Search Results

Search found 30213 results on 1209 pages for 'object serialization'.

Page 15/1209 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Breaking up a large PHP object used to abstract the database. Best practices?

    - by John Kershaw
    Two years ago it was thought a single object with functions such as $database->get_user_from_id($ID) would be a good idea. The functions return objects (not arrays), and the front-end code never worries about the database. This was great, until we started growing the database. There's now 30+ tables, and around 150 functions in the database object. It's getting impractical and unmanageable and I'm going to be breaking it up. What is a good solution to this problem? The project is large, so there's a limit to the extent I can change things. My current plan is to extend the current object for each table, then have the database object contain these. So, the above example would turn into (assume "user" is a table) $database->user->get_user_from_id($ID). Instead of one large file, we would have a file for every table.

    Read the article

  • Questioning one of the arguments for dependency injection: Why is creating an object graph hard?

    - by oberlies
    Dependency injection frameworks like Google Guice give the following motivation for their usage (source): To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph. Building object graphs by hand is labour intensive (...) and makes testing difficult. But I don't buy this argument: Even without dependency injection, I can write classes which are both easy to instantiate and convenient to test. E.g. the example from the Guice motivation page could be rewritten in the following way: class BillingService { private final CreditCardProcessor processor; private final TransactionLog transactionLog; // constructor for tests, taking all collaborators as parameters BillingService(CreditCardProcessor processor, TransactionLog transactionLog) { this.processor = processor; this.transactionLog = transactionLog; } // constructor for production, calling the (productive) constructors of the collaborators public BillingService() { this(new PaypalCreditCardProcessor(), new DatabaseTransactionLog()); } public Receipt chargeOrder(PizzaOrder order, CreditCard creditCard) { ... } } So there may be other arguments for dependency injection (which are out of scope for this question!), but easy creation of testable object graphs is not one of them, is it?

    Read the article

  • Is there an alternative to the term "calling object"?

    - by ybakos
    Let's suppose you've got a class defined (in pseudocode): class Puppy { // ... string sound = "Rawr!"; void bark() { print(sound); } } And say, given a Puppy instance, you call it's bark() method: Puppy p; p.bark(); Notice how bark() uses the member variable sound. In many contexts, I've seen folks describe sound as the member variable of the "calling object." My question is, what's a better term to use than "calling object?" To me, the object is not doing any calling. We know that member functions are in a way just functions with an implicit this or self parameter. I've come up with "receiving object," or "message recipient," which makes sense if you're down with the "messaging" paradigm. Do any of you happy hackers have a term that you like to use? I feel it should mean "the object upon which a method is called" and TOUWAMIC just doesn't cut it.

