Search Results

Search found 34146 results on 1366 pages for 'program design'.

Page 15/1366 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Need suggestion for Mutiple Windows application design

    - by King Chan
    This was previously posted in StackOverflow, I just moved to here... I am using VS2008, MVVM, WPF, Prism to make a mutiple window CRM Application. I am using MidWinow in my MainWindow, I want Any ViewModel would able to make request to MainWindow to create/add/close MidChildWindow, ChildWindow(from WPF Toolkit), Window (the Window type). ViewModel can get the DialogResult from the ChildWindow its excutes. MainWindow have control on all opened window types. Here is my current approach: I made Dictionary of each of the windows type and stores them into MainWindow class. For 1, i.e in a CustomerInformationView, its CustomerInformationViewModel can execute EditCommand and use EventAggregator to tell MainWindow to open a new ChildWindow. CustomerInformationViewModel: CustomerEditView ceView = new CustomerEditView (); CustomerEditViewModel ceViewModel = CustomerEditViewModel (); ceView.DataContext = ceViewModel; ChildWindow cWindow = new ChildWindow(); cWindow.Content = ceView; MainWindow.EvntAggregator.GetEvent<NewWindowEvent>().Publish(new WindowEventArgs(ceViewModel.ViewModeGUID, cWindow )); cWindow.Show(); Notice that all my ViewModel will generates a Guid for help identifies the ChildWindow from MainWindow's dictionary. Since I will only be using 1 View 1 ViewModel for every Window. For 2. In CustomerInformationViewModel I can get DialogResult by OnClosing event from ChildWindow, in CustomerEditViewModel can use Guid to tell MainWindow to close the ChildWindow. Here is little question and problems: Is it good idea to use Guid here? Or should I use HashKey from ChildWindow? My MainWindows contains windows reference collections. So whenever window close, it will get notifies to remove from the collection by OnClosing event. But all the Windows itself doesn't know about its associated Guid, so when I remove it, I have to search for every KeyValuePair to compares... I still kind of feel wrong associate ViewModel's Guid for ChildWindow, it would make more sense if ChildWindow has it own ID then ViewModel associate with it... But most important, is there any better approach on this design? How can I improve this better?

    Read the article

  • Process for beginning a Ruby on Rails project

    - by Daniel Beardsley
    I'm about to begin a Ruby on Rails project and I'd love to hear how others go through the process of starting an application design. I have quite a bit of experience with RoR, but don't have that many starting from scratch with only a vision experiences and would appreciate the wisdom of others who've been there. I'm looking for an order of events, reasons for the order, and maybe why each part is important. I can think of a few starting points, but I'm not sure where it's best to begin Model design and relationships (entities, how they relate, and their attributes) Think of user use-cases (or story-boards) and implement the minimum to get these done Create Model unit-tests then create the necessary migrations and AR models to get the tests to pass Hack out the most basic version of the simplest part of your application and go from there Start with a template for a rails app (like http://github.com/thoughtbot/suspenders) Do the boring gruntwork first (User auth, session management, ...) ...

    Read the article

  • Difference between Factory Method and Abstract Factory design patterns using C#.Net

    - by nijhawan.saurabh
    First of all I'll just put both these patterns in context and describe their intent as in the GOF book: Factory Method: Define an interface for creating an object, but let subclasses decide which class to instantiate. Factory Method lets a class defer instantiation to subclasses.   Abstract Factory: Provide an interface for creating families of related or dependent objects without specifying their concrete classes.   Points to note:   Abstract factory pattern adds a layer of abstraction to the factory method pattern. The type of factory is not known to the client at compile time, this information is passed to the client at runtime (How it is passed is again dependent on the system, you may store this information in configuration files and the client can read it on execution). While implementing Abstract factory pattern, the factory classes can have multiple factory methods. In Abstract factory, a factory is capable of creating more than one type of product (Simpilar products are grouped together in a factory)   Sample implementation of factory method pattern   Let's see the class diagram first:                   ProductFactory.cs // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public abstract class ProductFactory     {         /// <summary>         /// </summary>         /// <returns>         /// </returns>         public abstract Product CreateProductInstance();     } }     ProductAFactory.cs // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductAFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductAFactory:ProductFactory     {         public override Product CreateProductInstance()         {             return new ProductA();         }     } }         // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductBFactory.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductBFactory:ProductFactory     {         public override Product CreateProductInstance()         {             return new ProductB();           }     } }     // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="Product.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public abstract class Product     {         public abstract string Name { get; set; }     } }     // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductA.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductA:Product     {         public ProductA()         {               Name = "ProductA";         }           public override string Name { get; set; }     } }       // ----------------------------------------------------------------------- // <copyright file="ProductB.cs" company=""> // TODO: Update copyright text. // </copyright> // -----------------------------------------------------------------------   namespace FactoryMethod {     using System;     using System.Collections.Generic;     using System.Linq;     using System.Text;       /// <summary>     /// TODO: Update summary.     /// </summary>     public class ProductB:Product     {          public ProductB()         {               Name = "ProductA";         }         public override string Name { get; set; }     } }     Program.cs using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text;   namespace FactoryMethod {     class Program     {         static void Main(string[] args)         {             ProductFactory pf = new ProductAFactory();               Product product = pf.CreateProductInstance();             Console.WriteLine(product.Name);         }     } }       Normal 0 false false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

    Read the article

  • Improvements to Joshua Bloch's Builder Design Pattern?

    - by Jason Fotinatos
    Back in 2007, I read an article about Joshua Blochs take on the "builder pattern" and how it could be modified to improve the overuse of constructors and setters, especially when an object has a large number of properties, most of which are optional. A brief summary of this design pattern is articled here [http://rwhansen.blogspot.com/2007/07/theres-builder-pattern-that-joshua.html]. I liked the idea, and have been using it since. The problem with it, while it is very clean and nice to use from the client perspective, implementing it can be a pain in the bum! There are so many different places in the object where a single property is reference, and thus creating the object, and adding a new property takes a lot of time. So...I had an idea. First, an example object in Joshua Bloch's style: Josh Bloch Style: public class OptionsJoshBlochStyle { private final String option1; private final int option2; // ...other options here <<<< public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private String option1; private int option2; // other options here <<<<< public Builder option1(String option1) { this.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.option2 = option2; return this; } public OptionsJoshBlochStyle build() { return new OptionsJoshBlochStyle(this); } } private OptionsJoshBlochStyle(Builder builder) { this.option1 = builder.option1; this.option2 = builder.option2; // other options here <<<<<< } public static void main(String[] args) { OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation1 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); OptionsJoshBlochStyle optionsVariation2 = new OptionsJoshBlochStyle.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } Now my "improved" version: public class Options { // note that these are not final private String option1; private int option2; // ...other options here public String getOption1() { return option1; } public int getOption2() { return option2; } public static class Builder { private final Options options = new Options(); public Builder option1(String option1) { this.options.option1 = option1; return this; } public Builder option2(int option2) { this.options.option2 = option2; return this; } public Options build() { return options; } } private Options() { } public static void main(String[] args) { Options optionsVariation1 = new Options.Builder().option1("firefox").option2(1).build(); Options optionsVariation2 = new Options.Builder().option1("chrome").option2(2).build(); } } As you can see in my "improved version", there are 2 less places in which we need to add code about any addition properties (or options, in this case)! The only negative that I can see is that the instance variables of the outer class are not able to be final. But, the class is still immutable without this. Is there really any downside to this improvement in maintainability? There has to be a reason which he repeated the properties within the nested class that I'm not seeing?

    Read the article

  • The Template Method Design Pattern using C# .Net

    - by nijhawan.saurabh
    First of all I'll just put this pattern in context and describe its intent as in the GOF book:   Template Method: Define the skeleton of an algorithm in an operation, deferring some steps to Subclasses. Template Method lets subclasses redefine certain steps of an algorithm without changing the Algorithm's Structure.    Usage: When you are certain about the High Level steps involved in an Algorithm/Work flow you can use the Template Pattern which allows the Base Class to define the Sequence of the Steps but permits the Sub classes to alter the implementation of any/all steps.   Example in the .Net framework: The most common example is the Asp.Net Page Life Cycle. The Page Life Cycle has a few methods which are called in a sequence but we have the liberty to modify the functionality of any of the methods by overriding them.   Sample implementation of Template Method Pattern:   Let's see the class diagram first:            Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standard;}   And here goes the code:EmailBase.cs     1 using System;     2 using System.Collections.Generic;     3 using System.Linq;     4 using System.Text;     5 using System.Threading.Tasks;     6      7 namespace TemplateMethod     8 {     9     public abstract class EmailBase    10     {    11     12         public bool SendEmail()    13         {    14             if (CheckEmailAddress() == true) // Method1 in the sequence    15             {    16                 if (ValidateMessage() == true) // Method2 in the sequence    17                 {    18                     if (SendMail() == true) // Method3 in the sequence    19                     {    20                         return true;    21                     }    22                     else    23                     {    24                         return false;    25                     }    26     27                 }    28                 else    29                 {    30                     return false;    31                 }    32     33             }    34             else    35             {    36                 return false;    37     38             }    39     40     41         }    42     43         protected abstract bool CheckEmailAddress();    44         protected abstract bool ValidateMessage();    45         protected abstract bool SendMail();    46     47     48     }    49 }    50    EmailYahoo.cs      1 using System;     2 using System.Collections.Generic;     3 using System.Linq;     4 using System.Text;     5 using System.Threading.Tasks;     6      7 namespace TemplateMethod     8 {     9     public class EmailYahoo:EmailBase    10     {    11     12         protected override bool CheckEmailAddress()    13         {    14             Console.WriteLine("Checking Email Address : YahooEmail");    15             return true;    16         }    17         protected override bool ValidateMessage()    18         {    19             Console.WriteLine("Validating Email Message : YahooEmail");    20             return true;    21         }    22     23     24         protected override bool SendMail()    25         {    26             Console.WriteLine("Semding Email : YahooEmail");    27             return true;    28         }    29     30     31     }    32 }    33   EmailGoogle.cs      1 using System;     2 using System.Collections.Generic;     3 using System.Linq;     4 using System.Text;     5 using System.Threading.Tasks;     6      7 namespace TemplateMethod     8 {     9     public class EmailGoogle:EmailBase    10     {    11     12         protected override bool CheckEmailAddress()    13         {    14             Console.WriteLine("Checking Email Address : GoogleEmail");    15             return true;    16         }    17         protected override bool ValidateMessage()    18         {    19             Console.WriteLine("Validating Email Message : GoogleEmail");    20             return true;    21         }    22     23     24         protected override bool SendMail()    25         {    26             Console.WriteLine("Semding Email : GoogleEmail");    27             return true;    28         }    29     30     31     }    32 }    33   Program.cs      1 using System;     2 using System.Collections.Generic;     3 using System.Linq;     4 using System.Text;     5 using System.Threading.Tasks;     6      7 namespace TemplateMethod     8 {     9     class Program    10     {    11         static void Main(string[] args)    12         {    13             Console.WriteLine("Please choose an Email Account to send an Email:");    14             Console.WriteLine("Choose 1 for Google");    15             Console.WriteLine("Choose 2 for Yahoo");    16             string choice = Console.ReadLine();    17     18             if (choice == "1")    19             {    20                 EmailBase email = new EmailGoogle(); // Rather than newing it up here, you may use a factory to do so.    21                 email.SendEmail();    22     23             }    24             if (choice == "2")    25             {    26                 EmailBase email = new EmailYahoo(); // Rather than newing it up here, you may use a factory to do so.    27                 email.SendEmail();    28             }    29         }    30     }    31 }    32    Final Words: It's very obvious that why the Template Method Pattern is a popular pattern, everything at last revolves around Algorithms and if you are clear with the steps involved it makes real sense to delegate the duty of implementing the step's functionality to the sub classes. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standard;}

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for logging changes in parent/child objects saved to database

    - by andrew
    I’ve got a 2 database tables in parent/child relationship as one-many. I’ve got three classes representing the data in these two tables: Parent Class { Public int ID {get; set;} .. other properties } Child Class { Public int ID {get;set;} Public int ParentID {get; set;} .. other properties } TogetherClass { Public Parent Parent; Public List<Child> ChildList; } Lastly I’ve got a client and server application – I’m in control of both ends so can make changes to both programs as I need to. Client makes a request for ParentID and receives a Together Class for the matching parent, and all of the child records. The client app may make changes to the children – add new children, remove or modify existing ones. Client app then sends the Together Class back to the server app. Server app needs to update the parent and child records in the database. In addition I would like to be able to log the changes – I’m doing this by having 2 separate tables one for Parent, one for child; each containing the same columns as the original plus date time modified, by whom and a list of the changes. I’m unsure as to the best approach to detect the changes in records – new records, records to be deleted, records with no fields changed, records with some fields changed. I figure I need to read the parent & children records and compare those to the ones in the Together Class. Strategy A: If Together class’s child record has an ID of say 0, that indicates a new record; insert. Any deleted child records are no longer in the Together Class; see if any of the comparison child records are not found in the Together class and delete if not found (Compare using ID). Check each child record for changes and if changed log. Strategy B: Make a new Updated TogetherClass UpdatedClass { Public Parent Parent {get; set} Public List<Child> ListNewChild {get;set;} Public List<Child> DeletedChild {get;set;} Public List<Child> ExistingChild {get;set;} // used for no changes and modified rows } And then process as per the list. The reason why I’m asking for ideas is that both of these solutions don’t seem optimal to me and I suspect this problem has been solved already – some kind of design pattern ? I am aware of one potential problem in this general approach – that where Client App A requests a record; App B requests same record; A then saves changes; B then saves changes which may overwrite changes A made. This is a separate locking issue which I’ll raise a separate question for if I’ve got trouble implementing. The actual implementation is c#, SQL Server and WCF between client and server - sharing a library containing the class implementations. Apologies if this is a duplicate post – I tried searching various terms without finding a match though.

