Search Results

Search found 674 results on 27 pages for 'refactor'.

Page 15/27 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • I just received a complaint from a user of the website I maintain. Should I do anything?

    - by Chris
    I was sent sent a large wall of text from a user of the website I maintain at my job. They are clearly upset for having to deal with a horribly outdated web application that has not seen any serious updates in over 6+ years. No refactoring has been done, the code quality is terrible, the security unchecked, policy compliances ignored, in addition to being ugly and frankly embarrassing. Keep in mind this is a small business but the website is used by hundreds daily. I'm one of two programmers there, and I've been working there for two years. This person says they are about my age (22) and understand technology (but can't use proper grammar). The complaint mentioned awkward pages and actions on the website, but they don't even have a clue as to the depth of the flaws in this website. Now, I would love to honestly tell them that there's a lot wrong with this company and that this application was built when we were in high school. And that while it's not my fault that the website is terrible, I'm the one in position to fix it. But on the other hand, I could just say nothing and ignore it. Would doing this publicly have any advantage to future employees (showing integrity) or would it just be a completely pointless mistake? Odds are, even if I respond only that one person will ever read it. Regardless, I'm probably just going to ignore it and continue starting my project to refactor the website.

    Read the article

  • What is an appropriate language for expressing initial stages of algorithm refinement?

    - by hydroparadise
    First, this is not a homework assignment, but you can treat it as such ;). I found the following question in the published paper The Camel Has Two Humps. I was not a CS major going to college (I majored in MIS/Management), but I have a job where I find myself coding quite often. For a non-trivial programming problem, which one of the following is an appropriate language for expressing the initial stages of algorithm refinement? (a) A high-level programming language. (b) English. (c) Byte code. (d) The native machine code for the processor on which the program will run. (e) Structured English (pseudocode). What I do know is that you usually want to start your design implementation by writing down pseuducode and then moving/writing in the desired technology (because we all do that, right?) But I never thought about it in terms of refinement. I mean, if you were the original designer, then you might have access to the original pseudocode. But realisticly, when I have to maintain/refactor/refine somebody elses code, I just keep trucking with the language it currently resides in. Anybody have a definitive answer to this? As a side note, I did a quick scan of the paper as I havn't read every single detail. It presents various score statistics, can't find where the answers are with the paper.

    Read the article

  • I don't understand how TDD helps me get a good design if I need a design to start testing it

    - by Michael Stum
    I'm trying to wrap my head around TDD, specifically the development part. I've looked at some books, but the ones I found mainly tackle the testing part - the History of NUnit, why testing is good, Red/Green/Refactor and how to create a String Calculator. Good stuff, but that's "just" Unit Testing, not TDD. Specifically, I don't understand how TDD helps me get a good design if I need a Design to start testing it. To illustrate, imagine these 3 requirements: A catalog needs to have a list of products The catalog should remember which products a user viewed Users should be able to search for a product At this points, many books pull a magic rabbit out of a hat and just dive into "Testing the ProductService", but they don't explain how they came to the conclusion that there is a ProductService in the first place. That is the "Development" part in TDD that I'm trying to understand. There needs to be an existing design, but stuff outside of entity-services (that is: There is a Product, so there should be a ProductService) is nowhere to be found (e.g., the second requirement requires me to have some concept of a User, but where would I put the functionality to remind? And is Search a feature of the ProductService or a separate SearchService? How would I know which I should choose?) According to SOLID, I would need a UserService, but if I design a system without TDD, I might end up with a whole bunch of Single-Method Services. Isn't TDD intended to make me discover my design in the first place? I'm a .net developer, but Java resources would also work. I feel that there doesn't seem to be a real sample application or book that deals with a real line of business application. Can someone provide a clear example that illustrates the process of creating a design using TDD?

    Read the article

  • Proper library for enums

    - by Bobson
    I'm trying to refactor some code such that the display is separate from the implementation, and I'm not sure where to put the existing enums. My project is currently structured as follows: Utilities RemoteData (Depends on: Utilities) LocalData (Depends on: RemoteData, Utilities) RemoteWeb (Depends on: RemoteData, Utilities) LocalWeb (Depends on: RemoteData, LocalData, Utilities) I'm now trying to add "ViewLibrary (Depends on: Utilities)" to this list, and then adding it as a new dependency to both RemoteWeb and LocalWeb. It will contain a set of interfaces which the other two projects will implement, use to populate the view, and then consume the result. There's an enum which is currently used in all the projects except Utilities. It thus lives in the RemoteData project, because everything else depends on it. But this new ViewLibrary won't depend on either data project. So how will it know about this enum? Some options I see: Create a new project just for shared enum values. Add it to Utilities, even though it is related to data. Define it a second time in ViewLibrary, and require both RemoteWeb and LocalWeb to convert the one type into the other when they access the shared views. Add a dependency on RemoteData to the ViewLibrary, even though it's supposed to be independent of data-source. Are there any better options? Is this structure flawed to begin with?

    Read the article

  • Context-specific remap

    - by dotancohen
    I have the following handy VIM map: inoremap ( ()<Left> However, sometimes I will enter Insert mode to add a function call around a variable, like so: Was: $sql = "SELECT * FROM " . $someTable; To: $sql = "SELECT * FROM " . mysql_real_escape_string($someTable); The mapping makes a redundant ) after mysql_real_escape_string(. Is there any way to refactor the mapping so that if there exists a character after the cursor, and the character after the cursor is not whitespace, then )<left> is not appended to (? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Simplifying data search using .NET

    - by Peter
    An example on the asp.net site has an example of using Linq to create a search feature on a Music album site using MVC. The code looks like this - public ActionResult Index(string movieGenre, string searchString) { var GenreLst = new List<string>(); var GenreQry = from d in db.Movies orderby d.Genre select d.Genre; GenreLst.AddRange(GenreQry.Distinct()); ViewBag.movieGenre = new SelectList(GenreLst); var movies = from m in db.Movies select m; if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(searchString)) { movies = movies.Where(s => s.Title.Contains(searchString)); } if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(movieGenre)) { movies = movies.Where(x => x.Genre == movieGenre); } return View(movies); } I have seen similar examples in other tutorials and I have tried them in a real-world business app that I develop/maintain. In practice this pattern doesn't seem to scale well because as the search criteria expands I keep adding more and more conditions which looks and feels unpleasant/repetitive. How can I refactor this pattern? One idea I have is to create a column in every table that is "searchable" which could be a computed column that concatenates all the data from the different columns (SQL Server 2008). So instead of having movie genre and title it would be something like. if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(searchString)) { movies = movies.Where(s => s.SearchColumn.Contains(searchString)); } What are the performance/design/architecture implications of doing this? I have also tried using procedures that use dynamic queries but then I have just moved the ugliness to the database. E.g. CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[search_music] @title as varchar(50), @genre as varchar(50) AS -- set the variables to null if they are empty IF @title = '' SET @title = null IF @genre = '' SET @genre = null SELECT m.* FROM view_Music as m WHERE (title = @title OR @title IS NULL) AND (genre LIKE '%' + @genre + '%' OR @genre IS NULL) ORDER BY Id desc OPTION (RECOMPILE) Any suggestions? Tips?

    Read the article

  • Are there any good resources for refactoring existing C# code to use LINQ while keeping your tests passing?

    - by Paddyslacker
    I've been teaching myself a little LINQ and an exercise I thought would be useful was to take my existing Project Euler C# code, which I built using Test Driven Development and gradually convert it to LINQ. I realise that LINQ is not always the best solution for all of the Project Euler problems, but I don't want to get into that here. I'm wondering whether or not it's feasible to refactor "traditional" OO C# code to use LINQ and functional programming syntax whilst keeping all of your tests passing. I can't find a way to make the tiny steps I'm used to making using TDD when converting to LINQ and this is a roadblock for me. I seem to have to make large changes to come up with a single function that I then replace whole chunks of my code with. I realise I could write this from scratch in LINQ, but in the real world, I'd like to be able to replace parts of my existing C# code to take advantage of LINQ where appropriate. Has anyone been successful with this approach? What resources did you find useful for refactoring existing C# code to use LINQ whilst taking a Test Driven Development approach?

    Read the article

  • decouple software components via nameconvention

    - by csteinmueller
    I'm currently evaluating alternatives to refactor a drivermanagement. In my multitier architecture I have Baseclass DAL.Device //my entity Interfaces BL.IDriver //handles the dataprocessing between application and device BL.IDriverCreator //creates an IDriver from a Device BL.IDriverFactory //handles the driver creation requests Every specialization of Device has a corresponding IDriver implementation and a corresponding IDriverCreator implementation. At the moment the mapping is fix via a type check within the business layer / DriverFactory. That means every new driver needs a) changing code within the DriverFactory and b) referencing the new IDriver implementation / assembly. On a customers point of view that means, every new driver, used or not, needs a complex revalidation of their hardware environment, because it's a critical process. My first inspiration was to use a caliburn micro like nameconvention see Caliburn.Micro: Xaml Made Easy BL.RestDriver BL.RestDriverCreator DAL.RestDevice After receiving the RestDevicewithin the IDriverFactory I can load all driver dlls via reflection and do a namesplitting/comparing (extracting the xx from xxDriverCreator and xxDevice) Another idea would be a custom attribute (which also leads to comparing strings). My question: is that a good approach above layer borders? If not, what would be a good approach?

    Read the article

  • share code between check and process methods

    - by undu
    My job is to refactor an old library for GIS vector data processing. The main class encapsulates a collection of building outlines, and offers different methods for checking data consistency. Those checking functions have an optional parameter that allows to perform some process. For instance: std::vector<Point> checkIntersections(int process_mode = 0); This method tests if some building outlines are intersecting, and return the intersection points. But if you pass a non null argument, the method will modify the outlines to remove the intersection. I think it's pretty bad (at call site, a reader not familiar with the code base will assume that a method called checkSomething only performs a check and doesn't modifiy data) and I want to change this. I also want to avoid code duplication as check and process methods are mostly similar. So I was thinking to something like this: // a private worker std::vector<Point> workerIntersections(int process_mode = 0) { // it's the equivalent of the current checkIntersections, it may perform // a process depending on process_mode } // public interfaces for check and process std::vector<Point> checkIntersections() /* const */ { workerIntersections(0); } std::vector<Point> processIntersections(int process_mode /*I have different process modes*/) { workerIntersections(process_mode); } But that forces me to break const correctness as workerIntersections is a non-const method. How can I separate check and process, avoiding code duplication and keeping const-correctness?

    Read the article

  • How to handle notifications to several partial views of the same model?

    - by Seki
    I am working on refactoring an old simulation of a Turing machine. The application uses a class that contains the state and the logic of program execution, and several panels to display the tape representation and show the state, messages, and the GUI controls (start, stop, program listing, ...). I would like to refactor it using the MVC architecture that was not used originaly: the Frame is the only way to get access to the different panels and there is also a strong coupling between the "engine" class and the GUI updates in the way of frame.displayPanel.state.setText("halted"); or frame.outputPanel.messages.append("some thing"); It looks to me that I should put the state related code into an observable model class and make the different panels observers. My problem is that the java Observable class only provides a global notification to the Observers, while I would prefer not to refresh every Observers everytime, but only when the part that specificaly observe has changed. I am thinking of implementing myself several vectors of listeners (for the state / position, for the output messages, ...) but I feel like reinventing the wheel. I though also about adding some flags that the observers could check like isNewMessageAvailable(), hasTapeMoved(), etc but it sounds also approximative design. BTW, is it ok to keep the fetch / execute loop into the model or should I move it in another place? We can think in a theorical ideal way as I am completely revamping this small application.

    Read the article

  • If 'Architect' is a dirty word - what's the alternative; when not everyone can actually design a goo

