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 >

  • how to minimize application downtime when updating database and application ORM

    - by yamspog
    We currently run an ecommerce solution for a leisure and travel company. Everytime we have a release, we must bring the ecommerce site down as we update database schema and the data access code. We are using a custom built ORM where each data entity is responsible for their own CRUD operations. This is accomplished by dynamically generating the SQL based on attributes in the data entity. For example, the data entity for an address would be... [tableName="address"] public class address : dataEntity { [column="address1"] public string address1; [column="city"] public string city; } So, if we add a new column to the database, we must update the schema of the database and also update the data entity. As you can expect, the business people are not too happy about this outage as it puts a crimp in their cash-flow. The operations people are not happy as they have to deal with a high-pressure time when database and applications are upgraded. The programmers are upset as they are constantly getting in trouble for the legacy system that they inherited. Do any of you smart people out there have some suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Why is hibernate open session in view considered a bad practice?

    - by HeDinges
    And what kind of alternative strategies do you use for avoiding LazyLoadExceptions? I do understand that open session in view has issues with: Layered applications running in different jvm's Transactions are committed only at the end, and most probably you would like the results before. But, if you know that your application is running on a single vm, why not ease your pain by using an open session in view strategy?

    Read the article

  • When NOT to use MVVM?

    - by Vitalij
    I have started using MVVM pattern recently. I have had several projects where I used it and with every new one, I start to see that it will fit great within that new project. And now I start to ask myself are there situation when it's better NOT to use MVVM. Or is it such a nice pattern which you can use anywhere? Could you please describe several scenarios where MVVM wouldn't be the best choice?

    Read the article

  • Recommendations with hierarchical data on non-relational databases?

    - by Luki
    I'm developing an web application that uses a non-relational database as a backend (django-nonrel + AppEngine). I need to store some hierarchical data (projects/subproject_1/subproject_N/tasks), and I'm wondering which pattern should I use. For now I thought of: Adjacency List (store the item's parent id) Nested sets (store left and right values for the item) In my case, the depth of nesting for a normal user will not exceed 4-5 levels. Also, on the UI, I would like to have a pagination for the items on the first level, to avoid to load too many items at the first page load. From what I understand so far, nested sets are great when the hierarchy is used more for displaying. Adjacency lists are great when editing on the tree is done often. In my case I guess I need the displaying more than the editing (when using nested sets, even if the display would work great, the above pagination could complicate things on editing). Do you have any thoughts and advice, based on your experience with the non-relational databases?

    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

  • What are the 'big' advantages to have Poco with ORM?

    - by bonefisher
    One advantage that comes to my mind is, if you use Poco classes for Orm mapping, you can easily switch from one ORM to another, if both support Poco. Having an ORM with no Poco support, e.g. mappings are done with attributes like the DataObjects.Net Orm, is not an issue for me, as also with Poco-supported Orms and theirs generated proxy entities, you have to be aware that entities are actually DAO objects bound to some context/session, e.g. serializing is a problem, etc..

    Read the article

  • Sharing a database connection with included classes in a Sinatra application

    - by imightbeinatree
    I'm converting a part of a rails application to its own sinatra application. It has some beefy work to do and rather than have a million helps in app.rb, I've separated some of it out into classes. Without access to rails I'm rewriting finder several methods and needing access to the database inside of my class. What's the best way to share a database connection between your application and a class? Or would you recommend pushing all database work into its own class and only having the connection established there? Here is what I have in in app.rb require 'lib/myclass' configure :production do MysqlDB = Sequel.connect('mysql://user:password@host:port/db_name') end I want to access it in lib/myclass.rb class Myclass def self.find_by_domain_and_stub(domain, stub) # want to do a query here end end I've tried several things but nothing that seems to work well enough to even include as an example.

    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

  • Dependency Injection & Singleton Design pattern

    - by SysAdmin
    How do we identify when to use dependency injection or singleton pattern. I have read in lot of websites where they say "Use Dependency injection over singleton pattern". But I am not sure if I totally agree with them. For my small or medium scale projects I definitely see the use of singleton pattern straightforward. For example Logger. I could use Logger.GetInstance().Log(...) But, instead of this, why do I need to inject every class I create, with the logger's instance?.

