Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

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 136/348 | < Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >

  • Service Layer Patter - Could we avoid the service layer on a specific case?

    - by lidermin
    Hi, we are trying to implement an application using the Service Layer Pattern cause our application needs to connect to other multiple applications too, and googling on the web, we found this link of a demostrative graphic for the "right" way of apply the pattern: martinfowler.com - Service Layer Pattern But now we have a question: what if our system needs to implement some business logic, only for our application (like some maintenance data for the system itself) that we don't need to share with other systems. Based on this graphic: As it seems, it will be unnecesary to implement a service layer just for that; it will be more practical to avoid the service layer, and just go from User Interface to the Business Layer (for example). What should be the right way in this case to implement the Service Layer Pattern? What do you suggest us for a scenario like the one I told you? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Service Layer Patter - Could we avoid the service layer on a specific case?

    - by lidermin
    Hi, we are trying to implement an application using the Service Layer Pattern cause our application needs to connect to other multiple applications too, and googling on the web, we found this link of a demostrative graphic for the "right" way of apply the pattern: martinfowler.com - Service Layer Pattern But now we have a question: what if our system needs to implement some business logic, only for our application (like some maintenance data for the system itself) that we don't need to share with other systems. Based on this graphic: As it seems, it will be unnecesary to implement a service layer just for that; it will be more practical to avoid the service layer, and just go from User Interface to the Business Layer (for example). What should be the right way in this case to implement the Service Layer Pattern? What do you suggest us for a scenario like the one I told you? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • keep viewdata on RedirectToAction

    - by Thomas Stock
    [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult CreateUser([Bind(Exclude = "Id")] User user) { ... db.SubmitChanges(); ViewData["info"] = "The account has been created."; return RedirectToAction("Index", "Admin"); } This doesnt keep the "info" text in the viewdata after the redirectToAction. How would I get around this issue in the most elegant way? My current idea is to put the stuff from the Index controlleraction in a [NonAction] and call that method from both the Index action and in the CreateUser action, but I have a feeling there must be a better way. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Extension methods for encapsulation and reusability

    - by tzaman
    In C++ programming, it's generally considered good practice to "prefer non-member non-friend functions" instead of instance methods. This has been recommended by Scott Meyers in this classic Dr. Dobbs article, and repeated by Herb Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu in C++ Coding Standards (item 44); the general argument being that if a function can do its job solely by relying on the public interface exposed by the class, it actually increases encapsulation to have it be external. While this confuses the "packaging" of the class to some extent, the benefits are generally considered worth it. Now, ever since I've started programming in C#, I've had a feeling that here is the ultimate expression of the concept that they're trying to achieve with "non-member, non-friend functions that are part of a class interface". C# adds two crucial components to the mix - the first being interfaces, and the second extension methods: Interfaces allow a class to formally specify their public contract, the methods and properties that they're exposing to the world. Any other class can choose to implement the same interface and fulfill that same contract. Extension methods can be defined on an interface, providing any functionality that can be implemented via the interface to all implementers automatically. And best of all, because of the "instance syntax" sugar and IDE support, they can be called the same way as any other instance method, eliminating the cognitive overhead! So you get the encapsulation benefits of "non-member, non-friend" functions with the convenience of members. Seems like the best of both worlds to me; the .NET library itself providing a shining example in LINQ. However, everywhere I look I see people warning against extension method overuse; even the MSDN page itself states: In general, we recommend that you implement extension methods sparingly and only when you have to. So what's the verdict? Are extension methods the acme of encapsulation and code reuse, or am I just deluding myself?

    Read the article

  • QT/PyQT best practice for using QT Designer

    - by pierocampanelli
    What is your development approach with QT/PYQT and QT Designer ? Are you doing this: Put all components on the panel (without any layout) and arrange them Put components in layout (Align Vertically/Horizontally/Form/Grid) Generate UI file and start coding how do you manage when you have custom widget ? For example when you have to fine tune behaviour of a QButton or QLineEdit ? Is it possible to add this custom widget to designer?