    - by Andras Zoltan
    Now - I'm a developer first and foremost; but whenever I sit down to work on a big project with lots of interlinking components and areas, I will forward-plan my interfaces, base classes etc as best I can - putting on my Architect hat. For a few weeks I've been doing this for a huge project - designing whole swathes of interfaces etc for a business-wide platform that we're developing. The basic structure is a couple of big projects that consists of service and data interfaces, with some basic implementations of all of these. On their own, these assemblies are useless though, as they are simply intended intended as a scaffold on which to build a business-specific implementation (we have a lot of businesses). Therefore, the design of the core platform is absolutely crucial, since consumers of the system are not intended to know which implementation they are actually using. In the past it's not worked so well, but after a few proof-of-concepts and R&D projects this new platform is now growing nicely and is already proving itself. Then somebody else gets involved in the project - he's a TDD man who sees code-level architecture as an irrelevance and is definitely from the camp that 'architect' is a dirty word - I should add that our working relationship is very good despite this :) He's open about the fact that he can't architect in advance and obviously TDD really helps him because it allows him to evolve his systems over time. That I get, and totally understand; but it means that his coding style, basically, doesn't seem to be able to honour the architecture that I've been putting in place. Now don't get me wrong - he's an awesome coder; but the other day he needed to extend one of his components (an implementation of a core interface) to bring in an extra implementation-specific dependency; and in doing so he extended the core interface as well as his implementation (he uses ReSharper), thus breaking the independence of the whole interface. When I pointed out his error to him, he was dismayed. Being test-first, all that mattered to him was that he'd made his tests pass, and just said 'well, I need that dependency, so can't we put it in?'. Of course we could put it in, but I was frustrated that he couldn't see that refactoring the generic interface to incorporate an implementation-specific feature was just wrong! But it is all very Charlie Brown to him (you know the sound the adults make when they're talking to the children) - as far as he's concerned we don't need to worry about it because we can always refactor. The problem is, the culture of test-write-refactor is all very well and good - but not when you're dealing with a platform that is going to be shared out among so many projects that you could never get them all in one place to make the refactorings work. In my opinion, sometimes you actually have to think about what you're doing, and not just let nature take its course. Am I simply fulfilling the role of Architect as a dirty word here? I believe that architecture is important and should be thought about before code gets written; unless it's a particularly small project. But when you're working in a team of people who don't think that way, or even can't think that way how can you actually get this across? Is it a case of simply making the architecture off-limits to changes by other people? I don't want to start having bloody committees just to be able to grow the system; but equally I don't want to be the only one responsible for it all. Do you think the architect role is a waste of time? Is it at odds with TDD and other practises? Can this mix of different practises be made to work, or should I just be a lot less precious (and in so doing allow a generic platform become useless!)? Or do I just lay down the law? Any ideas/experiences/views gratefully received.

    Read the article

  • "Attach or Add an entity that is not new...loaded from another DataContext. This is not supported."

    - by sah302
    Similar error as other questions, but not quite the same, I am not trying to attach anything. What I am trying to do is insert a new row into a linking table, specifically UserAccomplishment. Relations are set in LINQ to User and Accomplishment Tables. I have a generic insert function: Public Function insertRow(ByVal entity As ImplementationType) As Boolean If entity IsNot Nothing Then Dim lcfdatacontext As New LCFDataContext() Try lcfdatacontext.GetTable(Of ImplementationType)().InsertOnSubmit(entity) lcfdatacontext.SubmitChanges() lcfdatacontext.Dispose() Return True Catch ex As Exception Return False End Try Else Return False End If End Function If you try and give UserAccomplishment the two appropriate objects this will naturally crap out if either the User or Accomplishment already exist. It only works when both user and accomplishment don't exist. I expected this behavior. What does work is simply giving the userAccomplishment object a user.id and accomplishment.id and populating the rest of the fields. This works but is kind of awkward to use in my app, it would be much easier to simply pass in both objects and have it work out what already exists and what doesn't. Okay so I made the following (please ignore the fact that this is horribly inefficient because I know it is): Public Class UserAccomplishmentDao Inherits EntityDao(Of UserAccomplishment) Public Function insertLinkerObjectRow(ByVal userAccomplishment As UserAccomplishment) Dim insertSuccess As Boolean = False If Not userAccomplishment Is Nothing Then Dim userDao As New UserDao() Dim accomplishmentDao As New AccomplishmentDao() Dim user As New User() Dim accomplishment As New Accomplishment() 'see if either object already exists in db' user = userDao.getOneByValueOfProperty("Id", userAccomplishment.User.Id) accomplishment = accomplishmentDao.getOneByValueOfProperty("Id", userAccomplishment.Accomplishment.Id) If user Is Nothing And accomplishment Is Nothing Then 'neither the user or the accomplishment exist, both are new so insert them both, typical insert' insertSuccess = Me.insertRow(userAccomplishment) ElseIf user Is Nothing And Not accomplishment Is Nothing Then 'user is new, accomplishment is not new, so just insert the user, and the relation in userAccomplishment' Dim userWithExistingAccomplishment As New UserAccomplishment(userAccomplishment.User, userAccomplishment.Accomplishment.Id, userAccomplishment.LastUpdatedBy) insertSuccess = Me.insertRow(userWithExistingAccomplishment) ElseIf Not user Is Nothing And accomplishment Is Nothing Then 'user is not new, accomplishment is new, so just insert the accomplishment, and the relation in userAccomplishment' Dim existingUserWithAccomplishment As New UserAccomplishment(userAccomplishment.UserId, userAccomplishment.Accomplishment, userAccomplishment.LastUpdatedBy) insertSuccess = Me.insertRow(existingUserWithAccomplishment) Else 'both are not new, just add the relation' Dim userAccomplishmentBothExist As New UserAccomplishment(userAccomplishment.User.Id, userAccomplishment.Accomplishment.Id, userAccomplishment.LastUpdatedBy) insertSuccess = Me.insertRow(userAccomplishmentBothExist) End If End If Return insertSuccess End Function End Class Alright, here I basically check if the supplied user and accomplishment already exists in the db, and if so call an appropriate constructor that will leave whatever already exists empty, but supply the rest of the information so the insert can succeed. However, upon trying an insert: Dim result As Boolean = Me.userAccomplishmentDao.insertLinkerObjectRow(userAccomplishment) In which the user already exists, but the accomplishment does not (the 99% typical scenario) I get the error: "An attempt has been made to Attach or Add an entity that is not new, perhaps having been loaded from another DataContext. This is not supported." I have debugged this multiple times now and am not sure why this is occuring, if either User or Accomplishment exist, I am not including it in the final object to try to insert. So nothing appears to be attempted to be added. Even in debug, upon insert, the object was set to empty. So the accomplishment is new and the user is empty. 1) Why is it still saying that and how can I fix it ..using my current structure 2) Pre-emptive 'use repository pattern answers' - I know this way kind of sucks in general and I should be using the repository pattern. However, I can't use that in the current project because I don't have time to refactor that due to my non existence knowledge of it and time constraints. The usage of the app is going to so small that the inefficient use of datacontext's and what have you won't matter so much. I can refactor it once it's up and running, but for now I just need to 'push through' with my current structure. Edit: I also just tested this when having both already exists, and only insert each object's IDs into the table, that works. So I guess I could manually insert whichever object doesn't exist as a single insert, then put the ids only into the linking table, but I still don't know why when one object exists, and I make it empty, it doens't work.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring a leaf class to a base class, and keeping it also a interface implementation

    - by elcuco
    I am trying to refactor a working code. The code basically derives an interface class into a working implementation, and I want to use this implementation outside the original project as a standalone class. However, I do not want to create a fork, and I want the original project to be able to take out their implementation, and use mine. The problem is that the hierarchy structure is very different and I am not sure if this would work. I also cannot use the original base class in my project, since in reality it's quite entangled in the project (too many classes, includes) and I need to take care of only a subdomain of the problems the original project is. I wrote this code to test an idea how to implement this, and while it's working, I am not sure I like it: #include <iostream> // Original code is: // IBase -> Derived1 // I need to refactor Derive2 to be both indipendet class // and programmers should also be able to use the interface class // Derived2 -> MyClass + IBase // MyClass class IBase { public: virtual void printMsg() = 0; }; /////////////////////////////////////////////////// class Derived1 : public IBase { public: virtual void printMsg(){ std::cout << "Hello from Derived 1" << std::endl; } }; ////////////////////////////////////////////////// class MyClass { public: virtual void printMsg(){ std::cout << "Hello from MyClass" << std::endl; } }; class Derived2: public IBase, public MyClass{ virtual void printMsg(){ MyClass::printMsg(); } }; class Derived3: public MyClass, public IBase{ virtual void printMsg(){ MyClass::printMsg(); } }; int main() { IBase *o1 = new Derived1(); IBase *o2 = new Derived2(); IBase *o3 = new Derived3(); MyClass *o4 = new MyClass(); o1->printMsg(); o2->printMsg(); o3->printMsg(); o4->printMsg(); return 0; } The output is working as expected (tested using gcc and clang, 2 different C++ implementations so I think I am safe here): [elcuco@pinky ~/src/googlecode/qtedit4/tools/qtsourceview/qate/tests] ./test1 Hello from Derived 1 Hello from MyClass Hello from MyClass Hello from MyClass [elcuco@pinky ~/src/googlecode/qtedit4/tools/qtsourceview/qate/tests] ./test1.clang Hello from Derived 1 Hello from MyClass Hello from MyClass Hello from MyClass The question is My original code was: class Derived3: public MyClass, public IBase{ virtual void IBase::printMsg(){ MyClass::printMsg(); } }; Which is what I want to express, but this does not compile. I must admit I do not fully understand why this code work, as I expect that the new method Derived3::printMsg() will be an implementation of MyClass::printMsg() and not IBase::printMsg() (even tough this is what I do want). How does the compiler chooses which method to re-implement, when two "sister classes" have the same virtual function name? If anyone has a better way of implementing this, I would like to know as well :)

    Read the article

  • TDD - beginner problems and stumbling blocks

    - by Noufal Ibrahim
    While I've written unit tests for most of the code I've done, I only recently got my hands on a copy of TDD by example by Kent Beck. I have always regretted certain design decisions I made since they prevented the application from being 'testable'. I read through the book and while some of it looks alien, I felt that I could manage it and decided to try it out on my current project which is basically a client/server system where the two pieces communicate via. USB. One on the gadget and the other on the host. The application is in Python. I started off and very soon got entangled in a mess of rewrites and tiny tests which I later figured didn't really test anything. I threw away most of them and and now have a working application for which the tests have all coagulated into just 2. Based on my experiences, I have a few questions which I'd like to ask. I gained some information from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1146218/new-to-tdd-are-there-sample-applications-with-tests-to-show-how-to-do-tdd but have some specific questions which I'd like answers to/discussion on. Kent Beck uses a list which he adds to and strikes out from to guide the development process. How do you make such a list? I initially had a few items like "server should start up", "server should abort if channel is not available" etc. but they got mixed and finally now, it's just something like "client should be able to connect to server" (which subsumed server startup etc.). How do you handle rewrites? I initially selected a half duplex system based on named pipes so that I could develop the application logic on my own machine and then later add the USB communication part. It them moved to become a socket based thing and then moved from using raw sockets to using the Python SocketServer module. Each time things changed, I found that I had to rewrite considerable parts of the tests which was annoying. I'd figured that the tests would be a somewhat invariable guide during my development. They just felt like more code to handle. I needed a client and a server to communicate through the channel to test either side. I could mock one of the sides to test the other but then the whole channel wouldn't be tested and I worry that I'd miss that. This detracted from the whole red/green/refactor rhythm. Is this just lack of experience or am I doing something wrong? The "Fake it till you make it" left me with a lot of messy code that I later spent a lot of time to refactor and clean up. Is this the way things work? At the end of the session, I now have my client and server running with around 3 or 4 unit tests. It took me around a week to do it. I think I could have done it in a day if I were using the unit tests after code way. I fail to see the gain. I'm looking for comments and advice from people who have implemented large non trivial projects completely (or almost completely) using this methodology. It makes sense to me to follow the way after I have something already running and want to add a new feature but doing it from scratch seems to tiresome and not worth the effort. P.S. : Please let me know if this should be community wiki and I'll mark it like that. Update 0 : All the answers were equally helpful. I picked the one I did because it resonated with my experiences the most. Update 1: Practice Practice Practice!

    Read the article

  • How can I keep my MVC Views, models, and model binders as clean as possible?

    - by MBonig
    I'm rather new to MVC and as I'm getting into the whole framework more and more I'm finding the modelbinders are becoming tough to maintain. Let me explain... I am writing a basic CRUD-over-database app. My domain models are going to be very rich. In an attempt to keep my controllers as thin as possible I've set it up so that on Create/Edit commands the parameter for the action is a richly populated instance of my domain model. To do this I've implemented a custom model binder. As a result, though, this custom model binder is very specific to the view and the model. I've decided to just override the DefaultModelBinder that ships with MVC 2. In the case where the field being bound to my model is just a textbox (or something as simple), I just delegate to the base method. However, when I'm working with a dropdown or something more complex (the UI dictates that date and time are separate data entry fields but for the model it is one Property), I have to perform some checks and some manual data munging. The end result of this is that I have some pretty tight ties between the View and Binder. I'm architecturally fine with this but from a code maintenance standpoint, it's a nightmare. For example, my model I'm binding here is of type Log (this is the object I will get as a parameter on my Action). The "ServiceStateTime" is a property on Log. The form values of "log.ServiceStartDate" and "log.ServiceStartTime" are totally arbitrary and come from two textboxes on the form (Html.TextBox("log.ServiceStartTime",...)) protected override object GetPropertyValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor, IModelBinder propertyBinder) { if (propertyDescriptor.Name == "ServiceStartTime") { string date = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue("log.ServiceStartDate").ConvertTo(typeof (string)) as string; string time = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue("log.ServiceStartTime").ConvertTo(typeof (string)) as string; DateTime dateTime = DateTime.Parse(date + " " + time); return dateTime; } if (propertyDescriptor.Name == "ServiceEndTime") { string date = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue("log.ServiceEndDate").ConvertTo(typeof(string)) as string; string time = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue("log.ServiceEndTime").ConvertTo(typeof(string)) as string; DateTime dateTime = DateTime.Parse(date + " " + time); return dateTime; } The Log.ServiceEndTime is a similar field. This doesn't feel very DRY to me. First, if I refactor the ServiceStartTime or ServiceEndTime into different field names, the text strings may get missed (although my refactoring tool of choice, R#, is pretty good at this sort of thing, it wouldn't cause a build-time failure and would only get caught by manual testing). Second, if I decided to arbitrarily change the descriptors "log.ServiceStartDate" and "log.ServiceStartTime", I would run into the same problem. To me, runtime silent errors are the worst kind of error out there. So, I see a couple of options to help here and would love to get some input from people who have come across some of these issues: Refactor any text strings in common between the view and model binders out into const strings attached to the ViewModel object I pass from controller to the aspx/ascx view. This pollutes the ViewModel object, though. Provide unit tests around all of the interactions. I'm a big proponent of unit tests and haven't started fleshing this option out but I've got a gut feeling that it won't save me from foot-shootings. If it matters, the Log and other entities in the system are persisted to the database using Fluent NHibernate. I really want to keep my controllers as thin as possible. So, any suggestions here are greatly welcomed! Thanks

    Read the article

  • ISAPI Rewrite rule help ( .html -> .aspx )

    - by ben
    Hello, Recently I'm working on a refactor project from asp to asp.net 3.5. There are lots of .html file uses .inc file for the header and footer in the old site, and needed to be converted to .aspx uses master page. My problem is, for search engine and for bookmark those old pages are all gone Therefore I need to redirect the old .html pages to .aspx. I've been trying to find a way to fix that, finally i found ISAPI_Rewrite might be the tool that i can use. After a few hours reading the document on the site, i still have no clue how to write the syntax at all :( Could anyone give a some examples please? ex. rewrite all urls under www.example.com/en to www.example.com/ rewrite all .html to .aspx The server is using Windows 2000, IIS6, ISAPI_Rewrite 3 Lite Thanks in advance ben :)

    Read the article

  • djb2 Hash Function

    - by Jainish
    I am using the djb2 algorithm to generate the hash key for a string which is as follows hash(unsigned char *str) { unsigned long hash = 5381; int c; while (c = *str++) hash = ((hash << 5) + hash) + c; /* hash * 33 + c */ return hash; } Now with every loop there is a multiplication with two big numbers, After some time with the 4th of 5th character of the string there is a overflow as the hash value becomes huge What is the correct way to refactor so that the hash value does not overflow and the hashing also happens correctly

    Read the article

  • Jdeveloper vs java/j2ee/js+extjs ?

    - by ssgam
    Hi All, i am new to the web development environment, having came from a unix/c environment. i've been recently asked to create a web app, which i thought would require postgresql, java/j2ee, and javascript for the client interface. as i had wanted a nicer gui, i've been reading up on extjs, which looks really nice to me. a colleague mentioned that the time needed time needed to learn all these various pieces is time consuming, and Jdeveloper seems to provide most of what we'd need (i was shown a demo, which appears to be able to generate some nice web interfaces). what are the pros and cons with the different approaches ? some i can think of: - jdeveloper is an integrated ide, which creates UI easily, tightly integrated with database. (pro) - jdeveloper will be heavier? (con) - wizard generated code may be harder to refactor ? (con) - java/j2ee/js+extjs needs to develop things from ground up (con) thanks in advance for sharing your experiences and thoughts ... sam

    Read the article

  • How do I iterate over the properties of an anonymous object in C#?

    - by Tomas Lycken
    I want to take an anonymous object as argument to a method, and then iterate over its properties to add each property/value to a a dynamic ExpandoObject. So what I need is to go from new { Prop1 = "first value", Prop2 = SomeObjectInstance, Prop3 = 1234 } to knowing names and values of each property, and being able to add them to the ExpandoObject. How do I accomplish this? Side note: This will be done in many of my unit tests (I'm using it to refactor away a lot of junk in the setup), so performance is to some extent relevant. I don't know enough about reflection to say for sure, but from what I've understood it's pretty performance heavy, so if it's possible I'd rather avoid it... Follow-up question: As I said, I'm taking this anonymous object as an argument to a method. What datatype should I use in the method's signature? Will all properties be available if I use object?

    Read the article

  • Access restriction on class due to restriction on required library rt.jar?

    - by sal
    I'm attempting to compile Java 1.4 code that was created by IBM's WSDL2Java on Java5 without recreating the stubs and saw this error in Eclipse. I'm under the assumption that the stubs created should just compile as long as the runtime jars are available (they are). Access restriction: The type QName is not accessible due to restriction on required library C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0_16\jre\lib\rt.jar The full classname is javax.xml.namespace.QName What exactly is going on here? Is this a case where I am trying to refactor a pig from sausage? Am I better off recreating the stubs?

    Read the article

  • Shortest Ruby Quine

    - by AaronThomson
    Just finished reading this blog post: http://www.skorks.com/2010/03/an-interview-question-that-prints-out-its-own-source-code-in-ruby/ In it, the author argues the case for using a quine as an interview question. I'm not sure I agree but thats not what this question is about. He goes on to construct a quine in Ruby and refactor it to make it shorter. He then challenges the reader to try to make it even shorter. I played around with it for a while and came up with the following: s="s=;puts s[0,2]+34.chr+s+34.chr+s[2,36]";puts s[0,2]+34.chr+s+34.chr+s[2,36] This is the first time I have ever attempted a quine and I can't figure out how to make it any shorter. What is the shortest Ruby quine you can come up with? Please post an explanation if your implementation requires it.

    Read the article

  • Using Propel ORM in my own custom classes

    - by Stick it to THE MAN
    I am refactoring a few classes I wrote a while ago, into my Symfony project (v1.3.2 with Propel ORM). The classes originally used direct connections to the database, I want to refactor those classes (stored in $(SF_LIB_DIR)) so that I can call propel and also use the ORM objects. To clarify, So for example, I want to be able to use code like this in my custom classes: try { $con = Propel::getConnection(); $c = new Criteria(); $foo = new PropelORMFooObject(); $foobar = PropelORMFooBarObjectPeer::fetch($c); //set fields etc $foo->setFooBar($foobar); // now save using obtained connection .. $foo->save($con) }catch(SomeException $e) { //deal with it } I assume that I will need to add some require_once() statements to my custom libraries, but it is not clear which files to include. Does anyone know how to do this?

    Read the article

  • Converting Oracle date arithmetic to work in HSQLDB

    - by JBristow
    I'm trying to spot-test an Oracle backed database with hsqldb and dbunit, but I've run into a snag. The problem is with the following EJB-QL (simplified a bit): SELECT o FROM Offer o WHERE :nowTime BETWEEN o.startDate AND o.startDate + 7 This seems to only work in Oracle's version of SQL. What's the easiest way for me to convert this to work in both hsqldb and oracle? Assume that changing the two between arguments to named parameters is a very difficult refactor, so I'm going to favor answers that provides a more standardized analog to o.startdate + 7 EDIT: After doing some more research, it looks like Oracle converts the above snippet to o.startdate + INTERVAL '7' DAY which is apparently more standard, but doesn't work in HSQLDB.

    Read the article

  • How to define an Integer bean in Struts 1.x

    - by ian_scho_es
    Hi. How do you instantiate an Integer bean, assigning a value, in the Struts 1.x framework? <bean:define id="index" type="java.lang.Integer" value="0"/> or <bean:define id="index" type="java.lang.Integer" value="${0}"/> Results in a: java.lang.ClassCastException: java.lang.String <bean:define id="index" type="java.lang.Integer" value="<%=0%>"/> Results in: The method setValue(String) in the type DefineTag is not applicable for the arguments (int) <% java.lang.Integer index = new java.lang.Integer(0); %> Works, but makes my eyes bleed. Note that I had to refactor iterating over a list but am now applying a filter within the iteration. This was the cleanest solution of all! <logic:equal name="aplicacion" property="generico" value="false" indexId="index"> Maybe I need to go about this completely differently. Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to find unneccesary dependencies in a maven multi-project?

    - by hstoerr
    If you are developing a large evolving multi module maven project it seems inevitable that there are some dependencies given in the poms that are unneccesary, since they are transitively included by other dependencies. For example this happens if you have a module A that originally includes C. Later you refactor and have A depend on a module B which in turn depends on C. If you are not careful enough you'll wind up with both B and C in A's dependency list. But of course you do not need to put C into A's pom, since it is included transitively, anyway. Is there tool to find such unneccesary dependencies? (These dependencies do not actually hurt, but they might obscure your actual module structure and having less stuff in the pom is usually better. :-)

    Read the article

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