    Read the article

  • Only root object on request is deserialized when using Message.GetBody<>

    - by user324627
    I am attempting to create a wcf service that accepts any input (Action="*") and then deserialize the message after determining its type. For the purposes of testing deserialization I am currently hard-coding the type for the test service. I get no errors from the deserialization process, but only the outer object is populated after deserialization occurs. All inner fields are null. I can process the same request against the original wcf service successfully. I am deserializing this way, where knownTypes is a type list of expected types: DataContractSerializer ser = new DataContractSerializer(new createEligibilityRuleSet ().GetType(), knownTypes); createEligibilityRuleSet newReq = buf.CreateMessage().GetBody<createEligibilityRuleSet>(ser); Here is the class and sub-classes of the request object. These classes are generated by svcutil using a top down approach from an existing wsdl. I have tried replacing the XmlTypeAttributes with DataContracts and the XmlElements with DataMembers with no difference. It is the instance of CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest on the createEligibilityRuleSet object that is null. I have included the request retrieved from the request at the bottom /// <remarks/> [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("svcutil", "3.0.4506.2152")] [System.SerializableAttribute()] [System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()] [System.ComponentModel.DesignerCategoryAttribute("code")] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlTypeAttribute(AnonymousType = true, Namespace = "http://RulesEngineServicesLibrary/RulesEngineServices")] public partial class createEligibilityRuleSet { private CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest requestField; /// <remarks/> [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlElementAttribute(Form = System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchemaForm.Unqualified, IsNullable = true, Order = 0)] public CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest request { get { return this.requestField; } set { this.requestField = value; } } } /// <remarks/> [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("svcutil", "3.0.4506.2152")] [System.SerializableAttribute()] [System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()] [System.ComponentModel.DesignerCategoryAttribute("code")] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlTypeAttribute(Namespace = "http://RulesEngineServicesLibrary")] public partial class CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest : RulesEngineServicesSvcRequest { private string requestField; /// <remarks/> [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlElementAttribute(Form = System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchemaForm.Unqualified, Order = 0)] public string request { get { return this.requestField; } set { this.requestField = value; } } } [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(ApplyMemberEligibilitySvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CreateCompletionCriteriaRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CopyRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(DeleteRuleSetByIDSvcRequest))] [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("svcutil", "3.0.4506.2152")] [System.SerializableAttribute()] [System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()] [System.ComponentModel.DesignerCategoryAttribute("code")] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlTypeAttribute(Namespace = "http://RulesEngineServicesLibrary")] public partial class RulesEngineServicesSvcRequest : ServiceRequest { } /// <remarks/> [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(RulesEngineServicesSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CreateEligibilityRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(ApplyMemberEligibilitySvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CreateCompletionCriteriaRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(CopyRuleSetSvcRequest))] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlIncludeAttribute(typeof(DeleteRuleSetByIDSvcRequest))] [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("svcutil", "3.0.4506.2152")] [System.SerializableAttribute()] [System.Diagnostics.DebuggerStepThroughAttribute()] [System.ComponentModel.DesignerCategoryAttribute("code")] [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlTypeAttribute(Namespace = "http://FELibrary")] public partial class ServiceRequest { private string applicationIdField; /// <remarks/> [System.Xml.Serialization.XmlElementAttribute(Form = System.Xml.Schema.XmlSchemaForm.Unqualified, Order = 0)] public string applicationId { get { return this.applicationIdField; } set { this.applicationIdField = value; } } } Request from client comes on Message body as below. Retrieved from Message at runtime. <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope" xmlns:rul="http://RulesEngineServicesLibrary/RulesEngineServices"> <soap:Header/> <soap:Body> <rul:createEligibilityRuleSet> <request> <applicationId>test</applicationId> <request>Perf Rule Set1</request> </request> </rul:createEligibilityRuleSet> </soap:Body> </soap:Envelope>

    Read the article

  • Serializing a part of object graph

    - by Felix
    Hi all, I have a problem regarding Java custom serialization. I have a graph of objects and want to configure where to stop when I serialize a root object from client to server. Let's make it a bit concrete, clear by giving a sample scenario. I have Classes of type Company Employee (abstract) Manager extends Employee Secretary extends Employee Analyst extends Employee Project Here are the relations: Company(1)---(n)Employee Manager(1)---(n)Project Analyst(1)---(n)Project Imagine, I'm on the client side and I want to create a new company, assign it 10 employees (new or some existing) and send this new company to the server. What I expect in this scenario is to serialize the company and all bounding employees to the server side, because I'll save the relations on the database. So far no problem, since the default Java serialization mechanism serializes the whole object graph, excluding the field which are static or transient. My goal is about the following scenario. Imagine, I loaded a company and its 1000 employees from the server to the client side. Now I only want to rename the company's name (or some other field, that directly belongs to the company) and update this record. This time, I want to send only the company object to the server side and not the whole list of employees (I just update the name, the employees are in this use case irrelevant). My aim also includes the configurability of saying, transfer the company AND the employees but not the Project-Relations, you must stop there. Do you know any possibility of achieving this in a generic way, without implementing the writeObject, readObject for every single Entity-Object? What would be your suggestions? I would really appreciate your answers. I'm open to any ideas and am ready to answer your questions in case something is not clear.

    Read the article

  • Serializing an extended form object

    - by andyperfect
    I've been reading up on this whole subject, but I never came across this specific problem. I already understand that the whole idea of serializing an entire form is a horrible idea and just doesn't work. But, I am encountering a bit of a different problem. I have a class that inherits the "button" form object, that I call DataButton. Now for my problem. I want to be able to serialize this class, but I don't need any of the information from the actual button class. Is there any way to bypass the fact that I can't set the button form object to Serializable() and notify VB that when serialization is to occur, it should simply skip over that information? Theoretically, if such a procedure were possible, I'd be able to do the entire serialization without a hitch. I came up with the idea earlier of removing the "inherits" feature from the class, and having simply a button within the class, but that makes my program really difficult to work with as I am constantly changing the location, size, backgroundImage, text, and whatnot. Thus, immediate updates would be much tougher to work with. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • spl_object_hash for PHP < 5.2 (unique ID for object instances)

    - by Rowan
    I'm trying to get unique IDs for object instances in PHP 5+. The function, spl_object_hash() is available from PHP 5.2 but I'm wondering if there's a workaround for older versions. There are a couple of functions in the comments on php.net but they're not working for me. The first (simplified): function spl_object_hash($object){ if (is_object($object)){ return md5((string)$object); } return null; } does not work with native objects (such as DOMDocument), and the second: function spl_object_hash($object){ if (is_object($object)){ ob_start(); var_dump($object); $dump = ob_get_contents(); ob_end_clean(); if (preg_match('/^object\(([a-z0-9_]+)\)\#(\d)+/i', $dump, $match)) { return md5($match[1] . $match[2]); } } return null; } looks like it could be a major performance buster! Does anybody have anything up their sleeve?

    Read the article

  • PHP: How do I access child properties from a method in a base object?

    - by Nick
    I'd like for all of my objects to be able to return a JSON string of themselves. So I created a base class for all of my objects to extend, with an AsJSON() method: class BaseObject { public function AsJSON() { $JSON=array(); foreach ($this as $key = $value) { if(is_null($value)) continue; $JSON[$key] = $value; } return json_encode($JSON); } } And then extend my child classes from that: class Package extends BaseObject { ... } So in my code, I expect to do this: $Box = new Package; $Box-SetID('123'); $Box-SetName('12x8x6'); $Box-SetBoxX('12'); $Box-SetBoxY('8'); $Box-SetBoxZ('6'); echo $Box-AsJSON(); But the JSON string it returns only contains the BaseClass's properties, not the child properties. How do I modify my AsJSON() function so that $this refers to the child's properties, not the parent's?

    Read the article

  • Why "object reference not set to an instance of an object" doesn't tell us which object?

    - by Saeed Neamati
    We're launching a system, and we sometimes get the famous exception NullReferenceException with the message Object reference not set to an instance of an object. However, in a method where we have almost 20 objects, having a log which says an object is null, is really of no use at all. It's like telling you, when you are the security agent of a seminar, that a man among 100 attendees is a terrorist. That's really of no use to you at all. You should get more information, if you want to detect which man is the threatening man. Likewise, if we want to remove the bug, we do need to know which object is null. Now, something has obsessed my mind for several months, and that is: Why .NET doesn't give us the name, or at least the type of the object reference, which is null?. Can't it understand the type from reflection or any other source? Also, what are the best practices to understand which object is null? Should we always test nullability of objects in these contexts manually and log the result? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Associating an object with another object for GC clearup

    - by thecoop
    Is there any way of associating an object instance (object A) with a second object (object B) in a generalised way, so that when B gets collected A becomes eligable for collection? The same behaviour that would happen if B had an instance variable pointing to A, but without explicitly changing the class definition of B, and being able to do this in a dynamic way? The same sort of effect could be done by using the Component.Disposed event in a funky way, but I don't want to make B disposable EDIT I'm basically creating a cache of objects that are associated with a single 'root' object, and I don't want the cache to be static, as there can be lots of root objects using different caches, so lots of memory will be used up when a root object is no longer used but the cached objects are still around. So, I want a collection of cached objects to be associated with each 'root' object, without changing the root object definition. Sort of like metadata of an extra object reference attached to each root object instance. That way, each collection will get collected when the root object is collected, and not hang around like they would if a static cache was used.

    Read the article

  • How to marshal an object and its content (also objects)

    - by Waldo Spek
    I have a question for which I suspect the answer is a bit complex. At this moment I am programming a DLL (class library) in C#. This DLL uses a 3rd party library and therefore deals with 3rd party objects of which I do not have the source code. Now I am planning to create another DLL, which is going to be used in a later stadium in my application. This second DLL should use the 3rd party objects (with corresponding object states) created by the first DLL. Luckily the 3rd party objects extend the MarshalByRefObject class. I can marshal the objects using System.Runtime.Remoting.Marshal(...). I then serialize the objects using a BinaryFormatter and store the objects as a byte[] array. All goes well. I can deserialize and unmarshal in a the opposite way and end up with my original 3rd party objects...so it appears... Nevertheless, when calling methods on my 3rd party deserialized objects I get object internal exceptions. Normally these methods return other 3rd party objects, but (obviously - I guess) now these objects are missing because they weren't serialized. Now my global question: how would I go about marshalling/serializing all the objects which my 3rd party objects reference...and cascade down the "reference tree" to obtain a full and complete serialized object? Right now my guess is to preprocess: obtain all the objects and build my own custom object and serialize it. But I'm hoping there is some other way...

    Read the article

  • Xml Serialization and the [Obsolete] Attribute

    - by PSteele
    I learned something new today: Starting with .NET 3.5, the XmlSerializer no longer serializes properties that are marked with the Obsolete attribute.  I can’t say that I really agree with this.  Marking something Obsolete is supposed to be something for a developer to deal with in source code.  Once an object is serialized to XML, it becomes data.  I think using the Obsolete attribute as both a compiler flag as well as controlling XML serialization is a bad idea. In this post, I’ll show you how I ran into this and how I got around it. The Setup Let’s start with some make-believe code to demonstrate the issue.  We have a simple data class for storing some information.  We use XML serialization to read and write the data: public class MyData { public int Age { get; set; } public string FirstName { get; set; } public string LastName { get; set; } public List<String> Hobbies { get; set; }   public MyData() { this.Hobbies = new List<string>(); } } Now a few simple lines of code to serialize it to XML: static void Main(string[] args) { var data = new MyData {    FirstName = "Zachary", LastName = "Smith", Age = 50, Hobbies = {"Mischief", "Sabotage"}, }; var serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof (MyData)); serializer.Serialize(Console.Out, data); Console.ReadKey(); } And this is what we see on the console: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="IBM437"?> <MyData xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <Age>50</Age> <FirstName>Zachary</FirstName> <LastName>Smith</LastName> <Hobbies> <string>Mischief</string> <string>Sabotage</string> </Hobbies> </MyData>   The Change So we decided to track the hobbies as a list of strings.  As always, things change and we have more information we need to store per-hobby.  We create a custom “Hobby” object, add a List<Hobby> to our MyData class and we obsolete the old “Hobbies” list to let developers know they shouldn’t use it going forward: public class Hobby { public string Name { get; set; } public int Frequency { get; set; } public int TimesCaught { get; set; }   public override string ToString() { return this.Name; } } public class MyData { public int Age { get; set; } public string FirstName { get; set; } public string LastName { get; set; } [Obsolete("Use HobbyData collection instead.")] public List<String> Hobbies { get; set; } public List<Hobby> HobbyData { get; set; }   public MyData() { this.Hobbies = new List<string>(); this.HobbyData = new List<Hobby>(); } } Here’s the kicker: This serialization is done in another application.  The consumers of the XML will be older clients (clients that expect only a “Hobbies” collection) as well as newer clients (that support the new “HobbyData” collection).  This really shouldn’t be a problem – the obsolete attribute is metadata for .NET compilers.  Unfortunately, the XmlSerializer also looks at the compiler attribute to determine what items to serialize/deserialize.  Here’s an example of our problem: static void Main(string[] args) { var xml = @"<?xml version=""1.0"" encoding=""IBM437""?> <MyData xmlns:xsi=""http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"" xmlns:xsd=""http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema""> <Age>50</Age> <FirstName>Zachary</FirstName> <LastName>Smith</LastName> <Hobbies> <string>Mischief</string> <string>Sabotage</string> </Hobbies> </MyData>"; var serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(MyData)); var stream = new StringReader(xml); var data = (MyData) serializer.Deserialize(stream);   if( data.Hobbies.Count != 2) { throw new ApplicationException("Hobbies did not deserialize properly"); } } If you run the code above, you’ll hit the exception.  Even though the XML contains a “<Hobbies>” node, the obsolete attribute prevents the node from being processed.  This will break old clients that use the new library, but don’t yet access the HobbyData collection. The Fix This fix (in this case), isn’t too painful.  The XmlSerializer exposes events for times when it runs into items (Elements, Attributes, Nodes, etc…) it doesn’t know what to do with.  We can hook in to those events and check and see if we’re getting something that we want to support (like our “Hobbies” node). Here’s a way to read in the old XML data with full support of the new data structure (and keeping the Hobbies collection marked as obsolete): static void Main(string[] args) { var xml = @"<?xml version=""1.0"" encoding=""IBM437""?> <MyData xmlns:xsi=""http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"" xmlns:xsd=""http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema""> <Age>50</Age> <FirstName>Zachary</FirstName> <LastName>Smith</LastName> <Hobbies> <string>Mischief</string> <string>Sabotage</string> </Hobbies> </MyData>"; var serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(MyData)); serializer.UnknownElement += serializer_UnknownElement; var stream = new StringReader(xml); var data = (MyData)serializer.Deserialize(stream);   if (data.Hobbies.Count != 2) { throw new ApplicationException("Hobbies did not deserialize properly"); } }   static void serializer_UnknownElement(object sender, XmlElementEventArgs e) { if( e.Element.Name != "Hobbies") { return; }   var target = (MyData) e.ObjectBeingDeserialized; foreach(XmlElement hobby in e.Element.ChildNodes) { target.Hobbies.Add(hobby.InnerText); target.HobbyData.Add(new Hobby{Name = hobby.InnerText}); } } As you can see, we hook in to the “UnknownElement” event.  Once we determine it’s our “Hobbies” node, we deserialize it ourselves – as well as populating the new HobbyData collection.  In this case, we have a fairly simple solution to a small change in XML layout.  If you make more extensive changes, it would probably be easier to do some custom serialization to support older data. A sample project with all of this code is available from my repository on bitbucket. Technorati Tags: XmlSerializer,Obsolete,.NET

    Read the article

  • Serialize .Net object to json, controlled using xml attributes

    - by sprocketonline
    I have a .Net object which I've been serializing to Xml and is decorated with Xml attributes. I would now like to serialize the same object to Json, preferably using the Newtonsoft Json.Net library. I'd like to go directly from the .Net object in memory to a Json string (without serializing to Xml first). I do not wish to add any Json attributes to the class, but instead would like for the Json serializer use the existing Xml attributes. [XmlRoot("hello")] public class world{ [XmlIgnore] public int ignoreMe{ get; } [XmlElement("foo")] public int bar{ get; } [XmlElement("marco")] public int polo{ get; } } becomes "hello":{ "foo":0, "marco":0 }

    Read the article

  • Create an Xml file from an object

    - by remi bourgarel
    I work as a web developer with a web designer and we usually do like this : - I create the system , I generate some Xml files - the designer display the xml files with xslt Nothing new. My problem is that I use Xml Serialization to create my xml files, but I never use Deserialization. So I'd like to know if there is a way to avoid fix like these : empty setter for my property empty parameter-less constructor implement IXmlSerializable and throw "notimplementedexception" on deserialization do a copy of the class with public fields

    Read the article

  • communication between 2 programs written in different language - Serialization ?

    - by trojanwarrior3000
    when is serialization,marshaling etc required during communication between programs residing across 2 different machines /network/Internet? Suppose I have a client program in java/flash and a server program in C. Can't I implement communication using a custom protocol of my own ? I guess so. When is serialization etc needed?I am aware Java RMI,CORBA etc have these mechanisms. But why? Is it a must? please enlighten me?

    Read the article

  • Create an Xml file from an object (c#)

    - by remi bourgarel
    Hi All, I work as a web developer with a web designer and we usually do like this : - I create the system , I generate some Xml files - the designer display the xml files with xslt Nothing new. My problem is that I use Xml Serialization to create my xml files, but I never use Deserialization. So I'd like to know if there is a way to avoid fix like these : empty setter for my property empty parameter-less constructor implement IXmlSerializable and throw "notimplementedexception" on deserialization do a copy of the class with public fields thanks.

    Read the article

  • Clone LINQ To SQL object Extension Method throws object dispose exception....

    - by gtas
    Hello all, I have this extension method for cloning my LINQ To SQL objects: public static T CloneObjectGraph<T>(this T obj) where T : class { var serializer = new DataContractSerializer(typeof(T), null, int.MaxValue, false, true, null); using (var ms = new System.IO.MemoryStream()) { serializer.WriteObject(ms, obj); ms.Position = 0; return (T)serializer.ReadObject(ms); } } But while i carry objects with not all references loaded, while qyuerying with DataLoadOptions, sometimes it throws the object disposed exception, but thing is I don't ask for references that is not loaded (null). e.g. I have Customer with many references and i just need to carry on memory the Address reference EntityRef< and i don't Load anything else. But while i clone the object this exception forces me to load all the EntitySet< references with the Customer object, which might be too much and slow down the application speed. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Using the same CArchive object for archive and un-archive

    - by bdhar
    Following is a sample code: CFile serFile; serFile.Open(_T("Person.ser"), CFile::modeCreate | CFile::modeWrite); CArchive writer(&serFile, CArchive::store); me.Serialize(writer); writer.Close(); serFile.Close(); serFile.Open(_T("Person.ser"), CFile::modeRead); CArchive reader(&serFile, CArchive::load); CPerson clone; clone.Serialize(reader); reader.Close(); serFile.Close(); Here, I have a writer which archives the object me. Then, I use another CArchive object reader to un-archive it. Is it possible to re-construct or set any property of writer to make it, the reader instead of declaring another CArchive object reader? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Formatting dates when serialising an object in C# (2.0)

    - by zoman
    Hi, I'm xml-serializing a object with a large number of properties and I have two properties with DateTime types. I'd like to format the dates for the serialized output. I don't really want to implement the ISerializable interface and overwrite the serialization for every property. Is there any other way to achieve this? (I'm using C#, .NET 2) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • If you use XML Serialization how do you validate data?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I am planning to try to use XML Serialization in C# but I am wondering if I get a .xml file how do I check if the xml file confirms to the right type? Like usually you would make a schema that you can validate against to make sure if it confirms to the right format. Can you hook a schema up to to XML Serialization or does it do this checking automatically? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Use a custom value object or a Guid as an entity identifier in a distributed system?

    - by Kazark
    tl;dr I've been told that in domain-driven design, an identifier for an entity could be a custom value object, i.e. something other than Guid, string, int, etc. Can this really be advisable in a distributed system? Long version I will invent an situation analogous to the one I am currently facing. Say I have a distributed system in which a central concept is an egg. The system allows you to order eggs and see spending reports and inventory-centric data such as quantity on hand, usage, valuation and what have you. There area variety of services backing these behaviors. And say there is also another app which allows you to compose recipes that link to a particular egg type. Now egg type is broken down by the species—ostrich, goose, duck, chicken, quail. This is fine and dandy because it means that users don't end up with ostrich eggs when they wanted quail eggs and whatnot. However, we've been getting complaints because jumbo chicken eggs are not even close to equivalent to small ones. The price is different, and they really aren't substitutable in recipes. And here we thought we were doing users a favor by not overwhelming them with too many options. Currently each of the services (say, OrderSubmitter, EggTypeDefiner, SpendingReportsGenerator, InventoryTracker, RecipeCreator, RecipeTracker, or whatever) are identifying egg types with an industry-standard integer representation the species (let's call it speciesCode). We realize we've goofed up because this change could effect every service. There are two basic proposed solutions: Use a predefined identifier type like Guid as the eggTypeID throughout all the services, but make EggTypeDefiner the only service that knows that this maps to a speciesCode and eggSizeCode (and potentially to an isOrganic flag in the future, or whatever). Use an EggTypeID value object which is a combination of speciesCode and eggSizeCode in every service. I've proposed the first solution because I'm hoping it better encapsulates the definition of what an egg type is in the EggTypeDefiner and will be more resilient to changes, say if some people now want to differentiate eggs by whether or not they are "organic". The second solution is being suggested by some people who understand DDD better than I do in the hopes that less enrichment and lookup will be necessary that way, with the justification that in DDD using a value object as an ID is fine. Also, they are saying that EggTypeDefiner is not a domain and EggType is not an entity and as such should not have a Guid for an ID. However, I'm not sure the second solution is viable. This "value object" is going to have to be serialized into JSON and URLs for GET requests and used with a variety of technologies (C#, JavaScript...) which breaks encapsulation and thus removes any behavior of the identifier value object (is either of the fields optional? etc.) Is this a case where we want to avoid something that would normally be fine in DDD because we are trying to do DDD in a distributed fashion? Summary Can it be a good idea to use a custom value object as an identifier in a distributed system (solution #2)?

