Search Results

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

Page 146/348 | < Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Handling Dialogs in WPF with MVVM

    - by Ray Booysen
    In the MVVM pattern for WPF, handling dialogs is one of the more complex operations. As your view model does not know anything about the view, dialog communication can be interesting. I can expose an ICommand that when the view invokes it, a dialog can appear. Does anyone know of a good way to handle results from dialogs? I am speaking about windows dialogs such as MessageBox. One of the ways we did this was have an event on the viewmodel that the view would subscribe to when a dialog was required. public event EventHandler<MyDeleteArgs> RequiresDeleteDialog; This is OK, but it means that the view requires code which is something I would like to stay away from.

    Read the article

  • When to use CreateChildControls() vs. embedding in the ASPX

    - by Kelly French
    I'm developing a webpart for SharePoint 2007 and have seen several posts that advise to do all the creation of controls in the code-behind. I'm transitioning from Java J2EE development so I don't have the platform history of .Net/ASP/etc. In other places it shows how you can do the same thing by embedding the control definition into the asp page with tags My question is this: What is the rule governing where to implement controls? Has this rule changed recently, ASP vs ASP.Net or ASP.Net MVC maybe? Is this advice limited to SharePoint development?

    Read the article

  • C# using the "this" keyword in this situation?

    - by Alex
    Hi, I've completed a OOP course assignment where I design and code a Complex Number class. For extra credit, I can do the following: Add two complex numbers. The function will take one complex number object as a parameter and return a complex number object. When adding two complex numbers, the real part of the calling object is added to the real part of the complex number object passed as a parameter, and the imaginary part of the calling object is added to the imaginary part of the complex number object passed as a parameter. Subtract two complex numbers. The function will take one complex number object as a parameter and return a complex number object. When subtracting two complex numbers, the real part of the complex number object passed as a parameter is subtracted from the real part of the calling object, and the imaginary part of the complex number object passed as a parameter is subtracted from the imaginary part of the calling object. I have coded this up, and I used the this keyword to denote the current instance of the class, the code for my add method is below, and my subtract method looks similar: public ComplexNumber Add(ComplexNumber c) { double realPartAdder = c.GetRealPart(); double complexPartAdder = c.GetComplexPart(); double realPartCaller = this.GetRealPart(); double complexPartCaller = this.GetComplexPart(); double finalRealPart = realPartCaller + realPartAdder; double finalComplexPart = complexPartCaller + complexPartAdder; ComplexNumber summedComplex = new ComplexNumber(finalRealPart, finalComplexPart); return summedComplex; } My question is: Did I do this correctly and with good style? (using the this keyword)?

    Read the article

  • Should I use IDisposable for purely managed resources?

    - by John Gietzen
    Here is the scenario: I have an object called a Transaction that needs to make sure that only one entity has permission to edit it at any given time. In order to facilitate a long-lived lock, I have the class generating a token object that can be used to make the edits. You would use it like this: var transaction = new Transaction(); using (var tlock = transaction.Lock()) { transaction.Update(data, tlock); } Now, I want the TransactionLock class to implement IDisposable so that its usage can be clear. But, I don't have any unmanaged resources to dispose. however, the TransctionLock object itself is a sort of "unmanaged resource" in the sense that the CLR doesn't know how to properly finalize it. All of this would be fine and dandy, I would just use IDisposable and be done with it. However, my issue comes when I try to do this in the finalizer: ~TransactionLock() { this.Dispose(false); } I want the finalizer to release the transaction from the lock, if possible. How, in the finalizer, do I detect if the parent transaction (this.transaction) has already been finalized? Is there a better pattern I should be using? The Transaction class looks something like this: public sealed class Transaction { private readonly object lockMutex = new object(); private TransactionLock currentLock; public TransactionLock Lock() { lock (this.lockMutex) { if (this.currentLock != null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); this.currentLock = new TransactionLock(this); return this.currentLock; } } public void Update(object data, TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); // ... } } internal void ValidateLock(TransactionLock tlock) { if (this.currentLock == null) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); if (this.currentLock != tlock) throw new InvalidOperationException(/* ... */); } internal void Unlock(TransactionLock tlock) { lock (this.lockMutex) { this.ValidateLock(tlock); this.currentLock = null; } } }

    Read the article

  • multiple classes with same methods - best pattern

    - by Tony
    I have a few classes in my current project where validation of Email/Website addresses is necessary. The methods to do that are all the same. I wondered what's the best way to implement this, so I don't need to have these methods copy pasted everywhere? The classes themselves are not necessarily related, they only have those validation methods in common.

    Read the article

  • Is there a difference between Perl's shift versus assignment from @_ for subroutine parameters?

    - by cowgod
    Let us ignore for a moment Damian Conway's best practice of no more than three positional parameters for any given subroutine. Is there any difference between the two examples below in regards to performance or functionality? Using shift: sub do_something_fantastical { my $foo = shift; my $bar = shift; my $baz = shift; my $qux = shift; my $quux = shift; my $corge = shift; } Using @_: sub do_something_fantastical { my ($foo, $bar, $baz, $qux, $quux, $corge) = @_; } Provided that both examples are the same in terms of performance and functionality, what do people think about one format over the other? Obviously the example using @_ is fewer lines of code, but isn't it more legible to use shift as shown in the other example? Opinions with good reasoning are welcome.

    Read the article

  • Invoicing vs Quoting or Estimating

    - by FreshCode
    If invoices can be voided, should they be used as quotations? I have an Invoices tables that is created from inventory associated with a Job or Order. I could have a Quotes table as a halfway-house between inventory and invoices, but it feels like I would have duplicate data structures and logic just to handle an "Is this a quote?" bit. From a business perspective, quotes are different from invoices: a quote is sent prior to an undertaking and an invoice is sent once it is complete and payment is due, but how to represent this in my repository and model. What is an elegant way to store and manage quotes & invoices in a database? Edit: indicated Job === Order for this particular instance.

    Read the article

  • call my web services from other app with javascript?

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi. I got .asmx a web service on my app. I need to call a method from an other app to get statistics from my app. I need it to return XML. the call to the webmethod is done with javascript soap. There is a default hellow world webmethod and calling that work but it seem that when i try to call a method where i need to pass parameters and it need to execute code it wont work and just return my error message. any ideas on what can be wrong. am I using the wrong web method?

    Read the article

  • [Delphi] How would you refactor this code?

    - by Al C
    This hypothetical example illustrates several problems I can't seem to get past, even though I keep trying!! ... Suppose the original code is a long event handler, coded in the UI, triggered when a user clicks a cell in a grid. Expressed as pseudocode it's: if Condition1=true then begin //loop through every cell in row, //if aCell/headerCellValue>1 then //color aCell red end else if Condition2=true then begin //do some other calculation adding cell and headerCell values, and //if some other product>2 then //color the whole row green end else show an error message I look at this and say "Ah, refactor to the strategy pattern! The code will be easier to understand, easier to debug, and easier to later extend!" I get that. And I can easily break the code into multiple procedures. The problem is ultimately scope related. Assume the pseudocode makes extensive use of grid properties, values displayed in cells, maybe even built-in grid methods. How do you move all that to another unit, without referencing the grid component in the UI--which would break all the "rules" about loose coupling that make OOP valuable? ... I'm really looking forward to responses. Thanks, as always -- Al C.

    Read the article

  • File descriptor limits and default stack sizes

    - by Charles
    Where I work we build and distribute a library and a couple complex programs built on that library. All code is written in C and is available on most 'standard' systems like Windows, Linux, Aix, Solaris, Darwin. I started in the QA department and while running tests recently I have been reminded several times that I need to remember to set the file descriptor limits and default stack sizes higher or bad things will happen. This is particularly the case with Solaris and now Darwin. Now this is very strange to me because I am a believer in 0 required environment fiddling to make a product work. So I am wondering if there are times where this sort of requirement is a necessary evil, or if we are doing something wrong. Edit: Great comments that describe the problem and a little background. However I do not believe I worded the question well enough. Currently, we require customers, and hence, us the testers, to set these limits before running our code. We do not do this programatically. And this is not a situation where they MIGHT run out, under normal load our programs WILL run out and seg fault. So rewording the question, is requiring the customer to change these ulimit values to run our software to be expected on some platforms, ie, Solaris, Aix, or are we as a company making it to difficult for these users to get going? Bounty: I added a bounty to hopefully get a little more information on what other companies are doing to manage these limits. Can you set these pragmatically? Should we? Should our programs even be hitting these limits or could this be a sign that things might be a bit messy under the covers? That is really what I want to know, as a perfectionist a seemingly dirty program really bugs me.

    Read the article

  • how to merge ecommerce transaction data between two databases

    - by yamspog
    We currently run an ecommerce solution for a leisure and travel company. Everytime we have a release, we must bring the ecommerce site down as we update database schema and the data access code. We are using a custom built ORM where each data entity is responsible for their own CRUD operations. This is accomplished by dynamically generating the SQL based on attributes in the data entity. For example, the data entity for an address would be... [tableName="address"] public class address : dataEntity { [column="address1"] public string address1; [column="city"] public string city; } So, if we add a new column to the database, we must update the schema of the database and also update the data entity. As you can expect, the business people are not too happy about this outage as it puts a crimp in their cash-flow. The operations people are not happy as they have to deal with a high-pressure time when database and applications are upgraded. The programmers are upset as they are constantly getting in trouble for the legacy system that they inherited. Do any of you smart people out there have some suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately?

    - by sharptooth
    According to Wikipedia (the table at the page bottom), the earliest known version control systems were CVS and TeamWare both known from year 1990. How can it be? Software development has been here from at most 1960's and I honestly can't imagine working with codebase without version control. How could it happen that version control software emerged so lately compared to software development?

    Read the article

  • MyController class must produce class according to the enum type.

    - by programmerist
    GenoTipController must produce class according to the enum type. i have 3 class: _Company,_Muayene,_Radyoloji. Also i have CompanyView Class GetPersonel method. if you look GenoTipController my codes need refactoring. Can you understand me? i need a class according to ewnum type must me produce class. For example; case DataModelType.Radyoloji it must return radyoloji= new Radyoloji . Everything must be one switch case? public class GenoTipController { public _Company GenerateCompany(DataModelType modeltype) { _Company company = null; switch (modeltype) { case DataModelType.Radyoloji: break; case DataModelType.Satis: break; case DataModelType.Muayene: break; case DataModelType.Company: company = new Company(); break; default: break; } return company; } public _Muayene GenerateMuayene(DataModelType modeltype) { _Muayene muayene = null; switch (modeltype) { case DataModelType.Radyoloji: break; case DataModelType.Satis: break; case DataModelType.Muayene: muayene = new Muayene(); break; case DataModelType.Company: break; default: break; } return muayene; } public _Radyoloji GenerateRadyoloji(DataModelType modeltype) { _Radyoloji radyoloji = null; switch (modeltype) { case DataModelType.Radyoloji: radyoloji = new Radyoloji(); break; case DataModelType.Satis: break; case DataModelType.Muayene: break; case DataModelType.Company: break; default: break; } return radyoloji; } } public class CompanyView { public static List GetPersonel() { GenoTipController controller = new GenoTipController(); _Company company = controller.GenerateCompany(DataModelType.Company); return company.GetPersonel(); } } public enum DataModelType { Radyoloji, Satis, Muayene, Company } }

    Read the article

  • Choosing a design pattern for a class that might change it's internal attributes

    - by the_drow
    I have a class that holds arbitrary state and it's defined like this: class AbstractFoo { }; template <class StatePolicy> class Foo : public StatePolicy, public AbstractFoo { }; The state policy contains only protected attributes that represent the state. The state might be the same for multiple behaviors and they can be replaced at runtime. All Foo objects have the same interface to abstract the state itself and to enable storing Foo objects in containers. I would like to find the least verbose and the most maintainable way to express this.

    Read the article

  • Do the UI first with SketchFlow - Do I concern about the UI look?

    - by stacker
    There is no questions: UI-First Software Development. But what does it takes to do the UI first? I started to build a website, a complicated one, and know I start to concern about the UI. Instead to start coding html+css, I decided to start with SkecthFlow. now, I'm very confused. Do I want to build a exact sketch? meaning to think about colors, fonts make sure that the button will look like a web link... etc, or just build the application sketch flow? meaning put a textboxes and buttons. Do I need to implement every thing in SketchFlow first? I'm looking for best practice.

    Read the article

  • How to call superconstructor in a neat way

    - by sandis
    So here is my code: public MyClass (int y) { super(y,x,x); //some code } My problem is that in this case i want to generate a 'x' and sent to the super constructor. However the call to the superconstructor must be the first line in this constructor. Of course I could do something like this: int x; { x = generateX(); } But this feels ugly, and then the code will run no matter what constructor I use, which feels not so nice. Right now I am consider encapsulating my whole object in another object that only calculates x and then starts this object. Is this the best approach?

    Read the article

  • How to write a good PHP database insert using an associative array

    - by Tom
    In PHP, I want to insert into a database using data contained in a associative array of field/value pairs. Example: $_fields = array('field1'=>'value1','field2'=>'value2','field3'=>'value3'); The resulting SQL insert should look as follows: INSERT INTO table (field1,field2,field3) VALUES ('value1','value2','value3'); I have come up with the following PHP one-liner: mysql_query("INSERT INTO table (".implode(',',array_keys($_fields)).") VALUES (".implode(',',array_values($_fields)).")"); It separates the keys and values of the the associative array and implodes to generate a comma-separated string . The problem is that it does not escape or quote the values that were inserted into the database. To illustrate the danger, Imagine if $_fields contained the following: $_fields = array('field1'=>"naustyvalue); drop table members; --"); The following SQL would be generated: INSERT INTO table (field1) VALUES (naustyvalue); drop table members; --; Luckily, multiple queries are not supported, nevertheless quoting and escaping are essential to prevent SQL injection vulnerabilities. How do you write your PHP Mysql Inserts? Note: PDO or mysqli prepared queries aren't currently an option for me because the codebase already uses mysql extensively - a change is planned but it'd take alot of resources to convert?

    Read the article

  • What are possible designs for the DCI architecture?

    - by Gabriel Šcerbák
    What are possibles designs for implementation of the DCI (data, contexts, interactions) architecture in different OOP languages? I thought of Policy based design (Andrei Alexandrescu) for C++, DI and AOP for Java. However, I also thought about using State design pattern for representing roles and some sort of Template method for the interactions... What are the other possibilities?

    Read the article

  • Singular method name for single object argument, plural for a list?

    - by nasufara
    I'm having a problem with naming a method for a database application. In my Database instance, I have a method that can remove an Agreement object from the database. However, I want to be able to remove multiple Agreements at once, to be able to use transactions. The problem is that I also have an overload to remove a single Agreement object. Essentially, my structure is like this: public class Database { // ... public void RemoveAgreement(Agreement a) { // ... } public void RemoveAgreement(IEnumerable<Agreement> agreements) { // ... } } But this can be confusing, as the overload with the list of Agreements has a singular name, despite being inherently plural. My question is, how should I structure this? Should I have two overloads with the name RemoveAgreement(), or RemoveAgreements()? Or should I use two separate methods, instead of overloads? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Visitor Pattern can be replaced with Callback functions?

    - by getit
    Is there any significant benefit to using either technique? In case there are variations, the Visitor Pattern I mean is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_pattern And below is an example of using a delegate to achieve the same effect (at least I think it is the same) Say there is a collection of nested elements: Schools contain Departments which contain Students Instead of using the Visitor pattern to perform something on each collection item, why not use a simple callback (Action delegate in C#) Say something like this class Department { List Students; } class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student> actionDelegate) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu); } } } } School A = new School(); ...//populate collections A.Visit((student)=> { ...Do Something with student... }); *EDIT Example with delegate accepting multiple params Say I wanted to pass both the student and department, I could modify the Action definition like so: Action class School { List Departments; VisitStudents(Action<Student, Department> actionDelegate, Action<Department> d2) { foreach(var dep in this.Departments) { d2(dep); //This performs a different process. //Using Visitor pattern would avoid having to keep adding new delegates. //This looks like the main benefit so far foreach(var stu in dep.Students) { actionDelegate(stu, dep); } } } }

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to unit test code that generates random output?

    - by Flynn1179
    Specifically, I've got a method picks n items from a list in such a way that a% of them meet one criterion, and b% meet a second, and so on. A simplified example would be to pick 5 items where 50% have a given property with the value 'true', and 50% 'false'; 50% of the time the method would return 2 true/3 false, and the other 50%, 3 true/2 false. Statistically speaking, this means that over 100 runs, I should get about 250 true/250 false, but because of the randomness, 240/260 is entirely possible. What's the best way to unit test this? I'm assuming that even though technically 300/200 is possible, it should probably fail the test if this happens. Is there a generally accepted tolerance for cases like this, and if so, how do you determine what that is?

    Read the article

  • Immutable classes in C++

    - by ereOn
    Hi, In one of my projects, I have some classes that represent entities that cannot change once created, aka. immutable classes. Example : A class RSAKey that represent a RSA key which only has const methods. There is no point changing the existing instance: if you need another one, you just create one. My objects sometimes are heavy and I enforced the use of smart pointers to avoid copy. So far, I have the following pattern for my classes: class RSAKey : public boost::noncopyable, public boost::enable_shared_from_this<RSAKey> { public: /** * \brief Some factory. * \param member A member value. * \return An instance. */ static boost::shared_ptr<const RSAKey> createFromMember(int member); /** * \brief Get a member. * \return The member. */ int getMember() const; private: /** * \brief Constructor. * \param member A member. */ RSAKey(int member); /** * \brief Member. */ const int m_member; }; So you can only get a pointer (well, a smart pointer) to a const RSAKey. To me, it makes sense, because having a non-const reference to the instance is useless (it only has const methods). Do you guys see any issue regarding this pattern ? Are immutable classes something common in C++ or did I just created a monster ? Thank you for your advices !

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >