Search Results

Search found 8692 results on 348 pages for 'patterns practices'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 155/348 | < Previous Page | 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162  | Next Page >

  • What is a 'better' approach to query/save from server: DTO or Wcf Data Services?

    - by bonefisher
    From my perspective, the Data Services and their query approach is useful when querying simple object graphs from your server-side domain model. But when you want to query complex dependencies I couldn't create anything good out of it. The classic DTO approach is fine-grained and can handle everything, but the downside is that you have to create Dto classes for every type of server-request which is time consuming and you have to synchronize the Dto type with your domain entity/business logic.

    Read the article

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • wpf command pattern

    - by evan
    I have a wpf gui which displays a list of information in separate window and in a separate thread from the main application. As the user performs actions in the main window the side window is updated. (For example if you clicked page down in the main window a listbox in the side window would page down). Right now the architecture for this application feels very messy and I'm sure there is a cleaner way to do it. It looks like this: Main Window contains a singleton SideWindowControl which communicates with an instance of the SideWindowDisplay using events - so, for example, the pagedown button would work like: 1) the event handler of the button on the main window calls SideWindowControl.PageDown() 2) in the PageDown() function a event is created and thrown. 3) finally the gui, ShowSideWindowDisplay is subscribing to the SideWindowControl.Actions event handles the event and actually scrolls the listbox down - note because it is in a different thread it has to do that by running the command via Dispatcher.Invoke() This just seems like a very messy way to this and there must be a clearer way (The only part that can't change is that the main window and the side window must be on different threads). Perhaps using WPF commands? I'd really appreciate any suggestions!! Thanks

    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

  • What's the best way to write a maintainable web scraping app?

    - by Benj
    I wrote a perl script a while ago which logged into my online banking and emailed me my balance and a mini-statement every day. I found it very useful for keeping track of my finances. The only problem is that I wrote it just using perl and curl and it was quite complicated and hard to maintain. After a few instances of my bank changing their webpage I got fed up of debugging it to keep it up to date. So what's the best way of writing such a program in such a way that it's easy to maintain? I'd like to write a nice well engineered version in either Perl or Java which will be easy to update when the bank inevitably fiddle with their web site.

    Read the article

  • Standard Workflow when working with JPA

    - by jschoen
    I am currently trying to wrap my head around working with JPA. I can't help but feel like I am missing something or doing it the wrong way. It just seems forced so far. What I think I know so far is that their are couple of ways to work with JPA and tools to support this. You can do everything in Java using annotations, and let JPA (whatever implementation you decide to use) create your schema and update it when changes are made. You can use a tool to reverse engineer you database and generate the entity classes for you. When the schema is updated you have to regenerate these classes, or manually update them. There seems to be drawbacks to both, and benefits to both (as with all things). My question is in an ideal situation what is the standard workflow with JPA? Most schemas will require updates during the maintenance phase and especially during the development phase, so how is this handled?

    Read the article

  • "requiresuniqueemail=true" implementation in asp.net site

    - by domineer
    Hi people I got a social networking site that is running live right now.The first time I launched my site I let requiresuniqueemail=false set-up on my web.config inorder for me to create dummy accounts for testing purposes and to start up the site you know.However the site is kind of stable right now w/ almost 5k members.So I would like to set-up the requiresuniqueemail to true so that users cannot reuse their existing email address and for me to make it sure that there will be unique email ad for each site user.I know the site got like 100 users with the same email address.My question is what could be the problem I'm going to face if I do this right now(requiresuniqueemail="true") and how to do this efficiently(without errors and if possible sitewide say in the global assax)?I tested and I already got an error if I logout an account.Like say a user try to click log-out this code runs: Dim d As DateTime = DateTime.Now.AddMinutes(-1 * Membership.UserIsOnlineTimeWindow) Dim theuser As MembershipUser = Membership.GetUser() theuser.LastActivityDate = d Membership.UpdateUser(theuser) If Not Cache(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") Is Nothing Then Cache.Remove(Page.User.Identity.Name.ToLower() + "currentstatus") End If Then an exception occured on updateuser() function saying System.Configuration.Provider.ProviderException: The E-mail supplied is invalid. This is just one instance I know that I encountered a problem. Hoping to hear your ideas guys.....

    Read the article

  • Does it ever make sense to make a fundamental (non-pointer) parameter const?

    - by Scott Smith
    I recently had an exchange with another C++ developer about the following use of const: void Foo(const int bar); He felt that using const in this way was good practice. I argued that it does nothing for the caller of the function (since a copy of the argument was going to be passed, there is no additional guarantee of safety with regard to overwrite). In addition, doing this prevents the implementer of Foo from modifying their private copy of the argument. So, it both mandates and advertises an implementation detail. Not the end of the world, but certainly not something to be recommended as good practice. I'm curious as to what others think on this issue. Edit: OK, I didn't realize that const-ness of the arguments didn't factor into the signature of the function. So, it is possible to mark the arguments as const in the implementation (.cpp), and not in the header (.h) - and the compiler is fine with that. That being the case, I guess the policy should be the same for making local variables const. One could make the argument that having different looking signatures in the header and source file would confuse others (as it would have confused me). While I try to follow the Principle of Least Astonishment with whatever I write, I guess it's reasonable to expect developers to recognize this as legal and useful.

    Read the article

  • When should we use Views, Temporary Tables and Direct Queries ? What are the Performance issues in a

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I want to know the performance of using Views, Temp Tables and Direct Queries Usage in a Stored Procedure. I have a table that gets created every time when a trigger gets fired. I know this trigger will be fired very rare and only once at the time of setup. Now I have to use that created table from triggers at many places for fetching data and I confirms it that no one make any changes in that table. i.e ReadOnly Table. I have to use this tables data along with multiple tables to join and fetch result for further queries say select * from triggertable By Using temp table select ... into #tx from triggertable join t2 join t3 and so on select a,b, c from #tx --do something select d,e,f from #tx ---do somethign --and so on --around 6-7 queries in a row in a stored procedure. By Using Views create view viewname ( select ... from triggertable join t2 join t3 and so on ) select a,b, c from viewname --do something select d,e,f from viewname ---do somethign --and so on --around 6-7 queries in a row in a stored procedure. This View can be used in other places as well. So I will be creating at database rather than at sp By Using Direct Query select a,b, c from select ... into #tx from triggertable join t2 join t3 join ... --do something select a,b, c from select ... into #tx from triggertable join t2 join t3 join ... --do something . . --and so on --around 6-7 queries in a row in a stored procedure. Now I can create a view/temporary table/ directly query usage in all upcoming queries. What would be the best to use in this case.

    Read the article

  • how to share a variable between two threads

    - by prmatta
    I just inherited some code, two threads within this code need to perform a system task. One thread should do the system task before the other thread. They should not be performing the system task together. The two threads do not have references to each other. Now, I know I can use some sort of a semaphore to achieve this. But my question is what is the right way to get both threads to access this semaphore. I could create a static variable/method a new class : public class SharedSemaphore { private static Semaphore s = new Semaphore (1, true); public static void performSystemTask () { s.acquire(); } public static void donePerformingSystemTask() { s.release(); } } This would work (right?) but this doesn't seem like the right thing to do. Because, the threads now have access to a semaphore, without ever having a reference to it. This sort of thing doesn't seem like a good programming practice. Am I wrong?

    Read the article

  • standard debugging way for javascript/jquery

    - by ZX12R
    This is my usual way to debug javascript. Include alert(0); to break the flow and find out what is happening. sometimes when i need multiple check points i do alert('the flow is now in function 1'); alert('the flow is now in function 2'); or sometimes just alert('success'); i would like to know if there is any standard way for debugging adopted as i am finding my current method very intrusive. thanks in advance..:)

    Read the article

  • Well written open source java projects

    - by Algorist
    I want to improve my design and programming skills by understanding design & code of open source projects. I downloaded hadoop,groovy but they are very difficult to follow. I am not having a clue of how to follow this code without having a high level overview of the design. Any suggestions?? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to handle 'this' pointer in constructor?

    - by Kyle
    I have objects which create other child objects within their constructors, passing 'this' so the child can save a pointer back to its parent. I use boost::shared_ptr extensively in my programming as a safer alternative to std::auto_ptr or raw pointers. So the child would have code such as shared_ptr<Parent>, and boost provides the shared_from_this() method which the parent can give to the child. My problem is that shared_from_this() cannot be used in a constructor, which isn't really a crime because 'this' should not be used in a constructor anyways unless you know what you're doing and don't mind the limitations. Google's C++ Style Guide states that constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method. This solves the 'this-in-constructor' problem as well as a few others as well. What bothers me is that people using your code now must remember to call Init() every time they construct one of your objects. The only way I can think of to enforce this is by having an assertion that Init() has already been called at the top of every member function, but this is tedious to write and cumbersome to execute. Are there any idioms out there that solve this problem at any step along the way?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing User Interface. What is an effective way ?

    - by pierocampanelli
    I have an accounting & payroll client/server application where there are several input form with complex data validation rules. I am finding an effective way to perform unit testing of user interface. For complex validation rules I mean: "Disable button X if I Insert a value in textfield Y" "Enable a combobox if I insert a value in a textfield" ...... ...... Most promising pattern i have found is suggested by M. Fowler (http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/ModelViewPresenter.html). Have you any experience about Unit Testing of User Interface? As technology stack I am using: .NET 3.5 & Windows Forms Widget Library.

    Read the article

  • .Net - Whats the difference between a Session Facade and Business Delegate?

    - by KP65
    What I understand so far: Business Delegate - In the presentation tier, as an ASP component, provides an interface for ASP views to access business components without exposing their API, therefore reducing coupling between the two. Session Facade - In the business tier, as a com+ component, encapsulates business objects, provides a course grain interface for views to access business components. Reduces coupling, hides complex business component interaction from views. So what is the actual difference? They seem pretty similar to me..

    Read the article

  • Process a batch of items, return an object to report on status

    - by Naeem Sarfraz
    I'm looking for a pattern (or good practice) for the following scenario: My function List<BatchItemResponse> Process(List<BatchItem> Data) {..} will process a list of data, and return info on where each item in the batch could be processed. struct BatchItemResponse { int BatchItemID; bool Processed; string Description; } Any thoughts? Is what I've proposed as good as it gets?

    Read the article

  • Regarding the ViewModel

    - by mizipzor
    Im struggling to understand the ViewModel part of the MVVM pattern. My current approach is to have a class, with no logic whatsoever (important), except that it implements INotifyPropertyChanged. The class is just a collection of properties, a struct if you like, describing an as small part of the data as possible. I consider this my Model. Most of the WPF code I write are settings dialogs that configure said Model. The code-behind of the dialog exposes a property which returns an instance of the Model. In the XAML code I bind to subproperties of that property, thereby binding directly to the Model's properties. Which works quite well since it implements the INotifyPropertyChanged. I consider this settings dialog the View. However, I havent really been able to figure out what in all this is the ViewModel. The articles Ive read suggests that the ViewModel should tie the View and the Model together, providing the logic the Model lacks but is still to complex to go directly into the View. Is this correct? Would, in my example, the code-behind of the settings dialog be considered the ViewModel? I just feel a bit lost and would like my peers to debunk some of my assumptions. Am I completely off track here?

    Read the article

  • Can i change the view without changing the controller?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Pretend1 there is a place to type in a name:     Name: __________________ When the text box changes, the value is absorbed into the controller, who stores it in data model. Business rules require that a name be entered: if there is no text entered the TextBox should be colored something in the view to indicate baddness; otherwise it can be whatever color the view likes. The TextBox contains a String, the controller handles a String, and the model stores a String. Now lets say i want to improve the view. There is a new kind of text box2 that can be fed not only string-based keyboard input, but also an image. The view (currently) knows how to determine if the image is in the proper format to perform the processing required to extract text out of it. If there is text, then that text can be fed to the controller, who feeds it to the data model. But if the image is invalid, e.g.3 wrong file format invalid dimensions invalid bit depth unhandled or unknown encoding format missing or incorrectly located registration marks contents not recognizable the view can show something to the user that the image is bad. But the telling the user that something is bad is supposed to be the job of the controller. i'm, of course, not going to re-write the controller to handle Image based text-input (e.g. image based names). a. the code is binary locked inside a GUI widget4 b. there other views besides this one, i'm not going to impose a particular view onto the controller c. i just don't wanna. If i have to change things outside of this UI improvement, then i'll just leave the UI unimproved5 So what's the thinking on having different views for the same Model and Controller? Nitpicker's Corner 1 contrived hypothetical example 2 e.g. bar code, g-mask, ocr 3 contrived hypothetical reasons 4 or hardware of a USB bar-code scanner 5 forcing the user to continue to use a DateTimePicker rather than a TextBox

    Read the article

  • Is the a pattern for iterating over lists held by a class (dynamicly typed OO languages)

    - by Roman A. Taycher
    If I have a class that holds one or several lists is it better to allow other classes to fetch those lists(with a getter) or to implement a doXList/eachXList type method for that list that take a function and call that function on each element of the list contained by that object. I wrote a program that did a ton of this and I hated passing around all these lists sometimes with method in class a calling method in class B to return lists contained in class C, B contains a C or multiple C's (note question is about dynamically typed OO languages languages like ruby or smalltalk) ex. (that came up in my program) on a Person class containing scheduling preferences and a scheduler class needing to access them.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162  | Next Page >