    Read the article

  • JavaScriptSerializer deserialize object "collection" as property in object failing

    - by bill
    Hi All, I have a js object structured like: object.property1 = "some string"; object.property2 = "some string"; object.property3.property1 = "some string"; object.property3.property2 = "some string"; object.property3.property2 = "some string"; i'm using JSON.stringify(object) to pass this with ajax request. When i try to deserialize this using JavaScriptSerializer.Deserialize as a Dictionary i get the following error: No parameterless constructor defined for type of 'System.String'. This exact same process is working for regular object with non "collection" properties.. thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • Object mapping in objective-c (iphone) from JSON

    - by freshfunk
    For my iPhone app, I'm consuming a RESTful service and getting JSON. I've found libraries to deserialize this into an NSDictionary. However, I'm wondering if there are any libraries to deserialize the JSON/NSDictionary/Property List into my object (an arbitrary one on my side). The java equivalent would be the object-relational mappers although the sort of object mapping I'm looking for is relatively straightforward (simple data types, no complex relationships, etc.). I noticed that Objective-C does have introspection so it seems theoretically possible but I haven't found a library to do it. Or is there a simple way to load an object from an NSDictionary/Property List object that doesn't require modification every time the object changes? For example: { "id" : "user1", "name" : "mister foobar" "age" : 20 } gets loaded into object @interface User : NSObject { NSString *id; NSString *name; int *age; }

    Read the article

  • using an existing object in ajax-called php files?

    - by noname
    i have in my index.php created an object and set some property values. then i use jquery ajax to call some php files and i want to use the object created. i tried this one but it didn´t work: ---- in index.php ---- // Create a new object session_start(); $object = new stdClass(); $object->value = 'something'; $object->other_value = 'something else'; // Save the object in the user's session $_SESSION['object'] = $object; ---- Then in the next page that loads from AJAX ---- // Start the session saved from last time session_start(); // Get the object out $object = $_SESSION['object']; // Prints "something" print $object->value; how do i accomplish this. cause i dont want to recreate the object in every ajaxcalled php script. thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • What's the benefit of object-oriented programming over procedural programming?

    - by niko
    I'm trying to understand the difference between procedural languages like C and object-oriented languages like C++. I've never used C++, but I've been discussing with my friends on how to differentiate the two. I've been told C++ has object-oriented concepts as well as public and private modes for definition of variables: things C does not have. I've never had to use these for while developing programs in Visual Basic.NET: what are the benefits of these? I've also been told that if a variable is public, it can be accessed anywhere, but it's not clear how that's different from a global variable in a language like C. It's also not clear how a private variable differs from a local variable. Another thing I've heard is that, for security reasons, if a function needs to be accessed it should be inherited first. The use-case is that an administrator should only have as much rights as they need and not everything, but it seems a conditional would work as well: if ( login == "admin") { // invoke the function } Why is this not ideal? Given that there seems to be a procedural way to do everything object-oriented, why should I care about object-oriented programming?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >