Search Results

Search found 14074 results on 563 pages for 'programmers'.

Page 149/563 | < Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >

  • Do I need a degree in Computer Science to get a junior Programming job?

    - by t84
    Do I need to go to Uni to get a job as a Junior C# coder? I'm 26 and have been working in Games (Production) for 6 years and I am thinking of a change, I've had exposure to VB6, VBA, HTML, CSS, PHP, JavaScript over the past few years and did a web design NCFE at College, but other than that, nothing else! I'm teaching myself C# at the moment with books and I was wondering 'how much' I need to learn and also how I can improve my chances of getting a programming job! Am I a late started to learn coding? (I know many people who started at a very young age!) Thanks for the help :)

    Read the article

  • Using an Apt Repository for Paid Software Updates

    - by Scott Warren
    I'm trying to determine a way to distribute software updates for a hosted/on-site web application that may have weekly and/or monthly updates. I don't want the customers who use the on-site product to have to worry about updating it manually I just want it to download and install automatically ala Google Chrome. I'm planning on providing an OVF file with Ubuntu and the software installed and configured. My first thought on how to distributed software is to create six Apt repositories/channels (not sure which would be better at this point) that will be accessed through SSH using keys so if a customer doesn't renew their subscription we can disable their account: Beta - Used internally on test data to check the package for major defects. Internal - Used internally on live data to check the package for defects (dog fooding stage). External 1 - Deployed to 1% of our user base (randomly selected) to check for defects. External 9 - Deployed to 9% of our user base (randomly selected) to check for defects. External 90 - Deployed to the remaining 90% of users. Hosted - Deployed to the hosted environment. It will take a sign off at each stage to move into the next repository in case problems are reported. My questions to the community are: Has anyone tried something like this before? Can anyone see a downside to this type of a procedure? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Why has C prevailed over Pascal?

    - by Konrad Morawski
    My understanding is that in the 1980s and perhaps in the 1990s, too - Pascal and C were pretty much head-to-head as production languages. Is the ultimate demise of Pascal only due to Borland's neglection of Delphi? Or was there more of such bad luck; or perhaps something inherently wrong with Pascal (any hopes for its revival?). I hope it's not an open, unanswerable question. I'm interested in historical facts and observations one can back up, rather than likes and dislikes. I also failed to find a duplicate question, which actually surprised me somewhat.

    Read the article

  • Rails and Mongoid best way to implement sharing system

    - by Matteo Pagliazzi
    I have to model User and Board in rails using mongoid as ODM. Each board is referenced to an user through a foreign key user_id and now I want to add the ability to share a board with other users. Following CRUD I'd create a new Model called something like Share and it's releated Controller with the ability to create/edit/delete a Share but I have some doubts: First, where to save informations about Shares? I think I may create a field in the Board's collection called shared_with including an array of user ids. in a MySQL I'd created a new table with the ids of who share, the resource shared and the user the resources is shared with but I don't think that's necessary using MongoDB. Every user a Board is shared with should be able to edit the Board (but not to delete it) so the Board should have two relations one with the owner and another with the users the board is shared with, right? For permission (the owner should be able to delete a board but the users it is shared with shouldn't) what to use? I'm using Devise for authentication but I think something like CanCan would fit better. but how to implement it? What do you think about this way? Do you find any problems or have better solutions?

    Read the article

  • How to handle growing QA reporting requirements?

    - by Phillip Jackson
    Some Background: Our company is growing very quickly - in 3 years we've tripled in size and there are no signs of stopping any time soon. Our marketing department has expanded and our IT requirements have as well. When I first arrived everything was managed in Dreamweaver and Excel spreadsheets and we've worked hard to implement bug tracking, version control, continuous integration, and multi-stage deployment. It's been a long hard road, and now we need to get more organized. The Problem at Hand: Management would like to track, per-developer, who is generating the most issues at the QA stage (post unit testing, regression, and post-production issues specifically). This becomes a fine balance because many issues can't be reported granularly (e.g. per-url or per-"page") but yet that's how Management would like reporting to be broken down. Further, severity has to be taken into account. We have drafted standards for each of these areas specific to our environment. Developers don't want to be nicked for 100+ instances of an issue if it was a problem with an include or inheritance... I had a suggestion to "score" bugs based on severity... but nobody likes that. We can't enter issues for every individual module affected by a global issue. [UPDATED] The Actual Questions: How do medium sized businesses and code shops handle bug tracking, reporting, and providing useful metrics to management? What kinds of KPIs are better metrics for employee performance? What is the most common way to provide per-developer reporting as far as time-to-close, reopens, etc.? Do large enterprises ignore the efforts of the individuals and rather focus on the team? Some other questions: Is this too granular of reporting? Is this considered 'blame culture'? If you were the developer working in this environment, what would you define as a measureable goal for this year to track your progress, with the reward of achieving the goal a bonus?

