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 >

  • How can I sync three classes?

    - by TheMachineCharmer
    class Foo { Bar b; List<Foo> Neighbours; } class Bar { Spam s; List<Bar> Neighbours; } class Spam { List<string> Neighbours; } Each of these classes have AddNeighbour,RemoveNeighbour methods. User can add/remove Neighbours from any of the class at random. I want these three objects to be in sync. How can I do this?

    Read the article

  • How to refactor this Ruby on Rails code?

    - by yuval
    I want to fetch posts based on their status, so I have this code inside my PostsController index action. It seems to be cluttering the index action, though, and I'm not sure it belongs here. How could I make it more concise and where would I move it in my application so it doesn't clutter up my index action (if that is the correct thing to do)? if params[:status].empty? status = 'active' else status = ['active', 'deleted', 'commented'].include?(params[:status]) ? params[:status] : 'active' end case status when 'active' #active posts are not marked as deleted and have no comments is_deleted = false comments_count_sign = "=" when 'deleted' #deleted posts are marked as deleted and have no comments is_deleted = true comments_count_sign = "=" when 'commented' #commented posts are not marked as deleted and do have comments is_deleted = false comments_count_sign = ">" end @posts = Post.find(:all, :conditions => ["is_deleted = ? and comments_count_sign #{comments_count_sign} 0", is_deleted])

    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

  • Where do you put your unit test?

    - by soulmerge
    I have found several conventions to housekeeping unit tests in a project and I'm not sure which approach would be suitable for our next PHP project. I am trying to find the best convention to encourage easy development and accessibility of the tests when reviewing the source code. I would be very interested in your experience/opinion regarding each: One folder for productive code, another for unit tests: This separates unit tests from the logic files of the project. This separation of concerns is as much a nuisance as it is an advantage: Someone looking into the source code of the project will - so I suppose - either browse the implementation or the unit tests (or more commonly: the implementation only). The advantage of unit tests being another viewpoint to your classes is lost - those two viewpoints are just too far apart IMO. Annotated test methods: Any modern unit testing framework I know allows developers to create dedicated test methods, annotating them (@test) and embedding them in the project code. The big drawback I see here is that the project files get cluttered. Even if these methods are separated using a comment header (like UNIT TESTS below this line) it just bloats the class unnecessarily. Test files within the same folders as the implementation files: Our file naming convention dictates that PHP files containing classes (one class per file) should end with .class.php. I could imagine that putting unit tests regarding a class file into another one ending on .test.php would render the tests much more present to other developers without tainting the class. Although it bloats the project folders, instead of the implementation files, this is my favorite so far, but I have my doubts: I would think others have come up with this already, and discarded this option for some reason (i.e. I have not seen a java project with the files Foo.java and FooTest.java within the same folder.) Maybe it's because java developers make heavier use of IDEs that allow them easier access to the tests, whereas in PHP no big editors have emerged (like eclipse for java) - many devs I know use vim/emacs or similar editors with little support for PHP development per se. What is your experience with any of these unit test placements? Do you have another convention I haven't listed here? Or am I just overrating unit test accessibility to reviewers?

    Read the article

  • Database Structure for CakePHP Models

    - by Michael T. Smith
    We're building a data tracking web app using CakePHP, and I'm having some issues getting the database structure right. We have Companies that haveMany Sites. Sites haveMany DataSamples. Tags haveAndBelongToMany Sites. That is all set up fine. The problem is "ranking" the sites within tags. We need to store it in the database as an archive. I created a Rank model that is setup like this: rank ( id (int), sample_id (int), tag_id (int), site_id (int), rank (int), total_rows) ) So, the question is, how do I create the associations for tag, site and sample to rank? I originally set them as haveMany. But the returned structures don't get me where I'd like to be. It looks like: [Site] => Array ( [Sample] = Array(), [Tag] = Array() ) When I'm really looking for: [Site] => Array ( [Tag] = Array ( [Sample] => Array ( [Rank] => Array ( ...data... ) ) ) ) I think that I may not be structuring the database properly; so if I need to update please let me know. Otherwise, how do I write a find query that gets me where I need to be? Thanks! Thoughts? Need more details? Just ask!