    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

  • Howto mix TDD and RAII

    - by f4
    I'm trying to make extensive tests for my new project but I have a problem. Basically I want to test MyClass. MyClass makes use of several other class which I don't need/want to do their job for the purpose of the test. So I created mocks (I use gtest and gmock for testing) But MyClass instantiate everything it needs in it's constructor and release it in the destructor. That's RAII I think. So I thought, I should create some kind of factory, which creates everything and gives it to MyClass's constructor. That factory could have it's fake for testing purposes. But's thats no longer RAII right? Then what's the good solution here?

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Why do I need to give my options a value attribute in my dropdown? JQuery related.

    - by Alex
    So far in my web developing experiences, I've noticed that almost all web developers/designers choose to give their options in a select a value like so: <select name="foo"> <option value="bar">BarCheese</option> // etc. // etc. </select> Is this because it is best practice to do so? I ask this because I have done a lot of work with jQuery and dropdown's lately, and sometimes I get really annoyed when I have to check something like: $('select[name=foo]').val() == "bar"); To me, many times that seems less clear than just being able to check the val() against BarCheese. So why is it that most web developers/designers specify a value paramater instead of just letting the options actual value be its value? And yes, if the option has a value attribute I know I can do something like this: $('select[name=foo] option:contains("BarCheese")').attr('selected', 'selected'); But I would still really like to know why this is done. 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

  • DDD: Enum like entities

    - by Chris
    Hi all, I have the following DB model: **Person table** ID | Name | StateId ------------------------------ 1 Joe 1 2 Peter 1 3 John 2 **State table** ID | Desc ------------------------------ 1 Working 2 Vacation and domain model would be (simplified): public class Person { public int Id { get; } public string Name { get; set; } public State State { get; set; } } public class State { private int id; public string Name { get; set; } } The state might be used in the domain logic e.g.: if(person.State == State.Working) // some logic So from my understanding, the State acts like a value object which is used for domain logic checks. But it also needs to be present in the DB model to represent a clean ERM. So state might be extended to: public class State { private int id; public string Name { get; set; } public static State New {get {return new State([hardCodedIdHere?], [hardCodeNameHere?]);}} } But using this approach the name of the state would be hardcoded into the domain. Do you know what I mean? Is there a standard approach for such a thing? From my point of view what I am trying to do is using an object (which is persisted from the ERM design perspective) as a sort of value object within my domain. What do you think? Question update: Probably my question wasn't clear enough. What I need to know is, how I would use an entity (like the State example) that is stored in a database within my domain logic. To avoid things like: if(person.State.Id == State.Working.Id) // some logic or if(person.State.Id == WORKING_ID) // some logic

    Read the article

  • 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

  • What is the best practice when coding math class/functions ?

    - by Isaac Clarke
    Introductory note : I voluntarily chose a wide subject. You know that quote about learning a cat to fish, that's it. I don't need an answer to my question, I need an explanation and advice. I know you guys are good at this ;) Hi guys, I'm currently implementing some algorithms into an existing program. Long story short, I created a new class, "Adder". An Adder is a member of another class representing the physical object actually doing the calculus , which calls adder.calc() with its parameters (merely a list of objects to do the maths on). To do these maths, I need some parameters, which do not exist outside of the class (but can be set, see below). They're neither config parameters nor members of other classes. These parameters are D1 and D2, distances, and three arrays of fixed size : alpha, beta, delta. I know some of you are more comfortable reading code than reading text so here you go : class Adder { public: Adder(); virtual Adder::~Adder(); void set( float d1, float d2 ); void set( float d1, float d2, int alpha[N_MAX], int beta[N_MAX], int delta[N_MAX] ); // Snipped prototypes float calc( List& ... ); // ... inline float get_d1() { return d1_ ;}; inline float get_d2() { return d2_ ;}; private: float d1_; float d2_; int alpha_[N_MAX]; // A #define N_MAX is done elsewhere int beta_[N_MAX]; int delta_[N_MAX]; }; Since this object is used as a member of another class, it is declared in a *.h : private: Adder adder_; By doing that, I couldn't initialize the arrays (alpha/beta/delta) directly in the constructor ( int T[3] = { 1, 2, 3 }; ), without having to iterate throughout the three arrays. I thought of putting them in static const, but I don't think that's the proper way of solving such problems. My second guess was to use the constructor to initialize the arrays Adder::Adder() { int alpha[N_MAX] = { 0, -60, -120, 180, 120, 60 }; int beta[N_MAX] = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; int delta[N_MAX] = { 0, 0, 180, 180, 180, 0 }; set( 2.5, 0, alpha, beta, delta ); } void Adder::set( float d1, float d2 ) { if (d1 > 0) d1_ = d1; if (d2 > 0) d2_ = d2; } void Adder::set( float d1, float d2, int alpha[N_MAX], int beta[N_MAX], int delta[N_MAX] ) { set( d1, d2 ); for (int i = 0; i < N_MAX; ++i) { alpha_[i] = alpha[i]; beta_[i] = beta[i]; delta_[i] = delta[i]; } } My question is : Would it be better to use another function - init() - which would initialize arrays ? Or is there a better way of doing that ? My bonus question is : Did you see some mistakes or bad practice along the way ?

    Read the article

  • Truth tables in code? How to structure state machine?

    - by HanClinto
    I have a (somewhat) large truth table / state machine that I need to implement in my code (embedded C). I anticipate the behavior specification of this state machine to change in the future, and so I'd like to keep this easily modifiable in the future. My truth table has 4 inputs and 4 outputs. I have it all in an Excel spreadsheet, and if I could just paste that into my code with a little formatting, that would be ideal. I was thinking I would like to access my truth table like so: u8 newState[] = decisionTable[input1][input2][input3][input4]; And then I could access the output values with: setOutputPin( LINE_0, newState[0] ); setOutputPin( LINE_1, newState[1] ); setOutputPin( LINE_2, newState[2] ); setOutputPin( LINE_3, newState[3] ); But in order to get that, it looks like I would have to do a fairly confusing table like so: static u8 decisionTable[][][][][] = {{{{ 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }}, {{ 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }}}, {{{ 0, 0, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}}, {{{{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}, {{{ 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }}, {{ 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}}}; Those nested brackets can be somewhat confusing -- does anyone have a better idea for how I can keep a pretty looking table in my code? Thanks! Edit based on HUAGHAGUAH's answer: Using an amalgamation of everyone's input (thanks -- I wish I could "accept" 3 or 4 of these answers), I think I'm going to try it as a two dimensional array. I'll index into my array using a small bit-shifting macro: #define SM_INPUTS( in0, in1, in2, in3 ) ((in0 << 0) | (in1 << 1) | (in2 << 2) | (in3 << 3)) And that will let my truth table array look like this: static u8 decisionTable[][] = { { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }, { 0, 0, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 1, 1 }, { 0, 1, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1, 1, 1 }}; And I can then access my truth table like so: decisionTable[ SM_INPUTS( line1, line2, line3, line4 ) ] I'll give that a shot and see how it works out. I'll also be replacing the 0's and 1's with more helpful #defines that express what each state means, along with /**/ comments that explain the inputs for each line of outputs. Thanks for the help, everyone!

    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

  • Is it Bad Practice to use C++ only for the STL containers?

    - by gmatt
    First a little background ... In what follows, I use C,C++ and Java for coding (general) algorithms, not gui's and fancy program's with interfaces, but simple command line algorithms and libraries. I started out learning about programming in Java. I got pretty good with Java and I learned to use the Java containers a lot as they tend to reduce complexity of book keeping while guaranteeing great performance. I intermittently used C++, but I was definitely not as good with it as with Java and it felt cumbersome. I did not know C++ enough to work in it without having to look up every single function and so I quickly reverted back to sticking to Java as much as possible. I then made a sudden transition into cracking and hacking in assembly language, because I felt I was concentrated too much attention on a much too high level language and I needed more experience with how a CPU interacts with memory and whats really going on with the 1's and 0's. I have to admit this was one of the most educational and fun experiences I've had with computers to date. For obviously reasons, I could not use assembly language to code on a daily basis, it was mostly reserved for fun diversions. After learning more about the computer through this experience I then realized that C++ is so much closer to the "level of 1's and 0's" than Java was, but I still felt it to be incredibly obtuse, like a swiss army knife with far too many gizmos to do any one task with elegance. I decided to give plain vanilla C a try, and I quickly fell in love. It was a happy medium between simplicity and enough "micromanagent" to not abstract what is really going on. However, I did miss one thing about Java: the containers. In particular, a simple container (like the stl vector) that expands dynamically in size is incredibly useful, but quite a pain to have to implement in C every time. Hence my code currently looks like almost entirely C with containers from C++ thrown in, the only feature I use from C++. I'd like to know if its consider okay in practice to use just one feature of C++, and ignore the rest in favor of C type code?

    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 >