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 139/348 | < Previous Page | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >

  • linux tooling for starting as a net programmer

    - by alfredo dobrekk
    What are the linux developper tools to do the things i do with .NET in my windows environnement : I would like to port my client server application that runs under winform/nhibernate/sql server. Language c# Database SQL server ORM Nhibernate Source control SVN / Tortoise Unit testing Nunit Continuous integration Cruise Control Should i go java and eclipse ? Python and ??? Ruby and ??? Is there some IDE that allow me to manage all these processes under linux ?

    Read the article

  • Is extending a singleton class wrong?

    - by Anwar Shaikh
    I am creating a logger for an application. I am using a third party logger library. In which logger is implemented as singleton. I extended that logger class because I want to add some more static functions. In these static functions I internally use the instance (which is single) of Logger(which i inherited). I neither creates instance of MyLogger nor re-implemented the getInstance() method of super class. But I am still getting warnings like destructor of MyLogger can not be created as parent class (Loggger) destructor is not accessible. I want to know, I am I doing something wrong? Inheriting the singleton is wrong or should be avoided??

    Read the article

  • help me to choose between two software architecture

    - by alex
    // stupid title, but I could not think anything smarter I have a code (see below, sorry for long code but it's very-very simple): namespace Option1 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public AuxClass1 AuxClass { get { return _auxClass; } set { _auxClass = value; } } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } namespace Option2 { class AuxClass1 { string _field1; public string Field1 { get { return _field1; } set { _field1 = value; } } // another fields. maybe many fields maybe several properties public void Method1() { // some action } public void Method2() { // some action 2 } } class MainClass { AuxClass1 _auxClass; public string Field1 { get { return _auxClass.Field1; } set { _auxClass.Field1 = value; } } public void Method1() { _auxClass.Method1(); } public void Method2() { _auxClass.Method2(); } public MainClass() { _auxClass = new AuxClass1(); } } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { // Option1 Option1.MainClass mainClass1 = new Option1.MainClass(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Field1 = "string1"; mainClass1.AuxClass.Method1(); mainClass1.AuxClass.Method2(); // Option2 Option2.MainClass mainClass2 = new Option2.MainClass(); mainClass2.Field1 = "string2"; mainClass2.Method1(); mainClass2.Method2(); Console.ReadKey(); } } What option (option1 or option2) do you prefer ? In which cases should I use option1 or option2 ? Is there any special name for option1 or option2 (composition, aggregation) ?

    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

  • Manipulating the address of a variable to store a smaller type?

    - by Sidnicious
    This is what I get for pampering myself with high-level programming languages. I have a function which writes a 32-bit value to a buffer, and a uint64_t on the stack. Is the following code a sane way to store it? uint64_t size = 0; // ... getBytes((uint32_t*)&size+0x1); I'm assuming that this would be the canonical, safe style: uint64_t size = 0; // ... uint32_t smallSize; getBytes(&smallSize); size = smallSize;

    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

  • Should a setter return immediately if assigned the same value?

    - by Andrei Rinea
    In classes that implement INotifyPropertyChanged I often see this pattern : public string FirstName { get { return _customer.FirstName; } set { if (value == _customer.FirstName) return; _customer.FirstName = value; base.OnPropertyChanged("FirstName"); } } Precisely the lines if (value == _customer.FirstName) return; are bothering me. I've often did this but I am not that sure it's needed nor good. After all if a caller assigns the very same value I don't want to reassign the field and, especially, notify my subscribers that the property has changed when, semantically it didn't. Except saving some CPU/RAM/etc by freeing the UI from updating something that will probably look the same on the screen/whatever_medium what do we obtain? Could some people force a refresh by reassigning the same value on a property (NOT THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD PRACTICE HOWEVER)? 1. Should we do it or shouldn't we? 2. Why?

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between a private and public funtion?

    - by Kyle
    I am a new programmer, and I started in C and am now starting to enjoy JavaScript and a tiny bit of PHP more. Lately I've heard the terms 'private' and 'public' functions a lot. Could anybody give an explanation of the both and how they are of use to a programmer? And I'm probably totally wrong here... but is a (function(){}) in javascript a private function?

    Read the article

  • What is the cleanest way to use anonymous functions?

    - by Fletcher Moore
    I've started to use Javascript a lot more, and as a result I am writing things complex enough that organization is becoming a concern. However, this question applies to any language that allows you to nest functions. Essentially, when should you use an anonymous function over a named global or inner function? At first I thought it was the coolest feature ever, but I think I am going overboard. Here's an example I wrote recently, ommiting all the variable delcarations and conditionals so that you can see the structure. function printStream() { return fold(function (elem, acc) { ... var comments = (function () { return fold(function (comment, out) { ... return out + ...; }, '', elem.comments); return acc + ... + comments; }, '', data.stream); } I realized though (I think) there's some kind of beauty in being so compact, it is probably isn't a good idea to do this in the same way you wouldn't want a ton of code in a double for loop.

    Read the article

  • Which of these is better practice?

    - by Fletcher Moore
    You have a sequence of functions to execute. Case A: They do not depend on each other. Which of these is better? function main() { a(); b(); c(); } or function main() { a(); } function a() { ... b(); } function b() { ... c(); } Case B: They do depend on successful completion of the previous. function main() { if (a()) if (b()) c(); } or function main() { if (!a()) return false; if (!b()) return false; c(); } or function main() { a(); } function a() { ... // maybe return false b(); } funtion b() { ... // maybe return false c(); } Better, of course, means more maintainable and easier to follow.

    Read the article

  • Problem implementing Interceptor pattern

    - by ph0enix
    I'm attempting to develop an Interceptor framework (in C#) where I can simply implement some interfaces, and through the use of some static initialization, register all my Interceptors with a common Dispatcher to be invoked at a later time. The problem lies in the fact that my Interceptor implementations are never actually referenced by my application so the static constructors never get called, and as a result, the Interceptors are never registered. If possible, I would like to keep all references to my Interceptor libraries out of my application, as this is my way of (hopefully) enforcing loose coupling across different modules. Hopefully this makes some sense. Let me know if there's anything I can clarify... Does anyone have any ideas, or perhaps a better way to go about implementing my Interceptor pattern? Update: I came across Spring.NET. I've heard of it before, but never really looked into it. It sounds like it has a lot of great features that would be very useful for what I'm trying to do. Does anyone have any experience with Spring.NET? TIA, Jeremy

    Read the article

  • Magento Onepage Success Conversion Tracking Design Pattern

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

    Read the article

  • Which is the better C# class design for dealing with read+write versus readonly

    - by DanM
    I'm contemplating two different class designs for handling a situation where some repositories are read-only while others are read-write. (I don't foresee any need to a write-only repository.) Class Design 1 -- provide all functionality in a base class, then expose applicable functionality publicly in sub classes public abstract class RepositoryBase { protected virtual void SelectBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void InsertBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void UpdateBase() { // implementation... } protected virtual void DeleteBase() { // implementation... } } public class ReadOnlyRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } } public class ReadWriteRepository : RepositoryBase { public void Select() { SelectBase(); } public void Insert() { InsertBase(); } public void Update() { UpdateBase(); } public void Delete() { DeleteBase(); } } Class Design 2 - read-write class inherits from read-only class public class ReadOnlyRepository { public void Select() { // implementation... } } public class ReadWriteRepository : ReadOnlyRepository { public void Insert() { // implementation... } public void Update() { // implementation... } public void Delete() { // implementation... } } Is one of these designs clearly stronger than the other? If so, which one and why? P.S. If this sounds like a homework question, it's not, but feel free to use it as one if you want :)

    Read the article

  • What is there so useful in the Decorator Pattern? My example doesn't work

    - by Green
    The book says: The decorator pattern can be used to extend (decorate) the functionality of a certain object I have a rabbit animal. And I want my rabbit to have, for example, reptile skin. Just want to decorate a common rabbit with reptile skin. I have the code. First I have abstract class Animal with everythig that is common to any animal: abstract class Animal { abstract public function setSleep($hours); abstract public function setEat($food); abstract public function getSkinType(); /* and more methods which for sure will be implemented in any concrete animal */ } I create class for my rabbit: class Rabbit extends Animal { private $rest; private $stomach; private $skinType = "hair"; public function setSleep($hours) { $this->rest = $hours; } public function setFood($food) { $this->stomach = $food; } public function getSkinType() { return $this->$skinType; } } Up to now everything is OK. Then I create abstract AnimalDecorator class which extends Animal: abstract class AnimalDecorator extends Animal { protected $animal; public function __construct(Animal $animal) { $this->animal = $animal; } } And here the problem comes. Pay attention that AnimalDecorator also gets all the abstract methods from the Animal class (in this example just two but in real can have many more). Then I create concrete ReptileSkinDecorator class which extends AnimalDecorator. It also has those the same two abstract methods from Animal: class ReptileSkinDecorator extends AnimalDecorator { public function getSkinColor() { $skin = $this->animal->getSkinType(); $skin = "reptile"; return $skin; } } And finaly I want to decorate my rabbit with reptile skin: $reptileSkinRabbit = ReptileSkinDecorator(new Rabbit()); But I can't do this because I have two abstract methods in ReptileSkinDecorator class. They are: abstract public function setSleep($hours); abstract public function setEat($food); So, instead of just re-decorating only skin I also have to re-decorate setSleep() and setEat(); methods. But I don't need to. In all the book examples there is always ONLY ONE abstract method in Animal class. And of course it works then. But here I just made very simple real life example and tried to use the Decorator pattern and it doesn't work without implementing those abstract methods in ReptileSkinDecorator class. It means that if I want to use my example I have to create a brand new rabbit and implement for it its own setSleep() and setEat() methods. OK, let it be. But then this brand new rabbit has the instance of commont Rabbit I passed to ReptileSkinDecorator: $reptileSkinRabbit = ReptileSkinDecorator(new Rabbit()); I have one common rabbit instance with its own methods in the reptileSkinRabbit instance which in its turn has its own reptileSkinRabbit methods. I have rabbit in rabbit. But I think I don't have to have such possibility. I don't understand the Decarator pattern right way. Kindly ask you to point on any mistakes in my example, in my understanding of this pattern. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Should I use the Model-View-ViewModel (MVVM) pattern in Silverlight projects?

    - by Jon Galloway
    One challenge with Silverlight controls is that when properties are bound to code, they're no longer really editable in Blend. For example, if you've got a ListView that's populated from a data feed, there are no elements visible when you edit the control in Blend. I've heard that the MVVM pattern, originated by the WPF development community, can also help with keeping Silverlight controls "blendable". I'm still wrapping my head around it, but here are some explanations: http://www.nikhilk.net/Silverlight-ViewModel-Pattern.aspx http://mark-dot-net.blogspot.com/2008/11/model-view-view-model-mvvm-in.html http://www.ryankeeter.com/silverlight/silverlight-mvvm-pt-1-hello-world-style/ http://jonas.follesoe.no/YouCardRevisitedImplementingTheViewModelPattern.aspx One potential downside is that the pattern requires additional classes, although not necessarily more code (as shown by the second link above). Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Separation of interfaces and implementation

    - by bonefisher
    From assembly(or module) perspective, what do you think of separation of Interface (1.assembly) and its Implementation (2.assembly)? In this way we can use some IoC container to develop more decoupling desing.. Say we have an assembly 'A', which contains interfaces only. Then we have an assembly 'B' which references 'A' and implements those interfaces..It is dependent only on 'A'. In assembly 'C' then we can use the IoC container to create objects of 'A' using dependency injection of objects from 'B'. This way 'B' and 'C' are completely unaware (not dependent) of themselves..

    Read the article

  • What is the proper way to code a read-while loop in Scala?

    - by ARKBAN
    What is the "proper" of writing the standard read-while loop in Scala? By proper I mean written in a Scala-like way as opposed to a Java-like way. Here is the code I have in Java: MessageDigest md = MessageDigest.getInstance( "MD5" ); InputStream input = new FileInputStream( "file" ); byte[] buffer = new byte[1024]; int readLen; while( ( readLen = input.read( buffer ) ) != -1 ) md.update( buffer, 0, readLen ); return md.digest(); Here is the code I have in Scala: val md = MessageDigest.getInstance( hashInfo.algorithm ) val input = new FileInputStream( "file" ) val buffer = new Array[ Byte ]( 1024 ) var readLen = 0 while( readLen != -1 ) { readLen = input.read( buffer ) if( readLen != -1 ) md.update( buffer, 0, readLen ) } md.digest The Scala code is correct and works, but feels very un-Scala-ish. For one it is a literal translation of the Java code, taking advantage of none of the advantages of Scala. Further it is actually longer than the Java code! I really feel like I'm missing something, but I can't figure out what. I'm fairly new to Scala, and so I'm asking the question to avoid falling into the pitfall of writing Java-style code in Scala. I'm more interested in the Scala way to solve this kind of problem than in any specific helper method that might be provided by the Scala API to hash a file. (I apologize in advance for my ad hoc Scala adjectives throughout this question.)

    Read the article

  • Interface and base class mix, the right way to implement this

    - by Lerxst
    I have some user controls which I want to specify properties and methods for. They inherit from a base class, because they all have properties such as "Foo" and "Bar", and the reason I used a base class is so that I dont have to manually implement all of these properties in each derived class. However, I want to have a method that is only in the derived classes, not in the base class, as the base class doesn't know how to "do" the method, so I am thinking of using an interface for this. If i put it in the base class, I have to define some body to return a value (which would be invalid), and always make sure that the overriding method is not calling the base. method Is the right way to go about this to use both the base class and an interface to expose the method? It seems very round-about, but every way i think about doing it seems wrong... Let me know if the question is not clear, it's probably a dumb question but I want to do this right.

    Read the article

  • What are Code Smells? What is the best way to correct them?

    - by Rob Cooper
    OK, so I know what a code smell is, and the Wikipedia Article is pretty clear in its definition: In computer programming, code smell is any symptom in the source code of a computer program that indicates something may be wrong. It generally indicates that the code should be refactored or the overall design should be reexamined. The term appears to have been coined by Kent Beck on WardsWiki. Usage of the term increased after it was featured in Refactoring. Improving the Design of Existing Code. I know it also provides a list of common code smells. But I thought it would be great if we could get clear list of not only what code smells there are, but also how to correct them. Some Rules Now, this is going to be a little subjective in that there are differences to languages, programming style etc. So lets lay down some ground rules: ** ONE SMELL PER ANSWER PLEASE! & ADVISE ON HOW TO CORRECT! ** See this answer for a good display of what this thread should be! DO NOT downmod if a smell doesn't apply to your language or development methodology We are all different. DO NOT just quickly smash in as many as you can think of Think about the smells you want to list and get a good idea down on how to work around. DO downmod answers that just look rushed For example "dupe code - remove dupe code". Let's makes it useful (e.g. Duplicate Code - Refactor into separate methods or even classes, use these links for help on these common.. etc. etc.). DO upmod answers that you would add yourself If you wish to expand, then answer with your thoughts linking to the original answer (if it's detailed) or comment if its a minor point. DO format your answers! Help others to be able to read it, use code snippets, headings and markup to make key points stand out!

    Read the article

  • strategy for observer pattern?

    - by fayer
    I want to use observer pattern for a logging system. We have got logObservers and logObservables. The class that will have to log something will implement iLogObservable and include these methods: private $logObservers = array(); public function addLogObserver($logObserver) { $this->logObservers[] = $logObserver; } public function removeLogObserver($logObserver) { $this->logObservers[] = $logObserver; } public function write($type, $message) { foreach($this->logObservers as $logObserver) { $logObserver->log($level, $message); ; } } Then I noticed, that a lot of classes that will use logging will have these methods and I have to copy paste. So isn't it better to have these methods in a class I call LogObservable or just Log and then use strategy (instantiate this class inside all classes that will have to log). When I change the methods in Log, all logObservables will be affected. However, I have not seen anyone use observer pattern with strategy pattern yet, but it seems to be very efficient and remove the duplications. What do you think?

    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 | 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146  | Next Page >