    Read the article

  • Appropriate programming design questions.

    - by Edward
    I have a few questions on good programming design. I'm going to first describe the project I'm building so you are better equipped to help me out. I am coding a Remote Assistance Tool similar to TeamViewer, Microsoft Remote Desktop, CrossLoop. It will incorporate concepts like UDP networking (using Lidgren networking library), NAT traversal (since many computers are invisible behind routers nowadays), Mirror Drivers (using DFMirage's Mirror Driver (http://www.demoforge.com/dfmirage.htm) for realtime screen grabbing on the remote computer). That being said, this program has a concept of being a client-server architecture, but I made only one program with both the functionality of client and server. That way, when the user runs my program, they can switch between giving assistance and receiving assistance without having to download a separate client or server module. I have a Windows Form that allows the user to choose between giving assistance and receiving assistance. I have another Windows Form for a file explorer module. I have another Windows Form for a chat module. I have another Windows Form form for a registry editor module. I have another Windows Form for the live control module. So I've got a Form for each module, which raises the first question: 1. Should I process module-specific commands inside the code of the respective Windows Form? Meaning, let's say I get a command with some data that enumerates the remote user's files for a specific directory. Obviously, I would have to update this on the File Explorer Windows Form and add the entries to the ListView. Should I be processing this code inside the Windows Form though? Or should I be handling this in another class (although I have to eventually pass the data to the Form to draw, of course). Or is it like a hybrid in which I process most of the data in another class and pass the final result to the Form to draw? So I've got like 5-6 forms, one for each module. The user starts up my program, enters the remote machine's ID (not IP, ID, because we are registering with an intermediary server to enable NAT traversal), their password, and connects. Now let's suppose the connection is successful. Then the user is presented with a form with all the different modules. So he can open up a File Explorer, or he can mess with the Registry Editor, or he can choose to Chat with his buddy. So now the program is sort of idle, just waiting for the user to do something. If the user opens up Live Control, then the program will be spending most of it's time receiving packets from the remote machine and drawing them to the form to provide a 'live' view. 2. Second design question. A spin off question #1. How would I pass module-specific commands to their respective Windows Forms? What I mean is, I have a class like "NetworkHandler.cs" that checks for messages from the remote machine. NetworkHandler.cs is a static class globally accessible. So let's say I get a command that enumerates the remote user's files for a specific directory. How would I "give" that command to the File Explorer Form. I was thinking of making an OnCommandReceivedEvent inside NetworkHandler, and having each form register to that event. When the NetworkHandler received a command, it would raise the event, all forms would check it to see if it was relevant, and the appropriate form would take action. Is this an appropriate/the best solution available? 3. The networking library I'm using, Lidgren, provides two options for checking networking messages. One can either poll ReadMessage() to return null or a message, or one can use an AutoResetEvent OnMessageReceived (I'm guessing this is like an event). Which one is more appropriate?

    Read the article

  • Should I define a single "DataContext" and pass references to it around or define muliple "DataConte

    - by Nate Bross
    I have a Silverlight application that consists of a MainWindow and several classes which update and draw images on the MainWindow. I'm now expanding this to keep track of everything in a database. Without going into specifics, lets say I have a structure like this: MainWindow Drawing-Surface Class1 -- Supports Drawing DataContext + DataServiceCollection<T> w/events Class2 -- Manages "transactions" (add/delete objects from drawing) Class3 Each "Class" is passed a reference to the Drawing Surface so they can interact with it independently. I'm starting to use WCF Data Services in Class1 and its working well; however, the other classes are also going to need access to the WCF Data Services. (Should I define my "DataContext" in MainWindow and pass a reference to each child class?) Class1 will need READ access to the "transactions" data, and Class2 will need READ access to some of the drawing data. So my question is, where does it make the most sense to define my DataContext? Does it make sense to: Define a "global" WCF Data Service "Context" object and pass references to that in all of my subsequent classes? Define an instance of the "Context" for each Class1, Class2, etc Have each method that requires access to data define its own instance of the "Context" and use closures handle the async load/complete events? Would a structure like this make more sense? Is there any danger in keeping an active "DataContext" open for an extended period of time? Typical usecase of this application could range from 1 minute to 40+ minutes. MainWindow Drawing-Surface DataContext Class1 -- Supports Drawing DataServiceCollection<DrawingType> w/events Class2 -- Manages "transactions" (add/delete objects from drawing) DataServiceCollection<TransactionType> w/events Class3 DataServiceCollection<T> w/events

    Read the article

  • Extension Methods - IsNull and IsNotNull, good or bad use?

    - by Jaimal Chohan
    I like readability. So, I came up with an extension mothod a few minutes ago for the (x =! null) type syntax, called IsNotNull. Inversly, I also created a IsNull extension method, thus if(x == null) becomes if(x.IsNull()) and if(x != null) becomes if(x.IsNotNull()) However, I'm worried I might be abusing extension methods. Do you think that this is bad use of Extenion methods?

    Read the article

  • Generating a URL pattern when provided a set of 5 or so URLs

    - by ryan
    Provided with a set of URLs, I need to generate a pattern, For example: http://www.buy.com/prod/disney-s-star-struck/q/loc/109/213724402.html http://www.buy.com/prod/samsung-f2380-23-widescreen-1080p-lcd-monitor-150-000-1-dc-8ms-1920-x/q/loc/101/211249863.html http://www.buy.com/prod/panasonic-nnh765wf-microwave-oven-countertop-1-6-ft-1250w-panasonic/q/loc/66357/202045865.html http://www.buy.com/prod/escape-by-calvin-klein-for-women-3-4-oz-edp-spray/q/loc/66740/211210860.html http://www.buy.com/prod/v-touch-8gb-mp3-mp4-2-8-touch-screen-2mp-camera-expandable-minisd-w/q/loc/111/211402014.html Pattern is http://www.buy.com/prod/[^~]/q/loc/[^~].html

    Read the article

  • Synchronising scripts / db / files from dev system to web server

    - by Spoonface
    I work as a freelance web dev, and up until now have been ftping my scripts / databases / static files to my web server manually, but I'm finding that is too error prone. So I'm looking for an app to automate uploading new and updated scripts / files / databases / etc. I know a lot of independent devs use WinSCP or Unison, but I don't think those apps can synch databases. Does anyone have any other suggestions? It doesn't need to be anything overly feature rich as I'm not working within a team or across multiple operating systems or anything like that. I can purchase any reasonably priced license if necesary. My work is primarily for PHP / MySQL / Apache on a Windows system, and then uploaded to a Linux / Apache server. thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC: post-redirect-get pattern, with only two overloaded action methods

    - by Rafi
    Is it possible to implement post-redirect-get pattern, with two overloaded action methods(One for GET action and the other for POST action) in ASP.NET MVC. In all of the MVC post-redirect-get pattern samples, I have seen three different action methods for the post-redirect-get process, each having different names. Is this really required? For Eg:(Does the code shown below, follows Post-Redirect-Get pattern?) public class SalaryTransferController : Controller { // // GET: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index(int id) { SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm = new SalaryTransferIndexViewModel(id) { SelectedDivision = DivisionEnum.Contracting }; //Do some processing here return View(vm); } // // POST: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpPost] public ActionResult Index(SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm) { bool validationsuccess = false; //validate if (validationsuccess) return RedirectToAction("Index", new {id=1234 }); else return View(vm); } } Thank you for your responses.

    Read the article

  • Game AI: Pattern for implementing Sense-Think-Act components?

    - by Rosarch
    I'm developing a game. Each entity in the game is a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. (Or inheritants thereof.) For NPCs, the GameObjectController is split into: IThinkNPC: reads current state and makes a decision about what to do IActNPC: updates state based on what needs to be done ISenseNPC: reads current state to answer world queries (eg "am I being in the shadows?") My question: Is this ok for the ISenseNPC interface? public interface ISenseNPC { // ... /// <summary> /// True if `dest` is a safe point to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="dest"></param> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <param name="range"></param> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeToRetreat(Vector2 dest, float angleToThreat, float range); /// <summary> /// Finds a new location to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <returns></returns> Vector2 newRetreatDest(float angleToThreat); /// <summary> /// Returns the closest LightSource that illuminates the NPC. /// Null if the NPC is not illuminated. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> ILightSource ClosestIlluminatingLight(); /// <summary> /// True if the NPC is sufficiently far away from target. /// Assumes that target is the only entity it could ever run from. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeFromTarget(); } None of the methods take any parameters. Instead, the implementation is expected to maintain a reference to the relevant GameObjectController and read that. However, I'm now trying to write unit tests for this. Obviously, it's necessary to use mocking, since I can't pass arguments directly. The way I'm doing it feels really brittle - what if another implementation comes along that uses the world query utilities in a different way? Really, I'm not testing the interface, I'm testing the implementation. Poor. The reason I used this pattern in the first place was to keep IThinkNPC implementation code clean: public BehaviorState RetreatTransition(BehaviorState currentBehavior) { if (sense.IsCollidingWithTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "is colliding with target"); return BehaviorState.ATTACK; } if (sense.IsSafeFromTarget() && sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() == null) { return BehaviorState.WANDER; } if (sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() != null && sense.SeesTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "collides with target"); return BehaviorState.CHASE; } return currentBehavior; } Perhaps the cleanliness isn't worth it, however. So, if ISenseNPC takes all the params it needs every time, I could make it static. Is there any problem with that?

    Read the article

  • How often to run getWritableDatabase() and getReadableDatabase()?

    - by jawonlee
    I'm writing a Service, a Content Provider, and one or more apps. The Service writes new data to the Content Provider's SQLite database every 5 minutes or so plus at user input, and is intended to run pretty much forever in the background. The app, when running, will display data pulled from the Content Provider, and will be refreshed whenever the Service puts more data into the Content Provider's database. Given that the Service only inserts into the database once every five minutes, when is the right time to call SQLiteOpenHelper's getWritableDatabase() / getReadableDatabase()? Is it on the onCreate() of the Content Provider, or should I run it every time there is an insert() and close it at the end of insert()? The data being inserted every 5 minutes will contain multiple inserts.

    Read the article

  • Counting down to zero in contrast to counting up to length - 1

    - by Helper Method
    Is it recommended to count in small loops (where possible) down from length - 1 to zero instead of counting up to length - 1? 1.) Counting down for (int i = a.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { if (a[i] == key) return i; } 2.) Counting up for (int i = 0; i < a.length; i++) { if (a[i] == key) return i; } The first one is slightly faster that the second one (because comparing to zero is faster) but is a little more error-prone in my opinion. Besides, the first one could maybe not be optimized by future improvements of the JVM. Any ideas on that?

    Read the article

  • Any difference in compiler behavior for each of these snippets?

    - by HotHead
    Please consider following code: 1. uint16 a = 0x0001; if(a < 0x0002) { // do something } 2. uint16 a = 0x0001; if(a < uint16(0x0002)) { // do something } 3. uint16 a = 0x0001; if(a < static_cast<uint16>(0x0002)) { // do something } 4. uint16 a = 0x0001; uint16 b = 0x0002; if(a < b) { // do something } What compiler does in backgorund and what is the best (and correct) way to do above testing? p.s. sorry, but I couldn't find the better title :) EDIT: values 0x0001 and 0x0002 are only example. There coudl be any 2 byte value instead. Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • Static classes in PHP via abstract keyword?

    - by Boldewyn
    According to the PHP manual, a class like this: abstract class Example {} cannot be instantiated. If I need a class without instance, e.g. for a registry pattern: class Registry {} // and later: echo Registry::$someValue; would it be considered good style to simply declare the class as abstract? If not, what are the advantages of hiding the constructor as protected method compared to an abstract class? Rationale for asking: As far as I see it, it could a bit of feature abuse, since the manual refers to abstract classes more as like blueprints for later classes with instantiation possibility.

    Read the article

  • Managing aesthetic code changes in git

    - by Ollie Saunders
    I find that I make a lot of small changes to my source code, often things that have almost no functional effect. For example: Refining or correcting comments. Moving function definitions within a class for a more natural reading order. Spacing and lining up some declarations for readability. Collapsing something using multiple lines on to one. Removing an old piece of commented-out code. Correcting some inconsistent whitespace. I guess I have a formidable attention to detail in my code. But the problem is I don't know what to do about these changes and they make it difficult to switch between branches etc. in git. I find myself not knowing whether to commit the minor changes, stash them, or put them in a separate branch of little tweaks and merge that in later. None those options seems ideal. The main problem is that these sort of changes are unpredictable. If I was to commit these there would be so many commits with the message "Minor code aesthetic change.", because, the second I make such a commit I notice another similar issue. What should I do when I make a minor change, a significant change, and then another minor change? I'd like to merge the three minor changes into one commit. It's also annoying seeing files as modified in git status when the change barely warrants my attention. I know about git commit --amend but I also know that's bad practice as it makes my repo inconsistent with remotes.

    Read the article

  • Is it better to use List or Collection?

    - by Vivin Paliath
    I have an object that stores some data in a list. The implementation could change later, and I don't want to expose the internal implementation to the end user. However, the user must have the ability to modify and access this collection of data. Currently I have something like this: public List<SomeDataType> getData() { return this.data; } public void setData(List<SomeDataType> data) { this.data = data; } Does this mean that I have allowed the internal implementation details to leak out? Should I be doing this instead? public Collection<SomeDataType> getData() { return this.data; } public void setData(Collection<SomeDataType> data) { this.data = new ArrayList<SomeDataType>(data); }

    Read the article

  • Password reset by email without a database table

    - by jpatokal
    The normal flow for resetting a user's password by mail is this: Generate a random string and store it in a database table Email string to user User clicks on link containing string String is validated against database; if it matches, user's pw is reset However, maintaining a table and expiring old strings etc seems like a bit of an unnecessary hassle. Are there any obvious flaws in this alternative approach? Generate a MD5 hash of the user's existing password Email hash string to user User clicks on link containing string String is validated by hashing existing pw again; if it matches, user's pw is reset Note that the user's password is already stored in a hashed and salted form, and I'm just hashing it once more to get a unique but repeatable string. And yes, there is one obvious "flaw": the reset link thus generated will not expire until the user changes their password (clicks the link). I don't really see why this would be a problem though -- if the mailbox is compromised, the user is screwed anyway.

    Read the article

  • Is my method for avoiding dynamic_cast<> faster than dynamic_cast<> itself ?

    - by ereOn
    Hi, I was answering a question a few minutes ago and it raised to me another one: In one of my projects, I do some network message parsing. The messages are in the form of: [1 byte message type][2 bytes payload length][x bytes payload] The format and content of the payload are determined by the message type. I have a class hierarchy, based on a common class Message. To instanciate my messages, i have a static parsing method which gives back a Message* depending on the message type byte. Something like: Message* parse(const char* frame) { // This is sample code, in real life I obviously check that the buffer // is not NULL, and the size, and so on. switch(frame[0]) { case 0x01: return new FooMessage(); case 0x02: return new BarMessage(); } // Throw an exception here because the mesage type is unknown. } I sometimes need to access the methods of the subclasses. Since my network message handling must be fast, I decived to avoid dynamic_cast<> and I added a method to the base Message class that gives back the message type. Depending on this return value, I use a static_cast<> to the right child type instead. I did this mainly because I was told once that dynamic_cast<> was slow. However, I don't know exactly what it really does and how slow it is, thus, my method might be as just as slow (or slower) but far more complicated. What do you guys think of this design ? Is it common ? Is it really faster than using dynamic_cast<> ? Any detailed explanation of what happen under the hood when one use dynamic_cast<> is welcome !

    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 | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >