKey"> Country:</label> <%= Html.DropDownList("CountryKey", Model.Country, "please select") %> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("CountryKey", "*") %> </p> so tell me what you think about it

    Read the article

  • Refactor Regex Pattern - Java

    - by UK
    Hello All, I have the following aaaa_bb_cc string to match and written a regex pattern like \\w{4}+\\_\\w{2}\\_\\w{2} and it works. Is there any simple regex which can do this same ?

    Read the article

  • Pattern Matching with XSLT

    - by genesis11
    I'm trying to match a pattern into a string in XSLT/XPath using the matches function, as follows: <xsl:when test="matches('awesome','awe')"> ... </xsl:when> However, in both Firefox 3.5.9 and IE8, it doesn't show up. IE8 tells me that "'matches' is not a valid XSLT or XPath function." Is this due to XSLT 2.0 not being supported, and is there a way around this?

    Read the article

  • java filenames filter pattern

    - by Sergey
    Hello, I need to implement File[] files = getFiles( String folderName, String ptrn ); Where ptrn is a command prompt style pattern like "*2010*.txt" I'm familar with FilenameFilter class, but can't implement public boolean accept(File dir, String filename) because String.matches() doesn't accept such patterns. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java - is this an idiom or pattern, behavior classes with no state

    - by Berlin Brown
    I am trying to incorporate more functional programming idioms into my java development. One pattern that I like the most and avoids side effects is building classes that have behavior but they don't necessarily have any state. The behavior is locked into the methods but they only act on the parameters passed in. The code below is code I am trying to avoid: public class BadObject { private Map<String, String> data = new HashMap<String, String>(); public BadObject() { data.put("data", "data"); } /** * Act on the data class. But this is bad because we can't * rely on the integrity of the object's state. */ public void execute() { data.get("data").toString(); } } The code below is nothing special but I am acting on the parameters and state is contained within that class. We still may run into issues with this class but that is an issue with the method and the state of the data, we can address issues in the routine as opposed to not trusting the entire object. Is this some form of idiom? Is this similar to any pattern that you use? public class SemiStatefulOOP { /** * Private class implies that I can access the members of the <code>Data</code> class * within the <code>SemiStatefulOOP</code> class and I can also access * the getData method from some other class. * * @see Test1 * */ class Data { protected int counter = 0; public int getData() { return counter; } public String toString() { return Integer.toString(counter); } } /** * Act on the data class. */ public void execute(final Data data) { data.counter++; } /** * Act on the data class. */ public void updateStateWithCallToService(final Data data) { data.counter++; } /** * Similar to CLOS (Common Lisp Object System) make instance. */ public Data makeInstance() { return new Data(); } } // End of Class // Issues with the code above: I wanted to declare the Data class private, but then I can't really reference it outside of the class: I can't override the SemiStateful class and access the private members. Usage: final SemiStatefulOOP someObject = new SemiStatefulOOP(); final SemiStatefulOOP.Data data = someObject.makeInstance(); someObject.execute(data); someObject.updateStateWithCallToService(data);

    Read the article

  • Is scala's cake pattern possible with parametrized components?

    - by Nicolas
    Parametrized components work well with the cake pattern as long as you are only interested in a unique component for each typed component's, example: trait AComponent[T] { val a:A[T] class A[T](implicit mf:Manifest[T]) { println(mf) } } class App extends AComponent[Int] { val a = new A[Int]() } new App Now my application requires me to inject an A[Int] and an A[String], obviously scala's type system doesn't allow me to extends AComponent twice. What is the common practice in this situation ?

    Read the article

  • Command Design Pattern

    - by pchajer
    After reading command design pattern, I have a couple of question - Why we are creating concrete command and receiver object on client. Can't this initialization on invoker class? I think client should create invoker and pass it's request to invoker. Invoker should take care of all the stuff. By doing this, We have less dependency on client. The design of class diagram is totally different from actual design.

    Read the article

  • C# ProgressBar design pattern

    - by MadSeb
    Hi, I'm working on a database upgrader application. The upgrader updates the schema of a database ( adds new columns, renames columns , adds new tables, new views to an existing database by executing SQL statements ). When a user wants to upgrade from version 1.0 to 2.0 , "Upgrader" objects are taken from an object factory and the "Execute" method of each "Upgrader" is called. The GUI of the application has a progress bar and each time an upgrader object performs a SQL statement the progress bar gets incremented. while (!version.Equal(CurrentVersion)) { IUpgrader myUpgrader = UpgraderFactory.GetUpgrader(version); myUpgrader.Execute(UpgradedFile,progressbar); version.Increment(); } My question is very simple : how should the upgrader object communicate with the progressbar. In the code above, the upgrader object is given direct access to the progressbar but I'm wondering if some better way of doing this or better design pattern exists. Regards, Seb

    Read the article

  • Can i override an abstract method written in a parent class, with a different name in a child class?

    - by Ranhiru
    abstract class SettingSaver { public abstract void add(string Name, string Value); public abstract void remove(string SettingName); } class XMLSettings : SettingSaver { public override void add(string Name, string Value) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public override void remove(string SettingName) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } Is there anyway that I can change the name of the add function in XMLSettings class to addSetting but make sure it overrides the add function in the SettingSaver? I know it should be definitely overridden in derived classes but just want to know whether I can use a different name :) Thanx in advance :D

    Read the article

  • Composite pattern in C++ problem

    - by annouk
    Hello! I have to work with an application in C++ similar to a phone book: the class Agenda with an STL list of Contacts.Regarding the contacts hierarchy,there is a base-class named Contact(an abstract one),and the derived classes Friend and Acquaintance(the types of contact). These classes have,for instance, a virtual method called getName,which returns the name of the contact. Now I must implement the Composite pattern by adding another type of contact,Company(being derived from Contact),which also contains a collection of Contacts(an STL list as well),that can be either of the "leaf" type(Friends or Acquaintances),or they can be Companies as well. Therefore,Company is the Compound type. The question is: how and where can I implement an STL find_if to search the contact with a given name(via getName function or suggest me smth else) both among the "leaf"-type Contact and inside the Company collection? In other words,how do I traverse the tree in order to find possible matches there too,using an uniform function definition? I hope I was pretty clear...

    Read the article

  • Building a database class in PHP

    - by Sprottenwels
    I wonder if I should write a database class for my application, and if so, how to accomplish it? Over there on SO, a guy mentioned it should be written as an abstract class. However, I can't understand why this would be a benefit. Do I understand correctly, that if I would write an abstract class, every other class that methods will need a database connection, could simply extend this abstract class and have it's own database object? If so, how is this different from a "normal" class where I could instantiate an database object? Another method would be to completely forget about my own class and to instantiate a mysqli object on demand. What do you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Are Promises/A a good event design pattern to implement even in synchronous languages like PHP?

    - by Xeoncross
    I have always kept an eye out for event systems when writing code in scripting languages. Web applications have a history of allowing the user to add plugins and modules whenever needed. In most PHP systems you have a global/singleton event object which all interested parties tie into and wait to be alerted to changes. Event::on('event_name', $callback); Recently more patterns like the observer have been used for things like jQuery. $(el).on('event', callback); Even PHP now has built in classes for it. class Blog extends SplSubject { public function save() { $this->notify(); } } Anyway, the Promises/A proposal has caught my eye. It is designed for asynchronous systems, but I'm wondering if it is also a good design to implement now that even synchronous languages like PHP are changing. Combining Dependency Injection with Promises/A seems it might be the best combination for handling events currently.

    Read the article

  • What is the better design decision approach?

    - by palm snow
    I have two classes (MyFoo1 and MyFoo2) that share some common functionality. So far it does not seem like I need any polymorphic inheritence but at this point I am considering the following options: Have the common functionality in a utility class. Both of these classes call these methods from that utility class. Have an abstract class and implement common methods in that abstract class. Then derive MyFoo1 and MyFoo2 from that abstract class. Any suggestion on what would be a better design decision?

    Read the article

  • When is factory method better than simple factory and vice versa?

    - by Bruce
    Hi all Working my way through the Head First Design Patterns book. I believe I understand the simple factory and the factory method, but I'm having trouble seeing what advantages factory method brings over simple factory. If an object A uses a simple factory to create its B objects, then clients can create it like this: A a = new A(new BFactory()); whereas if an object uses a factory method, a client can create it like this: A a = new ConcreteA(); // ConcreteA contains a method for instantiating the same Bs that the BFactory above creates, with the method hardwired into the subclass of A, ConcreteA. So in the case of the simple factory, clients compose A with a B factory, whereas with the factory method, the client chooses the appropriate subclass for the types of B it wants. There really doesn't seem to be much to choose between them. Either you have to choose which BFactory you want to compose A with, or you have to choose the right subclass of A to give you the Bs. Under what circumstances is one better than the other? Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • Extending abstract classes in c#

    - by ng
    I am a Java developer and I have noticed some differences in extending abstract classes in c# as opposed to Java. I was wondering how a c# developer would achived the following. 1) Covarience public abstract class A { public abstract List<B> List(); } public class BList : List<T> where T : B { } public abstract class C : A { public abstract BList List(); } So in the above hierarchy, there is covarience in C where it returns a type compatible with what A returns. However this gives me an error in Visual Studio. Is there a way to specify a covarient return type in c#? 2) Adding a setter to a property public abstract class A { public abstract String Name { get; } } public abstract class B : A { public abstract String Name { get; set } } Here the compiler complains of hiding. Any suggestions? Please do not suggest using interfaces unless that is the ONLY way to do this.

    Read the article

  • MVC repository pattern design decision

    - by bradjive
    I have an asp .net MVC application and recently started implementing the repository pattern with a service validation layer, much like this. I've been creating one repository/service for each model that I create. Is this overkill? Instead, should I create one repository/service for each logical business area that provides CRUD for many different models? To me, it seems like I'm either cluttering the project tree with many files or cluttering a class with many methods. 6 one way half dozen the other. Can you think of any good arguments either way?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >