Search Results

Search found 14326 results on 574 pages for 'design by contract'.

Page 132/574 | < Previous Page | 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139  | Next Page >

  • Is it okay to showcase templates/layouts recreated in different codes in a portfolio?

    - by Souta
    I have several different templates/layouts, both simple and complex. I recreated these templates multiple times, just using different codes. (Say, a complex one was originally made in only HTML and CSS, I recreated it using HTML, Javascript, CSS, then again with a HTML and PHP concoction, and etc.) I wanted to showcase my work and skills by doing this, but I don't know if it would be okay for that all to go into a resumé/portfolio. This is why: Freelancing Does potential business really care about how their site is made, as long as it looks and functions to their liking? (As in, should I just only show the one example of each template/layout and not the multiple recreations?) Potential Hire However, if a potential employer were to stumble across my resumé/portfolio, would having the multiple recreations do any good for a career outlook? (As in, this potential employer is a company where I could be working on a team to create/develop sites and not be freelancing; would a lack of skill-shining turn this employer away because I didn't set myself apart and show that I'm not just like every other budding web designer?) Those two issues have me wondering if it is okay to have a resumé/portfolio combined for this specific reason. Or does something like this not matter to potential business (as a freelancer) because they wouldn't care either way as long as it looks and functions to their liking and therefore it is okay to showcase the recreations with the originals?

    Read the article

  • C++: calling non-member functions with the same syntax of member ones

    - by peoro
    One thing I'd like to do in C++ is to call non-member functions with the same syntax you call member functions: class A { }; void f( A & this ) { /* ... */ } // ... A a; a.f(); // this is the same as f(a); Of course this could only work as long as f is not virtual (since it cannot appear in A's virtual table. f doesn't need to access A's non-public members. f doesn't conflict with a function declared in A (A::f). I'd like such a syntax because in my opinion it would be quite comfortable and would push good habits: calling str.strip() on a std::string (where strip is a function defined by the user) would sound a lot better than calling strip( str );. most of the times (always?) classes provide some member functions which don't require to be member (ie: are not virtual and don't use non-public members). This breaks encapsulation, but is the most practical thing to do (due to point 1). My question here is: what do you think of such feature? Do you think it would be something nice, or something that would introduce more issues than the ones it aims to solve? Could it make sense to propose such a feature to the next standard (the one after C++0x)? Of course this is just a brief description of this idea; it is not complete; we'd probably need to explicitly mark a function with a special keyword to let it work like this and many other stuff.

    Read the article

  • does class reference itself static anti pattern in prism

    - by Michael Riva
    I have an application and my desing approach look like this: class Manager { public int State; static Manager _instance = null; public static Manager Instance { get { return _instance; } set { if (_instance == value) return; _instance = value; } } public Manager() { State = 0; Instance=this; } } class Module1 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } class Module2 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } class Module3 { public void GetState() { Console.WriteLine(Manager.Instance.State); } } Manager class already registered in Bootstrapper like : protected override void ConfigureContainer() { base.ConfigureContainer(); Container.RegisterType<Manager>(new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager()); } protected override void InitializeModules() { Manager man= Container.Resolve<Manager>(); } Question is do I need to define my manager object as static in its field to be able to reach its state? Or this is anti pattern or bad for performance?

    Read the article

  • Prefer class members or passing arguments between internal methods?

    - by geoffjentry
    Suppose within the private portion of a class there is a value which is utilized by multiple private methods. Do people prefer having this defined as a member variable for the class or passing it as an argument to each of the methods - and why? On one hand I could see an argument to be made that reducing state (ie member variables) in a class is generally a good thing, although if the same value is being repeatedly used throughout a class' methods it seems like that would be an ideal candidate for representation as state for the class to make the code visibly cleaner if nothing else. Edit: To clarify some of the comments/questions that were raised, I'm not talking about constants and this isn't relating to any particular case rather just a hypothetical that I was talking to some other people about. Ignoring the OOP angle for a moment, the particular use case that I had in mind was the following (assume pass by reference just to make the pseudocode cleaner) int x doSomething(x) doAnotherThing(x) doYetAnotherThing(x) doSomethingElse(x) So what I mean is that there's some variable that is common between multiple functions - in the case I had in mind it was due to chaining of smaller functions. In an OOP system, if these were all methods of a class (say due to refactoring via extracting methods from a large method), that variable could be passed around them all or it could be a class member.

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Avoid this and new - further reading? [closed]

    - by Thomas Deutsch
    I do not want this to end in a sort of religious discussion, i want to collect some sources for further reading on this topic. As shown here: Node.js Style and Structure Point 1: Avoid this and new you can find a good example when it could be better to use closures instead of a prototype, and to make every argument explicit. Ok, i agree - could be nice, but i need to know more. Can anyone recommend a good link? Would this make my code 100% object-pattern-free ? (no factory-, repository-, module- pattern?)

    Read the article

  • Rails: The Law of Demeter [duplicate]

    - by user2158382
    This question already has an answer here: Rails: Law of Demeter Confusion 4 answers I am reading a book called Rails AntiPatterns and they talk about using delegation to to avoid breaking the Law of Demeter. Here is their prime example: They believe that calling something like this in the controller is bad (and I agree) @street = @invoice.customer.address.street Their proposed solution is to do the following: class Customer has_one :address belongs_to :invoice def street address.street end end class Invoice has_one :customer def customer_street customer.street end end @street = @invoice.customer_street They are stating that since you only use one dot, you are not breaking the Law of Demeter here. I think this is incorrect, because you are still going through customer to go through address to get the invoice's street. I primarily got this idea from a blog post I read: http://www.dan-manges.com/blog/37 In the blog post the prime example is class Wallet attr_accessor :cash end class Customer has_one :wallet # attribute delegation def cash @wallet.cash end end class Paperboy def collect_money(customer, due_amount) if customer.cash < due_ammount raise InsufficientFundsError else customer.cash -= due_amount @collected_amount += due_amount end end end The blog post states that although there is only one dot customer.cash instead of customer.wallet.cash, this code still violates the Law of Demeter. Now in the Paperboy collect_money method, we don't have two dots, we just have one in "customer.cash". Has this delegation solved our problem? Not at all. If we look at the behavior, a paperboy is still reaching directly into a customer's wallet to get cash out. EDIT I completely understand and agree that this is still a violation and I need to create a method in Wallet called withdraw that handles the payment for me and that I should call that method inside the Customer class. What I don't get is that according to this process, my first example still violates the Law of Demeter because Invoice is still reaching directly into Customer to get the street. Can somebody help me clear the confusion. I have been searching for the past 2 days trying to let this topic sink in, but it is still confusing.

    Read the article

  • Does MVC apply only to web

    - by Deeptechtons
    It is almost and instantaneous whenever I talk to developers about Model View Controller (MVC) they say you make a request to a url the server builds a entity (MODEL) and provides you with visual representation of that model. So does this mean MVC is only for the web or have I been meeting people who are just developers who employ MVC for writing web applications? Are there usages for MVC on desktop style applications? I for one am new to paradigm and would like to know of any super-set to MVC

    Read the article

  • Should a web designer know server-side coding?

    - by Rasoul Zabihi
    We're implementing an CMS based on ASP.NET MVC. Now, any designer should be able to provide themes for this CMS. But to write a theme, they need to be able to modify the generated HTML, thus the concept of View. In other words, they should be capable to either modify current views, or create new views from scratch, to fit their requirements. However, now we're not sure that we're taking the right path. Should a web designer (HTML, CSS, JavaScript + Photoshop) really know about server-side platforms like Razor or PHP, or classic ASP, or anything else?

    Read the article

  • best way to send messages to all subscribers with multiple subscriptions and multiple providers

    - by coding_idiot
    I'm writing an application in which - Many users can subsribe to posts made by another users. So for a single publisher there can be many subscribers. When a message is posted by an user X, all users who have subscribed to messages of User X will be sent an email. How to achieve this ? I'm thinking of using publish-subscribe pattern. And then I came through JMS. Which is the best JMS implementation to use according to your experience ? Or else what else solution do you propose to the given problem ? Shall I go for a straight-forward solution ?: User x posts a message, I find all users (from database) who subscribe to user x and then for every user, I call the sendEmail() method. [EDIT] My intention here is not to send-emails. I'm really sorry if it wasn't clear. I also have to send kind of system-notifications apart from Email to all subscribers. Right now, I've implemented the email-sending as a threadPool

    Read the article

  • Implementing new required feature after software release

    - by TiagoBrenck
    Fake Scenario There is a software that was released 1 year ago. The software is to map and register all kind of animals on our planet. When the software was released, the client only needed to know the scientific name of the animal, a flag if it is in risk of extinction and a scale of dangerous(that is a fake software and specification, I don't want to discuss this here). There are already 100.000 animals records saved on DB. New Feature One year later, the client wants a new feature. It is really important to him to know the animals classes, and this is a required field. So he asks me to put a field to input the animal class, and this field is required. Or maybe where this animal was discovered. Problem I have already 100.000 recorded animals without a class or where it was discovered, but I need to insert a new column to storage this information and this column can't be null. I don't have a default value for this situation (there isn't a default animal class or where it was discovered). I don't want to keep the requirement rule only on my software, my DB must have this requirement too(I like to keep business rules on DB too). What are the alternatives to solve this situation? I am on a situation that this new feature cannot be previewed or reviewed for the existing records. The time already passed and I can't go back on time to get it

    Read the article

  • Using Dynamic LINQ to get a filter for my Web API

    - by Espo
    We are considering using the Dynamic.CS linq-sample included in the "Samples" directory of visual studio 2008 for our WebAPI project to allow clients to query our data. The interface would be something like this (In addition to the normal GET-methods): public HttpResponseMessage List(string filter = null); The plan is to use the dynamic library to parse the "filter"-variable and then execute the query agains the DB. Any thoughts if this is a good idea? Is it a security problem?

    Read the article

  • The balance between client and server functionality

    - by Eugen Martynov
    I want to bring the discussion that started in our teams and get your opinion about it. Assume we have an user account which could have different credentials for authentication and associated email to recover. An user has possibility to do signup with an email or use his social profile to complete signup process. As an Rest API from the backend to client looks like: Create account Authorise Update user data Link social account Register email Verify email In addition our BE is distributed and divided between several services/servers/clusters. So different calls are related to different end points. In case of the social sign up some of steps should be skipped or simplified. For example, with Facebook signup we could already skip email registration and verification step (we ask email permission form user), linking the social account and pre-fill user displayed name. So we proposed to have another end point which will hide/combine different calls on BE and return whole process result to the clients. The pros for this approach: No more duplication of functionality between clients Speed up the networking and user experience The cons for this approach: Additional work for backend Probably most complex scenarios in future updates I would like to get your opinion or experience with this situation. Especially if you already experienced point #2 from against reasons.

    Read the article

  • How to had operation with character/items on binary with concrete operations on C++?

    - by Piperoman
    I have the next problem. A item can had a lot of states: NORMAL = 0000000 DRY = 0000001 HOT = 0000010 BURNING = 0000100 WET = 0001000 COLD = 0010000 FROZEN = 0100000 POISONED= 1000000 A item can had some states at same time but not all of them Is impossible to be dry and wet at same time. If you COLD a WET item, it turns into FROZEN. If you HOT a WET item, it turns into NORMAL A item can be BURNING and POISON Etc. I have try to set binary flags to states, and use AND to set operation to combine different states, checking before if is possible or not to do it, or change to another status. Exist a concrete patron to solve this problem efficiently without had a interminable switch that check every states with everynew states? It is relative easy to check 2 different states, but if exist a third state it is not trivial to do.

    Read the article

  • What are common patterns for handling possible pluralization in message properties?

    - by C. Ross
    Obviously users like to see text properly pluralized, and pluralization schemes vary in the various written languages one may encounter. When internationalizing an app, what pattern(s) are useful for handling messages with possible pluralization? What about messages with multiple possible pluralization? For example: "N review(s):" One pattern would be reviews.title.singular="{0} review:" reviews.title.singular="{0} reviews:" And this may not support all languages. Or a more complicated case: "Found M question(s) with N comment(s)." This would be difficult to support in English?

    Read the article

  • Designing a system with different business rules for different customers

    - by user1595846
    My company is rewriting our proprietary business application. The current architecture is poorly done and inflexible. It is coded more procedural oriented as opposed to object oriented. It has become difficult to maintain. Our system is a web application written in .Net Webforms. I am considering ASP.Net MVC for the rewrite. We intend to rewrite it with a good, solid architecture with the goal of maintainability and reusable classes for some of our other systems and services. We would also like the system to be customizable for different customers in the event that we market the system. I am considering redesigning the system based on the layered architecture (Presentation, Business, Data Access layers) described in the Microsoft Patterns and Practices Application Architecture Guide. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff650706.aspx Hopefully this isn't too open ended, but how would you recommend allowing for different business logic/rules for different customers? I'm aware of Windows Workflow Foundation, but from what I've read about it, it seems many business rules could be too complicated to handle there. Also, Can anyone point me to where I can download an example of a .net solution that is based on the Application Architecture Guide? I have already downloaded the Layered Architecture Solution Guidance and the Expense Sample on codeplex. I was looking for something a bit larger and more robust that I could step through the code and see how it works. If you feel there are better architectures to base our redesign on please feel free to share. I appreciate your help!

    Read the article

  • Should developers make their games easier with new versions?

    - by Gil Kalai
    It seems that the game Angry Birds is becoming gradually easier with new versions. Maybe so people get the illusion of progress and satisfaction of breaking new records? I would like to know if gradual small modifications of games to enhance the sense of improvement and learning by users is known/common/standard practice in game developing. (I don't mean to say that there is anything wrong with such a practice.)

    Read the article

  • Handling deleted users - separate or same table?

    - by Alan Beats
    The scenario is that I've got an expanding set of users, and as time goes by, users will cancel their accounts which we currently mark as 'deleted' (with a flag) in the same table. If users with the same email address (that's how users log in) wish to create a new account, they can signup again, but a NEW account is created. (We have unique ids for every account, so email addresses can be duplicated amongst live and deleted ones). What I've noticed is that all across our system, in the normal course of things we constantly query the users table checking the user is not deleted, whereas what I'm thinking is that we dont need to do that at all...! [Clarification1: by 'constantly querying', I meant that we have queries which are like: '... FROM users WHERE isdeleted="0" AND ...'. For example, we may need to fetch all users registered for all meetings on a particular date, so in THAT query, we also have FROM users WHERE isdeleted="0" - does this make my point clearer?] (1) continue keeping deleted users in the 'main' users table (2) keep deleted users in a separate table (mostly required for historical book-keeping) What are the pros and cons of either approach?

    Read the article

  • Should I extract specific functionality into a function and why?

    - by john smith optional
    I have a large method which does 3 tasks, each of them can be extracted into a separate function. If I'll make an additional functions for each of that tasks, will it make my code better or worse and why? Edit: Obviously, it'll make less lines of code in the main function, but there'll be additional function declarations, so my class will have additional methods, which I believe isn't good, because it'll make the class more complex. Edit2: Should I do that before I wrote all the code or should I leave it until everything is done and then extract functions?

    Read the article

  • share distribution question

    - by facebook-100000781341887
    Hi, I just developed a facebook game(mifia like), but the graphic I make is not good, because it is reference with some existing photo, trace with AI, and coloring it. Therefore, I invite my friend to join me, he is a graphic designer, own a company with his friend (I know both of them), for the share, I expect at least 70% for me, and at most 30% for them (both of them want to join). Therefore, they give me a counter offer, 60% for me and 40% for them, of course, I feel their counter offer is unacceptable because they only build the image in part time, and all the other work just like coding, webhosting...etc, is what I do in full time. Why they said they worth 40% is that they will make a good graphic, they can provide a advertise channel(on local magazine), etc... Actually, I don't think the game need advertisement on local magazine because the game is not target for local... Please give me some comments on this issue(is the share fair? what is the importance of the image of the game, is it worth more than 30%), or can anyone share the experience on this. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to determine if class meets single responsibility principle ?

    - by user1483278
    Single Responsibility Principle is based on high cohesion principle. The difference between the two is that highly cohesive classes feature a set of responsibilities that are strongly related, while classes adhering to SRP have just one responsibility. But how do we determine whether particular class features a set of responsibilities and is thus just highly cohesive, or whether it has only one responsibility and is thus adhering to SRP? Namely, isn't it more or less subjective, since some may find class very granular ( and as such will consider a class as adhering to SRP ), while others may find it not granular enough?

    Read the article

  • How to Structure a Trinary state in DB and Application

    - by ABMagil
    How should I structure, in the DB especially, but also in the application, a trinary state? For instance, I have user feedback records which need to be reviewed before they are presented to the general public. This means a feedback reviewer must see the unreviewed feedback, then approve or reject them. I can think of a couple ways to represent this: Two boolean flags: Seen/Unseen and Approved/Rejected. This is the simplest and probably the smallest database solution (presumably boolean fields are simple bits). The downside is that there are really only three states I care about (unseen/approved/rejected) and this creates four states, including one I don't care about (a record which is seen but not approved or rejected is essentially unseen). String column in the DB with constants/enum in application. Using Rating::APPROVED_STATE within the application and letting it equal whatever it wants in the DB. This is a larger column in the db and I'm concerned about doing string comparisons whenever I need these records. Perhaps mitigatable with an index? Single boolean column, but allow nulls. A true is approved, a false is rejected. A null is unseen. Not sure the pros/cons of this solution. What are the rules I should use to guide my choice? I'm already thinking in terms of DB size and the cost of finding records based on state, as well as the readability of code the ends up using this structure.

    Read the article

  • overriding implemented base class methods

    - by user793468
    I read somewhere that the chain of inheritance breaks when you alter a behavior from derived class. What does "altering a behavior" mean here? Is overriding an already implemented method in base class considered as "altering behavior"? Or, does the author mean altering method signatures and the output? Also, I ready Duplicating code is not a good practice, and its a maintenance nightmare. Again, does overriding an already implemented method in base class considered "Duplicating code"? If not, what would be considered as "Duplicating code"? I

    Read the article

  • Questioning one of the arguments for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

    - by oberlies
    Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So there may be other arguments for dependency injection (which are out of scope for this question!), but easy creation of testable object graphs is not one of them, is it?

    Read the article

  • How were some language communities (eg, Ruby and Python) able to prevent fragmentation while others (eg, Lisp or ML) were not?

    - by chrisaycock
    The term "Lisp" (or "Lisp-like") is an umbrella for lots of different languages, such as Common Lisp, Scheme, and Arc. There is similar fragmentation is other language communities, like in ML. However, Ruby and Python have both managed to avoid this fate, where innovation occurred more on the implementation (like PyPy or YARV) instead of making changes to the language itself. Did the Ruby and Python communities do something special to prevent language fragmentation?

    Read the article

  • How to handle monetary values in PHP and MySql?

    - by Songo
    I've inherited a huge pile of legacy code written in PHP on top of a MySQL database. The thing I noticed is that the application uses doubles for storage and manipulation of data. Now I came across of numerous posts mentioning how double are not suited for monetary operations because of the rounding errors. However, I have yet to come across a complete solution to how monetary values should be handled in PHP code and stored in a MySQL database. Is there a best practice when it comes to handling money specifically in PHP? Things I'm looking for are: How should the data be stored in the database? column type? size? How should the data be handling in normal addition, subtraction. multiplication or division? When should I round the values? How much rounding is acceptable if any? Is there a difference between handling large monetary values and low ones? Note: A VERY simplified sample code of how I might encounter money values in everyday life: $a= $_POST['price_in_dollars']; //-->(ex: 25.06) will be read as a string should it be cast to double? $b= $_POST['discount_rate'];//-->(ex: 0.35) value will always be less than 1 $valueToBeStored= $a * $b; //--> any hint here is welcomed $valueFromDatabase= $row['price']; //--> price column in database could be double, decimal,...etc. $priceToPrint=$valueFromDatabase * 0.25; //again cast needed or not? I hope you use this sample code as a means to bring out more use cases and not to take it literally of course. Bonus Question If I'm to use an ORM such as Doctrine or PROPEL, how different will it be to use money in my code.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139  | Next Page >