    Read the article

  • Passing ViewModel for backbone.js from MVC3 Server-Side

    - by Roman
    In ASP.NET MVC there is Model, View and Controller. MODEL represents entities which are stored in database and essentially is all the data used in a application (for example, generated by EntityFramework, "DB First" approach). Not all data from model you want to show in the view (for example, hashs of passwords). So you create VIEW MODEL, each for every strongly-typed-razor-view you have in application. Like this: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; namespace MyProject.ViewModels.SomeController.SomeAction { public class ViewModel { public ViewModel() { Entities1 = new List<ViewEntity1>(); Entities2 = new List<ViewEntity2>(); } public List<ViewEntity1> Entities1 { get; set; } public List<ViewEntity2> Entities2 { get; set; } } public class ViewEntity1 { //some properties from original DB-entity you want to show } public class ViewEntity2 { } } When you create complex client-side interfaces (I do), you use some pattern for javascript on client, MVC or MVVM (I know only these). So, with MVC on client you have another model (Backbone.Model for example), which is third model in application. It is a bit much. Why don`t we use the same ViewModel model on a client (in backbone.js or another framework)? Is there a way to transfer CS-coded model to JS-coded? Like in MVVM pattern, with knockout.js, when you can do like this: in SomeAction.cshtml: <div style="display: none;" id="view_model">@Json.Encode(Model)</div> after that in Javascript-code var ViewModel = ko.mapping.fromJSON($("#view_model").get(0).innerHTML); now you can extend your ViewModel with some actions, event handlers, etc: ko.utils.extend(ViewModel, { some_function: function () { //some code } }); So, we are not building the same view model on the client again, we are transferring existing view model from server. At least, data. But knockout.js is not suitable for me, you can`t build complex UI with it, it is just data-binding. I need something more structural, like backbone.js. The only way to build ViewModel for backbone.js I can see now is re-writing same ViewModel in JS from server with hands. Is there any ways to transfer it from server? To reuse the same viewmodel on server view and client view?

    Read the article

  • Ideal way to set global uncaught exception Handler in Android

    - by Samuh
    I want to set a global uncaught exception handler for all the threads in my Android application. So, in my Application subclass I set an implementation of Thread.UncaughtExceptionHandler as default handler for uncaught exceptions. Thread.setDefaultUncaughtExceptionHandler( new DefaultExceptionHandler(this)); In my implementation, I am trying to display an AlertDialog displaying appropriate exception message. However, this doesn't seem to work. Whenever, an exception is thrown for any thread which goes un-handled, I get the stock, OS-default dialog (Sorry!-Application-has-stopped-unexpectedly dialog). What is the correct and ideal way to set a default handler for uncaught exceptions? Thanks.

    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

  • 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

  • What is this Design Pattern?

    - by Can't Tell
    I read the Wikipedia articles on FactoryMethod and AbstractFactory but the following code doesn't seem to fit anywhere. Can someone explain to me what the following pattern is or if it is an anti-pattern? interace PaymentGateway{ void makePayment(); } class PaypalPaymentGateway implements PaymentGateway { public void makePayment() { //some implementation } } class AuthorizeNetPaymentGateway implements PaymentGateway { public void makePayment() { //some implementation } } class PaymentGatewayFacotry{ PaymentGateway createPaymentGateway(int gatewayId) { if(gatewayId == 1) return PaypalPaymentGateway(); else if(gatewayId == 2) return AuthorizeNetPaymentGateway(); } } Let's say the user selects the payment method using a radio button on an html page and the gatewayId is derived from the radio button value. I have seen code like this and thought it was the AbstractFactory pattern but after reading the Wikipedia article, I'm having doubts.

    Read the article

  • To trigger everytime with .click()?

    - by Dejan.S
    I tried to have a .click() on a <a> to find out it wont trigger every time I click, what it suppose to do is open a dialog. That is not the only problem I would need to pass a value to my jquery to. I just cant figure this one out. I need it to be a <a> because it's gone be in a dropdown menu. Do you got any suggestions? this is the code I use so far $(document).ready(function() { $('a').click(function() { var first = "<iframe style='width: 100%; height: 100%;' src='" + need to put value here + "'</iframe>'"; $('.iframe').html(first); $('#dialog').dialog({ bgiframe: true, modal: true, height: 600, width: 1000 }); }); }); thanks guys

    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

  • Why represent shopping carts and order invoices differently in a domain model?

    - by Todd
    I've built some shopping cart systems in the past, but I always designed them such that the final order invoice is just a shopping cart that has been marked as "purchased". All the logic for adding/removing/changing items in a cart is also the logic for the order. All data is stored in the same tables in the database. But it seems this is not the proper way to design an e-commerce site.. Can someone explain the benefit of separating the shopping cart from invoices in the domain model? It seems to me this would lead to a lot of duplicated code, an extra set of tables in the database, and make it harder to maintain in the event the system need to start accommodating more complicated orders (like specifying selected options for an item which may or may not change the price/availability/shipping time of the order). I'm assuming I just haven't seen the light, as every book and other example I see seems to separate these two seemingly similar concerns -- but I can't find any explanation as to the benefit of doing such! It's also the case in the systems that I design that changes are often made after the initial order is confirmed. It's not uncommon for items to be removed, replaced, or added afterwards (but prior to fulfillment).

    Read the article

  • How work with common utils project.

    - by ais
    For example, I have some project Common.Utils.csproj and use it in all other projects. I can store its (Utils) sourses in one repository and modify it only there, register dll in gac and use it as dll in other projects, or I can clone sourse anywhere I need, include project in solution, use it as source and push modifications. So, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • Should a C++ constructor do real work?

    - by Wade Williams
    I'm strugging with some advice I have in the back of my mind but for which I can't remember the reasoning. I seem to remember at some point reading some advice (can't remember the source) that C++ constructors should not do real work. Rather, they should initialize variables only. The advice when on to explain that real work should be done in some sort of init() method, to be called separately after the instance was created. The situation is I have a class that represents a hardware device. It makes logical sense to me for the constructor to call the routines that query the device in order to build up the instance variables that describe the device. In other words, once new instantiates the object, the developer receives an object which is ready to be used, no separate call to object-init() required. Is there a good reason why constructors shouldn't do real work? Obviously it could slow allocation time, but that wouldn't be any different if calling a separate method immediately after allocation. Just trying to figure out what gotchas I not currently considering that might have lead to such advice.

    Read the article

  • pattern to transfer search model to dao

    - by zeroed
    We have a dao as a project (jar file). Clients use its interfaces and factories to operate with database. Using standard CRUD operations, dao allows you to search an entity by some search criteria. What is the best way to represent this criteria? Is transfer object appropriate pattern in this situation? How should client create SearchModel instance? Please, share. Regards.

    Read the article

  • Use the serialVersionUID or suppress warnings?

    - by Okami
    Dear all, first thing to note is the serialVersionUID of a class implementing Interface Serializable is not in question. What if we create a class that for example extends HttpServlet? It also should have a serialVersionUID. If someone knows that this object will never be serialized should he define it or add an annotation to suppress those warnings? What would you do and why? Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Okami

    Read the article

  • What types of objects should the ViewModel reference in the MVVM pattern?

    - by Blanthor
    I've seen quite a few examples of MVVM. I can see that the View should reference the ViewModel. I've seen recently an example of a ViewModel referencing a View, which seems wrong to me, as it would result in tighter coupling. Given that ViewModel is often described as an intermediary between the View and the Model, is there more to the ViewModel than a facade to domain objects? I hope I used the term "facade" correctly here.

    Read the article

  • Using different numeric variable types

    - by DataPimp
    Im still pretty new so bear with me on this one, my question(s) are not meant to be argumentative or petty but during some reading something struck me as odd. Im under the assumption that when computers were slow and memory was expensive using the correct variable type was much more of a necessity than it is today. Now that memory is a bit easier to come by people seem to have relaxed a bit. For example, you see this sample code everywhere: for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) int? (-2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,648) for length? Isnt byte (0-255) a better choice? So Im curious of your opinion and what you believe to be best practice, I hate to think this would be used only because the acronym "int" is more intuitive for a beginner...or has memory just become so cheap that we really dont need to concern ourselves with such petty things and therefore we should just use long so we can be sure any other numbers/types(within reason) used can be cast automagically? ...or am Im just being silly by concerning myself with such things?

    Read the article

  • Does OOP make sense for small scripts?

    - by Fabian
    I mostly write small scripts in python, about 50 - 250 lines of code. I usually don't use any objects, just straightforward procedural programming. I know OOP basics and I have used object in other programming languages before, but for small scripts I don't see how objects would improve them. But maybe that is just my limited experience with OOP. Am I missing something by not trying harder to use objects, or does OOP just not make a lot of sense for small scripts?

    Read the article

  • Where to put a recursive function when following MVC?

    - by Glibly
    Hello, I have a recursive function being used to generate a menu on my site. The function is calling a database for each level of children in the menu, and generating html for them. I've currently put this function in a Model part of the code, however, I feel that generating html in the model goes against the MVC. I didn't put it in a Controller because I didn't want to have database calls or HTML generation there. I didn't put it in a View because I didn't want database calls there either. Is the 'correct' way of tackling this problem to have a Controller call a recursive function in a Model that returns a 2d array representing the menu. Then pass the array to a view which has it's own recursive function for generating html from the array?

    Read the article

  • Conceptually, how does replay work in a game?

    - by SnOrfus
    I was kind of curious as to how replay might be implemented in a game. Initially, I thought that there would be just a command list of every player/ai action that was taken in the game, and it then 're-plays' the game and lets the engine render as usual. However, I have looked at replays in FPS/RTS games, and upon careful inspection even things like the particles and graphical/audible glitches are consistent (and those glitches are generally *in*consistent). So How does this happen. In fixed camera angle games I though it might just write every frame of the whole scene to a stream that gets stored and then just replays the stream back, but that doesn't seem like enough for games that allow you to pause and move the camera around. You'd have to store the locations of everything in the scene at all points in time (No?). So for things like particles, that's a lot of data to push which seems like a significant draw on the game's performance whilst playing.

    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 >