    Read the article

  • Tips On Using The Service Contracts Import Program

    - by LuciaC
    Prior to release 12.1 there was no supported way to import contracts into the EBS Service Contracts application - there were no public APIs nor contract load programs provided.  From release 12.1 onwards the 'Service Contracts Import Program' is provided to load service contracts into the application. The Service Contracts Import functionality is explained in How to Use the Service Contracts Import Program - Scope and Limitations (Doc ID 1057242.1).  This note includes an attached document which explains the program architecture, shows the Entity Relationship Diagram and details the interface table definitions. The Import program takes data from the interface tables listed below and populates the contracts schema tables:  OKS_USAGE_COUNTERS_INTERFACE OKS_SALES_CREDITS_INTERFACEOKS_NOTES_INTERFACEOKS_LINES_INTERFACEOKS_HEADERS_INTERFACEOKS_COVERED_LEVELS_INTERFACEThese interface tables must be loaded via a custom load program.The Service Contracts Import concurrent request is then submitted to create contracts from this legacy data. The parameters to run the Import program are:  Parameter Description  Mode Validate only, Import  Batch Number Batch_Id (unique id populated into the OKS_HEADERS_INTERFACE table)  Number of Workers Number of workers required (these are spawned as separate sub-requests)  Commit size Represents number of successfully processed contracts commited to database The program spawns sub-requests for the import worker(s) and the 'Service Contracts Import Report'.  The data is validated prior to import and into the Contracts tables and will report errors in the Service Contracts Import Report program output file (Import Execution Report).  Troubleshooting tips are provided in R12.1 - Common Service Contract Import Errors (Doc ID 762545.1); this document lists some, but not all, import errors.  The document will be updated over time.  Additional help is given in Debugging Tip for Service Contracts Import Errors (Doc ID 971426.1).After you successfully import contracts, you can purge the records from the interface tables by running the Service Contracts Import Purge concurrent program. Note that there is no supported way to mass delete data from the Contracts schema tables once they are populated, so data loaded by the Import program must be fully tested and verified before the program is run to load data into a Production system.A Service Contracts Import Test program has been provided which will take an existing contract in the application and load the interface tables using the data from that contract.  This can be used as an example for guidance on how to load the interface tables.  The Test program functionality is explained in How to Use the Service Contracts Test Import Program Provided in Release 12.1 (Doc ID 761209.1).  Note that the Test program has some limitations which do not apply to the full Import program and is not a supported program, it is simply a testing tool.  

    Read the article

  • C# Design How to Elegantly wrap a DAL class

    - by guazz
    I have an application which uses MyGeneration's dOODads ORM to generate it's Data Access Layer. dOODad works by generating a persistance class for each table in the database. It works like so: // Load and Save Employees emps = new Employees(); if(emps.LoadByPrimaryKey(42)) { emps.LastName = "Just Got Married"; emps.Save(); } // Add a new record Employees emps = new Employees(); emps.AddNew(); emps.FirstName = "Mr."; emps.LastName = "dOOdad"; emps.Save(); // After save the identity column is already here for me. int i = emps.EmployeeID; // Dynamic Query - All Employees with 'A' in thier last name Employees emps = new Employees(); emps.Where.LastName.Value = "%A%"; emps.Where.LastName.Operator = WhereParameter.Operand.Like; emps.Query.Load(); For the above example(i.e. Employees DAL object) I would like to know what is the best method/technique to abstract some of the implementation details on my classes. I don't believe that an Employee class should have Employees(the DAL) specifics in its methods - or perhaps this is acceptable? Is it possible to implement some form of repository pattern? Bear in mind that this is a high volume, perfomacne critical application. Thanks, j

    Read the article

  • Domain driven design: Manager and service

    - by ryudice
    I'm creating some business logic in the application but I'm not sure how or where to encapsulate it, I've used the repository pattern for data access, I've seen some projects that use DDD that have some classes with the "Service" suffix and the "manager" suffix, what are each of this clases suppose to take care of in DDD?

    Read the article

  • Repeated properties design pattern

    - by Mark
    I have a DownloadManager class that manages multiple DownloadItem objects. Each DownloadItem has events like ProgressChanged and DownloadCompleted. Usually you want to use the same event handler for all download items, so it's a bit annoying to have to set the event handlers over and over again for each DownloadItem. Thus, I need to decide which pattern to use: Use one DownloadItem as a template and clone it as necessary var dm = DownloadManager(); var di = DownloadItem(); di.ProgressChanged += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_ProgressChanged); di.DownloadCompleted += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_DownloadCompleted); DownloadItem newDi; newDi = di.Clone(); newDi.Uri = "http://google.com"; dm.Enqueue(newDi); newDi = di.Clone(); newDi.Uri = "http://yahoo.com"; dm.Enqueue(newDi); Set the event handlers on the DownloadManager instead and have it copy the events over to each DownloadItem that is enqeued. var dm = DownloadManager(); dm.ProgressChanged += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_ProgressChanged); dm.DownloadCompleted += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_DownloadCompleted); dm.Enqueue(new DownloadItem("http://google.com")); dm.Enqueue(new DownloadItem("http://yahoo.com")); Or use some kind of factory var dm = DownloadManager(); var dif = DownloadItemFactory(); dif.ProgressChanged += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_ProgressChanged); dif.DownloadCompleted += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(di_DownloadCompleted); dm.Enqueue(dif.Create("http://google.com")); dm.Enqueue(dif.Create("http://yahoo.com")); What would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • RESTful Question/Answer design?

    - by Kirschstein
    This is a toy project I'm working on at the moment. My app contains questions with multiple choice answers. The question url is in the following format, with GET & POST mapping to different actions on the questions controller. GET: url.com/questions/:category/:difficulty => 'ask' POST: url.com/questions/:category/:difficulty => 'answer' I'm wondering if it's worth redesigning this into a RESTful style. I know I'd need to introduce answers as a resource, but I'm struggling to think of a url that would look natural for answering that question. Would a redesign be worthwhile? How would you go about structuring the urls?

    Read the article

  • Design Question on when to save

    - by Ben
    Hi, I was just after peoples opinion on when the best time to save an object (or collection of objects) is. I appreciate that it can be completely dependent on the situation that you are in but here is my situation. I have a collection of objects "MyCollection" in a grid. You can open each object "MyObject" in an editor dialogue by double clicking on the grid. Selecting "Cancel" on the dialogue will back out any changes you have made, but should selecting "ok" commit those changes back to the database, or should they commit the changes on that object back to the collection and have a save method that iterates through the collection and saves all changed objects? If i have an object "MyParentObject", that contains a collection of childen "MyChildObjectCollection", none of the changes made to each "MyChildObject" would be commited to the database until the "MyParentObject" was saved - this makes sense. However in my current situation, none of the objects in the collection are linked, therefore should the "Ok" on the dialogue commit the changes to the database? Appreciate any opinions on this. Thanks

    Read the article

  • User account design and security...

    - by espinet
    Before I begin, I am using Ruby on Rails and the Devise gem for user authentication. Hi, I was doing some research about account security and I found a blog post about the topic awhile ago but I can no longer find it again. I read something about when making a login system you should have 1 model for User, this contains a user's username, encrypted password, and email. You should also have a model for a user's Account. This contains everything else. A User has an Account. I don't know if I'm explaining this correctly since I haven't seen the blog post for several months and I lost my bookmark. Could someone explain how and why I should or shouldn't do this. My application deals with money so I need to cover my bases with security. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Schema design: many to many plus additional one to many

    - by chrisj
    Hi, I have this scenario and I'm not sure exactly how it should be modeled in the database. The objects I'm trying to model are: teams, players, the team-player membership, and a list of fees due for each player on a given team. So, the fees depend on both the team and the player. So, my current approach is the following: **teams** id name **players** id name **team_players** id player_id team_id **team_player_fees** id team_players_id amount send_reminder_on Schema layout ERD In this schema, team_players is the junction table for teams and players. And the table team_player_fees has records that belong to records to the junction table. For example, playerA is on teamA and has the fees of $10 and $20 due in Aug and Feb. PlayerA is also on teamB and has the fees of $25 and $25 due in May and June. Each player/team combination can have a different set of fees. Questions: Are there better ways to handle such a scenario? Is there a term for this type of relationship? (so I can google it) Or know of any references with similar structures?

    Read the article

  • Project design / FS layout for large django projects

    - by rcreswick
    What is the best way to layout a large django project? The tutuorials provide simple instructions for setting up apps, models, and views, but there is less information about how apps and projects should be broken down, how much sharing is allowable/necessary between apps in a typical project (obviously that is largely dependent on the project) and how/where general templates should be kept. Does anyone have examples, suggestions, and explanations as to why a certain project layout is better than another? I am particularly interested in the incorporation of large numbers of unit tests (2-5x the size of the actual code base) and string externalization / templates.

    Read the article

  • General ORM design question

    - by Calvin
    Suppose you have 2 classes, Person and Rabbit. A person can do a number of things to a rabbit, s/he can either feed it, buy it and become its owner, or give it away. A rabbit can have none or at most 1 owner at a time. And if it is not fed for a while, it may die. Class Person { Void Feed(Rabbit r); Void Buy(Rabbit r); Void Giveaway(Person p, Rabbit r); Rabbit[] rabbits; } Class Rabbit { Bool IsAlive(); Person pwner; } There are a couple of observations from the domain model: Person and Rabbit can have references to each other Any actions on 1 object can also change the state of the other object Even if no explicit actions are invoked, there can still be a change of state in the objects (e.g. Rabbit can be starved to death, and that causes it to be removed from the Person.rabbits array) As DDD is concerned, I think the correct approach is to synchronize all calls that may change the states in the domain model. For instance, if a Person buys a Rabbit, s/he would need to acquire a lock in Person to make a change to the rabbits array AND also another lock in Rabbit to change its owner before releasing the first one. This would prevent a race condition where 2 Persons claim to be the owner of the little Rabbit. The other approach is to let the database to handle all these synchronizations. Who makes the first call wins, but then the DB needs to have some kind of business logics to figure out if it is a valid transaction (e.g. if a Rabbit already has an owner, it cannot change its owner unless the Person gives it away). There are both pros/cons in either approach, and I’d expect the “best” solution would be somewhere in-between. How would you do it in real life? What’s your take and experience? Also, is it a valid concern that there can be another race condition the domain model has committed its change but before it is fully committed in the database? And for the 3rd observation (i.e. state change due to time factor). How will you do it?

    Read the article

  • How to better design it ???

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

    Read the article

  • Design issue with ATG CommercePipelineManager

    - by user1339772
    The definition of runProcess() method in PipelineManager is public PipelineResult runProcess(String pChainId, Object pParam) throws RunProcessException This gives me an impression that ANY object can be passed as the second param. However, ATG OOTB has PipelineManager component referring to CommercePipelineManager class which overrides the runProcess() method and downcast pParam to map and adds siteId to it. Basically, this enforces the client code to send only Map. Thus, if one needs to create a new pipeline chain, has to use map as data structure to pass on the data. Offcourse, one can always get around this by creating a new PipelineManager component, but I was just wondering the thought behind explicitly using map in CommercePipelineManager

    Read the article

  • Exploring the Factory Design Pattern

    - by asksuperuser
    There was an article here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/Ee817667%28pandp.10%29.aspx The first part of tut implemented this pattern with abstract classes. The second part shows an example with Interface class. But nothing in this article discusses why this pattern would rather use abstract or interface. So what explanation (advantages of one over the other) would you give ? Not in general but for this precise pattern.

    Read the article

  • Repository Design Pattern Guidance

    - by thefactor
    Let's say you have an MVVM CRM application. You have a number of customer objects in memory, through a repository. What would be the appropriate place to handle tasks that aren't associated with traditional MVVM tasks from a GUI? For example, let's say every few minutes you want to check to see if their address is valid and pop up a notification if it is not. Or you want to send out an hourly e-mail update. Or you want a window to pop up to remind you to call a customer at a specific time. Where does this logic go? It's not GUI/action-oriented, and it's not logic that would be appropriate for a repository, I think.

    Read the article

  • Domain-Driven-Design question

    - by Michael
    Hello everyone, I have a question about DDD. I'm building a application to learn DDD and I have a question about layering. I have an application that works like this: UI layer calls = Application Layer - Domain Layer - Database Here is a small example of how the code looks: //****************UI LAYER************************ //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface and implementation for Shopping Cart service would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); //This is the UI layer, //Calling into Application Layer //to get the shopping cart for a user. //Interface for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.ApplicationLayer.dll //and implementation for IShoppingCart would be in MyApp.Model. IShoppingCart shoppingCart = service.GetShoppingCartByUserName(userName); //Show shopping cart information. //For example, items bought, price, taxes..etc ... //Pressed Purchase button, so even for when //button is pressed. //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory again. IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); IShoppingCartService service = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartService>(); service.Purchase(shoppingCart); //**********************Application Layer********************** public class ShoppingCartService : IShoppingCartService { public IShoppingCart GetShoppingCartByUserName(string userName) { //Uses Ioc to get the service from the factory. //This factory would be in the MyApp.Infrastructure.dll IImplementationFactory factory = new ImplementationFactory(); //Interface for repository would be in MyApp.Infrastructure.dll //but implementation would by in MyApp.Model.dll IShoppingCartRepository repository = factory.GetImplementationFactory<IShoppingCartRepository>(); IShoppingCart shoppingCart = repository.GetShoppingCartByUserName(username); //Do shopping cart logic like calculating taxes and stuff //I would put these in services but not sure? ... return shoppingCart; } public void Purchase(IShoppingCart shoppingCart) { //Do Purchase logic and calling out to repository ... } } I've seem to put most of my business rules in services rather than the models and I'm not sure if this is correct? Also, i'm not completely sure if I have the laying correct? Do I have the right pieces in the correct place? Also should my models leave my domain model? In general I'm I doing this correct according DDD? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is there a design pattern for this ?

    - by ytrewq
    I have a component that needs to call a specific service depending on the input it receives. So my component has to look at the input and based on a configuration that says "for this input call this service with this data" needs to call the proper service. The services have a common signature method and a specific one (each). I thought about an abstract class that includes the signatures for all three methods. The implementation for the two services will override all three methods (throwing NotImplementedException for the methods that are not supported by current service). A component that could be initialized with a map (that for each input type will have the type of the service to be called) will also be defined. Do you have a better approach to cope this scenario ?

    Read the article

  • Object model design choice

    - by spinon
    I am currently working on a ASP.NET MVC reporting application using C#. This is a redesign from a PHP application that was just initially thrown together and is now starting to gain some more traction. SowWe are in the process of reworking the backend to have a more OO approach. One of the descisions I am currently wrestling with is how to structure the domain objects. Since 95% of the site is readonly I am not sure if the typical approaches are practical. Should I create domain objects for the primary pieces of the application (ticket, assignment, assignee) and then create static methods off of these areas to pull the reporting data? Or should I just skip that part and create the chart data classes and have some get method off of these classes? It's not a real big application and currenlty I am the only one developing on it. But I feel torn as to which approach. I feel that the first one is the better choice but maybe overkill given that the majority of uses is for aggregate reporting. Anybody have some good insight on why I should go one way or another?

    Read the article

  • Looking for an appropriate design pattern

    - by user1066015
    I have a game that tracks user stats after every match, such as how far they travelled, how many times they attacked, how far they fell, etc, and my current implementations looks somewhat as follows (simplified version): Class Player{ int id; public Player(){ int id = Math.random()*100000; PlayerData.players.put(id,new PlayerData()); } public void jump(){ //Logic to make the user jump //... //call the playerManager PlayerManager.jump(this); } public void attack(Player target){ //logic to attack the player //... //call the player manager PlayerManager.attack(this,target); } } Class PlayerData{ public static HashMap<int, PlayerData> players = new HashMap<int,PlayerData>(); int id; int timesJumped; int timesAttacked; } public void incrementJumped(){ timesJumped++; } public void incrementAttacked(){ timesAttacked++; } } Class PlayerManager{ public static void jump(Player player){ players.get(player.getId()).incrementJumped(); } public void incrementAttacked(Player player, Player target){ players.get(player.getId()).incrementAttacked(); } } So I have a PlayerData class which holds all of the statistics, and brings it out of the player class because it isn't part of the player logic. Then I have PlayerManager, which would be on the server, and that controls the interactions between players (a lot of the logic that does that is excluded so I could keep this simple). I put the calls to the PlayerData class in the Manager class because sometimes you have to do certain checks between players, for instance if the attack actually hits, then you increment "attackHits". The main problem (in my opinion, correct me if I'm wrong) is that this is not very extensible. I will have to touch the PlayerData class if I want to keep track of a new stat, by adding methods and fields, and then I have to potentially add more methods to my PlayerManager, so it isn't very modulized. If there is an improvement to this that you would recommend, I would be very appreciative. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic proxy generator – Part 1 – Creating the Assembly builder, Module builder and cach

    - by SeanMcAlinden
    I’ve recently started a project with a few mates to learn the ins and outs of Dependency Injection, AOP and a number of other pretty crucial patterns of development as we’ve all been using these patterns for a while but have relied totally on third part solutions to do the magic. We thought it would be interesting to really get into the details by rolling our own IoC container and hopefully learn a lot on the way, and you never know, we might even create an excellent framework. The open source project is called Rapid IoC and is hosted at http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/ One of the most interesting tasks for me is creating the dynamic proxy generator for enabling Aspect Orientated Programming (AOP). In this series of articles, I’m going to track each step I take for creating the dynamic proxy generator and I’ll try my best to explain what everything means - mainly as I’ll be using Reflection.Emit to emit a fair amount of intermediate language code (IL) to create the proxy types at runtime which can be a little taxing to read. It’s worth noting that building the proxy is without a doubt going to be slightly painful so I imagine there will be plenty of areas I’ll need to change along the way. Anyway lets get started…   Part 1 - Creating the Assembly builder, Module builder and caching mechanism Part 1 is going to be a really nice simple start, I’m just going to start by creating the assembly, module and type caches. The reason we need to create caches for the assembly, module and types is simply to save the overhead of recreating proxy types that have already been generated, this will be one of the important steps to ensure that the framework is fast… kind of important as we’re calling the IoC container ‘Rapid’ – will be a little bit embarrassing if we manage to create the slowest framework. The Assembly builder The assembly builder is what is used to create an assembly at runtime, we’re going to have two overloads, one will be for the actual use of the proxy generator, the other will be mainly for testing purposes as it will also save the assembly so we can use Reflector to examine the code that has been created. Here’s the code: DynamicAssemblyBuilder using System; using System.Reflection; using System.Reflection.Emit; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Assembly {     /// <summary>     /// Class for creating an assembly builder.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicAssemblyBuilder     {         #region Create           /// <summary>         /// Creates an assembly builder.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="assemblyName">Name of the assembly.</param>         public static AssemblyBuilder Create(string assemblyName)         {             AssemblyName name = new AssemblyName(assemblyName);               AssemblyBuilder assembly = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.DefineDynamicAssembly(                     name, AssemblyBuilderAccess.Run);               DynamicAssemblyCache.Add(assembly);               return assembly;         }           /// <summary>         /// Creates an assembly builder and saves the assembly to the passed in location.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="assemblyName">Name of the assembly.</param>         /// <param name="filePath">The file path.</param>         public static AssemblyBuilder Create(string assemblyName, string filePath)         {             AssemblyName name = new AssemblyName(assemblyName);               AssemblyBuilder assembly = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.DefineDynamicAssembly(                     name, AssemblyBuilderAccess.RunAndSave, filePath);               DynamicAssemblyCache.Add(assembly);               return assembly;         }           #endregion     } }   So hopefully the above class is fairly explanatory, an AssemblyName is created using the passed in string for the actual name of the assembly. An AssemblyBuilder is then constructed with the current AppDomain and depending on the overload used, it is either just run in the current context or it is set up ready for saving. It is then added to the cache.   DynamicAssemblyCache using System.Reflection.Emit; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Exceptions; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Resources.Exceptions;   namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Assembly {     /// <summary>     /// Cache for storing the dynamic assembly builder.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicAssemblyCache     {         #region Declarations           private static object syncRoot = new object();         internal static AssemblyBuilder Cache = null;           #endregion           #region Adds a dynamic assembly to the cache.           /// <summary>         /// Adds a dynamic assembly builder to the cache.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="assemblyBuilder">The assembly builder.</param>         public static void Add(AssemblyBuilder assemblyBuilder)         {             lock (syncRoot)             {                 Cache = assemblyBuilder;             }         }           #endregion           #region Gets the cached assembly                  /// <summary>         /// Gets the cached assembly builder.         /// </summary>         /// <returns></returns>         public static AssemblyBuilder Get         {             get             {                 lock (syncRoot)                 {                     if (Cache != null)                     {                         return Cache;                     }                 }                   throw new RapidDynamicProxyAssertionException(AssertionResources.NoAssemblyInCache);             }         }           #endregion     } } The cache is simply a static property that will store the AssemblyBuilder (I know it’s a little weird that I’ve made it public, this is for testing purposes, I know that’s a bad excuse but hey…) There are two methods for using the cache – Add and Get, these just provide thread safe access to the cache.   The Module Builder The module builder is required as the create proxy classes will need to live inside a module within the assembly. Here’s the code: DynamicModuleBuilder using System.Reflection.Emit; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Assembly; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Module {     /// <summary>     /// Class for creating a module builder.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicModuleBuilder     {         /// <summary>         /// Creates a module builder using the cached assembly.         /// </summary>         public static ModuleBuilder Create()         {             string assemblyName = DynamicAssemblyCache.Get.GetName().Name;               ModuleBuilder moduleBuilder = DynamicAssemblyCache.Get.DefineDynamicModule                 (assemblyName, string.Format("{0}.dll", assemblyName));               DynamicModuleCache.Add(moduleBuilder);               return moduleBuilder;         }     } } As you can see, the module builder is created on the assembly that lives in the DynamicAssemblyCache, the module is given the assembly name and also a string representing the filename if the assembly is to be saved. It is then added to the DynamicModuleCache. DynamicModuleCache using System.Reflection.Emit; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Exceptions; using Rapid.DynamicProxy.Resources.Exceptions; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Module {     /// <summary>     /// Class for storing the module builder.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicModuleCache     {         #region Declarations           private static object syncRoot = new object();         internal static ModuleBuilder Cache = null;           #endregion           #region Add           /// <summary>         /// Adds a dynamic module builder to the cache.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="moduleBuilder">The module builder.</param>         public static void Add(ModuleBuilder moduleBuilder)         {             lock (syncRoot)             {                 Cache = moduleBuilder;             }         }           #endregion           #region Get           /// <summary>         /// Gets the cached module builder.         /// </summary>         /// <returns></returns>         public static ModuleBuilder Get         {             get             {                 lock (syncRoot)                 {                     if (Cache != null)                     {                         return Cache;                     }                 }                   throw new RapidDynamicProxyAssertionException(AssertionResources.NoModuleInCache);             }         }           #endregion     } }   The DynamicModuleCache is very similar to the assembly cache, it is simply a statically stored module with thread safe Add and Get methods.   The DynamicTypeCache To end off this post, I’m going to create the cache for storing the generated proxy classes. I’ve spent a fair amount of time thinking about the type of collection I should use to store the types and have finally decided that for the time being I’m going to use a generic dictionary. This may change when I can actually performance test the proxy generator but the time being I think it makes good sense in theory, mainly as it pretty much maintains it’s performance with varying numbers of items – almost constant (0)1. Plus I won’t ever need to loop through the items which is not the dictionaries strong point. Here’s the code as it currently stands: DynamicTypeCache using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Security.Cryptography; using System.Text; namespace Rapid.DynamicProxy.Types {     /// <summary>     /// Cache for storing proxy types.     /// </summary>     internal static class DynamicTypeCache     {         #region Declarations           static object syncRoot = new object();         public static Dictionary<string, Type> Cache = new Dictionary<string, Type>();           #endregion           /// <summary>         /// Adds a proxy to the type cache.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="type">The type.</param>         /// <param name="proxy">The proxy.</param>         public static void AddProxyForType(Type type, Type proxy)         {             lock (syncRoot)             {                 Cache.Add(GetHashCode(type.AssemblyQualifiedName), proxy);             }         }           /// <summary>         /// Tries the type of the get proxy for.         /// </summary>         /// <param name="type">The type.</param>         /// <returns></returns>         public static Type TryGetProxyForType(Type type)         {             lock (syncRoot)             {                 Type proxyType;                 Cache.TryGetValue(GetHashCode(type.AssemblyQualifiedName), out proxyType);                 return proxyType;             }         }           #region Private Methods           private static string GetHashCode(string fullName)         {             SHA1CryptoServiceProvider provider = new SHA1CryptoServiceProvider();             Byte[] buffer = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(fullName);             Byte[] hash = provider.ComputeHash(buffer, 0, buffer.Length);             return Convert.ToBase64String(hash);         }           #endregion     } } As you can see, there are two public methods, one for adding to the cache and one for getting from the cache. Hopefully they should be clear enough, the Get is a TryGet as I do not want the dictionary to throw an exception if a proxy doesn’t exist within the cache. Other than that I’ve decided to create a key using the SHA1CryptoServiceProvider, this may change but my initial though is the SHA1 algorithm is pretty fast to put together using the provider and it is also very unlikely to have any hashing collisions. (there are some maths behind how unlikely this is – here’s the wiki if you’re interested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA_hash_functions)   Anyway, that’s the end of part 1 – although I haven’t started any of the fun stuff (by fun I mean hairpulling, teeth grating Relfection.Emit style fun), I’ve got the basis of the DynamicProxy in place so all we have to worry about now is creating the types, interceptor classes, method invocation information classes and finally a really nice fluent interface that will abstract all of the hard-core craziness away and leave us with a lightning fast, easy to use AOP framework. Hope you find the series interesting. All of the source code can be viewed and/or downloaded at our codeplex site - http://rapidioc.codeplex.com/ Kind Regards, Sean.

    Read the article

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