    Read the article

  • What kind of code would Kent Beck avoid unit testing?

    - by tieTYT
    I've been watching a few of the Is TDD Dead? talks on youtube, and one of the things that surprised me is Kent Beck seems to acknowledge that there are just some kinds of programs that aren't worth unit testing. For example, right here DHH says that Kent Beck is ... very happy to say "Well, TDD doesn't fit in this case, I'm just going to bail" It's frustrating to me that Kent Beck seems to acknowledge this, but nobody asks him to elaborate on it or give concrete examples. I'd like to know the situations where Kent Beck thinks TDD is a bad fit. Nobody can read his mind or speak for him, but I'm hoping he's been transparent enough through his books/tweets/whatever for someone to be able to answer. I'm not necessarily going to take what he says as gospel, but it would be useful to know that the times I've tried TDD and it just felt impossible/useless are situations that he would have bailed on it himself. Or, if it turned out he would have tested that code it'd suggest to me that I was approaching the process very wrong. I also think it would be enlightening to understand why he would bail on such projects. My opinion on why this is not a duplicate of "When is it appropriate to not unit test?" After skimming those answers I'm not satisfied. For example, look at UncleBob's answer. He doesn't even acknowledge that such a situation exists. I really think there's value in understanding Kent Beck's position, not just a general, "What's your opinion?" type of question. After all, he's the father of TDD.

    Read the article

  • How to modify Perl script to move packets in diffrent directory based on version? [migrated]

    - by Peter Penzov
    I have this Perl script which is used to soft packages based on packet version: #!/usr/bin/perl -w # # Compare versions of all *.rpm files against the # latest packages installed (if installed) # # Usage: # rpmver.pl # This script looks for all *.rpm files. # use strict; use RPM2; my $rpm_db = RPM2->open_rpm_db(); for my $filename (<*.rpm>) { my $h = RPM2->open_package( $filename ); # Ensure we compare against the newest # package of the given name. my ($installed) = sort { $b <=> $a } $rpm_db->find_by_name($h->name); if (not $installed) { printf "Package %s not installed.\n", $h->as_nvre; } else { my ($result) = ($h <=> $installed); if ($result < 0) { printf "Installed package %s newer than file %s\n", $installed->as_nvre, $h->as_nvre; } else { printf "File %s newer than installed package %s\n", $h->as_nvre, $installed->as_nvre; } } } I have a Linux repository with SRPMs. I want to move the packages with the latest into different directory for example latest_lackages. How the script must be modified?

    Read the article

  • How does the GPL static vs. dynamic linking rule apply to interpreted languages?

    - by ekolis
    In my understanding, the GPL prohibits static linking from non-GPL code to GPL code, but permits dynamic linking from non-GPL code to GPL code. So which is it when the code in question is not linked at all because the code is written in an interpreted language (e.g. Perl)? It would seem to be too easy to exploit the rule if it was considered dynamic linking, but on the other hand, it would also seem to be impossible to legally reference GPL code from non-GPL code if it was considered static! Compiled languages at least have a distinction between static and dynamic linking, but when all "linking" is just running scripts, it's impossible to tell what the intent is without an explicit license! Or is my understanding of this issue incorrect, rendering the question moot? I've also heard of a "classpath exception" which involves dynamic linking; is that not part of the GPL but instead something that can be added on to it, so dynamic linking is only allowed when the license includes this exception?

    Read the article

  • Data Aggregation of CSV files java

    - by royB
    I have k csv files (5 csv files for example), each file has m fields which produce a key and n values. I need to produce a single csv file with aggregated data. I'm looking for the most efficient solution for this problem, speed mainly. I don't think by the way that we will have memory issues. Also I would like to know if hashing is really a good solution because we will have to use 64 bit hashing solution to reduce the chance for a collision to less than 1% (we are having around 30000000 rows per aggregation). For example file 1: f1,f2,f3,v1,v2,v3,v4 a1,b1,c1,50,60,70,80 a3,b2,c4,60,60,80,90 file 2: f1,f2,f3,v1,v2,v3,v4 a1,b1,c1,30,50,90,40 a3,b2,c4,30,70,50,90 result: f1,f2,f3,v1,v2,v3,v4 a1,b1,c1,80,110,160,120 a3,b2,c4,90,130,130,180 algorithm that we thought until now: hashing (using concurentHashTable) merge sorting the files DB: using mysql or hadoop or redis. The solution needs to be able to handle Huge amount of data (each file more than two million rows) a better example: file 1 country,city,peopleNum england,london,1000000 england,coventry,500000 file 2: country,city,peopleNum england,london,500000 england,coventry,500000 england,manchester,500000 merged file: country,city,peopleNum england,london,1500000 england,coventry,1000000 england,manchester,500000 The key is: country,city. This is just an example, my real key is of size 6 and the data columns are of size 8 - total of 14 columns. We would like that the solution will be the fastest in regard of data processing.

    Read the article

  • deciphering columnar transposition cipher

    - by Arfan M
    I am looking for an idea on how to decipher a columnar transposition cipher without knowing the key or the length of the key. When I take the cipher text as input to my algorithm I will guess the length of the key to be the factors of the length of the cipher text. I will take the first factor suppose the length was 20 letters so I will take 2*10 (2 rows and 10 columns). Now I want to arrange the cipher text in the columns and read it row wise to see if there is any word forming and match it with a dictionary if it is something sensible. If it matches the dictionary then it means it is in correct order or else I want to know how to make other combinations of the columns and read the string again row wise. Please suggest another approach that is more efficient.

    Read the article

  • What programming languages have you taught your children?

    - by Dubmun
    I'm a C# developer by trade but have had exposure to many languages (including Java, C++, and multiple scripting languages) over the course of my education and career. Since I code in the MS world for work I am most familiar with their stack and so I was excited when Small Basic was announced. I immediately started teaching my oldest to program in it but felt that something was missing from the experience. Being able to look up every command with the IDE's intellisense seemed to take something from the experience. Sure, it was easy to grasp but I found myself thinking that a little more challenge might be in order. I'm looking for something better and I would like to hear your experiences with teaching your children to program in whatever language you have chosen to do so in. What did you like and dislike? How fast did they pick it up? Were they challenged? Frustrated? Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • A big flat text file or a HTML site for language documentation?

    - by Bad Sector
    A project of mine is a small embeddable Tcl-like scripting language, LIL. While i'm mostly making it for my own use, i think it is interesting enough for others to use, so i want it to have a nice (but not very "wordy") documentation. So far i'm using a single flat readme.txt file. It explains the language's syntax, features, standard functions, how to use the C API, etc. Also it is easy to scan and read in almost every environment out there, from basic text-only terminals to full-fledged high-end graphical desktop environments. However, while i tried to keep things nicely formatted (as much as this is possible in plain text), i still think that being a big (and growing) wall of text, it isn't as easy on the eyes as it could be. Also i feel that sometimes i'm not writing as much as i want in order to avoid expanding the text too much. So i thought i could use another project of mine, QuHelp, which is basically a help site generator for sites like this one with a sidebar that provides a tree of topics/subtopics and offline full text search. With this i can use HTML to format the documentation and if i use QuHelp for some other project that uses LIL, i can import LIL's documentation as part of the other project's documentation. However converting the existing documentation to QuHelp/HTML isn't a small task, especially when it comes to functions (i'll need to put more detail on them than what currently exists in the readme.txt file). Also it loses the wide range of availability that it currently has (even if QuHelp's generated code degrades gracefully down to console-only web browsers, plain text is readable from everywhere, including from popular editors such as Vim and Emacs - i had someone once telling me that he likes LIL's documentation because it is readable without leaving his editor). So, my question is simply this: should i keep the documentation as it is now in the form of a single readme.txt file or should i convert it to something like the site i mentioned above? There is also the option to do both, but i'm not sure if i'll be able to always keep them in sync or if it is worth the effort. After asking around in IRC i've got mixed answers: some liked the wide availability of the single text file, others said that it is looks as bad as a man page (personally i don't mind that - i can read man pages just fine - but other people might have issues reading them). What do you think?

    Read the article

  • Is this kind of Design by Contract useless?

    - by Charlie Pigarelli
    I've just started informatics university and I'm attending a programming course about C(++). The programming professor prefers to teach very few things (in 3 month we have just reached the functions topic) and connect every topic with a type of programming design that somehow is similar to the Design by Contract design. Basically what he ask us to do is to write every exercise with comments Pre-conditions, Post-conditions and Invariants that should prove the correctness of each program we write. But this doesn't make any sense to me. I mean, ok: maybe writing down your thoughts prevent you from doing some mistakes, but if this is all an abstract thing, then if your program intuition is wrong you'll write your program wrong and then you'll also write pre and post conditions wrong probably auto convincing your self about its correctness. Most of the time, both me and other students have written programs that seemed ok and that had correct pre and post condition too. But at the moment of testing it was just completely wrong. I had some experience before this course of programming and I had written a lot of line of code before and I found myself comfortably with just writing a program and unit test it. It take less time to accomplish and is less "abstract" than just thinking about what every single piece of your program should do in every case (which is kinda like mentally testing it). Finally, all this pre and post conditions takes me like 80% of the total time of the exercise. It's harder to think about putting down this pre and post correct than to write the program itself. Since we are like the only course of the only university probably in the entire world that makes this things, could someone please tell me how should I manage this thing? Am I right thinking that this doesn't worth anything? Should I change university? (there are like double of the people attending that course and it seems that usually very few people passes the exam the first year). Should I convince myself it's method is right?

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages of Maven when it comes to single man, educational projects

    - by Leron
    I've spend a few hours playing around with Maven + reading some stuff on the apache official site and also a few random googled articles. By this I mean that I really tried to find the answers myself - both by reading and by doing things on my own. Also maybe worth to mention that I installed the m2e plugin so most of the time I've tried things out from Eclipse and not using the command line too much. However aside from the generated project that for example prevent me from using the default package I didn't see that much of a difference with the standard way I've created my projects before try Maven. In fact I've almost decided to skip Maven for now and move on to the other technology I wanted to learn more in-depth - Hibernate, but when I start with opening the official page the first thing I've read was the recommendation to use Hibernate with Maven. That get me confused and made me taking a step back and trying once more to find what I'm obviously missing right now. As it's said in the maven.apache.. site, the true strength of Maven is shown when you work on large projects with other people, but I lack the option to see how Maven is really used in this scenario, still i think that there are maybe advantages even when it comes to working with small projects alone, but I really have difficulties to point them out. So what do you think are the advantages of Maven when it's used for small projects writing from a single person. What are the things that I should be aware of and try to exploit (I mean features offered by Maven) that can come in handy in this situations?

    Read the article

  • mysql join with multiple values in one column

    - by CYREX
    I need to make a query that creates 3 columns that come from 2 tables which have the following relations: TABLE 1 has Column ID that relates to TABLE 2 with column ID2 In TABLE 1 there is a column called user In TABLE 2 there is a column called names There can be 1 unique user but there can be many names associated to that user. If i do the following i get all data BUT the user column repeats itself for each name it has associated. What i want is for use to appear unique but the names columns appear with all the names associated to the user column but separated by commas, like the following: select user,names from TABLE1 left join TABLE2 on TABLE1.id = TABLE2.id This will show the users repeated everytime a name appears for that user. what i want is to appear like this: USER - NAMES cyrex - pedrox, rambo, zelda homeboy - carmen, carlos, tom, sandra jerry - seinfeld, christine ninja - soloboy etc....

    Read the article

  • Personal knowledge base [closed]

    - by AlexLocust
    Possible Duplicate: How do you manage your knowledge base? Hello. Now I am using easy writing pad for scratches while doing some researches, solving troubles or doing workarounds. But.. you now, it's really difficult to remember all details of founded solution and it's alternatives after few months. And writing pad is not wery useful. Usually writing pad doesn't contains half of needed inforation: links founded in internet, output of some test commands and etc. Now I'am looking for a tool for storing information about my researches and it's results. Basic reqirements: ability to store files; ability to store formatted text (kind of HTML will be nice) with hyperlinks and code snippets; tags on notes; easy to use. Now I'am thinking about some kind of file-system organized storage, but I think it will be inconvenient. Another thinks is local wiki or blog. So, my question is: How do you organize you knowlege base? What tools do you use, and what "pros and cons".

    Read the article

  • How and where do you store your private work/sourcecode?

    - by Amir Rezaei
    I have worked as a developer for over 10 years now. During that time I have had my own small projects where I have developed tools, applications and games. I have not found any robust solution to store my work. It’s always fun to get back to your code and see how you did before and how you would do it now. It’s just work that is unfortunate to lose. There are SVN solution such as Google’s Project Hosting. However I’m not interested in sharing my code or making it open source. Currently I’m hosting my own SVN server. So here comes my question: How and where do you store your private work/sourcecode? Requirements: Sourcecode versioning Backup Prefers free Edit: Remote access Edit: I have used Dropbox + TrueCrypt + SVN. Unfortunately you are limited to 5gb.

    Read the article

  • TDD - Outside In vs Inside Out

    - by Songo
    What is the difference between building an application Outside In vs building it Inside Out using TDD? These are the books I read about TDD and unit testing: Test Driven Development: By Example Test-Driven Development: A Practical Guide: A Practical Guide Real-World Solutions for Developing High-Quality PHP Frameworks and Applications Test-Driven Development in Microsoft .NET xUnit Test Patterns: Refactoring Test Code The Art of Unit Testing: With Examples in .Net Growing Object-Oriented Software, Guided by Tests---This one was really hard to understand since JAVA isn't my primary language :) Almost all of them explained TDD basics and unit testing in general, but with little mention of the different ways the application can be constructed. Another thing I noticed is that most of these books (if not all) ignore the design phase when writing the application. They focus more on writing the test cases quickly and letting the design emerge by itself. However, I came across a paragraph in xUnit Test Patterns that discussed the ways people approach TDD. There are 2 schools out there Outside In vs Inside Out. Sadly the book doesn't elaborate more on this point. I wish to know what is the main difference between these 2 cases. When should I use each one of them? To a TDD beginner which one is easier to grasp? What is the drawbacks of each method? Is there any materials out there that discuss this topic specifically?

    Read the article

  • Should I add parameters to instance methods that use those instance fields as parameters?

    - by john smith optional
    I have an instance method that uses instance fields in its work. I can leave the method without that parameters as they're available to me, or I can add them to the parameter list, thus making my method more "generic" and not reliable on the class. On the other hand, additional parameters will be in parameters list. Which approach is preferable and why? Edit: at the moment I don't know if my method will be public or private. Edit2: clarification: both method and fields are instance level.

    Read the article

  • TDD vs. Productivity

    - by Nairou
    In my current project (a game, in C++), I decided that I would use Test Driven Development 100% during development. In terms of code quality, this has been great. My code has never been so well designed or so bug-free. I don't cringe when viewing code I wrote a year ago at the start of the project, and I have gained a much better sense for how to structure things, not only to be more easily testable, but to be simpler to implement and use. However... it has been a year since I started the project. Granted, I can only work on it in my spare time, but TDD is still slowing me down considerably compared to what I'm used to. I read that the slower development speed gets better over time, and I definitely do think up tests a lot more easily than I used to, but I've been at it for a year now and I'm still working at a snail's pace. Each time I think about the next step that needs work, I have to stop every time and think about how I would write a test for it, to allow me to write the actual code. I'll sometimes get stuck for hours, knowing exactly what code I want to write, but not knowing how to break it down finely enough to fully cover it with tests. Other times, I'll quickly think up a dozen tests, and spend an hour writing tests to cover a tiny piece of real code that would have otherwise taken a few minutes to write. Or, after finishing the 50th test to cover a particular entity in the game and all aspects of it's creation and usage, I look at my to-do list and see the next entity to be coded, and cringe in horror at the thought of writing another 50 similar tests to get it implemented. It's gotten to the point that, looking over the progress of the last year, I'm considering abandoning TDD for the sake of "getting the damn project finished". However, giving up the code quality that came with it is not something I'm looking forward to. I'm afraid that if I stop writing tests, then I'll slip out of the habit of making the code so modular and testable. Am I perhaps doing something wrong to still be so slow at this? Are there alternatives that speed up productivity without completely losing the benefits? TAD? Less test coverage? How do other people survive TDD without killing all productivity and motivation?

    Read the article

  • Best way to deal with a system without a user acceptance / testing phase

    - by billy.bob
    Historically I've been able to get away with making small changes to an in-house helpdesk system riding on a LAMP stack and just making a backup prior to editing. This has no user acceptance / testing phase and I work on the live .php files directly. However now the requirement has arisen that will require a bit more coding done, and I'm obviously not particularly happy about making these changes without a framework to support me. What would the best way forward be? I could just make another backup I suppose.

    Read the article

  • JSP Include: one large bean or bean for each include

    - by shylynx
    I want to refactor a webapp that consists of very distorted JSPs and servlets. Because we can't switch to a web framework easily we have to keep JSPs and Servlets, and now we are in doubt how to include pages into another and how to setup the use:bean-directives effectively. At the first step we want to decouple the code for the core-actions and the bean-creation into servlets. The servlets should forward to their corresponding pages, which should use the bean. The problem here is, that each jsp consists of different sub- and sub-sub-jsp that are included into another. Here is a shortend extract (because reality is more complex): head header top navigation actionspanel main header actionspanel foot footer Moreover each jsp (also the header and footer) use dynamic data. For example title and actionspanel can change on each page-reload or do have links and labels that depend on the processing by the preceding servlet. I know that jsp-include-directives should only be used for static content und should be avoided for dynamic content. But here we have very large pages, that consist of many parts. Now the core questions: Should I use one big bean for each page, so that each bean holds also data for header and footer beside its core data, so that each subsequent included jsp uses the same bean-directive? For example: DirectoryJSP <- DirectoryBean CompareJSP <- CompareBean Or should I use one bean for each jsp, so that each bean only holds the data for one jsp and its own purpose. For example: DirectoryJSP <- DirectoryBean HeaderJSP <- HeaderBean FooterJSP <- FooterBean CompareJSP <- CompareBean HeaderJSP <- HeaderBean FooterJSP <- FooterBean In the second case: should the subsequent beans be a member of the corresponding parent bean, so that only the parent bean is attached as attribute to the request? Or should each bean attached to the request?

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice for when to check if something needs to be done?

    - by changokun
    Let's say I have a function that does x. I pass it a variable, and if the variable is not null, it does some action. And I have an array of variables and I'm going to run this function on each one. Inside the function, it seems like a good practice is to check if the argument is null before proceeding. A null argument is not an error, it just causes an early return. I could loop through the array and pass each value to the function, and the function will work great. Is there any value to checking if the var is null and only calling the function if it is not null during the loop? This doubles up on the checking for null, but: Is there any gained value? Is there any gain on not calling a function? Any readability gain on the loop in the parent code? For the sake of my question, let's assume that checking for null will always be the case. I can see how checking for some object property might change over time, which makes the first check a bad idea. Pseudo code example: for(thing in array) { x(thing) } Versus: for(thing in array) { if(thing not null) x(thing) } If there are language-specific concerns, I'm a web developer working in PHP and JavaScript.

    Read the article

  • javac -cp : cannot find symbol problem [migrated]

    - by LivingThing
    I have 3 classes CustomerAddress, Customer and CustomerMain. Customer has a import statement : import org.abc.customers.CustomerAddress; While CustomerMain has an import statement : import org.abc.customers.CustomerAddress; import org.abc.customers.Customer; The package for all of these classes are package org.abc.customer Now, this program works fine on eclipse but when i try to compile and run on cmd prompt it would not compile javac CustomerAddress.java compiles fine then since Customer depends on CustomerAddress i give javac -cp . Customer.java but the compiler complains error cannot find symbol CustomerAddress Thanks

    Read the article

  • Clean way to use mutable implementation of Immutable interfaces for encapsulation

    - by dsollen
    My code is working on some compost relationship which creates a tree structure, class A has many children of type B, which has many children of type C etc. The lowest level class, call it bar, also points to a connected bar class. This effectively makes nearly every object in my domain inter-connected. Immutable objects would be problematic due to the expense of rebuilding almost all of my domain to make a single change to one class. I chose to go with an interface approach. Every object has an Immutable interface which only publishes the getter methods. I have controller objects which constructs the domain objects and thus has reference to the full objects, thus capable of calling the setter methods; but only ever publishes the immutable interface. Any change requested will go through the controller. So something like this: public interface ImmutableFoo{ public Bar getBar(); public Location getLocation(); } public class Foo implements ImmutableFoo{ private Bar bar; private Location location; @Override public Bar getBar(){ return Bar; } public void setBar(Bar bar){ this.bar=bar; } @Override public Location getLocation(){ return Location; } } public class Controller{ Private Map<Location, Foo> fooMap; public ImmutableFoo addBar(Bar bar){ Foo foo=fooMap.get(bar.getLocation()); if(foo!=null) foo.addBar(bar); return foo; } } I felt the basic approach seems sensible, however, when I speak to others they always seem to have trouble envisioning what I'm describing, which leaves me concerned that I may have a larger design issue then I'm aware of. Is it problematic to have domain objects so tightly coupled, or to use the quasi-mutable approach to modifying them? Assuming that the design approach itself isn't inherently flawed the particular discussion which left me wondering about my approach had to do with the presence of business logic in the domain objects. Currently I have my setter methods in the mutable objects do error checking and all other logic required to verify and make a change to the object. It was suggested that this should be pulled out into a service class, which applies all the business logic, to simplify my domain objects. I understand the advantage in mocking/testing and general separation of logic into two classes. However, with a service method/object It seems I loose some of the advantage of polymorphism, I can't override a base class to add in new error checking or business logic. It seems, if my polymorphic classes were complicated enough, I would end up with a service method that has to check a dozen flags to decide what error checking and business logic applies. So, for example, if I wanted to have a childFoo which also had a size field which should be compared to bar before adding par my current approach would look something like this. public class Foo implements ImmutableFoo{ public void addBar(Bar bar){ if(!getLocation().equals(bar.getLocation()) throw new LocationException(); this.bar=bar; } } public interface ImmutableChildFoo extends ImmutableFoo{ public int getSize(); } public ChildFoo extends Foo implements ImmutableChildFoo{ private int size; @Override public int getSize(){ return size; } @Override public void addBar(Bar bar){ if(getSize()<bar.getSize()){ throw new LocationException(); super.addBar(bar); } My colleague was suggesting instead having a service object that looks something like this (over simplified, the 'service' object would likely be more complex). public interface ImmutableFoo{ ///original interface, presumably used in other methods public Location getLocation(); public boolean isChildFoo(); } public interface ImmutableSizedFoo implements ImmutableFoo{ public int getSize(); } public class Foo implements ImmutableSizedFoo{ public Bar bar; @Override public void addBar(Bar bar){ this.bar=bar; } @Override public int getSize(){ //default size if no size is known return 0; } @Override public boolean isChildFoo return false; } } public ChildFoo extends Foo{ private int size; @Override public int getSize(){ return size; } @Override public boolean isChildFoo(); return true; } } public class Controller{ Private Map<Location, Foo> fooMap; public ImmutableSizedFoo addBar(Bar bar){ Foo foo=fooMap.get(bar.getLocation()); service.addBarToFoo(foo, bar); returned foo; } public class Service{ public static void addBarToFoo(Foo foo, Bar bar){ if(foo==null) return; if(!foo.getLocation().equals(bar.getLocation())) throw new LocationException(); if(foo.isChildFoo() && foo.getSize()<bar.getSize()) throw new LocationException(); foo.setBar(bar); } } } Is the recommended approach of using services and inversion of control inherently superior, or superior in certain cases, to overriding methods directly? If so is there a good way to go with the service approach while not loosing the power of polymorphism to override some of the behavior?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156  | Next Page >