Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns and 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 146/348 | < Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >

  • Allow for modular development while still running in same JVM?

    - by Marcus
    Our current app runs in a single JVM. We are now splitting up the app into separate logical services where each service runs in its own JVM. The split is being done to allow a single service to be modified and deployed without impacting the entire system. This reduces the need to QA the entire system - just need to QA the interaction with the service being changed. For inter service communication we use a combination of REST, an MQ system bus, and database views. What I don't like about this: REST means we have to marshal data to/from XML DB views couple the systems together which defeats the whole concept of separate services MQ / system bus is added complexity There is inevitably some code duplication between services You have set up n JBoss server configurations, we have to do n number of deployments, n number of set up scripts, etc, etc. Is there a better way to structure an internal application to allow modular development and deployment while allowing the app to run in a single JVM (and achieving the associated benefits)?

    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# Property Access vs Interface Implementation

    - by ehdv
    I'm writing a class to represent a Pivot Collection, the root object recognized by Pivot. A Collection has several attributes, a list of facet categories (each represented by a FacetCategory object) and a list of items (each represented by a PivotItem object). Therefore, an extremely simplified Collection reads: public class Collection { private List<FacetCategory> categories; private List<PivotItem> items; // other attributes } What I'm unsure of is how to properly grant access to those two lists. Because declaration order of both facet categories and items is visible to the user, I can't use sets, but the class also shouldn't allow duplicate categories or items. Furthermore, I'd like to make the Collection object as easy to use as possible. So my choices are: Have Collection implement IList<PivotItem> and have accessor methods for FacetCategory: In this case, one would add an item to Collection foo by writing foo.Add(bar). This works, but since a Collection is equally both kinds of list making it only pass as a list for one type (category or item) seems like a subpar solution. Create nested wrapper classes for List (CategoryList and ItemList). This has the advantage of making a consistent interface but the downside is that these properties would no longer be able to serve as lists (because I need to override the non-virtual Add method I have to implement IList rather than subclass List. Implicit casting wouldn't work because that would return the Add method to its normal behavior. Also, for reasons I can't figure out, IList is missing an AddRange method... public class Collection { private class CategoryList: IList<FacetCategory> { // ... } private readonly CategoryList categories = new CategoryList(); private readonly ItemList items = new ItemList(); public CategoryList FacetCategories { get { return categories; } set { categories.Clear(); categories.AddRange(value); } } public ItemList Items { get { return items; } set { items.Clear(); items.AddRange(value); } } } Finally, the third option is to combine options one and two, so that Collection implements IList<PivotItem> and has a property FacetCategories. Question: Which of these three is most appropriate, and why?

    Read the article

  • Should my internal API classes be all in one package?

    - by Chris
    I'm hard at work packaging up an API for public consumption. As such I'm trying to limit the methods that are exposed to only those that I wish to be public and supportable. Underneath this of course there are a multitude of limited access methods. The trouble is that I have a lot of internal code that needs to access these restricted methods without making those methods public. This creates two issues: I can't create interfaces to communicate between classes as this would make these my internal methods public. I can't access protected or default methods unless I put the majority of my internal classes in the same package. So, I have around 70 or 80 internal classes in cleanly segregated packages BUT with overly permissive access modifiers. Would you say that a single package is the lesser of two evils or is there a better way to be able to mask my internal methods whilst keeping more granular packages? I'd be interested to find out the best practice here. I'm already aware of This

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • [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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Is this a "valid" css image replacement technique?

    - by user278457
    I just came up with this, it seems to work in all modern browsers, I just tested it then on (IE8/compatibility, Chrome, Safari, Moz) HTML <img id="my_image" alt="my text" src="images/small_transparent.gif" /> CSS #my_image{ background-image:url('images/my_image.png'); width:100px; height:100px;} Pro's: image alt text is best-practice for accessibility/seo no extra HTML markup, and the css is pretty minimal too gets around the css on/images off issue where "text-indent" techniques hide text from low bandwidth users The biggest disadvantage that I can think of is the css off/images on situation, because you'll only send a transparent gif. I'd like to know, who uses images without stylesheets? some kind of mobile phone or something? I'm making some sites for clients in regional Australia (hundreds of km from the nearest city), where many users will be suffering from dial-up connections, and often outdated browsers too, so the "images off" issue is an important consideration. are there any other side effects with this technique that I haven't considered?

    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

  • Good case for a Null Object Pattern? (Provide some service with a mailservice)

    - by fireeyedboy
    For a website I'm working on, I made an Media Service object that I use in the front end, as well as in the backend (CMS). This Media Service object manipulates media in a local repository (DB); it provides the ability to upload/embed video's and upload images. In other words, website visitors are able to do this in the front end, but administrators of the site are also able to do this in the backend. I'ld like this service to mail the administrators when a visitor has uploaded/embedded a new medium in the frontend, but refrain from mailing them when they upload/embed a medium themself in the backend. So I started wondering whether this is a good case for passing a null object, that mimicks the mail funcionality, to the Media Service in the backend. I thought this might come in handy when they decide the backend needs to have implemented mail functionality as well. In simplified terms I'ld like to do something like this: Frontend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new StandardMailService() ); Backend: $mediaService = new MediaService( new MediaRepository(), new NullMailService() ); How do you feel about this? Does this make sense? Or am I setting myself up for problems down the road?

    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

  • 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

  • Create swipe controlled simple flipbook style animation in ObjC

    - by eco_bach
    Hi I am a beginner in Obj C development, though quite experienced (over 10 years) with other ECMAscript based languages and OOP development. I want to build a simple flipbook style animation, controlled through swiping motion. I'm sure extremely simple for any advanced ObjC coders. Can anyone with extensive ObjC-CocoaTouch experience give me some higher level recommendations? ie, 1 -general application design, should I start with a simple view based application, or navigation based or? 2 -should I use 3rd party animation frameworks such as Cocos2D, or stick with built in classes and methods? 3 -if using built in methods, classes, what is the recommended way of achieving a animation, that will be controlled via swipe and touch gestures? 4 -I want to eventually have multiple 'flipbooks' that I can 'instantly' swap with one another, ie to give the net effect of an object changing color, etc, but not sure how to approach this from a memory management point of view, related to #1 above Except for point 3 above, I'm not expecting any actual code examples. Just general guidelines to follow and perhaps, what are some next steps I should take in my goal as an ObjC code samurai.

    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

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