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 158/348 | < Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >

  • Representing xml through a single class

    - by Charles
    I am trying to abstract away the difficulties of configuring an application that we use. This application takes a xml configuration file and it can be a bit bothersome to manually edit this file, especially when we are trying to setup some automatic testing scenarios. I am finding that reading xml is nice, pretty easy, you get a network of element nodes that you can just go through and build your structures quite nicely. However I am slowly finding that the reverse is not quite so nice. I want to be able to build a xml configuration file through a single easy to use interface and because xml is composed of a system of nodes I am having a lot of struggle trying to maintain the 'easy' part. Does anyone know of any examples or samples that easily and intuitively build xml files without declaring a bunch of element type classes and expect the user to build the network themselves? For example if my desired xml output is like so <cook version="1.1"> <recipe name="chocolate chip cookie"> <ingredients> <ingredient name="flour" amount="2" units="cups"/> <ingredient name="eggs" amount="2" units="" /> <ingredient name="cooking chocolate" amount="5" units="cups" /> </ingredients> <directions> <direction name="step 1">Preheat oven</direction> <direction name="step 2">Mix flour, egg, and chocolate</direction> <direction name="step 2">bake</direction> </directions> </recipe> <recipe name="hot dog"> ... How would I go about designing a class to build that network of elements and make one easy to use interface for creating recipes? Right now I have a recipe object, an ingredient object, and a direction object. The user must make each one, set the attributes in the class and attach them to the root object which assembles the xml elements and outputs the formatted xml. Its not very pretty and I just know there has to be a better way. I am using python so bonus points for pythonic solutions

    Read the article

  • Debugging a Browser Redirect Loop

    - by just_wes
    Hi all, I am using CakePHP with the Auth and ACL components. My page loads fine for non-registered users, but if I try to log in as a registered user I get an infinite redirect loop in the browser. I am sure that this is some sort of permissions problem, but the problem exists even for users who have permissions for everything. The only way to prevent this behavior is to allow '*' in my AppController's beforeFilter method. What is the best way to debug this sort of problem? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Design pattern to integrate Rails with a Comet server

    - by empire29
    I have a Ruby on Rails (2.3.5) application and an APE (Ajax Push Engine) server. When records are created within the Rails application, i need to push the new record out on applicable channels to the APE server. Records can be created in the rails app by the traditional path through the controller's create action, or it can be created by several event machines that are constantly monitoring various inputstream and creating records when they see data that meets a certain criteria. It seems to me that the best/right place to put the code that pushes the data out to the APE server (which in turn pushes it out to the clients) is in the Model's after_create hook (since not all record creations will flow through the controller's create action). The final caveat is I want to push a piece of formatted HTML out to the APE server (rather than a JSON representation of the data). The reason I want to do this is 1) I already have logic to produce the desired layout in existing partials 2) I don't want to create a javascript implementation of the partials (javascript that takes a JSON object and creates all the HTML around it for presentation). This would quickly become a maintenance nightmare. The problem with this is it would require "rendering" partials from within the Model (which im having trouble doing anyhow because they don't seem to have access to Helpers when they're rendered in this manner). Anyhow - Just wondering what the right way to go about organizing all of this is. Thanks

    Read the article

  • In .NET which loop runs faster for or foreach

    - by Binoj Antony
    In c#/VB.NET/.NET which loop runs faster for or foreach? Ever since I read that for loop works faster than foreach a long time ago I assumed it stood true for all collections, generic collection all arrays etc. I scoured google and found few articles but most of them are inconclusive (read comments on the articles) and open ended. What would be ideal is to have each scenarios listed and the best solution for the same e.g: (just example of how it should be) for iterating an array of 1000+ strings - for is better than foreach for iterating over IList (non generic) strings - foreach is better than for Few references found on the web for the same: Original grand old article by Emmanuel Schanzer CodeProject FOREACH Vs. FOR Blog - To foreach or not to foreach that is the question asp.net forum - NET 1.1 C# for vs foreach [Edit] Apart from the readability aspect of it I am really interested in facts and figures, there are applications where the last mile of performance optimization squeezed do matter.

    Read the article

  • How should my team decide between 3-tier and 2-tier architectures?

    - by j0rd4n
    My team is discussing the future direction we take our projects. Half the team believes in a pure 3-tier architecture while the other half favors a 2-tier architecture. Project Assumptions: Enterprise business applications Business logic needed between user and database Data validation necessary Service-oriented (prefer RESTful services) Multi-year maintenance plan Support hundreds of users 3-tier Team Favors: Persistant layer <== Domain layer <== UI layer Service boundary between at least persistant layer and domain layer. Domain layer might have service boundary between it. Translations between each layer (clean DTO separation) Hand roll persistance unless we can find creative yet elegant automation 2-tier Team Favors: Entity Framework + WCF Data Service layer <== UI layer Business logic kept in WCF Data Service interceptors Minimal translation between layers - favor faster coding So that's the high-level argument. What considerations should we take into account? What experiences have you had with either approach?

    Read the article

  • Giving the script tag an ID

    - by The Code Pimp
    Hi guys, i came across a scenario where giving a <script> element an "ID" would solve a problem easily. However, after reading about the script tag at w3schools and quirksmode, it seems doing so could have some unforeseen consequences. Has anyone come across any of these issues with modern browsers such as Chrome, Safari, FF3 up and IE 7 up? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is this 2D array initialization a bad idea?

    - by Brendan Long
    I have something I need a 2D array for, but for better cache performance, I'd rather have it actually be a normal array. Here's the idea I had but I don't know if it's a terrible idea: const int XWIDTH = 10, YWIDTH = 10; int main(){ int * tempInts = new int[XWIDTH * YWIDTH]; int ** ints = new int*[XWIDTH]; for(int i=0; i<XWIDTH; i++){ ints[i] = &tempInts[i*YWIDTH]; } // do things with ints delete[] ints[0]; delete[] ints; return 0; } So the idea is that instead of newing a bunch of arrays (and having them placed in different places in memory), I just point to an array I made all at once. The reason for the delete[] (int*) ints; is because I'm actually doing this in a class and it would save [trivial amounts of] memory to not save the original pointer. Just wondering if there's any reasons this is a horrible idea. Or if there's an easier/better way. The goal is to be able to access the array as ints[x][y] rather than ints[x*YWIDTH+y].

    Read the article

  • I don't like Python functions that take two or more iterables. Is it a good idea?

    - by Xavier Ho
    This question came from looking at this question on Stackoverflow. def fringe8((px, py), (x1, y1, x2, y2)): Personally, it's been one of my pet peeves to see a function that takes two arguments with fixed-number iterables (like a tuple) or two or more dictionaries (Like in the Shotgun API). It's just hard to use, because of all the verbosity and double-bracketed enclosures. Wouldn't this be better: >>> class Point(object): ... def __init__(self, x, y): ... self.x = x ... self.y = y ... >>> class Rect(object): ... def __init__(self, x1, y1, x2, y2): ... self.x1 = x1 ... self.y1 = y1 ... self.x2 = x2 ... self.y2 = y2 ... >>> def fringe8(point, rect): ... # ... ... >>> >>> point = Point(2, 2) >>> rect = Rect(1, 1, 3, 3) >>> >>> fringe8(point, rect) Is there a situation where taking two or more iterable arguments is justified? Obviously the standard itertools Python library needs that, but I can't see it being pretty in maintainable, flexible code design.

    Read the article

  • Manually setting object's position or have the object do it all?

    - by N. Lucas
    I'm stuck thinking about the best way to go about setting a line segment's position, I have a class Line(length, angle, previous) being called from a class Polygon.. Right now I have: public function Line(length:Number, angle:Number, previous:Line = null) { if (previous != null) { this.x = previous.end.x; this.y = previous.end.y; } /**/ } Now, is this the best practice or should I be doing: Polygon.addLine(length:Number, angle:Number):void { var previous = _line[_line.length - 1]; // Array containing all Lines var line:Line = new Line(length, angle, previous); line.x = previous.end.x; line.y = previous.end.y; /**/ }

    Read the article

  • small scale web site - global javascript file style/format/pattern - improving maintainability

    - by yaya3
    I frequently create (and inherit) small to medium websites where I have the following sort of code in a single file (normally named global.js or application.js or projectname.js). If functions get big, I normally put them in a seperate file, and call them at the bottom of the file below in the $(document).ready() section. If I have a few functions that are unique to certain pages, I normally have another switch statement for the body class inside the $(document).ready() section. How could I restructure this code to make it more maintainable? Note: I am less interested in the functions innards, more so the structure, and how different types of functions should be dealt with. I've also posted the code here - http://pastie.org/999932 in case it makes it any easier var ProjectNameEnvironment = {}; function someFunctionUniqueToTheHomepageNotWorthMakingConfigurable () { $('.foo').hide(); $('.bar').click(function(){ $('.foo').show(); }); } function functionThatIsWorthMakingConfigurable(config) { var foo = config.foo || 700; var bar = 200; return foo * bar; } function globallyRequiredJqueryPluginTrigger (tooltip_string) { var tooltipTrigger = $(tooltip_string); tooltipTrigger.tooltip({ showURL: false ... }); } function minorUtilityOneLiner (selector) { $(selector).find('li:even').not('li ul li').addClass('even'); } var Lightbox = {}; Lightbox.setup = function(){ $('li#foo a').attr('href','#alpha'); $('li#bar a').attr('href','#beta'); } Lightbox.init = function (config){ if (typeof $.fn.fancybox =='function') { Lightbox.setup(); var fade_in_speed = config.fade_in_speed || 1000; var frame_height = config.frame_height || 1700; $(config.selector).fancybox({ frameHeight : frame_height, callbackOnShow: function() { var content_to_load = config.content_to_load; ... }, callbackOnClose : function(){ $('body').height($('body').height()); } }); } else { if (ProjectNameEnvironment.debug) { alert('the fancybox plugin has not been loaded'); } } } // ---------- order of execution ----------- $(document).ready(function () { urls = urlConfig(); (function globalFunctions() { $('.tooltip-trigger').each(function(){ globallyRequiredJqueryPluginTrigger(this); }); minorUtilityOneLiner('ul.foo') Lightbox.init({ selector : 'a#a-lightbox-trigger-js', ... }); Lightbox.init({ selector : 'a#another-lightbox-trigger-js', ... }); })(); if ( $('body').attr('id') == 'home-page' ) { (function homeFunctions() { someFunctionUniqueToTheHomepageNotWorthMakingConfigurable (); })(); } });

    Read the article

  • DI with disposable objects

    - by sunnychaganty
    Suppose my repository class looks like this: class myRepository : IDisposable{ private DataContext _context; public myRepository(DataContext context){ _context = context; } public void Dispose(){ // to do: implement dispose of DataContext } } now, I am using Unity to control the lifetime of my repository & the data context & configured the lifetimes as: DataContext - singleton myRepository - create a new instance each time Does this mean that I should not be implementing the IDisposable on the repository to clean up the DataContext? Any guidance on such items?

    Read the article

  • Should I make sure arguments aren't null before using them in a function.

    - by Nathan W
    The title may not really explain what I'm really trying to get at, couldn't really think of a way to describe what I mean. I was wondering if it is good practice to check the arguments that a function accepts for nulls or empty before using them. I have this function which just wraps some hash creation like so. Public Shared Function GenerateHash(ByVal FilePath As IO.FileInfo) As String If (FilePath Is Nothing) Then Throw New ArgumentNullException("FilePath") End If Dim _sha As New Security.Cryptography.MD5CryptoServiceProvider Dim _Hash = Convert.ToBase64String(_sha.ComputeHash(New IO.FileStream(FilePath.FullName, IO.FileMode.Open, IO.FileAccess.Read))) Return _Hash End Function As you can see I just takes a IO.Fileinfo as an argument, at the start of the function I am checking to make sure that it is not nothing. I'm wondering is this good practice or should I just let it get to the actual hasher and then throw the exception because it is null.? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Get absolute (base) url in sinatra.

    - by berkes
    Right now, I do a get '/' do set :base_url, "#{request.env['rack.url_scheme']}://#{request.env['HTTP_HOST']}" # ... haml :index end to be able to use options.base_url in the HAML index.haml. But I am sure there is a far better, DRY, way of doing this. Yet I cannot see, nor find it. (I am new to Sinatra :)) Somehow, outside of get, I don't have request.env available, or so it seems. So putting it in an include did not work. How do you get your base url?

    Read the article

  • Opinions regarding C++ programming practice

    - by Sagar
    I have a program that I am writing, not too big. Apart from the main function, it has about 15 other functions that called for various tasks at various times. The code works just fine all in one file, and as it is right now. However, I was wondering if anyone had any advice on whether it is smarter/more efficient/better programming to put those functions in a separate file different from where main is, or whether it even matters at all. If yes, why? If no, why not? I am not new at C++, but definitely not an expert either, so if you think this question is stupid, feel free to tell me so. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • How to implement Administrator rights in Java Application?

    - by Yatendra Goel
    I am developing a Data Modeling Software that is implemented in Java. This application converts the textual data (stored in a database) to graphical form so that users can interpret the data in a more efficient form. Now, this application will be accessed by 3 kinds of persons: 1. Managers (who can fill the database with data and they can also view the visual form of the data after entering the data into the database) 2. Viewers (who can only view the visual form of data that has been filled by managers) 3. Administrators (who can create and manage other administrators, managers and viewers) Now, how to implement 3 diff. views of the same application. Note: Managers, Viewers and Administrators can be located in any part of the world and should access the application through internet. One idea that came in my mind is as follows: Step1: Code all the business logic in EJBs so that it can be used in distributed environment (means which can be accessed by several users through internet) Step2: Code 3 Swing GUI Clients: One for administrators, one for managers and one for viewers. These 3 GUI clients can access business logic written in EJBs. Step3: Distribute the clients corresponding to their users. For instance, manager client to managers. =================================QUESTIONS======================================= Q1. Is the above approach is correct? Q2. This is very common functionality that various softwares have. So, Do they implement this kind of functionality through this way or any other way? Q3. If any other approach would be more better, then what is that approach?

    Read the article

  • What design pattern to use for one big method calling many private methods

    - by Jeune
    I have a class that has a big method that calls on a lot of private methods. I think I want to extract those private methods into their own classes for one because they contain business logic and I think they should be public so they can be unit tested. Here's a sample of the code: public void handleRow(Object arg0) { if (continueRunning){ hashData=(HashMap<String, Object>)arg0; Long stdReportId = null; Date effDate=null; if (stdReportIds!=null){ stdReportId = stdReportIds[index]; } if (effDates!=null){ effDate = effDates[index]; } initAndPutPriceBrackets(hashData, stdReportId, effDate); putBrand(hashData,stdReportId,formHandlerFor==0?true:useLiveForFirst); putMultiLangDescriptions(hashData,stdReportId); index++; if (stdReportIds!=null && stdReportIds[0].equals(stdReportIds[1])){ continueRunning=false; } if (formHandlerFor==REPORTS){ putBeginDate(hashData,effDate,custId); } //handle logic that is related to pricemaps. lstOfData.add(hashData); } } What design pattern should I apply to this problem?

    Read the article

  • Constructor Overload Problem in C++ Inherrentance

    - by metdos
    Here my code snippet: class Request { public: Request(void); ……….. } Request::Request(void) { qDebug()<<"Request: "<<"Hello World"; } class LoginRequest :public Request { public: LoginRequest(void); LoginRequest(QDomDocument); …………… } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(void) { qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World"; requestType=LOGIN; requestId=-1; } LoginRequest::LoginRequest(QDomDocument doc){ qDebug()<<"LoginRequest: "<<"Hello World with QDomDocument"; LoginRequest::LoginRequest(); xmlDoc_=doc; } When call constructor of Overrided LoginRequest LoginRequest *test=new LoginRequest(doc); I came up with this result: Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World with QDomDocument Request: Hello World LoginRequest: Hello World Obviously both constructor of LoginRequest called REquest constructor. Is there any way to cape with this situation? I can construct another function that does the job I want to do and have both constructors call that function. But I wonder is there any solution?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for extending Android's activities?

    - by Carl
    While programming on Android, I end up writing a parent activity which is extended by several others. A bit like ListActivity. My parent activity extends Activity. if I intend to use a Map or a List, I can't use my parent activity as superclass - the child activity can only extend one activity obviously. As such I end up writing my parent activities with the same logic for Activity, ListActivity, MapActivity and so forth. What am I looking for is some sort of trait functionality/design pattern which would help in this case. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • C# Linq: Can you merge DataContexts?

    - by Andreas Grech
    Say I have one database, and this database has a set of tables that are general to all Clients and some tables that are specific to certain clients. Now what I have in mind is creating a primary DataContext that includes only the tables that are general to all the clients, and then create separate DataContexts that contain only the tables that are specific to the client. Is there a way to kind of "merge" DataContexts so that it becomes one context? So for Client A, I need one DataContext that includes both the general tables and also the tables for that specific client (retrieved from two different DataContexts) ? [Update] What I think I can do is, from the Partial Class of the DataContext instead of letting my DataContext inherit from DataContext I make it inherit from MyDataContext; that way, the tables from MyDataContext and the other DataContext will be available in one DataContext class. What do you think about this approach? Of course with something like this you can only merge two datacontexts at once though...

    Read the article

  • How to test a site rigorously?

    - by Sarfraz
    Hello, I recently created a big portal site. It's time for putting it to test. How do you guys test a site rigorously? What are the ways and tools for that? Can we sort of mimic hundreds of virtual users visiting the site to see its load handling? The test should be for both security and speed Thanks in advance.

    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 | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >