Search Results

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

Page 144/348 | < Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >

  • Is there a design pattern for injecting methods into a class?

    - by glenn I.
    I have a set of classes that work together (I'm coding in javascript). There is one parent class and a number of child classes that are instantiated by the parent class. I have a number of clients of these classes that each need to add on one more methods to the parent or child classes. Rather than having each client inherit from these classes, which is doable but messy because of the child classes, I am having these clients pass functions into the parent class when they instantiate the main class. The main class creates the methods dynamically and the clients can call the methods like they were there all along. My questions are: is this a sensible thing to do? what would the design pattern be for what I am doing?

    Read the article

  • design using a readonly class in c#

    - by edosoft
    Hi Small design question here. I'm trying to develop a calculation app in C#. I have a class, let's call it InputRecord, which holds 100s of fields (multi dimensional arrays) This InputRecordclass will be used in a number of CalculationEngines. Each CalculcationEngine can make changes to a number of fields in the InputRecord. These changes are steps needed for it's calculation. Now I don't want the local changes made to the InputRecord to be used in other CalculcationEngine's classes. The first solution that comes to mind is using a struct: these are value types. However I'd like to use inheritance: each CalculationEngine needs a few fields only relevant to that engine: it's has it's own InputRecord, based on BaseInputRecord. Can anyone point me to a design that will help me accomplish this?

    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

  • Application Design: Single vs. Multiple Hits to the DB

    - by shyneman
    I'm building a service that performs a set of configured activities based on the type of request that it receives. Each activity involves going to the database and retrieving/updating some kind of information. The logic for each activity can be generalized and re-used across different request types. The activities may need to participate in a transaction for the duration of the servicing the request. One option, I'm considering is having each activity maintain its own access to DAL/database. This fully encapsulates the activity into a stand-alone re-usable piece, but hitting the database multiple times for one request doesn't seem like a viable option. I don't really know how to easily implement the concept of a transaction across the multiple activities here either. The second option is to encapsulate ALL the activities into one big activity and hit the database once. But this does not allow re-use and configuration of these activities for different requests. Does anyone have any suggestions and input about what should be the best way to approach my problem? Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice in regards to building composite dtos off of an aggregate root with domain

    - by Chance
    I'm trying to figure out the best approach/practice for assembling a composite data transfer object off of an aggregate root and would love to hear people's thoughts on this. For example, lets say I have a root that has a few domain objects as children. I want to assemble a specific view dto, based on some business logic, that either has attributes or full dto's of it's objects. What I'm struggling with is trying to figure out where that assembly should happen. I can see it going on the domain object of the aggregate root as there is some business logic associated with it. The benefits of this approach from what I've deduced thus far is that it should reduce the inevitable business logic from bleeding outisde of the domain object. It also allows for private methods that take care of tasks that could become more complex from an external builder. The downsides being that the domain object becomes much more entrenched in the application's workflow and represents much more than just the domain object. It also could become very large in the scenario where you need multiple composite Dtos. Alternatively, I could also see it belonging to some form of transfer object assembler where there is a builder for each domain object. The domain objects would still be responsible for GetDto() and UpdateFromDto(dto). Outside of that, the builder would handle the construction and deconstruction of composite dtos. The downside is kind of mentioned above, where I fear this will easily lead to developers unfamiliar with DDD bleeding a ton of business logic into the assembler which is what I want to desperately avoid. Any thoughts would be greatly apperciated.

    Read the article

  • Passing data between objects in Chain of Responsibility pattern

    - by AbrahamJP
    While implementing the Chain of Responsibility pattern, i came across a dilemma om how to pass data between objects in the chain. The datatypes passed between object in the chain can differ for each object. As a temporary fix I had created a Static class containing a stack where each object in the chain can push the results to the stack while the next object in the chain could pop the results from the stack. Here is a sample code on what I had implemented. public interface IHandler { void Process(); } public static class StackManager { public static Stack DataStack = new Stack(); } //This class doesn't require any input to operate public class OpsA : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var ProcessedData = DoSomeOperation(); StackManager.DataStack.Push(ProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } //This class require input data to operate upon public class OpsB : IHandler { public IHandler Successor {get; set; } public void Process() { //Retrieve the results from the previous Operation var InputData = StackManager.DataStack.Pop(); //Do some processing, store the result into Stack var NewProcessedData = DoMoreProcessing(InputData); StackManager.DataStack.Push(NewProcessedData); if(Successor != null) Successor(); } } public class ChainOfResponsibilityPattern { public void Process() { IHandler ProcessA = new OpsA(); IHandler ProcessB = new OpsB(); ProcessA.Successor = ProcessB; ProcessA.Process(); } } Please help me to find a better approach to pass data between handlers objects in the chain.

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice to "look up" Java Enums?

    - by Marcus
    We have a REST API where clients can supply parameters representing values defined on the server in Java Enums. So we can provide a descriptive error, we add this lookup method to each Enum. Seems like we're just copying code (bad). Is there a better practice? public enum MyEnum { A, B, C, D; public static MyEnum lookup(String id) { try { return MyEnum.valueOf(id); } catch (IllegalArgumentException e) { throw new RuntimeException("Invalid value for my enum blah blah: " + id); } } } Update: The default error message provided by valueOf(..) would be No enum const class a.b.c.MyEnum.BadValue. I would like to provide a more descriptive error from the API.

    Read the article

  • How to Inserting message into View that depends on session value. ASP.NET MVC. Best practice

    - by Andrew Florko
    User have to populate multistep questionnaire web-forms and step messages depend on the option chosen by user at the very beginning. Messages are stored in web.config file. I use asp.net mvc project, strong typed views and keep business logic separated from controller in static class. I don't want to make business logic dependency on web.config. Well, I have to insert message into view that depends on session value. There are at least 2 options how to implement this: View model has property that is populated in controller/businessLogic and rendered in view like <%: Model.HelpMessage1 %>. I have to pass web.config values from controller to businessLogic that makes business logic methods signature too complex. I don't want to make configuration source abstract (in order to let business logic read configuration values from its methods directly) also. Create static helper class that is called from view like <%: ViewHelper.HelpMessage1(Model.Option1) %>. But in this case logic what to show seems to be separated into two classes: business logic & viewHelper. What will you suggest? Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • best practice for passing many arguments to method ?

    - by Tony
    Occasionally , we have to write methods that receive many many arguments , for example : public void doSomething(Object objA , Object objectB ,Date date1 ,Date date2 ,String str1 ,String str2 ) { } When I encounter this kind of problem , I often encapsulate arguments into a map. Map<Object,Object> params = new HashMap<Object,Object>(); params.put("objA",ObjA) ; ...... public void doSomething(Map<Object,Object> params) { // extracting params Object objA = (Object)params.get("objA"); ...... } This is not a good practice , encapsulate params into a map is totally a waste of efficiency. The good thing is , the clean signature , easy to add other params with fewest modification . what's the best practice for this kind of problem ?

    Read the article

  • What should the Java main method be for a standalone application (for Spring JMS) ?

    - by Brandon
    I am interested in creating a Spring standalone application that will run and wait to receive messages from an ActiveMQ queue using Spring JMS. I have searched a lot of places and cannot find a consistent way of implementing the main method for such a standalone application. There appears to be few examples of Spring standalone applications. I have looked at Tomcat, JBoss, ActiveMQ and other examples from the around the web but I have not come to a conclusion so ... What is the best practice for implementing a main method for a Java application (specifically Spring with JMS) ?

    Read the article

  • Any reason not to always log stack traces?

    - by Chris Knight
    Encountered a frustrating problem in our application today which came down to an ArrayIndexOutOfBounds exception being thrown. The exception's type was just about all that was logged which is fairly useless (but, oh dear legacy app, we still love you, mostly). I've redeployed the application with a change which logs the stack trace on exception handling (and immediately found the root cause of the problem) and wondered why no one else did this before. Do you generally log the stack trace and is there any reason you wouldn't do this? Bonus points if you can explain (why, not how) the rationale behind having to jump hoops in java to get a string representation of a stack trace!

    Read the article

  • How to release a simple program

    - by Zenya
    What is the best practice for releasing a simple software? Suppose I created a very small simple and useful program or a tool and would like to share it with everyone by uploading it to my web-site. Do I need a license and which one? (I read http://www.gnu.org/ and http://www.fsf.org/ but still cannot decide - there are too many of them.) Do I need to put somewhere a copyright and what is the basic principles of creating "Copyright" string? How can I make a user, who is going to download and install my program, to believe that my program doesn't contain viruses or a malicious code?

    Read the article

  • Exposing APIs - third party or homegrown?

    - by amelvin
    Parts of the project I'm currently working on (I can't give details) will be exposed as an API at some point over the next few months and I was wondering whether anyone could recommend a third party API 'provider' (possibly Mashery or SO advertiser Webservius). And I mean recommend in the 'I've used these people and they are good' sense because although I can google for an answer to this question it is more difficult to get truly unbiased opinions. As an addendum is there much mileage in creating a bespoke API solution and has anyone had any joy going down that road? Thanks in anticipation.

    Read the article

  • How should the Version field be used in Trac?

    - by Eric
    I use Trac to track bugs, and future changes in my software projects. Tickets in Trac have a "Version" field and I'm trying to figure out the best way to use this field. Say I find a series of bugs in version 1.0 of my software. I create tickets in track for each and assign them to version 1.0. Now say I fix some of the bugs, and add some of the new features and release version 1.1. But some of the old 1.0 bugs are still in 1.1. Should I change their corresponding tickets to version 1.1 because they also now exist in 1.1? Or should I leave them set to version 1.0 as a way of tracking what version the bug was found in, and just assume that any open tickets in older versions still exist in newer versions?

    Read the article

  • How do I know if I'm being truly clever and not just "clever"?

    - by Covar
    If there's one thing I've learned from programming is that there are clever solutions to problems, and then there are "clever" solutions to problems. One is an intelligent solution to a difficult problem that results in improved efficiency and a better way to to do something and the other will wind up on The Daily WTF, and result in headaches and pain for anyone else involved. My question is how do you distinguish between one and the other? How do you figure out if you've over thought the solution? How do you stop yourself from throwing away truly clever solutions, thinking they were "clever"?

    Read the article

  • how can i use switch statement on type-safe enum pattern

    - by Fer
    I found a goodlooking example about implementation enums in a different way. That is called type-safe enum pattern i think. I started using it but i realized that i can not use it in a switch statement. My implementation looks like the following: public sealed class MyState { private readonly string m_Name; private readonly int m_Value; public static readonly MyState PASSED= new MyState(1, "OK"); public static readonly MyState FAILED= new MyState(2, "ERROR"); private MyState(int value, string name) { m_Name = name; m_Value = value; } public override string ToString() { return m_Name; } public int GetIntValue() { return m_Value; } } What can i add to my class in order to be able to use this pattern in switch statements in C#? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to better design it ???

    - by Deepak
    public interface IBasePresenter { } public interface IJobViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public interface IActivityViewPresenter : IBasePresenter { } public class BaseView { public IBasePresenter Presenter { get; set; } } public class JobView : BaseView { public IJobViewPresenter JobViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IJobViewPresenter;} } } public class ActivityView : BaseView { public IActivityViewPresenter ActivityViewPresenter { get { this.Presenter as IActivityViewPresenter;} } } Lets assume that I need a IBasePresenter property on BaseView. Now this property is inherited by JobView and ActivityView but if I need reference to IJobViewPresenter object in these derived classes then I need to type cast IBasePresenter property to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityPresenter (which I want to avoid) or create JobViewPresenter and ActivityViewPresenter on derived classes (as shown above). I want to avoid type casting in derived classes and still have reference to IJobViewPresenter or IActivityViewPresenter and still have IBasePresenter in BaseView. Is there a way I can achieve it ?

    Read the article

  • Combine hash values in C#

    - by Chris
    I'm creating a generic object collection class and need to implement a Hash function. I can obviously (and easily!) get the hash values for each object but was looking for the 'correct' way to combine them to avoid any issues. Does just adding, xoring or any basic operation harm the quality of the hash or am I going to have to do something like getting the objects as bytes, combining them and then hashing that? Cheers in advance

    Read the article

  • How to test method call order with Moq

    - by Finglas
    At the moment I have: [Test] public void DrawDrawsAllScreensInTheReverseOrderOfTheStack() { // Arrange. var screenMockOne = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screenMockTwo = new Mock<IScreen>(); var screens = new List<IScreen>(); screens.Add(screenMockOne.Object); screens.Add(screenMockTwo.Object); var stackOfScreensMock = new Mock<IScreenStack>(); stackOfScreensMock.Setup(s => s.ToArray()).Returns(screens.ToArray()); var screenManager = new ScreenManager(stackOfScreensMock.Object); // Act. screenManager.Draw(new Mock<GameTime>().Object); // Assert. screenMockOne.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock one"); screenMockTwo.Verify(smo => smo.Draw(It.IsAny<GameTime>()), Times.Once(), "Draw was not called on screen mock two"); } But the order in which I draw my objects in the production code does not matter. I could do one first, or two it doesn't matter. However it should matter as the draw order is important. How do you (using Moq) ensure methods are called in a certain order? Edit I got rid of that test. The draw method has been removed from my unit tests. I'll just have to manually test it works. The reversing of the order though was taken into a seperate test class where it was tested so it's not all bad. Thanks for the link about the feature they are looking into. I sure hope it gets added soon, very handy.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >