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 162/348 | < Previous Page | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >

  • Is Area what I am looking for?

    - by Dejan.S
    Hi I'm new to MVC2 or MVC in general. I'm gone do basic app with a backend. Now I been thinking about how I should do with the folders, views, controllers & routes for the AdminFolder. Now I just saw something called Areas. Is that a way to go for me?

    Read the article

  • Is there anything bad in declaring nested class inside interface in java?

    - by Roman
    I have an interface ProductService with method findByCriteria. This method had a long list of nullable parameters, like productName, maxCost, minCost, producer and so on. I refactored this method by introducing Parameter Object. I created class SearchCriteria and now method signature looks like this: findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria) I thought that instances of SearchCriteria are only created by method callers and are only used inside findByCriteria method, i.e.: void processRequest() { SearchCriteria criteria = new SearchCriteria () .withMaxCost (maxCost) ....... .withProducer (producer); List<Product> products = productService.findByCriteria (criteria); .... } and List<Product> findByCriteria(SearchCriteria criteria) { return doSmthAndReturnResult(criteria.getMaxCost(), criteria.getProducer()); } So I did not want to create a separate public class for SearchCriteria and put it inside ProductServiceInterface: public interface ProductService { List<Product> findByCriteria (SearchCriteria criteria); static class SearchCriteria { ... } } Is there anything bad with this interface? Where whould you place SearchCriteria class?

    Read the article

  • Displaying performance metrics in a modern web app?

    - by Charles
    We're updating our ancient internal PHP application at work. Right now, we gather extensive performance measurements on every pageview, and log them to the database. Additionally, users requested that some of the metrics be displayed at the bottom of the page. This worked out pretty well for us, because the last thing that the application does on every request is include the file containing the HTML footer. The updated parts of the application use an MVC framework and a Dispatch/Request/Response loop. The page footer is no longer the last thing done. In fact, it could very well be the first thing done, before the rest of the page is created. Because we can grab the Response before it's returned to the user, we could try to include placeholders for the performance metrics in the footer and simply replace them with the actual numbers, but this strikes me as a bad idea somehow. How do you handle this in your modern web app? While we're using PHP, I'm curious how it's done in a Ruby/Rails app, and in your favorite Python framework.

    Read the article

  • Where do you put your dependencies?

    - by The All Foo
    If I use the dependency injection pattern to remove dependencies they end up some where else. For example, Snippet 1, or what I call Object Maker. I mean you have to instantiate your objects somewhere...so when you move dependency out of one object, you end up putting it another one. I see that this consolidates all my dependencies into one object. Is that the point, to reduce your dependencies so that they all reside in a single ( as close to as possible ) location? Snippet 1 - Object Maker <?php class ObjectMaker { public function makeSignUp() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignUpObject = new ControlSignUp(); $SignUpObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignUpObject; } public function makeSignIn() { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); $SignInObject = new ControlSignIn(); $SignInObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $SignInObject; } public function makeTweet( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $TweetObject = new ControlTweet(); $TweetObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject, $TextObject, $MessageObject); return $TweetObject; } public function makeBookmark( $DatabaseObject = NULL, $TextObject = NULL, $MessageObject = NULL ) { if( $DatabaseObject == 'small' ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); } else if( $DatabaseObject == NULL ) { $DatabaseObject = new Database(); $TextObject = new Text(); $MessageObject = new Message(); } $BookmarkObject = new ControlBookmark(); $BookmarkObject->setObjects($DatabaseObject,$TextObject,$MessageObject); return $BookmarkObject; } }

    Read the article

  • Should a developer write their own test plan for Q/A?

    - by Mat Nadrofsky
    Who writes the test plans in your shop? Who should write them? I realize developers (like me) regularly do their own unit testing whilst developing and in some cases even their own Q/A depending on the size of the shop and the nature of the business, but in a big software shop with a full development team and Q/A team, who should be writing those official "my changes are done now" test plans? Soon, we'll be bringing on another Q/A member to our development team. My question is, going forward, is it a good practice to get your developers to write their own test plans? Something tells me that part of that might make sense but another part might not... What I like about that: Developer is very familiar with the changes made, thus it's easy to produce a document... What I don't like about that: Developer knows how it's supposed to work and might write a test plan that caters to this without knowing it. So, with the above in mind, what is the general stance on this topic? I'm of course already reading books like the Mythical Man-Month, Code Complete and a few others which really do help, but I'd like to get some input from the group as well.

    Read the article

  • Are protected constructors considered good practice?

    - by Álvaro G. Vicario
    I'm writing some little helper classes to handle trees. Basically, I have a node and a special root node that represents the tree. I want to keep it generic and simple. This is part of the code: <?php class Tree extends TreeNode{ public function addById($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ if( $parent = $this->findNodeById($parent_id) ){ $parent->addChildById($node_id, $generic_content); } } } class TreeNode{ public function __construct($node_id, $parent_id, $generic_content){ // ... } protected function addChildById($node_id, $generic_content){ $this->children[] = new TreeNode($this->node_id, $node_id, $generic_content); } } $Categories = new Tree; $Categories->addById(1, NULL, $foo); $Categories->addById(2, NULL, $bar); $Categories->addById(3, 1, $gee); ?> My questions: Is it sensible to force TreeNode instances to be created through TreeNode::addById()? If it's so, would it be good practise to declare TreeNode::__construct() as private/protected?

    Read the article

  • Is it OK to write code after [super dealloc]? (Objective-C)

    - by Richard J. Ross III
    I have a situation in my code, where I cannot clean up my classes objects without first calling [super dealloc]. It is something like this: // Baseclass.m @implmentation Baseclass ... -(void) dealloc { [self _removeAllData]; [aVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [anotherVariableThatBelongsToMe release]; [super dealloc]; } ... @end This works great. My problem is, when I went to subclass this huge and nasty class (over 2000 lines of gross code), I ran into a problem: when I released my objects before calling [super dealloc] I had zombies running through the code that were activated when I called the [self _removeAllData] method. // Subclass.m @implementation Subclass ... -(void) deallloc { [super dealloc]; [someObjectUsedInTheRemoveAllDataMethod release]; } ... @end This works great, and It didn't require me to refactor any code. My question Is this: Is it safe for me to do this, or should I refactor my code? Or maybe autorelease the objects? I am programming for iPhone if that matters any.

    Read the article

  • Haskel dot (.) and dollar ($) composition: correct use.

    - by Robert Massaioli
    I have been reading Real World Haskell and I am nearing the end but a matter of style has been niggling at me to do with the (.) and ($) operators. When you write a function that is a composition of other functions you write it like: f = g . h But when you apply something to the end of those functions I write it like this: k = a $ b $ c $ value But the book would write it like this: k = a . b . c $ value Now to me they look functionally equivalent, they do the exact same thing in my eyes. However, the more I look, the more I see people writing their functions in the manner that the book does: compose with (.) first and then only at the end use ($) to append a value to evaluate the lot (nobody does it with many dollar compositions). Is there a reason for using the books way that is much better than using all ($) symbols? Or is there some best practice here that I am not getting? Or is it superfluous and I shouldn't be worrying about it at all? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Where to store global variables like file paths in java ?

    - by Jules Olléon
    In my application I use some icons. Where should I store the path of the directory containing those icons ? The icons are used in different classes so it doesn't really make sense to store them in one of those classes in particular. I read that global variables are evil, but is it acceptable to use a class (eg Commons) containing only public static final fields to store this king of data ? What solution is used in professional applications ?

    Read the article

  • Where should global Application Settings be stored on Windows 7?

    - by Kerido
    Hi everybody, I'm working hard on making my product work seamlessly on Windows 7. The problem is that there is a small set of global (not user-specific) application settings that all users should be able to change. On previous versions I used HKLM\Software\__Company__\__Product__ for that purpose. This allowed Power Users and Administrators to modify the Registry Key and everything worked correctly. Now that Windows Vista and Windows 7 have this UAC feature, by default, even an Administrator cannot access the Key for writing without elevation. A stupid solution would, of course, mean adding requireAdministrator option into the application manifest. But this is really unprofessional since the product itself is extremely far from administration-related tasks. So I need to stay with asInvoker. Another solution could mean programmatic elevation during moments when write access to the Registry Key is required. Let alone the fact that I don't know how to implement that, it's pretty awkward also. It interferes with normal user experience so much that I would hardly consider it an option. What I know should be relatively easy to accomplish is adding write access to the specified Registry Key during installation. I created a separate question for that. This also very similar to accessing a shared file for storing the settings. My feeling is that there must be a way to accomplish what I need, in a way that is secure, straightforward and compatible with all OS'es. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • database design - empty fields

    - by imanc
    Hey, I am currently debating an issue with a guy on my dev team. He believes that empty fields are bad news. For instance, if we have a customer details table that stores data for customers from different countries, and each country has a slightly different address configuration - plus 1-2 extra fields, e.g. French customer details may also store details for entry code, and floor/level plus title fields (madamme, etc.). South Africa would have a security number. And so on. Given that we're talking about minor variances my idea is to put all of the fields into the table and use what is needed on each form. My colleague believes we should have a separate table with extra data. E.g. customer_info_fr. But this seams to totally defeat the purpose of a combined table in the first place. His argument is that empty fields / columns is bad - but I'm struggling to find justification in terms of database design principles for or against this argument and preferred solutions. Another option is a separate mini EAV table that stores extra data with parent_id, key, val fields. Or to serialise extra data into an extra_data column in the main customer_data table. I think I am confused because what I'm discussing is not covered by 3NF which is what I would typically use as a reference for how to structure data. So my question specifically: - if you have slight variances in data for each record (1-2 different fields for instance) what is the best way to proceed?

    Read the article

  • how to handle exceptions/errors in php?

    - by fayer
    when using 3rd part libraries they tend to throw exceptions to the browser and hence kill the script. eg. if im using doctrine and insert a duplicate record to the database it will throw an exception. i wonder, what is best practice for handling these exceptions. should i always do a try...catch? but doesn't that mean that i will have try...catch all over the script and for every single function/class i use? Or is it just for debugging? i don't quite get the picture. Cause if a record already exists in a database, i want to tell the user "Record already exists". And if i code a library or a function, should i always use "throw new Expcetion($message, $code)" when i want to create an error? Please shed a light on how one should create/handle exceptions/errors. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Have you ever derived a programming solution from nature?

    - by Ryu
    When you step back and look at ... the nature of animals, insects, plants and the problems they have organically solved perhaps even the nature and balance of the universe Have you ever been able to solve a problem by deriving an approach from nature? I've heard of Ant Colony Algorithms being able to optimize supply chain amongst other things. Also Fractal's being the "geometry of nature" have been applied to a wide range of problems. Now that spring is here again and the world is coming back to life I'm wondering if anybody has some experiences they can share. Thanks PS I would recommend watching the "Hunting the Hidden Dimension" Nova episode on fractals.

    Read the article

  • how should i create my own 'now' / DateTime.Now ?

    - by Michel
    Hi all, i'm starting to build a part of a system which will hold a lot of DateTime validations, and a lot of 'if it was done before now' or 'if it will start in an hour etc'. Usual way to go is to use DateTime.Now to get the actual time. I predict however, that during unit test that will give me a real headache because i will have to setup my testdata for the time when the test will run in stead of use a default set of test data. So i thought: why not use my own 'now' so i can set the current datetime to any moment in time. As i don't want to set the testservers internal clock i was thinking about this solution, and i was wondering what you think of it. Base thought is that i use my own DateTime class. That class gives you the current datetime, but you can also set your own time from outside. public static class MyDateTime { private static TimeSpan _TimeDifference = TimeSpan.Zero; public static DateTime Now { get { return DateTime.Now + _TimeDifference; } } public static void SetNewNow(DateTime newNow) { _TimeDifference = newNow - DateTime.Now; } public static void AddToRealTime(TimeSpan timeSpan ) { _TimeDifference = timeSpan; } public static void SubtractFromRealTime(TimeSpan timeSpan) { _TimeDifference = - timeSpan; } }

    Read the article

  • How to handle too many files in Qt

    - by mree
    I'm not sure how to ask this, but here goes the question: I'm migrating from J2SE to Qt. After creating some small applications in Qt, I noticed that I've created way too many files compared to what I would've create if I was developing in Java (I use Netbeans). For an example, for a GUI to Orders, I'd have to create Main Order Search Window Edit Order Dialog Manage Order Dialog Maybe some other dialogs... For Java, I don't have to create a new file for every new Dialog, the Dialog will be created in the JFrame class itself. So, I will only be seeing 1 file for Orders which has other Dialogs in it. However, in Qt, I'd have to create 1 ui file, 1 header file, 1 cpp file for each of the Dialog (I know I can just put the cpp in the header, but it's easier to view codes in seperate files). So, in the end, I might end up with 3 (if there are 3 dialogs) x3 files = 9 files for the GUI in Qt, compared to Java which is only 1 file. I do know that I can create a GUI by coding it manually. But it seems easy on small GUIs but not some on complicated GUIs with lots of inputs, tabs and etc. So, is there any suggestion on how to minimize the file created in Qt?

    Read the article

  • How do I correct feature envy in this case?

    - by RMorrisey
    I have some code that looks like: class Parent { private Intermediate intermediateContainer; public Intermediate getIntermediate(); } class Intermediate { private Child child; public Child getChild() {...} public void intermediateOp(); } class Child { public void something(); public void somethingElse(); } class Client { private Parent parent; public void something() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().something(); } public void somethingElse() { parent.getIntermediate().getChild().somethingElse(); } public void intermediate() { parent.getIntermediate().intermediateOp(); } } I understand that is an example of the "feature envy" code smell. The question is, what's the best way to fix it? My first instinct is to put the three methods on parent: parent.something(); parent.somethingElse(); parent.intermediateOp(); ...but I feel like this duplicates code, and clutters the API of the Parent class (which is already rather busy). Do I want to store the result of getIntermediate(), and/or getChild(), and keep my own references to these objects?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay if my ViewModel 'creates' bindable user controls for my View?

    - by j0rd4n
    I have an entry-point View with a tab control. Each tab is going to have a user control embedded within it. Each embedded view inherits from the same base class and will need to be updated as a key field on the entry-point view is updated. I'm thinking the easiest way to design this page is to have the entry-point ViewModel create and expose a collection of the tabbed views so the entry-point View can just bind to the user control elements using a DataTemplate on the tab control. Is it okay for a ViewModel to instantiate and provide UI elements for its View?

    Read the article

  • 'is instanceof' Interface bad design

    - by peterRit
    Say I have a class A class A { Z source; } Now, the context tells me that 'Z' can be an instance of different classes (say, B and C) which doesn't share any common class in their inheritance tree. I guess the naive approach is to make 'Z' an Interface class, and make classes B and C implement it. But something still doesn't convince me because every time an instance of class A is used, I need to know the type of 'source'. So all finishes in multiple 'ifs' making 'is instanceof' which doesn't sound quite nice. Maybe in the future some other class implements Z, and having hardcoded 'ifs' of this type definitely could break something. The escence of the problem is that I cannot resolve the issue by adding functions to Z, because the work done in each instance type of Z is different. I hope someone can give me and advice, maybe about some useful design pattern. Thanks

    Read the article

  • typeof === "undefined" vs. != null

    - by Thor Thurn
    I often see JavaScript code which checks for undefined parameters etc. this way: if (typeof input !== "undefined") { // do stuff } This seems kind of wasteful, since it involves both a type lookup and a string comparison, not to mention its verbosity. It's needed because 'undefined' could be renamed, though. My question is: How is that code any better than this approach: if (input != null) { // do stuff } As far as I know, you can't redefine null, so it's not going to break unexpectedly. And, because of the type-coercion of the != operator, this checks for both undefined and null... which is often exactly what you want (e.g. for optional function parameters). Yet this form does not seem widespread, and it even causes JSLint to yell at you for using the evil != operator. Why is this considered bad style?

    Read the article

  • To "null" or not to "null" my class's attributes

    - by Helper Method
    When I write a class in Java, I like to initialize the attributes which are set to a default value directly and attributes which are set by the caller in the constructor, something like this: public class Stack<E> { private List<E> list; private size = 0; public Stack(int initialCapacity) { list = new ArrayList<E>(initialCapacity); } // remainder omitted } Now suppose I have a Tree class: public class Tree<E> { private Node<E> root = null; // no constructor needed, remainder omitted } Shall I set the root attribute to null, to mark that it is set to null by default, or omit the null value?

    Read the article

  • Pattern or recommneded refactoring for method

    - by iKode
    I've written a method that looks like this: public TimeSlotList processTimeSlots (DateTime startDT, DateTime endDT, string bookingType, IList<Booking> normalBookings, GCalBookings GCalBookings, List<DateTime> otherApiBookings) { { ..... common process code ...... while (utcTimeSlotStart < endDT) { if (bookingType == "x") { //process normal bookings using IList<Booking> normalBookings } else if (bookingType == "y") { //process google call bookings using GCalBookings GCalBookings } else if (bookingType == "z" { //process other apibookings using List<DateTime> otherApiBookings } } } So I'm calling this from 3 different places, each time passing a different booking type, and each case passing the bookings I'm interested in processing, as well as 2 empty objects that aren't used for this booking type. I'm not able to get bookings all into the same datatype, which would make this easier and each booking type needs to be processed differently, so I'm not sure how I can improve this. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Design pattern: polymorphisim for list of objects

    - by ziang
    Suppose I have a class A, and A1, A2 inherits from A. There are 2 functions: List<A1> getListA1(){...} List<A2> getListA2(){...} Now I want to do something similar to both A1 and A2 in another function public void process(List<A>){...} If I want to pass the instance of either ListA1 or ListA2, of course the types doesn't match because the compiler doesn't allow the coercion from List< A1 to List< A. I can't do something like this: List<A1> listA1 = getListA1(); List<A> newList = (List<A>)listA1; //this is not allowed. So what is the best approach to the process()? Is there any way to do it in a universal way rather than write the similar code to both List and List?

    Read the article

  • Use multiple css files or a single file organised by comments

    - by David
    Hi, what is regarded as the best approach to organising css. At the moment I am using a single link in the head of my xhtml documents as follows: <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style/imports.css" /> In this file im importing several different css files i.e. reset.css, structure.css, skin.css I know there is an overhead in doing this as each requires an extra trip to the server but it makes things much more logical and organised in my opinion. Does anyone have an opinion on how best to organise their css. - Would it be better to put all these seperate css funcions into one single file? Also, is it best practice to minify css.

    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 | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >